LogFAQs > #931458479

ParanoidObsessive posted...

"Immortal" means "not mortal". And "mortal" only means "subject to death". So, being immortal means you cannot die, but it doesn't necessarily include not aging. It just means you can't die from aging. Nor does it preclude you from losing limbs, or remaining healthy in any way.

Never said it did - literally all I said was that immortals cannot die, whereas ageless beings can. I said nothing about injury or degeneration.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

It's not so much the individual act as much as the constant accumulation of regrets and sorrow.

And why would love and good memories not accumulate the same way?

This is why I say that I sometimes think people have a fatalistic view of immortality, one that's often influenced by fiction more than critical thought (Highlander being an excellent example).

If anything, I think an immortal would be more at peace with the notion of death and impermanence, because they would get very experienced with it. And speaking as someone who has watched a large number of relatives pass - some old and at the end of a full life, some young and tragically lost in their prime, some in between - it really does get easier the more often you do it. You develop what I characterize as a healthier view of death, that it is the natural conclusion to life that all face eventually. Grief is not a heartache that never goes away - not unless you allow it to be. You simply come to reflect fondly on the times you had together, cognizant of the fact that your time with *everyone* is limited, because either you or they will eventually pass on. The only thing that being an immortal changes about that equation is that it will always be the other person rather than you.

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!