Slashdot Mirror
Study Finds the Pious Fight Death Hardest
Stanislav_J writes "A US study suggests that people with strong religious beliefs appear to want doctors to do everything they can to keep them alive as death approaches. The study, following 345 patients with terminal cancer, found that 'those who regularly prayed were more than three times more likely to receive intensive life-prolonging care than those who relied least on religion.' At first blush, this appears paradoxical; one would think that a strong belief in an afterlife would lead to a more resigned acceptance of death than nonbelievers who view death as the end of existence, the annihilation of consciousness and the self. Perhaps the concept of a Judgment produces death-bed doubts? ('Am I really saved?') Or, given the Judeo-Christian abhorrence of suicide, and the belief that it is God who must ultimately decide when it is 'our time,' is it felt that refusing aggressive life support measures or resuscitation is tantamount to deliberately ending one's life prematurely?"
Because they don't really believe and haven't had time to consider and come to terms with their own mortality.
I'd be praying for a quick death so my family wouldn't have to pay the millions to keep me alive after hitting the limit on my insurance policy.
Maybe, since they believe in a higher power, they believe that they "belong" on Earth and "have work to do" and that they can actually make a difference in the universe.
Compare this with an atheist who might believe that life is futile, fleeting, and nothing they do matters in the long run... they might be more accepting and complacent.
I'm not saying that either of these two are the case, my real point is that there are a billion different ways to look at this.
I'd be inclined to suspect(admittedly without experimental evidence) that, rather than being cause or effect of one another, piety and pursuit of aggressive EOL care are both effects.
People with the greatest fear of death would be inclined both to fight it medically and to seek reassurance against it theologically.
Probably get modded down for this.. for "religion" has always struck me as a haven for the fearful, those who lack self-esteem, or narcissistic personalities looking for external justification for their insane behaviour.
When such an individual is confronted with the prospect of death.. all that doubt, self-loathing and regret must really be a lot to suddenly bear when they "know" they're about to face the final judge.
I think there's a common paradoxical belief amongst Christians in the US that, rather than life being sacred, being alive is sacred. Life as a whole would include the entire cycle from birth to being consumed by the Earth. In this case though, I think it's more a case of FUD injected into their veins by the Church. I have no problems with religion, and consider myself to believe in some higher power. However, in my experience, Christian Churches spend way more time preaching about the punishment that awaits those who are not "saved" than they spend talking about how great it is to go out into the world and help your fellow man. The very concept that there is nothing you can do beyond blindly holding a belief to prevent eternal suffering in hell creates lots of FUD. It is not in the human nature to constantly blindly believe without at least occasionally questioning it. And the moment that you question it, is the moment that you create an instance where you will go to hell upon death.
I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
People who follow the instructions of authority, believe others should follow such instructions, and tend to believe that authority is right most or all of the time, are called authoritarian. People who hold to belief systems dictated by a hidden power with perfect judgement are some such. Those people also tend to believe/believe in other authorities judgements and power. Thus, people who hold strong religious beliefs tend to be the same people who most strongly believe in (and expect results from) the abilities of health care authorities -- doctors.
The same paradox was noted by Stanley Milgram in the Yale Experiments http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment A nurse was one of the people who continued to follow instructions and "shock" a subject after the subject appeared dead, just because she was told to. At first it seemed a paradox that a nurse would follow instructions that would harm another. He figured it that he was equivalent to a doctor in the nurses mind, and so she was following his instructions to the letter without evaluation, just as she was trained to do with doctors. (Nurses these days are trained differently).
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
A few notes to remember about this study:
Personally, I would much rather go for hospice care. Aside from being more comfortable for the patient, it also gives them a chance to say goodbye to everyone properly, rather than just gurgling at your horrified visitors from inside a torture chamber.
This study was done on terminally ill cancer patients. My wife is an RN, and in our discussions about her job it has been very apparent to her that death by cancer, slowly, causes a very different reaction in most people she has seen than other terminal illnesses.
I'm not saying there is anything wrong with the study, but I would like to see it expanded to, for example, heart/lung failure and other forms of terminal disease, and see what the difference is.
One aspect that I have seen in cancer end-of-life treatment is the heavy reliance on pain-killers to cope (nothing WRONG with that, just an observance). This could also have a very serious effect on EOL decisions.
-- I really need to bleed off some of this
only God has a right to decide when my time is.
In the cases mentioned in the article, basically He has already decided it's their time, but they keep defying Him by relying on machines and drugs and surgeries, prolonging the time away from Him.
So, basically, no. You're not letting Him decide when your time is; you're attempting to artifically take every last second possible.
"Everybody wants to go to heaven,
Nobody wants to go now."
Maybe these folks just love life, and regard it as a great gift, something they don't want to end so soon...?
Nope, this is not a religion-bashing post, so I doubt it gets much support. I do find it interesting that so many here have to be so critical of other peoples life choices.
Standard disclaimer: Not a religious person, personally. But so long as your religion doesn't call for you to kill me because I don't pledge my life to your Deity, then it's fine with me that you believe whatever you want to. His Noodly Greatness forgives all, in the End. ;)
"...there are some things that can beat smartness and foresight. Awkwardness and stupidity can." ~ Mark Twain
Doesn't always work though. I think most of the oldest people at my church have DNR's. But we're 'spiritual' people, not 'religious'.
Also, given that these are are terminal cancer patients, some christians could get really confused and think that just because God can heal them, he just hasn't yet and "must need more time" (obviously a logically fallacy).
While it's true that people with a greater fear of death are more likely to explore religion and that it may attract them to explore a belief, I seriously doubt that would get them to devote their life to it. Fears are only motivating when we are immediately faced with them. I've met very few people that actually live with a constant sense of foreboding (actually none).
I'd be really interested in any data on this when is comes to deaths that are less premature/illness related.
I cannot speak for all the pious, nor do I know how the study defines the pious so I will speak for myself. [cue the anti-whatever snarks...]
I believe we---mankind---were created for this world, not some ethereal place in the clouds. The Bible teaches that the people of God will live on earth forever, with a brief (relatively speaking) intermission elsewhere (between death and the return of Jesus Christ). It's quite interesting that the Bible begins with the Tree of Life in a garden (Eden) and ends with the Tree of Life in a city (see Genesis 2-3 and Revelation 21-22). Actually, the Tree of Life is still in a garden-like area that we would call a park. When Jesus returns He will create a sort of heavenly Central Park in the midst of a great city.
God intended from the beginning that man should live on the earth and the great promise is that one day man will live on a newly recreated earth and God will dwell with man forever in a world of peace, free of greed and anger and malice and war and poverty and hunger. In other words, people were created for this world and it should come as no surprise that they want to stay in it as long as possible. If, however, one does not believe this or one believes that this world is all there is, why delay the inevitable? Non-existence can often seem more desirable than a bad existence in this fractured, fallen world. For those who have hope for a future, existence in this broken world is desirable because they believe they were meant for it all along.
Life is short; think quickly.
Simply speaking as a Lutheran Christian, I regard death as the enemy. However I believe that Christ conquered death so it is not to be feared. Death should never to be treated with dignity, but given the scorn it deserves. It doesn't need to be fought, but life is our gift and to be preserved as far as it is reasonable.
I'd hardly call this a study. They took 345 people dying of terminal cancer. You can make a hundred different inferences from such a small sampling. Here's a few:
Maybe some/most of these people were pious because they were dying
Maybe these people actually enjoyed their life more because they were pious
Maybe they were more pious because they were younger and didn't actually want to die
etc.
Nothing is learned from this study other than the fact that some religious people who have cancer don't want to die.... WOW. That should be in tomorrow paper... errr perhaps they'll need a special edition.
Oh believe me, I agree with you 100%
I would choose to consider myself a "Christian", if one were to apply a label to my religious beliefs.
The core tenent of Christianity is to (paraphrasing) "Love God above everything, love others as much as you love yourself."
Now I have serious problems with pretty much all organized Christian faith. They spend all their time telling you that you're going to burn in hell if you don't do this, or don't say that, or if you vote in favor of gay marriage, or eat red meat on Fridays during Lent, or use a condom or Pay us 10% of your wages or fail to wear your holy underwear at all times. You have the godhatesfags.com morons who obviously really fucking hate themselves if they're "loving others as much as you love yourself".
Its not my place to pass judgement on ANYONE. I live my life, believe what I believe, pass on my beliefs when appropriate, and try my best to be good natured. And I fail miserably at times :). I try to do good overall in the world, and help other people out when they need it. And quite frankly, I can do that without someone telling me the myriad of ways I'm going to go to hell.
But I agree..the Burn in Hell shit is nothing but FUD. These people who call themselves Christian and constantly tell you how you're going to burn in hell....well, assuming hell IS real, my personal opinion is they'll probably be there too.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
I thought original sin was a catholic idea. Granted, catholics outnumber other christians in most places, but it still warrants pointing out that they are not representative in this regard.
I am literally 3000 tokens away from the chaotic crossbow --Stephen
After 5 years I've logged in again to /. to post a reply >.
Anyway I wanted to say that there's nothing impossible in religion. Those who are religious tend to hang on longer because they believe a higher power is at work and can solve impossible things. It has nothing to do with being afraid of death, rather being hopeful that their terminal ailment CAN indeed be cured.
Meanwhile the non religious would normally just give up and die.. because some guy said so.
did you forget to take your meds?
In outright atheism one may find oblivion appealing rather than a compulsory eternal life, one may also treasure the finite term of consciousness a little more and when you're done you're done, there's not a sodding thing you can do about it. That's not what I think myself, but thats possibly the point of view of many non-pious, they've already found their peace in life and fear nothing.
After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
Obviously, the entire post was crafted with one and only purpose in mind: to make a trollish statement about "nonbelievers who view death as the end of existence, the annihilation of consciousness and the self". The rest was added for the sole purpose to make the trolling less obvious.
Ignorant of the fact that there are many many different types of religions and religious people. Ignorant of the fact that there are many different types of atheists (even ones that fear death). Ignorant of the fact that stereotyping a very large and very broad category of people(religious)is a not at all informative or useful.
One time I threw a brick at a duck.
... they KNOW what awaits them.
I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
The data is pretty easy to explain based on the hypothesis that religion is motivated by an irrational fear of death; the same irrational fear of death also motivates the desire for excessive medical intervention. The religious are also are much more afraid of violent crime than the rest of the population.
Unfortunately, the paranoid fears of this group is responsible for bad public policy, such as imposing unwanted life extending measures on others, irrational security features, human rights violations in the name of national security, and an irrational and unforgiving "get tough on crime" approach.
People pray a lot. The question is what they actually do with their lives.
Many church regulars will tell you about people they know who attend every Sunday, yet who live some of the most amoral lives imaginable.
So prayer itself isn't a measure of religiousness. It may even be a measure of self delusion so that people can live with what they have done with their lives.
Too many people don't know why they live. They don't really believe in anything, so the thought of death scares them to no end. They seek prayer as an affirmation that they're basically good people, even if they don't feel like their time on Earth was a good thing.
I call that a guilty conscience, not a pious person.
Nearly fifty percent of all graduates come from the bottom half of the class!
His will cannot be defied, they were merely doing his bidding. How can any action of man be artificial when god is everywhere, omnipresent and omnipotent. There is only the will of the divine, and what you see as doctors performing miracles is in fact a host of angels.
You need a better line of reasoning to convince believers that they are cheating their god.
They have a close family that loves them more often. The others in the sample may be people that are all jaded and broke all ties with family and community (including religion) and don't care as much.
This does not mean atheists don't care if they live. What it does mean is the people break off from both communities but the loner stones get lumped back into the atheist group.
It's a broken study. Lovers fight harder than haters, regardless.
Personally, I'd classify myself as a "Christian" and this is the main reason that I can believe -- while I am totally comfortable with death (not to the extent that I'm going to go play on the freeway) I also see the possibility of "supernatural events" aka "miracles" to occur and thus can see that prolonging a loved one's life via life-support seems plausible, particularly for a younger individual. However, myself, if I was old and have had a full life, I don't think I see the need to be on life support -- I've done what I need to do in this life.
This idea isn't discussed in the originally linked BBC article, but comes up in other articles on the same study (http://abcnews.go.com/Health/MindMoodNews/story?id=7105959&page=1 for example)
So no, I disagree that it's patients being "unsure" about the afterlife or that they're unwilling to accept death. I just think it's relatives that are praying for a miracle.
Every religious group is a hate group to some extent. You must have a them to rally against.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I'll preface this by saying that I'm more or less an atheist (formally I'm an agnostic because I've never felt the whole thing worth investing much mental effort on, but I can't imagine myself ever being a believer).
I think we can look at the death of Pope John Paul II as illustrative. John Paul had staked a lot of his papacy on what he saw as the inviolability of life, arguing ultimately, as we all remember, that life is the gift of God and therefore we need to do everything we can to preserve it. So, when he was at his own end, hopelessly and obviously terminal, he had his doctors do everything in their power to preserve his own life as long as possible, with the idea that if this life is indeed God's gift then everything possible must be done to preserve every second of it. This was widely reported at the time.
Now, we can argue all day about what life is and when it begins and ends, about whether or not John Paul's papacy did anything to preserve life in the world, and so on. But his death and the way he handled it demonstrate that if you accept the premises of Christianity then there are very good reasons to do everything possible to stave off death, beyond the various forms of hypocrisy, fear, self-delusion, and so forth that the average Slashdot responder is so quick to cite.
They're grateful for every minute.
Or it could be that in suffering they find themselves identifying with the suffering Christ underwent on the cross.
Or perhaps they believe their suffering has been brought to them for some higher purpose. They view whatever fate God has assigned them as a test of their faith.
Or perhaps they believe there is something noble about never giving up. Some of those dying of cancer today were of the same generation that stormed the beaches of Normandy...
If I really believe that God created me, then for me to have a passive attitude toward death is hippocritical; how could I expect God to care about my life if I didn't?
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
"I do not fear death. I had been dead for billions of years before I was born and had not suffered the slightest of inconvenience from it." -- Mark Twain (Samuel Clemens).
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
The core tenent of Christianity is to (paraphrasing) "Love God above everything, love others as much as you love yourself."
Spot on. Matthew 22:36-40.
Now I have serious problems with pretty much all organized Christian faith. They spend all their time telling you that you're going to burn in hell if you don't do this, or don't say that,
As another poster suggested, perhaps you've been going to the wrong churches. Yes, you'll burn in hell if you aren't saved, but salvation is a free gift, not a reward; you can't earn it by doing the right things or not saying the wrong things (Ephesians 2:8-9). Christianity isn't about rules to govern our behavior (1 Corinthians 10:23), but your actions and words are a reflection of your heart (Luke 6:43-45); if you know God and love God, then your actions and words will naturally fall into line with God's will, and you won't need rules to adhere to.
or if you vote in favor of gay marriage,
That's a tricky issue; clearly God doesn't approve (Leviticus 18:22) but legislating morality generally doesn't work. The call to love our neighbors isn't restricted to just our straight neighbors, but different people have a variety of interpretations of what they think the right thing to do is.
or eat red meat on Fridays during Lent,
Lent is not a Biblical concept; it was invented by the Catholics, and most other Christians don't usually observe it. If you do observe Lent, you certainly don't have to choose red meat; whatever vice you think would be the most beneficial to give up is fine. I've heard some people are giving up texting and Facebook for Lent this year.
or use a condom
Contraception is definitely not prohibited by the Bible. Again, another screwy Catholic thing.
or Pay us 10% of your wages
The Jewish concept of setting aside 10% is rather different than the modern Christian concept of tithing; see Wikipedia.
or fail to wear your holy underwear at all times.
And that one's a Mormon thing, also not even close to Biblical.
You have the godhatesfags.com morons who obviously really fucking hate themselves if they're "loving others as much as you love yourself".
Yeah, no kidding. Assholes.
Its not my place to pass judgement on ANYONE. I live my life, believe what I believe, pass on my beliefs when appropriate, and try my best to be good natured. And I fail miserably at times :). I try to do good overall in the world, and help other people out when they need it. And quite frankly, I can do that without someone telling me the myriad of ways I'm going to go to hell.
That's a great attitude to have. Unfortunately, it won't keep you out of hell - that free gift of salvation I mentioned must be accepted, or it doesn't apply. None of us is inherently good enough to be permitted into the presence of God (Romans 3:23), no matter how good we try to be, because like you said, you fail miserably at times - we all do, and it only takes once. God doesn't recognize any difference between tiny little sins and great big huge sins, nor between one or two sins and a lifetime of constant sinning; it's all sin, and it must be paid for. Jesus died to pay for that sin, but you must turn your life over to Him in order to accept that gift (Romans 10:9-10).
But hey, if you'd rather not, that's your choice to make, not mine.
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
Firstly, this thread seems to forget that there are many religions, not just Christianity. Each religion treats the coming of death differently. We Muslims are actually taught to be fearful of God and the coming of death. Being fearful of God and death is judged a positive trait.I have said before and I will say it again: you do not need a God to justify doing bad (and good) things in life. Atheists are as prone to having "insane behaviour" as religious people, or any human being. In fact, we say that those who don't believe in God are the ones who are narcissistic, in that by not believing in God, they elevate themselves to Godhood.
There are many verses in the Quran and hadiths that says every little action, good or bad that we do in this world, hidden or clearly seen, will be replayed and judged on Judgment Day and we are constantly reminded that death afflicts the young and healthy as equally as the old and sick. Muslims are taught to pray for an "easy" death, easy in the sense that the soul leaves the body without much suffering to the body. We fear death because we might not have asked people for forgiveness when we had the chance, or we had not carried out our duties and responsibilities to the best of our abilities, or we have taken more than we have given back. Yet we do not "hate" death because life and the whole Universe is an illusion, a game. We score points by doing good and lose points when we do bad things. The "real" life begins after death, one that is eternal and where we reap our rewards or receive our punishments. There are many verses in the Quran where non-believers and sinners on Judgment Day, will beg for another chance to return to this life and do better, but always the answer is it is too late.
Thus, it is a duty of a Muslim to live as long as possible, while doing as much good deeds as he can, to prepare for the inevitable. When a Muslim is on his death bed, his family and friends will attend to him, and whisper in his ear "there is no God but Allah" and asks him to repeat it so that it will be his last words. Quranic verses will be recited in his presence to calm him down and to face death with dignity. And when he dies, it is the duty of his children to regularly pray for him so that God forgives him.
So you obviously don't believe in God. I accept that. Then why do you belittle those who do? You choose to highlight evil religious people, yet you conveniently ignore those who serve the community and do good deeds. We Muslims are taught to praise and respect people who do good deeds, be they Muslims or not. If you don't believe in the Afterlife, does that invalidates the good deeds of those who do? Will you not benefit from the positive effects of good deeds done by the pious? Or are you ironically succumbing to the same dogmatic stance that you accuse believers of having?
How do you know? If I were a "god" that "invented" the universe and the "scare quotes" within it I would be very different from how I am now, and I think you would be too.
From a memetic point of view, this only makes sense. Any religion that believe offing yourself as fast as possible was a good idea would be like the Ebola of religions, wiping itself out before getting a good shot at jumping hosts.
As the suicide thing was explained to me:
1) Early Christians attempted to get themselves into a state of grace by good works and baptism. Many of them, when they had convinced themselves they had achieved it, tended to suicide rather than taking the risk of backsliding and dying while out of grace. The religion survived mainly because, on the average, it recruited faster than it lost adherents due to suicide.
2) The church officials came up with an interpretation of the scriptures that made committing suicide a sin that would, itself, pull the adherent out of a state of grace. This was, of course, a mortal sin, not because it was particularly evil, but because, being dead, the adherent could no longer repent, atone, and again achieve grace. Oops!
This didn't stop the behavior, of course. But now it became a game of the adherent trying to get somebody ELSE to kill him, rather than doing it himself, and goading them into it in a way that did not constitute sin.
A lot of Christians were in the Roman Empire and annoying Roman officials became a common method. (They had policies of non-interference with the local religions as long as they weren't a problem and of making a painful and fatal example of anyone who upset the operation of their empire.) Things like aggressively preaching using the governor, the general, the bureaucrats, and the legionaries as shining examples of horrible sinners, gang protests, etc. You get the idea. Get killed while trying to propagate the religion and not only hold onto the state of grace but gain some martyr points. The Romans were more than happy to oblige. (Volunteers for the games!) Thus was born the Roman Persecution
3) Eventually the church officials came up with another interpretation to close off that route (and practically made "rendering onto Caesar" a duty, turning the church into something suitable for making the adherents more docile subjects rather than toxic pains-in-the-neck). Roughly that time a Roman emperor converted and gave state sanction to the church. Suicide-by-cop was now out and the church-state connection born.
Now I don't claim that this is accurate. But assuming it happened this way it makes sense in three ways:
- Legitimate (and perhaps divinely inspired) interpretations - straight face value.
- Cynical design by officials to raise their congregations' size and donations, or survival rate.
- Meme-theory evolution, with the pro-survival doctrinal mutations becoming more successful as their hosts live longer and better, propagating this version of the infection farther and faster.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
I was raised a very "on fire" Evangelical Christian, but have since seen the light and accepted myself as my Personal Lord and Savior--a spiritual condition which has brought me much more happiness and peace than Jesus ever did.
As such, I think I have a very keen insight into the psychological differences between highly religious people and agnostic/atheistic people.
Basically, the belief in an afterlife that is great (for you and people who agree with you, anyway) really shields you from ever having to sit down and think, "I am going to die. It's not going to be some other person--some old man--who looks like me. It's going to be me. Just like I am now, but I'm going to look like that old man." Instead, the whole concept of mortality is couched in language like "going to a better place" or "being with Jesus" or whatever. Your entire concept of death is euphemistic. As a result, you have a sense of peace and well-being because you don't need to worry about death.
All that changes, I imagine, however, when the time actually comes. Suddenly you can't be euphemistic anymore. It isn't so much this "meta" idea of death. It is your lungs filling up with fluid. It is pain wracking your body as the cancer spreads. It is the heartbreak of knowing that you and your loved ones are going to be separated now, and you don't know when you'll see them again, or in what form (this is assuming you really believe in heaven). Suddenly it's not so beautiful. Suddenly it's the nuts and bolts of your body--the only vessel you know--falling apart and failing you. Suddenly it is very real and very immediate.
And you weren't ready for that.
Atheists, however, accept death--the nuts and bolts--as inevitable, and probably first thing you have to come to terms with if you are an atheist is how you're going to think about death. And, I think, most people have to put themselves through that process of thinking and realizing that, yes, you are going to die. Your lungs will fill with fluid. Your body will be wracked with pain. By the time you get to that point, you have already thought a lot about this, and have resigned yourself to the pitiful, painful, undignified end almost all of us eventually face.
So you don't see any point in fighting.
Furthermore, a mindset that believes in a "super-natural" world--a world and truth and story that supersedes and explains everything we experience and in which we play an important part--comes to see death as more important than it really is. Part of the benefit of religion is that it makes one feel that everything they do is part of a Grand Plan, that everything fits together and has meaning. As an atheist, I know that it doesn't. I know that whether I live or die is wholly inconsequential. I am the product of an incredibly complex physical system that started moving billions of years ago when something exploded. Whether I lived or did not makes no difference whatsoever.
And herein lies one of the most important distinctions between religious people and atheists: Religious people find that viewpoint hopelessly sad and question why we would want to live. Atheists think that the pleasure of typing into a textbox on Slashdot while nibbling black licorice is plenty reason to keep processing oxygen and sugars for as long as they can. The warmth and camaraderie of friends and family are enough. Life is worth living for life's sake. That may be the genes, who are selfish and want to be propagated, talking, but who cares?
Religious people's peace and happiness are conditional, and when the conditions change, they often don't know how to cope. Atheists are unconditional, and therefore don't kick up such a fuss when it's over.
My $0.02.
Religion is for those who fear the reality that the universe is truly indifferent to their existence