• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Critically Discuss D.Z. Phillips Conception of Immortality.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Critically Discuss D.Z. Phillips Conception of Immortality In his book 'Death and Immortality', D Z Phillips starts by asking the question: does belief in immortality rest on a mistake? The first two chapters are negative in the sense that they examine traditional philosophical, as well as common sense, conceptions of what immortality means. Phillips argues that philosophical analyses centred on the notion of immortality have generally been constructed around certain essential presuppositions: presuppositions that assume some form of continuation of personal identity after death. One cannot logically deny that, by definition, death entails the end of bodily existence, so one, it seems, is logically drawn to the notion that survival after death entails the survival of some kind of non-bodily identity - the soul. In the last two chapters Phillips disputes this presupposition, claiming that a perfectly valid conception of immortality can be maintained without resorting to any form of dualism. Phillips gives an alternative account of immortality based, not on any realm of existence beyond this life, but on certain moral and religious modes of living within this life. Unlike some of writers, e.g. R. Swinburn, D Z Phillips does not support the notion that belief in continuous personal existence is logically defendable. Indeed, he provides an extremely robust argument to the contrary, claiming that such claims are open to fatal logical objections. ...read more.

Middle

And it is in this context that we should view the concept of immortality. Phillips is making an important distinction here: the distinction between a belief as empirical proposition and a belief in terms of faith, that is seeing one's life in context of certain eternal, and non-temporal considerations. I.e. "I believe that God exists" is an empirical proposition, whereas "I believe in God" is a statement about one's faith and moral commitments. This is a critical distinction because it is in "believing" in the second sense, that we come to understand the meaning and value of self-renunciation , and thus , journey from the temporal to the eternal. This is the religious conception of "dying to the self" and Phillips wants to say that this is the true Christian message that is so often lost when the scriptures are read too literally. Very much linked to the concept of immortality is the big moral question that has occupied philosophers for centuries, namely: why should I live a good life? A superficial reading of the scriptures provides a simple answer i.e. our conduct in this world is rewarded or punished in the next world. Philips does more than merely disagree with this reading, here he draws on Simone Veil, arguing that such a conception of immortality is positively harmful because all notions of compensation in the next life for ...read more.

Conclusion

Again, if the meaning of the picture is seen in these terms then who is Phillips to take that picture a way? The question is: is Phillips's picture truer, more meaningful, or more valuable than any other is pictures? Phillips certainly believes that he is touching on the original meaning. He argues that this meaning is not only found in the scriptures but goes back as far as Plato. (The Christian concept of immortality is thought to be based on the platonic theme) He criticises those who fail to read the whole meaning. For example, of Geach and Flew he says: "my quarrel... is not of what they say they find in the Phaedo, but because that is all they find their" (P46). Phillips picks up on Plato's idea of "purification", arguing that this refers to the differentiation between doing an apparent morally commendable deed, but impurely (essentially for the good of the doer) and acting morally for the right reason (for the sake of the good). As for the question of whether Phillips's conception of immortality is more valuable than any other concept of immortality? Well, Phillips, being a philosopher, would certainly argued for the value of the truth over falsity. But whether those of a non- philosophical disposition could find meaning, and those of a spiritually insecure disposition could if find solace in Phillips's conception of immortality is perhaps doubtful. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Existence of God section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Existence of God essays

  1. "Discuss critically religious and secular ethical arguments about environmental issues"

    We must use our reasoning to search for and pursue the purpose that God has put into the world as its creator. However, human initiative is brought into question when we start using this 'reason' and intelligence to build nuclear bombs capable of destroying the entire planet several times over,

  2. Is There Life After Death?

    In the short breath of life we have, we do not earn enough evil to reason being burned forever. Often, I think people are punished here on earth in the form of prison or execution. A further punishment is not necessarily warranted unless the person has not changed their ideas of what they did.

  1. T H E D E S I G N A R ...

    be nothing but one great machine, subdivided into an infinite number of lesser machines.' - All design necessarily implies a designer, - A great design necessarily implies Greatness in the designer - There is clearly great design in the world which is like a great machine, therefore - There must be a great designer of the world.

  2. For what reasons have some philosophers argued that religious language is meaningless?

    However, God can be attributed with 'love' as it exists in the universe and he is thus it's cause is, why can't we also say "God is evil" or "sour-tasting"? Aquinas' response to this would be that God cannot be called evil because he does not cause I, because it

  1. Explain the Ontological argument.

    Over time the males grouped together until they planned to kill him. This resulted in ambivalent feelings- hatred on the one hand, combined with veneration on the other. The strength of these feelings were so great that the resentment of the young males grew, until they grouped together to kill him.

  2. Discuss critically the advantages and disadvantages of accepting that New Testament texts are literal.

    it is not logical to believe they are true, yet it also cannot be falsified (Swinburne). The falsification principle is based on the idea that if conditions cannot be presented where the theory would not work, then it must be accepted as true.

  1. Assess Critically the Claim that the Concept of Supremely Perfect Being is Incoherent.

    If a Supremely Perfect Being knew future contingents, that I would lose (or win), then it is not a future contingent, it would be a fact and could not be different. Nevertheless, if a Supremely Perfect Being knows the future, then it will necessarily come to pass, meaning if a

  2. Preliminary Interpretation of Descartes Meditations

    Although Descartes now knows he exists, he does not know exactly what he is. After considering what he used to think he was; he used to think he was a human being with a body that could be perceived by senses, but still imaging there to be an evil deceiver

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work