Epicureanism and the Wrongness of Killing

1Citations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Your institution provides access to this article.

Abstract

This paper argues that Epicureanism about death is consistent with grounding the wrongness of killing in the interests of the victim. Both defenders and critics of Epicureanism should agree that, if we knew Epicureanism to be false, then we would have a moral reason not to kill people. We would have this reason because we would know that killing people harms them. And even Epicureans should agree that, given their evidence, Epicureanism could be false. Given that it could be false, and given that we would harm people by killing them if it were, we in fact have a moral reason not to kill them—a reason which, as this paper will show, is both grounded in their interests and consistent with the failure of death to be in any way bad. The latter part of the paper discusses some advantages that this approach enjoys over two other attempts to reconcile Epicureanism with the wrongness of killing, by David Hershenov and Mikel Burley, respectively.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Burkhardt, T. (2020). Epicureanism and the Wrongness of Killing. Journal of Ethics, 24(2), 177–192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10892-019-09317-y

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free