the meaning of death essay

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser or activate Google Chrome Frame to improve your experience.

Love & Marriage
Home & Family
Your Mission, Your Purpose
Operation Iron Swords
2020-2021: Unprecedented Times
Science & Technology
Soul & Mystical
Months & Holidays
Weekly Parsha

MyLife: Chassidus Applied

Ethics of Our Fathers
Embracing Neurodiversity: Understanding and Nurturing Each of Our Special Souls
The Kabbalah of the 4 Elements: Fire, Air, Water, Earth
Midlife Miracle
Discover Your Spiritual DNA
Kabbalah of the Zodiac Course
World Leaders
Spiritual Antidote
Meaningful Life Center Live
Soul Vitamins: 3-Minute Videos
Weekly Masterclass
MeaningfulLIVE
Birthday Guide
How to Pray
Kabbalah Art Poster
What is Love?
The 10 Commandments in 10 Minutes June 9 @ 3:00 pm
MyLife: Chassidus Applied June 9 @ 8:00 pm
"I Will Do and I Will Hear" June 10
Our Mission
Simon Jacobson
Our Ambassadors
Spiritual Guide to Counting the Omer

Toward a Meaningful Life

60 DAYS: A Spiritual Guide to the High Holidays
The Ultimate Life Skills Package
60 DAYS + Shofar Horn: High Holiday Package
Tree of Life Kabbalah Art Poster – Limited Edition
Designer Stationery Gift Set (12 Cards)
New Year’s Bundle: 60 Days + Inside Time
Genuine Shofar Horn
Holiday Sermons
Weekly Parsha Sermon
Baal Shem Tov Insights
Holiday Guides
Life Coaching with Rabbi Jacobson
Sermon Library All-Access
MLC Premium Membership
Baal Shem Tov Insights, Applied to Contemporary Life – 55 Issues

Join the global war of goodness. Partner with us on the spiritual frontlines.

Excerpts From Toward a Meaningful Life
Death, Grief, & Mourning

Death & Grieving

Shorts • Essays • 8 Comments

SHARE THIS POST

And the living shall take to heart — Ecclesiastics, 7:2 The soul never dies — The Rebbe

In 1950, after the passing of his predecessor and father-in-law, the Rebbe emphasized that it was important not to eulogize the deceased, but to let their good deeds speak for them. Citing a letter that his father-in-law wrote in 1920, after the passing of his own father, the Rebbe explained that a true leader is like a shepherd who never abandons his flock, leaving behind a philosophy and a clear course of action. Indeed, he explained, “he is even more present than during his lifetime, since his soul is freed from the physical constraints of time and space.”

What Does Death Really Mean?

Death: The very word strikes fear in people’s hearts. They consider death as unfathomable as it is inevitable. They are barely able to talk about it, to peer beyond the word itself and allow themselves to contemplate its true implications. This is an understandable reaction, given the fact that so many people think of life as nothing more than a state in which the human body is biologically active. But it is time to ask ourselves: What happens after death, if anything? What does death really mean? How should the surviving loved ones react?

The mystery of death is part of the enigma of the soul and of life itself; understanding death really means understanding life. During life as we know it, the body is vitalized by the soul; upon death, there is a separation between body and soul. But the soul continues to live on as it always has, now unfettered by the physical constraints of the body. And since a person’s true character — his goodness, virtue, and selflessness — lies in the soul, it is logical to assume that he will ascend to a higher state after fulfilling his responsibilities on Earth.

Modern physics has taught us that no substance truly disappears, that it only changes form. A tree, for instance, might be cut down and used to build a house, or a table, or a chair. Regardless of how the form changes, the wood remains wood. And when that same wood is burned in a furnace, it again changes form, becoming an energy that gives off heat and gas. The tree, the chair, and the fire are all merely different forms of the same substance.

If this is the case with a material substance, it is even more so with a spiritual substance. The spiritual life force in man, the soul, never disappears; upon death, it simply changes from one form to another, higher form. This may be difficult to comprehend at first, since we are so dependent on using our sensory tools to get through life. With wood, for example, it is easier to hold a chair in our hands than to hold fire; and yet, anyone who has ever seen or felt a fire cannot doubt for a moment that it exists.

No matter what physical ailments might befall a person, they are just that: physical ailments. Nothing that happens to the flesh and blood diminishes in any way the soul’s power, which is purely spiritual. It is inappropriate, therefore, to use the term “afterlife” to define what happens after death. “Afterlife” implies that we have entered another, separate place, whereas death is actually a continuation of life as we know it, only in a new, higher form. The chapter in Genesis discussing the death of Sarah, for instance, is called “The Life of Sarah.” The chapter discussing the death of Jacob is called “And Jacob Lived.” How odd it now seems to name death “Life”!

So before we can truly answer the question “What is death?” we must first ask, “What is life?” By medical definition, life takes place when one’s brain and heart are functioning. Yet a person can be biologically alive but not alive at all; breathing and walking and talking are only the manifestations of what we call life. The true source of life, the energy that allows the body to function, is the soul. And the soul, because it is connected to G-d, the giver of life, is immortal. While the manifestations of life may cease upon death, the soul lives on, only in a different form.

How can a mortal human being connect to eternal life? By living a material life that fuses body and soul, thereby connecting to G-d. A person who transforms his or her body into a vehicle for love and generosity is a person who nurtures his or her eternal soul. It is by giving life to others that one becomes truly alive.

To a person for whom life consists of material gains, death indeed represents the end. It is the time when fleeting achievements come to a halt. But to a person for whom life consists of spiritual gains, life never ends. The soul is fueled by the inexhaustible energy of the good deeds a person performed on Earth, and it lives on materially through his or her children and the others who perpetuate his or her spiritual vitality. As the sages say, “Just as his descendants are alive, he, too, is alive”

We often have a hard time distinguishing between biological life and spiritual life, or true life. We are distracted by the many material trappings of biological life. Once the soul leaves the body, though, we can clearly see how it lives on, how that soul inspires people to perform good deeds, to educate and help others, to live G-dly and spiritual lives. It is when a righteous person physically departs the Earth that he or she begins to exert the most profound influence.

A revered and aged rabbi, when he was very near death, asked that he be moved into the study hall where he delivered his discourses. “Soon I am going to Heaven,” he told his followers, “but I am leaving you all my writings, and along with them, my spirit.” When his grandson heard these words, he began to weep. His grandfather, weak with illness, turned to him and said, “Emotions? Emotions? No. Intellect, intellect.” From that moment on, the boy thought only of the life of his grandfather’s soul, not the death of his body.

What Does Death Mean For The Survivors?

While death represents the soul’s elevation to a higher level, it nevertheless remains a painful experience for the survivors. At the same time, it must serve — as must all experiences in life — as a lesson. We must see death not as a negative force, but as an opportunity for growth.

Since death provokes such strong emotions, we must have a clear channel through which to express them, to go about healing in a constructive way. When a loved one dies, two powerful and conflicting emotions are aroused: sadness over the loss and confusion about the future. The sages teach us that it would be barbaric not to mourn at all, but that we should not mourn longer than necessary. A week of mourning is sufficient; otherwise, a person’s death becomes a presence unto itself, continuously saddening us and impeding our progress in life.

But why should we restrain our natural pain and sadness over a loved one’s death? Grief is a feeling, after all, and feelings cannot be controlled, can they? Isn’t it wrong to set limits on our grief, or to try to channel it in a certain direction?

True, feelings are feelings, but we can choose whether to experience them in a destructive or productive light. The key in this case is to understand death for what it is, to celebrate its positive element: A mourner must realize that the soul of his or her loved one has now reached an even greater place than it occupied during its time on Earth, and that it will continue to rise. It is the act of reconciling this positive realization against our grief that can turn death from a traumatic experience into a cathartic one.

To diminish our expression of grief is unhealthy and inappropriate, but to allow our grief to overwhelm us is to selfishly overlook the true meaning of death — the fact that a righteous person’s soul has found an even more righteous home.

Because the strongest bond between a mother and daughter or a husband and wife is a spiritual one, it remains strong after death. Mourning also helps us retain this bond, for the soul of a departed person, eternal and intact, watches over the people with whom she was close. Every gracious act gives her great pleasure and satisfaction, particularly when such acts are committed in a manner that she taught, whether by instruction or example.

Her soul is fully aware of what is happening to the friends and relatives she has left behind. The soul is distressed when they experience undue grief or depression, and it rejoices when they move beyond their initial pain and continue to build their lives and inspire those around them.

There is no way to replace a departed loved one, for each person is a complete world. But there is a way to help fill the void. When family and friends supplement their customary good deeds with further virtuous acts on behalf of the departed, they continue the work of his or her soul. By performing such acts in the memory of a loved one, we can truly build a living memorial.

But after all is said and done, death can be an incomprehensible, devastating experience to those who are left behind. After all the rationalizations, all the explanations, the heart still cries. And it should cry.

When a friend or relative is grieving for a loved one, do not try to explain; just be there with them. Soothe and console them, and weep with them. There is nothing you can really say, for no matter how we might try, we must accept that we often do not understand G-d’s mysterious ways.

Ask of G-d to finally bring the day when death shall be no more, when “death shall be swallowed up forever and G-d shall wipe the tears from every face” (Isaiah 25:8).

Buy the best-seller, Toward a Meaningful Life starting at $13.99, from our MLC Shop , Amazon or Kindle . Or sign up for our weekly email to receive a dose of meaning every Thursday night.

death grieving

Available in softcover ($13.99) and hardcover ($24.99).

Did you enjoy this? Get personalized content delivered to your own MLC profile page by joining the MLC community. It's free! Click here to find out more.

How to Cope with Grief

Grief is a necessary catharsis for the release and relief of the pain resulting from the death of a loved one. But how does one grieve in a healthy way?

Immortalize Your Loved One: Yahrzeit/Memorial Reminder

Commemorate Your Loved One on the Anniversary of their Passing. We will send you a free yearly Yahrzeit reminder along with a meaningful Yahrzeit guide that will help you celebrate and remember the life and legacy of your loved one and help keep his/her soul and spirit alive.

Terumah: Where Death Meets Life

Cynics argue that at the end of it all, almighty death vanquishes life. Yet life can triumph over death, transforming the deepest grief into the greatest of joys.

There is no leaning in life and death.

Thats pretty hot

Life, death. Only an illusion.

they are the same just like pain and pleasure there’s a peak and subsides

Thank you for these reflection. I do believe that we need to focus on the good and believe that the soul keep on living. Today someone dear to me dyed and by believing that the soul is ‘alive’ it does easy the pain.

Give up on your body is death.

To understand a Word and the Letters that made it REAL you must first know who made those Letters which form that Word for only that Person can know the understanding of the Words Mentioned.

Spell out God like you did all other words, let them that great opinion.

Thursday, June 06

After 3336 years how far are we from sinai, wednesday, june 05, sinai’s message to jews, christians and muslims: 3336 years later, tuesday, june 04 @ 8:00am, how to connect with others: a seven step method, monday, june 03, the magic of one human connection, sunday, june 02 @ 8:00pm, should we be concerned that america will turn against jews, and begin planning our exit strategy, sunday, june 02 @ 3:00pm, is world peace achievable lessons from sinai, sunday, june 09 @ 3:00pm, the 10 commandments in 10 minutes, sunday, june 09 @ 8:00pm, monday, june 10, “i will do and i will hear”, tuesday, june 11 @ 8:00am, the 10 commandments of life, wednesday, june 12, weekly masterclass: no class.

LIFE SKILLS

A Summary and Analysis of Roland Barthes’ ‘The Death of the Author’

By Dr Oliver Tearle (Loughborough University)

‘The Death of the Author’ is an influential 1968 essay by the French literary theorist Roland Barthes. But what does Barthes mean by ‘the death of the author’? This important short essay was crucial in the development of poststructuralist literary theory in the 1970s and 1980s, as many English departments, especially in the United States, adopted Barthes’ ideas (along with those of other thinkers such as Jacques Derrida).

Let’s take a closer look at Barthes’ argument in this essay. You can read ‘The Death of the Author’ here before proceeding to our summary and analysis of it.

‘The Death of the Author’: summary

Barthes begins ‘The Death of the Author’ with an example, taken from the novel Sarrasine by the French novelist Honore de Balzac. Quoting a passage from the novel, Barthes asks us who ‘speaks’ those words: the hero of the novel, or Balzac himself? If it is Balzac, is he speaking personally or on behalf of all humanity?

Barthes’ point is that we cannot know . Writing, he boldly proclaims, is ‘the destruction of every voice’. Far from being a positive or creative force, writing is, in fact, a negative, a void, where we cannot know with any certainty who is speaking or writing.

Indeed, our obsession with ‘the author’ is a curiously modern phenomenon, which can be traced back to the Renaissance in particular, and the development of the idea of ‘the individual’. And much literary criticism, Barthes points out, is still hung up on this idea of the author as an individual who created a particular work, so we speak of how we can detect Baudelaire the man in the novels of Baudelaire the writer. But this search for a definitive origin or source of the literary text is a wild goose chase, as far as Barthes is concerned.

He points out that some writers, such as the nineteenth-century French poet Stéphane Mallarmé, have sought to remind us, through their works, that it is language which speaks to us, rather than the author. The author should write with a certain impersonality: writing is done by suppressing the author’s personality in order to let the work be written.

Moving away from our traditional idea of ‘the Author’ (Barthes begins to capitalise the word as if to draw a parallel with a higher entity, like God) can help us to see the relationship between writer and text in new ways. In the traditional view, the author is like a parent, who conceives the text rather as a parent conceives a child. The author thus exists before the novel or poem or play, and then creates that literary work.

But in Barthes’ radical new way of viewing the relationship between the two, writer and text are born simultaneously, because whenever we read a literary work we are engaging with the writer here and now , rather than having to go back (to give our own example) four hundred years to consider Shakespeare the Renaissance ‘author’. ‘Shakespeare’, as writer, exists now, in the moment we read his works on the page in the twenty-first century.

Writing is a performative act which only exists at the moment we read the words on the page, because that is the only moment in which those words are actually given meaning – and they are given their meaning by us, who interpret them.

Instead, then, we should think of not ‘the Author’ but ‘the scriptor’ (Barthes used the French scripteur in his original essay, a rare French term which means, essentially, ‘copyist’). We shouldn’t view a work of literature as a kind of secular version of a sacred text, where the ‘Author’ is a God who has imbued the text with a single meaning.

Instead, the literary text is a place where many previous works of literature ‘blend and clash’, a host of influences and allusions and quotations. Indeed, ‘none of them’, Barthes asserts, is ‘original’. Instead, the text is ‘a tissue of quotations’.

Barthes concludes ‘The Death of the Author’ by arguing that imposing an Author on a text actually limits that text, because we have to view the literary work in relation to the author who wrote it. Its meaning must be traced back to the person who produced it.

But writing, for Barthes, doesn’t work like that: it’s a ‘tissue of signs’ which only have meaning when the reader engages with them. The meaning of a text lies ‘not in its origin but in its destination’, and that in order for the reader of the text to exist and have meaning as a term, we must do away with this idea that the author determines the meaning of the text.

‘The Death of the Author’: analysis

‘The Death of the Author’ makes several bold but important claims about the relationship between author and literary text: that works of literature are not original; and that the meaning of a work of literature cannot be determined simply by looking to the author of that work. Instead, we as readers are constantly working to create the meaning of a text.

Writing is ‘the destruction of every voice’ – not the creation of a voice, which is how we tend to think of a creative art such as writing. The literary text is not original, either: indeed, every text is a ‘tissue of quotations’.

This may strike us as Barthes overplaying his hand – surely works of literature contain original thoughts, phrases, and ideas, and aren’t literally just a string of quotations from existing works? – but Barthes is interested in language throughout ‘The Death of the Author’, and it’s true that in every work of literature the words the author uses, those raw materials through which meaning is created, are familiar words, and therefore not original: merely put together in a slightly new way.

(A notable exception is in the nonsense works of Lewis Carroll, whose ‘ Jabberwocky ’ does contain a whole host of original words; but part of the fun is that we recognise this poem as the exception, rather than the normal way works of literature generate their meaning.)

‘The Death of the Author’ was a bold and influential statement, but its argument had numerous precursors: his emphasis on impersonality, for instance, had already been made almost half a century earlier by T. S. Eliot, in his 1919 essay ‘ Tradition and the Individual Talent ’, although Eliot still believed in the poet as an important source of the written text.

And in the mid-twentieth century, New Criticism, particularly in the United States, argued that the text had meaning in isolation, separate from the author who produced it, and that searching for authorial intention in the work of literature was something of a red herring.

‘The Death of the Author’ makes a compelling argument about the way a work of literature has meaning in relation to its readers rather than its author. We twenty-first-century readers of Dickens are not the same people as the Victorians who read his work when its author was alive, for instance. Words change their meanings over time and take on new resonance.

However, we might counter Barthes’ argument by making a couple of points. The first is perhaps an obvious one: that it needn’t be an ‘either/or’ and that the birth of the reader doesn’t necessarily have to be at the cost of the death of the author. We can read Keats’s poems and try to understand what the young Romantic poet meant by his words, what he was trying to say as the author of the work, while also acknowledging the fact that ‘Ode on a Grecian Urn’ has new resonances for us, two centuries after it was written.

The second point is that viewing a work of literature as a mere ‘tissue of signs’ threatens to put it on the same level as a bus timetable or a telephone directory. They, too, contain nothing but familiar words, names, and numbers, and are not original. Works of literature may (in the main) draw on familiar words and even familiar phrases, but great works of art put these words and ‘signs’ into new combinations – and there is a virtually infinite number of those – which can create new meanings for us.

So we might view the relationship between author, text, and reader as a tripartite partnership rather than bipartite one: all three elements are important in creating the text’s meaning.

If I give a poem to my students and don’t tell them anything about its author, they can analyse the poem’s language and try to determine its meaning; but knowing something about the author and their context may help to reveal new meanings which are important in understanding the text. As soon as we know a poem is by Sylvia Plath, and we can bring the details of her life (and death) to our reading of the poem, its meaning changes.

So we do need to bear in mind who wrote a text and how that might be significant in creating its meaning, even if we also need to acknowledge (as Barthes does) that once a text is written and goes out into the world, it is no longer solely the property of the author who wrote it, but its meaning is also generated by those who read it.

Discover more from Interesting Literature

Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.

Type your email…

4 thoughts on “A Summary and Analysis of Roland Barthes’ ‘The Death of the Author’”

Pingback: A Short Analysis of Sylvia Plath’s ‘Words’ – Interesting Literature
Pingback: The Curious Meaning of Queen’s ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ – Interesting Literature
Pingback: The Curious Meaning of ‘American Pie’ by Don McLean – Interesting Literature
Pingback: A Summary and Analysis of Isaac Asimov’s ‘The Immortal Bard’ – Interesting Literature

Our Stories: Essays on Life, Death, and Free Will

John Martin Fischer, Our Stories: Essays on Life, Death, and Free Will , Oxford UP, 2009, 184pp., $65.00 (hbk), ISBN 9780195374957.

Reviewed by David Hodgson, Supreme Court of New South Wales

1 Bernard Williams, Problems of the Self (Cambridge University Press, 1973), p. 89.

2 Martha Nussbaum, The Therapy of Desire (Princeton University Press, 1994), p. 203.

3 I have attempted to support such an account in various writings, for example in an essay available at < http://users.tpg.com.au/raeda/website/why.htm > and published in Times Literary Supplement on 6 July 2007.

Search with any image

Unsupported image file format.

Image file size is too large..

Drag an image here

Politics & Social Sciences

Sorry, there was a problem.

Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required .

Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.

Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.

Image Unavailable

To view this video download Flash Player

On the Meaning of Death: Essays on Mortuary Rituals and Eschatological Beliefs (Uppsala Studies in Cultural Anthropology : No. 8) Paperback – January 1, 1989

Language English
Publisher Coronet Books Inc
Publication date January 1, 1989
Dimensions 6.75 x 0.75 x 9.75 inches
ISBN-10 9155422748
ISBN-13 978-9155422745
See all details

Product details

Publisher ‏ : ‎ Coronet Books Inc (January 1, 1989)
Language ‏ : ‎ English
ISBN-10 ‏ : ‎ 9155422748
ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-9155422745
Item Weight ‏ : ‎ 1.4 pounds
Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 6.75 x 0.75 x 9.75 inches

Customer reviews

5 star		0%
4 star		0%
3 star		0%
2 star		0%
1 star		0%

Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.

To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.

No customer reviews

About Amazon
Investor Relations
Amazon Devices
Amazon Science
Sell products on Amazon
Sell on Amazon Business
Sell apps on Amazon
Become an Affiliate
Advertise Your Products
Self-Publish with Us
Host an Amazon Hub
› See More Make Money with Us
Amazon Business Card
Shop with Points
Reload Your Balance
Amazon Currency Converter
Amazon and COVID-19
Your Account
Your Orders
Shipping Rates & Policies
Returns & Replacements
Manage Your Content and Devices
Amazon Assistant

Conditions of Use
Privacy Notice
Consumer Health Data Privacy Disclosure
Your Ads Privacy Choices

Reflections on Death in Philosophical/Existential Context

Symposium: Reflections Before, During, and Beyond COVID-19
Published: 27 July 2020
Volume 57 , pages 402–409, ( 2020 )

Cite this article

Nikos Kokosalakis 1

43k Accesses

3 Citations

Explore all metrics

Is death larger than life and does it annihilate life altogether? This is the basic question discussed in this essay, within a philosophical/existential context. The central argument is that the concept of death is problematic and, following Levinas, the author holds that death cannot lead to nothingness. This accords with the teaching of all religious traditions, which hold that there is life beyond death, and Plato’s and Aristotle’s theories about the immortality of the soul. In modernity, since the Enlightenment, God and religion have been placed in the margin or rejected in rational discourse. Consequently, the anthropocentric promethean view of man has been stressed and the reality of the limits placed on humans by death deemphasised or ignored. Yet, death remains at the centre of nature and human life, and its reality and threat become evident in the spread of a single virus. So, death always remains a mystery, relating to life and morality.

Chambers of Consciousness and Houses of Life: Nietzschean Hermeneutics in Arthur Machen’s The Great God Pan

The prohibition of suicide and its theological rationale in catholic moral and canonical tradition: origins and development, is dignity still necessary in health care from definition to recognition of human dignity.

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

What a piece of work is a man! how noble in reason! how infinite in faculty! In form and moving, how express and admirable! In action, how like an angel! in apprehension, how like a god! the beauty of the world! the paragon of animals! And yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust? William Shakespeare ( 1890 : 132), Hamlet, Act 2, scene 2, 303–312.

In mid-2019, the death of Sophia Kokosalakis, my niece and Goddaughter, at the age of 46, came like a thunderbolt to strike the whole family. She was a world-famous fashion designer who combined, in a unique way, the beauty and superb aesthetics of ancient and classical Greek sculptures and paintings with fashion production of clothes and jewellery. She took the aesthetics and values of ancient and classical Greek civilization out of the museums to the contemporary art of fashion design. A few months earlier she was full of life, beautiful, active, sociable and altruistic, and highly creative. All that was swept away quickly by an aggressive murderous cancer. The funeral ( κηδεία ) – a magnificent ritual event in the church of Panaghia Eleftherotria in Politeia Athens – accorded with the highly significant moving symbolism of the rite of the Orthodox Church. Her parents, her husband with their 7-year-old daughter, the wider family, relatives and friends, and hundreds of people were present, as well as eminent representatives of the arts. The Greek Prime Minister and other dignitaries sent wreaths and messages of condolences, and flowers were sent from around the world. After the burial in the family grave in the cemetery of Chalandri, some gathered for a memorial meal. This was a high profile, emotional final goodbye to a beloved famous person for her last irreversible Journey.

Sophia’s death was circumscribed by social and religious rituals that help to chart a path through the transition from life to death. Yet, the pain and sorrow for Sophia’s family has been very deep. For her parents, especially, it has been indescribable, indeed, unbearable. The existential reality of death is something different. It raises philosophical questions about what death really means in a human existential context. How do humans cope with it? What light do religious explanations of death shed on the existential experience of death and what do philosophical traditions have to say on this matter?

In broad terms religions see human life as larger than death, so that life’s substance meaning and values for each person are not exhausted with biological termination. Life goes on. For most religions and cultures there is some notion of immortality of the soul and there is highly significant ritual and symbolism for the dead, in all cultures, that relates to their memory and offers some notion of life beyond the grave. In Christianity, for example, life beyond death and the eternity and salvation of the soul constitutes the core of its teaching, immediately related to the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ. Theologically, Christ’s death and resurrection, declare the defeat of death by the death and the resurrection of the son of God, who was, both, God and perfectly human (theanthropos). This teaching signifies the triumph of life over death, which also means, eschatologically, the salvation and liberation of humankind from evil and the injustice and imperfection of the world. It refers to another dimension beyond the human condition, a paradisiac state beyond the time/space configuration, a state of immortality, eternity and infinity; it points to the sublimation of nature itself. So, according to Christian faith, the death of a human being is a painful boundary of transition, and there is hope that human life is not perishable at death. There is a paradox here that through death one enters real life in union with God. But this is not knowledge. It is faith and must be understood theologically and eschatologically.

While the deeply faithful, may accept and understand death as passage to their union with God, Sophia’s death shows that, for ordinary people, the fear of death and the desperation caused by the permanent absence of a beloved person is hard to bear – even with the help of strong religious faith. For those with lukewarm religious faith or no faith at all, religious discourse and ritual seems irrelevant or even annoying and irrational. However, nobody escapes the reality of death. It is at the heart of nature and the human condition and it is deeply ingrained in the consciousness of adult human beings. Indeed, of all animals it is only humans who know that they will die and according to Heidegger ( 1967 :274) “death is something distinctively impending”. The fear of death, consciously or subconsciously, is instilled in humans early in life and, as the ancients said, when death is near no one wants to die. ( Ην εγγύς έλθει θάνατος ουδείς βούλεται θνήσκειν. [Aesopus Fables]). In Christianity even Christ, the son of God, prayed to his father to remove the bitter cup of death before his crucifixion (Math. 26, 38–39; Luke, 22, 41–42).

The natural sciences say nothing much about the existential content and conditions of human death beyond the biological laws of human existence and human evolution. According to these laws, all forms of life have a beginning a duration and an end. In any case, from a philosophical point of view, it is considered a category mistake, i.e. epistemologically and methodologically wrong, to apply purely naturalistic categories and quantitative experimental methods for the study, explanation and interpretation of human social phenomena, especially cultural phenomena such as the meaning of human death and religion at large. As no enlightenment on such issues emerges from the natural sciences, maybe insights can be teased out from philosophical anthropological thinking.

Philosophical anthropology is concerned with questions of human nature and life and death in deeper intellectual, philosophical, dramaturgical context. Religion and the sacred are inevitably involved in such discourse. For example, the verses from Shakespeare’s Hamlet about the nature of man, at the preamble of this essay, put the matter in a nutshell. What is this being who acts like an angel, apprehends and creates like a god, and yet, it is limited as the quintessence of dust? It is within this discourse that I seek to draw insights concerning human death. I will argue that, although in formal logical/scientific terms, we do not know and cannot know anything about life after/beyond death, there is, and always has been, a legitimate philosophical discourse about being and the dialectic of life/death. We cannot prove or disprove the existence and content of life beyond death in scientific or logical terms any more than we can prove or disprove the existence of God scientifically. Footnote 1

Such discourse inevitably takes place within the framework of transcendence, and transcendence is present within life and beyond death. Indeed, transcendence is at the core of human consciousness as humans are the only beings (species) who have culture that transcends their biological organism. Footnote 2 According to Martin ( 1980 :4) “the main issue is… man’s ability to transcend and transform his situation”. So human death can be described and understood as a cultural fact immediately related to transcendence, and as a limit to human transcendental ability and potential. But it is important, from an epistemological methodological point of view, not to preconceive this fact in reductionist positivistic or closed ideological terms. It is essential that the discourse about death takes place within an open dialectic, not excluding transcendence and God a priori, stressing the value of life, and understanding the limits of the human potential.

The Problem of Meaning in Human Death

Biologically and medically the meaning and reality of human death, as that of all animals, is clear: the cessation of all the functions and faculties of the organs of the body, especially the heart and the brain. This entails, of course, the cessation of consciousness. Yet, this definition tells us nothing about why only the human species, latecomers in the universe, have always worshiped their gods, buried their dead with elaborate ritual, and held various beliefs about immortality. Harari ( 2017 :428–439) claims that, in the not too distant future, sapiens could aim at, and is likely to achieve, immortality and the status of Homo Deus through biotechnology, information science, artificial intelligence and what he calls the data religion . I shall leave aside what I consider farfetched utopian fictional futurology and reflect a little on the problem of meaning of human death and immortality philosophically.

We are not dealing here with the complex question of biological life. This is the purview of the science of biology and biotechnology within the laws of nature. Rather, we are within the framework of human existence, consciousness and transcendence and the question of being and time in a philosophical sense. According to Heidegger ( 1967 :290) “Death, in the widest sense, is a phenomenon of life. Life must be understood as a kind of Being to which there belongs a Being-in-the-world”. He also argues (bid: 291) that: “The existential interpretation of death takes precedence over any biology and ontology of life. But it is also the foundation for any investigation of death which is biographical or historiological, ethnological or psychological”. So, the focus is sharply on the issue of life/death in the specifically human existential context of being/life/death . Human life is an (the) ultimate value, (people everywhere raise their glass to life and good health), and in the midst of it there is death as an ultimate threatening eliminating force. But is death larger than life, and can death eliminate life altogether? That’s the question. Whereas all beings from plants to animals, including man, are born live and die, in the case of human persons this cycle carries with it deep and wide meaning embodied within specific empirical, historical, cultural phenomena. In this context death, like birth and marriage, is a carrier of specific cultural significance and deeper meaning. It has always been accompanied by what anthropologists refer to as rites of passage, (Van Gennep, 1960 [1909]; Turner, 1967; Garces-Foley, 2006 ). These refer to transition events from one state of life to another. All such acts and rites, and religion generally, should be understood analysed and interpreted within the framework of symbolic language. (Kokosalakis, 2001 , 2020 ). In this sense the meaning of death is open and we get a glimpse of it through symbols.

Death, thus, is an existential tragic/dramatic phenomenon, which has preoccupied philosophy and the arts from the beginning and has been always treated as problematic. According to Heidegger ( 1967 : 295), the human being Dasein (being-there) has not explicit or even theoretical knowledge of death, hence the anxiety in the face of it. Also, Dasein has its death, “not in isolation, but as codetermined by its primordial kind of Being” (ibid: 291). He further argues that in the context of being/time/death, death is understood as being-towards-death ( Sein zum Tode ). Levinas Footnote 3 ( 2000 :8), although indebted to Heidegger, disagrees radically with him on this point because it posits being-towards death ( Sein zum Tode) “as equivalent to being in regard to nothingness”. Leaving aside that, phenomenologically the concept of nothingness itself is problematic (Sartre: 3–67), Levinas ( 2000 :8) asks: “is that which opens with death nothingness or the unknown? Can being at the point of death be reduced to the ontological dilemma of being or nothingness? That is the question that is posed here.” In other words, Levinas considers this issue problematic and wants to keep the question of being/life/death open. Logically and philosophically the concept of nothingness is absolute, definitive and closed whereas the concept of the unknown is open and problematic. In any case both concepts are ultimately based on belief, but nothingness implies knowledge which we cannot have in the context of death.

Levinas (ibid: 8–9) argues that any knowledge we have of death comes to us “second hand” and that “It is in relation with the other that we think of death in its negativity” (emphasis mine). Indeed, the ultimate objective of hate is the death of the other , the annihilation of the hated person. Also death “[is] a departure: it is a decease [deces]”. It is a permanent separation of them from us which is felt and experienced foremost and deeply for the departure of the beloved. This is because death is “A departure towards the unknown, a departure without return, a departure with no forward address”. Thus, the emotion and the sorrow associated with it and the pain and sadness caused to those remaining. Deep-down, existentially and philosophically, death is a mystery. It involves “an ambiguity that perhaps indicates another dimension of meaning than that in which death is thought within the alternative to be/not- to- be. The ambiguity: an enigma” (ibid: 14). Although, as Heidegger ( 1967 :298–311) argues, death is the only absolute certainty we have and it is the origin of certitude itself, I agree with Levinas (ibid: 10–27) that this certitude cannot be forthcoming from the experience of our own death alone, which is impossible anyway. Death entails the cessation of the consciousness of the subject and without consciousness there is no experience. We experience the process of our dying but not our own death itself. So, our experience of death is primarily that of the death of others. It is our observation of the cessation of the movement, of the life of the other .

Furthermore, Levinas (Ibid: 10–13) argues that “it is not certain that death has the meaning of annihilation” because if death is understood as annihilation in time, “Here, we are looking for other dimension of meaning, both for the meaning of time Footnote 4 and for the meaning of death”. Footnote 5 So death is a phenomenon with dimensions of meaning beyond the historical space/time configuration. Levinas dealt with such dimensions extensively not only in his God, Death and Time (2000) but also in his: Totality and Infinity (1969); Otherwise than Being, or Beyond Essence (1991); and, Of God Who comes to mind (1998). So, existentially/phenomenologically such dimensions inevitably involve the concept of transcendence, the divine, and some kind of faith. Indeed, the question of human death has always involved the question of the soul. Humans have been generally understood to be composite beings of body/soul or spirit and the latter has also been associated with transcendence and the divine. In general the body has been understood and experienced as perishable with death, whereas the soul/spirit has been understood (believed) to be indestructible. Thus beyond or surviving after/beyond death. Certainly this has been the assumption and general belief of major religions and cultures, Footnote 6 and philosophy itself, until modernity and up to the eighteenth century.

Ancient and classical Greek philosophy preoccupied itself with the question of the soul. Footnote 7 Homer, both in the Iliad and the Odyssey, has several reference on the soul in hades (the underworld) and Pythagoras of Samos (580–496 b.c.) dealt with immortality and metempsychosis (reincarnation). Footnote 8 In all the tragedies by Sophocles (496–406 b,c,), Aeschylus (523–456 b. c.), and Euripides (480–406 b.c.), death is a central theme but it was Plato Footnote 9 (428?-347 b.c.) and Aristotle Footnote 10 (384–322 b.c.) – widely acknowledged as the greatest philosophers of all times – who wrote specific treatises on the soul. Let us look at their positions very briefly.

Plato on the Soul

Plato was deeply concerned with the nature of the soul and the problem of immortality because such questions were foundational to his theory of the forms (ideas), his understanding of ethics, and his philosophy at large. So, apart from the dialogue Phaedo , in which the soul and its immortality is the central subject, he also referred to it extensively in the Republic , the Symposium and the Apology as well in the dialogues: Timaeus , Gorgias, Phaedrus, Crito, Euthyfron and Laches .

The dialogue Phaedo Footnote 11 is a discussion on the soul and immortality between Socrates (470–399 b.c.) and his interlocutors Cebes and Simias. They were Pythagorians from Thebes, who went to see Socrates in prison just before he was about to be given the hemlock (the liquid poison: means by which the death penalty was carried out at the time in Athens). Phaedo, his disciple, who was also present, is the narrator. The visitors found Socrates very serene and in pleasant mood and wondered how he did not seem to be afraid of death just before his execution. Upon this Socrates replies that it would be unreasonable to be afraid of death since he was about to join company with the Gods (of which he was certain) and, perhaps, with good and beloved departed persons. In any case, he argued, the true philosopher cannot be afraid of death as his whole life, indeed, is a practice and a preparation for it. So for this, and other philosophical reasons, death for Socrates is not to be feared. ( Phaedo; 64a–68b).

Socrates defines death as the separation of the soul from the body (64c), which he describes as prison of the former while joined in life. The body, which is material and prone to earthly materialistic pleasures, is an obstacle for the soul to pursue and acquire true knowledge, virtue, moderation and higher spiritual achievements generally (64d–66e). So, for the true philosopher, whose raison-d’être is to pursue knowledge truth and virtue, the liberation of the soul from bodily things, and death itself when it comes, is welcome because life, for him, was a training for death anyway. For these reasons, Socrates says is “glad to go to hades ” (the underworld) (68b).

Following various questions of Cebes and Simias about the soul, and its surviving death, Socrates proceeds to provide some logical philosophical arguments for its immortality. The main ones only can be mentioned here. In the so called cyclical argument, Socrates holds that the immortality of the soul follows logically from the relation of opposites (binaries) and comparatives: Big, small; good, bad; just, unjust; beautiful, ugly; good, better; bad; worse, etc. As these imply each other so life/death/life are mutually inter-connected, (70e–71d). The second main argument is that of recollection. Socrates holds that learning, in general, is recollection of things and ideas by the soul which always existed and the soul itself pre-existed before it took the human shape. (73a–77a). Socrates also advises Cebes and Simias to look into themselves, into their own psych e and their own consciousness in order to understand what makes them alive and makes them speak and move, and that is proof for the immortality of the soul (78ab). These arguments are disputed and are considered inadequate and anachronistic by many philosophers today (Steadman, 2015 ; Shagulta and Hammad, 2018 ; and others) but the importance of Phaedo lies in the theory of ideas and values and the concept of ethics imbedded in it.

Plato’s theory of forms (ideas) is the basis of philosophical idealism to the present day and also poses the question of the human autonomy and free will. Phaedo attracts the attention of modern and contemporary philosophers from Kant (1724–1804) and Hegel (1770–1831) onwards, because it poses the existential problems of life, death, the soul, consciousness, movement and causality as well as morality, which have preoccupied philosophy and the human sciences diachronically. In this dialogue a central issue is the philosophy of ethics and values at large as related to the problem of death. Aristotle, who was critical of Plato’s idealism, also uses the concept of forms and poses the question of the soul as a substantive first principle of life and movement although he does not deal with death and immortality as Plato does.

Aristotle on the Soul

Aristotle’s conception of the soul is close to contemporary biology and psychology because his whole philosophy is near to modern science. Unlike many scholars, however, who tend to be reductionist, limiting the soul to naturalistic/positivistic explanations, (as Isherwood, 2016 , for instance, does, unlike Charlier, 2018 , who finds relevance in religious and metaphysical connections), Aristotle’s treatment of it, as an essential irreducible principle of life, leaves room for its metaphysical substance and character. So his treatise on the soul , (known now to scholars as De Anima, Shields, 2016 ), is closely related to both his physics and his metaphysics.

Aristotle sees all living beings (plants, animals, humans) as composite and indivisible of body, soul or form (Charlton, 1980 ). The body is material and the soul is immaterial but none can be expressed, comprehended or perceived apart from matter ( ύλη ). Shields ( 2016 ) has described this understanding and use of the concepts of matter and form in Aristotle’s philosophy as hylomorphism [ hyle and morphe, (matter and form)]. The soul ( psyche ) is a principle, arche (αρχή) associated with cause (αιτία) and motion ( kinesis ) but it is inseparable from matter. In plants its basic function and characteristic is nutrition. In animals, in addition to nutrition it has the function and characteristic of sensing. In humans apart from nutrition and sensing, which they share with all animals, in addition it has the unique faculty of noesis and logos. ( De Anima ch. 2). Following this, Heidegger ( 1967 :47) sees humans as: “Dasein, man’s Being is ‘defined’ as the ζωον λόγον έχον – as that living thing whose Being is essentially determined by the potentiality for discourse”. (So, only human beings talk, other beings do not and cannot).

In Chapter Five, Aristotle concentrates on this unique property of the human soul, the logos or nous, known in English as mind . The nous (mind) is both: passive and active. The former, the passive mind, although necessary for noesis and knowledge, is perishable and mortal (φθαρτός). The latter, the poetic mind is higher, it is a principle of causality and creativity, it is energy, aitia . So this, the poetic the creative mind is higher. It is the most important property of the soul and it is immaterial, immortal and eternal. Here Aristotle considers the poetic mind as separate from organic life, as substance entering the human body from outside, as it were. Noetic mind is the divine property in humans and expresses itself in their pursuit to imitate the prime mover, God that is.

So, Aristotle arrives here at the problem of immortality of the soul by another root than Plato but, unlike him, he does not elaborate on the metaphysics of this question beyond the properties of the poetic mind and he focuses on life in the world. King ( 2001 :214) argues that Aristotle is not so much concerned to establish the immortality of the human individual as that of the human species as an eidos. Here, however, I would like to stress that we should not confuse Aristotle’s understanding with contemporary biological theories about the dominance and survival of the human species. But whatever the case may be, both Aristotle’s and Plato’s treatises on the soul continue to be inspiring sources of debate by philosophers and others on these issues to the present day.

Death in Modernity

By modernity here is meant the general changes which occurred in western society and culture with the growth of science and technology and the economy, especially after the Enlightenment, and the French and the Industrial Revolutions, which have their cultural roots in the Renaissance, the Reformation and Protestantism.

It is banal to say that life beyond death does not preoccupy people in modernity as it did before and that, perhaps, now most people do not believe in the immortality of the soul. In what Charles Taylor ( 2007 ) has extensively described as A SECULAR AGE he frames the question of change in religious beliefs in the west as follows: “why was it virtually impossible not to believe in God in, say, 1500 in our western society, while in 2000 many of us find this not only easy, but even inescapable?” (p. 25). The answer to this question is loaded with controversy and is given variously by different scholars. Footnote 13 Taylor (ibid: 65–75, 720–726) shows how and why beliefs have changed radically in modernity. Metaphysical transcendent beliefs on life and death have shrunk into this-worldly secular conceptions in what he calls, “the immanent frame”. As a consequence, transcendence and the sacred were exiled from the world or reduced to “closed world structures”. Footnote 14 In this context many scholars spoke of “the death of God” (ibid: 564–575).

In criticizing postmodern relativism, which brings various vague conceptions of God and transcendence back in play, Gellner ( 1992 :80–83) praises what he calls Enlightenment Rationalist fundamentalism, which “at one fell swoop eliminates the sacred from the world”. Although he acknowledges that Kant, the deepest thinker of the Enlightenment, left morality reason and knowledge outside the purview of the laws of nature, thus leaving the question of transcendence open, he still claims that Enlightenment rationalism is the only positive scientific way to study religious phenomena and death rituals. This position seems to be epistemologically flawed, because it pre-empts what concerns us here, namely, the assumptions of modernity for the nature of man and its implications for the meaning and reality of death.

In rejecting religion and traditional conceptions of death, Enlightenment rationalism put forward an overoptimistic, promethean view of man. What Vereker ( 1967 ) described as the “God of Reason” was the foundation of eighteenth century optimism. The idea was that enlightened rationalism, based on the benevolent orderly laws of nature, would bring about the redeemed society. Enlightened, rational leaders and the gradual disappearance of traditional religious beliefs, obscurantism and superstitions, which were sustained by the ancient regime, would eventually transform society and would abolish all human evil and social and political injustice. Science was supportive of this view because it showed that natural and social phenomena, traditionally attributed to divine agencies and metaphysical forces, have a clear natural causation. These ideas, developed by European philosophers (Voltaire 1694–1778; Rousseau, 1712–1778; Kant, 1724–1804; Hume, 1711–1776; and many others), were foundational to social and political reform, and the basis of the French Revolution (1789–1799). However, the underlying optimism of such philosophical ideas about the benevolence of nature appeared incompatible with natural phenomena such as the great earthquake in Lisbon in 1755, which flattened the city and killed over 100,000 people. Enlightenment rationalism overemphasised a promethean, anthropocentric view of man without God, and ignored the limits of man and the moral and existential significance of death.

In his critique of capitalism, in the nineteenth century, Marx (1818–1883), promoted further the promethean view of man by elevating him as the author of his destiny and banishing God and religion as “the opium of the people”. In his O rigin of the Species (1859), Charles Darwin also showed man’s biological connections with primates, thereby challenging biblical texts about the specific divine origin of the human species. He confirmed human dominance in nature. Important figures in literature, however, such as Dostoevsky (1821–1881) and Tolstoy (1828–1910), pointed out and criticised the conceit and arrogance of an inflated humanism without God, promoted by the promethean man of modernity.

By the end of the twentieth century the triumph of science, biotechnology, information technology, and international capitalist monetary economics, all of them consequences of modernity, had turned the planet into a global village with improved living standards for the majority. Medical science also has doubled average life expectancy from what it was in nineteenth century and information technology has made, almost every adult, owner of a mobile smart phone. Moreover, visiting the moon has inflated man’s sense of mastery over nature, and all these achievements, although embodying Taylor’s ( 1992 ) malaise of modernity at the expense of the environment, have strengthen the promethean view and, somehow, ignored human limits. As a consequence, the reality of death was treated as a kind of taboo, tucked under the carpet.

This seems a paradox because, apart from the normal death of individuals, massive collective deaths, caused by nature and by hate and barbarity from man to man, were present in the twentieth century more than any other in history. The pandemic of Spanish flue 1917–1919 killed 39 million of the world’s population according to estimates by Baro et al. (2020). In the First World War deaths, military and civilians combined, were estimated at 20.5 million (Wikipedia). In the Second World War an estimated total of 70–85 million people perished, (Wikipedia). This did not include estimates of more than seven million people who died in the gulags of Siberia and elsewhere under Stalin. But Auschwitz is indicative of the unlimited limits, which human barbarity and cruelty of man to man, can reach. Bauman ( 1989 :x), an eminent sociologist, saw the Holocaust as a moral horror related to modernity and wrote: “ The Holocaust was born and executed in modern rational society, at the high stage of our civilization and at the peak of human cultural achievement, and for this reason it is a problem of that society, civilization and culture. ”

Questions associated with the mass death are now magnified by the spread of the coronavirus (Covid-19). This has caused global panic and created unpredictability at all levels of society and culture. This sudden global threat of death makes it timely to re-examine our values, our beliefs (secular or religious), and the meaning of life. Max Weber (1948: 182), who died a hundred years ago in the pandemic of great influenza, was sceptical and pessimistic about modernity, and argued that it was leading to a cage with “ specialists without spirit, sensualists without heart; this nullity imagines that it had attained a level of civilization never before achieved. ”

So, what does this examination of philosophical anthropology illuminate in terms of questions of human nature and life and death in deeper intellectual, philosophical, dramaturgical context? Now, we are well into the twenty-first century, and with the revolution in information science, the internet, biotechnology and data religion , the promethean view of man seems to have reached new heights. Yet, massive death, by a single virus this time, threatens again humanity; are there any lessons to be learned? Will this threat, apart from the negativity of death, bring back the wisdom, which T. S. Elliot said we have lost in modern times? Will it show us our limits? Will it reduce our conceit and arrogance? Will it make us more humble, moderate, prudent, and more humane for this and future generations, and for the sake of life in this planet at large? These are the questions arising now amongst many circles, and it is likely that old religious and philosophical ideas about virtuous life and the hope of immortality (eschatologically) may revive again as we are well within late modernity (I do not like the term postmodernity, which has been widely used in sociology since the 1980s).

The central argument of this essay has been that death has always been and remains at the centre of life. Philosophically and existentially the meaning of death is problematic, and the natural sciences cannot produce knowledge on this problem. Religious traditions always beheld the immortality of the soul and so argued great philosophers like Plato and Aristotle. Modernity, since the Enlightenment, rejected such views as anachronistic and advanced an anthropocentric promethean, view of man, at the expense of the sacred and transcendence at large. Instead, within what Taylor (1967: 537–193) has described as the immanent frame, it developed “closed world structures,” which are at the expense of human nature and human freedom. One consequence of this has been massive death during the twentieth century.

Following Levinas ( 2000 ), I argued that death should not be understood to lead to nothingness because nothingness means certitude and positive knowledge, which we cannot have existentially in the case of death. In this sense the reality of death should not be understood to lead to annihilation of life and remains a mystery. Moreover, the presence and the reality of death as a limit and a boundary should serve as educative lesson for both the autonomy and creativity of man and against an overinflated promethean view of her/his nature.

David Martin ( 1980 :16) puts the matter about human and divine autonomy as follows: “Indeed, it is all too easy to phrase the problem so that the autonomy of God and the autonomy of man are rival claimants for what science leaves over”. This concurs with his, ( 1978 :12), understanding of religion, (which I share), as “acceptance of a level of reality beyond the observable world known to science, to which we ascribe meanings and purposes completing and transcending those of the purely human realm”.

We do not know how and when human beings acquired this capacity during the evolutionary process of the species. It characterises however a radical shift from nature to culture as the latter is defined by Clifford Geertz (1973:68): “an ordered system of meanings and symbols …in terms of which individuals define their world, express their feelings and make their judgements”.

For a comprehensive extensive and impressive account and discussion of Levinas’ philosophy and work, and relevant bibliography, see Bergo ( 2019 ).

Perhaps it is worth mentioning here that the meaning of the concept of time, as it was in Cartesian Philosophy and Newtonian physics, has changed radically with Einstein’s theories of relativity and contemporary quantum physics (Heisenberg 1959 ). Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle (Hilgervood and Uffink, 2016 ) is very relevant to non- deterministic conceptions of time/space and scientific and philosophical discourse generally.

Various religions articulate the structure of these meanings in different cultural contexts symbolically and all of them involve the divine and an eschatological metaphysical dimension beyond history, beyond our experience of time and space.

Ancient Egyptian culture is well known for its preoccupation with life after death, the immortality of the soul and the elaborate ritual involved in the mummification of the Pharaohs. See: anen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_ Egyptian_ funerary_ practices). Also the findings of archaeological excavations of tombs of kings in all ancient cultures constitute invaluable sources of knowledge not only about the meaning of death and the beliefs and rituals associated with it in these cultures but also of life and religion and politics and society at large.

For an extensive account of general theories of the soul in Greek antiquity see: Lorenz ( 2009 ).

For a good account on Pythagoras’ views on the transmigration of the souls see: Huffman ( 2018 ).

For a recent good account on the diachronic importance of Plato’s philosophy see: Kraut ( 2017 ).

For a very extensive analytical account and discussion of Aristotle’s philosophy and work with recent bibliography see: Shields ( 2016 ).

For an overview of Phaedo in English with commentary and the original Greek text see: Steadman ( 2015 ).

See, for instance, Wilson ( 1969 ) and Martin ( 1978 ) for radically different analyses and interpretations of secularization.

Marxism is a good example. God, the sacred and tradition generally are rejected but the proletariat and the Party acquire a sacred significance. The notion of salvation is enclosed as potentiality within history in a closed system of the class struggle. This, however, has direct political consequences because, along with the sacred, democracy is exiled and turned into a totalitarian system. The same is true, of course, at the other end of the spectrum with fascism.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

P.O. Box 49, 34002, Vasiliko, Evia, Greece

Nikos Kokosalakis

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nikos Kokosalakis .

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Kokosalakis, N. Reflections on Death in Philosophical/Existential Context. Soc 57 , 402–409 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12115-020-00503-5

Download citation

Published : 27 July 2020

Issue Date : August 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s12115-020-00503-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Philosophical
Existential
Transcendence
Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

Essay Service Examples Health Death

Death Essay

Proper editing and formatting
Free revision, title page, and bibliography
Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

What is Scaring?

Different meaning, it is a part of life.

Our writers will provide you with an essay sample written from scratch: any topic, any deadline, any instructions.

Cite this paper

Join our 150k of happy users

Get original paper written according to your instructions
Save time for what matters most

Fair Use Policy

EduBirdie considers academic integrity to be the essential part of the learning process and does not support any violation of the academic standards. Should you have any questions regarding our Fair Use Policy or become aware of any violations, please do not hesitate to contact us via [email protected].

We are here 24/7 to write your paper in as fast as 3 hours.

Provide your email, and we'll send you this sample!

By providing your email, you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy .

Say goodbye to copy-pasting!

Get custom-crafted papers for you.

Enter your email, and we'll promptly send you the full essay. No need to copy piece by piece. It's in your inbox!

We will keep fighting for all libraries - stand with us!

Internet Archive Audio

This Just In
Grateful Dead
Old Time Radio
78 RPMs and Cylinder Recordings
Audio Books & Poetry
Computers, Technology and Science
Music, Arts & Culture
News & Public Affairs
Spirituality & Religion
Radio News Archive

Flickr Commons
Occupy Wall Street Flickr
NASA Images
Solar System Collection
Ames Research Center

All Software
Old School Emulation
MS-DOS Games
Historical Software
Classic PC Games
Software Library
Kodi Archive and Support File
Vintage Software
CD-ROM Software
CD-ROM Software Library
Software Sites
Tucows Software Library
Shareware CD-ROMs
Software Capsules Compilation
CD-ROM Images
ZX Spectrum
DOOM Level CD

Smithsonian Libraries
FEDLINK (US)
Lincoln Collection
American Libraries
Canadian Libraries
Universal Library
Project Gutenberg
Children's Library
Biodiversity Heritage Library
Books by Language
Additional Collections

Prelinger Archives
Democracy Now!
Occupy Wall Street
TV NSA Clip Library
Animation & Cartoons
Arts & Music
Computers & Technology
Cultural & Academic Films
Ephemeral Films
Sports Videos
Videogame Videos
Youth Media

Search the history of over 866 billion web pages on the Internet.

Mobile Apps

Wayback Machine (iOS)
Wayback Machine (Android)

Browser Extensions

Archive-it subscription.

Explore the Collections
Build Collections

Save Page Now

Capture a web page as it appears now for use as a trusted citation in the future.

Please enter a valid web address

Donate Donate icon An illustration of a heart shape

On the meaning of death : essays on mortuary rituals and eschatological beliefs

Bookreader item preview, share or embed this item, flag this item for.

Graphic Violence
Explicit Sexual Content
Hate Speech
Misinformation/Disinformation
Marketing/Phishing/Advertising
Misleading/Inaccurate/Missing Metadata

plus-circle Add Review comment Reviews

12 Previews

DOWNLOAD OPTIONS

No suitable files to display here.

PDF access not available for this item.

IN COLLECTIONS

Uploaded by station40.cebu on January 23, 2024

SIMILAR ITEMS (based on metadata)

Home — Essay Samples — Nursing & Health — Death — Narrative About Death

Narrative About Death

Categories: Death

About this sample

Words: 637 |

Published: Mar 19, 2024

Words: 637 | Page: 1 | 4 min read

Introduction, the inevitability of death, exploring death through literature, the narrative of hamlet, art as a narrative of death, religious narratives of death, the purpose of narratives about death.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

Expert in: Nursing & Health

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 497 words

2 pages / 1017 words

1 pages / 478 words

3 pages / 1450 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Death

It is difficult to deal with the loss of a parent. It’s worse when you have to go through it at a young age, but eventually, one comes to deal with it. I still have my moments when I miss the sound of his voice. I’ll start to [...]

The epic poem Beowulf, which is believed to have been written in the late 10th century, tells the story of a great Scandinavian warrior named Beowulf who comes to the aid of King Hrothgar of the Danes. The poem is filled with [...]

The Masque of the Red Death, written by Edgar Allan Poe, is a short story that explores the theme of death in a vivid and haunting manner. This essay will delve into the various ways in which death is portrayed in the story, as [...]

The debate surrounding "death with dignity" laws, or physician-assisted suicide, is a complex and emotionally charged issue that intersects with ethics, medicine, and personal freedom. At the heart of this debate is the question [...]

Being in the place of Stanley, I am no longer a part of this world of living things. I am already dead and now to my great surprise, my friend, the author Conan Doyle as well is going to meet me for he lost his wife in a car [...]

Emily Dickinson`s, Because I Could Not Stop For Death is a complex type of poem, that provides us important question about the construction of the poem. Why did she choose to talk about death?, how? and in what way?. Each poet [...]

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

Instructions Followed To The Letter
Deadlines Met At Every Stage
Unique And Plagiarism Free

Theme of Death in Literature: Examples & Definition

Death is undoubtedly one of the most mysterious events in life. Literature is among the mediums that allow people to explore and gain knowledge of death—a topic that in everyday life is often seen as taboo. 

This article by Custom-Writing.org will:

introduce the topic of death in literature and explain it;
discuss other issues related to the theme of death;
suggest some essay ideas on this topic.

💀 Significance of Death in Literature

🔮 How Death Theme Is Presented
💡 Related Themes

✍️ Death Essay Topics

📚 Death in Literature: Examples

🔍 References

Why is it important to write about death? Well, there are many reasons behind people’s curiosity about the said phenomenon. Death is unavoidable and intangible, something that can’t be seen or explained. One of literature’s central tasks is to give structure and meaning to things that are otherwise hard to perceive.

When it comes to death, literature has several functions:

It helps to deal with grief and death anxiety;
It gives meaning to life and death;
It makes sense of the phenomenon of death.

The picture enumerates the main functions of death theme in literature.

It’s also important to note that death as a theme exists separately from biological or physical death, as writers mainly focus on its spiritual and supernatural aspects.

🔮 Theme of Death in Literature: How Is It Presented?

Literary works make readers experience things and rethink the preexisting ideas of the world around them. However, these experiences are subjective. So, unsurprisingly, in various literary works, death is portrayed differently.

In every literary genre, the existence of death serves a different purpose:

In horror stories , it evokes fear or wonder.
In mystery novels , it creates a sense of curiosity and advances the plot.
In a tragedy , it usually leads to a moment of catharsis and provides closure.

The range of attitudes towards death also differs depending on the culture and the time period when the work was written.

Theme of Death in English Literature

Preoccupation with religion was the most notable feature of the Middle Ages . The church held unchallenged dominion over every aspect of people’s life. It’s not surprising that the ideas of hell and heaven were more certain than anything in the visible world.

During the Renaissance , people still held strong religious ideas. However, with the development of science, the representation of death in works of art became more realistic. Death became equivalent to annihilation.

Shakespeare’s Hamlet is an example of a tragedy that conveys that message. “The rest is silence” are the last words of Prince Hamlet. The phrase indicates that there’s no afterlife: an idea fairly different from what the majority believed around that time. 

Death in Victorian Literature

Similar to the medieval era, the mortality rate during the Victorian time was very high, so the death theme in literature continued to stay relevant and popular. Despite the 19th century being the era of secularization, it was also a period of sustained religious revival. That’s why the Victorian era is often called a golden age of supernatural stories.

A good example of a 19th-century novel that deals with the theme of death is Emily Bronte’s Wuthering Heights . As many as 11 characters die throughout the story. In the case of Heathcliff and Catherine, death is the only means that can unite them.
Charles Dickens is another famous figure whose novels cover the topic of death. In his sentimental novels, however, he focuses on the aspect of mourning rather than death’s freeing quality.

Death in American Literature

Literary critics agree that death is one of the most prominent themes in American literature. Many famous authors have devoted their works to this particular topic:

In Herman Melville’s fiction, characters die regardless of age, social status, or moral characteristics. That shows how inevitable death is and how unpredictable life can be.
Nathaniel Hawthorne worked in the Gothic genre, which includes supernatural elements, responds to social anxieties, and explores the topic of death.
When it comes to poetry, Emily Dickinson is one of the first names that come to mind. In many of her poems, she touches upon the topics of death and immortality.
Another famous figure worth mentioning is Edgar Allan Poe . His name is closely associated with the horror genre. An excellent example of a literary work where death is one of the central themes is Poe’s short story The Cask of Amontillado .
The topic of death is also characteristic of African American literature . It often focuses on the arc of mourning, such as in Toni Morrison’s Beloved .

Death in Children’s Literature

Although it may seem bizarre now to most people, death used to be one of the major themes in juvenile literature. Children’s books often mirror society and its complexity in a particular epoch. By introducing concepts such as death, the stories prepare children for the world’s harsh realities.

The concept of death has also served as a major plot device. For example, it was often used as a punishment for antagonists. Such stories stressed the importance of salvation and the precariousness of life. They also conveyed a moral message that reflected society’s values. As child mortality rates have decreased with time, the death theme has become less reoccurring in the kids’ literature.

Death Theme in Contemporary Literature

The contemporary view of death is far from that in ancient tragedies or Renaissance fiction. In the past, the death theme was often used as a plot device to provide closure or catharsis. Contemporary fiction usually presents a more realistic depiction. Death no longer serves as a moment of closure. Instead, it can work as an opening of a new story.

💡 Death in Literature: Related Themes

Death is undoubtedly one of the most popular topics in literature. Themes such as love, survival, disease, immortality, and grief are almost always portrayed in conjunction with death and are closely related to it.

The picture shows 5 themes related to the theme of death in literature.

Theme of Survival in Literature

Survival stories usually focus on characters that try to avoid death at any cost. They often find themselves in a hostile environment, out in nature, or in the midst of war. These stories portray people who are forced to fight for their lives and often show how far they can go to accomplish this goal.

The Road by Cormac McCarthy is an excellent example of survival fiction. It features a father and a son who travel through a post-apocalyptic world. The novel can be interpreted as a modern take on Homer’s The Odyssey .

Love and Death in Literature

It might be true that the fastest way to die in literature is to fall in love. Young lovers tragically dying at the end is a common trope that goes back to courtly literature. In its context, love is always unattainable. As a result, archetypes such as Romeo and Juliet or Tristian and Isolde gained popularity outside the genre.

Immortality in Literature

Immortality is a theme that has been very powerful within the literary tradition in almost every country. On the one hand, it can be presented as the end goal of a character who strives to gain eternal life. On the other hand, it’s usually seen as something that isn’t worth pursuing.

One example is The Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde. It shows how the desire for eternal youth can lead to a person’s downfall.

Death by Disease in Literature

Deadly diseases can often be seen in literature written during epidemics. Diseases such as the plague are sometimes used as plot devices. They can also serve as a divine punishment, add to the mystery, and evoke the feeling of dread in the readers.

The Masque of the Red Death by Edgar Allan Poe is an example of a story where a disease acts as an agent of death.

Theme of Grief in Literature

Grief is arguably life’s greatest source of distress. It is closely related to death, especially that of loved ones. Literary works that focus on the concept of mourning help people to face their worst fears and get through the loss of their loved ones.

Putting feelings into words makes it easier to cope with grief and gives meaning to the lives of the ones who passed. One good example of mourning literature is the novel Beloved by the American author Toni Morrison.

Death is a widely discussed topic not only in literature but also in mythology, psychology, philosophy, medicine, and many other studies. If you need to write an essay on death, here are some examples of topics:

The many faces of death.
Nietzsche and the death of God.
Burial practices of Native Americans .
Death as a psychological phenomenon.
Chinese philosophy on dealing with grief .
Death in Ancient Greek and Roman cultures.
Is the death penalty a fair punishment?
Funeral customs and cultural implications of death.
Why is the discussion about end-of-life care meaningful? 
Ways to portray death in the traditional and modern context.

Death in Literature Essay Topics

From ancient Greek literature to modern fiction, the topic of death stays relevant. It’s analyzed and talked about in many essays and research papers. Here’s a list of literature essay topics that may come in handy:

Death in Gothic literature .
Sylvia Plath and the poetics of death.
The nature of death in Emily Dickinson’s poetry.
Death in Camus’ The Outsider .
Suicide in modern Japanese literature.
Dance of the Dead in Medieval literature .
Symbolism of clock in Poe’s The Masque of the Red Death .
The poetry of mourning and its cultural significance.
The personification of death in American literature.
How do literary works shape people’s perception of death?

Theme of Death in Hamlet Essay Topics

Shakespeare’s Hamlet is probably the most famous literary work exploring death and its implications. Throughout the play, the phenomenon of death manifests itself in various forms. Here are some essay topics related to the famous tragedy:

The idea of suicide in Hamlet .
The meaning of Ophelia’s death.
Death, disease, and decay in Hamlet .
Murder as the ultimate goal in Hamlet .
Death and the questioning of human existence in Hamlet .
Hamlet and his obsession with death. 
How does grief affect Hamlet’s development as the character?
How does death manifest itself in Shakespeare’s Hamlet ?
How does the change in the point of view on death affect Hamlet’s character?
“Death, the undiscovere’d country, from whose bourn no traveler returns.” The importance of the quotation on the understanding of Hamlet .

📚 Theme of Death in Literature: Examples

Death has always been a topic many authors used to elicit an emotional response from the reader. In fiction, poetry, and theater death theme gives way to other topics ranging from love to madness. This section will introduce some literary works that have death as one of their central themes.

Theme of Death in Hamlet

Hamlet is arguably the most influential tragedy written by William Shakespeare. The theme of death in the play is tightly connected to those of grief, revenge, suicide, and murder. The author also incorporates some supernatural elements, such as the ghost of Hamlet’s father, to convey the sense of mystery. The ghost itself symbolizes the disruption to the preexisting social order of the time.

Hamlet’s most straightforward consideration of death happens in Act 4, Scene 3. In that scene, the young prince ironically describes the life-cycle of human existence. He interprets it this way: we eat in life, and later we are eaten in death. In Act 5, the play once again returns to the question of human existence. Hamlet ponders the futility of the human condition and the inevitability of death. Another encounter with death is through the character of Ophelia , who might have taken her own life.

The concept of suicide is also present throughout the play. It’s especially prominent in Hamlet’s famous soliloquies. However, Hamlet himself never attempts to take his own life. The whole plot of Shakespeare’s play is based on the idea of death; Hamlet becomes obsessed with revenge, but by doing so, he also becomes the agent of death. Want to know more? Check out our article on themes in Hamlet .

Hamlet Quotes about Death

In Shakespeare’s Hamlet , death is the driving force behind the major events of the play. It becomes the cause and the consequence of revenge. Here are some quotes from the tragedy that are related to death:

To die,—to sleep,— No more; and by a sleep to say we end The heartache, and the thousand natural shocks That flesh is heir to,—’tis a consummation Devoutly to be wish’d. Hamlet , Act 3, Scene 1

To be, or not to be: that is the question.  Hamlet , Act 3, Scene 1

Thou know’st ‘tis common; all that lives must die, Passing through nature to eternity. Hamlet , Act 1, Scene 2

Death Theme in A Good Man Is Hard to Find

Flannery O’Connor’s A Good Man Is Hard to Find presents the writer’s view on the outcome of life. It exhibits a deep religious insight through the use of the theme of death.

The Misfit is one way O’Connor portrays death. When the Misfit kills the grandmother, the readers are again reminded of mortality and its significance. However, the murder of the grandmother is foreshadowed from the very beginning of the story. The description of her dress, the passing away of the family, and the conversation with Misfit allude to her death.

The woman’s anxiety about death is what eventually leads her and her family to be the victims of murder. A Good Man is Hard to Find features a confrontation between a grandmother who personifies a superficial sense of goodness and a criminal that embodies evil. In turn, however, that said an evil man is the one who causes the older woman to see herself for what she is: a sinner. According to Christian values, death is life’s most precious gift. For that reason, grandmother’s desire to avoid it seems almost comical.

You’re welcome to check out our article on themes in A Good Man is Hard to Find where you can find more interesting info.

A Good Man Is Hard to Find: Quotes about Death

Here are some of the best death-related quotes from Flanner O’Conner’s short story A Good Man is Hard to Find :

Her collars and cuffs were white organdy trimmed with lace and at her neckline she had pinned a purple spray of cloth violets containing a sachet. In case of an accident, anyone seeing her dead on the highway would know at once that she was a lady. A Good Man is Hard to Find

“She would of been a good woman,” The Misfit said, “if it had been somebody there to shoot her every minute of her life.” A Good Man is Hard to Find

It was a head-doctor at the penitentiary said what I had done was kill my daddy but I known that for a lie. My daddy died in nineteen ought nineteen of the epidemic flu and I never had a thing to do with it. A Good Man is Hard to Find

Death in A Rose for Emily

The short story A Rose for Emily , written by William Faulkner, is an example of Southern Gothic literature, so death is naturally one of the story’s central themes. It presents itself in various forms throughout the plot.

In A Rose for Emily , Faulkner reflects the struggle that comes with maintaining tradition in the face of radical change. Emily herself may personify old values and practices that are getting replaced. Emily lives in her own world, which is a timeless vacuum.

Death dominates the story from the very beginning to end. Emily’s whole life has been haunted by death and loss. First, her father passes away, then her lover Homer. Emily tries to exert power over death by denying its existence in the first place. For instance, when Homer dies, Emily refuses to admit the fact of his death, even though she’s the one who inflicts it on him. Emily’s attempt at having a grotesque marriage with Homer’s dead body reveals her disturbing desire to fuse life and death. Nevertheless, it ends with death’s triumph.

Death Quotes in A Rose for Emily

The power of death is masterfully reflected in William Faulkner’s short story A Rose for Emily . Here are some quotes that demonstrate it:

So the next day we all said, “She will kill herself”; and we said it would be the best thing. A Rose for Emily

She died in one of the downstairs rooms, in a heavy walnut bed with a curtain, her gray head propped on a pillow yellow and moldy with age and lack of sunlight. A Rose for Emily

When Miss Emily Grierson died, our whole town went to her funeral: the men through a sort of respectful affection for a fallen monument, the women mostly out of curiosity to see the inside of her house, which no one save an old manservant— a combined gardener and cook— had seen in at least ten years. A Rose for Emily

We hope you enjoyed reading through our article and learned something new! Don’t hesitate to share it with your friends. Good luck exploring various themes in literature.

❓ Theme of Death in Literature FAQs

Because I Couldn’t Stop for Death is a lyrical poem written by Emily Dickinson. The most apparent themes of the poem are mortality and death. It’s an exploration of the inevitability of death and the uncertainties surrounding the dying process.

The short story The Masque of the Red Death , written by Edgar Allan Poe, is about the inevitability of death. Wealth and social status ultimately don’t matter: death can easily take anyone’s life anytime.

The theme of John Donne’s poem Death Be Not Proud is that death can’t corrupt the soul. The poet sees death not as a victor that claims his life but as something that frees his soul from his body.

There are plenty of works that focus on the idea of death. Here are some good examples:

1. The Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde. 2. The Cure for Grief by Nellie Hermann. 3. Beloved by Toni Morrison. 4.The Book Thief by Markus Zusak.

Death is a major topic in many literary works, including poetry. Works of poets such as Sylvia Plath, Emily Dickinson, Edgar Allan Poe, Robert Frost, etc., only prove that. The authors consistently write about death and its various manifestations.

Death and Dying in Literature: Cambridge University Press & Assessment
Why Death Is so Important in YA Fiction: The Guardian
Death and Literature: Different Approaches, from Simplicity to Obscurity: Redalyc
Can Novels Change Our Attitudes about Death?: Electric Literature
Death in Literature: Cambridge Scholars Publishing
Death as a Theme in Hamlet: ThoughtCo
Death in Wuthering Heights: Georgetown University in Washington DC
Death In Shakespeare: No Sweat Shakespeare
Can Books Ease the Pain of Grief?: BBC
The Conflict Between Aestheticism and Morality in Oscar Wilde’s The Picture of Dorian Gray: Boston University
The Meaning of Death in Shakespeare’s Hamlet: Harvard University
A Summary and Analysis of William Faulkner’s “A Rose for Emily”: Encyclopedia
Death, Be Not Proud: Encyclopedia Britannica
Water and Liquid in Toni Morrison’s Beloved: Dickinson College
Why We Write about Grief: The New York Times
Because I Could Not Stop for Death: The City University of New York
The Masque of the Red Death: California State University Dominguez Hills
Share to Facebook
Share to Twitter
Share to LinkedIn
Share to email

Theme of Loneliness, Isolation, & Alienation in Literature with Examples

Humans are social creatures. Most of us enjoy communication and try to build relationships with others. It’s no wonder that the inability to be a part of society often leads to emotional turmoil. World literature has numerous examples of characters who are disconnected from their loved ones or don’t fit...

Themes of Marriage & Love in Literature: Examples & Quotes

Have you ever loved? Even if you haven’t, you’ve seen it in countless movies, heard about it in songs, and read about it in some of the greatest books in world literature. If you want to find out more about love as a literary theme, you came to the right...

Gender Roles in Literature: Guide & Examples

Wouldn’t it be great if people of all genders could enjoy equal rights? When reading stories from the past, we can realize how far we’ve made since the dawn of feminism. Books that deal with the theme of gender inspire us to keep fighting for equality. In this article, our...

Dehumanization & Monsters in Literature: Types with Examples

What makes a society see some categories of people as less than human? Throughout history, we can see how people divided themselves into groups and used violence to discriminate against each other. When groups of individuals are perceived as monstrous or demonic, it leads to dehumanization. Numerous literary masterpieces explore the meaning of monstrosity and show the dire consequences of dehumanization. This article by Custom-Writing.org will: 👾 Monstrosity:...

Revenge Theme in Literature: Examples & Quotes

Revenge provides relief. Characters in many literary stories believe in this idea. Convinced that they were wronged, they are in the constant pursuit of revenge. But is it really the only way for them to find peace? This article by Custom-Writing.org is going to answer this and other questions related...

Money Theme in Literature: Overview & Quotes

Is money really the root of all evil? Many writers and poets have tried to answer this question. Unsurprisingly, the theme of money is very prevalent in literature. It’s also connected to other concepts, such as greed, power, love, and corruption. In this article, our custom writing team will: explore...

Themes in Literature: Definition & Examples of Central Ideas

Have you ever asked yourself why some books are so compelling that you keep thinking about them even after you have finished reading? Well, of course, it can be because of a unique plotline or complex characters. However, most of the time, it is the theme that compels you. A...

Theme of the American Dream in Literature: Guide & Topics

The American Dream theme encompasses crucial values, such as freedom, democracy, equal rights, and personal happiness. The concept’s definition varies from person to person. Yet, books by American authors can help us grasp it better. Many agree that American literature is so distinct from English literature because the concept of...

Nature Symbolism in Literature: Overview & Examples

You can find depictions of nature in literary works of any culture. Nature usually serves as the backdrop for the plot. In addition, it helps us understand the story’s mood and hint at a deeper meaning. It also allows authors to demonstrate characters’ development and emotional state. Sound interesting? Then this article by our custom-writing team is for you! Here, you’ll find: 🏞️ What...

Color Symbolism in Literature: Examples & Quotes

What is a color on its own? It is merely a phenomenon of light: red, blue, green, and so on. But what is color as a symbol? In fact, it’s a fantastic tool of emotional expression. It is only natural that the symbolic use of color has become an irreplaceable literary device. In this article by Custom-Writing.org, you will learn about: 🎨 Color Symbolism in Literature: Definition Color symbolism in literature refers to using colors...

Symbols in Literature: Definition and Examples

What comes to your mind when you see a white dove? Is it just a bird, or maybe a sign of peace and freedom? Some objects, words, or concepts evoke particular associations. They have an additional meaning that we can grasp. Such things are called symbols, and this article by...

Geoffrey Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales is an outstanding piece of literature that consists of fascinating stories about Pilgrims’ adventures. The book hides a lot of secrets behind its plot and famous prologue. Do you want to explore them? Take a look at our Canterbury Tales study guide! You will discover the...

Undergraduate
High School
Architecture
American History
Asian History
Antique Literature
American Literature
Asian Literature
Classic English Literature
World Literature
Creative Writing
Linguistics
Criminal Justice
Legal Issues
Anthropology
Archaeology
Political Science
World Affairs
African-American Studies
East European Studies
Latin-American Studies
Native-American Studies
West European Studies
Family and Consumer Science
Social Issues
Women and Gender Studies
Social Work
Natural Sciences
Pharmacology
Earth science
Agriculture
Agricultural Studies
Computer Science
IT Management
Mathematics
Investments
Engineering and Technology
Engineering
Aeronautics
Medicine and Health
Alternative Medicine
Communications and Media
Advertising
Communication Strategies
Public Relations
Educational Theories
Teacher's Career
Chicago/Turabian
Company Analysis
Education Theories
Shakespeare
Canadian Studies
Food Safety
Relation of Global Warming and Extreme Weather Condition
Movie Review
Admission Essay
Annotated Bibliography
Application Essay
Article Critique
Article Review
Article Writing
Book Review
Business Plan
Business Proposal
Capstone Project
Cover Letter
Creative Essay
Dissertation
Dissertation - Abstract
Dissertation - Conclusion
Dissertation - Discussion
Dissertation - Hypothesis
Dissertation - Introduction
Dissertation - Literature
Dissertation - Methodology
Dissertation - Results
GCSE Coursework
Grant Proposal
Marketing Plan
Multiple Choice Quiz
Personal Statement
Power Point Presentation
Power Point Presentation With Speaker Notes
Questionnaire
Reaction Paper
Research Paper
Research Proposal
SWOT analysis
Thesis Paper
Online Quiz
Literature Review
Movie Analysis
Statistics problem
Math Problem
All papers examples
How It Works
Money Back Policy
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
We Are Hiring

The Meaning of Life Through Death, Essay Example

Pages: 7

Words: 1954

Hire a Writer for Custom Essay

Use 10% Off Discount: "custom10" in 1 Click 👇

You are free to use it as an inspiration or a source for your own work.

Death is noted as the final stage of everything; the final strand that puts a person or any living creature at that to its end. The wonders of life simply make death rather ‘boring’. However, there are instances when death itself offers a new challenge that people tend to make peace with. One issue is how they would be able to survive the life before and after death. Confusing as it may, people do have an inkling on what will happen next after death; this is especially true for those who may have terminal health cases who may have not planned dying but wanted to accept it as a part of their ‘fate’ and yet are still wanting to make the best out of it. This may also be true of those who may be facing death with particular issues, a matter of being passed on by responsibilities by whosoever might die before them. These thoughts often develop fear among those involved in the situation. In the story Your Fears are Justified by Rick DeMarinis, and Survivors by Kim Addonizio, it could be understood that both assumptions about death and the worries that come along with it are all accounted for and valid to be realized by those involved in it. These short stories present life in a rather odd situation, but within a real context that define the reality of life to those who perfectly knew that their life has been cut short and that they should make a decision to make their time worthwhile before its end comes. In the discussion that follows, a focus on the theme of doubtful death shall be given attention to; addressing the doubts of the people whose lives have been presented in the stories, this analysis shall define what death does to those who know it is their time, and what changes does it actually make upon a person’s being and behavior towards life itself.

In the story Survivors by Kim Addonizio, the theme directs beyond the constraints of death. Being that the characters share a supposedly loving relationship between two males, the issue of ‘who goes first’ presents a rather crucial scenario that the survivor must be able to endure until he dies. The presentation of the situation takes the vision of one of the male partners who wishes to die first because of AIDS. His desire to die is dependent on the lack of courage to face life without his partner because of the many complications it may present him. One is that of the need to deal with the parents of his partner who would eventually become his responsibility. Although the mother may not be as adamant to the situation that he and their son is sharing, she does not approve of it either. It was also noted that the father of his partner was strictly against their ‘living situation’. The partner also has a parrot, a pet who seems to represent more than just the partner of the male individual whose vision is being presented in the story. Freedom is one theme that this story tends to explore. The parrot, being planned to be set free by the man after he partner dies implicates more than just the desire of the other individual to be alone after the other dies, it also represents the desire to be free from any responsibility; a reason why he actually wanted to die first. This fear of complications continue to linger in his mind as he wishes to go first, although it may seem that the signs are saying that his partner is clearly to ‘go’ earlier; a fact that would make it harder for him to face the last years of his life carrying the burden of taking care of his partner’s parrot and parents at the same time as he deals with his own health and gender issues.

Meanwhile, the story Your Fears are Justified by Rick DeMarinis presents a dying man with brain tumor. His case is rather terminal, a matter that specifically worries him. In the narration, it could be considered that the man has not come to settle with the situation yet. This could be observed through the beginning of the story where the patient narrates how he knew there was a bomb in the plane. His heart beat fast as if wanting to explode, and yet he tried to calmly deal with it. In a way, he knew he was dying anyway; that there was no reason to falter in the face of the particularly dangerous situation. Although he was calm, it does not mean he has already accepted his death; observably, the narration further implicates how nervous he was of the situation. Upon arriving at the hospital, he was placed beside a heart patient who was seemingly in need of a heart donor. The repetitive questioning and glancing of the couples from the other side of the bed specifically gave the narrator a distinct distaste of the situation. He did not approve of their though; as if waiting for him to die so that they can have his heart. In the end of the story, the line “ yes, there is no hope, some fuses are duds, some tumors are benign, some heart patients recover on their own…you have time to change your life ”, shows how the narrator is trying to come up with a final decision on whether or not to make his heart available for others to use as donor part for other patients. True, it might not be that easy to decide on matters such as this one. Only those who have accepted their situation and the status of their life and their health would be able to willingly offer their organs for donation. Such inconclusive acceptance of the situation poses a distinct source of fear for most individuals who know it is already time to let go; as they fight for the possibility of stretching the length of their life, it may be hard to take into account the fact that they are already dying. However, such state of mind could be achieved if a person is willing to accept that he is to leave the world and he is in need of leaving a legacy of his existence behind. Only and only because of this would the character in this story be able to come into terms with his situation and the decision he has to make about the meaning that his death is going to take.

Evidently, as seen from these particular stories, it could be understood that there are different reasons why people tend to face death with great fear. Being scared for themselves and being scared for those whom they love is a specifically valid reason for fear. As presented in the first story, one of the reasons for fearing death is the result that it may have on the loved ones that are to be left behind. The complications of life and the choices one make are supposed to end when death comes to end his life; however, this is not true for those whom they love and those whom they have shared their lives with. Relatively, the real fear over such situation involves the need of the loved ones left behind to thrive with whatever consequences of the decisions made by the dying man. After death, those decisions and choices would have a great impact on the lives of the ones he would leave behind. Relatively, this is the reason why it is important that a person thinks of others too before they actually meet with situations that questions their capacity to change things. On the other hand, other reasons for fear against death include the desire to leave a legacy; a meaning that would not only define their existence by the value that their life would have for others. For the second story noted in this discussion, it has been proven that the legacy that one leaves when he does specifically provides a great impact on how the value of his life is realized by others [whether or not they have a connection to the people they are likely to give meaning to]. The character of the second story still has a chance to change the course of his life through giving it a more meaningful value to others who might be able to use his body parts [which at some point would not have use for him after he dies]. Such a decision can only be made once he accepts that it is a rather more meaningful decision to make sure that his life would have better worth to others even after he dies. This decision is not an easy condition to accept nor make. Take into account those individuals who may be living at the peak years of their active lives when they get diagnosed with terminal health cases. It would be acceptable to note that they would experience a considerable point of disappointment; as for a fact, most individuals undergo a point of denial before they could actually take into account the reality of the situations they are subjected to. Only after getting through the point of denial would they be able to make reasonable decisions that would be able to establish more meaning to their existence even after they have died.

Overall, it could be understood that death is already a part of living. Although it may post a sense of ‘ending’ to everything, people still have different concerns regarding the need to face and accept its existence. Most of the time, understanding it, facing it and accepting its reality are three different issues that a person needs to give attention to; especially for those who seem to have no choice but to accept it. People with terminal health cases are however given a better chance to make sure that their death would have a meaningful impact on others. Depending on the stories that have been examined herein, the characters involved in each narrative are facing death as an unavoidable part of their being; a matter that cannot be stopped anymore. While this may be scary, this particular situation also provides them with a good sense of controlling matters and make sure that their death would not be the end of everything else. Preparing for the things that might come ahead provides them a good sense of control on how they are able to affect others positively. Unlike others who die abruptly, individuals who have been diagnosed with terminal cases could draw a time line in accordance with time still left for them to live to make sure that those days or years would be meaningful enough to prepare the ones they love for the instance when they are already gone. Fixing their decisions and making sure that their loved ones would not be burdened with their death is a chance given to them to make their lives more meaningful. Making sure that their lives would have better meaning through becoming organ donors is also an important aspect of preparing for death. Nevertheless, fear will always be a part of all these procedures. However, with acceptance and realization of death as a mere chance to leave a better legacy with the people they love and the people they hope to affect, people facing death would be able to face such life’s fact with a more positive attitude. Through this, death does not need to be the end of everything, but a chance to define one’s legacy, establishing the value of life that one has lived with; something that his loved ones would be able to remember with much pride and fulfillment.

Addonizio, K. Survivors. DeMarinis, R. Your Fears are Justified.

Stuck with your Essay?

Get in touch with one of our experts for instant help!

American Cancer Society, Essay Example

Constipation, Case Study Example

Time is precious

don’t waste it!

Plagiarism-free guarantee

Privacy guarantee

Secure checkout

Money back guarantee

Related Essay Samples & Examples

Voting as a civic responsibility, essay example.

Pages: 1

Words: 287

Utilitarianism and Its Applications, Essay Example

Words: 356

The Age-Related Changes of the Older Person, Essay Example

Pages: 2

Words: 448

The Problems ESOL Teachers Face, Essay Example

Pages: 8

Words: 2293

Should English Be the Primary Language? Essay Example

Pages: 4

Words: 999

The Term “Social Construction of Reality”, Essay Example

Words: 371

May 3, 2023

Contemplating Mortality: Powerful Essays on Death and Inspiring Perspectives

The prospect of death may be unsettling, but it also holds a deep fascination for many of us. If you're curious to explore the many facets of mortality, from the scientific to the spiritual, our article is the perfect place to start. With expert guidance and a wealth of inspiration, we'll help you write an essay that engages and enlightens readers on one of life's most enduring mysteries!

Death is a universal human experience that we all must face at some point in our lives. While it can be difficult to contemplate mortality, reflecting on death and loss can offer inspiring perspectives on the nature of life and the importance of living in the present moment. In this collection of powerful essays about death, we explore profound writings that delve into the human experience of coping with death, grief, acceptance, and philosophical reflections on mortality.

Through these essays, readers can gain insight into different perspectives on death and how we can cope with it. From personal accounts of loss to philosophical reflections on the meaning of life, these essays offer a diverse range of perspectives that will inspire and challenge readers to contemplate their mortality.

The Inevitable: Coping with Mortality and Grief

Mortality is a reality that we all have to face, and it is something that we cannot avoid. While we may all wish to live forever, the truth is that we will all eventually pass away. In this article, we will explore different aspects of coping with mortality and grief, including understanding the grieving process, dealing with the fear of death, finding meaning in life, and seeking support.

Understanding the Grieving Process

Grief is a natural and normal response to loss. It is a process that we all go through when we lose someone or something important to us. The grieving process can be different for each person and can take different amounts of time. Some common stages of grief include denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. It is important to remember that there is no right or wrong way to grieve and that it is a personal process.

Denial is often the first stage of grief. It is a natural response to shock and disbelief. During this stage, we may refuse to believe that our loved one has passed away or that we are facing our mortality.

Anger is a common stage of grief. It can manifest as feelings of frustration, resentment, and even rage. It is important to allow yourself to feel angry and to express your emotions healthily.

Bargaining is often the stage of grief where we try to make deals with a higher power or the universe in an attempt to avoid our grief or loss. We may make promises or ask for help in exchange for something else.

Depression is a natural response to loss. It is important to allow yourself to feel sad and to seek support from others.

Acceptance is often the final stage of grief. It is when we come to terms with our loss and begin to move forward with our lives.

Dealing with the Fear of Death

The fear of death is a natural response to the realization of our mortality. It is important to acknowledge and accept our fear of death but also to not let it control our lives. Here are some ways to deal with the fear of death:

Accepting Mortality

Accepting our mortality is an important step in dealing with the fear of death. We must understand that death is a natural part of life and that it is something that we cannot avoid.

Finding Meaning in Life

Finding meaning in life can help us cope with the fear of death. It is important to pursue activities and goals that are meaningful and fulfilling to us.

Seeking Support

Seeking support from friends, family, or a therapist can help us cope with the fear of death. Talking about our fears and feelings can help us process them and move forward.

Finding meaning in life is important in coping with mortality and grief. It can help us find purpose and fulfillment, even in difficult times. Here are some ways to find meaning in life:

Pursuing Passions

Pursuing our passions and interests can help us find meaning and purpose in life. It is important to do things that we enjoy and that give us a sense of accomplishment.

Helping Others

Helping others can give us a sense of purpose and fulfillment. It can also help us feel connected to others and make a positive impact on the world.

Making Connections

Making connections with others is important in finding meaning in life. It is important to build relationships and connections with people who share our values and interests.

Seeking support is crucial when coping with mortality and grief. Here are some ways to seek support:

Talking to Friends and Family

Talking to friends and family members can provide us with a sense of comfort and support. It is important to express our feelings and emotions to those we trust.

Joining a Support Group

Joining a support group can help us connect with others who are going through similar experiences. It can provide us with a safe space to share our feelings and find support.

Seeking Professional Help

Seeking help from a therapist or counselor can help cope with grief and mortality. A mental health professional can provide us with the tools and support we need to process our emotions and move forward.

Coping with mortality and grief is a natural part of life. It is important to understand that grief is a personal process that may take time to work through. Finding meaning in life, dealing with the fear of death, and seeking support are all important ways to cope with mortality and grief. Remember to take care of yourself, allow yourself to feel your emotions, and seek support when needed.

The Ethics of Death: A Philosophical Exploration

Death is an inevitable part of life, and it is something that we will all experience at some point. It is a topic that has fascinated philosophers for centuries, and it continues to be debated to this day. In this article, we will explore the ethics of death from a philosophical perspective, considering questions such as what it means to die, the morality of assisted suicide, and the meaning of life in the face of death.

Death is a topic that elicits a wide range of emotions, from fear and sadness to acceptance and peace. Philosophers have long been interested in exploring the ethical implications of death, and in this article, we will delve into some of the most pressing questions in this field.

What does it mean to die?

The concept of death is a complex one, and there are many different ways to approach it from a philosophical perspective. One question that arises is what it means to die. Is death simply the cessation of bodily functions, or is there something more to it than that? Many philosophers argue that death represents the end of consciousness and the self, which raises questions about the nature of the soul and the afterlife.

The morality of assisted suicide

Assisted suicide is a controversial topic, and it raises several ethical concerns. On the one hand, some argue that individuals have the right to end their own lives if they are suffering from a terminal illness or unbearable pain. On the other hand, others argue that assisting someone in taking their own life is morally wrong and violates the sanctity of life. We will explore these arguments and consider the ethical implications of assisted suicide.

The meaning of life in the face of death

The inevitability of death raises important questions about the meaning of life. If our time on earth is finite, what is the purpose of our existence? Is there a higher meaning to life, or is it simply a product of biological processes? Many philosophers have grappled with these questions, and we will explore some of the most influential theories in this field.

The role of death in shaping our lives

While death is often seen as a negative force, it can also have a positive impact on our lives. The knowledge that our time on earth is limited can motivate us to live life to the fullest and to prioritize the things that truly matter. We will explore the role of death in shaping our values, goals, and priorities, and consider how we can use this knowledge to live more fulfilling lives.

The ethics of mourning

The process of mourning is an important part of the human experience, and it raises several ethical questions. How should we respond to the death of others, and what is our ethical responsibility to those who are grieving? We will explore these questions and consider how we can support those who are mourning while also respecting their autonomy and individual experiences.

The ethics of immortality

The idea of immortality has long been a fascination for humanity, but it raises important ethical questions. If we were able to live forever, what would be the implications for our sense of self, our relationships with others, and our moral responsibilities? We will explore the ethical implications of immortality and consider how it might challenge our understanding of what it means to be human.

The ethics of death in different cultural contexts

Death is a universal human experience, but how it is understood and experienced varies across different cultures. We will explore how different cultures approach death, mourning, and the afterlife, and consider the ethical implications of these differences.

Death is a complex and multifaceted topic, and it raises important questions about the nature of life, morality, and human experience. By exploring the ethics of death from a philosophical perspective, we can gain a deeper understanding of these questions and how they shape our lives.

The Ripple Effect of Loss: How Death Impacts Relationships

Losing a loved one is one of the most challenging experiences one can go through in life. It is a universal experience that touches people of all ages, cultures, and backgrounds. The grief that follows the death of someone close can be overwhelming and can take a significant toll on an individual's mental and physical health. However, it is not only the individual who experiences the grief but also the people around them. In this article, we will discuss the ripple effect of loss and how death impacts relationships.

Understanding Grief and Loss

Grief is the natural response to loss, and it can manifest in many different ways. The process of grieving is unique to each individual and can be affected by many factors, such as culture, religion, and personal beliefs. Grief can be intense and can impact all areas of life, including relationships, work, and physical health.

The Impact of Loss on Relationships

Death can impact relationships in many ways, and the effects can be long-lasting. Below are some of how loss can affect relationships:

1. Changes in Roles and Responsibilities

When someone dies, the roles and responsibilities within a family or social circle can shift dramatically. For example, a spouse who has lost their partner may have to take on responsibilities they never had before, such as managing finances or taking care of children. This can be a difficult adjustment, and it can put a strain on the relationship.

2. Changes in Communication

Grief can make it challenging to communicate with others effectively. Some people may withdraw and isolate themselves, while others may become angry and lash out. It is essential to understand that everyone grieves differently, and there is no right or wrong way to do it. However, these changes in communication can impact relationships, and it may take time to adjust to new ways of interacting with others.

3. Changes in Emotional Connection

When someone dies, the emotional connection between individuals can change. For example, a parent who has lost a child may find it challenging to connect with other parents who still have their children. This can lead to feelings of isolation and disconnection, and it can strain relationships.

4. Changes in Social Support

Social support is critical when dealing with grief and loss. However, it is not uncommon for people to feel unsupported during this time. Friends and family may not know what to say or do, or they may simply be too overwhelmed with their grief to offer support. This lack of social support can impact relationships and make it challenging to cope with grief.

Coping with Loss and Its Impact on Relationships

Coping with grief and loss is a long and difficult process, but it is possible to find ways to manage the impact on relationships. Below are some strategies that can help:

1. Communication

Effective communication is essential when dealing with grief and loss. It is essential to talk about how you feel and what you need from others. This can help to reduce misunderstandings and make it easier to navigate changes in relationships.

2. Seek Support

It is important to seek support from friends, family, or a professional if you are struggling to cope with grief and loss. Having someone to talk to can help to alleviate feelings of isolation and provide a safe space to process emotions.

3. Self-Care

Self-care is critical when dealing with grief and loss. It is essential to take care of your physical and emotional well-being. This can include things like exercise, eating well, and engaging in activities that you enjoy.

4. Allow for Flexibility

It is essential to allow for flexibility in relationships when dealing with grief and loss. People may not be able to provide the same level of support they once did or may need more support than they did before. Being open to changes in roles and responsibilities can help to reduce strain on relationships.

5. Find Meaning

Finding meaning in the loss can be a powerful way to cope with grief and loss. This can involve creating a memorial, participating in a support group, or volunteering for a cause that is meaningful to you.

The impact of loss is not limited to the individual who experiences it but extends to those around them as well. Relationships can be greatly impacted by the death of a loved one, and it is important to be aware of the changes that may occur. Coping with loss and its impact on relationships involves effective communication, seeking support, self-care, flexibility, and finding meaning.

What Lies Beyond Reflections on the Mystery of Death

Death is an inevitable part of life, and yet it remains one of the greatest mysteries that we face as humans. What happens when we die? Is there an afterlife? These are questions that have puzzled us for centuries, and they continue to do so today. In this article, we will explore the various perspectives on death and what lies beyond.

Understanding Death

Before we can delve into what lies beyond, we must first understand what death is. Death is defined as the permanent cessation of all biological functions that sustain a living organism. This can occur as a result of illness, injury, or simply old age. Death is a natural process that occurs to all living things, but it is also a process that is often accompanied by fear and uncertainty.

The Physical Process of Death

When a person dies, their body undergoes several physical changes. The heart stops beating, and the body begins to cool and stiffen. This is known as rigor mortis, and it typically sets in within 2-6 hours after death. The body also begins to break down, and this can lead to a release of gases that cause bloating and discoloration.

The Psychological Experience of Death

In addition to the physical changes that occur during and after death, there is also a psychological experience that accompanies it. Many people report feeling a sense of detachment from their physical body, as well as a sense of peace and calm. Others report seeing bright lights or visions of loved ones who have already passed on.

Perspectives on What Lies Beyond

There are many different perspectives on what lies beyond death. Some people believe in an afterlife, while others believe in reincarnation or simply that death is the end of consciousness. Let's explore some of these perspectives in more detail.

One of the most common beliefs about what lies beyond death is the idea of an afterlife. This can take many forms, depending on one's religious or spiritual beliefs. For example, many Christians believe in heaven and hell, where people go after they die depending on their actions during life. Muslims believe in paradise and hellfire, while Hindus believe in reincarnation.

Reincarnation

Reincarnation is the belief that after we die, our consciousness is reborn into a new body. This can be based on karma, meaning that the quality of one's past actions will determine the quality of their next life. Some people believe that we can choose the circumstances of our next life based on our desires and attachments in this life.

End of Consciousness

The idea that death is simply the end of consciousness is a common belief among atheists and materialists. This view holds that the brain is responsible for creating consciousness, and when the brain dies, consciousness ceases to exist. While this view may be comforting to some, others find it unsettling.

Death is a complex and mysterious phenomenon that continues to fascinate us. While we may never fully understand what lies beyond death, it's important to remember that everyone has their own beliefs and perspectives on the matter. Whether you believe in an afterlife, reincarnation, or simply the end of consciousness, it's important to find ways to cope with the loss of a loved one and to find peace with your mortality.

Final Words

In conclusion, these powerful essays on death offer inspiring perspectives and deep insights into the human experience of coping with mortality, grief, and loss. From personal accounts to philosophical reflections, these essays provide a diverse range of perspectives that encourage readers to contemplate their mortality and the meaning of life.

By reading and reflecting on these essays, readers can gain a better understanding of how death shapes our lives and relationships, and how we can learn to accept and cope with this inevitable part of the human experience.

If you're looking for a tool to help you write articles, essays, product descriptions, and more, Jenni.ai could be just what you need. With its AI-powered features, Jenni can help you write faster and more efficiently, saving you time and effort. Whether you're a student writing an essay or a professional writer crafting a blog post, Jenni's autocomplete feature, customized styles, and in-text citations can help you produce high-quality content in no time. Don't miss out on the opportunity to supercharge your next research paper or writing project – sign up for Jenni.ai today and start writing with confidence!

Try Jenni for free today

Create your first piece of content with Jenni today and never look back

DOI: 10.2307/2803686
Corpus ID: 143220149

On the meaning of death : essays on mortuary rituals and eschatological beliefs

S. Cederroth , C. Corlin , Jan Lindström
Published 1 December 1990

19 Citations

Being in relation: a critical appraisal of religious diversity and mission encounter in madagascar, establishment of electric crematorium in nepal: continuity, changes and challenges, seals, craft, and community in bronze age crete, fetal personhood in the christian philippines: the view from a visayan island, cremation in norway: regulation, changes and challenges, formes des tombeaux et processus sociaux dans les cimetières brésiliens, formas tumulares e processos sociais nos cemitérios brasileiros, a 'good death': rustenburg miners dying from hiv/aids, dealing with the dead patient at the intensive care unit, making children, making chiefs: gender, power and ritual legitimacy, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Skip to main content
Skip to secondary menu
Skip to primary sidebar
Skip to footer

A Plus Topper

Improve your Grades

Essay about Death | Death Essay for Students and Children in English

February 7, 2024 by Prasanna

Essay about Death: We shall all die. I am trying not to be prophetically catastrophic or something in my passing exposition; it is basically an articulation of truth. Each living will die over the long haul.

There is plenty of conceivable outcomes to delay demise. A man may live twenty years or a hundred years; however, no man can live, for instance, 200 years. Hence, passing is predictable for us all, and there is no way around it.

You can also find more Essay Writing articles on events, persons, sports, technology and many more.

Long and Short Essays on Death for Students and Kids in English

We provide students with essay samples on a long essay of 500 words and a short essay of 150 words on the topic of death for reference.

Long Essay on Death 500 Words in English

Long Essay on Death is usually given to classes 7, 8, 9, and 10.

We are largely mindful of death, and we know it will come to us, every one of us. To a significant number of us passing cuts a chill down our spine ridden with dread, however to others it is ridden with quality and fulfilment of achievement. Luckily or tragically, we are completely sentenced to death. But there is an interesting thing; we don’t have the knowledge of how the inevitable will strike to have a conversation. Not just how we don’t even have a clue on where and when it will happen. We just know this is inescapable.

The most ordinarily showed system for understanding the way toward lamenting and getting ready for death is the DABDA model. It states that that person who is dying will progress through five stages. The stages are denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and pain, and acceptance. The DABDA stages are based on a theory of a Swiss psychologist Elisabeth Kubler-Ross. Researchers of the University of Michigan founded that, It is true that the brain is capable of acting for some time after we die. In that time brain shows a flashback of life in a dramatic scene to the person. But it differs man to man. Some people see a ray of light. Some people see a spiritual scene. That is controversial over the world.

Actually, we are all afraid of the loss of life for a proper reason, for it helps us continue to be alive. Who knows, perhaps if we weren’t afraid to die, we would be all too keen to do it in case of little problems like that.

We know death is a predictable thing, but still, when your loved one passes away, you will be broken naturally. In that time, the person needs to cry out loud to express the misery. We need to gather support to cop up the situation. We can feel good remembering the good cherished memories. And in the end, we have to embrace the present situation of life. Otherwise, life will be difficult to lead.

From a survey of 2017, we state that around 150,000 people die per day worldwide. Most of them know they are at the end of their lives. But here I want to share a myth about death. The myth I want to introduce, actually is not a myth. You can say it’s empathy or condolence for that person. The myth says positive thoughts can delay nearly came death. But It doesn’t affect. The development of explicit feelings doesn’t change the way that demise is a natural cycle, achieved by a mishap, or sickness measures that have arrived at a final turning point.

Our worldwide philosophy and religious views help us to lead a good life. That all philosophical facts of life start with Karma. And It stays with the soul afterlife. Philosophy says a soul never dies and takes birth with a new body and identity. We couldn’t find any logical fact about death, afterlife. But we can state that death is an entire genre of mystery.

Short Essay on Death 150 Words in English

Short Essay on Death is usually given to classes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6.

Everyone dies one day: is a popular dialogue of Game of Thrones TV series. And this is true. We know each living will die after the long race.

The most ordinarily showed system for understanding the way toward lamenting and getting ready for death is the DABDA model. It shows five stages of the dying process: denial, anger, bargaining, depression and pain and acceptance.

We all know death is inevitable. But when it comes about our loved one, we can’t control ourselves most of the time. But still, we need to embrace our life. And if we can’t cop up, we should have a consultation with a psychologist. Some people are afraid of death. It is called Thanatophobia, and it can be cured with love and faith.

According to Philosophy, Soul doesn’t have any end. And there are many souls which are commonly linked by DNA or any other factors. Sometimes they have the previous memory. And then the process is called transmigration. There are so many transmigration cases all over the world.

We don’t have any proper logic and information about the afterlife, transmigration and death. But after all these discussions we must say that death is a hell of a mystery.

10 Lines on Death Essay in English

1. Death is the permanent cessation of all biological features that sustain a living organism. 2. One of the main obvious indications of death is the point at which the eyes cover over, as liquid and oxygen quit streaming to the corneas. 3. Most of the time, the brain shows a flashback of life to the dying person before dying. 4. Thanatophobia is called as the fear of death. 5. People need to consult a psychologist if the death fear is getting worse. 6. When Thomas Edison died in 1941, Henry Ford captured his dying breath in a bottle. 7. According to philosophy, A soul never dies. 8. If a soul remembers his past life memory, it will be called transmigration. 9. Scientists said the DNA or any factor links all souls of all over the world. 10. Nearly 150,000 people die per day worldwide.

FAQ’s on Death Essay

Question 1. Does Dying hurt?

Answer: Pain is not an expected part of the dying process. In fact, some people experience no pain while dying. If someone’s particular condition does produce any pain, however, it can be managed by prescribed medications.

Question 2. What is the first stage of dying?

Answer: The first stage is shock and denial. This is a state of disbelief and numbed feelings.

Question 3. What happens after death?

Answer: The afterlife is a presence some accept that the basic piece of a person’s character or their continuous flow keeps on having after the passing of their actual body.

Question 4. How many people die each day?

Answer: Nearly 150,000 people die per day worldwide.

Picture Dictionary
English Speech
English Slogans
English Letter Writing
English Essay Writing
English Textbook Answers
Types of Certificates
ICSE Solutions
Selina ICSE Solutions
ML Aggarwal Solutions
HSSLive Plus One
HSSLive Plus Two
Kerala SSLC
Distance Education

Share full article

Supported by

student opinion

How Do You View Death?

Does thinking about your own mortality make you appreciate life? Or does the thought fill you with dread?

By Nicole Daniels

Note to Teachers: We don’t often take on the subject of death, but with the world experiencing a devastating pandemic, we thought this article might help students think about their own understanding of mortality.

This past year has been filled with death: More than 300,000 people in the United States and 1.6 million worldwide have died from the coronavirus.

Has the pandemic changed your understanding of death and dying? Have you had to grieve the death of a loved one? Has it made you consider your own mortality more? Has it made you appreciate the impermanence of life? Or have the staggering numbers made you feel numb?

In “ What Is Death? ,” Dr. BJ Miller writes about how the coronavirus pandemic has transformed our understanding of mortality and offers several frameworks for thinking about death:

This year has awakened us to the fact that we die. We’ve always known it to be true in a technical sense, but a pandemic demands that we internalize this understanding. It’s one thing to acknowledge the deaths of others, and another to accept our own. It’s not just emotionally taxing; it is difficult even to conceive. To do this means to imagine it, reckon with it and, most important, personalize it. Your life. Your death. Covid-19’s daily death and hospitalization tallies read like ticker tape or the weather report. This week, the death toll passed 300,000 in the United States. Worldwide, it’s more than 1.6 million. The cumulative effect is shock fatigue or numbness, but instead of turning away, we need to fold death into our lives. We really have only two choices: to share life with death or to be robbed by death. Fight, flight or freeze. This is how we animals are wired to respond to anything that threatens our existence. We haven’t evolved — morally or socially — to deal with a health care system with technological powers that verge on godly. Dying is no longer so intuitive as it once was, nor is death necessarily the great equalizer. Modern medicine can subvert nature’s course in many ways, at least for a while. But you have to have access to health care for health care to work. And eventually, whether because of this virus or something else, whether you’re young or old, rich or poor, death still comes. What is death? I’ve thought a lot about the question, though it took me many years of practicing medicine even to realize that I needed to ask it. Like almost anyone, I figured death was a simple fact, a singular event. A noun. Obnoxious, but clearer in its borders than just about anything else. The End. In fact, no matter how many times I’ve sidled up to it, or how many words I’ve tried on, I still can’t say what it is. If we strip away the poetry and appliqué our culture uses to try to make sense of death — all the sanctity and style we impose on the wild, holy trip of a life that begins, rises and falls apart — we are left with a husk of a body. No pulse, no brain waves, no inspiration, no explanation. Death is defined by what it lacks.

The essay continues:

Beyond fear and isolation, maybe this is what the pandemic holds for us: the understanding that living in the face of death can set off a cascade of realization and appreciation. Death is the force that shows you what you love and urges you to revel in that love while the clock ticks. Reveling in love is one sure way to see through and beyond yourself to the wider world, where immortality lives. A pretty brilliant system, really, showing you who you are (limited) and all that you’re a part of (vast). As a connecting force, love makes a person much more resistant to obliteration. You might have to loosen your need to know what lies ahead. Rather than spend so much energy keeping pain at bay, you might want to suspend your judgment and let your body do what a body does. If the past, present and future come together, as we sense they must, then death is a process of becoming. So, once more, what is death? If you’re reading this, you still have time to respond. Since there’s no known right answer, you can’t get it wrong. You can even make your life the answer to the question.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber? Log in .

Want all of The Times? Subscribe .

Essay on Death

Essay generator.

Death, a topic often shrouded in fear and mystery, is an inevitable part of the human experience. It is the ultimate destiny of every living creature, a natural process that marks the end of life’s journey. This essay seeks to explore the multifaceted nature of death, examining its significance, cultural perceptions, and the impact it has on the living.

At its core, death is the cessation of all biological functions that sustain a living organism. It is the final chapter in the natural cycle of life, following birth and growth. Despite its universality, the concept of death evokes a wide range of emotions and reactions, from fear and sadness to acceptance and peace. This disparity in reactions stems from individual beliefs, cultural backgrounds, and personal experiences with loss.

The Fear of Death

The fear of death, or thanatophobia, is a common human experience. This fear often arises from the unknown aspects of death, the finality it represents, and the separation it causes from loved ones. For many, the thought of death is unsettling because it confronts us with the limits of our existence and the uncertainty of what, if anything, comes after.

Cultural Perceptions of Death

Cultural perceptions of death vary widely across the globe, deeply influenced by religious beliefs, traditions, and societal norms. In some cultures, death is seen as a transition to another existence or a return to the earth’s natural cycle. For instance, Hinduism views death as a part of the soul’s journey toward liberation, while many Western societies tend to view death as an end, often associated with mourning and loss.

The Impact of Death on the Living

Grief and Mourning: Grief is the natural emotional response to the loss of a loved one. It encompasses a range of emotions, including sadness, anger, guilt, and disbelief. Mourning is the process through which individuals express and work through their grief.
Psychological Impact: The death of a loved one can lead to various psychological effects, such as depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Coping with the loss often involves adapting to a new reality without the deceased person.
Physical Health: Grief and emotional distress can have physical manifestations, including sleep disturbances, appetite changes, and somatic symptoms. Prolonged grief may also weaken the immune system, potentially leading to health issues.
Social Isolation: Grief can make individuals withdraw from social interactions, leading to feelings of loneliness and isolation. The bereaved may struggle to relate to others who have not experienced a similar loss.
Spiritual and Existential Reflection: Many people grapple with questions of faith, spirituality, and the meaning of life in the face of death. The search for understanding and comfort in spiritual or philosophical beliefs can be a significant part of the grieving process.
Financial and Practical Consequences: Death often comes with practical challenges, such as handling the deceased person’s estate, funeral expenses, and financial adjustments for the surviving family members.
Long-Term Effects: The impact of death can be enduring, with the loss continuing to affect individuals years or even decades later. Anniversaries, holidays, and life milestones may trigger renewed grief.

Philosophical Perspectives on Death

Philosophers throughout history have pondered the nature of death and its implications for living a meaningful life. Socrates, for example, viewed death as a release from the body, allowing the soul to reach a higher state of knowledge and purity. In contrast, existential philosophers like Jean-Paul Sartre and Martin Heidegger explored the idea that the inevitability of death gives life its urgency and significance, urging individuals to live authentically and fully.

The Role of Death in Literature and Art

Death has been a central theme in literature and art for centuries, serving as a source of inspiration, contemplation, and expression. Through stories, poems, paintings, and films, artists have explored the complexities of death, the grieving process, and the search for meaning in the face of mortality. These artistic expressions offer solace, understanding, and sometimes, a celebration of life’s transient beauty.

Coping with the Loss of a Loved One

Coping with the death of a loved one is a deeply personal journey that can vary significantly from person to person. Support from family, friends, and community, as well as professional counseling, can provide comfort and aid in the healing process. Engaging in rituals, such as funerals and memorial services, allows individuals to honor their loved ones, express their grief, and begin the process of moving forward.

The Importance of Discussing Death

Despite its inevitability, death is often considered a taboo subject in many societies. However, open discussions about death can demystify it, helping individuals prepare for their own mortality and the loss of others. Conversations about end-of-life wishes, wills, and funeral plans can ensure that individuals’ preferences are respected and can alleviate some of the burdens on grieving families.

Death and the Search for Meaning

The contemplation of death often leads individuals to seek meaning and purpose in their lives. It prompts questions about the legacy one wishes to leave behind and the values that guide one’s existence. Many find solace in the belief that their actions and relationships can transcend their physical presence, living on in the memories and lives of others.

In conclusion, Death, while a natural and inevitable part of life, remains one of the most profound mysteries of human existence. It challenges us to confront our fears, explore our beliefs, and reflect on the meaning of life. By acknowledging and discussing death, we can learn to appreciate the preciousness of life, strengthen our relationships, and live with greater purpose and authenticity. As we navigate the complexities of death, we find that in its shadow, the beauty and fragility of life are illuminated, urging us to cherish every moment and leave a lasting impact on the world around us.

Text prompt

Instructive
Professional

Generate an essay on the importance of extracurricular activities for student development

Write an essay discussing the role of technology in modern education.

Table of Contents
Random Entry
Chronological
Editorial Information
About the SEP
Editorial Board
How to Cite the SEP
Special Characters
Advanced Tools
Support the SEP
PDFs for SEP Friends
Make a Donation
SEPIA for Libraries
Entry Contents

Bibliography

Academic tools.

Friends PDF Preview
Author and Citation Info
Back to Top

The Meaning of Life

Many major historical figures in philosophy have provided an answer to the question of what, if anything, makes life meaningful, although they typically have not put it in these terms (with such talk having arisen only in the past 250 years or so, on which see Landau 1997). Consider, for instance, Aristotle on the human function, Aquinas on the beatific vision, and Kant on the highest good. Relatedly, think about Koheleth, the presumed author of the Biblical book Ecclesiastes, describing life as “futility” and akin to “the pursuit of wind,” Nietzsche on nihilism, as well as Schopenhauer when he remarks that whenever we reach a goal we have longed for we discover “how vain and empty it is.” While these concepts have some bearing on happiness and virtue (and their opposites), they are straightforwardly construed (roughly) as accounts of which highly ranked purposes a person ought to realize that would make her life significant (if any would).

Despite the venerable pedigree, it is only since the 1980s or so that a distinct field of the meaning of life has been established in Anglo-American-Australasian philosophy, on which this survey focuses, and it is only in the past 20 years that debate with real depth and intricacy has appeared. Two decades ago analytic reflection on life’s meaning was described as a “backwater” compared to that on well-being or good character, and it was possible to cite nearly all the literature in a given critical discussion of the field (Metz 2002). Neither is true any longer. Anglo-American-Australasian philosophy of life’s meaning has become vibrant, such that there is now way too much literature to be able to cite comprehensively in this survey. To obtain focus, it tends to discuss books, influential essays, and more recent works, and it leaves aside contributions from other philosophical traditions (such as the Continental or African) and from non-philosophical fields (e.g., psychology or literature). This survey’s central aim is to acquaint the reader with current analytic approaches to life’s meaning, sketching major debates and pointing out neglected topics that merit further consideration.

When the topic of the meaning of life comes up, people tend to pose one of three questions: “What are you talking about?”, “What is the meaning of life?”, and “Is life in fact meaningful?”. The literature on life's meaning composed by those working in the analytic tradition (on which this entry focuses) can be usefully organized according to which question it seeks to answer. This survey starts off with recent work that addresses the first, abstract (or “meta”) question regarding the sense of talk of “life’s meaning,” i.e., that aims to clarify what we have in mind when inquiring into the meaning of life (section 1). Afterward, it considers texts that provide answers to the more substantive question about the nature of meaningfulness (sections 2–3). There is in the making a sub-field of applied meaning that parallels applied ethics, in which meaningfulness is considered in the context of particular cases or specific themes. Examples include downshifting (Levy 2005), implementing genetic enhancements (Agar 2013), making achievements (Bradford 2015), getting an education (Schinkel et al. 2015), interacting with research participants (Olson 2016), automating labor (Danaher 2017), and creating children (Ferracioli 2018). In contrast, this survey focuses nearly exclusively on contemporary normative-theoretical approaches to life’s meanining, that is, attempts to capture in a single, general principle all the variegated conditions that could confer meaning on life. Finally, this survey examines fresh arguments for the nihilist view that the conditions necessary for a meaningful life do not obtain for any of us, i.e., that all our lives are meaningless (section 4).

1. The Meaning of “Meaning”

2.1. god-centered views, 2.2. soul-centered views, 3.1. subjectivism, 3.2. objectivism, 3.3. rejecting god and a soul, 4. nihilism, works cited, classic works, collections, books for the general reader, other internet resources, related entries.

One of the field's aims consists of the systematic attempt to identify what people (essentially or characteristically) have in mind when they think about the topic of life’s meaning. For many in the field, terms such as “importance” and “significance” are synonyms of “meaningfulness” and so are insufficiently revealing, but there are those who draw a distinction between meaningfulness and significance (Singer 1996, 112–18; Belliotti 2019, 145–50, 186). There is also debate about how the concept of a meaningless life relates to the ideas of a life that is absurd (Nagel 1970, 1986, 214–23; Feinberg 1980; Belliotti 2019), futile (Trisel 2002), and not worth living (Landau 2017, 12–15; Matheson 2017).

A useful way to begin to get clear about what thinking about life’s meaning involves is to specify the bearer. Which life does the inquirer have in mind? A standard distinction to draw is between the meaning “in” life, where a human person is what can exhibit meaning, and the meaning “of” life in a narrow sense, where the human species as a whole is what can be meaningful or not. There has also been a bit of recent consideration of whether animals or human infants can have meaning in their lives, with most rejecting that possibility (e.g., Wong 2008, 131, 147; Fischer 2019, 1–24), but a handful of others beginning to make a case for it (Purves and Delon 2018; Thomas 2018). Also under-explored is the issue of whether groups, such as a people or an organization, can be bearers of meaning, and, if so, under what conditions.

Most analytic philosophers have been interested in meaning in life, that is, in the meaningfulness that a person’s life could exhibit, with comparatively few these days addressing the meaning of life in the narrow sense. Even those who believe that God is or would be central to life’s meaning have lately addressed how an individual’s life might be meaningful in virtue of God more often than how the human race might be. Although some have argued that the meaningfulness of human life as such merits inquiry to no less a degree (if not more) than the meaning in a life (Seachris 2013; Tartaglia 2015; cf. Trisel 2016), a large majority of the field has instead been interested in whether their lives as individual persons (and the lives of those they care about) are meaningful and how they could become more so.

Focusing on meaning in life, it is quite common to maintain that it is conceptually something good for its own sake or, relatedly, something that provides a basic reason for action (on which see Visak 2017). There are a few who have recently suggested otherwise, maintaining that there can be neutral or even undesirable kinds of meaning in a person’s life (e.g., Mawson 2016, 90, 193; Thomas 2018, 291, 294). However, these are outliers, with most analytic philosophers, and presumably laypeople, instead wanting to know when an individual’s life exhibits a certain kind of final value (or non-instrumental reason for action).

Another claim about which there is substantial consensus is that meaningfulness is not all or nothing and instead comes in degrees, such that some periods of life are more meaningful than others and that some lives as a whole are more meaningful than others. Note that one can coherently hold the view that some people’s lives are less meaningful (or even in a certain sense less “important”) than others, or are even meaningless (unimportant), and still maintain that people have an equal standing from a moral point of view. Consider a consequentialist moral principle according to which each individual counts for one in virtue of having a capacity for a meaningful life, or a Kantian approach according to which all people have a dignity in virtue of their capacity for autonomous decision-making, where meaning is a function of the exercise of this capacity. For both moral outlooks, we could be required to help people with relatively meaningless lives.

Yet another relatively uncontroversial element of the concept of meaningfulness in respect of individual persons is that it is logically distinct from happiness or rightness (emphasized in Wolf 2010, 2016). First, to ask whether someone’s life is meaningful is not one and the same as asking whether her life is pleasant or she is subjectively well off. A life in an experience machine or virtual reality device would surely be a happy one, but very few take it to be a prima facie candidate for meaningfulness (Nozick 1974: 42–45). Indeed, a number would say that one’s life logically could become meaningful precisely by sacrificing one’s well-being, e.g., by helping others at the expense of one’s self-interest. Second, asking whether a person’s existence over time is meaningful is not identical to considering whether she has been morally upright; there are intuitively ways to enhance meaning that have nothing to do with right action or moral virtue, such as making a scientific discovery or becoming an excellent dancer. Now, one might argue that a life would be meaningless if, or even because, it were unhappy or immoral, but that would be to posit a synthetic, substantive relationship between the concepts, far from indicating that speaking of “meaningfulness” is analytically a matter of connoting ideas regarding happiness or rightness. The question of what (if anything) makes a person’s life meaningful is conceptually distinct from the questions of what makes a life happy or moral, although it could turn out that the best answer to the former question appeals to an answer to one of the latter questions.

Supposing, then, that talk of “meaning in life” connotes something good for its own sake that can come in degrees and that is not analytically equivalent to happiness or rightness, what else does it involve? What more can we say about this final value, by definition? Most contemporary analytic philosophers would say that the relevant value is absent from spending time in an experience machine (but see Goetz 2012 for a different view) or living akin to Sisyphus, the mythic figure doomed by the Greek gods to roll a stone up a hill for eternity (famously discussed by Albert Camus and Taylor 1970). In addition, many would say that the relevant value is typified by the classic triad of “the good, the true, and the beautiful” (or would be under certain conditions). These terms are not to be taken literally, but instead are rough catchwords for beneficent relationships (love, collegiality, morality), intellectual reflection (wisdom, education, discoveries), and creativity (particularly the arts, but also potentially things like humor or gardening).

Pressing further, is there something that the values of the good, the true, the beautiful, and any other logically possible sources of meaning involve? There is as yet no consensus in the field. One salient view is that the concept of meaning in life is a cluster or amalgam of overlapping ideas, such as fulfilling higher-order purposes, meriting substantial esteem or admiration, having a noteworthy impact, transcending one’s animal nature, making sense, or exhibiting a compelling life-story (Markus 2003; Thomson 2003; Metz 2013, 24–35; Seachris 2013, 3–4; Mawson 2016). However, there are philosophers who maintain that something much more monistic is true of the concept, so that (nearly) all thought about meaningfulness in a person’s life is essentially about a single property. Suggestions include being devoted to or in awe of qualitatively superior goods (Taylor 1989, 3–24), transcending one’s limits (Levy 2005), or making a contribution (Martela 2016).

Recently there has been something of an “interpretive turn” in the field, one instance of which is the strong view that meaning-talk is logically about whether and how a life is intelligible within a wider frame of reference (Goldman 2018, 116–29; Seachris 2019; Thomas 2019; cf. Repp 2018). According to this approach, inquiring into life’s meaning is nothing other than seeking out sense-making information, perhaps a narrative about life or an explanation of its source and destiny. This analysis has the advantage of promising to unify a wide array of uses of the term “meaning.” However, it has the disadvantages of being unable to capture the intuitions that meaning in life is essentially good for its own sake (Landau 2017, 12–15), that it is not logically contradictory to maintain that an ineffable condition is what confers meaning on life (as per Cooper 2003, 126–42; Bennett-Hunter 2014; Waghorn 2014), and that often human actions themselves (as distinct from an interpretation of them), such as rescuing a child from a burning building, are what bear meaning.

Some thinkers have suggested that a complete analysis of the concept of life’s meaning should include what has been called “anti-matter” (Metz 2002, 805–07, 2013, 63–65, 71–73) or “anti-meaning” (Campbell and Nyholm 2015; Egerstrom 2015), conditions that reduce the meaningfulness of a life. The thought is that meaning is well represented by a bipolar scale, where there is a dimension of not merely positive conditions, but also negative ones. Gratuitous cruelty or destructiveness are prima facie candidates for actions that not merely fail to add meaning, but also subtract from any meaning one’s life might have had.

Despite the ongoing debates about how to analyze the concept of life’s meaning (or articulate the definition of the phrase “meaning in life”), the field remains in a good position to make progress on the other key questions posed above, viz., of what would make a life meaningful and whether any lives are in fact meaningful. A certain amount of common ground is provided by the point that meaningfulness at least involves a gradient final value in a person’s life that is conceptually distinct from happiness and rightness, with exemplars of it potentially being the good, the true, and the beautiful. The rest of this discussion addresses philosophical attempts to capture the nature of this value theoretically and to ascertain whether it exists in at least some of our lives.

2. Supernaturalism

Most analytic philosophers writing on meaning in life have been trying to develop and evaluate theories, i.e., fundamental and general principles, that are meant to capture all the particular ways that a life could obtain meaning. As in moral philosophy, there are recognizable “anti-theorists,” i.e., those who maintain that there is too much pluralism among meaning conditions to be able to unify them in the form of a principle (e.g., Kekes 2000; Hosseini 2015). Arguably, though, the systematic search for unity is too nascent to be able to draw a firm conclusion about whether it is available.

The theories are standardly divided on a metaphysical basis, that is, in terms of which kinds of properties are held to constitute the meaning. Supernaturalist theories are views according to which a spiritual realm is central to meaning in life. Most Western philosophers have conceived of the spiritual in terms of God or a soul as commonly understood in the Abrahamic faiths (but see Mulgan 2015 for discussion of meaning in the context of a God uninterested in us). In contrast, naturalist theories are views that the physical world as known particularly well by the scientific method is central to life’s meaning.

There is logical space for a non-naturalist theory, according to which central to meaning is an abstract property that is neither spiritual nor physical. However, only scant attention has been paid to this possibility in the recent Anglo-American-Australasian literature (Audi 2005).

It is important to note that supernaturalism, a claim that God (or a soul) would confer meaning on a life, is logically distinct from theism, the claim that God (or a soul) exists. Although most who hold supernaturalism also hold theism, one could accept the former without the latter (as Camus more or less did), committing one to the view that life is meaningless or at least lacks substantial meaning. Similarly, while most naturalists are atheists, it is not contradictory to maintain that God exists but has nothing to do with meaning in life or perhaps even detracts from it. Although these combinations of positions are logically possible, some of them might be substantively implausible. The field could benefit from discussion of the comparative attractiveness of various combinations of evaluative claims about what would make life meaningful and metaphysical claims about whether spiritual conditions exist.

Over the past 15 years or so, two different types of supernaturalism have become distinguished on a regular basis (Metz 2019). That is true not only in the literature on life’s meaning, but also in that on the related pro-theism/anti-theism debate, about whether it would be desirable for God or a soul to exist (e.g., Kahane 2011; Kraay 2018; Lougheed 2020). On the one hand, there is extreme supernaturalism, according to which spiritual conditions are necessary for any meaning in life. If neither God nor a soul exists, then, by this view, everyone’s life is meaningless. On the other hand, there is moderate supernaturalism, according to which spiritual conditions are necessary for a great or ultimate meaning in life, although not meaning in life as such. If neither God nor a soul exists, then, by this view, everyone’s life could have some meaning, or even be meaningful, but no one’s life could exhibit the most desirable meaning. For a moderate supernaturalist, God or a soul would substantially enhance meaningfulness or be a major contributory condition for it.

There are a variety of ways that great or ultimate meaning has been described, sometimes quantitatively as “infinite” (Mawson 2016), qualitatively as “deeper” (Swinburne 2016), relationally as “unlimited” (Nozick 1981, 618–19; cf. Waghorn 2014), temporally as “eternal” (Cottingham 2016), and perspectivally as “from the point of view of the universe” (Benatar 2017). There has been no reflection as yet on the crucial question of how these distinctions might bear on each another, for instance, on whether some are more basic than others or some are more valuable than others.

Cross-cutting the extreme/moderate distinction is one between God-centered theories and soul-centered ones. According to the former, some kind of connection with God (understood to be a spiritual person who is all-knowing, all-good, and all-powerful and who is the ground of the physical universe) constitutes meaning in life, even if one lacks a soul (construed as an immortal, spiritual substance that contains one’s identity). In contrast, by the latter, having a soul and putting it into a certain state is what makes life meaningful, even if God does not exist. Many supernaturalists of course believe that God and a soul are jointly necessary for a (greatly) meaningful existence. However, the simpler view, that only one of them is necessary, is common, and sometimes arguments proffered for the complex view fail to support it any more than the simpler one.

The most influential God-based account of meaning in life has been the extreme view that one’s existence is significant if and only if one fulfills a purpose God has assigned. The familiar idea is that God has a plan for the universe and that one’s life is meaningful just to the degree that one helps God realize this plan, perhaps in a particular way that God wants one to do so. If a person failed to do what God intends her to do with her life (or if God does not even exist), then, on the current view, her life would be meaningless.

Thinkers differ over what it is about God’s purpose that might make it uniquely able to confer meaning on human lives, but the most influential argument has been that only God’s purpose could be the source of invariant moral rules (Davis 1987, 296, 304–05; Moreland 1987, 124–29; Craig 1994/2013, 161–67) or of objective values more generally (Cottingham 2005, 37–57), where a lack of such would render our lives nonsensical. According to this argument, lower goods such as animal pleasure or desire satisfaction could exist without God, but higher ones pertaining to meaning in life, particularly moral virtue, could not. However, critics point to many non-moral sources of meaning in life (e.g., Kekes 2000; Wolf 2010), with one arguing that a universal moral code is not necessary for meaning in life, even if, say, beneficent actions are (Ellin 1995, 327). In addition, there are a variety of naturalist and non-naturalist accounts of objective morality––and of value more generally––on offer these days, so that it is not clear that it must have a supernatural source in God’s will.

One recurrent objection to the idea that God’s purpose could make life meaningful is that if God had created us with a purpose in mind, then God would have degraded us and thereby undercut the possibility of us obtaining meaning from fulfilling the purpose. The objection harks back to Jean-Paul Sartre, but in the analytic literature it appears that Kurt Baier was the first to articulate it (1957/2000, 118–20; see also Murphy 1982, 14–15; Singer 1996, 29; Kahane 2011; Lougheed 2020, 121–41). Sometimes the concern is the threat of punishment God would make so that we do God’s bidding, while other times it is that the source of meaning would be constrictive and not up to us, and still other times it is that our dignity would be maligned simply by having been created with a certain end in mind (for some replies to such concerns, see Hanfling 1987, 45–46; Cottingham 2005, 37–57; Lougheed 2020, 111–21).

There is a different argument for an extreme God-based view that focuses less on God as purposive and more on God as infinite, unlimited, or ineffable, which Robert Nozick first articulated with care (Nozick 1981, 594–618; see also Bennett-Hunter 2014; Waghorn 2014). The core idea is that for a finite condition to be meaningful, it must obtain its meaning from another condition that has meaning. So, if one’s life is meaningful, it might be so in virtue of being married to a person, who is important. Being finite, the spouse must obtain his or her importance from elsewhere, perhaps from the sort of work he or she does. This work also must obtain its meaning by being related to something else that is meaningful, and so on. A regress on meaningful conditions is present, and the suggestion is that the regress can terminate only in something so all-encompassing that it need not (indeed, cannot) go beyond itself to obtain meaning from anything else. And that is God. The standard objection to this relational rationale is that a finite condition could be meaningful without obtaining its meaning from another meaningful condition. Perhaps it could be meaningful in itself, without being connected to something beyond it, or maybe it could obtain its meaning by being related to something else that is beautiful or otherwise valuable for its own sake but not meaningful (Nozick 1989, 167–68; Thomson 2003, 25–26, 48).

A serious concern for any extreme God-based view is the existence of apparent counterexamples. If we think of the stereotypical lives of Albert Einstein, Mother Teresa, and Pablo Picasso, they seem meaningful even if we suppose there is no all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-good spiritual person who is the ground of the physical world (e.g., Wielenberg 2005, 31–37, 49–50; Landau 2017). Even religiously inclined philosophers have found this hard to deny these days (Quinn 2000, 58; Audi 2005; Mawson 2016, 5; Williams 2020, 132–34).

Largely for that reason, contemporary supernaturalists have tended to opt for moderation, that is, to maintain that God would greatly enhance the meaning in our lives, even if some meaning would be possible in a world without God. One approach is to invoke the relational argument to show that God is necessary, not for any meaning whatsoever, but rather for an ultimate meaning. “Limited transcendence, the transcending of our limits so as to connect with a wider context of value which itself is limited, does give our lives meaning––but a limited one. We may thirst for more” (Nozick 1981, 618). Another angle is to appeal to playing a role in God’s plan, again to claim, not that it is essential for meaning as such, but rather for “a cosmic significance....intead of a significance very limited in time and space” (Swinburne 2016, 154; see also Quinn 2000; Cottingham 2016, 131). Another rationale is that by fulfilling God’s purpose, we would meaningfully please God, a perfect person, as well as be remembered favorably by God forever (Cottingham 2016, 135; Williams 2020, 21–22, 29, 101, 108). Still another argument is that only with God could the deepest desires of human nature be satisfied (e.g., Goetz 2012; Seachris 2013, 20; Cottingham 2016, 127, 136), even if more surface desires could be satisfied without God.

In reply to such rationales for a moderate supernaturalism, there has been the suggestion that it is precisely by virtue of being alone in the universe that our lives would be particularly significant; otherwise, God’s greatness would overshadow us (Kahane 2014). There has also been the response that, with the opportunity for greater meaning from God would also come that for greater anti-meaning, so that it is not clear that a world with God would offer a net gain in respect of meaning (Metz 2019, 34–35). For example, if pleasing God would greatly enhance meaning in our lives, then presumably displeasing God would greatly reduce it and to a comparable degree. In addition, there are arguments for extreme naturalism (or its “anti-theist” cousin) mentioned below (sub-section 3.3).

Notice that none of the above arguments for supernaturalism appeals to the prospect of eternal life (at least not explicitly). Arguments that do make such an appeal are soul-centered, holding that meaning in life mainly comes from having an immortal, spiritual substance that is contiguous with one’s body when it is alive and that will forever outlive its death. Some think of the afterlife in terms of one’s soul entering a transcendent, spiritual realm (Heaven), while others conceive of one’s soul getting reincarnated into another body on Earth. According to the extreme version, if one has a soul but fails to put it in the right state (or if one lacks a soul altogether), then one’s life is meaningless.

There are three prominent arguments for an extreme soul-based perspective. One argument, made famous by Leo Tolstoy, is the suggestion that for life to be meaningful something must be worth doing, that something is worth doing only if it will make a permanent difference to the world, and that making a permanent difference requires being immortal (see also Hanfling 1987, 22–24; Morris 1992, 26; Craig 1994). Critics most often appeal to counterexamples, suggesting for instance that it is surely worth your time and effort to help prevent people from suffering, even if you and they are mortal. Indeed, some have gone on the offensive and argued that helping people is worth the sacrifice only if and because they are mortal, for otherwise they could invariably be compensated in an afterlife (e.g., Wielenberg 2005, 91–94). Another recent and interesting criticism is that the major motivations for the claim that nothing matters now if one day it will end are incoherent (Greene 2021).

A second argument for the view that life would be meaningless without a soul is that it is necessary for justice to be done, which, in turn, is necessary for a meaningful life. Life seems nonsensical when the wicked flourish and the righteous suffer, at least supposing there is no other world in which these injustices will be rectified, whether by God or a Karmic force. Something like this argument can be found in Ecclesiastes, and it continues to be defended (e.g., Davis 1987; Craig 1994). However, even granting that an afterlife is required for perfectly just outcomes, it is far from obvious that an eternal afterlife is necessary for them, and, then, there is the suggestion that some lives, such as Mandela’s, have been meaningful precisely in virtue of encountering injustice and fighting it.

A third argument for thinking that having a soul is essential for any meaning is that it is required to have the sort of free will without which our lives would be meaningless. Immanuel Kant is known for having maintained that if we were merely physical beings, subjected to the laws of nature like everything else in the material world, then we could not act for moral reasons and hence would be unimportant. More recently, one theologian has eloquently put the point in religious terms: “The moral spirit finds the meaning of life in choice. It finds it in that which proceeds from man and remains with him as his inner essence rather than in the accidents of circumstances turns of external fortune....(W)henever a human being rubs the lamp of his moral conscience, a Spirit does appear. This Spirit is God....It is in the ‘Thou must’ of God and man’s ‘I can’ that the divine image of God in human life is contained” (Swenson 1949/2000, 27–28). Notice that, even if moral norms did not spring from God’s commands, the logic of the argument entails that one’s life could be meaningful, so long as one had the inherent ability to make the morally correct choice in any situation. That, in turn, arguably requires something non-physical about one’s self, so as to be able to overcome whichever physical laws and forces one might confront. The standard objection to this reasoning is to advance a compatibilism about having a determined physical nature and being able to act for moral reasons (e.g., Arpaly 2006; Fischer 2009, 145–77). It is also worth wondering whether, if one had to have a spiritual essence in order to make free choices, it would have to be one that never perished.

Like God-centered theorists, many soul-centered theorists these days advance a moderate view, accepting that some meaning in life would be possible without immortality, but arguing that a much greater meaning would be possible with it. Granting that Einstein, Mandela, and Picasso had somewhat meaningful lives despite not having survived the deaths of their bodies (as per, e.g., Trisel 2004; Wolf 2015, 89–140; Landau 2017), there remains a powerful thought: more is better. If a finite life with the good, the true, and the beautiful has meaning in it to some degree, then surely it would have all the more meaning if it exhibited such higher values––including a relationship with God––for an eternity (Cottingham 2016, 132–35; Mawson 2016, 2019, 52–53; Williams 2020, 112–34; cf. Benatar 2017, 35–63). One objection to this reasoning is that the infinity of meaning that would be possible with a soul would be “too big,” rendering it difficult for the moderate supernaturalist to make sense of the intution that a finite life such as Einstein’s can indeed count as meaningful by comparison (Metz 2019, 30–31; cf. Mawson 2019, 53–54). More common, though, is the objection that an eternal life would include anti-meaning of various kinds, such as boredom and repetition, discussed below in the context of extreme naturalism (sub-section 3.3).

3. Naturalism

Recall that naturalism is the view that a physical life is central to life’s meaning, that even if there is no spiritual realm, a substantially meaningful life is possible. Like supernaturalism, contemporary naturalism admits of two distinguishable variants, moderate and extreme (Metz 2019). The moderate version is that, while a genuinely meaningful life could be had in a purely physical universe as known well by science, a somewhat more meaningful life would be possible if a spiritual realm also existed. God or a soul could enhance meaning in life, although they would not be major contributors. The extreme version of naturalism is the view that it would be better in respect of life’s meaning if there were no spiritual realm. From this perspective, God or a soul would be anti-matter, i.e., would detract from the meaning available to us, making a purely physical world (even if not this particular one) preferable.

Cross-cutting the moderate/extreme distinction is that between subjectivism and objectivism, which are theoretical accounts of the nature of meaningfulness insofar as it is physical. They differ in terms of the extent to which the human mind constitutes meaning and whether there are conditions of meaning that are invariant among human beings. Subjectivists believe that there are no invariant standards of meaning because meaning is relative to the subject, i.e., depends on an individual’s pro-attitudes such as her particular desires or ends, which are not shared by everyone. Roughly, something is meaningful for a person if she strongly wants it or intends to seek it out and she gets it. Objectivists maintain, in contrast, that there are some invariant standards for meaning because meaning is at least partly mind-independent, i.e., obtains not merely in virtue of being the object of anyone’s mental states. Here, something is meaningful (partially) because of its intrinsic nature, in the sense of being independent of whether it is wanted or intended; meaning is instead (to some extent) the sort of thing that merits these reactions.

There is logical space for an orthogonal view, according to which there are invariant standards of meaningfulness constituted by what all human beings would converge on from a certain standpoint. However, it has not been much of a player in the field (Darwall 1983, 164–66).

According to this version of naturalism, meaning in life varies from person to person, depending on each one’s variable pro-attitudes. Common instances are views that one’s life is more meaningful, the more one gets what one happens to want strongly, achieves one’s highly ranked goals, or does what one believes to be really important (Trisel 2002; Hooker 2008). One influential subjectivist has recently maintained that the relevant mental state is caring or loving, so that life is meaningful just to the extent that one cares about or loves something (Frankfurt 1988, 80–94, 2004). Another recent proposal is that meaningfulness consists of “an active engagement and affirmation that vivifies the person who has freely created or accepted and now promotes and nurtures the projects of her highest concern” (Belliotti 2019, 183).

Subjectivism was dominant in the middle of the twentieth century, when positivism, noncognitivism, existentialism, and Humeanism were influential (Ayer 1947; Hare 1957; Barnes 1967; Taylor 1970; Williams 1976). However, in the last quarter of the twentieth century, inference to the best explanation and reflective equilibrium became accepted forms of normative argumentation and were frequently used to defend claims about the existence and nature of objective value (or of “external reasons,” ones obtaining independently of one’s extant attitudes). As a result, subjectivism about meaning lost its dominance. Those who continue to hold subjectivism often remain suspicious of attempts to justify beliefs about objective value (e.g., Trisel 2002, 73, 79, 2004, 378–79; Frankfurt 2004, 47–48, 55–57; Wong 2008, 138–39; Evers 2017, 32, 36; Svensson 2017, 54). Theorists are moved to accept subjectivism typically because the alternatives are unpalatable; they are reasonably sure that meaning in life obtains for some people, but do not see how it could be grounded on something independent of the mind, whether it be the natural or the supernatural (or the non-natural). In contrast to these possibilities, it appears straightforward to account for what is meaningful in terms of what people find meaningful or what people want out of their lives. Wide-ranging meta-ethical debates in epistemology, metaphysics, and the philosophy of language are necessary to address this rationale for subjectivism.

There is a cluster of other, more circumscribed arguments for subjectivism, according to which this theory best explains certain intuitive features of meaning in life. For one, subjectivism seems plausible since it is reasonable to think that a meaningful life is an authentic one (Frankfurt 1988, 80–94). If a person’s life is significant insofar as she is true to herself or her deepest nature, then we have some reason to believe that meaning simply is a function of those matters for which the person cares. For another, it is uncontroversial that often meaning comes from losing oneself, i.e., in becoming absorbed in an activity or experience, as opposed to being bored by it or finding it frustrating (Frankfurt 1988, 80–94; Belliotti 2019, 162–70). Work that concentrates the mind and relationships that are engrossing seem central to meaning and to be so because of the subjective elements involved. For a third, meaning is often taken to be something that makes life worth continuing for a specific person, i.e., that gives her a reason to get out of bed in the morning, which subjectivism is thought to account for best (Williams 1976; Svensson 2017; Calhoun 2018).

Critics maintain that these arguments are vulnerable to a common objection: they neglect the role of objective value (or an external reason) in realizing oneself, losing oneself, and having a reason to live (Taylor 1989, 1992; Wolf 2010, 2015, 89–140). One is not really being true to oneself, losing oneself in a meaningful way, or having a genuine reason to live insofar as one, say, successfully maintains 3,732 hairs on one’s head (Taylor 1992, 36), cultivates one’s prowess at long-distance spitting (Wolf 2010, 104), collects a big ball of string (Wolf 2010, 104), or, well, eats one’s own excrement (Wielenberg 2005, 22). The counterexamples suggest that subjective conditions are insufficient to ground meaning in life; there seem to be certain actions, relationships, and states that are objectively valuable (but see Evers 2017, 30–32) and toward which one’s pro-attitudes ought to be oriented, if meaning is to accrue.

So say objectivists, but subjectivists feel the pull of the point and usually seek to avoid the counterexamples, lest they have to bite the bullet by accepting the meaningfulness of maintaining 3,732 hairs on one’s head and all the rest (for some who do, see Svensson 2017, 54–55; Belliotti 2019, 181–83). One important strategy is to suggest that subjectivists can avoid the counterexamples by appealing to the right sort of pro-attitude. Instead of whatever an individual happens to want, perhaps the relevant mental state is an emotional-perceptual one of seeing-as (Alexis 2011; cf. Hosseini 2015, 47–66), a “categorical” desire, that is, an intrinsic desire constitutive of one’s identity that one takes to make life worth continuing (Svensson 2017), or a judgment that one has a good reason to value something highly for its own sake (Calhoun 2018). Even here, though, objectivists will argue that it might “appear that whatever the will chooses to treat as a good reason to engage itself is, for the will, a good reason. But the will itself....craves objective reasons; and often it could not go forward unless it thought it had them” (Wiggins 1988, 136). And without any appeal to objectivity, it is perhaps likely that counterexamples would resurface.

Another subjectivist strategy by which to deal with the counterexamples is the attempt to ground meaningfulness, not on the pro-attitudes of an individual valuer, but on those of a group (Darwall 1983, 164–66; Brogaard and Smith 2005; Wong 2008). Does such an intersubjective move avoid (more of) the counterexamples? If so, does it do so more plausibly than an objective theory?

Objective naturalists believe that meaning in life is constituted at least in part by something physical beyond merely the fact that it is the object of a pro-attitude. Obtaining the object of some emotion, desire, or judgment is not sufficient for meaningfulness, on this view. Instead, there are certain conditions of the material world that could confer meaning on anyone’s life, not merely because they are viewed as meaningful, wanted for their own sake, or believed to be choiceworthy, but instead (at least partially) because they are inherently worthwhile or valuable in themselves.

Morality (the good), enquiry (the true), and creativity (the beautiful) are widely held instances of activities that confer meaning on life, while trimming toenails and eating snow––along with the counterexamples to subjectivism above––are not. Objectivism is widely thought to be a powerful general explanation of these particular judgments: the former are meaningful not merely because some agent (whether it is an individual, her society, or even God) cares about them or judges them to be worth doing, while the latter simply lack significance and cannot obtain it even if some agent does care about them or judge them to be worth doing. From an objective perspective, it is possible for an individual to care about the wrong thing or to be mistaken that something is worthwhile, and not merely because of something she cares about all the more or judges to be still more choiceworthy. Of course, meta-ethical debates about the existence and nature of value are again relevant to appraising this rationale.

Some objectivists think that being the object of a person’s mental states plays no constitutive role in making that person’s life meaningful, although they of course contend that it often plays an instrumental role––liking a certain activity, after all, is likely to motivate one to do it. Relatively few objectivists are “pure” in that way, although consequentialists do stand out as clear instances (e.g., Singer 1995; Smuts 2018, 75–99). Most objectivists instead try to account for the above intuitions driving subjectivism by holding that a life is more meaningful, not merely because of objective factors, but also in part because of propositional attitudes such as cognition, conation, and emotion. Particularly influential has been Susan Wolf’s hybrid view, captured by this pithy slogan: “Meaning arises when subjective attraction meets objective attractiveness” (Wolf 2015, 112; see also Kekes 1986, 2000; Wiggins 1988; Raz 2001, 10–40; Mintoff 2008; Wolf 2010, 2016; Fischer 2019, 9–23; Belshaw 2021, 160–81). This theory implies that no meaning accrues to one’s life if one believes in, is satisfied by, or cares about a project that is not truly worthwhile, or if one takes up a truly worthwhile project but fails to judge it important, be satisfied by it, or care about it. A related approach is that, while subjective attraction is not necessary for meaning, it could enhance it (e.g., Audi 2005, 344; Metz 2013, 183–84, 196–98, 220–25). For instance, a stereotypical Mother Teresa who is bored by and alienated from her substantial charity work might have a somewhat significant existence because of it, even if she would have an even more significant existence if she felt pride in it or identified with it.

There have been several attempts to capture theoretically what all objectively attractive, inherently worthwhile, or finally valuable conditions have in common insofar as they bear on meaning in a person’s life. Over the past few decades, one encounters the proposals that objectively meaningful conditions are just those that involve: positively connecting with organic unity beyond oneself (Nozick 1981, 594–619); being creative (Taylor 1987; Matheson 2018); living an emotional life (Solomon 1993; cf. Williams 2020, 56–78); promoting good consequences, such as improving the quality of life of oneself and others (Singer 1995; Audi 2005; Smuts 2018, 75–99); exercising or fostering rational nature in exceptional ways (Smith 1997, 179–221; Gewirth 1998, 177–82; Metz 2013, 222–36); progressing toward ends that can never be fully realized because one’s knowledge of them changes as one approaches them (Levy 2005); realizing goals that are transcendent for being long-lasting in duration and broad in scope (Mintoff 2008); living virtuously (May 2015, 61–138; McPherson 2020); and loving what is worth loving (Wolf 2016). There is as yet no convergence in the field on one, or even a small cluster, of these accounts.

One feature of a large majority of the above naturalist theories is that they are aggregative or additive, objectionably treating a life as a mere “container” of bits of life that are meaningful considered in isolation from other bits (Brännmark 2003, 330). It has become increasingly common for philosophers of life’s meaning, especially objectivists, to hold that life as a whole, or at least long stretches of it, can substantially affect its meaningfulness beyond the amount of meaning (if any) in its parts.

For instance, a life that has lots of beneficence and otherwise intuitively meaning-conferring conditions but that is also extremely repetitive (à la the movie Groundhog Day ) is less than maximally meaningful (Taylor 1987; Blumenfeld 2009). Furthermore, a life that not only avoids repetition but also ends with a substantial amount of meaningful (or otherwise desirable) parts seems to have more meaning overall than one that has the same amount of meaningful (desirable) parts but ends with few or none of them (Kamm 2013, 18–22; Dorsey 2015). Still more, a life in which its meaningless (or otherwise undesirable parts) cause its meaningful (desirable) parts to come about through a process of personal growth seems meaningful in virtue of this redemptive pattern, “good life-story,” or narrative self-expression (Taylor 1989, 48–51; Wong 2008; Fischer 2009, 145–77; Kauppinen 2012; May 2015, 61–138; Velleman 2015, 141–73). These three cases suggest that meaning can inhere in life as a whole, that is, in the relationships between its parts, and not merely in the parts considered in isolation. However, some would maintain that it is, strictly speaking, the story that is or could be told of a life that matters, not so much the life-story qua relations between events themselves (de Bres 2018).

There are pure or extreme versions of holism present in the literature, according to which the only possible bearer of meaning in life is a person’s life as a whole, and not any isolated activities, relationships, or states (Taylor 1989, 48–51; Tabensky 2003; Levinson 2004). A salient argument for this position is that judgments of the meaningfulness of a part of someone’s life are merely provisional, open to revision upon considering how they fit into a wider perspective. So, for example, it would initially appear that taking an ax away from a madman and thereby protecting innocent parties confers some meaning on one’s life, but one might well revise that judgment upon learning that the intention behind it was merely to steal an ax, not to save lives, or that the madman then took out a machine gun, causing much more harm than his ax would have. It is worth considering how far this sort of case is generalizable, and, if it can be to a substantial extent, whether that provides strong evidence that only life as a whole can exhibit meaningfulness.

Perhaps most objectivists would, at least upon reflection, accept that both the parts of a life and the whole-life relationships among the parts can exhibit meaning. Supposing there are two bearers of meaning in a life, important questions arise. One is whether a certain narrative can be meaningful even if its parts are not, while a second is whether the meaningfulness of a part increases if it is an aspect of a meaningful whole (on which see Brännmark 2003), and a third is whether there is anything revealing to say about how to make tradeoffs between the parts and whole in cases where one must choose between them (Blumenfeld 2009 appears to assign lexical priority to the whole).

Naturalists until recently had been largely concerned to show that meaning in life is possible without God or a soul; they have not spent much time considering how such spiritual conditions might enhance meaning, but have, in moderate fashion, tended to leave that possibility open (an exception is Hooker 2008). Lately, however, an extreme form of naturalism has arisen, according to which our lives would probably, if not unavoidably, have less meaning in a world with God or a soul than in one without. Although such an approach was voiced early on by Baier (1957), it is really in the past decade or so that this “anti-theist” position has become widely and intricately discussed.

One rationale, mentioned above as an objection to the view that God’s purpose constitutes meaning in life, has also been deployed to argue that the existence of God as such would necessarily reduce meaning, that is, would consist of anti-matter. It is the idea that master/servant and parent/child analogies so prominent in the monotheist religious traditions reveal something about our status in a world where there is a qualitatively higher being who has created us with certain ends in mind: our independence or dignity as adult persons would be violated (e.g., Baier 1957/2000, 118–20; Kahane 2011, 681–85; Lougheed 2020, 121–41). One interesting objection to this reasoning has been to accept that God’s existence is necessarily incompatible with the sort of meaning that would come (roughly stated) from being one’s own boss, but to argue that God would also make greater sorts of meaning available, offering a net gain to us (Mawson 2016, 110–58).

Another salient argument for thinking that God would detract from meaning in life appeals to the value of privacy (Kahane 2011, 681–85; Lougheed 2020, 55–110). God’s omniscience would unavoidably make it impossible for us to control another person’s access to the most intimate details about ourselves, which, for some, amounts to a less meaningful life than one with such control. Beyond questioning the value of our privacy in relation to God, one thought-provoking criticism has been to suggest that, if a lack of privacy really would substantially reduce meaning in our lives, then God, qua morally perfect person, would simply avoid knowing everything about us (Tooley 2018). Lacking complete knowledge of our mental states would be compatible with describing God as “omniscient,” so the criticism goes, insofar as that is plausibly understood as having as much knowledge as is morally permissible.

Turn, now, to major arguments for thinking that having a soul would reduce life’s meaning, so that if one wants a maximally meaningful life, one should prefer a purely physical world, or at least one in which people are mortal. First and foremost, there has been the argument that an immortal life could not avoid becoming boring (Williams 1973), rendering life pointless according to many subjective and objective theories. The literature on this topic has become enormous, with the central reply being that immortality need not get boring (for more recent discussions, see Fischer 2009, 79–101, 2019, 117–42; Mawson 2019, 51–52; Williams 2020, 30–41, 123–29; Belshaw 2021, 182–97). However, it might also be worth questioning whether boredom is sufficient for meaninglessness. Suppose, for instance, that one volunteers to be bored so that many others will not be bored; perhaps this would be a meaningful sacrifice to make. Being bored for an eternity would not be blissful or even satisfying, to be sure, but if it served the function of preventing others from being bored for an eternity, would it be meaningful (at least to some degree)? If, as is commonly held, sacrificing one’s life could be meaningful, why not also sacrificing one’s liveliness?

Another reason given to reject eternal life is that it would become repetitive, which would substantially drain it of meaning (Scarre 2007, 54–55; May 2009, 46–47, 64–65, 71; Smuts 2011, 142–44; cf. Blumenfeld 2009). If, as it appears, there are only a finite number of actions one could perform, relationships one could have, and states one could be in during an eternity, one would have to end up doing the same things again. Even though one’s activities might be more valuable than rolling a stone up a hill forever à la Sisyphus, the prospect of doing them over and over again forever is disheartening for many. To be sure, one might not remember having done them before and hence could avoid boredom, but for some philosophers that would make it all the worse, akin to having dementia and forgetting that one has told the same stories. Others, however, still find meaning in such a life (e.g., Belshaw 2021, 197, 205n41).

A third meaning-based argument against immortality invokes considerations of narrative. If the pattern of one’s life as a whole substantially matters, and if a proper pattern would include a beginning, a middle, and an end, it appears that a life that never ends would lack the relevant narrative structure. “Because it would drag on endlessly, it would, sooner or later, just be a string of events lacking all form....With immortality, the novel never ends....How meaningful can such a novel be?” (May 2009, 68, 72; see also Scarre 2007, 58–60). Notice that this objection is distinct from considerations of boredom and repetition (which concern novelty ); even if one were stimulated and active, and even if one found a way not to repeat one’s life in the course of eternity, an immortal life would appear to lack shape. In reply, some reject the idea that a meaningful life must be akin to a novel, and intead opt for narrativity in the form of something like a string of short stories that build on each other (Fischer 2009, 145–77, 2019, 101–16). Others, though, have sought to show that eternity could still be novel-like, deeming the sort of ending that matters to be a function of what the content is and how it relates to the content that came before (e.g., Seachris 2011; Williams 2020, 112–19).

There have been additional objections to immortality as undercutting meaningfulness, but they are prima facie less powerful than the previous three in that, if sound, they arguably show that an eternal life would have a cost, but probably not one that would utterly occlude the prospect of meaning in it. For example, there have been the suggestions that eternal lives would lack a sense of preciousness and urgency (Nussbaum 1989, 339; Kass 2002, 266–67), could not exemplify virtues such as courageously risking one’s life for others (Kass 2002, 267–68; Wielenberg 2005, 91–94), and could not obtain meaning from sustaining or saving others’ lives (Nussbaum 1989, 338; Wielenberg 2005, 91–94). Note that at least the first two rationales turn substantially on the belief in immortality, not quite immortality itself: if one were immortal but forgot that one is or did not know that at all, then one could appreciate life and obtain much of the virtue of courage (and, conversely, if one were not immortal, but thought that one is, then, by the logic of these arguments, one would fail to appreciate limits and be unable to exemplify courage).

The previous two sections addressed theoretical accounts of what would confer meaning on a human person’s life. Although these theories do not imply that some people’s lives are in fact meaningful, that has been the presumption of a very large majority of those who have advanced them. Much of the procedure has been to suppose that many lives have had meaning in them and then to consider in virtue of what they have or otherwise could. However, there are nihilist (or pessimist) perspectives that question this supposition. According to nihilism (pessimism), what would make a life meaningful in principle cannot obtain for any of us.

One straightforward rationale for nihilism is the combination of extreme supernaturalism about what makes life meaningful and atheism about whether a spiritual realm exists. If you believe that God or a soul is necessary for meaning in life, and if you believe that neither is real, then you are committed to nihilism, to the denial that life can have any meaning. Athough this rationale for nihilism was prominent in the modern era (and was more or less Camus’ position), it has been on the wane in analytic philosophical circles, as extreme supernaturalism has been eclipsed by the moderate variety.

The most common rationales for nihilism these days do not appeal to supernaturalism, or at least not explicitly. One cluster of ideas appeals to what meta-ethicists call “error theory,” the view that evaluative claims (in this case about meaning in life, or about morality qua necessary for meaning) characteristically posit objectively real or universally justified values, but that such values do not exist. According to one version, value judgments often analytically include a claim to objectivity but there is no reason to think that objective values exist, as they “would be entities or qualities or relations of a very strange sort, utterly different from anything else in the universe” (Mackie 1977/1990, 38). According to a second version, life would be meaningless if there were no set of moral standards that could be fully justified to all rational enquirers, but it so happens that such standards cannot exist for persons who can always reasonably question a given claim (Murphy 1982, 12–17). According to a third, we hold certain beliefs about the objectivity and universality of morality and related values such as meaning because they were evolutionarily advantageous to our ancestors, not because they are true. Humans have been “deceived by their genes into thinking that there is a distinterested, objective morality binding upon them, which all should obey” (Ruse and Wilson 1986, 179; cf. Street 2015). One must draw on the intricate work in meta-ethics that has been underway for the past several decades in order to appraise these arguments.

In contrast to error-theoretic arguments for nihilism, there are rationales for it accepting that objective values exist but denying that our lives can ever exhibit or promote them so as to obtain meaning. One version of this approach maintains that, for our lives to matter, we must be in a position to add objective value to the world, which we are not since the objective value of the world is already infinite (Smith 2003). The key premises for this view are that every bit of space-time (or at least the stars in the physical universe) have some positive value, that these values can be added up, and that space is infinite. If the physical world at present contains an infinite degree of value, nothing we do can make a difference in terms of meaning, for infinity plus any amount of value remains infinity. One way to question this argument, beyond doubting the value of space-time or stars, is to suggest that, even if one cannot add to the value of the universe, meaning plausibly comes from being the source of certain values.

A second rationale for nihilism that accepts the existence of objective value is David Benatar’s (2006, 18–59) intriguing “asymmetry argument” for anti-natalism, the view that it is immoral to bring new people into existence because doing so would always be on balance bad for them. For Benatar, the bads of existing (e.g., pains) are real disadvantages relative to not existing, while the goods of existing (pleasures) are not real advantages relative to not existing, since there is in the latter state no one to be deprived of them. If indeed the state of not existing is no worse than that of experiencing the benefits of existence, then, since existing invariably brings harm in its wake, it follows that existing is always worse compared to not existing. Although this argument is illustrated with experiential goods and bads, it seems generalizable to non-experiential ones, including meaning in life and anti-matter. The literature on this argument has become large (for a recent collection, see Hauskeller and Hallich 2022).

Benatar (2006, 60–92, 2017, 35–63) has advanced an additional argument for nihilism, one that appeals to Thomas Nagel’s (1986, 208–32) widely discussed analysis of the extremely external standpoint that human persons can take on their lives. There exists, to use Henry Sidgwick’s influential phrase, the “point of view of the universe,” that is, the standpoint that considers a human being’s life in relation to all times and all places. When one takes up this most external standpoint and views one’s puny impact on the world, little of one’s life appears to matter. What one does in a certain society on Earth over 75 years or so just does not amount to much, when considering the billions of temporal years and billions of light-years that make up space-time. Although this reasoning grants limited kinds of meaning to human beings, from a personal, social, or human perspective, Benatar both denies that the greatest sort of meaning––a cosmic one––is available to them and contends that this makes their lives bad, hence the “nihilist” tag. Some have objected that our lives could in fact have a cosmic significance, say, if they played a role in God’s plan (Quinn 2000, 65–66; Swinburne 2016, 154), were the sole ones with a dignity in the universe (Kahane 2014), or engaged in valuable activities that could be appreciated by anyone anywhere anytime (Wolf 2016, 261–62). Others naturally maintain that cosmic significance is irrelevant to appraising a human life, with some denying that it would be a genuine source of meaning (Landau 2017, 93–99), and others accepting that it would be but maintaining that the absence of this good would not count as a bad or merit regret (discussed in Benatar 2017, 56–62; Williams 2020, 108–11).

Finally, a distinguishable source of nihilism concerns the ontological, as distinct from axiological, preconditions for meaning in life. Perhaps most radically, there are those who deny that we have selves. Do we indeed lack selves, and, if we do, is a meaningful life impossible for us (see essays in Caruso and Flanagan 2018; Le Bihan 2019)? Somewhat less radically, there are those who grant that we have selves, but deny that they are in charge in the relevant way. That is, some have argued that we lack self-governance or free will of the sort that is essential for meaning in life, at least if determinism is true (Pisciotta 2013; essays in Caruso and Flanagan 2018). Non-quantum events, including human decisions, appear to be necessited by a prior state of the world, such that none could have been otherwise, and many of our decisions are a product of unconscious neurological mechanisms (while quantum events are of course utterly beyond our control). If none of our conscious choices could have been avoided and all were ultimately necessited by something external to them, perhaps they are insufficient to merit pride or admiration or to constitute narrative authorship of a life. In reply, some maintain that a compatibilism between determinism and moral responsibility applies with comparable force to meaning in life (e.g., Arpaly 2006; Fischer 2009, 145–77), while others contend that incompatibilism is true of moral responsibility but not of meaning (Pereboom 2014).

Agar, N., 2013, Humanity’s End: Why We Should Reject Radical Enhancement , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Alexis., A., 2011, The Meaning of Life: A Modern Secular Answer to the Age-Old Fundamental Question , CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.
Arpaly, N., 2006, Merit, Meaning, and Human Bondage , Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Audi, R., 2005, “Intrinsic Value and Meaningful Life”, Philosophical Papers , 34: 331–55.
Ayer, A. J., 1947, “The Claims of Philosophy”, repr. in The Meaning of Life, 2 nd Ed. , E. D. Klemke (ed.), New York: Oxford University Press, 2000: 219–32.
Baier, K., 1957, “The Meaning of Life”, repr. in The Meaning of Life, 2 nd Ed. , E. D. Klemke (ed.), New York: Oxford University Press, 2000: 101–32.
Barnes, H., 1967, An Existentialist Ethics , New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Belliotti, R., 2019, Is Human Life Absurd? A Philosophical Inquiry into Finitude, Value, and Meaning . Leiden: Brill.
Belshaw, C., 2021, The Value and Meaning of Life , London: Routledge.
Benatar, D., 2006, Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence , New York: Oxford University Press.
–––, 2017, The Human Predicament , New York: Oxford University Press.
Bennett-Hunter, G., 2014, Ineffability and Religious Experience , Oxford: Routledge.
Blumenfeld, D., 2009, “Living Life over Again”, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research , 79: 357–86.
Bradford, G., 2015, Achievement , New York: Oxford University Press.
Brännmark, J., 2003, “Leading Lives”, Philosophical Papers , 32: 321–43.
Brogaard, B. and Smith, B., 2005, “On Luck, Responsibility, and the Meaning of Life”, Philosophical Papers , 34: 443–58.
Calhoun, C., 2018, Doing Valuable Time: The Present, the Future, and Meaningful Living , New York: Oxford University Press.
Campbell, S., and Nyholm, S., 2015, “Anti-Meaning and Why It Matters”, Journal of the American Philosophical Association , 1: 694–711.
Caruso, G. and Flanagan, O. (eds.), 2018, Neuroexistentialism: Meaning, Morals, and Purpose in an Age of Neuroscience , New York: Oxford University Press.
Cooper, D., 2003, Meaning . Durham: Acumen Publishing.
Cottingham, J., 2005, The Spiritual Dimension: Religion, Philosophy and Human Value , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
–––, 2016, “Meaningfulness, Eternity, and Theism”, in God and Meaning , J. Seachris and S. Goetz (eds.), New York: Bloomsbury Academic: 123–36.
Craig, W., 1994, “The Absurdity of Life Without God”, repr. in Exploring the Meaning of Life: An Anthology and Guide , J. Seachris (ed.), Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2013: 153–72.
Danaher, J., 2017, “Will Life Be Worth Living in a World Without Work? Technological Unemployment and the Meaning of Life”, Science and Engineering Ethics , 23: 41–64.
Darwall, S., 1983, Impartial Reason , Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Davis, W., 1987, “The Meaning of Life”, Metaphilosophy , 18: 288–305.
de Bres, H., 2018, “Narrative and Meaning in Life”, Journal of Moral Philosophy , 15: 545–71.
Dorsey, D., 2015, “The Significance of a Life’s Shape”, Ethics , 125: 303–30.
Egerstrom, K., 2015, “ Practical Identity and Meaninglessness ”, PhD Dissertation, Syracuse University.
Ellin, J., 1995, Morality and the Meaning of Life , Ft. Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.
Evers, D., 2017, “Meaning in Life and the Metaphysics of Value”, De Ethica , 4: 27–44.
Feinberg, J., 1980, “Absurd Self-Fulfillment,” repr. in Freedom and Fulfillment: Philosophical Essays , Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992: 297–330.
Ferracioli, L., 2018, “Procreative-parenting, Love’s Reasons, and the Demands of Morality”, The Philosophical Quarterly , 68: 77–97.
Fischer, J. M., 2009, Our Stories: Essays on Life, Death, and Free Will , New York: Oxford University Press.
–––, 2019, Death, Immortality, and Meaning in Life , New York: Oxford University Press.
Frankfurt, H., 1988, The Importance of What We Care About , New York: Cambridge University Press.
–––, 2004, The Reasons of Love , Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Gewirth, A., 1998, Self-Fulfillment , Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Goetz, S., 2012, The Purpose of Life: A Theistic Perspective , New York: Continuum.
Goldman, A., 2018, Life’s Values: Pleasure, Happiness, Well-Being, and Meaning , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Greene, P., 2021, “It Doesn’t Matter Because One Day It Will End”, Ethical Theory and Moral Practice , 24: 165–82.
Hanfling, O., 1987, The Quest for Meaning , New York: Basil Blackwell Inc.
Hare, R. M., 1957, “Nothing Matters”, repr. in Applications of Moral Philosophy , London: Macmillan, 1972: 32–47.
Hauskeller, M. and Hallich, O. (eds.), 2022, “Would It Be Better if We Had Never Existed? David Benatar's Anti-Natalism”, special issue of The Journal of Value Inquiry , 56: 1–151.
Hooker, B., 2008, “The Meaning of Life: Subjectivism, Objectivism, and Divine Support”, in The Moral Life: Essays in Honour of John Cottingham , N. Athanassoulis and S. Vice (eds.), New York: Palgrave Macmillan: 184–200.
Hosseini, R., 2015, Wittgenstein and Meaning in Life: In Search of the Human Voice , New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kahane, G., 2011, “Should We Want God to Exist?”, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research , 82: 674–96.
–––, 2014, “Our Cosmic Insignificance”, Noûs , 48: 745–72.
Kamm, F. M., 2013, Bioethical Prescriptions: To Create, End, Choose, and Improve Lives , New York: Oxford University Press.
Kass, L., 2002, Life, Liberty, and the Defense of Dignity: The Challenge for Bioethics , San Francisco: Encounter Books.
Kauppinen, A., 2012, “Meaningfulness and Time”, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research , 82: 345–77.
Kekes, J., 1986, “The Informed Will and the Meaning of Life”, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research , 47: 75–90.
–––, 2000, “The Meaning of Life”, in Midwest Studies in Philosophy, Volume 24; Life and Death: Metaphysics and Ethics , P. French and H. Wettstein (eds.), Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers: 17–34.
Kraay, K. (ed.), 2018, Does God Matter? Essays on the Axiological Consequences of Theism , New York: Routledge.
Landau, I., 1997, “Why Has the Question of the Meaning of Life Arisen in the Last Two and a Half Centuries?”, Philosophy Today , 41: 263–70.
–––, 2017, Finding Meaning in an Imperfect World , New York: Oxford University Press.
Le Bihan, B., 2019, “The No-Self View and the Meaning of Life”, Philosophy East and West , 69: 419–38.
Levinson, J., 2004, “Intrinsic Value and the Notion of a Life”, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism , 62: 319–29.
Levy, N., 2005, “Downshifting and Meaning in Life”, Ratio , 18: 176–89.
Lougheed, K., 2020, The Axiological Status of Theism and Other Worldviews , New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Mackie, J. L., 1977, Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong , repr. London: Penguin Books, 1990.
Markus, A., 2003, “Assessing Views of Life, A Subjective Affair?”, Religious Studies , 39: 125–43.
Martela, F., 2017, “Meaningfulness as Contribution”, Southern Journal of Philosophy , 55: 232–56.
Matheson, D., 2017, “The Worthwhileness of Meaningful Lives”, Philosophia , 48: 313–24.
–––, 2018, “Creativity and Meaning in Life”, Ratio , 31: 73–87.
Mawson, T., 2016, God and the Meanings of Life , London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
–––, 2019, Monotheism and the Meaning of Life , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
May, T., 2009, Death , Stocksfield: Acumen.
–––, 2015, A Significant Life: Human Meaning in a Silent Universe , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
McPherson, D., 2020, Virtue and Meaning: A Neo-Aristotelian Perspective , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Metz, T., 2002, “Recent Work on the Meaning of Life”, Ethics , 112: 781–814.
–––, 2013, Meaning in Life: An Analytic Study , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
–––, 2019, God, Soul and the Meaning of Life , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mintoff, J., 2008, “Transcending Absurdity”, Ratio , 21: 64–84.
Moreland, J. P., 1987, Scaling the Secular City: A Defense of Christianity , Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House.
Morris, T., 1992, Making Sense of It All: Pascal and the Meaning of Life , Grand Rapids, MI: Willliam B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
Mulgan, T., 2015, Purpose in the Universe: The Moral and Metaphysical Case for Ananthropocentric Purposivism , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Murphy, J., 1982, Evolution, Morality, and the Meaning of Life , Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Littlefield.
Nagel, T., 1970, “The Absurd”, Journal of Philosophy , 68: 716–27.
–––, 1986, The View from Nowhere , New York: Oxford University Press.
Nozick, R., 1974, Anarchy, State and Utopia , New York: Basic Books.
–––, 1981, Philosophical Explanations , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
–––, 1989, The Examined Life , New York: Simon and Schuster.
Nussbaum, M., 1989, “Mortal Immortals: Lucretius on Death and the Voice of Nature”, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research , 50: 303–51.
Olson, N., 2016, “Medical Researchers’ Ancillary Care Obligations”, Bioethics , 30: 317–24.
Pereboom, D., 2014, Free Will, Agency, and Meaning in Life , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pisciotta, T., 2013, “ Determinism and Meaningfulness in Lives ”, PhD Dissertation, University of Melbourne.
Purves, D. and Delon, N., 2018, “Meaning in the Lives of Humans and Other Animals”, Philosophical Studies , 175: 317–38.
Quinn, P., 2000, “How Christianity Secures Life’s Meanings”, in The Meaning of Life in the World Religions , J. Runzo and N. Martin (eds.), Oxford: Oneworld Publications: 53–68.
Raz, J., 2001, Value, Respect, and Attachment , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Repp, C., 2018, “Life Meaning and Sign Meaning”, Philosophical Papers , 47: 403–27.
Ruse, M. and Wilson, E., 1986, “Moral Philosophy as Applied Science”, Philosophy , 61: 173–92.
Scarre, G., 2007, Death . Stocksfield: Acumen.
Schinkel, A., De Ruyter, D., and Aviram, A., 2015, “Education and Life’s Meaning”, Journal of Philosophy of Education , 50: 398–418.
Seachris, J., 2011, “Death, Futility, and the Proleptic Power of Narrative Ending”, Religious Studies , 47: 141–63.
–––, 2013, “General Introduction”, in Exploring the Meaning of Life: An Anthology and Guide , J. Seachris (ed.), Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell: 1–20.
–––, 2016, “From the Meaning Triad to Meaning Holism: Unifying Life’s Meaning”, Human Affairs , 29: 363–78.
Singer, I., 1996, Meaning in Life, Volume 1: The Creation of Value , Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Singer, P., 1995, How Are We to Live? Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
Smith, Q., 1997, Ethical and Religious Thought in Analytic Philosophy of Language , New Haven: Yale University Press.
–––, 2003, “Moral Realism and Infinite Spacetime Imply Moral Nihilism”, in Time and Ethics: Essays at the Intersection , H. Dyke (ed.), Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers: 43–54.
Smuts, A., 2011, “Immortality and Significance”, Philosophy and Literature , 35: 134–49.
–––, 2018, Welfare, Meaning, and Worth , New York: Routledge
Solomon, R., 1993, The Passions: Emotions and the Meaning of Life , Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.
Street, S., 2015, “Does Anything Really Matter or Did We Just Evolve to Think So?”, in The Norton Introduction to Philosophy , G. Rosen et al. (eds.), New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.: 685–95.
Svensson, F., 2017, “A Subjectivist Account of Meaning in Life”, De Ethica , 4: 45–66.
Swenson, D., 1949, “The Dignity of Human Life”, repr. in The Meaning of Life, 2 nd Ed. , E. D. Klemke (ed.), New York: Oxford University Press, 2000: 21–30.
Swinburne, R., 2016, “How God Makes Life a Lot More Meaningful”, in God and Meaning , J. Seachris and S. Goetz (eds.), New York: Bloomsbury Academic: 151–63.
Tabensky, P., 2003, “Parallels Between Living and Painting”, The Journal of Value Inquiry , 37: 59–68.
Tartaglia, J., 2015, Philosophy in a Meaningless Life , London: Bloomsbury.
Taylor, C., 1989, Sources of the Self , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
–––, 1992, The Ethics of Authenticity , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Taylor, R., 1970, “The Meaning of Life”, in Good and Evil , repr. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Boooks, 2000: 319–34.
–––, 1987, “Time and Life’s Meaning”, The Review of Metaphysics , 40: 675–86.
Thomas, J., 2018, “Can Only Human Lives Be Meaningful?”, Philosophical Papers , 47: 265–97.
–––, 2019, “Meaningfulness as Sensefulness”, Philosophia , 47: 1555–77.
Thomson, G., 2003, On the Meaning of Life , South Melbourne: Wadsworth.
Tooley, M., 2018, “Axiology: Theism Versus Widely Accepted Monotheisms”, in Does God Matter? Essays on the Axiological Consequences of Theism , K. Kraay, (ed.), New York: Routledge: 46–69.
Trisel, B. A., 2002, “Futility and the Meaning of Life Debate”, Sorites , 14: 70–84.
–––, 2004, “Human Extinction and the Value of Our Efforts”, The Philosophical Forum , 35: 371–91.
–––, 2016, “Human Extinction, Narrative Ending, and Meaning of Life”, Journal of Philosophy of Life , 6: 1–22.
Velleman, J. D., 2015, Beyond Price: Essays on Birth and Death , Cambridge: Open Book Publishers.
Visak, T., 2017, “Understanding ‘Meaning of Life’ in Terms of Reasons for Action”, The Journal of Value Inquiry , 51: 507–30.
Waghorn, N., 2014, Nothingness and the Meaning of Life: Philosophical Approaches to Ultimate Meaning through Nothing and Reflexivity , London: Bloomsbury.
Wielenberg, E., 2005, Value and Virtue in a Godless Universe , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wiggins, D., 1988, “Truth, Invention, and the Meaning of Life”, rev. edn. in Essays on Moral Realism , G. Sayre-McCord (ed.), Ithaca: Cornell University Press: 127–65.
Williams, B., 1973, “The Makropulos Case: Reflections on the Tedium of Immortality”, in Problems of the Self , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 82–100.
–––, 1976, “Persons, Character and Morality”, in The Identities of Persons , A. O. Rorty (ed.), Berkeley: University of California Press: 197–216.
Williams, C., 2020, Religion and the Meaning of Life: An Existential Approach , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wolf, S., 2010, Meaning in Life and Why It Matters , Princeton: Princeton University Press.
–––, 2015, The Variety of Values: Essays on Morality, Meaning, and Love , New York: Oxford University Press.
–––, 2016, “Meaningfulness: A Third Dimension of the Good Life”, Foundations of Science , 21: 253–69.
Wong, W., 2008, “Meaningfulness and Identities”, Ethical Theory and Moral Practice , 11: 123–48.
Buber, M., 1923, I and Thou , W. Kaufmann (tr.), New York: Simon & Schuster Inc., 1970.
Camus, A., 1942, The Myth of Sisyphus , J. O’Brian (tr.), London: H. Hamilton, 1955.
James, W., 1899, “What Makes a Life Significant?”, in On Some of Life’s Ideals , New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1900.
Jaspers, K., 1931, Man in the Modern Age , E. Paul and C. Paul (tr.), New York: Routledge, 2010.
Kant, I., 1791, Critique of the Power of Judgment , P. Guyer and E. Mathews (tr.), New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
Kierkegaard, S., 1849, The Sickness unto Death , H. V. Hong and E. H. Hong (tr.), Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1980.
Marx, K., 1844, Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts , in Karl Marx Selected Writings, 2 nd Ed. , D. McLellan (ed., tr.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Nietzsche, F., 1885, Thus Spoke Zarathustra , in The Portable Nietzsche , W. Kaufmann (ed., tr.), New York: Viking Press, 1954.
Sartre, J.-P., 1946, Existentialism Is a Humanism , P. Mairet (tr.), London: Methuen & Co, 1948.
Schlick, M., 1927, “ On the Meaning of Life ”, P. Heath (tr.).
Schopenhauer, A., 1851, Parerga and Paralipomena: Short Philosophical Essays, Volume 2 , E. F. J. Payne (tr.), New York: Oxford University Press, 1974.
Tolstoy, L., 1884, A Confession , L. Maude and A. Maude (tr.).
Wittgenstein, L., 1929, Lecture on Ethics , E. Zamuner et al. (eds.), Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2014.
Benatar, D. (ed.), 2016, Life, Death & Meaning, 3 rd Ed. , Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Cottingham, J. (ed.), 2007, Western Philosophy: An Anthology, 2 nd Ed. , Oxford: Blackwell: pt. 12.
Garcia, R. and King, N. (eds.), 2009, Is Goodness Without God Good Enough? Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Klemke, E. D. and Cahn, S. M. (eds.), 2018, The Meaning of Life: A Reader, 4 th Ed. , New York: Oxford University Press.
Kolodny, N. (ed.), 2013, Death and the Afterlife , New York: Oxford University Press.
Leach, S. and Tartaglia, J. (eds.), 2018, The Meaning of Life and the Great Philosophers , London: Routledge.
Morioka, M. (ed.), 2015, Reconsidering Meaning in Life , Saitama: Waseda University.
––– (ed.), 2017, Nihilism and the Meaning of Life , Saitama: Waseda University.
Seachris, J. (ed.), 2013, Exploring the Meaning of Life: An Anthology and Guide , Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Seachris, J. and Goetz, S. (eds.), 2016, God and Meaning: New Essays , New York: Bloombsury Academic.
Baggini, J., 2004, What’s It All About?: Philosophy and the Meaning of Life , London: Granta Books.
Belliotti, R., 2001, What Is the Meaning of Life? , Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Belshaw, C., 2005, 10 Good Questions About Life and Death , Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Cottingham, J., 2003, On the Meaning of Life , London: Routledge.
Eagleton, T., 2007, The Meaning of Life: A Very Short Introduction , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fischer, J. M., 2019, Death, Immortality, and Meaning in Life , New York: Oxford University Press.
Ford, D., 2007, The Search for Meaning: A Short History , Berkeley: University of California Press.
Hauskeller, M., 2020, The Meaning of Life and Death: Ten Classic Thinkers on the Ultimate Question , London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Martin, M., 2002, Atheism, Morality, and Meaning , Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
Messerly, J., 2012, The Meaning of Life: Religious, Philosophical, Transhumanist, and Scientific Approaches , Seattle: Darwin and Hume Publishers.
Ruse, M., 2019, A Meaning to Life , New York: Oxford University Press.
Young, J., 2003, The Death of God and the Meaning of Life , New York: Routledge.

How to cite this entry . Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP Society . Look up topics and thinkers related to this entry at the Internet Philosophy Ontology Project (InPhO). Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers , with links to its database.

Delon, N., 2021, “ The Meaning of Life ”, a bibliography on PhilPapers.
Metz, T., 2021, “ Life, Meaning of ”, in Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy , E. Mason (ed.).
O’Brien, W., 2021, “ The Meaning of Life: Early Continental and Analytic Perspectives ”, in Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy , J. Fieser and B. Dowden (eds.).
Seachris, J., 2021, “ Meaning of Life: The Analytic Perspective ”, in Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy , J. Fieser and B. Dowden (eds.).

Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

Info about mirror sites

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

Architecture and Design
Asian and Pacific Studies
Business and Economics
Classical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies
Computer Sciences
Cultural Studies
Engineering
General Interest
Geosciences
Industrial Chemistry
Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies
Jewish Studies
Library and Information Science, Book Studies
Life Sciences
Linguistics and Semiotics
Literary Studies
Materials Sciences
Mathematics
Social Sciences
Sports and Recreation
Theology and Religion
Publish your article
The role of authors
Promoting your article
Abstracting & indexing
Publishing Ethics
Why publish with De Gruyter
How to publish with De Gruyter
Our book series
Our subject areas
Your digital product at De Gruyter
Contribute to our reference works
Product information
Tools & resources
Product Information
Promotional Materials
Orders and Inquiries
FAQ for Library Suppliers and Book Sellers
Repository Policy
Free access policy
Open Access agreements
Database portals
For Authors
Customer service
People + Culture
Journal Management
How to join us
Working at De Gruyter
Mission & Vision
De Gruyter Foundation
De Gruyter Ebound
Our Responsibility
Partner publishers

Your purchase has been completed. Your documents are now available to view.

The meaning of death in Kenkō Yoshida's Tsurezuregusa [Essays in idleness]

This article discusses the meaning of death in Kenkō Yoshida's Tsurezuregusa [Essays in idleness], completed around 1330 at the end of the Kamakura Period (1185–1333). Kenkō, who was a Buddhist monk and hermit, naturally construed the concept of death in terms of the impermanence of the world. Taking Lakoffian conceptual metaphor theory, in which death is understood as an abstract category, as a jumping-off point, I contrast the Buddhist conception of death with different conceptualizations of metaphor and metonymy by contemporary scholars to locate the notion of “death” in the medieval linguistic context. I claim that while death in Essays in idleness is more frequently considered non-literal, it is not interpretable metaphorically. This hints at an alternative, namely, that Kenkō's concept of death is created metonymically. Impermanence as a literary aesthetic thus crystallizes in the form of death as a syntagmatic metonym.

X / Twitter

Supplementary Materials

Please login or register with De Gruyter to order this product.

International Journal of the Sociology of Language

Journal and Issue

Articles in the same issue.

IMAGES

10 lines essay on Death || Short Essay on Death || Speech on Death
Of Death Essay, Of Death Essay Line by Line Explanation, Of Death Essay Summary, By Francis bacon
Outstanding Death Essay ~ Thatsnotus
Personal Essay On Death
Narrative Essay About Death
Essay Death

VIDEO

The Death of Common Courtesy
What is the meaning of death?#scary #horrorstories
How did Jesus die? The Purpose of Jesus' Death
Our Flag Means Death cancelled by Max after 2 seasons
Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead
Why Euthanasia Should Be Legalized and Regulated

COMMENTS

PDF The Meaning of Death in Shakespeare's Hamlet
The "common theme" of nature, Claudius says in Hamlet,is"death of fathers" (1.2.103-04). All who live must die, but death always feels, in Gertrude's words, "so particular" (1.2.75). Since death is also a "common theme" in Hamlet, this essay asks what the "particular" way characters die reveals about Shakespeare's ...
The Meaning of Death
The mystery of death is part of the enigma of the soul and of life itself; understanding death really means understanding life. During life as we know it, the body is vitalized by the soul; upon death, there is a separation between body and soul. But the soul continues to live on as it always has, now unfettered by the physical constraints of ...
Death (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
This article considers several questions concerning the philosophy of death. First, it discusses what it is to be alive. This topic arises because to die is roughly to lose one's life. The second topic is the nature of death, and how it bears on the persistence of organisms and persons. The third topic is the harm thesis, the claim that death ...
The Theme of Death, Loss, and Grief: [Essay Example], 512 words
Death, loss, and grief are universal experiences that have been explored and portrayed in literature for centuries. These themes often serve as a reflection of the human condition, providing insights into the emotional, psychological, and cultural dimensions of these experiences. This essay will delve into the interpretations of death, loss ...
A Summary and Analysis of Roland Barthes' 'The Death of the Author'
By Dr Oliver Tearle (Loughborough University) 'The Death of the Author' is an influential 1968 essay by the French literary theorist Roland Barthes. But what does Barthes mean by 'the death of the author'? This important short essay was crucial in the development of poststructuralist literary theory in the 1970s and 1980s, as many English…
[PDF] Does Death Give Meaning to Life
B. Trisel. Published 27 August 2015. Philosophy. Some people claim that death makes our lives meaningless. Bernard Williams and Viktor Frankl have made the opposite claim that death gives meaning to life. Although there has been much scrutiny of the former claim, the latter claim has received very little attention.
Our Stories: Essays on Life, Death, and Free Will
The first four essays concern the badness of death, the next three take up the possible goodness of immortality, and the last three focus on the way stories and free will give meaning to our lives. The Introduction gives an overview of the essays, and then offers some additional ruminations on these themes.
Thomas Nagel "Death": Summary and Analysis
Death Essay Outline Introduction. Introduction to Nagel's exploration of death as an evil; Definition of "death" as permanent and without conscious survival; The central question of whether death is an evil and why; Nagel's First Premise: Deprivation as the Basis for Death's Evil. Nagel's argument that death's evil is rooted in the deprivation ...
The Meaning of Life and Death Essay
The Meaning of Life and Death Essay. Better Essays. 3649 Words. 15 Pages. 8 Works Cited. Open Document. The Meaning of Life and Death The abstract idea of life cannot be explained by such simple ideas as being animated, breathing, or speaking. Ordinary machines in this century can perform all of these basic functions.
On the Meaning of Death: Essays on Mortuary Rituals and Eschatological
Articles chiefly in English; one article each in French and German. Foreword / Editors -- Introduction : Death and the concept of a person / Maurice Bloch -- Garo beliefs in the afterlife / Robbins Burling -- Pouring water and eating food : on the symbolism of death in a Sasak community on Lombok, Indonesia / Sven Cederroth -- The journey through the Bardo : notes on the symbolism of Tibetan ...
Reflections on Death in Philosophical/Existential Context
The central argument of this essay has been that death has always been and remains at the centre of life. Philosophically and existentially the meaning of death is problematic, and the natural sciences cannot produce knowledge on this problem. Religious traditions always beheld the immortality of the soul and so argued great philosophers like ...
Death Essay
Words: 931. Pages: 2. This essay sample was donated by a student to help the academic community. Papers provided by EduBirdie writers usually outdo students' samples. Cite this essay. Download. Death is an inevitable part of life, one that evokes a range of emotions and has been given many different meanings by cultures, religions, and belief ...
On the meaning of death : essays on mortuary rituals and eschatological
On the meaning of death : essays on mortuary rituals and eschatological beliefs. Publication date 1988 Topics Funeral rites and ceremonies, Death -- Religious aspects Publisher Uppsala : [Ubsaliensis Academiae] ; Stockholm, Sweden : Distributed by Almqvist & Wiksell International
Narrative About Death: [Essay Example], 637 words GradesFixer
Conclusion. In conclusion, the narrative about death is a deeply ingrained aspect of the human experience. It is through storytelling, artistic expression, and religious texts that we grapple with the profound questions and emotions that arise when confronted with our own mortality. These narratives provide us with a framework for understanding ...
Death Theme in Literature: Examples & Definition
️ Death Essay Topics . Death is a widely discussed topic not only in literature but also in mythology, psychology, philosophy, medicine, and many other studies. If you need to write an essay on death, here are some examples of topics: The many faces of death. Nietzsche and the death of God. Burial practices of Native Americans.
The Meaning of Life Through Death, Essay Example
Death is noted as the final stage of everything; the final strand that puts a person or any living creature at that to its end. The wonders of life simply make death rather 'boring'. However, there are instances when death itself offers a new challenge that people tend to make peace with. One issue is how they would be able to survive the ...
Contemplating Mortality: Powerful Essays on Death and Inspiring ...
In conclusion, these powerful essays on death offer inspiring perspectives and deep insights into the human experience of coping with mortality, grief, and loss. From personal accounts to philosophical reflections, these essays provide a diverse range of perspectives that encourage readers to contemplate their mortality and the meaning of life.
On the meaning of death : essays on mortuary rituals and eschatological
Hans Hadders. Sociology, History. Mortality. 2013. TLDR. It is illustrated how various cosmological, eschatological, soteriological, economical, environmental, as well as socio-political factors regulate and shape the form and content of cremation events and disposal in Norway. Expand. 16. PDF.
Death Essay for Students and Children in English
10 Lines on Death Essay in English. 1. Death is the permanent cessation of all biological features that sustain a living organism. 2. One of the main obvious indications of death is the point at which the eyes cover over, as liquid and oxygen quit streaming to the corneas. 3.
How Do You View Death?
This week, the death toll passed 300,000 in the United States. Worldwide, it's more than 1.6 million. The cumulative effect is shock fatigue or numbness, but instead of turning away, we need to ...
Essay on Death [Edit & Download], Pdf
Essay on Death. Death, a topic often shrouded in fear and mystery, is an inevitable part of the human experience. It is the ultimate destiny of every living creature, a natural process that marks the end of life's journey. This essay seeks to explore the multifaceted nature of death, examining its significance, cultural perceptions, and the ...
The Meaning of Life
3. Naturalism. Recall that naturalism is the view that a physical life is central to life's meaning, that even if there is no spiritual realm, a substantially meaningful life is possible. Like supernaturalism, contemporary naturalism admits of two distinguishable variants, moderate and extreme (Metz 2019).
The meaning of death in Kenkō Yoshida's Tsurezuregusa [Essays in idleness]
This article discusses the meaning of death in Kenkō Yoshida's Tsurezuregusa [Essays in idleness], completed around 1330 at the end of the Kamakura Period (1185-1333). Kenkō, who was a Buddhist monk and hermit, naturally construed the concept of death in terms of the impermanence of the world. Taking Lakoffian conceptual metaphor theory, in which death is understood as an abstract category ...

MyLife: Chassidus Applied

Join the global war of goodness. Partner with us on the spiritual frontlines.

Death & Grieving

What Does Death Really Mean?

What Does Death Mean For The Survivors?

Related Content

How to Cope with Grief

Immortalize Your Loved One: Yahrzeit/Memorial Reminder

Terumah: Where Death Meets Life

Thursday, June 06

A Summary and Analysis of Roland Barthes’ ‘The Death of the Author’

Discover more from Interesting Literature

4 thoughts on “A Summary and Analysis of Roland Barthes’ ‘The Death of the Author’”

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Our Stories: Essays on Life, Death, and Free Will

Unsupported image file format.

Sorry, there was a problem.

Image Unavailable

On the Meaning of Death: Essays on Mortuary Rituals and Eschatological Beliefs (Uppsala Studies in Cultural Anthropology : No. 8) Paperback – January 1, 1989

Product details

Customer reviews

No customer reviews

Reflections on Death in Philosophical/Existential Context

Cite this article

Similar content being viewed by others

Chambers of Consciousness and Houses of Life: Nietzschean Hermeneutics in Arthur Machen’s The Great God Pan

The Problem of Meaning in Human Death

Plato on the Soul

Aristotle on the Soul

Death in Modernity

Further Reading

Author information

Corresponding author

Additional information

Rights and permissions

About this article

Share this article

Death Essay

What is Scaring?

Cite this paper

Related articles

Most popular essays

Join our 150k of happy users

Internet Archive Audio

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Save Page Now

On the meaning of death : essays on mortuary rituals and eschatological beliefs

plus-circle Add Review comment Reviews

DOWNLOAD OPTIONS

IN COLLECTIONS

SIMILAR ITEMS (based on metadata)

Narrative About Death

Table of contents

Cite this Essay

Related Essays

Still can’t find what you need?

Related Essays on Death

Related Topics

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

Theme of Death in Literature: Examples & Definition

💀 Significance of Death in Literature

✍️ Death Essay Topics

🔍 References

🔮 Theme of Death in Literature: How Is It Presented?

Theme of Death in English Literature

Death in Victorian Literature

Death in American Literature

Death in Children’s Literature

Death Theme in Contemporary Literature

💡 Death in Literature: Related Themes

Theme of Survival in Literature

Love and Death in Literature

Immortality in Literature

Death by Disease in Literature

Theme of Grief in Literature

Death in Literature Essay Topics

Theme of Death in Hamlet Essay Topics

📚 Theme of Death in Literature: Examples

Theme of Death in Hamlet