Samad 1

Muhammad Ahmed Abdus Samad

22110097

SS 100

Syed Javed Nazir

22nd October 2018

In the article “The Importance of Afterlife. Seriously” for New York Times, the writer

Samuel Scheffler presents a philosophical analysis about how important the “afterlife” is for

each and every one of us. This article was written in late 2013, just before the publication of

Scheffler’s very well-known book “Death and the afterlife” which is on the similar context. The

article appeared in “The Stone” which is a forum of NYT for philosophers and other thinkers.

The implicit purpose behind this article seemingly indicates the promotion of his forthcoming

book (that was published some months after the article) and introduces people with his

philosophy about afterlife. Deep analysis of the article shows the Scheffler’s new way of

thinking about why “overcoming threats to human survival” was important.

Scheffler starts the article by clarifying his belief about the afterlife and goes on to make

a point about the importance of the upcoming generations. He presents a hypothetical scenario

and asks the audience some rhetorical questions. With support of relatable examples and

consequences of ‘infertility of human generation’ or ‘asteroid collision’ he builds on his thesis

that the consequences that our loved ones would have to face after us is not what actually
 Samad 2

matters, what actually concerns us is the idea that no new people would be there after us. Later in

the article, Scheffler logically relates the phenomenon with egoism and individualism, making a

claim that all our purpose of life is dependent on our descendants. Eventually, Scheffler switches

to the other side of the argument that is, if the humanity was to survive, and how near was the

end of humanity. He concluded his article by commenting on the obligations we have on our

descendants i.e. saving the world. He well rounds his analysis by explaining that it’s not only the

descendants who would be benefitted by our effort to save the worlds, but also our purpose of

life which is benefitted the most.

In the course of the article the writer used many of the oratory tools and rhetoric devices

depicting his professional writing skills. He uses the set of assumptions, imagery and logical

examples to pursue the audience and introduce them to a new interpretation of the phenomenon.

He constructs on his thesis and later relates the idea to the social issue of “preserving the

environment”. In doing this, Scheffler challenges some normal believes and scientific facts, that

were not explained in this text. Apart, the text is highly based on philosophical idea and misses

on much of the factual or research-based explanation, which is an interest driver for many

readers.

In the early part of the article the writer forces the assumption that “Humanity won’t exist

forever”. The writer assumes that readers are contained with the belief that humanity will

ultimately end. However, much of the modern Science and Biological researches nowadays

prove the flip side. In the article END OF DEATH by Sean Martin, for express.co, he mentions

the factual data about how human lifespan has increased over the years and people have started
 Samad 3

living longer (Martin 1). Moreover, he talks about how the technological progress have caused

many diseases to wipeout over the time, increasing humans’ life span. In another article on NBC

news “How Humans Might outlive the earth.”, Corey Powell talks about the latest scientific

advancements and continuous revolution of species. He infers that the pace at which technology

is improving, the ideas of multiplant era, Star-Hopping era and gravitational era makes much of

the larger sense. He refers to the Paul Steinhardt’s (of Princeton University) research on how

humans would survive the Big Bang by leapfrogging to the next cosmic cycle. Such theories

reject the idea “the end of humanity”.

Sheffler contradicts the idea that “personal afterlife” gives purpose to life. This may

offend readers who are possessed with the firm belief in the Hereafter: prominent religions on

earth including Christianity and Islam lay great emphasis on the Hereafter. Many of the actions

of humans are refined and effected by the judgement they will face in the Hereafter. “Personal

afterlife” is the source of hope for many of the people around. The outrageous rejection and

generalizing of author’s own idea over the way humans think may offend some of the Scheffler’s

audience. One such example is given in “Do Psychological beliefs effect Psychological

Adjustment to late-life and spousal loss” by Deborah Carr and Shane Sharp: she discusses about

how the concept of meeting their loved ones in after life gives a widowed woman’s life a

purpose. Hence, generalizing the idea that the survival of other humans is more important in

giving purpose to one’s life is what was not needed from Scheffler to make a point. However,

such generalization is not preferred when the audience is diverse.

(shift to for in intro) One of the very strong rhetoric devices used by Scheffler’s that

dominates throughout is the use of imagery. He takes help of rhetorical questions and logical
 Samad 4

examples to guide the thoughts of the audience towards his point. He mentions a hypothetical

scenario of asteroid collision and then asks the audience “how would you react”. This makes the

audience imagine and think over the topic. Hence, engaging the audience in the topic helps

Scheffler grab their interest. Contructing towards the main point, he mentions various related

examples that can easily be imagined by the audience keeping themselves in such a place. Such

information attaches the audience emotionally to the topic, as they imagine a collapsing world.

Moreover, this also appeal to logic as many of the movies and real-life examples can be related

to it. Amidst the article the writer presents another hypothetical scenario creating a picture in the

mind of audience and makes them imagine the consequences if the human race got infertile. This

example can be related by the audience as well as the author, to one of the top grossing movie of

2006 “Children of men”. The movie displays the same depression, anxiety and despair Scheffler

talks about in the article. This example logically and emotionally conveys Scheffler’s perception

that it is not only a person’s loved ones whose survival matters, but also the survival of entire

humanity.

Another quality of the Scheffler’s article is its cohernce. The flow of thoughts, questions,

explanation and then building a strong conclusion is a beautiful aspect of writing and is mostly

admired. A review on Scheffler s book “Death and The Afterlife” on Amazon.com describes his

way of writing as “meticulously argued and demanding in exactly the right way” and it has

“agreeable lightness and fluency”.( John Cottingham, Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews). As in

article Sheffler first explains his belief, then stirs it with imagery and dilutes his philosophy with

logical examples.
 Samad 5

Comparing this article with others of the similar genre, we can find how it stands out. He

presents the idea of “overcoming the threats to humanity”, in a way that is quite different and

more convincing. In this period of time there are many writers writing on the same genre i.e.

protecting the environment. The usual presentation by the writers on this topic includes either

materialistic benefits of preserving the environment, or relates it to ethics and concerns about the

welfare of our descendants. In the article for Gulf news the writer, Adithyan Rajan, claims

preservation of environment as the survival truth and the root of many current problems.

Another approach used by the writers nowadays is attaching business objectives to the

protection of environment. An article on Nature News by Drew Shindell talks on the topic

“Protecting Environment can Boost Economy”(Shindell 1). Shindell explains that taxing carbon

emission and using the money for the production of pollution free vehicles can bring business. In

a similar article, Sierra Club estimates that such an idea can generate thousands of jobs and

billions of dollars (Sierra Club 1). Thus, the approach by Samuel Scheffler can easily be listed

among the creative ones. Also, Sheffler’s definition of “afterlife” is discussed by Mark Johnson

in his Boston review of Sheffler’s book “Death and afterlife”. His definition of afterlife is

“neither supernatural continuation of life nor the result of a deeper naturalistic understanding of

the kind of thing we are”. For Scheffler, afterlife is a collective continuation of

humanity(Johnson 1). This contradicts the normal definition of afterlife that is usually contained

in one’s mind. Hence, again reflecting Scheffler’s ability to think differently and philosophically.

The effect of the article is enhanced by the inclusion of the artwork by Balbusso twins.

The picture displays the evolution of mankind and the vastness of the universe. A visual is
 Samad 6

created in the reader’s mind about how inter-related the humankind is to the past generations.

Moreover, it also makes us think about the survival of humanity through the ages. The

combination of colors used in the article includes scientific as well as historic shades. This

supports the Scheffler’s article by preparing the readers for the hypothetical scenario he is about

to present.

Hence, the overall article reflects the great philosophical as well as writing skills of

Samuel Scheffler. His philosophical researches as a Professor in Dept. of Philosophy in New

York University proves his credibility to write on such a topic.

Scheffler manages to convey his point to the target audience: the environmentalists

amongst the American public. Moreover, the catchy title and picture would grab the interest of

many readers, making the audience spread out of scholars, philosophers or environmentalists. By

the undermining of “personal afterlife” he may be hurting religious sentiments. Moreover, the

omission of any factual data or experimental analysis of his philosophy makes his argument

flawed to the Positivists. However, the well-built thesis and synchronized argument keeps the

reader interested throughout the article. Relating the philosophy to the environmental causes

gives purpose to the article and penetrates in the reader the importance of survival of their

descendants. Scheffler, wisely omits some of the information about the ways in which

environment and human life can be preserved. This has the implicit purpose of getting the

readers to read his upcoming book which contains detailed explanation of the topic. Hence the

purpose is well achieved as after reading this article the reader would leave with the curiosty to

know more thus looking forward to his upcoming book.

 Samad 7

Works Cited

Carr, Deborah, and Shane Sharp. “Do Afterlife Beliefs Effect Psychological Adjustments

to Latelife.” The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences,

Oxford University Press, Jan. 2014, <www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3894123/>

Johnston, Mark. “Is Life a Ponzi Scheme?” Boston Review, 13 July 2018,

<bostonreview.net/books-ideas/mark-johnston-samuel-scheffler-death-afterlife-humanity-ponzi-

scheme>.

Martin, Sean. “END OF DEATH: Humans Will One Day Be Able to Live FOREVER,

Says Leading Researcher.” Express.co.uk, Express.co.uk, 1 Nov. 2016,

<www.express.co.uk/news/science/727666/END-OF-DEATH-Humans-live-FOREVER-aubrey-

de-grey>.

Powell, Corey. “How Humans Might Outlive Earth, the Sun...and Even the Universe.”

NBCNews.com, NBCUniversal News Group, <www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/how-humans-

might-outlive-earth-sun-even-universe-ncna831291>.

Shindell, Drew. “Protecting the Environment Can Boost the Economy.” Nature News,

Nature Publishing Group, 20 May 2009, <www.nature.com/articles/459321b>.