Hacker News Reader

Comment by nobody9999 | Hacker News Reader

>Anyway, I think it's important that nobody is left to their final resting place without witnesses, and I also find avoiding that is a good way to engage with your community...

Funerals, like life, are for the living. The dead don't care -- they're dead.

This seems like a ghoulish way to make oneself feel more compassionate and caring, and does absolutely nothing for the deceased. As I said, they're dead -- they don't care.

That said, if using a dead person as as a prop to make you feel better about yourself, go for it. The dead person doesn't care -- they're dead. But pretending that it somehow makes a difference to the dead person is rather silly -- they're dead, they don't care.

Edit: Fixed prose.

View on HN

>The dead don't care -- they're dead.

We get it -- repeating it 4 times in 6 sentences is a lot.

>That said, if using a dead person as as a prop to make you feel better about yourself, go for it.

Yikes. Some people have different belief systems, some of those belief systems believe in the afterlife.

> Yikes. Some people have different belief systems, some of those belief systems believe in the afterlife.

That is fine, there are also people who follow the Flat Earth Society (with 'members all around the globe') or who follow the flying spaghetti monster (my wife is a card carrying member). Honestly, I actually thought for quite some time the Flat Earth Society was a joke. I wonder how many members consider it as such.

Now, you may have such beliefs. They're not based on facts though. And when it comes to beliefs, you should prepare to get ridiculed as they're not fact-based. When you face such ridiculousness, you may stand fierce, and decide to prove your point. But if it is not a factual-based point, and you are unable to prove it, do not be surprised when you are not taken seriously.

For me, belief is very simple. I am not going to believe in a God, and I only need to look at the suffering happening in one country in this world (which I am not going to name since the name is irrelevant). The immense suffering of people in this country, on both sides of the conflict, leads me to the simple conclusion that if there is a God it must be a cruel, conflicted being. Besides, why can these religious people not agree on the basics of their belief systems? Why would a loving God divide people like that?

Instead, I take a more simple approach to God and Devil. They're just bastardizations of the words and concepts of good and evil, and that is it. Concepts which had to be enforced onto people when law was weak, unjust, and fundamental democratic principles like Trias Politica did not yet exist. As far as these concepts ever worked well to begin with, we no longer need God and Devil.

>And when it comes to beliefs, you should prepare to get ridiculed as they're not fact-based.

You think it's fair game to ridicule people with other beliefs, I think that's sad.

I don't believe in god. But I'm also not going to ridicule people, or tell them that they're "using a dead person as as a prop to make you feel better about yourself", if they do believe in god. Being smug about your fact-based beliefs, or whatever, is just dumb.

> You think it's fair game to ridicule people with other beliefs, I think that's sad.

Oh, you do? I just read there's priests flying over flooded places in Russia to pray. How is that going to help anyone? Meanwhile, the institution they stand for OK's genocide in Ukraine. The (Catholic) pope also had a word to say about Ukraine, saying they should raise the white flag (ie. give up). Religious institutions are a means to an end for political gains.

For thousands of years we atheists have lived under the repression of popular religions, and those who followed different cults (such as one's using herbs and psychedelics) were repressed. We are not allowed to make fun of these religions, given how ridicule and non-evidence based they are? I'm glad we are able to in the society I live in (NL), even though I often find such humor extremely bo(oo)ring.

Now, during COVID crisis we had some crazy people, including with religious background cause 'vaccines are bad, mmkay?' and they were manipulated by populism and what not. It is almost like a new cult is started, and we've seen various people such as Elon Musk fall into the trap. According to you, I'm not allowed to make jokes about such either?

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence should count for religions just as well. You should not be able to get away with 'I have a large amount of followers, come at me'.

I'll give you this though: it isn't worth it to focus on this very small cult/belief system. There's much bigger ones which are far, far more nefarious.

>I just read there's priests flying over flooded places in Russia to pray. How is that going to help anyone?

Did they stop once they realized you were ridiculing them?

I agree that every issue you brought up is a legitimate issue. I just don't think ridicule is the solution.

And I especially don't think ridicule is warranted when we're talking about someone attending a funeral that no one else attended.

>According to you, I'm not allowed to make jokes about such either?

By all means, you are completely free to ridicule them, just as I'm free to call it out as unproductive and sad. I'm not sure why you and the other poster resort to this "are you trying to censor me?" rhetoric.

>Yikes. Some people have different belief systems, some of those belief systems believe in the afterlife.

That's great. And they can post what they think here too.

I made a comment which reflects my thoughts on the matter. That there are those who disagree is of little consequence to me WRT posting a comment on HN.

Are you suggesting that I censor myself so as not to upset folks who don't share my beliefs?

>Are you suggesting that I censor myself so as not to upset folks who don't share my beliefs?

No, lol. Where or how do you even get that out of what I typed?

You're free to type out whatever you want, all you want. And I'm free to say "yikes" because your comment is pretty rude and lacks any consideration for anyone with different beliefs than yours.

Yikes is a pretty bad response thought, let's be honest. It's passing judgement without an explanation. And if you follow it up with an explanation you can just remove the "yikes" part and your post instantly becomes so much better.

I disagree. Yikes was my mental response when I read the comment, and I wanted my comment to reflect what I actually thought.

>We get it -- repeating it 4 times in 6 sentences is a lot.

No, I don't think you do[0].

[0] https://literarydevices.net/repetition/

> using a dead person as as a prop to make you feel better about yourself

No, "feel better" is definitely not what myself (nor anyone else involved in this program, as far as I'm aware) is trying to achieve here.

I know that a deceased person doesn't care about pretty much anything. Yet, that doesn't preclude me from caring about them, does it?

>I know that a deceased person doesn't care about pretty much anything. Yet, that doesn't preclude me from caring about them, does it?

As I said:

>Funerals, like life, are for the living. The dead don't care -- they're dead.

As such, what you're doing isn't to benefit the dead. Nothing can benefit them.

It's to benefit the living as I said. And there's nothing wrong with that. In fact, it's a lovely thing to do.

But it doesn't benefit the dead in any way and pretending it does seems disingenuous IMHO.

That said, knock yourself out. I have no issue with what you're doing.

Burying the dead is, according to Christian belief, one of the corporal works of mercy:

   In the days of Shalmaneser I performed many acts of charity to my brethren. I would give my bread to the hungry and my clothing to the naked; and if I saw any one of my people dead and thrown out behind the wall of Nineveh, I would bury him.

– Tobit 1:16-17 [RSV]

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Tobit+1%3A16-17...

   The bodies of the dead must be treated with respect and charity, in faith and hope of the Resurrection. The burial of the dead is a corporal work of mercy; it honors the children of God, who are temples of the Holy Spirit.

– Catechism of the Catholic Church, para. 2300

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a5.htm#2300

Praying for the souls of the dead is one of the spiritual works of mercy:

   This teaching is also based on the practice of prayer for the dead, already mentioned in Sacred Scripture: "Therefore [Judas Maccabeus] made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin." From the beginning the Church has honored the memory of the dead and offered prayers in suffrage for them, above all the Eucharistic sacrifice, so that, thus purified, they may attain the beatific vision of God. The Church also commends almsgiving, indulgences, and works of penance undertaken on behalf of the dead: "Let us help and commemorate them. If Job's sons were purified by their father's sacrifice, why would we doubt that our offerings for the dead bring them some consolation? Let us not hesitate to help those who have died and to offer our prayers for them."

– Catechism of the Catholic Church, para. 1032

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p123a12.htm#1032

That's great.

I don't have anything against any of the above. If that's what you (and/or others) choose to do, knock yourself out and more power to you.

But argument from authority[0] isn't a real argument, especially since the tenets of the Catholic Church are based upon the idea that there's an invisible sky daddy somewhere who actually gives a rat's ass about humans.

That's laughable at best and (as history has shown over[1] and over[2][3][4][5] again) often causes brutal, evil deeds to be done to others.

So yeah, if an imaginary sky daddy fries your clams then, by all means, pay attention to what other believers in such fakery claim. And go right ahead -- I have no issue with it. But don't expect me to buy into that particular pile of horse manure.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_at_Ayyadieh

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Inquisition

[3] https://www.timesofisrael.com/20-years-before-the-holocaust-...

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_and_violence

[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_of_Verden

I was not attempting to make an argument from authority. Instead, I was offering a perspective from Christian beliefs re: your "make oneself feel more compassionate ... does nothing for the deceased".

Rather than leave it hand-wavy ("because of God and stuff") I cited Sacred Scripture and the Catechism to show that respectful burial and praying for the souls of the dead are positive obligations of the Christian faithful per the precept of charity, at least according to Catholic belief.

In the context of the OP, the sense of religious and moral obligation is not necessarily present, I grant that.

As for the rest of your reply to me, well ... for one, what do you hope to accomplish with such condescending language?

Re: "brutal, evil deeds", that seems to fall in the category of the problem of evil. More specifically, a variation along of the lines of: "If God has revealed Himself as Christians claim, and arranged it such that the transmission of that revelation across time and space is so crucial, then why does He permit Christians, especially their leadership, to commit evil acts, since those acts can so easily detract from their credibility?"

Those are just things to think about. I don't intend to make another reply in this thread.

>As for the rest of your reply to me, well ... for one, what do you hope to accomplish with such condescending language?

Nothing. Just stating the obvious -- that the Abrahamic religions are a bunch of hooey.

I don't expect that you'll suddenly realize that your invisible sky daddy is actually an imaginary sky daddy. In fact, I'd be shocked if you did.

I don't judge you for your belief in the ridiculous, I just don't share it.

Don't like that I'm not buying what you're selling? Too bad. Life is hard sometimes.

But hey, you do you and I wish you health, happiness and long life.

It's sad that you'll likely be too butt-hurt to reciprocate, but I understand and forgive you.

I think you are coming from a belief system that makes this all pointless and cynical, but this is quite kind for people with some religious beliefs.

Well, it's kind to their relatives. Not to the person in question, given they're dead. The theory here is that the dead person is looking down from above?

That works if the person giving the eulogy is also religious. If they aren't, then they shouldn't be believing that.

When you were a baby, many people were kind to you in ways that you don't remember. Was that also pointless?

I also think this goes well beyond the relatives. Part of being in a society is caring for one another. Here I am on another continent, and I feel better that these people are taking a moment to mark someone's passing. If it doesn't matter to you, fine, you don't have to do it. But I don't get why you're putting so much energy into being negative about it.

You don't necessarily need to be religious to have a belief in the afterlife, or at least a strong enough suspicion of it to want to be respectful. As an analogy, there's some evidence that people form memories when in a coma. Even if you can never prove that an individual is aware of you, it is still compassionate to assume that they can hear what you say about them.

>but this is quite kind for people with some religious beliefs.

Kind to whom? The people who don't come to such a funeral? The corpse?

And that's not a rhetorical question, as I genuinely don't understand.

But we'll all be dead one day! It's a compelling idea that if something happens to me and I lose touch with all my relatives, there might still be someone at my funeral.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com