Why People Get Suicide Wrong

schopenhauer1

It is not the physical act of suicide that is most common among the disheartened of life. Rather, it is the idea that we really don't want to go through with the physical act of suicide, but we don't like the premises of life and go through it nonetheless dealing with it along the way. It is being out of the circle of mild life-affirmation that most people (at least feign to) live. It is also about not even wanting to get into that circle, as that would simply be turning off the self-awareness of the situation. Buddhists and their ilk would say to let go- even of the self-awareness. All definitions should be swept away. Yet, the premises of life are still there- the survival/boredom- the dealing.. So dropping the self-awareness, is dropping the rebellion against that which is causing us to deal in the first place. De facto acceptance is not the answer for to disheartened either. It is consciously observing the dealing every step of the way. In fact, they don't want to let go- for ego reasons (like everyone else who has their identity wrapped up in a concept.. which everyone does).. Bringing from unhappiness with life to happiness isn't just a letting go of pessimistic thoughts.. That would be giving up an insight. It has to be integrated into the life. It isn't just blind acceptance and dropping the insights of the "dealing" life is presenting. It is going forward with this knowledge.

Shawn

Your post kind of rambles along. But, suicidal ideation is often a precursor to the act of suicide. Philosophy can only do so much, and professional therapists or doctors need to be seen if the suicidal ideation becomes an active planning of the event.

schopenhauer1

↪Posty McPostface

My point was suicide is more than the act of suicide- it is about the ideation. It is about living despite not liking its premises. That is prolonged suicide. It is not something to be dropped- no "cure" must be had to get into the circle of mild life-affirmation (well-adjusted in psychological jargon?).

Shawn

My point was suicide is more than the act of suicide- it is about the ideation. It is about living despite not liking its premises. That is prolonged suicide. It is not something to be dropped- a "cure" must be had to get into the circle of mild life-affirmation (well-adjusted in psychological jargon?). — schopenhauer1

I can only offer advice about coping with depression. Unfortunately, it never goes away, the thought patterns are deeply embedded. There are always alternatives though. Such as ketamine therapy or SSRI's. Some people are adamant about dealing with depression and try other venues like psilocybin or DMT, and can have breakthrough experiences (in controlled settings).

schopenhauer1

I can only offer advice about coping with depression. Unfortunately, it never goes away, the thought patterns are deeply embedded. There are always alternatives though. Such as ketamine therapy or SSRI's. Some people are adamant about dealing with depression and try other venues like psilocybin or DMT, and can have breakthrough experiences. — Posty McPostface

But that's the point.. calling it depression, and then making it something that has to be dealt with. How about depressive realism? Perhaps it is seeing things how they are, but still coping with it.

Shawn

But that's the point.. — schopenhauer1

The point should be directed or focused on dealing with it effectively, and only paid professionals can help with that. The only element missing in all this is that the stipulative definition of depression is so large and comprehensive that nobody really knows how to deal with it. It's a form of realism that is self-serving and justifying. You have to reach a cognitive dissonance that these feelings are unwarranted by your situation in life. Once you reach that cognitive dissonance, you can escape from the depression.

Just some ramblings on my part.

schopenhauer1

It's a form of realism that is self-serving and justifying. You have to reach a cognitive dissonance that these feelings are unwarranted by your situation in life. Once you reach that cognitive dissonance, you can escape from the depression. — Posty McPostface

It is this cognitive dissonance that I am suspicious of. Is it a mood or an evaluation on life? Why is that evaluation bad or wrong? Perhaps it is accurate.

macrosoft

we don't like the premises of life and go through it nonetheless dealing with it along the way. — schopenhauer1

Hi. Do you know the phrase: Life's a bitch and then you die ? And then in lots of comedy we get characters joking about the meaninglessness and terribleness of existence. My point is that this attitude is not generally repressed. Instead it's just part of a more complex vision of existence. To me the person who refuses to see the negative is similar to the person who refuses to see the positive. They want to dodge the complexity by ignoring half of it.

Jake

Perhaps it is seeing things how they are, but still coping with it. — schopenhauer1

No offense, and this may not apply to you, but the vast majority of Schopenhauer flavored posts on philosophy forums appear to be written by college sophomores living on mom and dad's money while typing their profound insights from a bean bag chair under the impressive beer can wall in their dorm room.

The "way things really are" is that nobody at that age really knows what they're talking about, for very understandable reasons. And it doesn't get a whole lot better as they proceed in to middle age and beyond either.

Human beings typically require a story to live within. Sometimes finding a story we like can be challenging. But then things happen, and life goes on. Until it doesn't. Not so complex after all.

To make it even simpler, let's reflect on a picture of Schopenhauer the man. Is his philosophy working for him?

macrosoft

Human beings typically require a story to live within. Sometimes finding a story we like can be challenging. But then things happen, and life goes on. Until it doesn't. Not so complex after all. — Jake

Well put. I guess the complexity is in that finding of a story.

Jake

I guess the complexity is in that finding of a story. — macrosoft

Indeed. Some people are good at that, and others not so much, like everything else. Huge brained profound philosopher grand thinker peeps like us often have problems with stories, because we tend to ask too much of them. Simpler folks tend to have simpler stories which are easier to manage.

schopenhauer1

The "way things really are" is that nobody at that age really knows what they're talking about, for very understandable reasons. And it doesn't get a whole lot better as they proceed in to middle age and beyond either. — Jake

What is the criteria for "better"? What is the insight people are supposed to get over time? Something to do with balance and acceptance? You didn't add anything except dismissive derision. Give some substance to the picture then. Man up.. Dismissive sarcasm is the strategy of a sophomore in college sitting on a bean bag, holding an impressive beer can, using dad's money.

schopenhauer1

Indeed. Some people are good at that, and others not so much, like everything else. Huge brained profound philosopher grand thinker peeps like us often have problems with stories, because we tend to ask too much of them. Simpler folks tend to have simpler stories which are easier to manage. — Jake

Schop's story was pretty nuanced. You can downplay for rhetorical points, or you can get in the complex muck.

TWI

I think part of the problem of depression is not realising it is often a normal part of life and therefore thinking that something is wrong. I can't imagine an intelligent person never getting depressed.

macrosoft

Huge brained profound philosopher grand thinker peeps like us often have problems with stories, because we tend to ask too much of them. — Jake

Again, well put. And I'd say philosophers in particular tell stories about how devoid of plot-holes the stories philosophers tell themselves (or ought to tell themselves) tend to be.

Shawn

It is this cognitive dissonance that I am suspicious of. Is it a mood or an evaluation on life? Why is that evaluation bad or wrong? Perhaps it is accurate. — schopenhauer1

I think it's an accurate evaluation. People tend to like life more than dying. It's just an inherent biological defense mechanism to prefer life over death. Given normal circumstances.

macrosoft

It is this cognitive dissonance that I am suspicious of. Is it a mood or an evaluation on life? Why is that evaluation bad or wrong? Perhaps it is accurate. — schopenhauer1

For me the issue is what accuracy can mean here. It's like grunge being more accurate than hair metal. 'Life is really X.' 'No, life is really Y.' How is either position going to be falsified? Like just about everyone (I assume), I've been up, down, and in between. In terrible moments, the uglier cosmic visions were more plausible. In good moments, the cheerier cosmic visions were more plausible. Of course our identities can get tangled up in one of the visions, and this may help lock us in. Or maybe the reverse is true. A largely constant mood may encourage a largely constant cosmic vision. In any case, we can't measure 'the thing itself' to see if our cosmic theory is correct. Or I don't see how we can.

Jake

What is the insight people are supposed to get over time? — schopenhauer1

To take college sophomores with a grain of salt, while remembering we've all been there.

schopenhauer1

↪Jake

That was simply self-referential. You didn’t say anything.

schopenhauer1

↪macrosoft

You bring it a good point that even things are going well, life seems to make sense.

Jake

I said this...

Human beings typically require a story to live within. Sometimes finding a story we like can be challenging. But then things happen, and life goes on. Until it doesn't. Not so complex after all. — Jake

But you don't like it because it doesn't create a space for you to play the role of profound expert. Ok, you are not obligated to like it, no problem.

schopenhauer1

But you don't like it because it doesn't create a space for you to play the role of profound expert. Ok, you are not obligated to like it, no problem. — Jake

I don't get what you are getting at. We tell ourselves stories about life? Not really. Life presents itself in a pretty straightforward fashion as far as how we are socially integrated into a particular situated culture and we learn to survive and entertain ourselves within this cultural framework. Everything from how basic needs of food/shelter are met to meeting our wants for entertainment which I deem as things beyond the tasks at hand that allow for survival needs.

Jake

We tell ourselves stories about life? — schopenhauer1

We ourselves, the "me", is a story. So it's more fundamental than me telling myself a story. The story teller is himself a story.

Meaning is a story. My life is meaningful because I'm a good Christian or a brilliant thinker or the best car mechanic in town etc.

Schopenhauer seems to be saying something like these are all just made up stories. Ok, fair enough. But there's no point in leaping from there in to all this endless dreariness. Imho, that's just Schopenhauer expanding his own personal situation and personality in to some kind of universal statement. You know, like me saying life is all about typing because it is for me.

It seems more helpful to work on building a better relationship with our story, whatever it might be. You know, the meaning story in our lives might be thought of as a friend, whom we've learned to not take too seriously.

schopenhauer1

It seems more helpful to work on building a better relationship with our story, whatever it might be. You know, the meaning story in our lives might be thought of as a friend, whom we've learned to not take too seriously. — Jake

If you looked at my previous thread, I had a similar sentiment though presented differently. It was about motivation. We must trick ourselves in a way, because there is no set reason we should do anything. We decide based on cultural preferences perhaps, or habit that we create for ourselves to give structure- but we don't have to. The ideas of authenticity and radical freedom are not lost on me here. However, the landscape this choosing occurs in is pretty much set as far as what Schopenhauer described as the psychological pendulum swing between survival (in some cultural related form) and entertainment. We are always lacking, and this is the root of his philosophy, in my opinion. It is what I describe as the "structural suffering" that is different than the contingent ones we face in our daily lives based on situations and varies depending on time, place, and circumstances.

matt

↪schopenhauer1

Is it really your experience that "we are always lacking"? This seems to be true only from an addictive mindset.

schopenhauer1

Is it really your experience that "we are always lacking"? This seems to be true only from an addictive mindset. — matt

Indeed, it is quite addictive. It is akin to Buddhist beliefs of suffering if you want a reference more well-known. As someone pointed out in another thread, there is a sense that any movement, any change made by a mind, is in a way mediated by some sort of need that is not fulfilled. Thus dissatisfaction drives us. Food/shelter/defecation etc. are obvious ones mediated by biological imperatives. Entertainment is the other end for beings such as ourselves with complex minds that need to focus attention on something. Boredom is a huge limit in this regard.

matt

↪schopenhauer1

Yes aren't we satisfied after a hearty meal? We're not "always" lacking.

schopenhauer1

Yes aren't we satisfied after a hearty meal? We're not "always" lacking. — matt

Its usually short and fleeting...and on to the next goal. The needs are insatiable and hard to satisfy for the complex human animal compared to the time, effort, and struggle to achieve goals/stay in equilibrium with comfort levels/health levels/ not being bored.

The ameliorative efforts are always an ad hoc effort in Western culture.. try meditating more, simplicity/minimalist movement, mindfulness.. these are all bandaids on a bigger issue.

The limits of the given situation for the human mind are survival-related goals and boredom-fleeing goals. Contendness is a negative in that it is negating the always-present lack which again gushes forth once it has been satiated :D.

Jake

We are always lacking, and this is the root of his philosophy, in my opinion. It is what I describe as the "structural suffering" — schopenhauer1

Imho, suffering is built in to the nature of thought, which explains why suffering is a universal property of the human condition, whatever the time and place etc. Does Schopensour have anything to say along those lines?

Jake

The ameliorative efforts are always an ad hoc effort in Western culture.. try meditating more, simplicity/minimalist movement, mindfulness.. these are all bandaids on a bigger issue. — schopenhauer1

If suffering arises from thought itself, then it seems such schemes would be addressing the heart of the issue. Your, um, thoughts?

matt

There is a satisfying satisfaction in our greatest pursuits.

Why People Get Suicide Wrong

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions