4 ms·
No. Death is really not that bad; to be dead is no more evil than not to exist, because to be dead is to not exist. Dying itself is evil in that it causes grief
by rntz 11y ago
No. Death is really not that bad; to be dead is no more evil than not to exist, because to be dead is to not exist. Dying itself is evil in that it causes grief to others still living; but while grief is painful, I do not think anyone would compare the evil of suffering grief to the evil of suffering slavery.
One might argue that death is bad on counterfactual grounds: if a person had not died, they could still be alive and happy, and isn't that better than them not existing? But this argument leads to the Repugnant Conclusion (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mere_addition_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mere_addition_paradox)! So be very careful if you take this line of argument that you understand what you are saying.
I happen to be a total-happiness utilitarian, and do accept the repugnant conclusion. But ultimately all this means is that death is a mirror-image of birth - it ceases one hopefully-happy life; birth begins one. There is grief attached to death and joy attached to birth, but apart from that there is just as much imperative to maximize births as there is to prevent deaths - and one of these is far easier. This is, however, a deeply counterintuitive position that I don't expect many others to share.
This isn't Deep Wisdom. It's just utilitarianism, taken seriously.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- meowface 11y agoIf you can hypothetically prevent death and also increase birth rates (without causing problems resulting from overpopulation), wouldn't you be increasing both average and total happiness?
- rntz 11y agoSure. I'm not opposed to ending death, and certainly not to work on extending healthy lifespan. I just don't think it qualifies as humanity's greatest problem.