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
    Joel Feinberg's 'ante-mortem interest' view holds that ha... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Posthumous harm is doubtful or impossible.

    Joel Feinberg's 'ante-mortem interest' view holds that harm consists in the setback of interests, not in the experiencing of a bad state.

    ?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.We intuitively judge harms to unconscious people and the dead as real, which requires a theory disconnected from subjective experience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Interest-setback theory explains why betrayal harms us even when we never discover it, whereas experience-based theories struggle here.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This view preserves our moral obligations to future generations and non-sentient beings with interests in not being wronged.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Harm's moral urgency seems tied to suffering and negative experience; setback to abstract interests lacks obvious normative force.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Not all interest-setbacks matter morally (e.g., thwarting desire for false fame), suggesting experience or other factors determine real harm.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The account struggles to explain why we should care about interests if their setback produces no negative consciousness whatsoever.
      ?

      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

    Harm's moral urgency seems tied to suffering and negative experience; setback to...Interest-setback theory explains why betrayal harms us even when we never discov...Not all interest-setbacks matter morally (e.g., thwarting desire for false fame)...Posthumous harm is doubtful or impossible.
    +3 moreShow less
    The account struggles to explain why we should care about interests if their set...This view preserves our moral obligations to future generations and non-sentient...We intuitively judge harms to unconscious people and the dead as real, which req...

    Details

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