My topic focuses on Rosenbaum’s defense of the epicurean view, Luper’s critique of this view and my argument on who has a stronger position in regards to the topic. I am going to do this by describing both arguments in a detailed manner. Rosenbaum defends the epicurean view while Luper argues against, both sides provide excellent arguments and my argument is that which I feel is more superior.
Rosenbaum defends the epicurean view throughout his essay. Epicurus “argued that since death is neither good or bad for the person dead and since the fear of that which is not bad for one is groundless, it is unreasonable to fear death” (Benatar, 175). A person when dead is lifeless and therefore cannot feel anything. This person is nonexistent and according to Rosenbaum because of this, the statement of whether death is good or bad does not apply to this situation. Since one cannot feel anything, one cannot experience a death situation and determine whether it is good or bad. Therefore it does not matter and there is no reason to fear death.
According to Rosenbaum there are three different concepts, which must be understood. These are, dying, death and being dead. The first two are often not distinguished; Rosenbaum says they must be distinguished as they mean two completely different things. “Dying we may say is the process whereby one comes to dead or the process wherein certain causes operate to bring about one’s being dead” (Benatar, 176). This is essentially the last phase of one’s life. It is the prelude to death itself. It is the process, which leads to becoming dead. Rosenbaum goes on to explain, “the process of dying may be comfortable or uncomfortable” (Benatar, 176). The process leading to eventua...
... middle of paper ...
...uper’s argument he is missing the point of Epicurus’s argument, which Rosenbaum has further explained. Of the two arguments Rosenbaum’s argument arguably has more points to back up the epicurean view than Luper’s. Luper’s is based on assumptions and we cannot live on assumptions.
In my essay, I provided a detailed description of both Rosenbaum’s argument and Luper’s in an unbiased manner. I did this by highlighting the main points of both arguments and getting this main point across. Both sides of the arguments are presented and I contrast and compare deciding which one I feel is superior. In my argument, I present points, which I have, accurate counter points for, from each argument. In conclusion, Rosenbaum and Luper both present arguments both for and against the Epicurean view, this essay is mainly describing each one and choosing a side at the end.
Death. Only two things are certain in life, death, and taxes. As the Human condition is concerned death is directly related to mortality. Mortality is in a sense the focus of all human existence. In most cases, the human mind inadvertently neglects this concept. In the true depth of mortality is hidden behind a shroud of humor. In the inquisitive, the brain creates a logical fallacy to cope with the concept. The basis of the human condition is mortality. The main points of the human condition are birth, growth, emotionality, aspiration, conflict, and mortality. Birth, growth, and aspiration all stem from the concept of mortality.
It is apparent that both authors provide insights into aiding the reader in making a conclusive determination, however, as mentioned; the reader may be misled by the author’s personal perceptive. Although much factual “doctrines” are exclusively used to provide a certain perceptive, both authors give their account as best as possible, however, neither side can conclusively claim their perceptive as ligament claims.
Intellectuals are philosophers, are writers, are artists. They are all those people who work with their minds by questioning the events that touch them and that are touched by them. To recall a Plato's famous allegory, we can say that intellectuals are those who are able to look beyond the shadows and never take concepts for granted. However, some questions as what their role is and, more specifically, whether they should be engaged in politics are still unanswerable. Over the years answers and behaviors towards the engaged culture have been various and we can assume that the intellectuals who cannot separate the two live their lives actively for they want to be part of the events that surround them and let awareness win over apathy. On the contrary, we can assume that those who let apathy win are the intellectuals that look at politics and culture as two different and specific concepts and live a solitary life far from society. However, this is not an appropriate judgment because it would be difficult to consider to which extent solitude can be regarded as cowardliness and to which extent action can be regarded as consciousness.
In this essay my aim is to separate the truth from the predjudice and find out whether Heinrich Schliemann was a greedy charlottarian, a talented archeologist or just someone who stumbled upon a great discovery.
American Philosophical Quarterly 21, no. 3 (1984): 227-36.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig; G. E. M. Anscombe, P.M.S. Hacker and Joachim Schulte (eds. and trans.). Philosophical Investigations. 4th edition, Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009. Print.
Epicurus. The Epicurus Reader: Selected Writings and Testimonia. Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., 1994. Translated and Edited by Brad Inwood and L.P. Gerson.
While many people today seem to be scared to die, and make great strides to avoid an early death, this is not a new human concern. In fact, Dr. Peter J. Brand did some extensive research on how people in Ancient Mesopotamia viewed death and the afterlife. He believes death was extremely scary to people of this region. In his article titled: Dying: Death and the Afterlife, Brand states, “Like all human cultures, the people of Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia were greatly troubled by death.” (Brand pg. 1) Apparently, it death was even more dreadful in the minds of the Mesopotamians. “Mesopotamian views of death were more pessimistic, resulting in less elaborate preparations for death.” (Brand pg.1) On the contrary, it seems that there would have been a lot of preparation involved, since the journey to the underworld alone was a perilous feat. This tells us that there was nothing glorified about death, and nothing exciting about traveling to the underworld. However, it reveals that there was a lot of confusion surrounding death, and confusion how to deal with it. Dr. Brand goes on to talk about how the underworld was a ...
The role of man in the cosmos is a topic of great debate among philosophers throughout history. Alexander Pope and Friedrich Nietzsche were two writers who took on this challenging dilemma in two very different fashions. I will be using Pope’s “An Essay on Man” in order to show and discuss his beliefs on the subject and Walter Kaufmann’s Portable Nietzsche as my source for Nietzsche’s opinion on the topic. Although both tackle the issue, they go about it with two very different processes.
His reasoning for this belief is as follows: Most of the schools associate the gods with divinity, in the sense that they have omnipotent control over humans and the world we live in. They believe that the gods watch over humans, and that if they are not properly pious and grateful to the gods for allowing their continued existence, that the gods will come down and smite them. Therefore, most schools conclude that in order to live a blessed life they must follow the will of the gods. Epicureanism, however, does not believe in this definition of a blessed life. Velleius explains that Epicureans believe the world is derived from atoms, rather than caused by gods. Epicureans do believe in gods, however instead of the common opinion that gods created our world and carefully watch over us as we interact in it, Epicureans believe that the gods have simply reached the most blessed form that we are unable to take. In the Epicurean
Death is the one great certainty in life. Some of us will die in ways out of our control, and most of us will be unaware of the moment of death itself. Still, death and dying well can be approached in a healthy way. Understanding that people differ in how they think about death and dying, and respecting those differences, can promote a peaceful death and a healthy manner of dying.
Frederick, Calvin J. "Death and Dying." Microsoft® Encarta® 98 Encyclopedia. © 1993-1997: Microsoft Corporation. CD-ROM.
Intro : Introduce the concept of death, and how the concept of death is shown to be something to be feared
Death is something that causes fear in many peoples lives. People will typically try to avoid the conversation of death at all cost. The word itself tends to freak people out. The thought of death is far beyond any living person’s grasp. When people that are living think about the concept of death, their minds go to many different places. Death is a thing that causes pain in peoples lives, but can also be a blessing.
Thornton, Stephen. "Karl Popper." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Edward N. Zalta. Spring 2014. Web. 13 March 2014.