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
    The argument that our attitude about future life should m... — Carmelics
    Home/Afterlife & Death
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The argument that our attitude about future life should match our attitude about past life does not straightforwardly apply to us.

    Afterlife & Death
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Humans exhibit asymmetric temporal concern: we are relieved when past suffering ends but distressed by future suffering (Parfit, 'Reasons and Persons').
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.This asymmetry reflects a deep structural difference in how we relate to past versus future events, not mere preference intensity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, the symmetry argument fails because it ignores built-in temporal directionality in human psychological orientation toward time.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Epicurus's symmetry argument assumes desires are purely quantitative and interchangeable across time, but Nagel argues desires have irreducibly forward-looking intentional structure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A non-gourmand has projects, relationships, and narrative commitments that are prospective in nature and cannot be satisfied posthumously.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Because our interests are constitutively future-oriented rather than merely additive, prenatal non-existence provides no genuine symmetrical counterweight to death.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Our attitude about future life should match our attitude about past life only if our interests and attitudes are limited in certain ways.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.But our attitude is not that of the life- or pleasure-gourmand.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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

    Topics

    Afterlife & Death

    Related

    A non-gourmand has projects, relationships, and narrative commitments that are p...Because our interests are constitutively future-oriented rather than merely addi...But our attitude is not that of the life- or pleasure-gourmand.Epicurus's symmetry argument assumes desires are purely quantitative and interch...
    +4 moreShow less
    Humans exhibit asymmetric temporal concern: we are relieved when past suffering ...Our attitude about future life should match our attitude about past life only if...Therefore, the symmetry argument fails because it ignores built-in temporal dire...This asymmetry reflects a deep structural difference in how we relate to past ve...

    Similar

    Our attitude about future life should match our attitude about past li...94%It is not irrational to want future life more than past life.81%It is not irrational to prefer that our lives be extended into the fut...79%The asymmetry in our attitudes toward prenatal and posthumous nonexist...79%

    Source

    AI-extracted2/3 agreementValid
    SEP: death
    But our attitude is not that of the life- or pleasure-gourmand.
    View source passageHide passage
    Our attitude about future life should match our attitude about past life if our interests and attitudes are limited in certain ways. If quantity of life is the only concern, a preference for future life is irrational. Similarly, the preference is irrational if our only concern is to maximize how much pleasure we experience over the course of our lives without regard to its temporal distribution. But our attitude is not that of the life- or pleasure-gourmand.
    Extraction notes

    Validity: The premises are present in the source passage and together they rationally support the conclusion that the symmetry argument doesn't straightforwardly apply to us, since the conditions under which the symmetry would hold (being a life- or pleasure-gourmand) do not match our actual attitudes.

    Confidence: The author uses the final sentence to push back against the symmetry claim by noting that the required conditions (limited interests) do not actually hold for us.

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit