Death has been an area of investigation for many philosophers throughout history. Plato believed in immortality, and therefore we can presume he took death seriously, Aristotle believed in the soul of things, and consequently, we can say that he too saw death as a matter not to be taken lightly. However, among many philosophers, two of them have argued that end is ‘nothing,’ that it is not of any importance and for this reason, it is not something wrong and so mustn’t be feared. These two philosophers were: Lucretius and Epicurus. Both of which were supporters and believers of Epicureanism.
In his work titled On the Nature of Things, Lucretius argues as follows:
“death is nothing to us, and no concern of ours since our tenure of the mind is mortal…So, when we shall be no more-when the union of body and spirit that engenders us has been disrupted- to us, who shall then be nothing, nothing by any hazard will happen anymore at all” (Lucretius, 36)
Based on this argument of Lucretius, we can say that he believes that after death there is nothing left. We will be nothing, and since there is nothingness after death and since our mind will soon stop functioning, we need not fear death. In other words, we can say that he is saying that we might as well embrace death when it comes. In the following lines, Lucretius personifies Nature and asks us why we should fear and cry over death if we have lived a worthy life. Here, we can presume that Lucretius is acting kind of like the idea of ‘carpe diem’ of the Renaissance (even though the Renaissance came very long after his time- which shows his influence on the Renaissance Men). Lucretius idea can be evaluated as such: if we have made use of each time we have and if we have had all the richness of the world, then there is no need to cry when death comes. Based on Lucretius’s argument of death, we can say that if a person has lived a good life, death is nothing to cry and fear because the person has lived as much as he can. And again, if a person has lived a lavish life full of wrong actions, death is a way to escape, so there is nothing to fear. As a result, Lucretius says not to worry death and not to cry when it comes. The problem here is that while he sees death as something we have to live through- which is a healthy way to live-, he also doesn’t take it seriously and regards it as the end of everything. However, this thinking can result in leaving whatever we own- both physically and spiritually- and falling into a deep hole of depression. Imagine believing that after you die, whatever you have- both your worldly possessions and your spiritual beliefs and your family- will be nothing to you. They will not affect whatsoever on your life after death. This would be a tough situation to cope with. So, instead of seeing death as a problem and trying to solve it like Lucretius, maybe if we saw death as another path to take in life, as something that life brings to us; then we would not fear death but take it seriously.
The argument that Epicurus puts forth is as follows:
“Accustom thyself to believe that death is nothing to us, for good and evil imply sentience, and death is the privation of all sentience; therefore a right understanding that death is nothing to us makes the mortality of life enjoyable, not by adding to life an illimitable time, but by taking away the yearning after immortality.” (Epicurus, 50)
From these lines, we understand that Epicurus sees death the same way as Lucretius; that death is nothing and is not to be feared, and only in this way can we gain pleasure from our lives. While in most respects this is an acceptable idea, in the sense that thinking about death can result in depressive behavior, it is also a problematic argument. The reason for this is that Epicurus, like Lucretius, sees death as a means of enjoying life; which can result in indulging in worldly things and forgetting the real meaning of life. Epicurus seems to be suggesting living an extreme experience of carpe diem, where the only aim is to enjoy life. The small positive thing we can take out from his argument is that; while he says to enjoy life, he doesn’t tell us how. In this sense, some people enjoy life by satisfying their appetite for various things, some by gaining their desire, some through education, or family or friends.
In a small sense, Epicurus’s argument of death differs from Lucretius. Lucretius says no to fear death not only because it is nothing but also because it is nothing if we have made use of our time. In this sense, Lucretius gives a little meaning to life through death: it is useful to benefit from the time we have in life, and once we have done this, then we will not fear death. In this context, making use of the time we have in life can mean many things, some of which are: spending time on education, spending time with family or friends, spending time working or spending time in pleasure. However, Epicurus claims that death is nothing and once we see it as a means of enjoying life, it is not to be feared. He does not emphasize making use of time, which is again a pleasure-oriented point of view. We can presume that according to Epicurus, the time has no value, and the only valuable thing we do is to enjoy life.Although Epicurus and Lucretius are both great philosophers; their ideas have been criticised and devalued by some thinkers and accepted and valued by others. Whether the views of these philosophers are valid or not is not essential; the significant thing in their way of thinking is that for some people they have provided a new way of thinking about death, for others they have provided a counter view that helps them strengthen their views on death.