Is Death the End of Life?

Name:

Tutor:

Course:

Date:

Is Death the End of Life?

Fischer, John Martin. “Free Will, Death, and Immortality: The Role of Narrative.” Philosophical Papers 34 (2005): 379-403. Print. In this article, Fischer goes to the extent of introducing other factors important in discussing the notion of death as the end of life such as free will and immortality. Accordingly, the author recalls a past perspective he had asserted within prior publications concerning the significance of free will in establishing a statement rather than imposing a difference. The source is reliable since it integrates other studies on death and life in order to establish value as an imperative factor for viewing death as the end of life. This source is reliable since it establishes a new argument regarding the relationship between death and life. By using free will as the value of life, the reader understands that death comprises the end of life since it impinges on the individual’s right to exercise his or her freedom of will.

Metz, Thaddeus “The Good, the True, and the Beautiful: Toward a Unified Account of Great Meaning in Life.” Religious Studies 47 (2011): 389-409. Print. In this article, Metz integrates religion as a formidable aspect in understanding death’s role as the end of life. The author evaluates the definitions of life and death by using religion as a strong determinant. The source is reliable because it acknowledges other arguments that do not necessarily coincide with Metz’ perspectives on the concepts of life and death. On the other hand, the objectivity of the source suffers from the author’s personal inclinations towards his own version of life and death due to use of personal experiences and arguments that do not integrate profound scholarly and academic knowledge. Since my topic involves arguing whether death is the end of life or not, the source is important due to its focus on life as well as death. By observing both ends of this philosophical spectrum, the source actually provides a firm foundation for conducting a rational study on the issue.

Portmore, D. W. “Desire Fulfillment and Posthumous Harm.” American Philosophical Quarterly 44 (2007): 227-238. In this article, Portmore offers a novel argument to the role of death as life’s ending factor by focusing specifically on the concept of harm. The author argues that death induces harm on life and as such, cannot qualify as the end of life itself since numerous posthumous events also inflict a certain level of harm on an individual’s life. This source is reliable since it offers a new philosophical platform for addressing the complexity of death and life. However, the source ignores the scientific observations of death and the state of individuals during the dying phase. However, since my topic involves establishing whether death is the end of life or not, the article offers new reasoning towards a rational discussion of the argument from both sides.

Suits, David B. “Why Death is Not Bad for the One who Died.” American Philosophical Quarterly 38.1 (2001): 269-284. Print. In this article, Suits focuses on the discussions surrounding life and death. His argument incorporates a world-based perspective on death’s role as the sole culminating factor of the human life. Consequently, Vernon provides a perspective based on scientific viewpoints concerning the end of life and the issue of death. This focus on death allows the author to establish a human-centric view to the respective issue. However, a considerable application of a human-based view on death dispels the objectivity associated with the following argument. The topic that I am concerned with involves death and its placement as the end of life as well as drawing a pragmatic connection to the nuances exhibited by Vernon in this controversial article. This source will be used to provide a rational and objective side to the issue of death as the determinant of life’s conclusion due to its focus on scientific-based perspectives and the general worldview of the occurrence.

Taylor, James Stacey. The Metaphysics and Ethics of Death. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Print. In this book, Taylor provides different philosophical perspectives on the aspect of death by exploring the ethics associated with it and its metaphysical nature. The author examines the various philosophical arguments provided by notable scholars over the years regarding the concept of death and its relevance in religion and society. The respective source is reliable since it provides a logical explanation of death by using different literatures from researchers involved in the study. However, by failing to provide a unique and fixed stand on the issue, it is difficult to understand the objective and motive of the discussion. As such, the reader is unaware of the author’s position within this entire philosophical argument. Since my subject involves death and its assertions as the end of life, the book offers different perspectives on the roles that death assumes among human beings. Hence, the source will be used to offer an objective side to the argument.

Works Cited

Fischer, John Martin. “Free Will, Death, and Immortality: The Role of Narrative.” Philosophical Papers 34 (2005): 379-403. Print.

Metz, Thaddeus “The Good, the True, and the Beautiful: Toward a Unified Account of Great Meaning in Life.” Religious Studies 47 (2011): 389-409. Print.

Portmore, D. W. “Desire Fulfillment and Posthumous Harm.” American Philosophical Quarterly 44 (2007): 227-238.

Suits, David B. “Why Death is Not Bad for the One who Died.” American Philosophical Quarterly 38.1 (2001): 269-284. Print.

Taylor, James Stacey. The Metaphysics and Ethics of Death. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Print.