Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

George Spiggott wrote:Their wishes don't matter.

That doesn't seem correct. For example, a woman wants to be cremated upon dying but her only son finds cremation abhorrent. It is possible that the son would still have his mother's corpse cremated because of her wishes.

Manchu wrote:

George Spiggott wrote:Their wishes don't matter.

That doesn't seem correct. For example, a woman wants to be cremated upon dying but her only son finds cremation abhorrent. It is possible that the son would still have his mother's corpse cremated because of her wishes.

its possible, but its just as likely if not more likely he would ignore her request and bury her.

It's also possible, and one might even say likely, that some living person might ignore the wishes of some other living person. That does not mean that the wishes of living people do not matter.

Manchu wrote:That doesn't seem correct. For example, a woman wants to be cremated upon dying but her only son finds cremation abhorrent. It is possible that the son would still have his mother's corpse cremated because of her wishes.

Either way it's a decision being made by a living person. If the woman is cremated the son chose to do that. We can choose to do what they asked or we can choose not to. Either way we (the living) make the final choice.

That has nothing to do with whether the wishes of the dead matter.

EDIT: I guess I should clarify that I understand that you are saying that the wishes of the dead only matter because the living say so. But if we say the wishes of the dead matter then they do -- which I think is what does in fact happen, as opposed to what you are saying happens.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
This does illustrate well, however, that the distinction between the living and the dead is not so absolute as we casually assume.

Manchu wrote:That has nothing to do with whether the wishes of the dead matter.

The wishes (choices) of the dead only matter to people who want to follow them. At which point they become the wishes (choices) of the living.

George Spiggott wrote:

Manchu wrote:That has nothing to do with whether the wishes of the dead matter.

The wishes (choices) of the dead only matter to people who want to follow them. At which point they become the wishes (choices) of the living.

The example of the mother who wants to be cremated seems to undermine this. OTOH, the son does not wish to cremate his mother's body. OTOH, the son wants to respect his mothers wishes. You are saying that the only important factor is that the son wants to respect his mother's wishes but this is obviously false. The son cannot respect his mother's wishes if she had none. Thus her wishes are of central importance even though she is now dead.

Manchu wrote:It's also possible, and one might even say likely, that some living person might ignore the wishes of some other living person. That does not mean that the wishes of living people do not matter.

for the most part though, wishes do not matter. you know the saying wish in one hand, you know what in the other, see which hand fills up first.

Your wish would only matter based on its merits and the likely hood of it happening.
Like everyone wishing for world peace, but as of today it seems like its never going to happen.
I wish I could have pizza and beer for dinner, hey look I have beer in the fridge and pizza is just a phone call away. Its a wish, because dinner is still a couple hours away and against my wishes, I might not live to see dinner.

Manchu wrote:The example of the mother who wants to be cremated seems to undermine this. OTOH, the son does not wish to cremate his mother's body. OTOH, the son wants to respect his mothers wishes. You are saying that the only important factor is that the son wants to respect his mother's wishes but this is obviously false. The son cannot respect his mother's wishes if she had none. Thus her wishes are of central importance even though she is now dead.

I'm saying that they are no longer hers. If the son cremates her it is his wish, he wanted to do as his mother asked.

The wishes of the dead are only of use where they are compatible with the wishes of the living.

sirlynchmob wrote:Your wish would only matter based on its merits and the likely hood of it happening.

We've just been using the word "wish" because it's a funerary colloquialism. What we really mean is desire, goal, preference, etc. I don't think the value of any expression among these categories is dependent upon likelihood of realization.

What do the Atheists want to replace the cross with?

George Spiggott wrote:I'm saying that they are no longer hers. If the son cremates her it is his wish, he wanted to do as his mother asked.

The wishes of the dead are only of use where they are compatible with the wishes of the living.

Again, the example seems to contradict this, if I understand what you mean by "of use."

The mother's wish is to be cremated. By respecting his mother's wishes, the son has not developed the desire to cremate his mother. He is cremating her against his own wishes because of his separate desire to respect her preferences -- which are meaningfully distinct from his own. It is possible to voluntarily act against one's will, as it were, according to a particular evaluation for the sake of some separate interest.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Medium of Death wrote:What do the Atheists want to replace the cross with?

They could save their pennies and do something like this:

Manchu wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:Your wish would only matter based on its merits and the likely hood of it happening.

We've just been using the word "wish" because it's a funerary colloquialism. What we really mean is desire, goal, preference, etc. I don't think the value of any expression among these categories is dependent upon likelihood of realization.

Its still applicable, you can desire, set goals, or state a preference for something, but until it happens, it hasn't been realized yet. As all of those require predicting the future, they are also dependent upon likelihood.

It is very unlikely that someone who wants to be a movie star will make it big in the pictures. And yet most of the people who have made it big in the pictures wanted to be movie stars.

Manchu wrote:It is very unlikely that someone who wants to be a movie star will make it big in the pictures. And yet most of the people who have made it big in the pictures wanted to be movie stars.

and some people just working at a coffee shop became movie stars.

Unlikely things can happen, but until it happens, its just a wish, desire, goal, preference, dream, etc.

like the moms request for his son, I'm sure the son would consider her wishes, but in the end its his decision. if he does what she wanted, her wish was realized. If he does something else, it wasn't.

Without wishes, goals, desires, preferences, etc, even otherwise likely things may not happen.

Manchu wrote: It is possible to voluntarily act against one's will, as it were, according to a particular evaluation for the sake of some separate interest.

Are you talking about cognitive dissonance? You may have two or more conflicting thoughts but they are all your thoughts.

Manchu wrote:I guess I should clarify that I understand that you are saying that the wishes of the dead only matter because the living say so

Absolutely.

That's a fine looking monument by the way. Anyone would be proud that they're venerating their predecessors with that.

sirlynchmob wrote:if he does what she wanted, her wish was realized. If he does something else, it wasn't.

The latter course of action (much less her death) does not annihilate the meaning, validity, existence, etc, of her wishes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

George Spiggott wrote:Are you talking about cognitive dissonance? You may have two or more conflicting thoughts but they are all your thoughts.

No, I am talking about distinct interests. In my example, their are three interests at play.

(1) the mother's wish to be cremated

(2) the son's abhorrence of cremation

(3) the son's desire to respect his mother's wishes

The third interest does not transform the second into the first. The third prioritizes the first above the second. It was never the son's wish to cremate the mother. The example illustrates that a person's wishes are not only important after she dies but also that the wishes of a person who is now dead can be even more important than some of the interests of a living person.

Manchu wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:if he does what she wanted, her wish was realized. If he does something else, it wasn't.

The latter course of action (much less her death) does not annihilate the meaning, validity, existence, etc, of her wishes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

George Spiggott wrote:Are you talking about cognitive dissonance? You may have two or more conflicting thoughts but they are all your thoughts.

No, I am talking about distinct interests. In my example, their are three interests at play.

(1) the mother's wish to be cremated

(2) the son's abhorrence of cremation

(3) the son's desire to respect his mother's wishes

The third interest does not transform the first into the second. The third prioritizes the first above the second. It was never the son's wish to cremate the mother. The example illustrates that a person's wishes are not only important after she dies but also that the wishes of a person who is now dead can be even be important than some of the interests of a living person.

But the wish is only as important to the living as much as the living allows it to be important. In the end its the sons choice on what happens to the body. If he doesn't consider his moms wish at all in his decision her wish was meaningless. Its not like mom has any more say in the matter, she can't object to what her sons does with the body.

George Spiggott wrote:That's a fine looking monument by the way. Anyone would be proud that they're venerating their predecessors with that.

It is an appropriate expression of patriotism in that does not necessarily convey any religious meaning.

Manchu wrote:(1) the mother's wish to be cremated

(2) the son's abhorrence of cremation

(3) the son's desire to respect his mother's wishes

The third interest does not transform the second into the first. The third prioritizes the first above the second. It was never the son's wish to cremate the mother. The example illustrates that a person's wishes are not only important after she dies but also that the wishes of a person who is now dead can be even more important than some of the interests of a living person.

One and three are the same thing. Without the son there is no mother's wish/desire. The mother's desire only exists because of the son and he alone will be the arbiter.

sirlynchmob wrote:If he doesn't consider his moms wish at all in his decision her wish was meaningless.

I think you mean "is meaningless" but I would still object. This is just like what you were saying earlier, if you don't mind me paraphrasing via my own counter example, that wanting to be a movie star is meaningless until you actually become one. It seems to me that you view "meaningfulness" in terms of realization. I simply object to that definition of "what matters." To me, things matter even if they are not yet realized or even if they never can be.

Let me give a further example, using your modification of the uncremated mother scenario. The son completely ignored his mother's wishes to be cremated. But the friend of the son thought badly of the son for doing so.

Manchu wrote:

George Spiggott wrote:That's a fine looking monument by the way. Anyone would be proud that they're venerating their predecessors with that.

It is an appropriate expression of patriotism in that does not necessarily convey any religious meaning.

It is.

Manchu wrote:It is possible to voluntarily act against one's will, as it were, according to a particular evaluation for the sake of some separate interest.

Not really, to the extent that the will is real, we cannot act without it. You might choose one desired action (according to the wishes of the mother) while ignoring another desired action (not doing so), but that doesn't mean you're acting against your own will.

That being said, if the mother had not wished to be cremated, the son would not have done so. That wish does matter, to the son, but is of little concern to the deceased once they are deceased. Unless, of course, they're looking down from on high, in which case they'll haunt the gak out of you for ignoring their wishes.

George Spiggott wrote:One and three are the same thing.

That is not the case. The son does not want to cremate the body. He wants to respect his mother's wishes. They remain distinct.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:You might choose one desired action (according to the wishes of the mother) while ignoring another desired action (not doing so), but that doesn't mean you're acting against your own will.

Yes, as I indicated, I was being a little pithy rather than exact.

That being said, if the mother had not wished to be cremated, the son would not have done so. That wish does matter, to the son, but is of little concern to the deceased once they are deceased.

The question is not whether the wishes of the dead matter to the dead, unless I have very much misinterpreted George's comment. His comment seems fairly absolute, however: "Their [the dead's] wishes don't matter."

Manchu wrote:The question is not whether the wishes of the dead matter to the dead, unless I have very much misinterpreted George's comment. His comment seems fairly absolute, however: "Their [the dead's] wishes don't matter."

From what I have understood his position is that the dead matter only because the living say they do.

dogma wrote:From what I have understood his position is that the dead matter only because the living say they do.

From above, to George:

Manchu wrote:I guess I should clarify that I understand that you are saying that the wishes of the dead only matter because the living say so. But if we say the wishes of the dead matter then they do -- which I think is what does in fact happen, as opposed to what you are saying happens.

Manchu wrote: "Their [the dead's] wishes don't matter."

Yep, not unless someone who is alive wants to enact them. By themselves they have no value.

When people say "dead people wanted this done" what they mean is "we (group of living people) want to do this". There's no active input from the dead.

I think you and I agree on that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Again, I should clarify: only the living can enact the wishes of people who are no longer alive; but the wishes of the dead do not cease to exist or have value merely because they are not enacted.

Manchu wrote:

dogma wrote:From what I have understood his position is that the dead matter only because the living say they do.

From above, to George:

Manchu wrote:I guess I should clarify that I understand that you are saying that the wishes of the dead only matter because the living say so.

At least my message isn't garbled.

Manchu wrote:But if we say the wishes of the dead matter then they do -- which I think is what does in fact happen, as opposed to what you are saying happens.