The problem here is that I am not convinced that this is just a thought experiment—it looks like something that might be more or less true.
Seems like a non-central fallacy. The usual definition of death assumes a permanent (and irreversible) cessation of all detectable signs of life. Your definition of death would have none of that. Feel free to clarify your definition, but be aware that it is non-standard and so you are better off picking a different word for it.
The definition I was going with was ‘ceasing to exist’ or if you are referring to something in the post then the more accurate definition there is probably something along the line of ‘no longer having subjective experiences’.
How do you know if something ceases to exist if there are no outward signs of this? What measurable and testable definition of “ceasing to exist” do you use? If “ceasing to exist” is only in your mind, how is it different from being afraid of a monster under your bed?
Seems like a non-central fallacy. The usual definition of death assumes a permanent (and irreversible) cessation of all detectable signs of life. Your definition of death would have none of that. Feel free to clarify your definition, but be aware that it is non-standard and so you are better off picking a different word for it.
You might also find A Human’s Guide to Words of some use.
The definition I was going with was ‘ceasing to exist’ or if you are referring to something in the post then the more accurate definition there is probably something along the line of ‘no longer having subjective experiences’.
How do you know if something ceases to exist if there are no outward signs of this? What measurable and testable definition of “ceasing to exist” do you use? If “ceasing to exist” is only in your mind, how is it different from being afraid of a monster under your bed?