?, ??, ?? (Life, Death, and Well-being)

? ??? ???????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?? ?? ? ????? ?????? ???? ? ? ??? ??? ?? ??? ??? ??? ? ???? ????. ??? ?? ??? ??? ?? ???? ?????, ?????? ?????? ????? ? ??? ???? ???? ?? ????. ??? ???? ????? ???? ??? ??????? ??? ??? ?? ?? ??? ??? ???? ??. ??? ???? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ???? ????. ??? ?? ?? ????? ?? ??? ??? ???? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???? ? ??? ??? ????. ?? ?????? ????? ?? ?? ??? ????? ???? ?? ????. ??? ??? ??? ???? ???? ?????? ???? ????? ????? ?? ??? ??? ????? ???? ??? ???. ?? ?????? ???? ? ?? ?? ??? ???? ?? ??? ??? ???? ??? ??? ?? ??? ??? ???? ??? ??? ?? ???? ?? ????.

This paper discusses whether two of the main contemporary theories of wellbeing-hedonism and the desire satisfaction theory-can solve the timing puzzle of death's badness. I first reconstruct the timing puzzle in the form of an argument, and argue that hedonists such as Epicurus may naturally endorse it. Nevertheless, Fred Feldman, an influential contemporary hedonist, proposes a precise solution to this problem. However, I reveal that his solution results from a misunderstanding of the puzzle. In doing so, I show that hedonism is not successful in dealing with the puzzle because it cannot solve the problem of posthumous harm. Unlike hedonism, the desire satisfaction theory can be regarded as a viable account to cope with the problem of posthumous harm. However, I argue that this theory is not successful in solving the timing puzzle either, while discussing several problems facing the view. In particular, I show that assuming the truth of the theory, death cannot be bad for the person who dies when she forms the desires at hand before she dies or when the desires are frustrated after she dies.