Titlebook: Can Death Be a Harm to the Person Who Dies?; Jack Li Book 20021st edition Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2002 Epicurus.death.is

風俗習慣

書目名稱Can Death Be a Harm to the Person Who Dies?影響因子(影響力)




書目名稱Can Death Be a Harm to the Person Who Dies?影響因子(影響力)學科排名




書目名稱Can Death Be a Harm to the Person Who Dies?網絡公開度




書目名稱Can Death Be a Harm to the Person Who Dies?網絡公開度學科排名




書目名稱Can Death Be a Harm to the Person Who Dies?被引頻次




書目名稱Can Death Be a Harm to the Person Who Dies?被引頻次學科排名




書目名稱Can Death Be a Harm to the Person Who Dies?年度引用




書目名稱Can Death Be a Harm to the Person Who Dies?年度引用學科排名




書目名稱Can Death Be a Harm to the Person Who Dies?讀者反饋




書目名稱Can Death Be a Harm to the Person Who Dies?讀者反饋學科排名

DEFT

Expiration

Indicative

CIS

Conclusion, him I have shown, in Chapter One, that the Epicurean argument is defective. Hence, at this point, I can at least claim that it is possible that death . be a harm to the person who dies. However, to really secure this conclusion, it is necessary to give further justification.

易達到

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-313-9777-8 him I have shown, in Chapter One, that the Epicurean argument is defective. Hence, at this point, I can at least claim that it is possible that death . be a harm to the person who dies. However, to really secure this conclusion, it is necessary to give further justification.

易達到

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-313-9777-8 him I have shown, in Chapter One, that the Epicurean argument is defective. Hence, at this point, I can at least claim that it is possible that death . be a harm to the person who dies. However, to really secure this conclusion, it is necessary to give further justification.

Eructation

Spontane intrazerebrale BlutungenThe Epicurean argument has provided the classical objection to the widely held view that death can be a harm to the person who dies. To attain the central aim of this book, first of all, I want to refute Epicurus in this chapter.

pessimism

Spontane intrazerebrale BlutungenThis chapter is concerned with the questions: Is the desire-thwarting theory acceptable? If not, why? Let me outline this theory first.

blister

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12382-5The deprivation theory is the most popular anti-Epicurean view.1 Silverstein calls this view the standard argument against the Epicurean view.2 In this chapter, I want to investigate whether or not this very popular anti-Epicurean view is satisfactory. To begin this task, let me first illustrate the deprivation theory.