PHIL 1100 Lecture Notes - Lecture 24: Epicurus

• School: Cornell University
• Department: Philosophy
• Course: PHIL 1100
• Professor: Karen Bennett

Document Summary

Nagel deprivationist account of why death is bad; how he would respond to epicurus and lucreitius. How he responds: it is the loss rather than the lack. Nagel: it is a mistake to think that something being bad for you, you must experience it as such (1st argument) Nagel: it is a mistake that you have to exist for it to be bad for you (2nd argument) Nagel relies on intuitive experiences (harming someone"s legacy, etc. ) Most explicitly making claim on second column of page 851. Still strange; what happens to a person goes beyond the bounds of their life. Interesting paradox; somehow, both epicurus and nagel seem wrong. Fourth premise; the long period of nonexistence after your death is just the same. Argument that there is a parallel; argues that both are just alike. The period of nonexistence after death is when you are deprived of experience; not deprived of anything before your birth.