Essay about Life After Death Is No Personal Survival

1527 Words Apr 27th, 2016 null Page
Survival of the self is a consistent question which has punctuated human thought throughout time. Whether embodied or disembodied, survival of the soul seems to be dependent on forces that humans do not have the technology to scientifically prove right now. The most plausible stance about life after death is no personal survival. To prove this, first, I will describe the arguments for personal survival, which I oppose, and then present an argument based on the unintelligibility of souls with Sosa’s “Spatial Awareness” debate. A criticism for this will be presented that uses a rebuttal against Sosa. My counter argument consists of observable explanations for why a soul seems to exist. Next, I will contend blank death being bad. However, Nagle’s replies will be brought up to counter this statement. Lastly, my rebuttal will describe the circumstances of death and how it should not be feared. To conclude, annihilation after death is the most plausible outcome.
The arguments presented against annihilation is personal survival. This is typically defined by embodied or disembodied continuation. Embodied survival consists of literal resurrection while disembodied can be seen as continuing life in a new body or a being that does not take up space. Moderate mind/body dualism often results in embodied survival as an answer to the problem of death. Here, a person consists of two things, mind and body, and both must continue. This is Literal resurrection as the same body is…

Related Documents