William Shakespeare s The Markopoulos - 1762 Words

Bernard William’s The Markopoulos Case focuses on the topic of immortality, and the issues that arise from the status of being immortal. William’s uses the concept of the play to refute the idea of immortality. This is due to the end of the Markopoulos play, where the immortal protagonist kills themselves out of the unbearable boredom of exhausting their categorical desires. Whereas Fischer rejects William’s view of immortality, due to the limiting constraints of his argument. Fischer asserts the immortal life would be livable, because it reflects a mortal life. In effect, I will further Fischer’s argument on the basis that an immortal life would be livable, on the account of packaged and repeatable goods. Therefore, this essay will†¦show more content†¦This is due to the consistency of their individual characteristics remaining the same for so many years. Problematically, William’s asserts, the immortal life would be undesirable, or unliva ble since we will inevitably exhaust our categorical desires. Whereas, Fischer denies William’s Attractiveness dilemma, asserting his argument is too narrow in thinking, due to the belief that the agent could only pursue one categorical desire. Insofar, as William asserts for X to remain immortal, X’s defining behaviors/characteristics/ (categorical desires) cannot change. Fischer refutes William’s argument of boredom, and coins it as the Attractiveness condition. However, a further dilemma that arises is that the individual cannot fathom, nor succumb to boredom in their future. (Fischer 260). William’s argues, if the agent has a fixed set of characteristics, overtime the individual will inevitably succumb to boredom, and consequently adopt new interests alien to the individual. However, Fischer denies William’s assertion, because the immortal agent will not only have ‘one’ interest, arguably Fischer asserts they will possess a package of categorical desires (261). Fischer denies the idea that the agent will only possess a single categorical desire that propels them in to the future, rather there is a conjunction of goods/interests. However, William’s asserts the