Skip to main content
Log in

Time, Value, and Collective Immortality

  • Published:
The Journal of Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Samuel Scheffler has recently defended what he calls the ‘afterlife conjecture’, the claim that many of our evaluative attitudes and practices rest on the assumption that human beings will continue to exist after we die. Scheffler contends that our endorsement of this claim reveals that our evaluative orientation has four features: non-experientialism, non-consequentialism, ‘conservatism,’ and future orientation. Here I argue that the connection between the afterlife conjecture and these four features is not as tight as Scheffler seems to suppose. In fact, those with an evaluative orientation that rejects these four features have equally strong moral reasons to endorse the existence of the collective afterlife.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. My critique of Scheffler is also germane to Lenman’s position (2002) that only from a “generation-centered perspective” can human extinction be thought bad.

  2. See also Scheffler’s reply to Seana Shiffrin (Scheffler 2013: 192–195), where he seems to backtrack on how fundamental conservatism, non-experientialism, and non-consequentialism are to our reactions to the prospect of human extinction.

  3. See also Scheffler (2013): 100, where he speaks of these stages as being “essential to our idea of a life that is temporally bounded.”

References

  • Behrendt, Kathy. 2007. Reasons to be fearful: Strawson, death and narrative. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 60: 133–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LeGuin, Ursula K. 1973. The ones who walk away from Omelas, New Dimensions, vol. 3. New York: Doubleday.

  • Lenman, James. 2002. On becoming extinct. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 83: 253–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacIntyre, Alasdair. 1984. After virtue, 2nd ed. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagel, Thomas. 1970. Death. Nous 4: 73–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheffler, Samuel. 2013. Death and the afterlife, ed. N. Kolodny. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Strawson, Galen. 2004. Against narrativity. Ratio 17: 428–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strawson, Galen. 2007. Episodic ethics. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 60: 85–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, Timothy. 2006. Conceptual truth. Aristotelian Society Supplementary 80: 1–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael Cholbi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cholbi, M. Time, Value, and Collective Immortality. J Ethics 19, 197–211 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10892-015-9198-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10892-015-9198-1

Keywords

Navigation