Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that If more life is not always better, Nagel's premise that death always deprives us of something good is false, and mortality need not be a universal misfortune.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Even lives with suffering contain goods (relationships, meaning, experiences) that death deprives us of, regardless of whether more is always better.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The claim 'more life isn't always better' doesn't establish that death causes no deprivation—only that deprivation's badness varies by context.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Mortality is a universal misfortune for beings with future-oriented desires because it thwarts all future possibilities for everyone equally.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.A life of extreme suffering with no redemptive value is not made better by mere continuation, so more life isn't always good.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If death can be timely (ending a good life at its natural peak), then death sometimes prevents harm rather than causing it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Nagel assumes the deprivation of future goods always outweighs present completion; but a finished life may have intrinsic value independent of duration.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.