|
LookingGodIntheEye posted:You're disgusting. It's more disgusting to say people must and absolutely must live in a world that promotes inequality and where access to finite resources and finite economies is limited. LookingGodIntheEye posted:You're stating that large segments of the population should not exist by virtue of their birth. If you can't see the parallel you're blind. Quote exactly where I said that. I said by virtue of choice people should choose not to exist instead of hitting a logical wall every single time they come into any form self criticism.
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 05:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 22:56 |
|
|
Job Truniht posted:It's more disgusting to say people must and absolutely must live in a world that promotes inequality and where access to finite resources and finite economies is limited. Job Truniht posted:Quote exactly where I said that. I said by virtue of choice people should choose not to exist instead of hitting a logical wall every single time they come into any form self criticism. America Inc. fucked around with this message at 06:08 on Feb 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 05:57
|
|
|
Job Truniht posted:It's more disgusting to say people must and absolutely must live in a world that promotes inequality and where access to finite resources and finite economies is limited. Why it's a positive benefit for them to remove themselves! Shall we provide incentives? A scholarship for your kids maybe.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 06:08
|
|
|
LookingGodIntheEye posted:No, to say to the disenfranchised of the world, "you're hopeless, die" is one of the most thoughtless things I've ever read, and is just the thing I would imagine coming from the mouth of someone who never faced actual hardship in their life. It's strictly utopian thought to believe that a society that can elevate the masses out of poverty and hardship without concrete goals or examples while simultaneously forcing individuals into logical ends where they must endure hardship for the sake of enduring hardship. That is pure, undistilled fascist ideology. Regardless of your views on the ethics of capitalism and inequality, people should rightfully be allowed to die. I provided examples as to why anti-suicide ideology was entangled in conservative thought, I stated that being against suicide is inherently reactionary and appears to religious morals/customs, and your only counter argument to that was this: LookingGodIntheEye posted:A lot of religious laws come from social mores that existed long before the actual religions were founded. We didn't need a phantom in the sky to figure out killing other people is wrong, but later on we made a god to codify that which was already seen as implicit law. The fact that religions across the world with completely separate origins prohibit suicide seems to imply something universal about how we view suicide. This is bad and you should feel bad. It's conservative thought. It should be rejected for simply being conservative thought. There's nothing to meaningful derive from suicide other than it is a leading cause of death in United States.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 06:12
|
|
|
Job Truniht posted:This is bad and you should feel bad. It's conservative thought. It should be rejected for simply being conservative thought. There's nothing to meaningful derive from suicide other than it is a leading cause of death in United States. Is there anything to derive from the fact that transgender people do it a lot? Or is it just OK that they "free up resources" more frequently than the rest of us?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 06:15
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Is there anything to derive from the fact that transgender people do it a lot? Or is it just OK that they "free up resources" more frequently than the rest of us? Maybe religion has a lot to do with homophobia and anti-suicide ideologies in the United States. This is a Dostoyevsky style argument where people infringe that society would degrade in pure anarchy, amoralism, and chaos if suicide, something antithetical to nearly all religions, was allowed. Does anyone here want to speak out against Norway for having legalized suicide?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 06:20
|
|
|
Job Truniht posted:It's strictly utopian thought to believe that a society that can elevate the masses out of poverty and hardship without concrete goals or examples while simultaneously forcing individuals into logical ends where they must endure hardship for the sake of enduring hardship. That is pure, undistilled fascist ideology. quote:I provided examples as to why anti-suicide ideology was entangled in conservative thought, quote:This is bad and you should feel bad. It's conservative thought. America Inc. fucked around with this message at 06:29 on Feb 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 06:21
|
|
|
quote:This is a Dostoyevsky style argument where people infringe that society would degrade in pure anarchy, amoralism, and chaos if suicide, something antithetical to nearly all religions, was allowed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 06:27
|
|
|
LookingGodIntheEye posted:Telling those born with undesirable traits to kill themselves is definitely fascist, considering the whole Holocaust thing. Maybe you were asleep when they taught that. More like climate change and famines are going to gently caress us hard in a few years, and stigmatizing suicide at that point would be a terrible idea. You continualy make this false dichotomy of "people should die" is equivalent to "people should have the right to die". Why? LookingGodIntheEye posted:People don't oppose suicide just because the spaghetti monster told them to. Even if opposing suicide is socially conservative, that does not actually make it wrong. Really, believe it. So Christianity shouldn't be held accountable for its inherent homophobia because it was practiced long before it came along? Of all things human progress, I think death is the most source of the most archaic views. People still believe that you can humanely kill someone, that there an ethical way that people should die, or that they should die at some indeterminate point in the future to natural causes as opposed to whatever brings them to it first. These are all wrong.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 06:29
|
|
|
Job Truniht posted:More like climate change and famines are going to gently caress us hard in a few years, and stigmatizing suicide at that point would be a terrible idea. You continualy make this false dichotomy of "people should die" is equivalent to "people should have the right to die". Why?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 06:35
|
|
|
LookingGodIntheEye posted:Let me make this simple. If you tell the poor and disenfranchised that they should kill themselves if they don't like their place, you are reaffirming the system that disenfranchised them in the first place, to a grotesque degree. If you tell gay or transgender people that killing themselves is okay as opposed to fighting back against their persecution, you entrench their persecution even further. You sound autistic. I really don't want to go down this alley since it'll just lead to misinterpretation, so I'll leave it at this: It's the opposite, because capitalist societies and global capitalism require ridiculously huge populations of poor who stay alive and stay in poverty in order to keep wages low. And people can be unhappy for a variety of other reasons. That doesn't mean they should be forced to take medicine or consult medical. Would you force anyone suffering from cancer in the United States from crippling their entire family with medical bills by compulsory medical treatment?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 06:42
|
|
|
Job Truniht posted:I really don't want to go down this alley since it'll just lead to misinterpretation, so I'll leave it at this: It's the opposite, because capitalist societies and global capitalism require ridiculously huge populations of poor who stay alive and stay in poverty in order to keep wages low.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 06:47
|
|
|
LookingGodIntheEye posted:Isn't climate change and famine good in your opinion then, because it maximizes the death of poor people? Kind of like a modern day black plague, shrinking the job market? I'd rather keep this on topic, but I think it'll play a long part in destroying capitalism and capitalist economies inherently dislike the idea that environmental destruction is proportional to the size and of their economies, which against their own ideological measure of progress.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 06:50
|
|
|
Job Truniht posted:I'd rather keep this on topic, but I think it'll play a long part in destroying capitalism and capitalist economies inherently dislike the idea that environmental destruction is proportional to the size and of their economies, which against their own ideological measure of progress. I mean, it's not like those in power can't see this in advance and find ways to keep the system working or anything. America Inc. fucked around with this message at 07:07 on Feb 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 07:03
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOV8mBjHHYg
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 07:06
|
|
|
Man, I know you're really enjoying trolling this thread into off-topic land with your false equivalencies and such, but the plight of the third world has so very little to do with whether or not a person has the right to take their own life. Just stop.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 07:14
|
|
|
Rime posted:Man, I know you're really enjoying trolling this thread into off-topic land with your false equivalencies and such, but the plight of the third world has so very little to do with whether or not a person has the right to take their own life. Just stop. America Inc. fucked around with this message at 07:29 on Feb 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 07:26
|
|
|
Rime posted:Why is suicide denied free will, when other life-ruining actions are not?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 07:27
|
|
|
LookingGodIntheEye posted:Is this in address to me or Job? Because I'm not trolling. I'm trying to understand the implications of Job's opinion on suicide, and it really terrifies me. It takes the right to die and takes it to an extreme through the extreme circumstances of climate change in a way that made me truly uncomfortable and awakened what I feared so much about climate change and resource scarcity in the first place. The clip from Soylent Green is not just me trying to make a joke, it's my nightmare. But I won't argue on it any more. I apologize. Oh, I misread your posts in that case, have you checked out the climate change thread? Most of humanity is going to die in about a century in even the most optimistic projections, not much need to be concerned about mass forced-suicides or anything like that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 07:38
|
|
|
killin is bad unless they got radiation poison or something and you got to smother em with a pillow before their lungs leak out through their eye sockets There are better options for people crippled by post-cultural ennui PupsOfWar fucked around with this message at 08:17 on Feb 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 08:13
|
|
|
Rime posted:Oh, I misread your posts in that case, have you checked out the climate change thread? Most of humanity is going to die in about a century in even the most optimistic projections, not much need to be concerned about mass forced-suicides or anything like that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 08:22
|
|
|
which gives me solace to know that suicides stigma will probably fade away, or at least be unable to enforce itself, naturally
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 08:28
|
|
|
Pegged Lamb posted:which gives me solace to know that suicides stigma will probably fade away, or at least be unable to enforce itself, naturally gently caress this thread got really bleak America Inc. fucked around with this message at 08:43 on Feb 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 08:41
|
|
|
As an unabashed hedonist, I'm completely pro-suicide. Go for it, man! But if you are going to kill yourself, why not try to eek out the maximum amount of pleasure before opting out of any and all new experiences? Live fearlessly and try to find new ways to die without really caring. Jump out of cars, hop trains, do a lot of drugs. I'd say "have sex with lots of people" but I'm terribly ugly, so that has always been an avenue denied to me but, hey, maybe you aren't ugly and your devil-may-care attitude will result in some crazy sex. Why kill yourself directly when you can just engage in awesome things that might get you killed? People will say "think about your future" but your "now" is "eating a bullet" so you really don't need to plan for a future beyond the next couple of seconds, since that is your default. If you want to default to your default, that is cool but isn't it also a waste? Wouldn't you rather die street racing or in a gang-related shooting? Why not choose the more badass path? Especially since there is a huge pile of nothing waiting at the end. So go for it. Maybe you'll find happiness at the end of that tunnel (I did). Maybe you won't and then, hey, you'll be just as dead. People should be allowed to kill themselves the same way people should be allowed to eat at McDonald's. You can totally do it, but try to change your life a little maybe so that isn't what you are doing. If, after trying to change, you still just want to kill yourself or eat at McDonald's, well, I can't say "no". Go for it man. If that is what you really want, go for it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 08:44
|
|
|
People who try to convince others to commit suicide are usually just miserable themselves. They want to bring other people down to their level because misery loves company. That's really all it is.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 09:53
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:Are you saying that our instincts are not an ingrained part of our personality? They are a part of us, but they aren't a rational part of us, and generally we don't consider starting from the assumption generated by instinct and constructing logical arguments to support it after the fact, to be a good application of logic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 11:19
|
|
|
Rime posted:Oh, I misread your posts in that case, have you checked out the climate change thread? Most of humanity is going to die in about a century in even the most optimistic projections, not much need to be concerned about mass forced-suicides or anything like that.  ), but coercing new life into existence when something like that looms on the horizon seems horrific.Then again, I suppose you could make the same argument against bringing children into existence at any point prior to the invention of modern medicine and painkillers. Or in general according to philosophers like Benatar.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 12:06
|
|
|
Consider this: Job Trunhit hates living people when he himself is alive!
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
LookingGodIntheEye posted:Resources aren't limited Unrelated to your actual point but this is factually incorrect. Resources are limited and the fact that we won't necessarily run out of resources in this generation doesn't change that. Even with "renewable" resources our ability to consume will one day exceed our ability to renew, assuming that point hasn't been crossed already.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 18:24
|
|
Who What Now posted:Unrelated to your actual point but this is factually incorrect. Resources are limited and the fact that we won't necessarily run out of resources in this generation doesn't change that. Even with "renewable" resources our ability to consume will one day exceed our ability to renew, assuming that point hasn't been crossed already. It's in my interest not to take this on board so you are morally obliged to kill yourself instead of me.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 18:31
|
|
|
You know, it's possible to be against people killing themselves, and also let it be legal. Like, I don't think Norwegians are pro-suicide just because they've decriminalized it. Of course, the common denominator in people offering examples of rational suicide here is fatalism. Fatalism is essential to how reactionary elements operate- "there is no alternative", "history has ended", etc. So it's pretty awe-inspiring to suggest that not wanting people to kill themselves is a reactionary position when the beliefs leading up to suicide (since depressed people are almost by definition fatalistic) are themselves entwined with reactionary capitalism.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:You know, it's possible to be against people killing themselves, and also let it be legal. Like, I don't think Norwegians are pro-suicide just because they've decriminalized it. You lost me after "fatalism".
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 19:45
|
|
OwlFancier posted:You lost me after "fatalism". People that are being held up as examples of "rational suicides" are people that made fatalistic conclusions about their situation. They were stuck in a dead-end job without any excitement in their life, and they concluded that they had no way to escape that under their own power, or they were impoverished and felt they had no hope of altering their circumstances. Thus, suicide became a rational response, as it does in depressed people, because there are no alternatives. By comparison, most reactionary approaches have relied on instilling fatalism as a defense. There is no alternative but the army shooting striking miners. Capitalism works. Equality is impossible. We have to be serious and admit that it's necessary to cut food stamps. Thus, calling anti-suicide attitudes reactionary is ridiculous when the attitudes that lead to suicide are the ones reactionaries seek to instill in people.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 19:55
|
|
|
I'm having a bit of difficulty understanding where capitalism and politics enter into it. Also I'm not sure that suicide needs to be the only option for it to be justified, merely the most personally appealing and expedient option. It is possible to conclude that there are other possible options but to also conclude that suicide is a definite solution which is more easily available. It doesn't really have to be fatalist, I mean, surely a committed fatalist would not feel they have the agency to commit suicide? OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 20:00 on Feb 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I'm having a bit of difficulty understanding where capitalism and politics enter into it. when the only book you have is das kapital, everything's a capitalist plot
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 20:00
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I'm having a bit of difficulty understanding where capitalism and politics enter into it. I'm responding to the posts being made in the thread, where people have suggested that pro-suicide is pro-gressive. Can you accept that I was using shorthand for the only reasonable option? Also, while it's possible, you'd probably need to find someone who actually concludes that, although they have several practical options to get out of their situation, they still would rather kill themselves (without invoking people with a terminal illness) than take any of the others for me to agree that it's a meaningful possibility.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
What's the loss to society when sadbrains manage to kill themselves?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:I'm responding to the posts being made in the thread, where people have suggested that pro-suicide is pro-gressive. Well, speaking from personal experience, if the objective is to stop the immediate and pressing pain of living, suicide is an immediately available and immediately effective option. Certainly it precludes the possibility of long term happiness, which other life changes do offer the hope of, though rarely the promise of, but those changes also do not present an immediate and effective solution to the cause of the suicidal inclinations, necessarily. Essentially, for the life improvement = better argument to work, the individual in question must desire life improvement, which I think is generally something that applies only to people who aren't especially inclined towards suicide anyway. You need hope, in some abundance, to visualize and wish for the kind of happy life that is used to justify more acceptable alternatives to suicide. Depending on your position, a cessation of life may represent an improvement in and of itself, a net zero compared to your current -1000 experience of life. Long term hopes are not a universal thing, essentially. Especially when you take into account that everyone dies anyway, the value of the possibility of some decades of comparative happiness, is certainly a little subjective. Not necessarily something everyone would be very swayed by? Again, this is being judged in comparison to the very available, very certain solution to your extremely pressing problem, a solution which is precluded by opting for one of the long term options. If you want a possibly more palatable analogy, suppose you are severely indebted to the point where you can't afford basic standards of living any more. In theory, if you worked hard for a long time, you could pay all of that off, but it would be difficult and if you lost your job, you'd be back at square one. Imagine I appear and I offer to pay off all your debts, but in return, I ensure that you will never be wealthy. You won't be cripplingly poor, but you also won't have plenty either. Now, whether you would take the offer is for you to decide, but I imagine you can see why each option would be compelling in its way? You wouldn't call somebody irrational for choosing the immediate, if limiting option, if they judged it unlikely, given their previous experience, that they would be better off than chancing it? OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 20:36 on Feb 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 20:22
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:They are a part of us, but they aren't a rational part of us, and generally we don't consider starting from the assumption generated by instinct and constructing logical arguments to support it after the fact, to be a good application of logic. oh haha you're one of those dorks who thinks it's possible to be rational OwlFancier posted:Depending on your position, a cessation of life may represent an improvement in and of itself, a net zero compared to your current -1000 current experience of life. ...uli?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 22:56 |
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:...uli? Not sure what you're saying there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 20:35
|
|