Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    A subject can only be harmed if there exists a subject to... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Death may be bad for those who die, even if they do not experience dying.

    A subject can only be harmed if there exists a subject to bear the harm at the time the harm occurs (the 'no subject' objection, Epicurus, Lucretius).

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Harm requires a conscious experience of badness; non-existent subjects cannot have experiences, so cannot be harmed.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If death ends all consciousness, the dead person never experiences their death as bad, so death itself causes no harm.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Attributing harm to non-subjects commits a logical error: we'd claim something bad happened to someone who no longer exists.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Harm can be comparative: dying at 30 is bad relative to the life one would have lived, regardless of post-death experience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.We recognize interests (continued existence, future projects) that can be thwarted even if the subject never experiences the thwarting.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The no-subject view implies it's not bad to kill someone painlessly in their sleep, which contradicts our moral intuitions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Afterlife & Death1 linked

    Related

    Attributing harm to non-subjects commits a logical error: we'd claim something b...Death may be bad for those who die, even if they do not experience dying.Harm can be comparative: dying at 30 is bad relative to the life one would have ...Harm requires a conscious experience of badness; non-existent subjects cannot ha...
    +3 moreShow less
    If death ends all consciousness, the dead person never experiences their death a...The no-subject view implies it's not bad to kill someone painlessly in their sle...We recognize interests (continued existence, future projects) that can be thwart...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit