Abstract

This article discusses the conceptual ambiguities in relation to the current definitions of ‘death’. It addresses the need for an essentially pluralistic approach that probes the limits of epistemic singularity and perceives death as an open concept. Despite the views dependent upon the irrevocable termination of existence, I assume the opposite: first, that there are manifold ways to respond philosophically to the issue, without giving priority to any sovereign or prescribed position; second, that the plurality of unequally convincing positions opens up the ‘democratic’ space of negotiations about life and death as a political space par excellence, privileged by philosophy. Finally, my thesis about the thanatological pluralism gets closer to what I shall call the ‘political philosophy of death’ in the future studies of the issue, here insufficiently explored.