A recent example of this is how the media acts like a vulture waiting to attack anyone who would pronounce negative judgement of late Senator Kennedy (on which I know nothing about and am just using as an example), and pass false praise of the man, thinking that no one would dare to challenge it because of the fear of being regarded as an evil, discompashionate person.
This intimidation to treat death as sacred is nothing more than a scheme aiming at getting free moral approval for all humans. Specifically the advocates' motivation is to get it for themselves.
Such is the motivation behind those who wish to silence any negative criticism, right or wrong.
How is the glorification of death help achieve free moral approval?
The issue involved in a eulogy is a man's entire personality and life - the highest most crucial judgement of a man.
A Eulogy, or in general what one is "morally approved" to say about a man that has died, is not a small matter of etiquette, as some people may claim.
The real issue is how is a man, any man, to be evaluated; is it proper to judge a man negatively as a whole and to pronounce it?
The just (from the word "justice") answer is YES. An evil man does not deserve a pretty eulogy.
The real issue is how is a man, any man, to be evaluated; is it proper to judge a man negatively as a whole and to pronounce it?
The just (from the word "justice") answer is YES. An evil man does not deserve a pretty eulogy.
A man who has done some good things and some bad things deserves both to be mentioned - with a positive overall emphasis to the extent that he renounced his bad deeds and became a better man. If he has done so successfully, his bad deeds become nothing more than an example of his dedication to the good.
Man's life is sacred - as a concept of what a man is and what is possible to us humans. But this does not make every individual man or woman automatically good, nor their life sacred. The life of a serial killer is not sacred.
Good will and generosity are not a replacement for justice - they are and can only be an extention of it.
The argument from intimidation is the weapon they are using to secure free moral approval. "What?! You speak ill of the dead? How dare you!"
The argument from intimidation is the weapon they are using to secure free moral approval. "What?! You speak ill of the dead? How dare you!"
The truth is always the most powerful weapon in the battle of ideas. Stand by it, don't be afraid to pronounce it.
