Your proposition seems to assume that existence is preferable to non-existence. What is the basis for that preference?
You talk about "those of whom he cares of"? Wouldn't a man of science recognized those feelings of "love" as nothing more than evolutionary mutations.
Also, what is "luck"? Is it satient?
Maybe I should simplify things a bit.
You see, when one is asleep, and not dreaming, time flies. There is nothingness all around. A state of 'black peace'. Perhaps this very same unconscious 'black peace' awaits death too. And a fear of this thought of nothingness after death perhaps caused human societies to invent the idea of religion, so as to attempt to give meaning to the happenings after death?
Existence is indeed preferable to its alternative smply because of the rarity wth which it seems to happen. Those very probabilities are very low, as the Creationists oft parrot, and if you are lucky enough to be favoured by them, then why not strive to keep the 'moment' longer?
Feelings of love, companionship and bonding are evolutionary mutations that vastly improve chances of survival. Social beings, like mankind, are the most successful biological creatures.
By the term 'satiate'(to which no meaning exists as far as I know), I presume you mean the opposite of 'insatiate'. I need you to elaborate for me to attempt to provide a satisfactory explanation. That "luck" referred to earlier is the very probabilities mentioned therein.