The Mirror-Image Argument: An Additional Reply to Johansson

The Journal of Ethics 18 (4):325-330 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

We have argued that it is rational to have asymmetric attitudes toward prenatal and posthumous non-existence insofar as this asymmetry is a special case of a more general asymmetry in our attitudes toward past and future pleasures. Here we respond to an interesting critique of our view by Jens Johansson. We contend that his critique involves an inappropriate conflation of the time from which the relevant asymmetry emerges and the time of the badness of death

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 103,486

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-04-02

Downloads
53 (#434,126)

6 months
4 (#909,732)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

John Fischer
University of California, Riverside

Citations of this work

How A-theoretic deprivationists should respond to Lucretius.Natalja Deng - 2015 - Journal of the American Philosophical Association 1 (3):417-432.
More on the Mirror: Reply to Fischer and Brueckner.Jens Johansson - 2014 - The Journal of Ethics 18 (4):341-351.
Doomsday Needn’t Be So Bad.Travis Timmerman - 2018 - Dialectica 72 (2):275-296.
A puzzle about death’s badness: Can death be bad for the paradise-bound?Taylor W. Cyr - 2016 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 80 (2):145-162.

View all 8 citations / Add more citations