Epicurus: We Are Not Harmed by Our Own Death - Essay Example

Epicurus: “We are not harmed by our own death”. Name Course Tutor Date Epicurus: “We are not harmed by our own death”. Epicurus is one of the greatest Athenian and philosopher to have ever lived following the death of Alex the great (323 B.c.E). “During his life time between 341-271 B.C” (Bailey, 1926, p.57) he wrote his ideologies and opinions on death which still surface in one of his surviving books, Epicurus: The Pleasant Life. In this book Epicurus aired his views of death as an occasion where men feared in their lifetime. He affirms that philosophical inquest is propelled by human need to comprehend the foundation of unhappiness; key amongst them was the fear of death (Bailey, 1926, p.65). Epicurus believed that human being should consider death to be nothing owing to his argument that it can never harm in the least. He argued that death should not worry a man since it would come and they would not sense it. He also claimed that the panic over death was an unreasonable panic and that people should not give in to such panic. In so doing, he supposed, that human being are in fact making the morals of life less pleasant. This essay outlines and assesses Epicurus argument that we are not harmed by our own death. According to Epicurus the word “death” in the sentence “we are not harmed by our own death”, he did not imply the dying process which appears to much more painful, therefore harmful for us (Bitsori & Galanakis, 2004, p.467). Epicurus also did not suggest the time of death which might or might not cause bad experience to us. What he suggested was being dead; being no more. His argument is only sound when we admit the metaphysical meaning that human no longer live and human no longer to have the ability to feel when dead. Epicurus was to some extent right in his argument. Fear of death was prominent at the time people were very irrational. They would panic about the next life and the rage of Hades, the god of death during the olden Greece. This panic was unfounded since people could not evade because it is the nature law. Every living thing which is born must at one point die. Therefore, fearing an incident that is unavoidable is quite unreasonable and Epicurus has precisely depicted this as “foolishness” (Warren, 2004). Individuals consider death as a very harsh and harmful reality of life. He says people waste precious times of their life fearing and panicking the effects of death that clearly is impossible to evade. Bailey (1926, p.59) claims that living and appreciating life fully is the most significant aspect of it since human can be sure of only the time they are alive as any might be their end. When life reaches its last part nearly always would appear less because one will never be contented with the way he or she has lived. The desire for an eternal life would be rather illogical since the human brain nature is to get exhausted of all around it, eventually the best people or things all appear dull and we desire it would come to an end. The reality that we would stop living one day in fact makes people’s life more important and pleasant. It is after this that human truly understand that their moment while living is limited and they endeavor to live it to the fullest. Explaining that death cannot harm us, Epicurus affirms that death is nothing to human because death is not sensational (Bailey, 1926, p.64). He believed that if human do not exist, they cannot have sensations since the state of non-existence is the lack of sensation. Meaning death in itself not a sensation but the absence of it; in short what you don’t feel cannot harm you. Epicurus’ major claim challenging the dreadful of death, though, is an effort to show that all such panic concerning states of non-existence are illogical. His argument is best explained by his simple remark that “when we are there, death is not, and when death is there, we are not.” Anybody desiring to demonstrate that a situation of non-existence harms others, Epicurus maintains, must prove, the person harmed, the moment the harm takes place, and the manner in which a person is harmed. According to Fischer (2000) the Epicurean argue that any idea of the harm resulting from death needs an existent matter of that harm which has challenged theorists to study and explain the metaphysical condition of the dead, the potential losses or dispossessions in relation to individual identity, the context of counterfactual plans concerning past and future individuals, and the outset of time required to rationalize the perception that death harms humans. In some situation where a person fears death since he or she is in responsible rank where some people also depend on him, they normally fear how things may turn out following his death. This view is too illogical since no man is indispensable. The dread is baseless because he cannot change the reality that he will one time die and not even feel it, hence the individuals depending on him will learn how to survive without him. In that manner, dwelling on the effects of death would only making ones life more difficult and miserable while still alive. Bitsori & Galanakis (2004, p. 468) hold that Epicurus was right in thinking that should death come one would not even feel the pain or harm since they are no more. Just like birth itself it is important to understand that death is not a harmful and painful as people may think. Human never bring to mind any even of harm in their birth nor any even of their death. One an individual is born and is leading his life, they hardly ever think of their birth, in the same way it is rather fair to take death in similar manner since it is something they ought not to concern themselves with (Warren, 2004). According to Gottlieb (2000) Epicurus claims that an individual must not concern themselves regarding death because the moment they cease to exist, death becomes annihilation which is good, bad or harmful. He considers death in itself is whole lack of sensitivity, whereby there exists no pleasure or harm. On his view, apparently neither the conditions nor the death process is intrinsically harmful- it is not bad for human. Fischer (2000) argues that Death is not actually painful since one people normally die consciously and can never hear or feel anything one they are gone. Of course, human worries concerning death shows not simply the fear of stopping to be alive, but the consciousness of seeing some precious thing taken away from them, of being forever withdrawn of a subsistence which would have kept on yielding pleasure. Epicurus’ reaction to this concern is that tranquility or ataraxia, not period, is the measure of a life better spent (Bailey, 1926, p.59). The moment it is realized, pleasure cannot be increased, either by more achievements or by a long life. This idea may be hard to believe for the people who perceive life as a rational tale with the starting point, the center and the end. In accordance with the view, human lives encompass a “plot,” that has to be played so as to be absolute. The panic of death considerably depends on this nature of seeing a persons’ life as a relating story. In conclusion, it is obvious Epicurus was simply in the matter he believed in. His opinions about death were rather rational thus it is not tricky to associate with it. The dread of death is certainly illogical and uncalled for. Death can thus be regarded as being at same level with birth. Death is an end and there can never be any exemptions. One must never waste valuable times of their life fearing death, but understanding that life is not boundless and they have to make the most of it whilst they are still alive. People can just make a difference in their life when still existing and not subsequent to it. All that people aim to achieve can be realized when they are alive. Therefore fearing death that it harms is not the solution and people must have something to accomplish with it in their life. References Annas, J. (1993). The Morality of Happiness. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bitsori, M., & Galanakis, E. (2004). "Epicurus’ death". World Journal of Urology 22(6), 466– 469. Bailey, C. (1926). Epicurus: The Pleasant Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p57-68 Fischer, J. (2000). The metaphysics of death. Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. Press. Gottlieb, A. (2000). The dream of reason: a history of western philosophy from the Greeks to the Renaissance. New York: W.W. Norton. Warren, J. (2004). Facing Death: Epicurus and his Critics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Read More