Difficult to generalize about perhaps. Should those with terminal illnesses, paraplegics, etc be offered false comfort rather than none?
General Questions is for questions with factual answers. Great Debates is our forum for debates. I’ll move this to Great Debates for you.
DrMatrix - GQ Moderator
Well, in the video game Final Fantasy X (and I feel like SUCH a geek for using this as an example), it was definitely worse, because it kept the world in an endless cycle, kept them focused on the solution that only gave them false hope, and kept them from even trying to find another answer that would end the problem for good.
I think it’s much the same things for many aspects of real life.
Yes, it is difficult to generalize. But, in general, I think false hope is more false than hope. In the example of those with terminal illnesses, I believe it is far better to know what is coming so that the dying person can put their affairs in order, say goodbye to their loved ones, etc. That being said, I’m sure that there will always be exceptions where the merciful/charitable thing is to give hope where there really is none. As a hypothetical example, consider an Alzheimer’s patient with very little ability to form lasting memories, and who also has a terminal cancer; what good is served reminding them every day that they will likely be dead within the next six months?
Ultimately, it depends. If you have a terminal disease and a false in your survival keeps you from sinking into depression, great. If you have a terminal disease and false hope keeps you from making out your will or trying to seek treatment, not so much.