Get The Makropulos Case: Reflections On The Tedium Of Immortality

Immortality is the indefinite continuation of a person's existence, even after death. In common parlance, immortality is virtually indistinguishable from afterlife, but philosophically speaking, they are not identical.

Williams's worry is that there are only so many categorical desires that one self can pursue. In the course of an immortal life, you would end up pursuing and satisfying every achievable categorical desire. Eventually, you would have nothing left to make your life worth living.

Williams is arguing from premises about the nature of desires and human character to these conclusions: Death is reasonably regarded as an evil; Lucretius is mistaken. Immortality would be a misfortune; death may be bad but immortality would be worse.

He broke down our desires into two groups: categorical and conditional desires. Categorical desires are essentially the desires that give our lives meaning; a life lived that does not complete someone's categorical desires would be seen as incomplete.

In “Why Immortality Is Not So Bad,” Fisher argues that immortality need not to be as bad as William says it would be and is inadequate. He argues that if an immortal life would be characterized by different experiences, there is no reason one to become bored with life.

(2) Repeatable pleasures: These are the sorts of pleasures where, once you have experienced them once, you DO form a desire to experience them again. For Page 6 6 instance, eating at your favorite restaurant, or hearing a really great song.

Some philosophers argue that, if we were immortal, we wouldn't value our achievements, our loved ones, or our health and safety. Others argue that, without death to give us a deadline to finish our projects, we wouldn't feel motivated to do anything, and lead lives full of apathy and indifference.