Epicurus has a set argument for what he believes death means to us. He makes this argument clear through his two premises and the conclusion that he reaches. What his argument is for what death means to us might possibly change if he were to consider in relation to not only a positive harm, but also a harm of deprivation. In this paper I am going to explain and discuss Epicurus’ argument for what death means to us, explain what positive harms and harms of deprivation are and the difference between the two, and address a way to fix Epicurus’ argument to meet the requirements by adding another premise. The argument that Epicurus poses for what death is to us is “Death, therefore—the most dreadful of evils — is nothing to us, since while we exist, death is not present, and whenever death is present, we do not exist” (Epicurus). The conclusion that …show more content…
A premise Epicurus could possibly add is “we are not aware of any deprivation or loss that death causes.” This would change his argument to “while we exist death is not present, when death is present we do not exist, we are not aware of any deprivation or loss that death causes, therefor death is nothing to us.” By simply adding the premise “we are not aware of any deprivation or loss that death causes” to Epicurus’ argument, it no longer makes death a harm of deprivation. While some might consider a harm to be a harm regardless of whether we are aware of it happening or not, this idea is not true. If a person is not aware of a harm that is happening to them, then it is in no way harming or hurting the person at hand. Therefor, by not being aware of the deprivation and loss of the good things that come from being alive, death ultimately becomes nothing to us. Adding this third premise to Epicurus’ argument allows it to still stand while being considered in respect to both positive harms and harms of
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
At the end of Book I of Plato’s Republic, Socrates attempts to persuade Thrasymachus that the just lead a happier and more flourishing life than the unjust (354a). He argues that justice is the virtue of the soul, which allows the soul to perform its ergon, or function, with excellence. Because the soul’s function is to live, justice allows the soul to live with excellence. In this paper, I shall present and critically examine Socrates’ reasoning behind this conclusion. The argument subtly commits the fallacy of equivocation because the term function is ambiguous.
Throughout humanity, the idea of suffering played a major role in human lives, in some cases by ending it. Nevertheless, according to popular religious traditions, the first humans, Adam and Eve, were placed on Earth to suffer for their sins in a life of misery. All humans are a part of this “original sin,” thus there is no such thing as innocent humans suffering in the world. “All have sinned and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). Popular religious themes are centered on the idea of continual suffering in life, like the Israelites who continued to suffer through the Holocaust.
There are many tragic reasonings through nature, where it may sadden a person or make a person happy. In the poems “The First Snowfall,” “Thanatopsis,” and “The Chambered Nautilus,” the value of nature is said to be that death is not tragic. In “The First Snowfall,” there is a broad understanding that is given to listeners to analyze that humans cannot care for their loved on who have passed, nature will. In “Thanatopsis” nature has the abilities to make us feel better by lightening out dark thoughts of death allowing us to understand that death is upon all, as we are not alone. In “The Chambered Nautilus” it gives us an understanding that nature remains with us and it tells us to make ourselves better than who we really are.
Analysis of Lucretius: On the Order of Things Introduction: Lucretius, the author of, “On the Order of Things” argues for the concept and ideology of an inevitable death, in that individuals should accept their fate instead of providing resistance. Lucretius commences by claiming that Atomism is the core reason of the existence of the universe, thereby reasoning that everything that currently exists in the world today is a product of the collision of atoms. Since human beings are comprised of these, there is no possibility that any part of them can survive after death, and thus humans should not fear death. He also delves into the Epicurean belief that individuals crave a life devoid of pain, and abundant with pleasure.
Elizabethan Death and Burial Rituals The differences between the Elizabethan era and the modern era vary in a multitude of ways. Most Elizabeth ways and rituals are considered outdated in this century but occasionally there are a few exceptions to that belief. In comparison to the 21st century, many objectives have changed but one ever present factor remains, death.
Epictetus did not have any rivals. He was well liked and was influenced by many philosophers. Stoicism’s closest rival was Epicureanism. Epicureanism was founded by Epicurus and taught people how to not fear death and the supernatural, as well as finding happiness at any given time. Its main belief is that pleasure is the end of life.
In Plato’s dialogue Phaedo, he explains the soul and comes to the conclusion that the soul is immortal. Through describing the last hours of Socrates life before his execution, he lays out three arguments in support of the idea that while the body may cease to exist the soul cannot perish. In this paper, I will explicate Socrates three arguments for the immortality of the soul and their objections. Then I will argue on the presupposition of the Law of Conservation of Mass, that the universe, entailing the soul, must be cyclical. The Law of Conservation of Mass
What he is saying is that it is a waste of time to value capitalistic ideologies, for example, wealth and fame. He implies that we are so wrapped up in our unnecessary desires that it just clouds our minds with things that really aren't important. By giving into temptations one has lost the ability to have self control. Epicurus tells us that when it comes down to it we will always pick things that bring us pleasure. He says what we don't think about is that a lot of our decisions we have made in hopes of the pleasure we were looking for only caused us pain in the end.
It is a convenient and comforting respond to unfortunate and even devastating ‘fate’. The pain becomes bearable to those who suffer because it is all part of a bigger plan, it is more than ‘you’. This concept is also built upon an irrational fundamental attitude, “the surrender of self to the ordering power of society.” (54) The problem of theodicy does not end at that.
It is important to also remember that, above the individual, Aristotle was concerned with the good of society in general. In places where resources are especially hard to come by, euthanasia may positively affect these societies. After all, the extending of the lives of the terminally ill comes along with financial as well as emotional strains for the family members thus, under these circumstances, it can be viewed as a very courageous act for someone to decide to end their own life for the sake of their relatives. In other words, society can have better financial benefits and fare better if those who are unproductive are euthanized. However, this argument is not consistent with Aristotle’s virtues of patience and temperance.
In the Republic, Plato gives an argument saying the soul is immortal. In this paper I will present his argument and show that his argument is invalid. I will show why the conclusion is not true and restate the argument to make it valid to help with Socrates’ claim. Plato’s argument on why the soul is immortal: 1. Something can only be destroyed by the thing that is bad for it.
Epictetus’s way of philosophy is one that is purely Stoic, imploring that the solution to human finitude is one where humans can live life without showing feeling or complaining about pain and hardships towards unsavory situations. Each of his rules in his handbook offers advice in which the subject simply “deals” with disappointment, or rather, doesn’t expect something out of the scopes of reason and logic, so that, figuratively, when occurrences don’t go their way, they aren’t disappointed. This is because to Epictetus, all external events in life are pre-determined by fate, so it’s already out of our hands from the beginning. With a calm dispassion, or indifference, we approach our fate and accept it. This is shown in his rules in The Handbook,
In Plato’s Apology, Socrates is put into trial because he is accused of corrupting the youth with his teachings that deviate from the established beliefs of the Greek society. Although he justifies that he is only doing what he believes is his duty, he reasons that even if he is given a death penalty, death is nothing to be feared. He raises multiple strong and effective arguments that explain to his audience that it is illogical to fear death. All of these arguments revolves around the central idea that death is not evil and that “no evil can happen to a good man, either in life or after death” (Apology, 41c). The first argument that Socrates presents during his trial is the idea that death is not the most important thing to worry about in
Everyman Shamyra Thompson ENGL 102-B27 Liberty University Everyman Thesis: In the morality play “Death Comes for Everyman”, the author shares his comprehension of death and how death’s treatment is a symbolic message that comes from God. The idea of the play is that God sends his message through Death which humans can’t avoid from happening when the time approaches. Everyman, the character in the play tries to reason with Death to get more time, however Death refuses Everyman’s offers of riches for Death because he has no use for material possessions. I.
I personally think that suffering helps us to notice and appreciate true happiness. If we did not feel pain, we would not realize how great life is. Aristotle implies we are able to control our happiness in this way. Once we have experienced suffering we know it eventually passes and life carries