Actually, I didn’t write that paper, so the thoughts contained therein aren’t mine.
The thoughts were apparently put on paper about ten years before I lost everything I valued here on earth, and began questioning everything I believed.
(If you look at the acknowledgements on that last page, you’ll see "the article was presented at the Oxford-Copenhagen Summit on Ethics in 1999, and at the International Society for Utilitarian Studies conference in North Carolina in 2000…)
I might never have considered these questions myself, if I hadn’t encountered one of the counter arguments Prof. Holtug addresses (namely, that it couldn’t be any worse for you if you didn’t exist, because there wouldn’t be any you.)
I thought the purpose of this section on philosophy was to discuss philosophy?
And as far as the question of whether any states of existence are better than non-existence having any bearing on your life, that might depend on whether your faith (in God, His existence, His goodness, His plan and purpose) is always as strong as you think it is now.
If you ever find yourself alone in the dark, questioning everything you once believed, the question of whether any state of earthly or heavenly existence could be better than non-existence might take on more practical importance.
I don’t know
Agustine, Anselm, and Aquinas seemed to think they could win souls by arguing that existence is greater than non-existence (that was part of their Cosmological argument in favor of God’s existence), but some might disagree (or even say they were making a category error.)
What I do know is that churchmen have been discussing philosophy since Paul’s sermon on Mars hill, and have considered it right and proper to do so.
The JW’s, the 7th day Adventists, other Sabbatarian groups, and Sunday Adventists have always denied the immortality of the soul, and now even the Church of England favors an annihilationist interpretation of scripture.
Given that view, it’s quite possible for creatures to cease to exist.
And given the view that existence can’t be any better or worse than non-existence, the saved gain nothing, and the lost lose nothing (and I don’t expect that argument to wine many souls, do you?)
But to answer your question directly (if the annihilationists are right, and suicide is a sin) I do think that my existence may have been in peril when I was first hit with the repeated suggestion that existence was really no better or worsethan non-existence.
Anyway, I would like to know what those with an interest in philosophy think of this paper.
Thank you.