Question 1

Which of the following best represents Epicurus' conclusion in his 'Letter to Menoeceus'?&#10;A) The process of dying is not bad for the dying person.&#10;B) Death is not a bad thing for the person who dies.&#10;C) One person's death cannot be bad for others.&#10;D) All of the above

Accepted Answer

Epicurus argues that death is not a bad thing for the person who dies because death is the end of all sensation, including pain and therefore, it cannot be bad for the dead person.

Question 2

According to Feit, which of the following assumptions does Epicurus make?&#10;A) The only things that are intrinsically bad for us are sensations of pain or suffering.&#10;B) When a person dies, he or she simply ceases to exist.&#10;C) Both (a) and (b) above.&#10;D) None of the above.

Accepted Answer

Feit states that Epicurus assumes that the only things that are intrinsically bad for us are sensations of pain or suffering and that when a person dies, he or she simply ceases to exist. Therefore, both (a) and (b) above are correct assumptions made by Epicurus.

Question 3

Which of the following theoretical perspectives claims that an event is (extrinsically) bad for a person if and only if that person's life would have had more well-being, on balance, if the event had not taken place?

A) Hedonism
B) The timing argument
C) Subsequentism
D) The deprivation account

The deprivation account

Accepted Answer

The theoretical perspective that claims an event is extrinsically bad for a person if and only if that person's life would have had more well-being, on balance, if the event had not taken place is called the deprivation account. Hedonism focuses on maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain, the timing argument evaluates the timing of events in relation to a person's overall well-being, and subsequentism focuses on the impact of an event on a person's future well-being.

Question 4

With respect to the Timing Argument, to which of the following premises does Feit focus his main objection?&#10;A) Premise 1: Nothing can be bad for a person before it happens.&#10;B) Premise 2: Nothing can be bad for a person when that person does not exist.&#10;C) Premise 3: From the time of a person's death onwards, that person no longer exists.&#10;D) Premise 4: Anything that is bad for a person must be bad for that person at some time or other.

Accepted Answer

Feit's main objection is to Premise 2, which he argues is false. He contends that it is possible for something to be bad for a person even if that person does not exist yet, citing the example of a person choosing not to have a child because they anticipate that the child's life would be filled with suffering.

Question 5

According to Feit, why should a hedonist say that the level of well-being that a dead person has is zero?&#10;A) The person is experiencing no pleasure and no pain.&#10;B) The person has no desires or preferences that are going unsatisfied.&#10;C) A dead person is comparable to an imaginary or merely possible being like a unicorn&#10;D) None of the above

Accepted Answer

According to Feit, hedonists believe that well-being is determined solely by the presence of pleasure and the absence of pain. Since a dead person is not experiencing any pleasure or pain, a hedonist would say that their level of well-being is zero.

Question 6

Feit suggests that if he became convinced that subsequentism is false, then he would accept which of the following?&#10;A) Atemporalism&#10;B) The desire satisfaction view&#10;C) Priorism&#10;D) Epicureanism

Accepted Answer

Subsequentism is the view that moral and ethical evaluations can only be made after the event has occurred. Atemporalism is the view that moral and ethical evaluations do not have temporal properties and exist outside of time. If Feit were to reject subsequentism, he may still hold on to the idea that moral and ethical evaluations exist outside of time, and therefore would likely accept the view of atemporalism.

Question 7

What does it mean to say that something intrinsically bad for a person? What does it mean to say that something is extrinsically bad for a person? How did Epicurus use hedonism, along with his view about what happens to a person at the time of death, to argue that death is not bad in any way for the one who dies? What is the deprivation account? How do philosophers who accept the deprivation account use it to object to Epicurus' reasoning?

Accepted Answer

The answer of What does it mean to say that...

Question 8

What is the timing argument? (Try to reconstruct the premises and the conclusion as carefully as you can.) For each premise of the argument, how might Epicurus, or someone who agrees with him, give a reason to think it is true? What is subsequentism? Why does Feit argue that we should accept it? How does Feit use this reasoning to object to the timing argument? (Be specific about which premise Feit denies and why.) Do you agree with Feit's evaluation of the timing argument? Why or why not?

Accepted Answer

The answer of What is the timing argument? (Try to...

Deck 11: Death Is Bad for Us When Were Dead