Morbid curiosity gone too far | Page 2 | INFJ Forum

Morbid curiosity gone too far

It could be said that death itself is selfish because it eventually deprives all of us of life and of each other.

LOL. You don't find that a weird thing to say? Selfish = concerned in self benefiting. I don't think that people belong to each other, or "humanity". I think their lives are their own.

It could be said that that phrase itself is selfish...
 
I find it amusing that people tend to preach about the moral implications without realizing that media is a mirror that reflects society's image back. We tend to swing toward extremes rather than find healthy balances. Should we go back to Victorian Era Values or embrace so-called Family Values (snickers)? As a culture, America is like a small child---short attention span and attracted toward bright/shiny and loud things. We are unsophisticated and banal in many ways and our "entertainment" reflects that.

+10 History repeats itself endlessly, people tend to ignore this or aren't even aware of it to begin with.

Here's a relevant song:

[video=youtube;kzgO0cI48Kk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzgO0cI48Kk[/video]


Yes, desensitization has been occurring through this medium for millennium.
One tribe falls, another rises accordingly. Power trips, humans love them.
In this "modern" age, it is morally reprehensible to enjoy killing and misfortune; however,
we would not be where we are, biologically, without it. This, I think,
is one of the greatest tragedies ever written. Would that it were not so.
 
LOL. You don't find that a weird thing to say? Selfish = concerned in self benefiting. I don't think that people belong to each other, or "humanity". I think their lives are their own.

It could be said that that phrase itself is selfish...

I disagree with your definition of selfishness. Selfishness is excessive and disregards the welfare of others. It is self-benefit taken to extremes.

I agree that people do not belong to each other like property but we need each other as much as we do food or water, else we become depressed and eventually die of loneliness. In one sense our lives are our own but because we must interact and cooperate our lives are shared and in this way we form spiritual bonds. Bonds such as the parent with a child, the bond between friends and the bond between spouses come to mind. Even with strangers we can recognize this similarity between them and ourselves and as such can show respect for what we have in common. I don't expect we will necessarily be moved to mourning in the same way that loved ones would but that doesn't prevent us from showing respect for the process because we know that one day will walk that same path.
 
I disagree with your definition of selfishness. Selfishness is excessive and disregards the welfare of others. It is self-benefit taken to extremes.

Then how does death itself fall under "selfishness"? It's just a process of nature.
 
Then how does death itself fall under "selfishness"? It's just a process of nature.

Death itself is not literally selfish but many people experience its effects in the same way they would selfishness because they've been deprived of someone they love or admire. Death may be a process of nature but it stirs emotions in us in the same way that a beautiful sunrise does.
 
[MENTION=4498]willow[/MENTION] my point is that, when you say this
That part of a human that represents life, consciousness, intelligence, the ability to form relationships with others and to create. These are the things we hold as special in human beings and there is an element of tragedy that when someone dies this portion of them is lost to the world. We may have memories of them in our mind, or recorded in writing or media but these are only echoes. The real essence is lost. We for instance may read the writings of Sir Isaac Newton but we will never experience the man. Spirit is something we cannot make, reproduce or explain and that sets it apart and worthy of respectful remembrance. There is also the issue of showing kindness to the relatives of the deceased. Their relationships with the deceased are severed and life without their loved one is a difficult adjustment to make. We should seek to make it easier not more difficult, imo. A good place to begin is not to use death, esp. of actual persons, as entertainment.

You must acknlowedge that aside from being kind and respectful to their family members, and to treasuring and respecting their memory the way that the dead person would have liked, the rest of what you said here have no direct relation to the dead person. These are things that benefit the living. You value these things because you benefit from them. You must realize this. Remembering these things that benefit you is not out of respect to them. To say so would be just you stroking your own value system because it sounds good to be nice about anything that is vaguely connected to the dead person, but it will not compliment their memory or bring them back. Like you said, their real essence is lost, and nothing you do to honor their former livingness can begin to encompass their worth not just as a part of humanity and basic human abilities, but for what made them special as a person.
 
You must realize this. Remembering these things that benefit you is not out of respect to them. To say so would be just you stroking your own value system because it sounds good to be nice about anything that is vaguely connected to the dead person, but it will not compliment their memory or bring them back. Like you said, their real essence is lost, and nothing you do to honor their former livingness can begin to encompass their worth not just as a part of humanity and basic human abilities, but for what made them special as a person.

I agree that there is nothing that could be done that could encompass the worth of a life that is the very reason nothing should be done to diminish what the loss represents. To respect is to esteem. It is life itself that I esteem and because I value life I can recognize that something of worth is lost and I can show respect for that. We can show respect to a person who has lost a home in a fire by recognizing what that home meant to a person. Are we to show less respect for the loss of a life which is imo, infinitely, more precious? That to me would be the height of selfishness.

It is also ridiculous to suggest that showing respect is an attempt to restore life. It is a symbolic act. Life is filled with them. This one is valuable to me and many others because it reminds us of the preciousness of human life. If it means nothing to you then wouldn't it be more appropriate to not even acknowledge the loss of life. To acknowledge it but in a disrespectful manner to me symbolizes the diminishing of the importance of life.

It seems to me that what you reject is symbolism and if that is the case then you will have to reject all of human expression.
 
Last edited:
I agree that there is nothing that could be done that could encompass the worth of a life that is the very reason nothing should be done to diminish what the loss represents.

It's your loss though. That's my point. You're just lamenting your loss. I just see it as no more symbolic than feeling sorry for yourself, the way you are wording it.
 
It's your loss though. That's my point. You're just lamenting your loss. I just see it as no more symbolic than feeling sorry for yourself, the way you are wording it.

No. I'm not lamenting my personal loss when a stranger dies. I'm recognizing the loss of human life as a general tragedy. You don't feel that but that doesn't mean my feelings on the matter are not real. I think the loss of human life is tragic and I appreciate when it is recognized respectfully. You don't. You cannot possibly know whether I feel sorry for myself or not. You are projecting your own feelings on to me.

The point that has been all ready made in this thread is that our philosophies about life affect such matters. I don't subscribe to the idea that people are just biological machines and I don't subscribe to the idea that strangers do not matter. Therefore, it affects how I view death and the rituals surrounding death. Your own philosophy affects your views on the matter. That's the point which I think Rite all ready made.
 
Last edited:
No. I'm not lamenting my personal loss when a stranger dies. I'm recognizing the loss of human life as a general tragedy. You don't feel that but that doesn't mean my feelings on the matter are not real. I think the loss of human life is tragic and I appreciate when it is recognized respectfully. You don't. You cannot possibly know whether I feel sorry for myself or not. You are projecting your own feelings on to me.

That is interesting. You are right, I would have been projecting, but that was just the way that I interpreted the wording, until you said this ^.

" I'm recognizing the loss of human life as a general tragedy." --> i don't really see loss of human life as tragic/not tragic in itself, except in regard to the families left behind who have to suffer. I only see it as unfortunate if the people died wrongly, but more because of the injustice of something ending a human life when it should not have happened. Although I cannot be empathic about viewing human death as a tragedy for the world it I can certainly accept that many others do.

edit: just because i do not view death in itself as tragic, does not mean i do not view life as precious while it is still going on. i just see them as separate things kind of.
 
That is interesting. You are right, I would have been projecting, but that was just the way that I interpreted the wording, until you said this ^.

" I'm recognizing the loss of human life as a general tragedy." --> i don't really see loss of human life as tragic/not tragic in itself, except in regard to the families left behind who have to suffer. I only see it as unfortunate if the people died wrongly, but more because of the injustice of something ending a human life when it should not have happened. Although I cannot be empathic about viewing human death as a tragedy for the world it I can certainly accept that many others do.

In my opinion, human death is also a tragedy for the person. It is the end of their ability to self-express and to enjoy.

I accept that your views are different.
 
I think this is what I'm getting at. Because I'm not going to argue that we need to end media sensationalism because I think that ship has sailed and won't be returning to the harbor.

I do agree that a campaign to end media sensationalism is pointless. People are free to believe anything they wish. However, once you've decided you believe in an idea then it makes sense to follow it up with appropriate action or else you are a hypocrite. If I think the media markets junk then why would I purchase that junk while complaining. (That statement is directed generally and not specifically to the OP.) It makes better sense not to purchase the junk in the first place. If it causes the media to change is not important. What is important is to live in harmony with ones beliefs.

People have been complaining about the media's attitude towards celebrity deaths since Princess Diana passed, if not before, yet they still buy the magazines and watch the programmes. It doesn't make sense. Personally, I think television in particular is junk so I don't pay for it. Am I in a campaign against media? Nope. I've simply reclaimed my time and money for things I consider more worthy.

Yes it is sad in my opinion that "life and death" have been reduced to a "spectacle." The point is that I don't take part in it and that's good enough for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gaze