5 ms·

Primarily because it is the mark of a life not well lived. Having family, friends etc are essential to a good life for most people.

• ams6110 11y ago
  Who are any of us to judge what a life well lived is to anyone else?
  • iamdave 11y ago
    Somehow I don't think that's what anyone is doing here.
  • coldtea 11y ago
    Society. The very notion of "well" etc (and most things we believe to be "good" or "ethical") comes from shared culture, else it's totally arbitrary personal preference. It's not about "logical objective reasoning" either. Treating people bad for example. Nothing "logical" about it being more wrong that treating them nice (especially if it benefits you to do so). But the culture we co-created and live in makes it wrong (and that's a good thing).
    • ams6110 11y ago
      Society has been trending towards "arbitrary personal preference" in many areas lately. Conversely, society has condoned and even encouraged things that are horribly unfair. So I don't see why we would carve out an exception for judging the "well-lived-ness" of a person's life based on society's precepts about the number or closeness of friends and family.
      • coldtea 11y ago
        >Society has been trending towards "arbitrary personal preference" in many areas lately Yeah, or degenerating, one could say. It also happened in the last days of Rome... >Conversely, society has condoned and even encouraged things that are horribly unfair. Well, it's a balancing act. Society doesn't mean people get a free pass to abandon personal judgement. That said, all those "horribly unfair" things seem horribly unfair to us, from a distance. To their own society they looked perfectly normal.