# How to live given the certainty of death.

Source: https://rickyrichards.com/blog/how-to-live-given-the-certainty-of-death
Author: Ricky Richards
Published: 2026-08-30
Category: Essay
Keywords: how to live a meaningful life, legacy versus lived experience, value of achievements versus happiness, mortality and life priorities, what makes life worth living

> How to decide what's worth doing in a finite life: legacy versus lived experience, and why most of us should choose differently.

I discovered this lecture given by Yale Professor Shelly Kagan, and I was intrigued by the title of the video.

[https://youtu.be/O8Hu465KL1w?si=BbTEW6kykCBdW_QP](https://youtu.be/O8Hu465KL1w?si=BbTEW6kykCBdW_QP)

In the video, he talks about how we need to be careful, given how short life is, to get things 'right'.

By which he means, there is so much to do in life that it is ultimately our decision to decide what is worth pursuing, given that part of what gives life value is the contents of one's life.

In the video, he proposes that there are three strategies that people typically pursue.

The first is the approach of packing it all in. Trying to do as much as one possibly can within a given lifetime.

The challenge with this, is that certain things we deem to be 'more valuable' to achieve in a lifetime may require us to sacrifice some of the smaller values to achieve bigger goals.

The second strategy is to focus on larger accomplishments. The idea being that one's life is more valuable if we achieve significant things over the course of it.

The downside to this, of course, is that aspiring to achieve larger accomplishments comes with a higher rate of failure, so we may miss out on the smaller of life's pleasures for no reward.

The third strategy is to find a mixture of the two. Strive for some large accomplishments, but supplement them with the smaller luxuries of life, be that a great meal or carving out moments to spend time with friends and family.

Then there is the question of whether one would aspire to have a long life, or whether it is okay trading a long life for a shorter life, if that shorter life contained greater levels of percieved value.

The years in the life, versus the life in the years.

Some philosophers pose that a great achievement early in one's life should be sufficient enough to go to the grave, having comfort in the fact that they have achieved something of great importance.

In doing so, they consider themselves to have created a level of immortality, in the sense that they go on, at least in the minds of others, beyond the point at which they are dead. People also seek to have children as a means of living beyond their personal existence. Again, seeking comfort from the idea that part of their genetics live on beyond the point at which they themselves do not.

Of course, others will point out that this is mere pseudo-immortality. Because what value is there in anything beyond the point at which you no longer exist?

...To sum up my own perspective...

I believe in pursuing life in the years, not the years in the life. And while I aspire to live a reasonable length of time, I would much prefer to experience the fruits of our world while I have the mobility and vigour with which to enjoy them. I would not, for example, aspire to live to 150 if the last 60 of which were filled with drudgery.

I do not, however, believe that just because one is old, there is no value to one's existence. I could see mental capacity becoming increasingly important in later life, and the idea of becoming a mentor or educator, though not in the pursuit of immortality. I do not hold it against myself that I have not, and likely will not, achieve any level of greatness that would warrant living on in the memories of others.

I simply believe that, if you are able to positively shape the lives of others, it is a good use of one's time.

While on the subject, I should probably mention that I have spent a good number of hours contemplating the value of legacy, and I came to the conclusion that if living on in the minds of others is one's goal, the best fields to pursue are likely politics, with the aspiration of becoming a president or a great leader during times of struggle, or that of being a scientist or inventor, who helps to create a new, life changing, technology.

The reason I believe these two to be the most fruitful professions to pursue for legacy is that, long beyond the time with which we remember celebrities or other figureheads, history will be told from the worldview of great leaders and inventors who bring about societal shifts and technologies that shape humankind, and it therefore adds to one's historical significance.

That said, I would argue that they often sacrifice their lived experience for historic significance.

The life of a politician is not one that I envy. Life as a politician is often filled with deceit and living against one's true nature in order to progress through one's career. It also requires unbelievable dedication in these less-than-favourable conditions to progress to the highest levels of office. Without factoring in that one must also somewhat align with the zeitgeist.

An inventor, however, is a lifestyle that I more closely resonate with. Someone who pursues something with vigour and passion, with the desire to uncover great discoveries that can push humankind forward.

In most cases, the inventors who solidify their name in history tend to live at the edges of society or possess disproportionate levels of intellect that go unrewarded for large portions of their life. Many inventors may not ever see the fruits of their discoveries in their lifetime, but will be remembered by history for their contributions to the development of humankind.

While I more closely resonate with this lifestyle, I do not consider myself to be remotely smart enough to contribute to the frontier of invention. 

Given how hard the life of a Politician or Scientist is, It is possibly for this reason that fame is so often desired, because the preconditions for attaining it are significantly lower, and while it doesn't come with historic significance, it is a precondition which, if used correctly, can unlock arguably the richest of lived life experiences. Fame, of course, often acts as a conduit to great wealth, which alone can also open many doors that add optionality and richness to life.

I, however, like the majority of us, are unlikely to attain any of these desirable life conditions. I am a mere NPC in the eyes of history. I see my role as somebody who can shape technologies in ways that can be easily consumed, and as far as pixel pushers go, I consider myself to be one of the better ones. I wake up grateful every day that society deems my profession sufficiently worthy of financial reward, such that I can enjoy a great many of life's experiences I deem worthwhile. Will I be remembered for my contributions? Probably not. Am I okay with that? As long as I make the most of my years, absolutely.

This is how I choose to live, given the certainty of death.