Аннотация: The paper was written for participation "Death and Self" workshop, scheduled for July 2-3, 2025, at the Institute of Philosophy, Goethe University Frankfurt.
Annotation
This essay draws on foundational texts: Epicurus"s Letter to Menoeceus (from Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers), Seneca"s Letters from a Stoic, Marcus Aurelius"s Meditations, Dostoevsky"s The Brothers Karamazov, and Jaspers"s Philosophy of Existence. Specific passages are cited to ground the analysis in primary sources, enhancing the discussion of death and selfhood.
The philosophical exploration of death and the self has long been a central concern across various traditions, with each thinker offering unique insights into how these two concepts intertwine. This essay examines the perspectives of Epicurus, Seneca, Marcus Aurelius, Dostoevsky and Jaspers on death and selfhood. Main questions: What constitutes a rational attitude toward our own death? Is death a harm to ourselves or only to those we leave behind? How do our sense of self and subjective experience shape our attitudes toward death?
Method. The essay employs a comparative method, analyzing how five thinkers from distinct traditions - Epicureanism, Stoicism, existentialism, and literature - address death and selfhood. By focusing on each philosopher"s view of the self and its influence on their attitude toward death, the essay uncovers both commonalities and contrasts.
Novelty. While these thinkers are often studied individually, this essay innovatively juxtaposes their ideas to highlight how the nature of the self-whether material, rational, moral, or existential-shapes attitudes toward death. This cross-traditional approach offers fresh insights into the interplay between selfhood and mortality.
Keywords: death, selfhood, rationality, harm, existentialism, Stoicism, Epicureanism, philosophy, meaning, authenticity.
Epicurus: Death as Nothing to Us
Epicurus (341-270 BCE), the founder of Epicureanism, viewed the self as a material entity-a temporary arrangement of atoms seeking pleasure and avoiding pain. He argued that death, as the dissolution of these atoms, is irrelevant to us. In his Letter to Menoeceus, he states, "Death is nothing to us; for that which is dissolved is without sensation, and that which is without sensation is nothing to us" (Diogenes Laertius Lives: 10.125). For Epicurus, a rational attitude toward death is to dismiss fear of it, as it neither affects us while alive nor harms us when dead, since the self ceases to exist. Death is not a harm to ourselves but might distress those left behind due to their own misconceptions. Our sense of self, tied to sensory experience, thus renders death insignificant once sensation ends.
Seneca: Death as a Natural Part of Life
Seneca (4 BCE-65 CE), a Roman Stoic, conceived of the self as a rational entity capable of aligning with nature. In Letters from a Stoic, he writes, "Rehearse death. To say this is to tell a person to rehearse his freedom" (Letter 26: 71). Seneca believed that a rational attitude toward death involves accepting it as an inevitable part of the natural order, using its contemplation to live more fully in the present. Unlike Epicurus, who negates death"s relevance, Seneca sees it as a liberator from fear if approached with reason. He suggests death is not a harm to the self -defined by its rational capacity-but may affect others through loss. Our sense of self as rational shapes an attitude of calm acceptance toward mortality.
Marcus Aurelius: Death and the Rational Self
Marcus Aurelius (121-180 CE), a Stoic Roman emperor, similarly viewed the self as the rational mind, part of a larger cosmic order. In Meditations, he reflects, "You have lived as a citizen in a great city. Five years or a hundred-what"s the difference? The laws make no distinction" (Book 12.36: 171). For Marcus, a rational attitude toward death is to see it as a natural transition, not to be feared but embraced as part of universal reason. Death is not a harm to the self, which persists in its rational essence until dissolution, though it may impact those who remain. Our sense of self as rational and interconnected with nature fosters an attitude of equanimity toward death.
Dostoevsky: Death, Faith, and the Moral Self
Fyodor Dostoevsky (1821-1881), a Russian novelist, explored death and selfhood through a moral and spiritual lens. In The Brothers Karamazov, Ivan Karamazov questions the meaning of life in the face of death, declaring, "If God does not exist, then everything is permitted" (Book 5 Chapter 4: 263). Dostoevsky suggests that a rational attitude toward death is elusive without faith or meaning, as the self - defined by moral struggle - grapples with despair or hope. Death may be a harm to the self if it leads to nihilism, but it can also inspire spiritual growth, affecting both the individual and others. Our subjective experience of the self as a moral entity profoundly shapes our complex, often conflicted attitudes toward mortality.
Karl Jaspers: Death as a Boundary Situation
Karl Jaspers (1883-1969), a German existentialist, saw the self as an evolving process shaped by confrontation with limits. In Philosophy of Existence, he describes death as a "boundary situation" that "throws us back upon ourselves" (p. 47). For Jaspers, a rational attitude involves facing death authentically, using it to deepen our existence rather than evade it. Death is not a harm but a catalyst for self-realization, though its impact on others depends on their own responses. Our sense of self, forged through subjective encounters with mortality, drives an attitude of engagement and meaning-making in the face of death.
Conclusion
Epicurus, Seneca, Marcus Aurelius, Dostoevsky, and Jaspers offer distinct yet interconnected views on death and selfhood. Epicurus dismisses death"s relevance to the material self, while Seneca and Marcus Aurelius advocate rational acceptance based on the self"s alignment with nature. Dostoevsky and Jaspers, however, emphasize the self"s moral and existential dimensions, viewing death as a challenge to meaning and authenticity. Together, they suggest that our sense of self-whether sensory, rational, moral, or existential-fundamentally shapes our attitudes toward death, addressing the workshop"s themes with enduring relevance.
References
Epicurus. Letter to Menoeceus. In Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers, Book 10, translated by R. D. Hicks, Loeb Classical Library, 1925.
Seneca. Letters from a Stoic, translated by Robin Campbell, Penguin Classics, 1969, Letter 26.
Marcus Aurelius. Meditations, translated by Gregory Hays, Modern Library, 2002, Book 12.36.
Dostoevsky, Fyodor. The Brothers Karamazov, translated by Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1990, Book 5, Chapter 4.
Jaspers, Karl. Philosophy of Existence, translated by Richard F. Grabau, University of Pennsylvania Press, 1971.