Article Text
Author meets critics
Mortal harm and the antemortem experience of death
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
-
Competing interests None.
-
Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
-
↵i Unless otherwise indicated, all page references are to this work.
-
↵ii I suspect that Taylor (pp. 14–15) would say that he has established the falsity of (d) with his challenge to Pitcher8 and Feinberg3 and his case for the impossibility of posthumous harm (chapter 3), and that these arguments would apply mutatis mutandis to mortal harm. I believe this is not the case, but space does not permit me to engage this material here.
-
↵iii A more extensive defence of a similar (if not quite the same) suggestion is given by Blatti.9
Linked Articles
- Author meets critics
- Author meets critics
- Author meets critics
- Author meets critics
- Author meets critics
- The concise argument
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Death, posthumous harm, and bioethics
- A full-blooded defence of full-blooded Epicureanism: responses to my critics
- Comments on Death, Posthumous Harm and Bioethics
- Abortion and deprivation: a reply to Marquis
- Do the ‘brain dead’ merely appear to be alive?
- A stronger policy of organ retrieval from cadaveric donors: some ethical considerations
- Death and organ donation: back to the future
- Taylor on posthumous organ procurement
- Of souls, selves, and cerebrums: a reply to Himma
- Taylor on presumed consent