##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

Benjamin Kultgen

Abstract

I argue that the possibility of posthumous harm ought to be rejected. My argument centers on a kind of repugnancy case involving posthumous harm. Supposing the existence of posthumous harm, a person whose wellbeing was extremely high while she was alive could incur small posthumous harms over a long enough period such that it is true of that person that she had a life not worth living. I respond to various objections and in the end conclude that rejecting posthumous harm is preferable to all other options.

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Section
Articles