lessdazed comments on Mike Darwin on Steve Jobs's hypocritical stance towards death - Less Wrong

25 Post author: Synaptic 08 October 2011 03:32AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (78)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: gwern 08 October 2011 01:57:16PM *  2 points [-]

It's forgotten now, although the liver thing got a fair amount of coverage (I certainly remember reading about how he gamed the system to get a liver) at the time. And now that there is renewed interest, it would be uncharitable and mean-spirited to speak ill of the dead.

Comment author: lessdazed 08 October 2011 07:55:13PM 10 points [-]

it would be uncharitable and mean-spirited to speak ill of the dead.

Why?

Comment author: Nisan 10 October 2011 06:27:34AM 5 points [-]

It's a tradition, like being nice to people on Christmas. There's no reason for Christmas in particular to be a day on which you're extra nice. But people aren't nice enough in general, so the tradition is a step in the right direction; I'm not going to criticize it.

Comment author: Nornagest 08 October 2011 09:09:41PM 3 points [-]

Because it feels like adding insult to injury for those grieving, I'd imagine.

Comment author: jhuffman 11 October 2011 07:58:29PM 0 points [-]

I wonder how the liver donor's family feels.

Comment author: Kingreaper 08 October 2011 09:34:14PM 6 points [-]

I'll agree with Nornagest on the insult to injury part, but there's also a second part:

If you talk about someone's failings after they die, but not before, then you seem to have been waiting until they were no longer available to defend themselves.

IOW: it seems cowardly, and dishonest. Because if they were still around, they might be able to dismiss your allegations.

Comment author: lessdazed 08 October 2011 09:39:50PM 5 points [-]

Can I mitigate people's negative feelings by mostly offering cites of old criticisms?

Comment author: Kingreaper 08 October 2011 09:44:11PM 4 points [-]

That should help, but I'm not certain how much. The problem is that whatever the reason for the rule originally, it's now ingrained as a moral absolute in some people's minds.

Comment author: gwern 08 October 2011 08:40:43PM 2 points [-]

Dunno; ask the normals. But I've read it so many times that they must have some such attitude.

Comment author: MarkusRamikin 08 October 2011 09:27:59PM *  2 points [-]

Normals have a problem there. When a death is fresh and on everyone's minds, you're supposed to be nice rather than care about facts, truth and accuracy. But by the time you're allowed to care about those things, nobody is paying attention any more.

Comment author: Craig_Heldreth 10 October 2011 01:04:21PM 0 points [-]

It is an anachronism from prehistory when the dead were presumed spirits, capable of hearing you speaking ill of them, and retaining power to injure you. The motivation is primal fear.