Statements: 321,452
Perspectives: 108,905
Topics: 42

Posthumous events cannot harm a person by thwarting her desires.

Afterlife & Death

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

0 reasons for

1 reason against

Reasons Against

1 perspective

Reason against

1.To harm a person by thwarting a desire, the event must occur while she still has that desire and still cares about whether it is fulfilled.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.A person and her desires are gone by the time a posthumous event occurs.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

Next step

Based on where you are in your exploration

Strongest counterpoint

Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

Source

AI-extracted3/3 agreementValid

SEP: death

Partridge (1981)

View source passage

However, the desire-based case for the possibility of posthumous harm remains controversial. It will be rejected by theorists who doubt that people are harmed by events that do not modify their intrinsic features, and by theorists who think that it hinges on the possibility of backwards causation, of course. Velleman (1991, p. 339) rejects the desire-based case on the grounds that “we think of a person's current well-being as a fact intrinsic to the present, not as a relation that he currently bears to his future.” Some theorists echo a criticism that was offered by Partridge (1981, p. 246). C...

Extraction notes

Validity: The premises, attributed to Partridge, logically support the conclusion that posthumous events cannot harm a person by thwarting her desires, and this argument is explicitly present in the source passage.

Confidence: Clearly stated argument in the text.

Details

Type: claim
Perspectives: 1 (0 for, 1 against)
Edits: 1 edit