You misunderstand me Gnus. It’s good that you haven’t read any of the German philosophers. Even a newspaper is too ‘intullektsjuol’ for a “duder” like yourself.
Jakob
But isn’t this in a sense true? Our human experience[s] can sometimes be flawed, misrepresented, misinterpreted, because of our “subjective” perceptions. I may not be understanding the above statement but IS it possible that we can find a totally rational and logical purpose ALSO not based on our experiences? In other words, the brain’s "fanciful" reality vs. what is actually known and seen. If that made sense.
Or is “human experience” here meant as also encompassing all present rational and original thought (at least original to the person him/her self, not just personal history, emotions, spiritual intuitions, et cetera.
I may be wrong here but couldn’t that also be seen as a form of, albeit, a mild one, narcissism or hedonism?
Does nature’s cause always lead to delight? It’s cause can be seen as struggling to become but is there necessarily delight in this unless one is speaking of “delight” as a much more subdued form of “being” - or having found “it”…whatever "it’s is.
Or perhaps better still - delight through self-perpetuating.
I don’t know Heidegger but did he actually have a problem or does the problem lie within us because we can’t understand him or don’t agree with him? That’s often the case you know.
Magnus Anderson,
There is another way to look at this question which would not be so concrete, MA – To someone in crisis, whose life might be so chaotic almost beyond the power to endure it in the moment would have a valid reason to ask this question and again, it might not be so concrete. There might be so much flowing in and out of yes’es and no’s, so much emotional fluctuation, so much struggle to endure, so much questioning of the purpose for living, but at the same time the strongest desire to simply let go.
.
Either a person who sees no meaning or essence left to life or one who sees so much or has seen so much. I mean, that is a really profound question in a person’s life - at least in the life of a conscious human being, one who also might reflect that question in a sane normal moment.
Questions of life and death are at the center of a person’s life…they are the core of one’s existence…certainly that of a philosopher and/or one seeking the truth and a new perspective.
But that’s not true of everyone, Magnus. What of the man or woman who has just lost his/her only child? How worth living do you think life is to that person in the moment? Or the person who has been so struggling with cancer that part of them would rather just let go in that moment but something keeps them from doing that.
What about the soldier oversees fighting a war who has seen so much death and destruction who is just about ready to give up because his/her mind has been stretched to the limit? It does happen you know.
When life is going well for us, sure it’s pretty obvious at that time that living is better than dying but we can’t assume that that is the truth for everyone simply because it is the way we feel. In this case, generalizing shows nothing.
There are cases where dying is preferrable to living. We don’t always hold that life is so precious and has so much meaning unless we see life with rose-colored glasses (which I have in the past while at the same time glimmering reality) which isn’t seeing life in all of its reality - the wonderful and the tragic. People havie breaking points and our lives are so changeable. Who was it who said “Life changes on a dime”!
Or it might weaken your position. 
Maybe or maybe not.
Did I, moron? I think that’s what every moron thinks when you call him a moron.
Your example is weak, but we can ignore that, since there ARE situations when death is preferable to life. This, however, is to conflate absolute valuations with relative valuations.
I explained this to that Aeon/Wizard fuckwit a while ago over at KTS, so maybe I could copy-paste that text here. But it’s irrelevant, isn’t it? It should be pretty obvious that life is superior to death.
And the reason for this is simply because you say so.
By the way, your one-liners are formulaic and bot-like and most importantly, completely pointless. What do you achieve when you spout non-sense of that sort? It is impossible for me to imagine that writing such formulaic crap can possibly be so engrossing. Either way, you should really put some effort in defending your beloved philosophers and ideas instead of simply repeating cliches that are so ineffective it’s not even funny.
There is life down to the quantum level.
It’s not about life.
It’s more like : “why awake? why not asleep?”
Life and death are, as concepts, the love of separatism.
Justification and choice come after fate and cause. Not before.