Epicurus's Theory Of Death

Introduction

Epicurus believed that death was not a misfortune. He Believed that once an individual passes away, he or she looses their wordily sensation. He drew that sensation is a necessary condition of value to a person, so without it, the person will not sense, therefore be incapable of feeling. Contemporary philosophers however object this theory. Arguing that death is bad precisely because it deprives a person of good experiences which one could not possibly experience when deceased. In paragraph one of this essay, it expands on the epicurean argument for death not being a calamity for the one passing away. The second paragraph will look at the with this view and lastly paragraph three will consider the objective argument of Thomas Nagel and Fred Feldman.

Epicureans argument

The question of whether death is bad for the individual passing away, was first introduced by the Greek philosopher, Epicurus. He concluded that death should not be feared as ‘where death is, I am not; where I am, death is not’. Epicurus believed that the study of philosophy can aid us in living happier and more pleasant life. Epicurus was a hedonist, who determined that the

Because of this short term memory window, such a being could have an outlook on life much like our own, Nozick claims. Yet if such a creature were to die tomorrow, in what sense has it been deprived of life? To the extent that we feel that it would be bad for such a creature to die, we can 't be basing that judgment on general deprivation in the way Nagel suggests, because the creature’s had an infinitely long life. Instead the creature has suffered particular deprivation of certain specific goods in life – its plans and hopes for tomorrow have been frustrated, say. But then Nagel’s account can’t be right, as it refers the badness of death to the general additive goodness of