My Very Late Thoughts on Souls and Saints Day

      "Death is something I have known intimately. It was not just the loss of a parent—it was the loss of a dream. At times, there are passing which could be violent, unjust, and filled with deep political and personal consequences. But even in that loss, I understood that death sharpens our sense of purpose. In mourning, we honor the memory of those who are gone by continuing their work, carrying their ideals forward. I realized that my own life was not truly in my hands. I had always known that death could come for me, but after that, I was no longer afraid of it. In a way, I embraced the possibility that my life could be cut short—because, in my heart, I believed that if I were to die, it would be for something greater than myself. In the final moments of life, death would not silence the cause people dedicated their lives to.
     As a woman in politics, death has always loomed close, not just for me, but for others like me—those who challenge the established powers, those who dare to speak truth to authority. We live with that knowledge, and we continue to act anyway, because the cause is greater than our own mortality. The struggle for freedom, for justice, for the dignity of people—these are causes that outlive us. We are not the ones who define the end; we are merely the vessels through which these ideals flow. And so, death is not an end—it is simply a transition. It’s a passage that teaches us to live with urgency, to act with courage, to love with conviction, and to strive for something beyond ourselves. In my heart, I have always believed that the most important thing is what we leave behind: the ideas, the love, the legacy. That is what survives death. Death is and was a part of the larger story of a nation struggling to free itself from the shackles of oppression. And that story is not finished. It is far from over." - Benazir Bhutto, a woman politician.

These thoughts reverberated, from a book I read somewhere, when we had our Saints and Souls Day this 2024. This year was my first to experience to be in a cemetery at dark because the day time had no public vehicles for transportation and the tropical sun was nakedly-scorchy to walk. Unlike normal days, the cemetery at night was filled with people and the candles flicker, casting trembling shadows over the graveyards, their flames seemed delicate unknown strange memories clinging to cast out darkness. Without doubt, prayers ignited its flames; its melted wax dropped gently like tears of the wick.

There seemed an undeniable morbidity about mortality. The apparent disinterest, indifference, and disinclination to talk about it was discomforting because it will also confront our own. It brings an emotional, psychological, and philosophical aspects which can be distressing, uncomfortable, and unsettling, too. No doubt, the dimension of fear and anxiety hound mortality and the constant distressing thoughts about human fragility.

These thoughts aren’t new. That's profoundly dealt in the olden times. Michel de Montaigne, a French philosopher in the period of Renaissance and a statesmen associated with skepticism, expressed that the inconstancy and fragility of human existence make death inevitable, contributing to a morbid awareness and ultimate vulnerability of each human beings. These, albeit his incessant questions about the certainty of knowledge and the limitations of human understanding. 

Heidegger, prominent German philosopher with his famous work on Being and Time which explored existentialism and phenomenology, described human existence emphasizing that human beings are unique in their awareness of their own existence and their relationship to time, death, and the world. He also explored how the awareness of death, which he called "being-toward-death," triggers existential anxiety and also challenges individuals to live authentically. He argued that death is a central aspect of human existence and that we can only live authentically when we acknowledge our mortality. This recognition of death helps us confront the limitations of our existence and live more genuinely. At the edge of it, once life ceases, there is no going back—no possibility for more experiences, relationships, or achievements. Heidegger’s influence on contemporary thought is profound, but his philosophy remained complex, difficult to fully summarize, and often controversial, particularly because of his early involvement with the Nazi Party during the 1930s, a matter that has led much debate and scrutiny. But what Heidegger thought about death was similarly taken by Epicurus, an ancient Greek philosopher associated with the thoughts of hedonism -- “pleasure as the highest good.” Although Epicurus suggested that death is the cessation of our consciousness but it is also a release from suffering. “Death is nothing to us; when we exist, death is not, and when death exists, we are not." He argued that when we are alive, death is not present, and when death comes, we no longer exist. According to his view, death is simply the cessation of experience, and since there is no suffering once we are dead, there is no reason to fear it. 

Epicurus advocated for simple living as a way to achieve happiness. He believed that unnecessary desires—such as the craving for wealth, power, or fame—were sources of anxiety and disturbance. By focusing on modest pleasures, particularly those that are natural and necessary (like food, shelter, and friendship), one could avoid the turbulence of desire and achieve contentment. This emphasis on simplicity often aligned Epicurus with ideas of self-sufficiency, where individuals sought to cultivate inner peace and happiness through self-reflection and moderation. His emphasis on mindfulness, simple pleasures, and the rejection of unnecessary desires resonate with modern movements like minimalism and self-care. The notion of seeking pleasure through reducing pain rather than seeking fleeting sensory indulgence coheres with ideas in modern cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), where understanding and managing one's desires and fears lead to greater peace of mind. Epicurus, however, had a unique perspective on the gods. Unlike many religious traditions of the time, he believed that the gods were indifferent to human affairs. For him, the gods lived in a state of perfect bliss, and had no interest in intervening in the world or in punishing humans. Thus, the fear of divine retribution was misguided.  This view helped to alleviate the anxiety people had about death and divine punishment, central elements of his philosophy of peace of mind.

However, in different cultural and religious contexts, death may be viewed as a transition to an afterlife. Reincarnation, they say. But even within these belief systems, the loss—the separation from loved ones and the disruption of life’s continuity—remains a potent source of grief and depression. Thus, universally, the loss of personal identity, relationships, and unfulfilled dreams made death a deeply emotional experience. Thus, Shakespeare’s Hamlet famously meditates on death’s dual nature, as both an escape from suffering and from terrifying experience.

On the other hand, existentialist philosophers like Sartre and Camus had rather confronted the absurdity of death, with the latter particularly emphasizing that while life is inherently meaningless and death inevitable, despair must be defied and instead, we must create meaning about our lives. Camus interposed the question of whether life is worth living as a fundamental philosophical problem, presenting death as a gloomy reality albeit the incessant struggle in seeking life’s purpose. Fragile in its existential despair but catalyzing as well the purposive search for meaning in an impermanent world.

Socrates: Knowledge and virtue with death

Socrates, the father of philosophy, teaches that life is for the pursuit of virtue and wisdom, and that death, while unknown, should not be feared. Death is seen not as an end but as a possible transition, offering either peace or the opportunity for the soul's further development.

In his view, life’s ultimate purpose aim to seek knowledge and virtue, while death should not be feared, as a transitional process towards a peaceful eternal rest. Socrates argued that death is an unknown reality, and fearing it is based on ignorance. He suggested that the wise man does not fear the unknown, but embraces it, understanding that it may hold no harm at all. Inspired by "the unexamined life is not worth living (Plato, Apology, 38a), Socrates emphasized that self-reflection and philosophical inquiry were central to human existence. He believed that living a virtuous life through the pursuit of wisdom was more important than physical comfort or material success. "For to fear death, is only to think ourselves wise without being truly wise, for no one knows whether death may not be the greatest of all blessings for a man, yet men fear it as if they knew that it is the greatest of evils. And surely it is the most blameworthy thing to believe that one knows what one does not know," Socrates wrote. (Plato, Apology, 29a).

In his dialogues, particularly in Phaedo, Socrates elaborated the idea that the soul is immortal and transcends physical death. He argued that since the soul seeks truth and knowledge, it must be divine and eternal. He expressed, "the soul, then, is most like the divine, and the immortal, and the rational; while the body is most like the mortal, and the perishable, and the irrational." (Plato, Phaedo, 80e). For him, the soul's true nature is unbound by the physical body, and death merely represents the separation of the soul from the body. Fearing it is a hindrance to the virtuous life. In Phaedo, he asserted: "A man who has been in the habit of examining himself and his life, and of controlling his desires, would not be afraid of death... Such a person would not fear the prospect of death, because he would recognize that it is not an evil." (Plato, Phaedo, 64a). For him, it is a potential liberation of the soul from the confines of the body and death might be the soul's release into a higher realm of existence where it can continue its search for truth. Socrates thought that the soul's journey toward truth and wisdom may be unimpeded by death, and in fact, death may free the soul to continue its intellectual and moral development beyond the body. He remarked: "But, as I said at the beginning, if you will not mind me saying again, I do believe that I am the wisest of all men in this, that I do not know that I know. For I know that I do not know." (Plato, Phaedo, 84d). 

Aristotle: death and naturalism

Aristotle's perspective on life and death is influenced by naturalism and about living a virtuous life. Mortality for him highlight the importance of living a good life. Since life is finite, humans must live it with purpose. Therefore, each person must strive for moral excellence and intellectual contemplation. Death - being is a natural event marking the end of the soul's relationship with the body, is part of the natural order and not as an event to be feared or mourned excessively. In his works, particularly in the Nicomachean Ethics, Metaphysics, and On the Soul (De Anima), Aristotle addressed the concepts of life, mortality, and the nature of the soul. Aristotle argued the purpose of life is grounded in the concept of eudaimonia (translated as "flourishing" or "happiness"). He saw life as a process of achieving one’s full potential through virtuous activity in accordance with reason. For him, human beings achieve eudaimonia through the practice of virtues, which are traits that enable a person to live in accordance with reason and nature. The good life, then, is a life of rational activity and moral virtue. "The good for man is an activity of the soul in accordance with virtue, in a complete life." (Nicomachean Ethics, Book I).

Aristotle believed that everything in nature has a function and the good for a thing is realized by performing its function well. For humans, this function is rational activity. Though it may sound a cliché these days, but his thoughts remain sublime: to live a fulfilling life is to live a life of reason and virtue. "The life of money-making is one undertaken by compulsion, and wealth is evidently not the good we are seeking for it is merely useful for the sake of something else." (Nicomachean Ethics, Book I). In Aristotle's view, the soul is the principle of life and the seat of reason. For him, the soul has three parts: the nutritive (basic life functions), the sensitive (emotions and desires), and the rational (thinking and decision-making). A flourishing life requires the proper integration of these faculties, with reason guiding the other parts. "The life of man is the life of the soul, and the soul is the form of the body." (On the Soul, Book II). As such, Aristotle’s views on death are not centered on metaphysical or religious ideation, but rather on the natural aspects of human life. Death for him is an inevitable and a natural part of the human experience, and he delved on this in the context of biology and ethics. He acknowledged death as the cessation of life, where the soul departs from the body. As soul is the form of the body, death represents the dissolution of the body's organization.

Unlike some philosophers who view death as a tragedy or a metaphysical problem, Aristotle treated it as a natural phenomenon, in the same way that birth, growth, and decay are natural processes. However, his focus is on living a life that fulfills its potential, rather than on what happens after death. "The aim of life is not the duration of existence but the quality of the life one lives, which consists in rational activity in accordance with virtue. (Nicomachean Ethics, Book I). "The life of the intellect is a life most divine, and in this the philosopher shares in the divine life." (Nicomachean Ethics, Book X). While Aristotle does not believe in an immortal soul in the religious sense, he does make a distinction between the intellectual part of the soul and the vegetative or sensitive parts. The intellectual part, which engages in contemplation and reasoning, is more aligned with the divine and has a kind of immortality, not through survival after death, but through its eternal engagement with truths.

Descartes: body is mortal, mind is immaterial

On the other hand, Rene Descartes, regarded as the father of modern philosophy, opined that life and death is deeply rooted in his dualism—the belief in the separation of the mind (soul) and the body. For Descartes, the body is mortal and subject to decay, but the mind is an immaterial substance that survives beyond physical death. Death, in his view, should not be feared, as it only affects the body and not the eternal, thinking soul. His reliance on reason and the clear distinction between mind and body offers comfort in the face of death, positioning the soul as immortal and beyond the reach of natural decay. Hence, in his purview, death is neither an end nor an evil but a natural event that cannot harm the essence of who we truly are: our rational, thinking mind. "Death is the separation of the soul from the body; for the soul is the form of the body." (On the Soul, Book II). While death is an inescapable aspect of existence, it does not diminish the value of life. Rather, the awareness of mortality serves as a backdrop to the pursuit of eudaimonia. The finite nature of life encourages humans to focus on living virtuously and wisely. Thus, he asserted, “the unexamined life is not worth living." (Apology of Socrates, as quoted by Aristotle’s followers, though Socrates, not Aristotle, states this).

Descartes philosophy places emphasis on reason, the immortality of the soul, and the relationship between thought and existence. In his reflections on life and death, Descartes engaged in profound analysis, focusing on the nature of existence, the role of the soul, and the impermanence of the body. His most famous philosophical assertion, “cogito, ergo sum” (I think therefore I am) from Meditations on First Philosophy (1641), encapsulates his belief in the primacy of thought and the mind in understanding existence. For Descartes, the mind (or soul) is the foundation of one’s being. The body, by contrast, is subject to the vagaries of death, decay, and imperfection. "The preservation of the mind is not dependent on the body, but on God alone; for it is by God's will that the mind exists in such a way that it can perceive things clearly and distinctly." (Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy, Meditation VI). Descartes argued that while the body is perishable and vulnerable to death, the mind—through its capacity for reason and clear thought—can survive beyond the death of the body. This view aligns with his dualism, which holds that the mind and body are two distinct substances: the mind is immaterial and eternal, while the body is material and mortal. As such, by inference, the body is mortal, the soul (or mind) is not subject to the same fate. He asserted that the soul is by nature is united to the body that it is impossible for them to be separated, but if the soul is capable of thinking, it must be distinct from the body, and therefore, can exist without it." (Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy, Meditation VI). For him, Descartes argued that the soul’s immortality is assured through its essence as thinking substance (res cogitans). Even if the body dies, the mind, as a non-material entity, can continue to exist. This idea was part of Descartes' broader view that rational thought and self-awareness are what make human beings distinct and that the body is merely a vessel for the soul.

In Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes reflected on the nature of fear of death, and how reason should help humans confront their mortality. He suggested that fear of death arises from the ignorance of the true nature of the soul and the body. "Death is not an event in life: we do not experience being dead. Death is not an evil, for that which does not exist cannot be an evil." For him, death itself is not an evil because it is merely the cessation of the body's functions and does not affect the eternal soul. Fear of death, therefore, is irrational because it is based on a misunderstanding of what death is and on a false identification of the self with the body rather than with the mind. He however firmly believed that God plays a central role in both life and death. In his view, the mind's immortality is guaranteed by God, who created the soul to be eternal. He wrote: "I am not my body, I am not my mind in the sense that the mind is a creation of God, and the soul is not subject to the corruptions of the body." For Descartes, God ensured the eternal nature of the mind, which cannot perish along with the body. He trusted in the divine as the source of the soul’s immortality, and his conception of death is deeply intertwined with a theistic worldview. Thus, he contended the soul’s ultimate survival and happiness are part of God’s greater plan for the universe.

But while Descartes believed in the immortality of the soul, he also maintained that the body was essentially a machine, governed by the laws of physics. The body’s movements are mechanical and governed by physical processes and death occurs when the body ceases to function. In his work The Passions of the Soul (1649), Descartes described how bodily functions, including death, are the result of natural causes. "The body is nothing but a machine, composed of matter and subject to the laws of nature; and the mind is that which governs the machine by directing the body’s movements and actions." When the body dies, it is because this machine can no longer function. However, this mechanical explanation does not extend to the soul, which operates outside of physical laws and is unaffected by the dissolution of the body.

Kierkegaard: life’s angsts and anxiety

On the other hand, Søren Kierkegaard, the 19th-century Danish philosopher, theologian, and is often considered one of the most significant precursors to existentialism, addressed the profound anxiety surrounding life, death, and existence, with a particular focus on individual responsibility, the tension between faith and doubt, and the fear of death. For Kierkegaard, life is filled with paradoxes and choices. His reflections on death are deeply intertwined with his views on anxiety, faith, and the self. Kierkegaard’s concept of anxiety (angst) plays a central role in his philosophy, particularly in relation to the human confrontation with death. Anxiety, for Kierkegaard, arose from the realization of our freedom and the awareness of our finite existence. This awareness brings with it the realization that death is inevitable and that we must face the possibility of non-being. In his work The Concept of Anxiety (1844), he wrote: “anxiety is the dizziness of freedom, which emerges when the spirit wants to posit itself as its own foundation.” In this sense, anxiety is a response to the realization that we are responsible for defining our lives and, ultimately, our own death. Death becomes an ultimate possibility that reveals both the finitude and the freedom of human existence. For Kierkegaard, the fear of death is not merely the fear of physical cessation but the fear of the unknown and the possible loss of the self.

Kierkegaard thought of death as the ultimate test of faith. The way one confronts death is tied directly to how a person lived and related to God. In contrast to the existential anxiety surrounding death, Kierkegaard argued that faith in God provided the individual with the means to face mortality with courage and hope. In his work Fear and Trembling (1843), Kierkegaard examined the biblical story of Abraham and his willingness to sacrifice his son Isaac in obedience to God, using it as a model of faith. He argued that true faith involved surrendering one's existence to God, including the fear of death. “The greatest thing the human being can do is to stand in the presence of the absolute and accept the paradox.” (Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling, 1843). Faith, in this sense, transcends human understanding and allows one to face the paradox of life and death. It is through faith that the individual can be at peace with death inspired by the terms of eternal significance rather than on mere physical termination.

Kierkegaard famously wrote about the leap of faith—an act of individual commitment to belief in God despite the paradoxes and uncertainties of existence. In the face of death, the leap of faith becomes a way of embracing mortality not with despair, but with the certainty of eternal life in God. The leap of faith is a recognition that human reason cannot fully grasp the meaning of life and death, but one chooses to trust in the divine. Kierkegaard writes in The Sickness Unto Death (1849): “The greatest paradox of all is that life and death are one—yet the person who cannot believe in it can never come to terms with death.” (Kierkegaard, The Sickness Unto Death, 1849). For him, the individual is confronted with the reality of death, but through leap of faith, they can embrace it as part of their relationship with God, which gives it meaning. Without faith, death is a terrifying and a meaningless end; with faith, it becomes a necessary passage to eternal life. Kierkegaard also wrote extensively on the theme of despair, which he viewed as a condition of the self’s failure to reconcile its finite existence with its infinite potential. Despair is linked to a failure to come to terms with death and the individual's mortality. For Kierkegaard, despair manifests when an individual does not fully realize their true self—when they live inauthentically or fail to embrace their freedom and responsibility before God. He explained, “despair is the sickness unto death, because it is the sickness of the self that has not yet found itself, and in its despair is still in the process of becoming itself.” 

Death, in this sense, is not just an external event but is experienced internally as part of the existential struggle to find one's true self. The fear of death and the despair it brings, therefore, is a symptom of the deeper existential issue of not having fully embraced one’s selfhood or relationship with God. The self is not merely an individual, but a relationship to the infinite, and death cannot sever that relationship. In his later work, The Concept of Faith (1849), Kierkegaard wrote: "the self is a synthesis of the finite and the infinite, the temporal and the eternal, the body and the soul, and the spirit, which relates itself to itself and is conscious of itself.” For Kierkegaard, the soul's connection with the infinite is eternal, and thus, even in death, the self continues to exist beyond time and space. While the body perishes, the true self remains intact in relation to God. Faith in this eternal reality is essential for confronting death, as it transforms death from an absolute end into a passage to eternal life.

Schopenhauer: death culminates suffering

Meanwhile, Arthur Schopenhauer, a 19th-century German philosopher, is known for his pessimistic view of life, influenced by his reading of Eastern philosophies, particularly Buddhism and Hinduism, as well as his own interpretation of Immanuel Kant's ideas. Schopenhauer believed that the fundamental nature of reality is will—a blind, irrational force driving all things—and that human existence is fraught with suffering, ultimately culminating in death. Schopenhauer's thoughts on life and death center on the inevitability of suffering, the futility of striving, and the release from existence that death represents.

Schopenhauer's philosophy about life and death was profoundly pessimistic but offered an intriguing perspective on the nature of existence. He viewed life as an endless cycle of suffering driven by the irrational will, with death as the ultimate freedom from this cycle. While humans fear death because of the powerful influence of the “will to live”, Schopenhauer believed that death should be seen not as something to dread, but as a natural and liberating end to the painful existence. Through death, the will ceases, and individuals are freed from the endless striving and suffering that define human life. In his view, the acceptance of death, as well as the recognition of suffering in others, will lead to a deeper compassion and a moral life, grounded in the knowledge that all beings are subject to the same fate.

At the center of Schopenhauer's ideation is the notion that life is governed by will—an insatiable, irrational force that propels all beings toward endless striving and desire. This will, however, can never be fully satisfied, thus, may lead to inevitable suffering. Life is essentially marked by pain, frustration, and the continual striving for unattainable goals, Schopenhauer thought. In his seminal work, The World as Will and Representation (1818), Schopenhauer contended: “life is the constant striving of the will towards an unattainable goal, a striving which leads to misery, and at the end of which stands death.” For Schopenhauer, existence is suffering because of the inherent nature of the will—it is a blind force that compels us to desire things that ultimately do not bring lasting fulfillment. The cycle of striving and dissatisfaction is endless, with each desire giving way to the next, creating a ceaseless loop of dissatisfaction. Thus, for him death as the final release from the endless cycle of suffering. This shouldn’t be feared, but rather, represents the cessation of the will’s demands. In his view, the individual’s consciousness and suffering are tied to the will, and when death comes, the will ceases to exist as an active force. This aligns with his broader view that life is essentially a futile struggle, and death offers liberation from this struggle. He wrote: “Death is the ultimate liberation, the deliverance from the tyranny of the will, from the horror of endless striving and suffering. To die is to escape the curse of existence.” Death therefore is the ultimate end of the individual’s suffering because the will is extinguished. The death of the body and the cessation of the will are seen as a return to the pre-conscious, undifferentiated state that exists before birth—an eternal, peaceful nothingness.

Schopenhauer also explored the paradoxical relationship between the will to live and the fear of death. Despite his bleak assessment of life, humans are driven by a deep, instinctual will to preserve their lives. He believed that the instinct to survive is an expression of the will, which keeps individuals bound to existence even though this is filled with suffering. He explained: “the fear of death is one of the strongest instincts in human beings. Yet, this instinct is not the result of reason, but of the will to live, which strives often irrationally to preserve itself against all odds.” (Schopenhauer, On the Basis of Morality, 1840). For him, this fear of death is irrational. The will to live, however, perpetuates the individual’s attachment to existence, even though existence itself is painful and futile. The tension between the fear of death and the desire to be free from suffering forms a central part of his analysis of human existence.

Schopenhauer further critiqued the notion of the self and its attachment to life as an illusion. The self, he argued, is not a stable, eternal entity but rather an expression of the will to live, which manifests in the individual’s desires, actions, and ego. He expounded: “the self is the individual manifestation of the will, and it is this very self that perpetuates suffering. To overcome the self, to dissolve the ego, is to overcome the will and achieve liberation from suffering.” (Schopenhauer, The World as Will and Representation, Vol. 2, 1844). The self, driven by the will, clings to life and continues to struggle, but this attachment is ultimately illusory. Death, in his view, represents the end of this illusion and the cessation of the self’s desire-driven existence.

Schopenhauer’s philosophy on death also extended to his views on compassion and the moral implications of suffering. He believed that the recognition of suffering in others is the basis for moral action, and he argued that the compassionate person understood that the will to live in others is just as much a source of suffering as it is in oneself. In his essay On the Basis of Morality (1840), Schopenhauer explicated: “the recognition of the suffering of others, the awareness of the will to live in others as well as oneself, leads to compassion, the greatest moral virtue. Death, in this sense, is not an individual matter, but a shared condition of all beings who suffer.” To do this leads to deeper empathy and a moral obligation to alleviate suffering wherever possible. Compassion is a way to transcend the self and the individual will, recognizing the interconnectedness of all suffering.

In contrast to his pessimism about life and death, Schopenhauer believed that art and aesthetic experience could offer temporary relief from the will’s suffering. Through art, individuals can momentarily escape the ceaseless striving and experience a form of timeless, will-less contemplation. In The World as Will and Representation (Vol. 2, 1818), he pointed: “art is the one true escape from the torment of existence. In moments of aesthetic contemplation, the individual transcends the self and experiences a fleeting liberation from the will.” In moments of deep aesthetic experience, whether through music, art, or nature, individuals can step outside their ego and the painful grasp of the will. In this state, death is not feared but accepted as a natural end to a temporary existence. Art, therefore, serves as a temporary reprieve from the suffering of life and a reminder of the peaceful nothingness that follows death.

Nietzsche: the ultimate affirmation

On the other hand, Friedrich Nietzsche, a 19th-century German philosopher, thought that life and death is ultimately about affirmation. Rather than seeking escape from life’s inevitable suffering or the certainty of death, Nietzsche encouraged individuals to embrace both as essential aspects of existence. Through the will to power, the Übermensch, and the eternal recurrence, Nietzsche challenged us to live authentically, to affirm life with all its struggles, and to transcend the fear of death by creating our own meaning and purpose. Nietzsche defined the Übermensch as an individual who has overcome traditional moral values and embraced life’s challenges without succumbing to despair or nihilism. The Übermensch transcends the fear of death by living a life of purpose, creativity, and self-overcoming. The Übermensch is the meaning of the earth. (Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra, 1883).

Nietzsche argued that death is simply the end of the individual’s struggle and creativity, but it does not diminish the value of life itself. Embracing life, with its suffering and joy, is the true philosophical act of strength and liberation. This philosopher, often associated with a radical revaluation of life, death, and morality, had a profound concept regarding life as the will to power, which he defined as the fundamental force or drive underlying all human action and existence. For him, life is not merely about survival or moral duty but about asserting one’s will and creating one’s own values. The will to power is an active striving to assert control over one’s circumstances and to transcend limitations. In his book Beyond Good and Evil in 1886, Nietzsche contended “the will to power, that is the most basic fact of human existence, not some external thing we fight for, but a force that is part of our very essence. Life is fundamentally about overcoming, asserting, and expanding this power thus, the continuous challenge to overcome obstacles, to grow, and to shape oneself.” This propounded that it is not the avoidance of suffering or death but the courageous engagement with life's challenges that defines human greatness. This idea encouraged individuals to embrace struggle as an essential part of their existence. He did not view death as something inherently tragic but as an inevitable part of existence which should not be feared or avoided. He argued that humans often live in fear of death because of the way they have been conditioned by religion and societal values, which often emphasize submission to fate and an afterlife. For Nietzsche, death is simply a natural end, and one's focus should be on living authentically and fully rather than fearing the inevitable. “To live is to suffer, to survive is to find some meaning in the suffering. But one should not fear death, for death is simply the end of the will to power, the cessation of struggle.” (Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra, 1883). Nietzsche’s concept of amor fati (love of fate) is tied to his views on death. Rather than shying away from death, Nietzsche encouraged individuals to embrace it as an integral part of the natural cycle. To love one’s fate means to accept all aspects of life, including suffering, challenges, and the certainty of death. “My formula for greatness in a human being is amor fati: that one wants nothing to be different, not forward, not backward, not in all eternity.” (Nietzsche, Ecce Homo, 1888). Here, Nietzsche presents the idea that embracing life, with all its suffering and death, is the path to greatness. One must not wish for an easier life or a different fate but should affirm everything, including death, as necessary for the development of one’s character.

One of Nietzsche’s most provocative ideas is the eternal recurrence, the notion that all events in life will recur infinitely, in exactly the same way, for all eternity. This idea poses a profound challenge to how one should live. Nietzsche asked whether individuals would be willing to live their life over and over, eternally, and if they could affirm this repetition, they would truly be living a life worth living. “What does your conscience say? – You shall become the person you are. You shall remain true to yourself, and to your love of life. What is your thought about the eternal recurrence? Can you look back upon your life and say, ‘I would do it again, I would live it again, a thousand times over’?” (Nietzsche, The Gay Science, 1882). The eternal recurrence challenges individuals to affirm their existence, to live with such intensity and passion that they could accept the eternal return of their life. The idea serves as a radical affirmation of life, where death is not feared because it is part of an eternal cycle that can be embraced.

Further, Nietzsche’s critique of Christian morality played a crucial role in his philosophy of life and death. He argued that Christianity, with its emphasis on suffering and the afterlife, encouraged individuals to devalue life on earth and focus on an imagined better existence after death. Nietzsche challenged this idea, proposing that such a focus on the afterlife prevents people from embracing life fully, with all its challenges and pleasures. “Christianity is the one great curse, the one immense and most fatal corruption. It is the one great lie. It poisons the fountains of life, and places the final goal of existence in something beyond this world, thus preventing individuals from affirming their own lives.” (Nietzsche, The Antichrist, 1888). In Nietzsche's view, death should not be seen as a gateway to a better existence but as the natural end of a life that has been fully lived. The obsession with an afterlife, fueled by Christianity, detracts from the value of the here and now. His philosophical project, then, is to challenge individuals to confront their mortality, embrace it, and live authentically in spite of it. “To live is to suffer, and to survive is to find meaning in that suffering. But death is not the greatest threat—living a life that is not worth living is the real tragedy.” (Nietzsche, The Gay Science, 1882). In this context, death is not the greatest fear for Nietzsche, but rather the fear of living an unexamined, unfulfilled, and inauthentic life. Death is inevitable, but it is how one lives that defines the quality of one’s existence.

Conclusion: fascinating mystery

Death, the one certainty that shadows every living being, remains a mystery that both terrifies and fascinates. Philosophers across centuries have grappled with its meaning, its inevitability, and its implications for how we live. From the stoic calm which urged us to contemplate our mortality as a way to live fully in the present, to the skeptical wisdom which saw death as simply the cessation of life, the spectrum of thought on death is as varied as the human experience itself. It is a defining feature of our existence, a reminder that we are finite and, therefore, must live authentically, acknowledging that our time on earth lacks eternity.

Yet, in all their divergent thoughts, these philosophers seem to converge on one essential point: death is both a fact and a riddle, a final frontier that neither defines us nor diminishes us. It reminds us of our fragility, our impermanence, but also, paradoxically, of our ability to transcend fear through understanding. Others say we die a little each day. So, what of death, then, after centuries of contemplation? It remains, perhaps, a question with no final answer. It is an end, yet also a beginning—both a cessation and a release. We are left with its silence, the space between our last breath and the world that continues without us. Death, it seems, is not something to be solved, but something to be met, not with fear or resignation, but with acceptance. In embracing its inevitability, we are reminded to live more fully, to seek meaning in each moment, knowing that our time is finite. This matter—forever the great unknown—becomes not a source of despair, but an invitation to live deeply, to love fiercely, and to be present in each precious time. 

Offer each other the sign of peace. 👻

=============

Buy me a coffee

💬If you consider this helpful and felt like donating to continue or sustain my arts, crafts, and reflective writings, share through this link https://buymeacoffee.com/vigloria