Analysis Of 'Why Immortality Is Not So Bad'

Elizabeth Elias

Professor Smutts

FYS

05 November 2017 In “Why Immortality Is Not So Bad,” Fisher argues that immortality need not to be as bad as William says it would be and is inadequate. He argues that if an immortal life would be characterized by different experiences, there is no reason one to become bored with life. Although william argues that immortality would be as bad, he uses an example to prove it of a woman named EM who is immortal, for drinking a certain potion, and gets bored with life. In the end, she refuses to continue drinking it, because life has become a dull a state of boredom, indifference, and coldness. Williams claims that any kind of eternal life would end up being like this at the in the end,which is boring, meaningless, and undesirable. Williams’s case for the conclusion is that death is evil rests on a distinction between two kinds of desires. The distinction turns on what it would be for desires to be satisfied. Some desires could be satisfied by completing the desired aim or by extinguishing the desire itself. Categorical desires are not like this; they can only be satisfied by achieving the desired goal. These desires can be extinguished, but that would not be a way of satisfying them. Some people have only desires of the first kind because they have not much to live for. Fisher begins to distill williams discussion for analyzing models of immortality. In order to be attractive to an individual the model must posit a future scenario in