”time-dependent bias.”

How much time must pass until one who evidently exerted little to no effort that wasn’t entirely self-serving, is practically deified?

To be honest, Alexander did little, though he is called ”The Great.”. Undefeated in major battles, conquering the known world at 25 is one way to put it. But another would be, widowing and orphaning countless, coming prepared to peoples’ lands, murdering them, pillaging, raping,burning, spreading carnage and destruction and terror, etc..all to fulfil HIS PERCEPTION of greatness. How is that different from the Mongol Empire, or Stalin, or Hitler, or sectarian violence among some religious groups? Him being younger, and undefeated, makes it more zestful and ”cooler” not more righteous or better.

As one of his generals put it upon his passing; ” yesterday the earth wasn’t large enough for him. Today, a hole in the ground will have to do.”

If enough time passes, even the worst man will be praised by simple minds. Every of the afore-mentioned figures have people today who swear allegiance to their memory. Hence borrowing a phrase from statistical analysis, ”time-dependent bias”. Though referring to placebo effect, it fits the idea of enough time passing by, causing us to give praise to characters we would shun, had they been our contemporaries.

One cannot go wrong if we give praise to righteous character and ideas and concepts. Not to people. For they shall always err…