Skip to content
Coordinates of ThoughtHome of Philosophy
Join

Card 6.20 · Root VI — The Philosophy of X Family

Philosophy of Death

Can something be bad for you if you are not there for it?

This question asks what death is, whether it is bad for the one who dies, and how a mortal life should be regarded.

From The Coordinates of Thought by Syed Raheel Shahzad, card 6.20, page 314

On this card
  1. Where it sits
  2. The rival answers
  3. Where do you stand?
  4. Key figures
  5. Talk about it here
  6. Connections

Where it sits

Under VI. Philosophy of X. Borders 1.3.2 Personal identity, 6.21 Meaning in life, 3.5 Value theory, 6.1 Philosophy of religion.

New to the fields of philosophy? Read the guide

The rival answers

PositionClaim
EpicureanDeath is nothing to us; where it is, we are not
Deprivation accountDeath is bad because it deprives you of goods you would have had
Annihilation is bad in itselfThe ending of a person is a harm independent of lost goods
Survival viewsDeath is a transition; the question changes accordingly
Immortality is worseAn endless life would become unbearable or meaningless
NeutralDeath is neither good nor bad; the framing is confused

Where do you stand?

Can something be bad for you if you are not there for it?

One tap, no sign-up. You can change your answer at any time. Answers are counted anonymously.

Key figures

FigureDatesTraditionContribution
Epicurus341–270 BCEGreekDeath is nothing to us: where we are, death is not; where death is, we are not
Lucretiusc. 99–55 BCERomanThe mirror of past non-existence
The Buddhac. 480–400 BCE (disputed)IndianImpermanence; craving for permanence as the source of suffering
Al-Ghazali1058–1111IslamicRemembrance of death as a spiritual discipline
Martin Heidegger1889–1976ContinentalBeing-toward-death as structuring an authentic life
Thomas Nagelb. 1937AnalyticThe deprivation account
Bernard Williams1929–2003AnalyticThe tedium of immortality

Also on this question: Marcus Aurelius

Talk about it here

Conversations about this question in Death:

Join free to ask about it Everything in Death

Connections

→ 6.21, 1.3.2 · ↔ 3.5, 6.1, 3.3.1, 6.23 · ◇ Epicureanism, deprivation account, survival views · ○ Axial Age; Classical; Modern; Table 8

→ depends on · ↔ borders: genuine overlap, neither prior · ◇ answered by: points from question to answers · ○ appears in: points to the timeline and the comparisons

The full card is in the book

In The Coordinates of Thought this card goes on to a worked example that sets the answers against one case, and to where the question touches daily life — page 314.

About the book Get the book