T. Nagel on death

Question 1

Biological death

Answer 1

• Assume that biological death is “the unequivocal and permanent end of our existence… unsupplemented by any form of conscious survival”
• Nagel notes, even those who think we are immortal must have a view of about death. (because their view about how good or bad a thing immortality is will be conditioned by what they think about the goodness or badness of death).

Question 2

Nagel’s main goals

Answer 2

• To show that if death really is an evil, then that must be so, not because of any of death’s positive features, but because of its negative features
• To solve 3 philosophical problems that arise for the view that death is an evil and that it is evil because of its negative features

Question 3

Nagel on why life is good

Answer 3

• Thinks our intuitive view is that what is most basically about life are conscious states and activities
• The idea is that no matter how good/bad the contents of consciousness and activity might be- no matter how good/bad one’s particular experiences or one’s particular actions might be- the mere enjoyment of conscious states and activities make life at least minimally worth living

Question 4

Nagel on why we tend to think death is bad

Answer 4

• We tend to think only the loss of the conscious states and activities that make living good
• And thus we feel that death is something of which one cannot have more or less

Question 5

Life’s goodness as positive, death’s badness as negative

Answer 5

Concludes that if death really is an evil, then it is not evil for any of its positive features but only for its negative ones

Question 6

Nagel vs Larkin

Answer 6

• Nagel thinks that Larkin’s view, while perhaps understandable, is confused
• We do not dread the idea of temporary suspension or even lack of life. As Nagel notes, pity would be the wrong attitude to bear towards those in suspended animation who will be revived.
• We do not regard the period before birth as a misfortune. You did not exist before you were born (or conceived). But the thought of the vast time before you existed does not ‘hold and horrify’

Question 7

3 philosophical problems

Answer 7

1. Can anything be bad for someone if they don’t experience it?
2. Who, exactly, is deprived of the goods of life? Who, in other words, is the subject of a particular case of death?
3. We didn’t have the goods of life before birth, but we don’t regard that period with horror. So why do we have this attitude towards death

Question 8

Nagel on problem 1

Answer 8

• Claiming that death isn’t an evil because no one can experience it rests on the highly implausible view that “what you don’t know can’t hurt you”
  ○ AKA The “mattering principle”
• It says that the only thing that can make a difference to how well someone’s life goes are factors that the person can detect within the course of their experience
• Nagel holds 2 objections

Question 9

Nagel on problem 2

Answer 9

Understanding the foregoing helps us to see that the living person is the one who is subject to the badness of death.

Question 10

Nagel on problem 3

Answer 10

No one exists before they are born, so no goods are cut off. But when one lives and must die, an easy to imagine possible future of indefinitely more goods of life looms. Death is a deprivation of this future. This is why we regard the period before birth as different from the period after death.