1
Student’s name
Phil 115, Summer 2022
First Paper
Topic 1
Epicurus’s great argument about the conclusion about death is premised on the notion
that it cannot be a bad thing. The theory is premised on the assumption that death has no victim
and it cannot be bad since he assumes that death does not cause any disagreeable sensation.
However, Nozick’s views on the experience machine seem to disapprove of these sentiments as
they are not in line with reality. Furthermore, most of us are harmed when a loved one dies.
Therefore, it is flawed for Epicurus to base his conclusion on the idea that death has no victim.
In Epicurus’s statement, I think he is alluding to the fact that death is essentially nothing
to us and cannot be a bad thing since all evil is premised on deprivation. Notably, his conclusions
imply that death is an absence of deprivation; therefore, it cannot be bad. The Epicurean
perspective is founded on the idea that for something to be wicked (or to be considered harmful
to an individual), it must cause some degree of disagreeable sensation, such as pain. However, in
Epicurus’s opinion, death does not entail any pain, so he concludes that demise cannot be bad for
the person who dies. Epicurus grounds his claim on the idea that there cannot be a victim for
death’s evil; thus, it cannot be evil, and there cannot be a period when death harms anybody, so
death cannot be evil. Consequently, by eliminating the desire for immortality rather than adding
an indefinite time, the proper knowledge that death is nothing for anyone makes human existence
pleasurable. Therefore, for Epicurus, the person who claims to fear death is illogical because
their pain comes from anticipating it rather than from the actual event.
Student’s name
Phil 115, Summer 2022
First Paper
Topic 1
Epicurus’s great argument about the conclusion about death is premised on the notion
that it cannot be a bad thing. The theory is premised on the assumption that death has no victim
and it cannot be bad since he assumes that death does not cause any disagreeable sensation.
However, Nozick’s views on the experience machine seem to disapprove of these sentiments as
they are not in line with reality. Furthermore, most of us are harmed when a loved one dies.
Therefore, it is flawed for Epicurus to base his conclusion on the idea that death has no victim.
In Epicurus’s statement, I think he is alluding to the fact that death is essentially nothing
to us and cannot be a bad thing since all evil is premised on deprivation. Notably, his conclusions
imply that death is an absence of deprivation; therefore, it cannot be bad. The Epicurean
perspective is founded on the idea that for something to be wicked (or to be considered harmful
to an individual), it must cause some degree of disagreeable sensation, such as pain. However, in
Epicurus’s opinion, death does not entail any pain, so he concludes that demise cannot be bad for
the person who dies. Epicurus grounds his claim on the idea that there cannot be a victim for
death’s evil; thus, it cannot be evil, and there cannot be a period when death harms anybody, so
death cannot be evil. Consequently, by eliminating the desire for immortality rather than adding
an indefinite time, the proper knowledge that death is nothing for anyone makes human existence
pleasurable. Therefore, for Epicurus, the person who claims to fear death is illogical because
their pain comes from anticipating it rather than from the actual event.
