31–40 of 51 posts
> After the initial fear of a cancer prognosis, Arline was diagnosed with lymphatic tuberculosis in 1941, possibly contracted from unpasteurized milk. I want to take a step back and realise how far humans have come in 80 years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps it's just too soon? Would you feel the same about Solomon's letters to his (first) wife? Or Mark Antony's letters to Cleopatra?
I think a reasonable bar is when a person passes out of living memory. Once it’s reasonably likely the last person who knew them is also dead, there’s no material harm that can be done by revealing their correspondence and the benefit to historians would outweigh any potential hurts to living people’s memory of someone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it the selling of these historical artifacts that offends you, or just the fact that they have become public documents? I don't think we can categorically call it vulgar to make public the private correspondence of long dead historical figures. They can certainly help us understand those people better. So is it the fact that someone is making a profit from the transaction that you find disturbing? That doesn't bot…
> They can certainly help us understand those people better. What exactly do you think you would learn about Feynman that is so important you feel your right to his personal correspondence to his wife outweighs his privacy (even from the grave). It’s not a new or novel debate, one of the more famous discussions on the topic would be the publication of the diary of Anne Frank. Unlike Feynman she wasn’t a historical fi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it the selling of these historical artifacts that offends you, or just the fact that they have become public documents? I don't think we can categorically call it vulgar to make public the private correspondence of long dead historical figures. They can certainly help us understand those people better. So is it the fact that someone is making a profit from the transaction that you find disturbing? That doesn't bot…
> They can certainly help us understand those people better. What exactly do you think you would learn about Feynman that is so important you feel your right to his personal correspondence to his wife outweighs his privacy (even from the grave). It’s not a new or novel debate, one of the more famous discussions on the topic would be the publication of the diary of Anne Frank. Unlike Feynman she wasn’t a historical fi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They can certainly help us understand those people better. What exactly do you think you would learn about Feynman that is so important you feel your right to his personal correspondence to his wife outweighs his privacy (even from the grave). It’s not a new or novel debate, one of the more famous discussions on the topic would be the publication of the diary of Anne Frank. Unlike Feynman she wasn’t a historical fi…
They're dead, they're beyond caring. Honestly this "sanctity of the dead" concept is a bit antiquated. Cremate the bodies, recycle the physical goods, move on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They can certainly help us understand those people better. What exactly do you think you would learn about Feynman that is so important you feel your right to his personal correspondence to his wife outweighs his privacy (even from the grave). It’s not a new or novel debate, one of the more famous discussions on the topic would be the publication of the diary of Anne Frank. Unlike Feynman she wasn’t a historical fi…
They're dead, they're beyond caring. Honestly this "sanctity of the dead" concept is a bit antiquated. Cremate the bodies, recycle the physical goods, move on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They can certainly help us understand those people better. What exactly do you think you would learn about Feynman that is so important you feel your right to his personal correspondence to his wife outweighs his privacy (even from the grave). It’s not a new or novel debate, one of the more famous discussions on the topic would be the publication of the diary of Anne Frank. Unlike Feynman she wasn’t a historical fi…
They're dead, they're beyond caring. Honestly this "sanctity of the dead" concept is a bit antiquated. Cremate the bodies, recycle the physical goods, move on.
Do you not have an estate plan on the basis once you’re dead you are beyond caring? Or do you have an estate plan but feel it is ok to violate on the basis you will be beyond caring and there is no sanctity of the dead?
Why even suggest cremation? Such a preference seems to contradict being beyond caring.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They can certainly help us understand those people better. What exactly do you think you would learn about Feynman that is so important you feel your right to his personal correspondence to his wife outweighs his privacy (even from the grave). It’s not a new or novel debate, one of the more famous discussions on the topic would be the publication of the diary of Anne Frank. Unlike Feynman she wasn’t a historical fi…
They're dead, they're beyond caring. Honestly this "sanctity of the dead" concept is a bit antiquated. Cremate the bodies, recycle the physical goods, move on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're dead, they're beyond caring. Honestly this "sanctity of the dead" concept is a bit antiquated. Cremate the bodies, recycle the physical goods, move on.
You should apply chesterton's fence to long-standing social traditions like this. There are certainly compelling reasons to respect the dead's wishes, even if the reasons are not apparent to you personally.
If not, this is just like when business people talk about "scalable" in meetings. Means nothing without more info.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're dead, they're beyond caring. Honestly this "sanctity of the dead" concept is a bit antiquated. Cremate the bodies, recycle the physical goods, move on.
I think it's less sanctity of the dead and more consent on what is allowed to be published. It's a fair argument. If I stumble across someone's messages to their ex-girlfriend who is now well-renowned in my circles, am I allowed to publish them? If they're dead does it really impact the ethics?
Much like in the Google/Meta dominated online world, the default is opt-in, it'd seem, as that likely generates capital such "estates" need, to survive.