Why is philosophy so overrated

Philosophy InDebate

First of all, how is death “assessed”? He is defned u.z. constantly different: from the “state of being a corpse” to “failure of some brain functions”. Presumably there is no “real” death “as such”, but only the failure of something that was defined as a condition for life (earlier heart and circulation, today brain activity, “consciousness” etc.). Dying has an existential and lived reality, death does not; therefore it cannot be overestimated or underestimated (R.M. Rilke: "There is death, dying that comes from that life in which he had love, meaning and need"). However, certain definitions of death are clearly overestimated, e.g. the definition of death as "irreversible failure of the functions of the organ: brain = brain activity" is overestimated as "human death" (organ transplantation). And for certain purposes (e.g. satisfaction of the "organ requirement") the definition is adapted ("partial brain death"). The need for transplantable hearts or the imminent "use" of transplantable brain tissue will change the definition again. The overestimation of death as defined in this way results in an underestimation of life: e.g. the "life" of the breathing, warm, metabolic, etc. explant bodies is no longer assigned any value; the "recovery" replaces the "evaluation"; the “dead rest” is replaced by the use value of the dead person, the “cemetery” by the salt crust urn or the scattered ashes, etc.