From Posthumous Harm to Posthumous Wrongs

This chapter considers and responds to some additional objections that can be raised against the book’s thesis. These include objections that claim that the Posthumous Harm Thesis has unacceptable implications; objections that even if posthumous harm is possible it is not a kind of harm that makes an act even prima facie wrong, or at least not in a non-trivial way; and objections that claim that it is morally irrelevant or insignificant. The chapter then concludes by discussing some of the ethical implications of the book’s thesis for such issues as posthumous organ and gamete removal, posthumous publication of private documents, posthumous damage to graves and corpses, and posthumous punishment and restitution.

From Unfelt Harm to Frustrated Desire

This chapter provides an extensive defense of the second premise of the book’s central argument: the claim that if it is possible for an act to wrongfully harm a person while they are alive even if the act has no effect on the person’s conscious experiences, then frustrating a person’s desires is one way to harm a person. The chapter begins by offering a defense of this claim. It argues that we should accept the Desire Satisfaction Principle if unfelt harm is possible because accepting the principle is necessary in order to provide the best explanation of the fact that unfelt harm is possible. It then considers a series of objections that can be raised against the claim and responds to them.

Unfelt Harm

This chapter provides an extensive defense of the first premise of the book’s central argument: the claim that it is possible for an act to wrongfully harm a person while they are alive even if the act has no effect on the person’s conscious experiences. The chapter begins by offering a series of thought experiments designed to motivate this claim, including a version of Nozick’s famous experience machine. It then identifies a series of objections that can be raised against the use of such thought experiments in support of this claim and argues that all of them can be successfully overcome.

From Frustrated Desire to Posthumous Harm

This chapter provides an extensive defense of the third premise of the book’s central argument: the claim that if frustrating a person’s desires is one way to harm a person then it is possible for an act to wrongfully harm a person even if the act takes place after the person is dead. After an overview, the chapter begins by presenting the basic reason for thinking that if the Desire Satisfaction Principle is true, then the Posthumous Harm Thesis is true. It then considers a series of objections that can be raised against the claim and responds to each of them.

Introduction

This chapter introduces the thesis of the book: the claim that it is possible for an act to wrongfully harm a person even if the act takes place after the person is dead. It then explains the significance of this thesis and critically discusses two strategies that might be used to defend it. Finally, the chapter provides a brief overview of the main argument the book provides in defense of this thesis. The argument rests on three main premises and the chapter concludes by providing a brief explanation and defense of each of them.