>>25327550Well, not necessarily. One could say that he's still "socially" alive, and that one day soon he will be dead. But his influence still remains.
Even still, I'm not referring to a metaphysical soul. I don't believe in any of that. But who he was as a person doesn't continue on after he passed away, or even if he were in a coma, or something like that.
You and I are people, right now. But after we die, our physical body becomes a corpse. Who we are, is a projection of ourself through our influence. Like, right now, you and I we "live" in one another's perception as "anonymous strangers". So long as either of us remember one another, we will have existed to the other.
So, that's also why people get offended when you speak poorly of a deceased person that they thought well of. All that remains of them is a memory, their physical influence, and a corpse. The most important of those three things is usually the memory. So to have that tarnished by jokes or a crude opinion is sort've meaningless.
It's like shitting on the last piece of a good cake that no one really intended on eating. Yes, it was going to eventually find its way to the trash. But we really didn't want to watch someone pull down their pants, get up on the table, take a squat on something that we all considered good and valuable at one time.
