31–40 of 44 posts
It's sad that we even consider it to be selfish. It shows how little empathy we have sometimes.
If someone jumps from the 40th floor of a burning building we can understand it. It's an extreme reaction to an extreme situation.
Like suicide.
Suicide is not selfish, it is a desperate act to stop the pain (physically or mentally). It's sad that we even consider it to be selfish. It shows how little empathy we have sometimes. If someone jumps from the 40th floor of a burning building we can understand it. It's an extreme reaction to an extreme situation. Like suicide.
Suicide is not selfish, it is a desperate act to stop the pain (physically or mentally). It's sad that we even consider it to be selfish. It shows how little empathy we have sometimes. If someone jumps from the 40th floor of a burning building we can understand it. It's an extreme reaction to an extreme situation. Like suicide.
The burning jumper scenario isn’t quite the same. In the case of 9/11 twin towers, the jumpers were murdered, they didn’t commit suicide. Death was certain for them whether they had jumped or not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The burning jumper scenario isn’t quite the same. In the case of 9/11 twin towers, the jumpers were murdered, they didn’t commit suicide. Death was certain for them whether they had jumped or not.
It's an example which people can understand. It's an impossible situation to escape from. They chose the slightly better scenario. People who commit suicide also chose the slightly better scenario (in their mind) for them.
> a physically healthy person I'm no psychologist, but would anyone who -wants- to self-terminate be considered a "healthy person"? Legitimate question -- I can't imagine someone who is in good health, has good relationships, and has a good possible "life trajectory" to want to self-terminate. > Seems we allow this now; if someone is truly intent they will find a way. I disagree that we "allow this", because it's alm…
You don't have to be depressed or anything to be suicidal. https://www.reddit.com/r/UnresolvedMysteries/comments/76qp85...
Absolutely. I believe it’s possible to have had enough life. I have Type 1 diabetes and do well managing it. I run long distances and if you saw me you’d think I was a normal athletic and fairly fit person. So technically I’m currently healthy but longterm who knows. But even before I was diagnosed (early 30s) I was sick of being alive. I was never drawn to having children, hate working, and don’t make that much mone…
You are literally providing a counterargument yourself. You wanted out, but with some help and effort are now doing fine. If everyone who wanted to kill themselves were left to their own devices, they would do so, frequently without taking these steps. We need to "stigmatise" suicide as a society, not because there aren't cases that can be helped, but because if we didn't we'd allow for a hell of a lot such false pos…
To me, the stigma of suicide is indicative of a broader flaw in the application of the value of life in society. Religious influences are fundamental to this stigma. Population has exploded in recent centuries. There's simply no way that everyone wants to be here, and exactly zero of us chose to be here (as far as we know, there is no pre-existence, and thus no opportunity to choose to be born).
As the notions of consciousness and existence are an enigma and will continue to be so for the foreseeable, the safe assumption is that every life is "valuable", that suicide is always "wrong" and if you're suicidal you must be "mentally ill" and need to "seek help".
It's unacceptable to simply not wish to exist anymore, regardless of your grievances about your own existence or existence in general. And, given that society now places more importance on each individual life, we grieve more than ever about premature deaths, something that was commonly accepted in older times. Combined with an interconnected information society, it seems that suicide in the west is quite forbidden, considering the real impact it has on the survivors (loved ones, followers of celebrities, strangers, etc).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's an example which people can understand. It's an impossible situation to escape from. They chose the slightly better scenario. People who commit suicide also chose the slightly better scenario (in their mind) for them.
They're not the same. In the jumper scenario, imminent death was certain whether they jumped or not. This is only true in a small fraction of suicides.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Divorce may hurt people, but it's not a great analogy because a divorced person can still be a good parent, financial supporter, repayer of debts, etc. There's a huge difference between the damage of divorce vs. the damage of death.
> good parent, financial supporter, repayer of debts It doesn't sound like you're interested in what this person wants or needs at all. You're just interested in what they can offer you while they're alive.
I'm only suggesting that the right to divorce is nothing like the right to death and isn't a useful analogy. The circumstances and considerations are radically different.
My older brother killed himself in a failed attempt to convincingly pretend to be suicidal in order to be transferred to a lower security part of a prison. He forgot that prison guards aren't paid enough to give a shit about anything so they didn't follow their policy of roaming around and checking on people and he bled to death. He was going to be there until he was almost 50.
Trying to be objective as possible. I think if it was allowed and there wasn't a massive social stigma against it, there would still be huge issues. Even old, experienced people are woefully bad at accurately estimating when a situation is irretrievably hopeless. So I think we would see a lot of young people (not just young as in kids but also 30-40 year olds) killing themselves for really stupid reasons (like we already do).
We might see someone lose a job and kill themselves when there's a good chance they could have recovered. A business might fail. A relationship might end. A loved one might die suddenly. A lonely person might be tired of trying. The temporary release of severe anguish in exchange for a life you currently aren't very fond of doesn't seem a high cost to pay soon after traumatic events occur.
I'm generally considered a pessimist. However, when it comes to life, I can step back and acknowledge that there are lots of really bad situations that are redeemable. It might take years of work. It might involve being depressed or broke for a very long time. But persistent effort is the greatest indicator of success.
I've been depressed my whole life so I understand the struggle. I know that in addition to the regular life things many of us suffer from, there are also various types of trauma that make the ordinary things unbearable.
I could see situations where I agree someone may have never had any chance for their lives to improve.
I knew a young woman in her 20s with a 14-year old daughter with autism. The child had so many issues she had to be monitored 24/7 to keep her from hurting herself. The mother had a dead end, shitty job (coincidentally she was a prison guard) that barely allowed her to survive. Between the job and the kid it was laughable to suggest that she had any realistic chance at all of going to school or finding a better job. When her girlfriend left her, she killed herself. She wasn't a friend of mine, only an acquaintance that I didn't know well. I wish she were still here, mostly from the pain that most any of us would feel from simply knowing a person that died young. However, when I step back and analyze her situation and try to think of any possibility of her finding some kind of relief or comfort, I don't think she had a chance. As a high school dropout, I should be a failure too, but I was fortunate and my interests as a youth happened to become very marketable.
Some of us are forever trapped by the decisions we make when we are younger. For those of us like this girl, where not just one or two things are stacked against you, but seemingly everything. How can we judge? I want to be angry at any person that leaves a child alone in this world when it could have been prevented, but would I have the strength to live an impoverished life of waking hell for 60 years? I'm not very confident I could.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That seems pretty unfair to the people that care about you. They might not even be family or close friends, but might be acquaintances, distant co-workers, or people you see on the street. They get happiness out of interacting with you and having you with them. It doesn't seem right to take that away from them. It sounds like you might be in a bad place mentally. I'm sure that it wouldn't hurt to talk to a profession…
What about sports? Radical sports? Travelling? Driving a car? Should I stop doing that because it may hurt or kill me and, by consequence, hurt people who care about me? Caring about a person comes with the risk of being hurt. I think it's equally selfish to expect people not to do stuff that may hurt you.