Nagel’s article on death studied the assumptions and theories of death. The basic questions on the topic are: what is the rationale behind death? What evil can be attributed to death? Nagel begins his study with a general theory of life and death. He explained death as the end of living; this meant the life of an individual would be terminated at the time of death. The basis of Nagel’s study began with three hypotheses on the study of death (Nagel 4).
The first hypothesis states that death is evil. The second hypothesis says death can be normal when it does not remove the essence of life. The third hypothesis expresses death as a deprivation of the good things of life. The first hypothesis studies the essence of living and the evil in death.
Nagel emphasized that death terminates the life of an individual and the good in him or her. We cannot ascribe the good of living but we can equally describe the harm in death. The death of an individual can be seen from three positions as described by Nagel. The first position seeks to explain the reason of death and why it is evil. When a student is killed on his way to school, they say the life of the student was short-lived.
This is true only when we cannot ascertain the future. Nagel provided more emphasis on this position of thought with the natural self. When we imagine what the future holds for the student, one would easily put forward the assumption of death is evil. Another example was seen in the case of a child suffering from a blood disease, his death would be comforting to the family because of the suffering the child had endured. The second position of the first hypothesis explained how death can be compared using different circumstances.
For example, an old woman smiled on her dying bed signifying she had completed a worthy life and wants a rest. Her death would be seen as a gift of life. The third position would be at the disadvantage in death. Death comes in various ways, and people believe death without pain is better than death with the pain. The way in which an individual dies contributes to the pain we feel when someone dies. The example above does not isolate death from evil; it only reminds us death is inevitable (Nagel 5).
We agree with the school of thought, death at a full age would be less painful to those who mourn their loss than death at a young age. This belief can be used to further the arguments on death. At what point would death be termed well deserved? The society would agree that death is well deserved on an individual depending on the circumstances surrounding an individual.
For example, when a robber is executed people tend to see his or her death as well deserved because of the pain the individual has inflicted in the community. The end of life for the individual was not seen as a deprivation of life but well deserved. This means death itself is not evil as put forward by Nagel’s third hypothesis the deprivation it brings, constitutes harm and may be termed evil. The pain we suffer when physically challenged can be related to death only when we say death is evil.
Nagel explained our analysis of the pain in death can only be complete if we know what happens to the individual when he or she dies. Nagel puts forward another troubling but compelling question on the time of birth of an individual. What do we lose before our birth? Do we gain or lose something if we were born earlier? Nagel used the question to conclude by saying death is not evil in itself but a factor of pain.
Nagel used real life situations to explain his views on death. He knew people held different accounts and beliefs about death, so he decided to center his argument on the common belief that death causes pain. Although every person is entitled to his or her opinion on the matter, Nagel believed his explanation would provide logical thinking to the questions about death.
This explanation will guide young and old learners on the philosophy of life and death. Nagel made his assertions using tactical approach. He related the basic question with rational thinking and generalized the topic to carry different arguments on the subject.
The analysis on death does not involve the afterlife of an individual. Nagel based his analysis on the assumption that the life of a man ended at the time of death. Nagel was motivated by his sense of thoughts. Nagel wanted to expand the assumptions surrounding death and explain these assumptions using logical thinking. There is nothing at stake in his beliefs, if he were wrong or right. Since no one can prove the existence of an afterlife or the deprivation of the good life by death.
Works Cited
Nagel, Thomas 1979, Death. Web.