University of Kwazulu-Natal

The Ethics And Philosophical Implications Of Celebrating Death The

Bonisiwe Shabane
-
the ethics and philosophical implications of celebrating death the

The Ethics and Philosophical Implications of Celebrating Death: The Case of Charlie Kirk and Beyond The act of celebrating or cheering for someone’s death, such as the hypothetical case of Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, raises profound ethical, philosophical, and psychological questions. This phenomenon is not merely a reaction to an individual’s passing but a reflection of deeper societal, moral, and psychological currents. When people express joy or satisfaction at someone’s death—particularly in public forums like workplaces or university campuses—it creates a complex dilemma. This issue intersects with free speech, moral philosophy, psychological disorders, religious teachings (specifically from the Bible and Catholic doctrine), and the tension between individual expression and societal harmony. Below, I explore the ethical and philosophical dimensions of this behavior, the psychological underpinnings, the religious perspectives, the free speech paradox, and potential paths toward balance, while addressing the hypocrisy of those who champion...

Philosophically, celebrating someone’s death challenges foundational ethical principles. From a deontological perspective, rooted in Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative, actions should be judged by their adherence to universal moral laws. Kant argued that we must treat others as ends in themselves, not as means to an end. Celebrating someone’s death, particularly a public figure like Charlie Kirk, reduces their humanity to a symbol of ideological opposition, violating their intrinsic dignity. This act fails Kant’s test of universalizability: if everyone celebrated the deaths of their adversaries, it would erode mutual respect and foster a culture of vengeance. In contrast, consequentialist ethics, such as utilitarianism proposed by John Stuart Mill, evaluates actions based on their outcomes.

Celebrating a death might bring temporary satisfaction to a group but risks long-term harm by deepening societal divisions and normalizing dehumanization. Mill’s harm principle suggests that free expression is permissible unless it causes significant harm to others. While cheering for a death may not directly harm the deceased, it can create a hostile environment, particularly in workplaces or campuses, where such expressions may alienate or intimidate others. This essay addresses the ethical, moral, and theological implications of publicly celebrating the death of a political or philosophical opponent, specifically in response to the killing of Charlie Kirk. I highlight the reactions from some individuals who feel it is unfair that people celebrating his death have faced consequences, like losing their jobs. I argue that there are serious moral, ethical, and theological concerns when someone openly rejoices in the death of another.

The other day I explored this topic in an essay titled Celebrating Death: A Disturbing Reality from a biblical point of view. I’d shared some verses that to me, are relevant to the topic. As a few more days have progressed from the pivotal moment when TPUSA founder Charlie Kirk was killed, we have begun to see some consequences to those very people who celebrated his assassination. Some people are saying ‘It’s not fair’ that they get fired. Or they say ‘It’s just an opinion, I thought we had free speech in this country?!” This caught my eye from Breitbart News, @BreitbartNews on Twitter-

There are three issues with someone publicly celebrating the killing of a political or philosophical opponent- moral, ethical, and theological. The ethical issues surrounding death and dying encompass a wide range of complex and sensitive topics that vary greatly across cultures, religions, and personal beliefs. Key ethical considerations include defining life and death, assessing the quality of life, and determining the respectful treatment of the body after death. The definition of life has evolved, particularly with advancements in medical technology that allow for life support even when there is no hope of recovery, raising questions about what constitutes a meaningful existence. Quality of life is often a central concern, with differing perspectives on whether life should be prolonged at all costs or if it is permissible to consider euthanasia or assisted suicide in cases of... Additionally, cultural and religious beliefs significantly influence how individuals and families approach decisions related to end-of-life care, including preferences for burial, cremation, or organ donation.

The importance of advance planning, such as creating advance directives or living wills, is emphasized, as having clear wishes articulated can ease the burden on loved ones during emotionally challenging times. Overall, discussions about death and dying are profoundly personal and are best navigated with sensitivity to the diverse beliefs and values that shape individual choices. Although ethics is concerned with the difference between right and wrong, what is right and what is wrong when it comes to issues of death and dying vary widely from culture to culture, religion... There are three general sets of ethical issues that need to be faced when considering matters of death and dying: Defining life and the cessation thereof, determining the quality of life that the individual... For many people, the parameters of ethical behavior are defined by their religious beliefs. No matter how decisions of death are dying are informed, however, such questions are best faced when the individual is still mentally sound and able to communicate their wishes.

This ensures that the wishes of the individual are fulfilled upon death and makes it easier for the family to make decisions and prepare for the loss of their loved one. Keywords Advance Directive; Culture; Dementia; Do Not Resuscitate Order; Ethics; Euthanasia; Extraordinary Measures; Heroic Measures; Living Will; Medical Device; Palliative Care; Quality of Life; Religion The approach of death is a difficult time as people struggle to resolve interpersonal issues before it is too late, put financial affairs in order, and make decisions about medical care. The person who is dying may also be attempting to come to terms with their death, and the loved ones left behind may begin to realize that they are faced with the loss of... In some cases, this realization is met with denial, and the family attempts to do everything in its power to prolong the life of the individual so that they do not have to face... In other cases, either the terminal person or loved one may be overcome by despair, particularly if the patient is facing a lingering, painful death with no hope of relief.

In still other cases, the family may be faced with the fact that their loved one is no longer able to communicate either because of dementia, coma, or other incapacitating illness and will have... Despite the fact that neither the dying person nor their loved ones may be emotionally capable of making a rational decision at this time, important decisions still need to be made. In general, there are three sets of ethical issues regarding death and dying that need to be considered when determining how best to meet one's end with dignity or support someone in doing so:... This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic. Is death larger than life and does it annihilate life altogether?

This is the basic question discussed in this essay, within a philosophical/existential context. The central argument is that the concept of death is problematic and, following Levinas, the author holds that death cannot lead to nothingness. This accords with the teaching of all religious traditions, which hold that there is life beyond death, and Plato’s and Aristotle’s theories about the immortality of the soul. In modernity, since the Enlightenment, God and religion have been placed in the margin or rejected in rational discourse. Consequently, the anthropocentric promethean view of man has been stressed and the reality of the limits placed on humans by death deemphasised or ignored. Yet, death remains at the centre of nature and human life, and its reality and threat become evident in the spread of a single virus.

So, death always remains a mystery, relating to life and morality. Keywords: Life, Philosophical, Existential, Death, Soul, Transcendence, Modernity What a piece of work is a man! how noble in reason! how infinite in faculty! In form and moving, how express and admirable!

In action, how like an angel! in apprehension, how like a god! the beauty of the world! the paragon of animals! And yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust? William Shakespeare (1890: 132), Hamlet, Act 2, scene 2, 303–312.

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless. For the living, death has a moral dimension. When we confront death and dying in our own lives and in the lives of others, we ask questions about the good, right, and fitting as they relate to our experiences of human mortality. When others die, the living are left with moral questions—questions that often generate personal inquiry as to whether a particular death was “good” or whether it was tragic, terrifying, or peaceful. In The Ethics of Death, the authors, one a philosopher and one a religious studies scholar, undertake an examination of the deaths that we experience as members of a larger moral community.

Their respectful and engaging dialogue highlights the complex and challenging issues that surround many deaths in our modern world and helps readers frame thoughtful responses. Unafraid of difficult topics, Steffen and Cooley fully engage suicide, physician assisted suicide, euthanasia, capital punishment, abortion, and war as areas of life where death poses moral challenges. Project MUSE promotes the creation and dissemination of essential humanities and social science resources through collaboration with libraries, publishers, and scholars worldwide. Forged from a partnership between a university press and a library, Project MUSE is a trusted part of the academic and scholarly community it serves. A site about God, the Catholic Church, Science, Philosophy, Religion, Atheism, and other worldly things. The act of celebrating or cheering for someone’s death, such as the hypothetical case of Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, raises profound ethical, philosophical, and psychological questions.

This phenomenon is not merely a reaction to an individual’s passing but a reflection of deeper societal, moral, and psychological currents. When people express joy or satisfaction at someone’s death—particularly in public forums like workplaces or university campuses—it creates a complex dilemma. This issue intersects with free speech, moral philosophy, psychological disorders, religious teachings (specifically from the Bible and Catholic doctrine), and the tension between individual expression and societal harmony. Below, I explore the ethical and philosophical dimensions of this behavior, the psychological underpinnings, the religious perspectives, the free speech paradox, and potential paths toward balance, while addressing the hypocrisy of those who champion... Philosophically, celebrating someone’s death challenges foundational ethical principles. From a deontological perspective, rooted in Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative, actions should be judged by their adherence to universal moral laws.

Kant argued that we must treat others as ends in themselves, not as means to an end. Celebrating someone’s death, particularly a public figure like Charlie Kirk, reduces their humanity to a symbol of ideological opposition, violating their intrinsic dignity. This act fails Kant’s test of universalizability: if everyone celebrated the deaths of their adversaries, it would erode mutual respect and foster a culture of vengeance. In contrast, consequentialist ethics, such as utilitarianism proposed by John Stuart Mill, evaluates actions based on their outcomes. Celebrating a death might bring temporary satisfaction to a group but risks long-term harm by deepening societal divisions and normalizing dehumanization. Mill’s harm principle suggests that free expression is permissible unless it causes significant harm to others.

While cheering for a death may not directly harm the deceased, it can create a hostile environment, particularly in workplaces or campuses, where such expressions may alienate or intimidate others.

People Also Search

The Ethics And Philosophical Implications Of Celebrating Death: The Case

The Ethics and Philosophical Implications of Celebrating Death: The Case of Charlie Kirk and Beyond The act of celebrating or cheering for someone’s death, such as the hypothetical case of Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, raises profound ethical, philosophical, and psychological questions. This phenomenon is not merely a reaction to an individual’s passing but a reflection of de...

Philosophically, Celebrating Someone’s Death Challenges Foundational Ethical Principles. From A

Philosophically, celebrating someone’s death challenges foundational ethical principles. From a deontological perspective, rooted in Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative, actions should be judged by their adherence to universal moral laws. Kant argued that we must treat others as ends in themselves, not as means to an end. Celebrating someone’s death, particularly a public figure like Charlie Ki...

Celebrating A Death Might Bring Temporary Satisfaction To A Group

Celebrating a death might bring temporary satisfaction to a group but risks long-term harm by deepening societal divisions and normalizing dehumanization. Mill’s harm principle suggests that free expression is permissible unless it causes significant harm to others. While cheering for a death may not directly harm the deceased, it can create a hostile environment, particularly in workplaces or cam...

The Other Day I Explored This Topic In An Essay

The other day I explored this topic in an essay titled Celebrating Death: A Disturbing Reality from a biblical point of view. I’d shared some verses that to me, are relevant to the topic. As a few more days have progressed from the pivotal moment when TPUSA founder Charlie Kirk was killed, we have begun to see some consequences to those very people who celebrated his assassination. Some people are...

There Are Three Issues With Someone Publicly Celebrating The Killing

There are three issues with someone publicly celebrating the killing of a political or philosophical opponent- moral, ethical, and theological. The ethical issues surrounding death and dying encompass a wide range of complex and sensitive topics that vary greatly across cultures, religions, and personal beliefs. Key ethical considerations include defining life and death, assessing the quality of l...