Unless a death is the proximate cause of the cessation of great harm, I cannot understand the impulse to celebrate: http://freethoughtblogs.com/iris/2017/05/18/well-this-certainly-cheered-me-up-roger-ailes-has-died/ …
-
You are emotionally indifferent to 99.999% of human deaths. You'd go insane if you weren't.
I nursed for a while. I never met a nurse who was indifferent the death of somebody with whom they had established a personal relationship.
-
-
Of course. But the main issue is deaths of people we never knew personally.
-
Not for me it's not. I don't find it surprising we react to the deaths of people we don't know.. We react to death of characters in novels!
-
Yes but that's because the novel is designed specifically to make us personally relate to its characters.
-
On the other end of the spectrum are beneficial deaths like Hitler's or Stalin's. But more relevant, how did you react to Pol Pot's death?
-
I remember feeling somewhat sad/angry that Pol Pot was able to die free, in old age, and of natural causes.
-
That's a stronger reaction than the ephemeral joy at reading about a disliked person's death.
-
Another example: disappointed that Milošević died before he could be convicted of war crimes. Also a stronger reaction.
-
Compared to those reactions (which I believe are very normal), the fleeting verbal "grave dancing" seems rather trivial.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.