Why is it that when a person dies, it causes more sadness than when many people dies.
2007-10-13 19:36:07 · 10 answers · asked by ragnaroklem 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Unless there's a personal face to death, people tend to be desensitised to it.
.
2007-10-13 20:00:41 · answer #1 · answered by Rai A 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I understand what you are getting at, but what you are suggesting is probably not quite true.
Sometimes when many people die, there is media attention on the the event that caused their deaths.... like the crazy person that shot them, or the tsunami etc.
When one person dies, the media focuses on the tragedy of the death of that person and the suffering that their family is going through. The intensity of sadness seems worse, but even in when many people die at once, there are also many people who are very sad.
It is just that media focus is on the event, not the individual suffering, when many people die. It is just an illusion that there is less sadness, and if you were actually at the mass tragedy it would be extremely sad and overwhelming. It might even leave you mentally scarred for life.
2007-10-13 19:51:26 · answer #2 · answered by tom b 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
"A person" is different from the plain "many people." This may be explained in the following situation:
You are sad because you are close to that single person who died. On the contrary, you are not that affected if a mass death occurs, espcially when you're not ossociated with any of the people who died in that mass death.
2007-10-13 19:47:19 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
When you are talking about mass death, you are dealing with numbers, and that sort of takes away from the humanity of it - it's just a statistic.
If you take one person out of that group and focus on just that one person, then you begin to realize that that individual was a person with hopes, dreams, fears, probably had a family, was probably loved by many. And the tragedy of that death is more easily understood and appreciated. That's why most novels and stories about these sorts of things usually focus on one individual or one family etc. A million people dying is just to difficult for most people to comprehend.
2007-10-13 19:45:40 · answer #4 · answered by the phantom 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm not sure your statement is true... But if one person you know well dies it hits home more than if a number of people who are not as close to you die. What is closest to you always affects you more.
2007-10-13 19:41:09 · answer #5 · answered by Michael 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are wrong! Unless you mean to those who are at a distance from the departed. With many dead it is the number dead times the sorrow of one dead - collectively.
I understand what you mean though. I suppose to a detached individual, you can't identify with the friends of fifty dead whereas you can with one. This ability to identify makes the difference.
2007-10-13 19:41:04 · answer #6 · answered by jemhasb 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Personal loss can not be compared to collective loss.
2007-10-13 19:40:21 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
When many people die, the mourners are usually in shock, and the people who would have mourned them are also dead. (Maybe?) (Just guessing here)
2007-10-13 19:40:46 · answer #8 · answered by Shinigami 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
someone said (I believe Stalin) that "one death is a tragedy, a million is a statistic"
2007-10-13 19:39:44 · answer #9 · answered by wigginsray 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Your question makes no sense. And not just your grammar.
2007-10-13 19:42:06 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋