Death by Thomas Nagel Article Analysis Essay Example

One of the earliest modern moral philosophers is the American philosopher, Thomas Nagel. In his essay "Death," Thomas Nagel’s wonders whether dying is a horrible thing. In this essay, Thomas Nagel’s' perspective on death will be examined, with a particular emphasis on his counterarguments to those who contend that death is not something to be feared.

The idea that death shouldn't be feared is supported by three primary points. The first is that since we do not personally experience death, it cannot cause us any misery. And we shouldn't be afraid of anything that doesn't hurt us. What You Don't Know Can't Hurt You is a guiding principle behind this way of thinking. We have no idea whether death is unpleasant because no one who has died has ever had the chance to share; therefore, we don't need to be afraid of it.

According to the second argument, the person who has passed away does not suffer from death; rather, others do. It can appear that there is no one left to harm because the person is no longer there. The third argument contends that if nonexistence after death is viewed negatively, then nonexistence prior to birth should be viewed negatively as well. Why is the analysis of nonexistence not symmetric?

According to Thomas Nagel "death is the unequivocal and permanent end of our existence, the question arises whether it is a bad thing to die" (Nagel p1). He still disagrees with the epicurean viewpoint despite having such a hardline view on death. 

Thomas Nagel disagrees with the philosophy of "what you don't know, can't hurt you" in life (Nagel p-4). Not all unfortunate circumstances may be explained by ignorance. When a tragedy occurs in our lives, we are saddened by it because misfortune is awful in and of itself, not merely because we are aware of it at the time. It doesn't matter if we were not conscious of a catastrophe in our lives—it still stinks. (Nagel p-4)

In response to the second point, Thomas Nagel argues that good and bad are not unique to individuals and are instead "irreducibly relational" to one another. Our relationships with others around us as well as our conscious or even innate qualities play a role in how good or bad our lives are. A person who is identifiable by his or her past and future possibilities, rather than only by the categorical situation of the moment, serves as the subject of good and bad fortune. (Nagel p-4,5)

The third explanation, put forth by Thomas Nagel, explains why prenatal and posthumous circumstances have distinct mindsets since there are no opportunities for prenatal people, but posthumous people miss out on opportunities they may have had. Man does not exist in the period of time prior to his conception or the period following his death, but the period following his passing represents the period of time in which he may have existed and might have made a difference. However, we cannot argue that if a guy had been born much earlier, they would have been someone else and the period before his birth would have been the one in which he would have lived. We are more devastated when a young person passes away since there are still so many possibilities for their future. He also questions if dying early is terrible or whether death itself is awful. Is it good to die when one has a long life and passes away in old age rather than while one is still young and has unrealized potential? (Nagel p-5).