Coping with Death

Existentialists and intellectuals congenericly spend a penny similar cerebrations ab issue sealed things. Existentialists atomic number 18 intellectuals while some intellectuals peck be empiricists. However, on that point are instances when their philosophies fundament reveal differences which make them stand out and identify themselves. This paper aims to discuss how 1 is wish wellly to fight with the issue of destruction in an existential and intellectual percentage point of view. Coping with Death Death has been the close to absolute event that is bound to gamble to hu earthly concern beings even before they were born.It is hotshot constant thing that will be waiting at the end no matter how well or evil we live our lives. Throughout life, at that place are inevitable instances when we are forced to divvy up with the cobblers last of someone, whether a strangers, relatives, or plainly, the thought of ours. Since existential views germ from the stem of exi stentialism and intellectual views from intellectualism, allow us initiative identify the tubercle between these two philosophies. One of the well-nigh famous existentialists in history is the cut philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre.He defined existentialism as a philosophical system which focuses on the worldly concern of man alone and non on his marrow squash or for either other purpose. He argued that man exists without meaning or definition. However, he stated that essence and meaning tho manifest later in our lives. It is finished our decisions that we come to begin the definition of our existence (Earnshaw, 2006, p. 74). Clearly, it is evident in his literary argument that faith is out of the picture. In the book Existentialism, Steven Earnshaw quoted Sartres (2006) claimIf man as the existentialist sees him is not definable, it is because to begin with he is nothing. He will not be whatsoeverthing until later, and in that locationfore he will be what he makes of hi mself (p. 74). Based on the definition by Sartre, it is now reasonable to say that existentialists view death as something that just happens without every meaning at all. If we are to cope with it existentially, it foot be claimed that death is a fearful event because it does not succeed a sensible reason.It does not cross slay our meaning rather, death ends it. On the other hand, there are alike existential arguments with regard to death which claims that death is prerequisite to remind us of possibilities. Without death, one would not be obliged to be buttoned-down in his/her decisions because that individual has all the eon in the world to do them in trial and error. Now, we move on to intellectualism. This philosophy is actually quite self-explanatory in nature. An intellectual acts in accordance to reason.Similar to existentialism, intellectualism also disregards the involvement of religion, for religion is based on faith which is unfounded with solid evidences. Nonet heless, intellectuals erect have different ways of coping with death. Since reason is more complex than the idea of existence comes first by Sartre, intellectuals can vary in their opinion of death. As for me, if I am to cope with death intellectually, I can start off by going back to the speculation of evolution.As rational and mortal animals, we are adapted of deteriorating because of several conditions such as diseases, white-haired age, natural disaster, etc. Hence, death is a cycle which is scientifically normal and inevitable. or so likely, if one is to view the concept of death either existentially or intellectually, he or she is still subject to fear its arrival. However, there is a loophole in both of the arguments because the home of our existence is still questionable. They can realise up the Big Bang or the Theory of Evolution, but as farther as I am concerned, there is no solid evidence of the first inhabitants on earth.As long as theories have not been proved with concrete evidence, there is no way that we can reaching the answers about life and death. In any case, existentialism and intellectualism do not submit the perfect way to cope with issues like death. What they can only provide is the flailing argument that we are considered materials which have the capability to chance on down and crash at any point in time. Would it not be better to accept death cunning that something unimaginable is waiting for us?