MORTAL HARM.

The harm thesis says that death may harm the individual who dies. The posthumous harm thesis says that posthumous events may harm those who die. Epicurus rejects both theses, claiming that there is no subject who is harmed, no clear harm which is received, and no clear time when any harm is received...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Philosophical Quarterly Vol. 57; no. 227; pp. 239 - 252
Autor principal: Luper, Steven
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Oxford University Press / USA Apr2007
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=24165490&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 24165490
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00318094
        PHQ
      jtl: Philosophical Quarterly
      issn: 00318094
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Apr2007
      vid: 57
      iid: 227
      pid: 622
      pub: Oxford University Press / USA
    artinfo:
      ui:
        24165490
        10.1111/j.1467-9213.2007.482.x
      ppf: 239
      ppct: 13
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
            size: 83KB
      tig:
        atl: MORTAL HARM.
      aug:
        au: Luper, Steven
      su:
        Philosophy education
        Mortality
        Death
        Spacetime
        Time
        Metaphysics
        Feldman, Fred
      sug:
        subj:
          Philosophy education
          Mortality
          Death
          Spacetime
          Time
          Metaphysics
          Feldman, Fred
      ab: The harm thesis says that death may harm the individual who dies. The posthumous harm thesis says that posthumous events may harm those who die. Epicurus rejects both theses, claiming that there is no subject who is harmed, no clear harm which is received, and no clear time when any harm is received. Feldman rescues the harm thesis with solutions to Epicurus' three puzzles based on his own version of the deprivation account of harm. But many critics, among them Lamont, Grey, Feit and Bradley, have rejected Feldman's solution to the timing puzzle, offering their own solutions in its place. I discuss these solutions to the timing puzzle, and defend the view that while we are alive we may incur harm for which death and posthumous events are responsible.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: © 2019 Scots Philosophical Association and the University of St. Andrews.
      item: Philosophical Quarterly
      holder: Oxford University Press / USA
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2007
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N