Why, of all things, talk about death? True, death is not an appealing subject to most people. It reminds us of an enemy that can never be beaten, a shadowy side to reality that cannot be changed or ignored. More frightening than that is death is out of our control.

I know many friends that have made peace with this enemy, tranquil and accepting of the end when it should come. But I have not. So much I want to do, learn, experience and see…and at any moment, my ability to do this could be taken from me. Then, after everything is taken away, after (presumably) my consciousness vanishes, what is left? Perhaps you, reader, can relate to this? The unpredictable nature of death can make one wary and anxious. Take, for example, the story of a school teacher that was walking to her class when she suddenly dropped dead on the sidewalk from an aneurysm.

There are two basic reasons why we emotionally react to the concept of death in such a way. First of all, self preservation. However, even deeper than this desire for self preservation is a desire for self-fulfillment. The human being needs a purpose, a motivation to live–not just to remain alive, but a reason to be alive. Knowing that one day we must forfeit our consciousness to “the void,” how do we cope? How do we view death?

The way that religion helps you cope with death is obvious. Its a complete parallel to the way that morphine helps a man cope with pain. But what about the secular perspective? There is no objective, universal way to view death in a gratifying light. The meaning of life and self cannot be experimented with or tested for data. So if the secular perspective is also subjective, and the religious perspective is subjective posing as objective, what makes the secular perspective any better or different?

I wish that what follows this sentence could be profound, inspiring and original…but it is actually very simple. The difference between the religious perspective and our secular perspective is evident in our awareness of the limitations in our knowledge. Secularists admit that no one views death the same, and every human  must come to terms with it in their own way. Secularists understand that they do not know objectively what death means for them, and so anything that they draw comfort from is entirely subjective. The religious person is not aware of this, insists that his/her subjective view is concrete fact, and tries to convince others of this “fact” without evidence or proof. Even though the religious person may sincerely believe that his/her view is fact, learned biases block any inkling of uncertainty.

Once my “transformation” into atheism was complete, I still had–I still do have–negative feelings toward this uncertainty; a world physically objective and philosophically subjective. Going from a worldview absolutely certain of everything to a worldview only reserving confidence to things supported by evidence and logic is a pretty drastic psychological change to acclimate to. I think my previous sense of security (however false and uncertain it really was) as a Christian, granted by these impostor “facts,” can account for this distress–for after the impostor “facts” were thrown away as useless, I expected something more really “FOR REAL” certain to take its place; to feel the same security, and then some, in my new secular beliefs. Only I soon realized that the subjective beliefs of this secular worldview do not offer that kind of security–one will constantly review them and their truth will always be threatened by fresh insights or intellectual onslaughts.

Then it suddenly dawned on me: I, and you reader, at least can find security and comfort in one thing. The reason why you should feel comforted and secure in your secular view of death–whatever that may be–is the same reason why you are uncomfortable with your uncertainty. It is the intellectual awareness that you have gained. Your uncertainty and doubt is evidence of it. The security and confidence that you felt in religion was a farce–an illusion. Morphine numbs the pain, but the cause of that pain is still there, just as the uncertainty still exists whether it is acknowledged or not. Because we acknowledge life’s uncertainties means we are closer to understanding reality.

Do you think this is enough? I would like your subjective opinions. :-)