| Αρχική | | | Προφίλ | | | Θέματα | | | Φιλοσοφική ματιά | | | Απόψεις | | | Σπουδαστήριο | | | Έλληνες | | | Ξένοι | | | Επιστήμες | | | Forum | | | Επικοινωνία | 
| Less Good but not Bad: In Defense of Epicureanism about the Badness of Death | |
| Συγγραφέας: Aaron Smuts Aaron Smuts: Less Good but not Bad: In Defense of Epicureanism about the Badness of Death (pdf, 31 pages) In  this  paper  I  defend  innocuousism—a  weak  form  of  Epicureanism  about  the badness  of  death.    I  argue  that  if  we  assume  both  mental  statism  about  wellbeing and that death is an experiential blank, it follows that death is not bad for the one who dies.  I defend innocuousism against the deprivation account of the badness of death.  I argue that recent defenses of the deprivation account, such as those offered by Fred Feldman and Ben Bradley, rest on a suspect notion of extrinsic  badness—a  notion  that  erroneously  confuses  events  whose  outcomes merely  could  have  been  better  with  those  that  are  bad.    In  reply,  I  defend  an alternate account according to which something is extrinsically bad if and only if it leads to states that are intrinsically bad.  On my  view, sometimes dying  may be less good than living, but it is never bad to die. | |
|  | |





 
			