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
    The death of a person and that person's existence do not ... — Carmelics
    Home/Afterlife & Death
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→A person's death is not extrinsically bad for her

    The death of a person and that person's existence do not overlap in time

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

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

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

    Topics

    Afterlife & Death

    Related

    A person's death is not extrinsically bad for herSomething can only be extrinsically bad for a person if they exist to be affecte...

    Similar

    The death of a person and that person's existence do not overlap in ti...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Afterlife & Death
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    100%
    Therefore there is no time at which death and its subject coexist, so ...83%
    After death no events can alter a moment of a person's life.82%
    A person may experience her death, but the death itself is distinct fr...82%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: death
    View source passageHide passage
    Epicurus (341–270) adopted a version of hedonism according to which pleasure (or pleasant experiences) is the only thing that is intrinsically good for us (that is, the only thing that is good for us in itself), while pain (or painful experiences) is the only thing that is intrinsically bad for us, bad in itself. Call this view intrinsic hedonism. (For a discussion of intrinsic value, see the entry on Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic Value.) Epicurus’s commitment to intrinsic hedonism prompted him to say, in his Letter to Menoeceus, that “everything good and bad lies in sensation.” He also claimed, in ...

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective