On a view most secularists accept, the deceased individual goes out of existence. How, then, can death be a bad thing for, or harm, the deceased? I consider the doctrine of subsequentism, according to which the bad thing for the deceased, or the harm of death to the deceased, takes place after he or she has died. The main puzzle for this view is to explain how we can predicate a property at a time (such as having a misfortune or being harmed) to an individual who does not exist at that time. This is the Problem of Predication. I consider alternative attempts to solve this puzzle, including one suggested by Ben Bradley, and I argue that they do not succeed. I go on to provide a new way of addressing the Problem of Predication and thus defending subsequentism against this specific threat, contrasting my approach with others currently on offer.

从大多数世俗主义者的观点来看，死者已经不复存在了。那么，死亡怎么可能对死者来说是一件坏事或伤害呢？我认为，后继主义的理论认为，对死者的坏事，或对死者的死亡伤害，发生在他或她死后。这种观点的主要难题在于解释我们如何一次将财产（例如不幸或受到损害）作为当时不存在的个人的依据。这是谓词问题。我考虑了解决这一难题的其他尝试，包括本·布拉德利（Ben Bradley）提出的尝试，我认为这些尝试不会成功。我将继续提供一种解决谓词问题的新方法，从而针对这种特定威胁捍卫后继主义，并将我的方法与当前提供的其他方法进行对比。