Boredom contra Rage, Tenth Aphorism

The bored cling to the facticity of death. The fictitious death is the only one worth striving for.


3 responses to “Boredom contra Rage, Tenth Aphorism

  1. “The bored cling to the facticity of death.”

    When you say ‘facticity’ do mean the factuality of death? As in it’s realness? We live in a bored culture trying to ‘keep it real’, does this apply to those numb masses?
    Seeking the realness of death.

    “The fictitious death is the only one worth striving for.”

    I can take this as meaning different things:
    a) Faking your own death = a ‘fictitious death. That could be worth striving for, especially because there could be some gains (insurance money /freedom from debt/responsibility).

    b) The death of a fictitious character. Like when you kill off a character in a story. That can be highly poetic.

    c) The death of someone known to us but far enough removed as to be a fictitious character. Someone who represents an idea in our minds as opposed to an actual person.

    Use Barack Obama as an example. Obama represents several Ideals/Ideas: Freedom, The Messiah, ‘The President’ and ‘The American Dream’ (the last two are in themselves a cluster of Ideals/Ideas).

    If he dies it becomes the loss of something fictitious because he was never any of these things in RL. This can be poetic, romantic even, as long as the right maneuverings are made around it. Just like Kennedys death, it became a story unto itself.

    Am I missing your point entirely?

    • According to the Oxford English Dictionary (accessible through the Toronto Public Library), “facticity,” means:

      The quality or condition of being a fact; factuality.

      The “realness” of death is only what is most obvious about it. There is, or at least can be, a grandeur to death that is cheapened by fear and advertising and, even, life itself because of its sheer abundance; “it is better that 20 million should die than one be saved” (Jeffers). By “fictitious death,” I mean the death you would be the author of, if you were a character in the novel of your life; the truest expression of human freedom lies in this: saying that it was not so because it had to be, but because I willed it (Nietzsche, paraphrase).

      No, you didn’t miss the point—just saw points that I hadn’t intended.

  2. When I was younger I would have argued that it was better to save 20 million, than 1. Now I believe differently. Maybe I’ve gotten cynical in my old age, or maybe I’ve been talking to Charm for too long.

    I see a clear value in the loss of 20 million. 20 million deaths, would be far more valuable to the world then 1 death. I’m not just talking about over population either.

    One life can mean so much. It represents an individual, a kernel value, an indivisible prime number. 20 million people, and their hopes and dreams mean nothing to me.

    I cannot and never will know these people. Once i know one of them, that individual is no longer part of the 20 million. At least in my mind, that’s how it works. I should read some of what this ‘Jeffers’ has to say.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s