Survival of Death

Survival of Death
Name
Institution
Due Date
Survival of Death
Introduction
The question about immortality raises vital discussions in society. Many people, including researchers and philosophers, have tried to create answers to the query. But they have not worked to the levels of eradicating its controversy. While some people believe in immortality, others do not. Also, the different individuals have varying reasons for the arguments. Some claim living forever is good and would motivate people to continue working and achieving the best in life. Others argue that immortality is boring since people will eventually live and do everything to exhaustion to the point of being idle. While survival to death is possible and exciting for people to know that they will never lose their lives, enjoying immortality may be proven wrong by aspects such as the boring bit of living forever in the predicted conditions such as global warming on the planet earth.
Main arguments
People can survive death since they are composed of bodies and souls. Although the body may lose value upon death, the soul continues to exist. Many dictionaries have assumed the meaning of death as the process of the body decomposing (Andrade, n.d.). However, it is not the end of a person’s existence. The human soul remains alive in other dimensions. In as much as the body does no longer exist after death and must eventually be disposed of in various including cremation and burial, people continue existing in forms, including the celestial state. In this stage, the vital signs like pulse and brain activity no longer hold and operate normally before death (Andrade, n.d.). Also, the vague and general remembrance of a person after death may be termed immortality. The continuity of a person’s deeds and the memories created when they are alive are essential (Hume, 2015). For instance, famous individuals like the baseball player Babe Ruth are immortal in a vague sense. His fans remember him and thus continue to exist among them despite the actual death of his body (Andrade, n.d.). Looking into such an existence philosophically illustrates that the immortality realized is the continuation of the individual’s identity. Thus, such people are immortal only because they are remembered by the living, though they do not legitimately exist (Andrade, n.d.). Thus, people can survive death through the soul’s continued existence and remembrance by the living after the death of the body.
Also, people will have the capability to survive death after the resurrection. The reformation of the body achieves immortality in life. Eventually, the restored body is incorporated into its original form with the soul to a new life again, but in the same state (Andrade, n.d.). Both the body and soul are solely brought back to their existence at this time. The idea of resurrection holds on to the fact that the bodies that constituted human beings shall rise again. This process or event brings people to their importance and use (Andrade, n.d.). They are expected to operate their activities normally, like before death. They can also interact with each other the same way they did before death and resurrection. In this case, the resurrection process is referred to as re-embodiment, which puts someone in the body. Therefore, it just means the idea of putting the dead back to their bodies. The staging performed by actors is an excellent example of the re-embodiment process predicated in the resurrection. Actors take and give a compelling presentation of the characters they represent in their acting (Andrade, n.d.). However, philosophers argue that people may not resurrect in the same bodies they once lived. Instead, the people after resurrection may be nothing but a replica of what once existed. But their original being is maintained in their souls, which cannot change.
Immortality can also be explained by the famous argument by Blaise Pascal. It is referred to as Pascal’s Wager argument. In its claim, it emphasizes people should probably stand for the positive side of an argument. For instance, if human beings had the chance to decide whether something they know a thing about exists, it is wiser for them to believe they exist (Andrade, n.d.). The best example in this illustration is the belief in God. If people hold on to the fact and belief that their immortal being exists, they will enjoy eternity as their reward. If they find that whatever they believe in does not exist in the end, they will have nothing to lose. Although they will have nothing to account for the mistake, they will not have faced the expected or predicted consequences of choosing the wrong path. Thus, it is better to believe that something exists and get the anticipated reward in the end instead of taking the opposite path of not believing to finally suffer in anguish if it does exist (Andrade, n.d.). By calculating the risks and benefits, it is better to believe that immortality is natu...