Makes sense that he would want to avoid the mental decline he saw with his loved ones. Sounds like he identified some of the early signs in himself and decided to act.
We didn't know that at the time, only from the results of the… I assume it was an autopsy?
Our society definitely keeps people alive--by default--well into cruelty.
But this? Too early.
Part of me understands this sentiment, which I take to be rooted in a feeling that he was of such value and had so much potential remaining that why would he take himself away from us...
...and those last few words were chosen deliberately, to highlight the selfishness and lack of empathy in the actual statement of "too early".
Part of me wants to apologize for suggesting selfishness and a lack of empathy, and part of absolutely does not: He was 90, he watched his wife die from cognitive decline, he may or may not have been declining, he may or may not have felt he had more to offer, but, most importantly, he chose to die when he could still make a choice.
Ultimately, that is the reason I cast any gainsaying as selfishness and/or lack of empathy: You DO NOT know him. I DO NOT know him. We DO NOT get to speak for him.
I loved his work. Despite all the flaws in Thinking, Fast and Slow, it remains an influential work, if for no other reason than it recast how we think about some of its subjects and themes.
Would I have hoped he would do more? Of course! Should he have stuck around because I wanted him to?
No. Period. Full stop. End of story.
The two best parts of euthanasia are grace and choice. He had both: He chose his time, and I expect, like my MIL, he died with grace and dignity.
For almost as long as I had known my MIL, she was in pain and suffered involuntary movements (inoperable benign tumour). When the pain got too bad, she had the plug pulled. She was almost giddy in the hospital, dressed in her favourite outfit, with two of her favourite people (not me, her daughter and grandson), having spent the day before with her love of 70+ years sharing memories and saying goodbye.
She was so happy that the pain would end, so happy to be going out on her terms.
Mourn Kahneman, but do not disrespect him - or anyone else - by second guessing him.
Autonomy and empathy are our greatest assets. We would do well to remember both.
I do think the point of where quality of life is declining too much is highly individual. And I hope we keep improving prophylaxis and treatments such that most people can turn 100 and still feel like they’re getting something out of life.
There is an essay by Roger Scruton, "Dying in Time", in "Confessions of a Heretic"[1] where he wrestles with our modern capacity to outlive our faculties. But I Decline Even Naming examples of that.
The last sentence reads: "The main point, it seems to me, is to maintain a life of active risk and affection, while helping the body along the path to decay, remembering always that the value of life does not consist in its length but its depth."
[1] https://www.google.com/books/edition/Confessions_of_a_Hereti...
What is considered as normal is defined by what is normally distributed. That which majority chooses. The following video essay explains that
Why Living Forever Would (Probably) Be Awful