How the Dead Live

Philosophia 39 (1):83-103 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper maintains (following Yougrau 1987; 2000 and Hinchliff 1996) that the dead and other former existents count as examples of non-existent objects. If the dead number among the things there are, a further question arises: what is it to be dead—how should the state of being dead be characterised? It is argued that this state should be characterised negatively: the dead are not persons, philosophers etc. They lack any of the (intrinsic) qualities they had while they lived. The only facts involving the dead are facts about the relations they stand in—including the relations they bear to the qualities they formerly instantiated, and the intentional relations they stand in to us. Given an appropriate conception of qualities the dead can be said to be quality-less objects: bare particulars. The ‘Bare Particular Theory’ of individuals, it is argued, is coherent if and only if it concedes that the bare particulars it allows for don’t exist. The account of the dead and other former existents as bare particulars does justice to the misfortune of death, and points the way to a general theory of nonexistent objects

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

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

The dead donor rule: Not dead yet.Laura A. Siminoff - 2003 - American Journal of Bioethics 3 (1):30.
Reevaluating the Dead Donor Rule.Mike Collins - 2010 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 35 (2):1-26.
Ex Post Facto: Peirce and the Living Signs of the Dead.Kieran Cashell - 2007 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 43 (2):345-372.
Research on dead infants.R. S. Downie - 2003 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 24 (2):161-175.
Respect for the dead and dying.Anthony Preus - 1984 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 9 (4):409-416.
Reconsidering the dead donor rule: Is it important that organ donors be dead?Norman Fost - 2004 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 14 (3):249-260.
What we owe the dead.J. Jeremy Wisnewski - 2009 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 26 (1):54-70.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-06-19

Downloads
168 (#111,563)

6 months
15 (#159,278)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Niall Connolly
University of Sheffield

Citations of this work

Permanent Value.Christopher Frugé - 2022 - Journal of the American Philosophical Association 8 (2):356-372.
Yes: Bare Particulars!Niall Connolly - 2015 - Philosophical Studies 172 (5):1355-1370.
Real (and) Imaginal Relationships with the Dead.Kathryn J. Norlock - 2017 - Journal of Value Inquiry 51 (2):341-356.
Fictional Characters and Characterisations.Niall Connolly - 2023 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 104 (2):348-367.

View all 8 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

On the Plurality of Worlds.David K. Lewis - 1986 - Malden, Mass.: Wiley-Blackwell.
On the Plurality of Worlds.David Lewis - 1986 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 178 (3):388-390.
Nonexistent Objects.Terence Parsons - 1980 - Yale University Press.
Truth and ontology.Trenton Merricks - 2007 - New York: Oxford University Press.

View all 46 references / Add more references