The question of whether or not a fear of death is rational is the crux of Jeffrie Murphy’s article Rationality and the Fear of Death. He sets out to argue that it is irrational to fear death and concludes that a fear of death is only rational if it helps the person live a meaningful life and irrational in all other cases when it has no real purpose in helping one live the way he wishes to. Murphy’s conclusion however leaves much to be desired in terms of strong evidence for his claim that fearing death is irrational. I plan to discuss my thoughts that Murphy’s original argument is weak and confusing at times and that he should have been arguing that fearing death, in fact, is rational rather than irrational in order to produce a stronger overall
…show more content…
As I mentioned before with the conditions he lays out, Murphy gives a good idea of what he thinks is a rational situation for a person to fear a particular state of affairs. I would argue that the two conditions are clearly met when for a person in fearing death since he states in his conclusion that a prudent fear of death is rational. A prudent fear of death allows a person to live a certain way, such as eating healthy and exercising, in order to avoid death as long as possible. Similarly, a prudent fear of death is compatible with a person wishing to satisfy other important desires in life. Murphy then says basically that it is irrational to fear death if it keeps one from living his life to the fullest or if one thinks fearing death will help them avoid bad things. This conclusion seems redundant and almost supports the rationality argument more than standing on its own. I maintain that had Murphy simply stated in the beginning that he claimed fearing death to be rational and had used the same argument, his conclusion would have been so much stronger and more believable for the reader. Rationality and the Fear of Death is Murphy’s attempt to argue that fearing death is irrational. He builds an argument around base definitions of terms and a set of conditions for what it means to fear rationally and comes to a conclusion that feels week and unsupported despite the evidence. I would argue that had he simply claimed support on the other side of the argument (that fear death is in fact rational for most people), his conclusion would have been much stronger and easier to
As I mentioned before with the conditions he lays out, Murphy gives a good idea of what he thinks is a rational situation for a person to fear a particular state of affairs. I would argue that the two conditions are clearly met when for a person in fearing death since he states in his conclusion that a prudent fear of death is rational. A prudent fear of death allows a person to live a certain way, such as eating healthy and exercising, in order to avoid death as long as possible. Similarly, a prudent fear of death is compatible with a person wishing to satisfy other important desires in life. Murphy then says basically that it is irrational to fear death if it keeps one from living his life to the fullest or if one thinks fearing death will help them avoid bad things. This conclusion seems redundant and almost supports the rationality argument more than standing on its own. I maintain that had Murphy simply stated in the beginning that he claimed fearing death to be rational and had used the same argument, his conclusion would have been so much stronger and more believable for the reader. Rationality and the Fear of Death is Murphy’s attempt to argue that fearing death is irrational. He builds an argument around base definitions of terms and a set of conditions for what it means to fear rationally and comes to a conclusion that feels week and unsupported despite the evidence. I would argue that had he simply claimed support on the other side of the argument (that fear death is in fact rational for most people), his conclusion would have been much stronger and easier to