Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
08-23-2002, 10:07 AM | #21 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Let Buzz Stay!!
Posts: 5,567
|
When we mourn we are actually mourning for ourselves, not for the deceased. We are mourning the loss of their love, their company and their counsel.
They are gone from the realm of the living but they are forever in our hearts. I would feel sadness for the death of all New Zealanders but my grief would be deeper and more profound at the death of one of my children. During WW2 Hitler basically turned the Jews into non-persons so the populace would be less likely to empathize. It worked and the unimaginable happened We need empathy as a species to survive. "Tell me not, in mournful numbers, Life is but an empty dream! For the soul is dead that slumbers, and things are not what they seem. Life is real! Life is earnest! And the grave is not its goal; Dust thou art; to dust returnest, Was not spoken of the soul." -Henry Wadsworth Longfellow [ August 23, 2002: Message edited by: Annabel Lee ]</p> |
08-23-2002, 03:33 PM | #22 |
Regular Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Georgia
Posts: 216
|
People depend on each other for support. People we love we have invested emotional capital into. Such shared relationships are precious because we need them. When my friend dies I can no longer call that friend for support. When my close family member dies, I have lost one of the closest ties in human society. When my child dies, I have lost a chance to propagate my genes and the highest emotional investment of any undertaking in human society. When my spouse dies, I have again lost a tremendous emotional investment. Now I have to go find a new spouse and spend years developing the relationship, and I worry that I might not find anyone who could replace them.
If a friend of mine has a parent who dies I feel grief for my friend. This grief is an emotional investment in the friendship. My friend trusts me to be there for him. When my friend cries, I feel genuine sorrow because I don't want my friend to be sad. It is in my best interest for my friend not to be sad. My friend cannot help me if he is sad. My friend is more likely to help me if he believes I will help him. If all the people in New Zealand died, I would feel curious and maybe even excited about something new. I would feel sympathy but not very strongly. I would know I was supposed to feel sympathy so I would probably fake much more sympathy than I actually felt. I might send aid because I want my country or myself to look good. The problem with people in New Zealand is that they don't really affect me. There is no cost to my genes. There is no loss of emotional investment. There is only empathy for people I do not know. Somehow, a starving child in some foreign country is a much stronger pull on my heartstrings. There must be something that makes me feel a stronger empathy toward children. Humans are born with the genetically endowed need for the approval and the attention of other humans. Also, we have evolved genuine empathy for one another. These needs are the glue that holds human society together and the basis of many morals. People who have these needs create stronger and more effective societies. Such societies are more able to defend themselves from the infidels and as such survive. Religion probably evolved for the same reason. These human needs are the basis of our grief at the loss of a loved one. Xenophobia is probably an evolved trait to protect our genes and societies. I don’t think it is an accident that there are not a wide variety of human species. Obviously this is all speculation and not scientific fact. I do not claim otherwise. It is what I believe, and it makes sense to me. Take what you like and ignore the rest. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|