Reconstructing philosopher’s ideas on whether we should fear being dead

The text is “Life, Death, and Meaning” edited by David Benatar. This is an extension of the previous paper from 3 pages to 5.
The paper should be a minimum 3 pages long, at least 750 words. It must be turned in through Blackboard. It is due by midnight (Boston time), Thursday April 30. (If you rewrite and expand this paper, it would be due May 19).
1. Choose two philosophers amongst Rosenbaum, Luper, and Kaufman. Reconstruct, critically evaluate, and compare each philosophers central answer and most important supporting arguments to the following question: What is the proper attitude for individuals to take towards their own deaths? Whose answer is stronger, and why?
2. Rosenbaum claims that a state of affairs is bad for person P only if P can experience it at some time (193). In the first two sections of his article, Kaufman argues against this thesis by claiming that the deprivation of death is bad for a person, even if that person could not experience it. Reconstruct, compare and critically evaluate the two philosophers arguments on this question. Who is correct, and why?
Some pointers and goals to keep in mind when writing a philosophy paper:
Make sure to focus only on the specific issues raised in the question you are answering
(do not attempt to summarize all of the various things the authors have said in their
pieces)
Use your own words as much as possible
Correctly cite and attribute direct quotations, and cite ideas that are not your own. For
assigned readings, cite by Author and Page Number. Please use an accepted citation style to refer to sources not included on the syllabus (APA, MLA, Chicago Manual of Style, Turabian, etc.).
Explaining the meaning of the claims involved as exactly and precisely as possible
Define and clarify any technical, controversial, or ambiguous terms or concepts
Clearly state each of the premises used to support the position under consideration, and
explain the supporting reasons for those premises
Explain any missing premises (and reasons in support of them) needed for the argument
Accurately represent the claims and arguments of the theorists considered
Focus only on the claims and arguments directly relevant to the question posed
Pay primary attention to the key arguments as presented in the text, though you may go
beyond those arguments once those have been adequately treated
Clearly organize the consideration of claims, premises, potentially contrary
considerations, and assessment
Critically evaluate positions and arguments by subjecting them to potential objections,
considering how the objections might be responded to, and rendering an overall assessment of the controversy