I wonder what what is the meaning of this discussion, what is the topic, what is the goal, what is the point? From my point of view it's an open discussion, left to be taken where "the stream" takes it (one of those I like), where each of us shares their opinions on whatever has been said for the others to see, contemplate upon and generally do what they like with. Personally I really like to see other opinions and constantly evolve my own. Why? Because it feels good!
Through bangee jumping you get to see what it's like to fall from a high place. You get to see how your body would react to imminent death. These things alone are educative enough in my opinion. To get close to death, I wonder how much that could affect a person view of life... I'm not trying to prove that people bangee jump for those reasons, I guess most of them do it for the rush, still, it IS an educative experience.
Concerning the similarity of any state with death, I'll say we can't know. We haven't died, we can't talk to the dead and if we could, we still wouldn't know how the state of death has altered their perception. In the end, what event isn't affected by the observer? Even if two or more people here agree, will they truly be having the same opinion on the same matter? Can two opinions ever be the same? Can a word ever be perceived exactly the same by two people?
Even if you steal all the senses a man still has his life and mind. He has memories and he can live inside them for the rest of his short life (no food and moisture whatsoever -> make conclusions). That's how the idea of existance kicks in. At the same time, being unable to sense things equals being unable to interact with them.
Does being senseless mean you're definately going to die? Can't a person be in a state of comma in a hospital, feeling nothing, but still being alive because others keep him? Also, couldn't a completely senseless but also "healthy" person be kept alive? I think they could.
Now, does being senseless equal being unable to interact with anything? A senseless person could be lying flat, rolling downhill, drowning in a lake, getting stabbed by another person who's purpose in life is to serve as an example in my post, or anything else your twisted imagination can come up with, and still that person wouldn't know the difference! They could be moving their hands frantically to test their functionality, but they wouldn't be getting any signal back from their hands so they wouldn't know if their hands did move...
What I'm trying to say here is that being senseless doesn't equal inability of interaction nor does it lead to certain
Which is better? Living a carefull, but long life seeing many things or living a wild life, experiencing many things in a short time and dying in a young age?
That's closely related to what we spoke of in the posts above, but in a different context. IMO, living a quiet life is the same as living senseless. That's rather existance, not living.
What is "better" than what and with what criteria? What is the goal you are planning to achieve that one or the other would help you achieve in a "better" (= more eficient) way?
Seeing things from my point of view there's no reason or meaning to life. You can make what you want out of it. Personally I generally lead "a quiet life" with the occasional "outburst". Am I somewhere between existance and life? What is the difference between existing and living?
Hmm... I'd like to see Crimson's "out of the box" opinions too... Where are you Crimson?!