Richard Donner dies at 91

Thank you for giving us the Lethal Weapon franchise.

R.I.P.

He was one of my filmmaking heroes. It was quite remarkable how during a chaotic independent production, he managed to make a seminal comic book masterpiece that still influences filmmakers to this day. And then undeterred after being fired from Superman II, he managed to carve out an interesting career for himself tackling nearly every film genre from comedies to action films and Westerns.

Rest in peace, Richard Donner.

Without wanting to be insensitive, but upon hearing of his passing that was my first thought too. But I'm a Virgo, and Virgos are materialistic.

The entire earth agreed upon the 24 hour rule? Oh ok.

"Actually, a lot of people would argue it should be longer"

And?  Alot of people argue a lot of riddiculous positions (a good chunk of my country still denies global warming and thinks Obama's a Kenyan). Isn't this just an appeal to popularity fallacy?

"but I personally feel 24 is enough".

So it's mostly your own personal arbitrary standards (which is what I assumed). Gotcha.

We're discussing manners and etiquette, not scientific facts.Ummm... Did you not read what I wrote? I made a distinction between how I feel and how others feel.Wait, what? Asking for her bra size would be inappropriate even if he was still alive. Anyway, do you remember that, when Chadwick Boseman died, a news site was criticized for publishing an article on how to replace him for BLACK PANTHER 2 less than 24 hours later? Well, this is the same issue.

oK?

"We're discussing manners and etiquette, not scientific facts."

Irrelevant to the broader disccussion, the point I'm making is we should base our morality/behavior/beliefs on sound philosophical reasoning and imperical evidence, not just because a bunch of people hold a belief (which is fallacious) whether it be manners, morality, or accepting scientific facts. Do you agree or disagree?

"Ummm... Did you not read what I wrote? I made a distinction between how I feel and how others feel.'

No, you initially made an appeal to popularity (Planet Earth), and then I pressed you on it, and then you admitted it was really your own personal standards. Which is it? Should I wait 24 hours because of societal standards (which is fallacious anyways) or because of your own moral framework? And what argument can you actually make for this? ("You should wait at least 24 hours because..."). You're not doing that. If you're response is going to be "It's insensitive to his loved ones" well obviously in certain contexts that would be true (like say his funeral), but that's not the situation were in. I doubt any of his close friends or relatives post on this forum. And why 24 hours? How did you come to that exact figure? And why is your number anymore valid then someone that would argue 48, or 72? Or not even not wait at all?

What makes you think there's no philosophical reasoning behind what I've been saying?

Because you haven't given any actual philosophical reasoning. I pressed you several times and you still haven't given any.

"The evidence is the fact that most people follow those kinds of rules already."

That's not "evidence" that's just an appeal to popularity fallacy. I've already addressed this. Do you think simply basing your morality on societal standards is a good argument? You realize society often has had very reprehensbile views, right?


"Morality is a form of belief, so you contradicted yourself there."

Uh no, I never said "morality isn't a belief", you're strawmanning me, I said we should base our morality/beliefs on sound philosophical reasoning and empirical evidence. You haven't given either one. Saying "a bunch of people hold this view" isn't "empirical evidence" if that's the argument you're gonna make


"I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you can't comprehend when you read my posts, considering all the grammatical errors you make."

Resorting to petty insults already? Getting desperate I see.


"I never said "The general rule is 24 hours."

I asked you according to who, and you said "the earth" which basically just means societal standards, or a "general rule". So yeah that's not an unfair interpretation of what you said.

"How can you be sure of that?"

Considering this is a pretty obscure  board that you have to get invited to find out about? I'm gonna take a wild guess and say yeah, none of his friends/relatives are on here.


"Ummm... Because that means an entire day has passed."

And? Do people just magically stop caring about the deceased after a day?  Again this is just a completely arbitrary standard that you're not really basing on any sound philosophical reasoning.


"What do you mean? I never said that those who prefer a longer time span are wrong. I clarified that the number I chose was personal."

What I asked it is why do you feel your number is anymore valid than someone elses? You say 24? Why not 48, 72, 96, or none at all? You're still not presenting an actual argument.

I'm gonna ask you again, what philosophical argument can you actually make for your "24 rule"? And don't respond back with "because it's personal'" or because "societal standards". Those aren't arguments.