Why is suicide denied free will, when other life-ruining actions are not?

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Why is suicide denied free will, when other life-ruining actions are not?

«‹›5 »

Captain_Maclaine: Sep 30, 2001; Every moment I'm alive, I pray for death!

Panzeh posted:

What's the loss to society when sadbrains manage to kill themselves?

Man, I hope we don't have anyone like that in this thread, because they might try to open a vein on your post.

Captain_Maclaine fucked around with this message at 22:44 on Feb 2, 2015

# ? Feb 2, 2015 22:29

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 2, 2024 23:46

Rime: Nov 2, 2011; by Games Forum

A more appropriate question is whether society or oneself should come first. Should someone who truly does not wish to live be forced through a battery of medical procedures, which may end up changing their very nature, just because they someday might do something good for the world? Is that (frankly low) potential truly appropriate justification for forcing a person to endure a pain that they no longer wish to?

Rime fucked around with this message at 23:48 on Feb 2, 2015

# ? Feb 2, 2015 22:41

Effectronica: May 31, 2011; Fallen Rib

OwlFancier posted:

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?

Okay, so in other words, you can't provide an example of someone committing or seeking suicide who was free from symptoms similar to those of depression, and indeed suggest that only certain people are "inclined towards suicide", or in other words, prone to depression.

Rime posted:

A more appropriate question is whether society or oneself should come first. Should someone who truly does not wish to live be forced through a battery of medical procedures, which may end up changing their very nature, just because they someday might do something good for the world? Is that (frankly low) potential truly appropriate justification for forcing a perwon to endure a pain that they no longer wish to?

Call 1-800-247-8255, please.

In any case, people's "natures" in the sense you're describing are constantly in flux, so should we discourage other things that would change your nature?

# ? Feb 2, 2015 23:26

Lightanchor: Nov 2, 2012

Rime posted:

A more appropriate question is whether society or oneself should come first. Should someone who truly does not wish to live be forced through a battery of medical procedures, which may end up changing their very nature, just because they someday might do something good for the world? Is that (frankly low) potential truly appropriate justification for forcing a perwon to endure a pain that they no longer wish to?

The well-being of people is the goal. Saving someone's life is 'doing something good for the world'. We don't cure people's diseases just because they someday might cure other people's diseases.

'changing their very nature'--that's not a thing, unless you mean it like going out to get food is changing your very nature from hungry to full.

# ? Feb 2, 2015 23:50

Jazu: Jan 1, 2006; Looking for some URANIUM? CLICK HERE

Rime posted:

A more appropriate question is whether society or oneself should come first. Should someone who truly does not wish to live be forced through a battery of medical procedures, which may end up changing their very nature, just because they someday might do something good for the world? Is that (frankly low) potential truly appropriate justification for forcing a person to endure a pain that they no longer wish to?

I don't give a poo poo about your nature if your nature sucks, and if you want to kill yourself, you think your nature sucks too.

# ? Feb 3, 2015 00:32

Pegged Lamb: Nov 5, 2007; Can't post for 3 years!

Jazu posted:

I don't give a poo poo about your nature if your nature sucks, and if you want to kill yourself, you think your nature sucks too.

That's a terrible attitude thats bound to result in all sorts of policies aimed at reeducation and compulsory conformity.

# ? Feb 3, 2015 00:37

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 2, 2024 23:46

evilweasel: Aug 24, 2002

I think whatever questions the OP had have been answered, and I am not really interested in having a bunch of people talk themselves into suicide here.

# ? Feb 3, 2015 00:41

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Why is suicide denied free will, when other life-ruining actions are not?

«‹›5 »