Abstract
AbstractDesire satisfaction theories of well-being and deprivationism about the badness of death face similar problems: desire satisfaction theories have trouble locating the time when the satisfaction of a future or past-directed desire benefits a person; deprivationism has trouble locating a time when death is bad for a person. I argue that desire satisfaction theorists and deprivation theorists can address their respective timing problems by accepting fusionism, the view that some events benefit or harm individuals only at fusions of moments in time. Fusionism improves on existing solutions to the timing problem for deprivationism because it locates death’s badness at the same time as both the victim of death and death itself, and it accounts for all of the ways that death is bad for a person. Fusionism improves on existing solutions to the problem of temporally locating the benefit of future and past-directed desires because it respects several attractive principles, including the view that the intrinsic value of a time for someone is determined solely by states of affairs that obtain at that time and the view that intrinsically beneficial events benefit a person when they occur.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Cited by
8 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Death, Badness, and Well-Being at a Time;The Journal of Value Inquiry;2023-12-08
2. Value after death;Ratio;2022-03-28
3. Well‐being, part 2: Theories of well‐being;Philosophy Compass;2022-01-12
4. Responding to the Timing Argument;Pacific Philosophical Quarterly;2021-08-30
5. Epicureanism and Skepticism about Practical Reason;Canadian Journal of Philosophy;2019-10-25