The Meaning of Life and Death

While death is a natural event, meaning that cells die and body systems fail, our experiences with death continue to be shaped and influenced by medical and cultural practices and trends. We are surrounded with many questions concerning the “meaning” of death, as our experiences and perceptions of death include many issues of morality. With more of us living longer and dying from chronic conditions rather than acute diseases, new medical technologies have been created to prolong life. Dying bodies are kept alive with medications and machines; however, these technologies raise questions about the quality of life and challenges are made against these life-prolonging measures. While the traditional view of death is seen as the “enemy”, systems have been created in order to “defeat” death and make it less “feared”, such as organ “harvesting” and transplantation. To make the process of dying easier and more comfortable, we have institutionalized hospice and palliative care. Through time, death has become a process that is less hidden, talked about, and individualized.

In my Comparative Study of Death class, we have talked about the differences between dying, (being) dead, and death. All three are connected with the experience of death, where death is defined as a process, (being) dead is defined a condition or state that the body is in, and lastly, death is defined as the transition from being alive to being dead and is what intervenes between dying and (being) dead. Our experiences of death are seen as a process and end as a state. “Acceptance” or “denial” of death depends on a variety of factors—social, circumstances of the case, cultural responses, and individual needs. Kubler-Ross wrote about the stages of death: denial and isolation, resentment and anger, bargaining, depression and hopelessness, and acceptance. In addition, each person will travel through these stages in their own way.



This YouTube video is a dark satire portraying our conceptions of what death really is and what it means to us as individuals. Once death arrives, decisions are made, and the choices vary. Contrary to our American dominant ideologies, the video portrays death as an event, rather than a process. The people in the video come to terms with death, and come up with strategies to defend themselves from death. Their fluctuating reactions project what Kubler-Rose describes as the stages of death. The individuals go from denial to acceptance, which all the stages are expressed through their reactions. When they are told they are dead by the grim reaper, they feel an experiential blank, where the phenomenon of anticipatory grief has occurred because they have been forewarned. In addition to these reactions, the video brings up the issue of what awaits for the newly deceased. Conceptions of the afterlife question what souls are, where they reside within us, and where do they go once we are dead. At the end of one’s life, feelings are evoked out of loss of agency in the world and moral personhood. The subjectivity of the body becomes objectified. All of these issues are open to question and subject to personal beliefs. Despite spirituality and achievement of a meaningful death that is “dignified”, death can be painful, full of contradictions, and fearful.

For a majority, the representation of factors such as cultural practices or rituals, religious beliefs or ideation, societal norms or laws, deeply influence individual choices and medical concerns. Margaret Lock’s article, “Living Cadavers and the Calculation of Death” discusses aging, dying, and the difference between health care systems and cultures. Lock states, “In North America, a brain dead body is biologically alive in the minds of those who work closely with it, but is no longer a person, whereas in Japan…such an entity is both living and remains a person, at least for several days after the brain death has been diagnosed” (150). The article examines intensive care units (ICU) and the use of medical technology, such as artificial ventilators. The use of these apparatus’ is created for human entities whose brains are diagnosed as irreversibly damaged, but whose bodies are kept alive by technological support. Lock describes “brain dead” patients as “betwixt and between, both alive and dead, breathing with technological assistance but irreversibly unconscious” (136). There is a gray area between what is considered alive and what is considered dead. Amongst these ailments, the management of dying people is what palliative medicine and care are for. In addition, Lock discusses the value of such brain-dead bodies, as they provide potential value towards the supply of donors for human organs to transplant. This dominant ideology is widely disputed and has different effects across cultures. Furthermore, Eric L. Krakauer’s article, “To Be Freed from the Infirmity of (the) Age”, also discusses the use of medical technology and its quest to control death. The use of medicine and technology can be used to free us of our “infirmity of age”. Krakauer states, “Deferring death becomes more important than attending to the soul or preparation for the afterlife or the next” (390). This reflects the dilemma between the conflicting values of medicine and morals and gives insight on bioethical concerns. By affirming one’s goals at life’s end, a person can die a “dignified death”. Additionally, in the midst of suffering at the end of one’s life, comfort and meaning can be provided. These articles allow us to rethink a medical death in larger, more humanistic terms.

In order to consider the meaning of death, we must look at the meaning of life and the relationship between life and death. One may believe that where there is life there is hope. Through the stories of suffering, hope begins with the decision to survive. The metaphorical “fight” against illness is taking on all of life’s aspects, for better or for worse. Life is not only about surviving, it is about engaging in the life we have and embracing it. It is one thing to be alive physically, it is another thing to be alive emotionally and spiritually. James W. Green’s book, “Beyond the Good Death”, examines the ways in which Americans react to death not only for themselves, but also, for those they care about. On the back of the book, Green states, “A compassionate physician once remarked that in his neonatal intensive care unit ‘no one dies in pain and no one dies alone.’ That was his policy: humane, honest, straightforward. But it is not that simple, as he knew. Like birth and marriage, death is ritually dense in all cultures, creating occasions when belief and ritual are as present and as important as the physician’s ministrations. In no society do people simply leave the dead as they are and unceremoniously walk away…Despite the routine disclaimers on death certificates, no on dies a ‘natural death.’ As culture-baring primates we do not have that option”. Each person, each culture is complex, as well as the experiences and practices surrounding death. If one can have a “lifestyle”, can one have a “deathstyle” too?

Sources:

Green, James W. 2008. “Beyond the Good Death: The Anthropology of Modern Dying”. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Krakauer, Eric L. 2007. “To Be Freed from the Infirmity of (the) Age: Subjectivity, Life-Sustaining Treatment, and Palliative Medicine.” In Subjectivity: Ethnographic Investigations. Joao Biehl, Byron Good, and Arthur Kleinman, eds. Berkeley: University of California Press. Pp. 381-397.

Lock, Margaret. 2004. “Living Cadavers and the Calculation of Death”. Body and Society 10(2-3): 135-152.