Hello everyone, I've been away from this site for sometime and lately I've been pondering a nice little topic called Death.

I've been pondering the question: "Is Death Evil?"

I'm up for a purely logical and philosophical discussion. if you are interested, I'm interested in hearing your thoughts.

ECCLESIASTES 7 VS 1 good name is better than fine perfume, and the day of death better than the day of birth.
JEREMIAH 20 VS 14 Cursed be the day wherein I was born: let not the day wherein my mother bare me be blessed

TAKE THAT HOW YOU WANT LOL

First of all, I will start with the following presuppositions for the sake of this discussion.

1. I'll assume that souls do not exist and even if they do, they do not live on after or before death
2. I'll also assume that there is no God or gods (yeah you heard that right) but somehow miraculously there is objective good and evil
3. I will suggest we keep the definition of good and evil simple as what a common man may regard as good and bad without having to go into unnecessary lengthy definitions.

If we accept the above as basic then I will make my argument thus.

Premise 1: A person's existence begins at birth and ends at death
Premise 2: For a thing to be either good or bad, a subject person must exist to experience it
Premise 3: There is no reason to believe that existence is better non-existence
Conclusion: Therefore if to die means to cease to exist, there is nothing wrong with the state death since the dead experience nothing. Furthermore following from this, killing a person is not intrinsically wrong.


Disclaimer for the over excited ones: I am not personally convicted by the above argument but I have presented it to see how you will tackle it. I am also willing to defend it

Let the fun begin!

obadiah777: ECCLESIASTES 7 VS 1 good name is better than fine perfume, and the day of death better than the day of birth.
JEREMIAH 20 VS 14 Cursed be the day wherein I was born: let not the day wherein my mother bare me be blessed

TAKE THAT HOW YOU WANT LOL

Lol, buzugee you don close my case already before I even open am.

Mr anony:
Lol, buzugee you don close my case already before I even open am.

NOT MY INTENTION SIR

obadiah777: NOT MY INTENTION SIR

nah, it is very much allowed

My twin's back! Yay!....Is he?

Well, here I am. And I think that Death is evil.

I think it is because

1. Evil is a corruption, distortion or, perhaps, outright negation of good or that which is true and right.

2. Harmonious relationships is true, good and right as nature evidences that when things are rightly and properly related to one another, the best outcomes are realized.

3. Death is a rupture of relationships. The physical type ruptures the relationships between the various parts of the organism's being and between it and the world around it. That is a negation of the right order of things. The spiritual type ruptures the relationship between a man and God. The eternal type is a total separation from the Source of Life.

Thus, Death is evil.

Edit: so sorry, twin bro. I began editing after your op but got otherwise engaged so I didn't see your following post until I posted. Will see about addressing your argument sha, but later

Hey Anony,

Yeah I know I was not invited but what da heck...aint leaving till I say my bit

If I go with the assumptions you made then I might say, death can be either bad or good, depending on one's viewpoint.

If everything starts and ends here and I am one who loves life and have gotten all the 'good' things life can throw at me. I have all the money I need, I have access to the lady I want in my life, I have beautiful kids, trustworthy friends and am really enjoying just being here on Earth then all of a sudden I have to give up everything because there is something called death? Definitely, in this scenario death is bad because it would deprive me of a lot...

On the contrary, if I am a homeless dude who has absolutely nothing going for him...one who is spat on, disrespected by everyone, and getting a meal is nothing short of a miracle then death would be a welcome development because death might just be the much needed escape route out of my life of misery.

Ihedinobi: My twin's back! Yay!....Is he?

Lol hahaha, yeah I'm back at least for a bit.

Well, here I am. And I think that Death is evil.

It will be fun to argue against you for the first time. Let us begin

I think it is because

1. Evil is a corruption, distortion or, perhaps, outright negation of good or that which is true and right.

Good I agree that evil is a corruption and negation of good. but in order to ponder right and wrong, you must be alive first. Why is life good in itself and death bad in itself?

2. Harmonious relationships is true, good and right as nature evidences that when things are rightly and properly related to one another, the best outcomes are realized.

Still only valid as long as one is alive

3. Death is a rupture of relationships. The physical type ruptures the relationships between the various parts of the organism's being and between it and the world around it. That is a negation of the right order of things. The spiritual type ruptures the relationship between a man and God. The eternal type is a total separation from the Source of Life.
Thus, Death is evil.

Hmm ok, but I am presupposing that there is no God to relate to in this case and I am limiting my argument to the physical nonetheless let us look at an underlying assumption you are making. You are taking for granted that relationships are good and separations are bad but this is not necessarily true as not all relationships are good and some separations are very good.

Now I think the main problem before you is to show why a state of existence and relationshipsin itself is better than a state of no relationships or consciousness

striktlymi: Hey Anony,

Yeah I know I was not invited but what da heck...aint leaving till I say my bit

If I go with the assumptions you made then I might say, death can be either bad or good, depending on one's viewpoint.

If everything starts and ends here and I am one who loves life and have gotten all the 'good' things life can throw at me. I have all the money I need, I have access to the lady I want in my life, I have beautiful kids, trustworthy friends and am really enjoying just being here on Earth then all of a sudden I have to give up everything because there is something called death? Definitely, in this scenario death is bad because it would deprive me of a lot...

On the contrary, if I am a homeless dude who has absolutely nothing going for him...one who is spat on, disrespected by everyone, and getting a meal is nothing short of a miracle then death would be a welcome development because death might just be the much needed escape route out of my life of misery.

Nice and interesting, lol you know you are always free to comment.

By looking at your points, you have not really made an argument at all instead, you've pitched your tent solidly on the fence.
If you carefully read my argument again, you will notice that in my conclusion there is a troublesome proposition I have dubiously sneaked in.
By you sitting on the fence, you have fallen right into my trap because now you have to accept that it is good to kill a poor man but rich men should be spared.

Is this your position?

honestly i lost two very precious people in my life recently and this experience is what made me interested in this topic.

just saying death is bad or good is just a display of ignorance which isnt anybody's fault.


to me, since death is an inevitable end of every human, then it cant be as bad as we think. if we dont know what waits for us when we close our eyes in death...then its natural for the fear of the unknown to make us feel it is bad. but come to think of it, good and bad people both die, so what makes it bad? i think death is a good thing but it is natural for humans to think it is a bad thing. i lost my mum and fiance recently and i dont believe that a bad thing has happened to them. i just believe that for them to actually experience death... then it isnt a bad thing afterall. their death makes me a little less afraid of this unknown.

i think it is religion that makes us think death is bad... it makes us see it as punishment, we then fail to realize that it is indeed and inevitable end. if there is actually life after death, then i think it would be a place of harmony, i think this way because of the seemingly necessity of death. this necessity cant be for a bad cause

Mr anony:
Nice and interesting, lol you know you are always free to comment.

By looking at your points, you have not really made an argument at all instead, you've pitched your tent solidly on the fence.

Lol!!! So you noticed...

Mr anony:
If you carefully read my argument again, you will notice that in my conclusion there is a troublesome proposition I have dubiously sneaked in.
By you sitting on the fence, you have fallen right into my trap because now you have to accept that it is good to kill a poor man but rich men should be spared.

Is this your position?

Well Anony, that is not my position exactly. I don't believe anyone should be put to death just because he or she is poverty stricken...there are people who are poor and are happy with the life they have got while there are those who are rich and are struggling to find meaning in life...

Whether one sees the beauty of life or not, really has nothing to do with 'wealth'...there are a number of reasons one might choose to just end it all and in such circumstance (especially ill health) death might just be a good thing, considering that there is no consequence involved.

Now to the ish of taking another's life. I don't consider it appropriate for someone (including the government) to take the life of another for no justifiable reason...in my opinion, if anyone chooses to die without committing a heinous crime, then the individual should be the one to take his/her own life as against wanting someone else to help him/her with it.

Welcome back Mr Anony.
*Still wondering why the different id's though*
I like the way this argument is fashioned. Perhaps, for once I might be in the same position with my brothers at the other side.
...
Firstly, I think if we are to go from the most basic form, a person does not begin to exist at birth but from the moment of ovum fertilization-zygote formation.
That is to say that, conception as we know it is not a birthing of an existent to be, but route for another phase in the maturation of an already existing being.
If we are to operate by objective morality, the presence or absence of a subject to experience the deed is not really a basis for categorizing morality.
The determinant factor, I think, should be the effect of the deed on the survival of the 'sorroundings'.(By this I mean everything including man).
Let me illustrate.
Assuming a spring water sorrounded by irregularly arranged clump of stones is situated in a local community.
The only available source of water the locals depend on.
Now, let's say Anony is heavily pressed from the watery beans and pap he had the previous day.
He walks around the vicinity searching for a place to drop the ugly thing.
And finally, he spotted the spring. He went for it.
The spring with some scents of fresh air, beautifully conformed that the thought of dropping the 'rascals' gladdens his heart.
And like the gentleman his inputs will not mimick, he walks to the spot, positions with swag and ordered the ugly rascal to let him be.
It mixes and settles at the bottom of the water.
The water the only hope for the community has been denatured and polluted.
The locals as usual, without knowing (like they have an option if they knew), keep drinking from the spring.
As time passed, diseases that are water borne became highly pronounced.
Due it inadequate healthcare some deaths were recorded.
Remember it all began with Anony's running stomach.
Assuming he didn't drop the ugly rascal there, their wouldn't have been the chain reaction.
What I think it should be is, objectively, morality seeks the effects of an act to it sorroundings.
When it is detrimental it is bad and vice versa.

frank3.16:
honestly i lost two very precious people in my life recently and this experience is what made me interested in this topic.

just saying death is bad or good is just a display of ignorance which isnt anybody's fault.


to me, since death is an inevitable end of every human, then it cant be as bad as we think. if we dont know what waits for us when we close our eyes in death...then its natural for the fear of the unknown to make us feel it is bad. but come to think of it, good and bad people both die, so what makes it bad? i think death is a good thing but it is natural for humans to think it is a bad thing. i lost my mum and fiance recently and i dont believe that a bad thing has happened to them. i just believe that for them to actually experience death... then it isnt a bad thing afterall. their death makes me a little less afraid of this unknown.

i think it is religion that makes us think death is bad... it makes us see it as punishment, we then fail to realize that it is indeed and inevitable end. if there is actually life after death, then i think it would be a place of harmony, i think this way because of the seemingly necessity of death. this necessity cant be for a bad cause

Hello Frank,

Sorry for your loss...

If you were given the choice of having your loved ones back, would you hesitate at the opportunity?

.

Mr anony: First of all, I will start with the following presuppositions for the sake of this discussion.

1. I'll assume that souls do not exist and even if they do, they do not live on after or before death
2. I'll also assume that there is no God or gods (yeah you heard that right) but somehow miraculously there is objective good and evil
3. I will suggest we keep the definition of good and evil simple as what a common man may regard as good and bad without having to go into unnecessary lengthy definitions.

If we accept the above as basic then I will make my argument thus.

Premise 1: A person's existence begins at birth and ends at death
Premise 2: For a thing to be either good or bad, a subject person must exist to experience it
Premise 3: There is no reason to believe that existence is better non-existence
Conclusion: Therefore if to die means to cease to exist, there is nothing wrong with the state death since the dead experience nothing. Furthermore following from this, killing a person is not intrinsically wrong.


Disclaimer for the over excited ones: I am not personally convicted by the above argument but I have presented it to see how you will tackle it. I am also willing to defend it

Let the fun begin!

So you deliberately left my name out of the topic.....I am now "others" to you?


After all we've been through? The debunking? The anonyism? The epic fails?

I refuse to spend my logic here after this ego bursting done to me

#logicboy's big ego deflated
#butthurt

This post stubbornly appeared twice.

Very bad mtn services in O-town.

Mr anony:
Lol hahaha, yeah I'm back at least for a bit.


It will be fun to argue against you for the first time. Let us begin



Good I agree that evil is a corruption and negation of good. but in order to ponder right and wrong, you must be alive first. Why is life good in itself and death bad in itself?


Still only valid as long as one is alive


Hmm ok, but I am presupposing that there is no God to relate to in this case and I am limiting my argument to the physical nonetheless let us look at an underlying assumption you are making. You are taking for granted that relationships are good and separations are bad but this is not necessarily true as not all relationships are good and some separations are very good.

Now I think the main problem before you is to show why a state of existence and relationshipsin itself is better than a state of no relationships or consciousness

I knew it'd be only for a bit Good to have you at all anyhow

Honestly, if I'd seen your second post before I posted, I'd have answered differently. And, in fact, I mean to when I come off transit. So, wait on me o. I think I'm actually gonna have some real fun. These atheists have been real Valium since forever, that is, except for when they are Nausea.

frank3.16:
honestly i lost two very precious people in my life recently and this experience is what made me interested in this topic.

just saying death is bad or good is just a display of ignorance which isnt anybody's fault.


to me, since death is an inevitable end of every human, then it cant be as bad as we think. if we dont know what waits for us when we close our eyes in death...then its natural for the fear of the unknown to make us feel it is bad. but come to think of it, good and bad people both die, so what makes it bad? i think death is a good thing but it is natural for humans to think it is a bad thing. i lost my mum and fiance recently and i dont believe that a bad thing has happened to them. i just believe that for them to actually experience death... then it isnt a bad thing afterall. their death makes me a little less afraid of this unknown.

i think it is religion that makes us think death is bad... it makes us see it as punishment, we then fail to realize that it is indeed and inevitable end. if there is actually life after death, then i think it would be a place of harmony, i think this way because of the seemingly necessity of death. this necessity cant be for a bad cause

sorry to hear about your loss man. I'll second Kay 17's question though

striktlymi:

Hello Frank,

Sorry for your loss...

If you were given the choice of having your loved ones back, would you hesitate at the opportunity?

no, i wouldn't hesitate. but i think u are looking at this argument from the missing ur loved one point of view instead of the imagination of what the experience of death is.

the question tome is: is death evil? the action itself, the process of death. and not the effect of that process that had already taken place.
if we judge death from its effect, then we can easily say its evil because it brings about sadness and vacuum to the living.
but do u thing those who experience death have experienced a bad thing? me i think they haven't.

i think that since death is an inevitable end, it is for a good cause. it is for a good cause because it is inevitable.

striktlymi:

Lol!!! So you noticed...

Of course I did, it was blatantly obvious.

Well Anony, that is not my position exactly. I don't believe anyone should be put to death just because he or she is poverty stricken...there are people who are poor and are happy with the life they have got while there are those who are rich and are struggling to find meaning in life...

Whether one sees the beauty of life or not, really has nothing to do with 'wealth'...there are a number of reasons one might choose to just end it all and in such circumstance (especially ill health) death might just be a good thing, considering that there is no consequence involved.

Now to the ish of taking another's life. I don't consider it appropriate for someone (including the government) to take the life of another for no justifiable reason...in my opinion, if anyone chooses to die without committing a heinous crime, then the individual should be the one to take his/her own life as against wanting someone else to help him/her with it.

I know that was not your position but I want to press you to take a stance. Now you are for the right of a person to take his own life. I won't contest that but I will contest the right of a person not to be murdered. If death is not a bad thing and life is not necessarily a good thing,then it equally can't necessarily be a bad thing to kill. wouldn't you agree?

Mr anony: sorry to hear about your loss man. I'll second Kay 17's question though

i guess u mean striklymi's question... that is my answer above. i am actually still struggling to get over it (especially that of my fiance which it more recent)

Mr anony:
If we accept the above as basic then I will make my argument thus.

Premise 1: A person's existence begins at birth and ends at death
Premise 2: For a thing to be either good or bad, a subject person must exist to experience it
Premise 3: There is no reason to believe that existence is better non-existence
Conclusion: Therefore if to die means to cease to exist, there is nothing wrong with the state death since the dead experience nothing. Furthermore following from this, killing a person is not intrinsically wrong.

Not one to participate in philosophical debates. Let's see how long before I run off.

I do not agree with your conclusion. From premise 1, we agree that life comes before death. A person has the opportunity to have a good experience on earth. Death would mean experiencing nothing, in essence losing the ability to experience something. To outrightly seize one's right to experience life by 'murder', would then be evil/wrong.

frank3.16:


no, i wouldn't hesitate. but i think u are looking at this argument from the missing ur loved one point of view instead of the imagination of what the experience of death is.

the question tome is: is death evil? the action itself, the process of death. and not the effect of that process that had already taken place.
if we judge death from its effect, then we can easily say its evil because it brings about sadness and vacuum to the living.
but do u thing those who experience death have experienced a bad thing? me i think they haven't.

i think that since death is an inevitable end, it is for a good cause. it is for a good cause because it is inevitable.

Very nice points you have raised and I tend to agree with you when I see it from your 'looking glass'...but Frank don't you think it is rather a wicked (evil) act to be deprived of the company of a loved one?

If kidnapping is inherently evil, why not death? Technically they are almost the same...they both deprive us of those we love. Yes, I know that death is inevitable but why can't we just all live forever and let death be a matter of choice?

I believe if death is a choice, some folks who are dead today would rather prefer to be alive; and if they would rather choose to live then I am of the opinion that for those people death is necessarily a bad thing.

Mr anony:
Of course I did, it was blatantly obvious.

Mr anony:
I know that was not your position but I want to press you to take a stance. Now you are for the right of a person to take his own life. I won't contest that but I will contest the right of a person not to be murdered. If death is not a bad thing and life is not necessarily a good thing,then it equally can't necessarily be a bad thing to kill. wouldn't you agree?

This really has to do with infringing on someone elses right...if death is not necessarily a bad thing (from this looking glass) it still does not give one the licence to take the life another.

Eating is not a bad thing...as a matter of fact eating is a very good thing...do I now say because eating is good then I go about forcing every adult I see on the way to eat?

It is one thing to allow people kill themselves if they want to and another thing for an individual to forcefully take the life of another...even if death is good, every man should be given the dignity of choosing how he leaves this world (all other factors like accidents etc remaining constant).

still you are looking at the from the living's point of view... i think this question is asked so that we can try to decern something beyond the ordinary. i mean think deeper than the effect of death.

now if u say death is a bad thing, then why must everyone experience it... remember it is an inevitable end. are u trying u to tell me that we are born to experience a bad thing? are u trying to tell me that we must all experience this inevitable end which it bad?

i still maintain that if death was bad... then it wouldnt have been an inevitable end for all, only bad people would have to experience this this which is death.

but the reality is that we all, everyone must experience it... how then can it be bad when it is a necessary cause. are u trying to tell me that we are born into this world just to experience an evil end(death)?

frank3.16:
still you are looking at the from the living's point of view... i think this question is asked so that we can try to decern something beyond the ordinary. i mean think deeper than the effect of death.

Well Frank I don't know why Mr Anony asked the question but really, I am not just looking at it solely from the point of view of the living...if we look at it from the viewpoint of one who just became a father but only has less than a month to live, we can't but say that death is wicked...the individual is being deprived of watching his baby grow.

frank3.16:

now if u say death is a bad thing, then why must everyone experience it... remember it is an inevitable end. are u trying u to tell me that we are born to experience a bad thing? are u trying to tell me that we must all experience this inevitable end which it bad?

I guess the reason why I sat on the fence initially is coming to light...based on the assumptions Anony gave, death can either be good or bad...it all depends on the circumstance. The fact that death is inevitable does not really make it a good thing...

People fall sick...we can say to a large extent that sickness is inevitable...does this make sickness a good thing? If we have a choice to make between being sick and not being sick, I believe everyone would prefer the latter...the same with death...some people would rather prefer to live and for such people dying is bad.

frank3.16:

i still maintain that if death was bad... then it wouldnt have been an inevitable end for all, only bad people would have to experience this this which is death.

I do understand the angle you are looking at it from and I agree with you but if I am to go with the assumptions of Anony then death can be either good or bad...

frank3.16:

but the reality is that we all, everyone must experience it... how then can it be bad when it is a necessary cause. are u trying to tell me that we are born into this world just to experience an evil end(death)?

That's not my point actually...my thoughts so far on this ish are determined by the assumptions we are meant to work with.

nice one striklymi... i think we are on the same page here but just looking at it form different points of view.

i agree if everyone is given opportunity to chose they would not chose to die. once again if u read my first page u will see where i said this is becasue of we are yet to fully understand what happens after death. the fear of the unknown makes us unconciously think it is a bad thing. that means it is absolutely normal to think that death is a bad thing. when u remember missing ur loved ones forever.

now comparing death with sickness does not go well with me because with sickness we know what we experience when we are sick and we know the experience we dislike when we are sick. but with death it is an unknown even,u cant know how the experience is like. secondly death is an end for all... sickness is not an end.

if all will experience this end.. how can it then b evil

frank3.16:
nice one striklymi... i think we are on the same page here but just looking at it form different points of view.

i agree if everyone is given opportunity to chose they would not chose to die. once again if u read my first page u will see where i said this is becasue of we are yet to fully understand what happens after death. the fear of the unknown makes us unconciously think it is a bad thing. that means it is absolutely normal to think that death is a bad thing. when u remember missing ur loved ones forever.

now comparing death with sickness does not go well with me because with sickness we know what we experience when we are sick and we know the experience we dislike when we are sick. but with death it is an unknown even,u cant know how the experience is like. secondly death is an end for all... sickness is not an end.

if all will experience this end.. how can it then b evil

I agree with the above and sorry for using such an example...sickness and death shouldn't be compared.

For the bit on the 'experience'...one of Anony's assumptions was that there is absolutely nothing to experience because we seize to exist after death.

Now since we know that we are leaving a lot behind as we move into 'non-existence', can't we therefore say that death is not welcomed?

Reyginus: Welcome back Mr Anony.
*Still wondering why the different id's though*

Lol, I was getting really addicted to NL so in order to lock myself out changed my passwords to a long string of characters I can't remember and then changed my email to some random stuff so that I won't be able to retrieve it. The new ids are the price I paid for a lack of self-control.

I like the way this argument is fashioned. Perhaps, for once I might be in the same position with my brothers at the other side.
...
Firstly, I think if we are to go from the most basic form, a person does not begin to exist at birth but from the moment of ovum fertilization-zygote formation.
That is to say that, conception as we know it is not a birthing of an existent to be, but route for another phase in the maturation of an already existing being.
If we are to operate by objective morality, the presence or absence of a subject to experience the deed is not really a basis for categorizing morality.
The determinant factor, I think, should be the effect of the deed on the survival of the 'sorroundings'.(By this I mean everything including man).
Let me illustrate.
Assuming a spring water sorrounded by irregularly arranged clump of stones is situated in a local community.
The only available source of water the locals depend on.
Now, let's say Anony is heavily pressed from the watery beans and pap he had the previous day.
He walks around the vicinity searching for a place to drop the ugly thing.
And finally, he spotted the spring. He went for it.
The spring with some scents of fresh air, beautifully conformed that the thought of dropping the 'rascals' gladdens his heart.
And like the gentleman his inputs will not mimick, he walks to the spot, positions with swag and ordered the ugly rascal to let him be.
It mixes and settles at the bottom of the water.
The water the only hope for the community has been denatured and polluted.
The locals as usual, without knowing (like they have an option if they knew), keep drinking from the spring.
As time passed, diseases that are water borne became highly pronounced.
Due it inadequate healthcare some deaths were recorded.
Remember it all began with Anony's running stomach.
Assuming he didn't drop the ugly rascal there, their wouldn't have been the chain reaction.
What I think it should be is, objectively, morality seeks the effects of an act to it sorroundings.
When it is detrimental it is bad and vice versa.

Nice illustration there but you are taking for granted a position we have not established. You are assuming that the deaths are wrong by default but that is precisely what I am challenging. I see no reason why non-existence can be wrong. That's the philosophical question I want you to grapple first. Why is existence better than non-existence?

Logicboy03:


So you deliberately left my name out of the topic.....I am now "others" to you?


After all we've been through? The debunking? The anonyism? The epic fails?

I refuse to spend my logic here after this ego bursting done to me

#logicboy's big ego deflated
#butthurt

hahaha why are whinging again. You know my opinion of you does not determine your worth. Don't give me credit I don't deserve. You are invited by default. Feel free to join in the fun.