I will grant you that animal cognition is often far more sophisticated than we tend to credit it. However it is fairly easy to determine that animals do not, at anything like the human amplitude, experience existential angst. The higher animals experience grief and loss, compassion, empathy, and therefore sorrow ... but I see little evidence that they are not entirely present-oriented with no more than an intuitive self preservation instinct ... not an understanding of the story arc of their existence and where it's leading.

Nor is this a disparaging thing ... it is to their advantage in many ways.

Our awareness of context and ability to tell stories is both a blessing and a curse -- just as them not knowing what's coming is both a blessing and a curse.

Zapffe's acknowledgement of existential angst is not a "gloomy opinion" and there's no need to deny how such self-awareness can effect us or to assume Zapffe is personally weak around it. Acknowledging angst would in fact be the first step toward overcoming those negative impacts. Simple acceptance of the fact of one's mortality comes from facing it AS fact. It is largely learned helplessness, a lot of it coming from religion, that wrongly makes us think that mortality IS unbearable and must be remedied through the rituals and asserted truths of religion. It is not in fact that big of a deal, but for the big deal religion makes of it.

@mordant I don’t know if this has anything to do with anything but Irish Setters are known to become depressed if they are separated from their owners. I witnessed it first hand and had to deal with it one time.

A neighbor who has cows told me that if a calf dies the cows will hold a funeral—stand around the corpse in a circle and low pitifully. Maybe it’s a good thing they can’t understand what’s in store for their calves when they are sent to the slaughter house.

You are probably right that we humans have more of the mental abilities that it takes to work ourselves up into a depression. It’s not really necessary IMO. As you say, a lot of it is learned helplessness.Some studies show that religious people tend to be happier. I’m not sure we can blame religion. For some reason depression is rampant in Norway, which is not a very religious country.

[newsinenglish.no]

This reminds my of Albert Ellis, the famous psychiatrist who developed Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy. He was an atheist for all of his life and was very strident about atheism until he was old. He mellowed out with age and started calling for tolerance for the religion of patients. He based that on empirical data.

@WilliamFleming As the article points out, Norway is more recognizing / aware of mental illness and more accepting of the need to treat it without stigma. It is not that they have a higher rate of it than the rest of the West.

You are of course correct that we can't lay existential angst (or depression, a narrower topic which is not what I was talking about) strictly at the feet of religion. Religion didn't invent it, it just leveraged it. I would regard the inherent human condition as the "fire", religion as one of the major accelerants.

There is also the problem of modern, urban, technological life and how it is out of step with the hunter-gatherer milieu we're adapted to via natural selection, and some other things in the mix.

@mordant “There is also the problem of modern, urban, technological life and how it is out of step with the hunter-gatherer milieu we're adapted to via natural selection, and some other things in the mix.”

I fully agree. I think one reason I’m alive today is because I refused to be pigeonholed into an office. I wanted to work outside, move around, be part of a team. And in retirement I have settled into a little isolated farm. There are some drawbacks of course.

Definitely agree. Suffering is an avoidable aspect of being. We have certainly made many attempts throughout history to abate it in many forms. Personally, I think suffering is a crucial part of life. I think we would be far less without it. The degree that is necessary, I'm not sure. However, it can certainly be a catalyst for many positive things.

@Gawd I am of the belief that suffering always diminishes the sufferer. Not that you can't make lemonade from lemons, but I prefer to use my energy and time on other things where possible.

That said, suffering is an integral part of the human condition and always will be; transcending, easing and/or avoiding suffering and maximizing enjoyment and value are the appropriate goals of living.

Accepting the fact of one's own mortality is part of that process, and in fact in my experience has been one of the easier aspects of it, once you get past the operant conditioning of religion that it's a horrible, terrible, no-good thing about which we must live in terror.

The bigger problem is managing disappointment and regret and sorrow.

@mordant I greatly disagree that suffering always diminishes the sufferer. It may. But the opposite is often true. It is often that the dealing with the suffering and its causes that leads one to reach greater levels of strength, resolve, and understanding which leads to real and enduring progress. Overgeneralization is a serious error in reasoning and may lead to false conclusions.

@wordywalt I see the elevation of suffering to a virtue as reflecting a lack of imagination. We're so inured to suffering that we can't imagine how we would progress without it, and wrongly see it as a necessary ingredient to personal growth.

Mind you, some of this hinges on the definition of "suffering". I do not consider stubbing my toe or experiencing the natural consequences of an irresponsible or ill considered action to be "suffering". I consider suffering to be the result of imposing on someone, unchosen life paths, such as the loss of a spouse or child to premature death, or being forced to accept severe physical or mental or financial limitations. Not some momentary annoyance but something that changes how we are able / obliged to define ourselves. Not ordinary natural obstacles but imposed or excessive natural obstacles. The kind of thing that leaches value and choice / empowerment, and therefore meaning and purpose, from one's life.

One concern of mine is that we must never excuse or tolerate such suffering, or assume it is somehow deserved; we must always work to reduce or if possible, eliminate it. If we start to accept suffering as inevitable then we become indifferent to it (at least when seen in others, anyway) and civil society is threatened.

Perhaps. I think he was speaking of humanity as a whole. No one is free from suffering.

@Gawd
Suffering can be brought to a tolerable minimum. Life can be very much worth living.

Yes, anything can be food for thought. Sometimes people share the ideas of writers, philosophers, scientists, or otherwise because they find the ideas interesting. Crazy eh!?!

If you find the chapter of your book interesting and worth sharing, you should do so. You are free to and sharing ideas and knowledge is a good thing.

As for you're snide attitude, I really don't give a F.F. for it, so please displace your anger elsewhere.

@Gawd not anger, contempt perhaps for fishers.

@Mofo1953 That's quiet an assumption as to my motivation for sharing. You'd think a person on a site for agnostics/atheists would know something about not making baseless assumptions.

@Gawd my experience as a monitor points out and indicates that members who copy paste stuff verbatim and not even include a POV are usually fishing for point, so my assumption is not "baseless" contrary to your assumptions of me having a snide attitude and being angry.

@Mofo1953 Oh, your snide attitude and anger were anything but baseless.

@Mofo1953 Anyway, like I said I like to share ideas from others that I find interesting and worth sharing. So if you don't agree that's fine. You can simply not read them. When I go to the bookstore I don't stop in the romance section and browse through it because I don't care for it. So I skip it and move on to the sections I I care for. Just do the same.

@Gawd assumptions again?

@Gawd this forum is for opinions, unfortunately unless you open your post with something of a warning like "this post does not contain my opinion or this post is a copy paste that I have put just for your reading it and opining", then one must read all, until you realize that the whole thing contains no opinions and is plagiarism from an encyclopedia site, it would not be plagiarism if you mention the source, but you did neither, so there is no way of knowing prior to reading the whole thing. I would have skipped it gladly had I known in advance.

@Mofo1953 Great.

I definitely agree with you. We have developed many psychological ways to defend ourselves. I disagree with his antinatalist conclusion though.

Yes it is from Wikipedia. I think it's food for thought. I think he makes some rather interesting points to ponder, hence the share.

I think he raises a good point in the contrast of the mind of humans and other animals. We can think of the past and future and feel joy or sorrow for either. We aware of, and able to contemplate our own mortality. We have the power of imagination. All many things that can contribute to the human condition and our suffering. Things that we try to avoid for the most part and he demonstrates various ways in which we try to cope.

It depends on the definition of "spiritual." Of course it's a very ambiguous word. "Spiritual" can mean much more than merely the supernatural. Also, we do have "spiritual needs." There is much evidence to this in Psychology and Neuroscience.

@Gawd Not the way that I
read them.

@DenoPenno Not the way you read what?

@Gawd Psychology and Neuroscience.

@DenoPenno I like Sam Harris' use of the word "Spiritual." I'll find something on it and share.

[samharris.org]

@Gawd If anyone has to rely on the "ambiguity" of a word to justify their beliefs, they've got some seriously shit beliefs.
Spirituality is just as much ridiculous horseshit as religion.

@KKGator Many words are ambiguous. I'm sure even some that you regularly use. Their ambiguity however doesn't discredited their use. It just means they have various interpretations. You may believe that "spirituality is just as much ridiculous horseshit as religion" but that's likely because you are unaware of interpretations of the word that are unrelated to religion. You're viewpoint seems rather myopic.

@Gawd It's actually irrelevant what my viewpoint is to you.
It's no different than the opinions of all those philosophers.
There's not a single one of them whose opinion is any more valid than mine,
or anyone else's.

@KKGator You're just arguing relativism which is silly. Do you really think that all opinions are equally valid?

@Gawd Why would you wish to continue a discussion with someone whose viewpoint is "silly"?
It's cool though. We're done.
Enjoy your night.

@KKGator To illustrate to you that when it comes to opinions and ideas relativism is preposterous.

Enjoy your night as well.

@Gawd Your opinion has been duly noted, and will receive the
consideration it deserves.
Thank you.

@KKGator You're welcome.

Red herring.