Living with Death I: On Mortality
Given the current circumstances, there is something ironic, or perhaps rather fitting, about our latest Food for Thought discussion being about death. In late February, a blend of students and faculty crowded into Collegium’s Food for Thought meeting room in Harrison College House to discuss our own mortality.
Our discussion on mortality was first framed through Dylan Thomas’ 1951 poem, Do not go gentle into that good night. a poem whose two refrains, “do not go gentle into the good night” and “rage, rage against the dying of the light” have been frequently referenced in subsequent discussions of death. One student noted that these two refrains, repeating alternatively at the end of each stanza, created a mantra-like tone that, combined with the rhyme scheme throughout, instills within the reader a need to rally against death itself. Indeed, Thomas shows that although humans are of “old age” and “frail deeds,” their resistance against death can be beautiful, an impressive clash of “burning and raving” and “blazing like meteors.” Certainly, as a species, there is a fascination with survivor narratives, of people fighting against cancer, sickness, and wounds, to take control of our own lives and circumstances. Perhaps, this is why Thomas’ poem resonates with so many; it takes the feeling of anxiety and powerlessness in the face of death, and gives us the choice to rally against it.
“Do not go gentle into that good night. Rage, rage against the dying of the light.”
With this deep anxiety to resist death, and this clear desperation to live, what about the prospect of extending life? We turned to Yuval Harari, who explores this concept in Homo Deus. As Harari points out, we are at a unique point in history where the prospect of immortality is not as impossible as it once might have been. Historically, most deaths have been due to some “technical glitch” – A malfunctioning heart, cancer, disease – so theoretically, we could one day find a “technical solution” to every problem. However, if science found a way to extend one’s life into a permanent state would you take it? Many of us rejected the idea. They instinctively considered the extension of life to this extent unnatural, and believed that it is the impermanence of life that gives it value. It was however, interesting to consider how everyday developments in science and medicine continue to “extend” life by killing cancerous cells, adding artificial heart pumps, and developing vaccines. While we reject the idea of immortality now, will it, by a process of normalization, become the next artery reconstruction surgery?
By rejecting the prospect of immortality, the group reached a general consensus that mortality was necessary to “enjoy the small beauties of each day” and appreciate the value of life. Knowing that one’s state is impermanent brings a sense of intent to our actions, and aids us in a reexamination of what should motivates us. So “rage” with conviction in this life. Then go, “faithfully, contentedly and bravely.”
