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
    There seems to be no time when death, if it is a misfortu... — Carmelics
    Home/Afterlife & Death
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    There seems to be no time when death, if it is a misfortune, can be ascribed to its unfortunate subject.

    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.So long as a person exists, he has not yet died.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Once he has died, he no longer exists.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.A harm can be ascribed to a subject at the time of the events that deprive them of goods, not only when the subject consciously experiences it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Death deprives a person of future goods during the ante-mortem period when that person still exists as a subject.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, death as a deprivation harm is ascribable to the living person who will undergo it, grounded in Epictet's and Nagel's deprivation account.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Persons persist through time as four-dimensional entities with temporal parts, such that a future dead stage is a genuine part of the whole person.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A misfortune can be located at the temporal part of an entity most directly affected, even if that part lacks consciousness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.On this perdurance view, death's misfortune is ascribed to the person's terminal temporal stage, dissolving the existential gap Epicurus exploited.
      ?

      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

    A harm can be ascribed to a subject at the time of the events that deprive them ...A misfortune can be located at the temporal part of an entity most directly affe...Death deprives a person of future goods during the ante-mortem period when that ...On this perdurance view, death's misfortune is ascribed to the person's terminal...
    +4 moreShow less
    Once he has died, he no longer exists.Persons persist through time as four-dimensional entities with temporal parts, s...So long as a person exists, he has not yet died.Therefore, death as a deprivation harm is ascribable to the living person who wi...

    Similar

    Mortality is a misfortune (death is bad for us).86%Therefore there is no time at which death and its subject coexist, so ...79%No matter when it happens, dying is bad for those who die.77%It is impossible for an event that occurs after a person dies to be ba...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: death
    View source passageHide passage
    One difficulty is the problem of the subject. Suppose we are terminators rather than anti-terminators (discussed in Section 2.6). Suppose, too, that you die at time t1 but had you not you would have experienced joy at time t2. Time t2 arrives while you are dead, so that, given the termination thesis, t2 arrives while you no longer exist. Consider the property, lacks joy. Does it make sense to attribute this (or any other) property to you at t2? Does it make sense to say that some subject has a property at a time when that subject does not exist? If not, it seems difficult to make sense of your...

    Details

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