Quote:
Originally Posted by N.T.M.  You missed the point entirely. It says, excluding its aid in the past (evolution), presently we can cognitively transcend that since we are capable of realizing our insignificance.
Savy? |
Quote:
Originally Posted by A Joseph Smith Sphinx Also, this is a kinda silly question, because even if people may "choose" not to be afraid, their actual behavior when faced with the situation typically changes substantially and in ways that neither they nor others could predict. People think differently in real situations than they do when hypothesizing about things. |
A lot of people believe that they can cognitively transcend fears like that, but in reality, these same people rarely demonstrate the same lack of fear.
People can and do override a gut instinct "not to die," but it rarely has anything to do with fear of death. If people can see an activity as fun, preserving their honor, or having some other benefit, they might do it even if there is a risk of death attached. However, people won't just disregard the presence of the risk (e.g. people normally don't just not care about traffic signals unless they hope to get some thrill out of it) in every day life precisely because they would be dead otherwise.
It's not transcending the fear of death, it's deciding that some benefits are worth the risk of dying. Not having this ability would still be an evolutionary disadvantage, because everything has some risk of dying.
Also, you asked about our opinions on the quote as well as on our fear of death. If I think an argument is full of shit because it disregards facts about the way humans work psychologically, then that is still my opinion on the matter.