Richard III dig: DNA confirms bones are king's
bbc.co.uk
bbc.co.uk
Which makes it all the more worthwhile to be remembered for what you've done while you're alive (hopefully postive things) than where your bones rest even if you were born into privilege.
I don't know if this will keep going, but there are people to this day (usually mathematicians or someone with an affinity to that line) who tenderly care for the grave of Thomas Bayes. The man has been gone for almost 250 years.
Same for the people who are found months after they have died -- the dead don't care (or do anything else).
You're only partly right: The dead won't care. But if you're remembered for good things by others, then by default you've done good while you're alive. That's really the point of living don't you think?
We can all debate the metaphysical on what happens afterwards, but what's real, observable and true is the effect you had on those around you while you're alive and the legacy you leave behind. Bayes obviously won't care what happens today, he can't. But those alive today still do after so many years.
The fact that we won't be around to experience the merits of our actions doesn't mean our actions should be devoid of merit.
Well, in my opinion, you shouldn't base your actions on what you can write on your resume... Do good things, regardless of how broadly it will be received. You can easily portray yourself as a saint but in reality do more harm than good, and get away with it. But why care the about how you will be perceived when you're gone? The time it takes to be forgotten doesn't have anything to do with how "good" you were.
If you did miracles for elderly people you might get forgotten a minute after your death. Does that mean that your actions doesn't count? Why would you even care to think about it?
Really anything can be taken from you. Money, status, memories and even life itself, but the one thing no one can ever take away is what you've done. Whether you're remembered or not your actions can never be reversed, so hopefully they better be good ones.
The confluence of factors is what allows such a high probability to be ascribed to the hypothesis.
In the Talmud there is a famous expression, "He who saves a life is as if he saves and entire world and he who destroys a life is as if he destroys an entire world." and this relates to the meaning of this statement.
But the only reasonable explanation is that they are using mitochondrial DNA. The advantage of the mitochondrial DNA is that it is not mixed so, ignoring a few random mutations, the mitochondrial DNA of this person and the king should be equal.
[1] http://www.nbcnews.com/id/13662242/ns/technology_and_science...
There are many good arguments against the British royalty -- cost is not one of them. Were they a private family with private holdings, the people of the UK would pay more taxes than they do now.
The only way you can argue that abolishing the monarchy would save money is if you argue that they should be stripped from their private property. But if you start such land redistribution, just where should you end? Most of the land in the UK is held by aristocrats. And the US is not much better -- in the wealthy areas in the east, most of the land was originally acquired by means that would be less than reputable today.
You could kind of argue that all of the land in the US was acquired by less than reputable means. :P
Death duties? Capital gains tax?
Actually I have no strong feelings either way and tend to view the monarchy as part of the tourism industry.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/article-2192974/Prince-Har...
Thanks guys!
If there was nobody living at Buckingham Palace, far fewer people would go see it.
The Dutch royal family moved from Amsterdam to The Hague, still, their old palace is still a big tourist attraction.
better than living in a 40c desert.
"The Sunne in Splendour" retells Richard's life and also offers a fascinating look at his older brother Edward IV, a man who warred his entire life and never lost a battle.
https://bristolclassics.wordpress.com/2013/02/04/bah-and-fur...