חדש באתר: עוזר בינה מלאכותית המבוסס על כתביו ושיעוריו של הרב מיכאל אברהם

Q&A: Is Death Bad?

Back to list  |  🌐 עברית  |  ℹ About
Originally published:
This is an English translation (via GPT-5.4). Read the original Hebrew version.

Is Death Bad?

Question

Have a good week, Rabbi.
See the title. I mean not the consequences of death (like the longing and sadness of relatives), but death itself — is non-existence less good than existence?

  • Of course the question arises how one defines good and bad. If in the usual hedonistic way — then in my view, it is clear that death is not bad, since there is no subject here to “suffer” the non-existence. Therefore, in an atheist worldview, at least in my opinion, there is no real justification for fearing death.

Answer

Fear of death is not because death is bad. Fear is what makes it bad.
But there is another formulation, which speaks in terms of morality and not exactly good and bad. The value of life means that life has unconditional value, and in that sense death is bad. It is not bad for someone, since as you wrote, after a person dies there is no longer that someone for whom it is bad. It is bad in some objective sense. A reduction of life in the world is a negative value, and an increase of life is a positive value. This is a postulate, and there is no point in trying to ground it in one utility or another.a0

Discussion on Answer

Peshita (2019-09-22)

Why not take a utilitarian approach?
A person who benefits the world — his life is good and his death is bad.
A person who harms the world — his death is preferable to his life.

Michi (2019-09-22)

Because that ignores the value of life and turns it into a means.

Peshita (2019-09-22)

From what I see, when others use the concept of the value of life, most of the time it comes to hide the fact that what is bubbling down there in the soul is fear of death, and so as not to be reminded of it they use the concept of the value of life.

But in any case, even someone for whom the value of life is so important can still incorporate it into a utilitarian approach. He would simply define benefiting the world as benefiting life.
But he would still have to agree that the value of the life of a person who harms the world beyond a certain threshold is already negative, and it would have been better had he not lived.

Leave a Reply

Back to top button