> > Is it really living if you don't have anything worth dying for?
>
> What a silly question.

It's an entirely normal question.

>Why would it be only living if you had a reason to stop doing so?

(previous post)

>If you love someone, is it really love only if you'd be willing to stop?

Yes, of course. Read "The Tale of Two Cities" for a famous example. "Till We Have Faces" also has a top-notch discussion about this topic. Love cares about the wellbeing of its object, which includes letting go when necessary. (If what you were getting at was closer to "fancy" or "be fond of" than "love", then you'd get the No answer you were fishing for.)

>Is it really a cheese sandwich if it's not anything other than a cheese sandwich?

Uh, yes. Not anything other than a cheese sandwich = really a cheese sandwich.

>Sounds rather backwards to me. So I'll reverse it:
>
> If you have something you would die for, is it worth living?

Ever so clearly yes. The first example that comes to mind is of a mother taking care of her child. Lots of species can identify with that passion.

-Gabe