Help me to reconcile rationality and the eulogization of an animal, please.

[sl8]

I think I am a fairly rational and even skeptical person.

I read a post in the Lounge, from user jpak, about an owl that had died (https://www.democraticunderground.com/10181030269). It seemed a very natural thing to say something nice about this owl that had provided a service to us.

Thinking about it a little more, I realized that such eulogies, whether to animal or human, indicate to me one of the very best features of humankind, but I'm not sure why. I understand that the words benefit the living and not the dead, but I'm not clear clear as to how that works and how that even comports with rationality.

If to an animal, it wouldn't understand the eulogy when alive, and in any case the subject is dead and beyond hearing.

I suppose part of the purity of the eulogy is in that the speaker cannot expect any material benefit from the words, but what is the rational benefit?

Anyway, thanks for reading and for any thoughts you may provide.

[guillaumeb]

1. If it is a eulogy for a pet,

perhaps the eulogy is to remind the listeners of the emotional benefits provided by that pet. And as you say, all funerary services are for the survivors, but it is good for the survivors to remember.

And given that we are emotional and rational beings, it is good to acknowledge both sides.

On the other hand, we have creatures like Paul Ryan, and the Koch brothers, and Donald Trump, who reduce everything to a monetary value.

[sl8]

3. Thank you.

That all makes sense to me.

The rational/emotional dichotomy is what's troubling me, but I suppose that's not unique to me.

[Stardust1]

2. The way I see it.

Promoting empathy is benificial to us as a species as a whole. It shows others how we will potentially treat them in a similar situation. This extending to other animals is natural as we become more aware that we are part of an ecosystem rather then above it.

[sl8]

4. Thank you.

Promoting empathy being beneficial to the species is not something I'd thought about. That's really interesting.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

5. Eulogies, as well as funerals and memorial services, are for the living.

Whether the dead is a human or an animal of some kind, it's we who remain behind who have the need to express grief or appreciation or whatever.

[sl8]

7. Thank you.

Why do you think we have this need?

[KT2000]

6. the benefits

are many: we acknowledge the person's sadness over the loss; we affirm that there was a life that is now gone; we affirm that the life had value; and, in turn we affirm that our own life has value.

[sl8]

8. Thank you.

While I certainly don't dispute any of the points you made, I'm not sure that they are entirely rational.

We could extrapolate from your last point, that if our own life has value, that we should survive. That seems rational, or at least in accordance with the theory of the survival of the fittest.

[KT2000]

9. since we know

that we will not survive, we do what we can to give our lives value and importance. Deaths are honored because we may be mourning and that is what we want for ourselves - to know we are living with meaning and value to what surrounds us.

I don't know that the rituals of human life are very rational but rather they are attempts to define the abstract.