Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(8)
Eternalism, the position that those who are harmed by death are always incurring harm, is surely wrong.
The problem, of course, is that by the time posthumous events occur nothing remaining of us is capable of incurring harm.
Subsequentism is more plausible, but it is hard to make sense of the idea of incurring harm posthumously, since we are not responsive while dead.
Hence its lacking goods at some time does not imply, of a thing, that it is incurring harm at that time.
In Plato's Meno, Meno holds an updated version of the functional conception, claiming that a man's virtue consists in the political ability to harm one's enemies and help one's friends, without incurring harm to oneself (71e).
But his critics are looking for an answer to a second question, namely this: 'at which times does Lincoln incur the harm for which his death is responsible?' To this latter question it is absurd to reply that Lincoln is always incurring harm.
Similar(50)
"Those practices do incur harm," he said, and should come under the scrutiny of the Fish and Wildlife Service.
At those times when (living) people are responsive, they may incur harm; because shoes are never responsive, they can never incur harm.
Is it plausible to argue that dead people can still incur harm?
Assuming he is unresponsive while dead, it is hard to take seriously the idea that he incurs harm then.
Nevertheless, concurrentists could be correct about when death harms us even if they are wrong about the time we incur harm from posthumous events.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com