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
    If an object that is an organism may continue its existen... — Carmelics
    Home/Afterlife & Death
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    If an object that is an organism may continue its existence as a corpse, then 'dead' applies univocally to it at any time t after it dies, meaning roughly 'died before t'.

    Afterlife & Death
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.On this view, the organism and the corpse are the same object.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.That object was once alive and then died.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.So at any time t after it dies, 'dead' applies to it in the same sense, meaning it died before t.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.'Dead' as applied to a corpse picks out a present state of decomposition, not merely a historical event of dying before t.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A corpse at t+1 day and a corpse at t+1 year differ in degree of 'deadness' in ways univocal past-tense predication cannot capture.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore 'dead' functions more like a gradable adjective tracking current biological states than a uniform relational predicate anchored to a past event.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Olson and van Inwagen argue that organisms cease to exist at death, meaning the corpse is a numerically distinct object, not the same continuant.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the organism and corpse are distinct objects, 'dead' cannot apply univocally to one object across pre- and post-death times, since no single object persists through both phases.
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    Afterlife & Death

    Related

    'Dead' as applied to a corpse picks out a present state of decomposition, not me...A corpse at t+1 day and a corpse at t+1 year differ in degree of 'deadness' in w...If the organism and corpse are distinct objects, 'dead' cannot apply univocally ...Olson and van Inwagen argue that organisms cease to exist at death, meaning the ...
    +4 moreShow less
    On this view, the organism and the corpse are the same object.So at any time t after it dies, 'dead' applies to it in the same sense, meaning ...That object was once alive and then died.Therefore 'dead' functions more like a gradable adjective tracking current biolo...

    Similar

    So at any time t after it dies, 'dead' applies to it in the same sense...92%Whether an organism leaves a corpse or not, and whether its corpse exi...89%If corpses were never alive, then they never died, so being dead (as a...84%Theorists who deny that an organism may continue its existence as a co...84%

    Source

    AI-extracted2/3 agreementValid
    SEP: death
    If, on the other hand, an object that is an organism may continue its existence as a corpse...
    View source passageHide passage
    As is mentioned below, some theorists deny that an object that is at one time an organism may continue its existence as a corpse. Such theorists will say that organisms and their corpses are two different objects. They may conclude that ‘dead’ is ambiguous—that it means one thing as applied to organisms, and another thing as attributed to the corpses organisms leave. In any case, they will need to deny that, as concerns corpses, being dead implies having died, as corpses are never alive, according to them. If, on the other hand, an object that is an organism may continue its existence as a cor...
    Extraction notes

    Validity: The premises capture the reasoning present in the final sentence of the passage: if the organism continues as a corpse (same object), then since it was once alive and died, 'dead' applies univocally at any later time t, meaning roughly 'died before t'.

    Confidence: Directly stated in the text.

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit