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.

mattyrm wrote: i dont actually wish to offend any American marines and i dont really mind if you wish to think that i have hair like David Bowie and i wear leather underpants.

I didn't think you did. I've never met a serviceman who didn't bag on the other branches/services. I thought that was part of the fun of being in the service. You get to make fun of the others.

mattyrm wrote:Dont be getting all Freud on me cos i knocked a few posts out. If you ever see me dressed like a French sailor you can say "I told you so"

Why are you so worried about someone getting 'all Freud' on you? Tell me how that makes you feel.

Howard A Treesong wrote:

FITZZ wrote: When a celebrity/entertainer/etc,who work I admire passes away I may feel a sense of loss,and in some cases (Joey Ramone for example) even a twinge of sadness,however their is no profound grief involved,simply because no matter how much I admired or enjoyed these peoples works,they was no real emotional attachment to them.
I've lost my Grandmother,Mom,a Sister and several very close friends and each of theses passing deeply affected me due to each Pearson being an integral part of my "real" life.

We have evolved empathy and emotions though, and for most of history we have only 'known' people as those being around us, friends, family and neighbours. When these people are suffering in some fashion we empathise with them. Through TV and media, which are very recent developments relatively speaking, we now 'know' lots of people and simply the same feelings can be stirred with people we've never met. It applied to starving kids on TV from another country. Why should we care? They aren't our family, they don't even know them. Helping them in any fashion is unlikely to benefit us in any way at all. But we empathise with them and are emotionally moved by their plight. It's probably for this reason that some people get very upset when their favourite TV character dies. And I mean "character" not actor. People watching a character in a soap or some other series every week for some years can create emotional attachment to that person and become upset when they 'die'. It may me an evolutionary emotional misfire originally formed for empathising with those strictly in your local area or group, but we didn't evolve watching TV and reading newspapers they just trigger the same feelings, and it doesn't make the feelings less real for the person feeling them.

Overall I agree with you,I can obviously empathize with the plight of starving children,and was indeed saddened by the passing of people I'd only "known" through various media (Ramone,Carlin and Pryor immediately jump to mind)...and I recall my Grandmother crying because a character in one of "her soaps" (the character not the actual actor) had passed away.

I simply contend that,for me at least,the feeling of grief and loss are much more pronounced with the passing of a person who has actually been "involved" in my life in a personal way.

FITZZ wrote: I simply contend that,for me at least,the feeling of grief and loss are much more pronounced with the passing of a person who has actually been "involved" in my life in a personal way.

This is what I don't get. No one has argued we should feel more for a celebrity than a family member. Not once has anyone made that statement, yet it has been refuted several times.

Even though I am fairly confident that mattyrm may have over-reacted a bit, I'm pretty sure I can see where he is coming from.

Now correct me if I'm wrong, or simply tell me to feth off, but it seems mattyrm has seen plenty of good men killed, almost all of whom will never be noticed by the public, and his view is that if they aren't recognised, why should these people?


And on topic, I don't care when someone dies. I have the respectful "Damn that sucks" and about 1 second of thought to how the family must feel before going about my business.

Ahtman wrote:

FITZZ wrote: I simply contend that,for me at least,the feeling of grief and loss are much more pronounced with the passing of a person who has actually been "involved" in my life in a personal way.

This is what I don't get. No one has argued we should feel more for a celebrity than a family member. Not once has anyone made that statement, yet it has been refuted several times.

Don't misunderstand Ahtman,I wasn't attempting refute an argument that,IMO,shouldn't exist.

I readily agree that for many,the passing of celebrities can be a moving experience,and I don't see that as somehow being a "bad" thing (the emotions experienced,not the passing).
I than added that of course one feels that sense of loss more deeply when it is some one whom the person actually knew that passes,but meant that statement as a simple matter of ,what should be,fact,not as an attempt to negate the feelings one has regarding the former.

Tim the Biovore wrote:Even though I am fairly confident that mattyrm may have over-reacted a bit

It is the over reaction that has gotten attention, not the sentiment.

Tim the Biovore wrote:is that if they aren't recognised, why should these people?

99.9% of the world will die without being noticed globally. A few people are known throughout the world. The diferrence is fairly simple. Of course there are great monuments to fallen soldiers, not so much to actors and musicians.

Tim the Biovore wrote:And on topic, I don't care when someone dies. I have the respectful "Damn that sucks" and about 1 second of thought to how the family must feel before going about my business.

Have you read the thread?

As pointed out earlier, I know Matty quite well IRL. I wouldn't say he was macho in the Captain Awesome, 'gym-queen' sort of way. He's more of a '50s dad' type.

He hates it, HATES it, when I try to hug him!

On Topic: I will be VERY sad when Pratchett finally goes. Fact.

Wow! Some of you guys are pretty cold!

They aren't, they're just trying to act like they are.

I've noticed that a lot on here actually.

Anymore, when I see the state of the world and I hear somebody close to me has died, my thought is "Well, at least their troubles are over".

One of the things that confuses me, mattyrm, is how worked up you get about things you perceive in the world as "injustices", such as the thread on dangerous driving, but then don't care about a person you can put a face to. You got more worked up about a poor faceless person in a news report than Pete Postlethwaite. That in itself is fine, as the whole subject of dangerous driving is one that gets my goat too, but to be so upset about the girl who was killed by the drink driver then pass off Pete with less than a "meh" seems odd. It is like it is the circumstances that killed the girl are more important to you than the girl herself. That doesn't seem like a "high tolerance to emotional pain", it just seems cold and detached.

BloodQuest wrote:Wow! Some of you guys are pretty cold!

Albatross wrote:They aren't, they're just trying to act like they are.

Quoted for perfectly timed, apt answer.

On topic:

I have really only been upset at the deaths of two "public figures" if that's the term we've been using. Warren Zevon and more recently, Leslie Neilsen. I wasn't as upset as I would have been had it been someone that I know, but it still bummed me out.

As for more private citizens: The condition of the person's death when I hear about it has a pretty big impact on my reaction to it. Some 97-year old woman who died in here sleep? Good for her, she had a good run.

Something like the Jessica Lunsford incident makes me physically ill.

I've had two close family members die (grandparent's dog and great grandfather) but not being amazingly sad. Sure, I though "Huh... sucks." once I found out, but life goes on; I've cared very little about celebrity deaths; Michael Jackson died and I cracked a joke about him (granted, I don't like that I did it, as I don't like people cracking jokes about me, but I just did because I wanted to).

LN has been the only person who's death provoked more than a joke or a shrug of the shoulders. There was a moment of "huh..." but it was short-lived.

I'm not completely without emotion, but really there are a select few people i'd honestly grieve for any period of time longer than the day they died, anyone else... sucks to be them.

Fifty wrote:One of the things that confuses me, mattyrm, is how worked up you get about things you perceive in the world as "injustices", such as the thread on dangerous driving, but then don't care about a person you can put a face to. You got more worked up about a poor faceless person in a news report than Pete Postlethwaite. That in itself is fine, as the whole subject of dangerous driving is one that gets my goat too, but to be so upset about the girl who was killed by the drink driver then pass off Pete with less than a "meh" seems odd. It is like it is the circumstances that killed the girl are more important to you than the girl herself. That doesn't seem like a "high tolerance to emotional pain", it just seems cold and detached.

True enough, first of all, im not a proper bastard, i think that the argument was merely down to the use of one word. I do not see how it is possible to be genuinely concerned when somebody you do not know dies, thats not to say anything bad about PP, its just my opinion.

Terry Pratchett is a good example by Alb, i really like the bloke, have all his books, watched his euthanasia lecture, admire him greatly, but will I care when he dies? Of course not! I dont know him! The only thing that will sadden me is that i will not get to read any more of his wonderful books, but thats not really caring is it? I mean.. its for selfish reasons!

If the only reason people care when a famous person dies is because they feel it will impact on their life negatively, thats not really caring is it?

Now what you said above however, is very true. And i can explain that one in far more simple terms.

To me, the circumstances ARE more important than the girl herself. I dont know the girl, or her Dad. I kinda feel sorry for the father, because i can imagine it happening to me and therefore have empathy for his situation. I feel very strongly about these miscarriages of justice because when we allow filth to get away with things then it increases the likelihood of this incident happening to me, or someone that i actually do know, and therefore do care about.

Ergo, i dont realy care about the girl. Sure its sad, but i cant care, because i dont know her or her dad. I can empathise, but its not really caring.

And i care about criminals, and dirty criminal immigrants that we should be deporting and terrorists etc because they kill innocent people, and one day, one of the innocent people might be someone i actually genuinelly DO care about.

Its hard to convey tone and genuine emotion via keyboard, and im sorry if that makes me sound like a douche, but i really didnt intend for this to turn into an epic, i was merely winding MGS up and then retorting to several people flinging things in my direction.

I dont think im a bad guy really.. but... the worlds a tough place right? You just gotta be tougher!

mattyrm wrote:
Its hard to convey tone and genuine emotion via keyboard, and im sorry if that makes me sound like a douche, but i really didnt intend for this to turn into an epic, i was merely winding MGS up and then retorting to several people flinging things in my direction.

Seems you failed doubly there.

I think the problem lies in that caring is being used in two different ways. mattyrm is using it in the sense of nurturing or being invested in a subject, ie the emotional context. I know for me when I used it I was using the attentive context, which doesn't necessitate being emotionally invested.

So what mattyrm is reading is that we are emotional about the subject when we aren't. What we see when he is typing is that he is saying that his passing isn't even worth the merest glance, which is an exceptionally bleak attitude.

Of course, assuming the only reason people notice someone passing away is how it will affect them is in error, but not the cause of the tension or confusion. I'm sure for some it is true, but it is certainly not the case in all.

Yeah, mostly a case of Matty using the word "care" a bit differently than most everyone else in the thread.

Matty, your position does make a lot more sense as expressed here. The truncated, beer-soaked way you tried to get it across before didn't quite work.