The Denial of Death (Ernest Becker)

OVERVIEW

The Denial of Death is the 19th book I’ve read for this blog, the 17th book dedicated entirely to death, dying, and mortality. This book was incredible and likely not a stretch to say one of the most important books I’ve ever read. Becker expertly argues each piece of theory (save for a questionable 10th chapter about mental illness) and very eloquently summarizes the work of his psychological and philosophical predecessors.  

Becker was a cultural anthropologist interested in why humans refuse to acknowledge their own mortality. He received the Pulitzer Prize posthumously in 1974 for The Denial of Death. From the longview, Becker argues these concepts:

·        Nature is a veritable hell of suffering. Death is terrifying. Life is equally terrifying. The human animal is cursed with a fragile body and a highly evolved brain that can comprehend its own annihilation. Humans are animals haunted by death.

·        The basic motivation for human behaviour is controlling our universal and ingrained anxiety about death.

·        We devise defense mechanisms, or “character armor,” to prevent overwhelm and paralysis, to keep the truth of life and death mostly unconscious. Functioning from within these repressions we can convince ourselves we are safe and that the world is manageable. This is what Becker calls “the vital lie of character.”

·        The desire to transcend death, to achieve earthly heroism, to be of cosmic significance, is universal and innate. Because our finitude and our awareness of our finitude prevent us from achieving this physically, we achieve it symbolically. Becker uses the term ‘immortality project,’ with these different flavours:

  • Personal immortality projects: writing a book, having a family, working to create a ‘better world.’ Some personal achievement that we believe is meaningful and lasting.

  • Societal immortality projects: “society itself is a codified hero system, which means that society everywhere is a living myth of the significance of human life, a defiant creation of meaning.” One can achieve self-worth and meaning then simply by participating in the culture and following the prescribed rules, statuses, roles, etc. (You can see how personal and societal projects are inextricably intertwined).

  • Religious immortality projects: aligning with a specific religion or belief system that convinces you that you are immortal (this goes beyond symbolic immortality and purports literal immortality).

·        The root of all evil is fear of death. The evil that erupts from our attempt to deny death and achieve heroism we could call “the costs of pretending not to be mad” or “the toll that [the] pretense of sanity takes.” Becker (I think) expands on this in his book Escape from Evil.

·        Humans require life-enhancing illusions to be content.

While I’ll again underscore my belief that this is the most important book (certainly about death) that I’ve read to date, I need to linger on my dissatisfaction with Becker’s easy acceptance that religion is the only confident way to find meaning in life (here Becker keeps company with Kierkegaard). Becker describes why humans yearn for immortal, suprahuman authority figures. He also describes why humans need to believe they survive death and are imbued with cosmic specialness. He recognizes these are the functions that religion serves and all but calls religion a security blanket for the psyche. So his ultimate acceptance that religion is the answer, not because it’s true but because it’s necessary, was disappointing.

 

WHAT NOW? (actions for mortal atheists)

Consider your own mortality

Becker aligns himself with other great philosophers on this point, that the only way to live fully is to address the terror of death. Here though, to his credit, Becker cautions that one should only bite off a little at a time – that to fully face the anxiety all at once would be to invite insanity.

 

Be mindful of your immortality projects

Becker notes that part of the human condition is the search for meaning, purpose, and something that will endure after you’re gone. That could be your kids, a book you want to write, a cause you want to serve, a business venture, or a general feeling of “making the world a better place.” While Becker is silent on whether it’s helpful to recognize this is what you’re doing (trying to achieve immortality), I think it is. For one, understanding our intrinsic motivators is almost always (to my mind) beneficial. It allows us to be more thoughtful and less automatic. In another way, maybe you can loosen your grip a bit if one of these ‘projects’ doesn’t pan out. Don’t mindlessly wrap up your self-worth in their success; this of course is predicated on the assumption that we are rational agents capable of selecting what gives us purpose, and I don’t know if that’s true or not (Becker says that humans need “life-enhancing illusions,” which to me begs the question: can we pick our own illusions?).

 I also wonder if it’s possible to choose our immortality projects. If I decide that my life’s purpose is to use my consciousness to appreciate (or even just contemplate) the universe, and that my immortality will be the subtle ways I shape the world simply by existing, well then my likelihood of success is almost 100% (vs. if my success were defined by my kids turning out well, or my book winning a Pulitzer).

 

Relinquish control (or at least loosen the grip)

This, like the recommendation to contemplate one’s mortality, is a common theme in books about death and dying. The Denial of Death (like others) underscores that what bothers us most is our powerlessness, vulnerability, insecurity, and smallness. I rather agree with the Buddhists that this is an invitation to inhabit these states, to examine them closely, and to get curious with these discomforts. Doing this is not only preparation for dying, but for living too (especially living with the knowledge of our finitude).

 

IN SUM:

Is this book entirely secular? No. Plenty of mention of religion, but more from a clinical, investigative perspective.

If you had to describe the book in one sentence? Freud thought everything was about sex, Becker thinks everything is about death.

Who should read this book? Anyone who is serious about understanding the consequences of mortality coupled with self-consciousness, and how human behaviour is shaped by the anxiety of death.