Question, why do you think suicide is a philosophical question? I ask for two reasons. 1) I think it is a philosophical question, put in the proper context of whether existence is worth continuing, putting new people into existence, what we should get out of life, what values we hold, how society is run, etc. and 2) I think your OP is lacking in philosophical elements, so I am trying to rectify that a bit to make this more of a philosophical debate, and not an advice column, as this forum is more for philosophical musing, debate, reflection, etc.

Why do you ask? Do you know someone specifically who wants to commit suicide? If so, providing the suicide prevention telephone number seems like the best way to go about it.

both suicide and suicide prevention are philosophical themes to me. Suicide is a philosophical question in the sense that it is a fundamental choice between bearing some huge burden or Going for the unknown of death. Is the absence of the bad the good despite not being able to enjoy such goodness? I think that's an ethical question. There's also the psychological part but I'm even more naive in that respect. Regarding suicide prevention, that's also a philosophical question. Are you doing good to the person by trying to stop him or her from suiciding? I cannot think beyond some ethics. I would rather have the philosophical debate instead of an advice but to me they are both welcome. At the end of the day I think advice also requires philosophy as backup.

I don't know anyone in such circumstances but It could happen that some friend or familiar of mine wanted to commit suicide and I felt forced to do something about it.

Going for the unknown of death. Is the absence of the bad the good despite not being able to enjoy such goodness? I think that's an ethical question. There's also the psychological part but I'm even more naive in that respect. Regarding suicide prevention, that's also a philosophical question. Are you doing good to the person by trying to stop him or her from suiciding? I cannot think beyond some ethics. I would rather have the philosophical debate instead of an advice but to me they are both welcome. At the end of the day I think advice also requires philosophy as backup. — Alan

Ok, I like those questions. I think you bring up a really good point about not being able to get the benefit of the "relief" of the suicide. The very relief that is trying to be obtained is also obliterated with death, hence why Schopenhauer said:

Suicide may also be regarded as an experiment — a question which man puts to Nature, trying to force her to an answer. The question is this: What change will death produce in a man’s existence and in his insight into the nature of things? It is a clumsy experiment to make; for it involves the destruction of the very consciousness which puts the question and awaits the answer. — Schopenhauer, On Suicide

I also had a lengthy discussion about Cioran's aphorism:

“It is not worth the bother of killing yourself, since you always kill yourself too late.” — Emil Cioran, The Trouble with Being Born

I take this as somewhat similar to Schopenhauer, the damage is already done by being born and enduring the suffering that drove you to suicide. There would be no actual relief from the death itself.

If you do a google search "What to do when someone is suicidal", you will find websites that tell you what to do. Is that helpful to you?

It seems like you want to have a philosophical discussion about suicide, but the OP consists of you merely asking for practical advice. I see that schopenhauer1 is helping you make this discussion more philosophical. I'll leave you two to it.

You're absolutely right. I should have stick to a single activity and not both the philosophical debate and the advice but again, advice must also be followed by philosophical support which will be mostly related to ethics. A psychological backup would have to be much more specific to the person, I believe. In any case, I surely read on Google what I'm supposed to do in that case.

I also think the quote about "not worth the bother" is revealing. I think Cioran was saying that by killing yourself that means you took it seriously enough to do that. Clearly, there is a sort of play on existential themes- reversing the seriousness of suicide with the lightness of reveling in understanding life's inherent negative nature. In this case there is a certain glee to the pessimistic understanding. He extends this to the reader with his biting turn of phrase. Life sucks- let's talk about it.

I for one never thought the positivity police was very convincing. The more "hope" and positivity just seems to underscore the inherent negativity and structural and contingent flaws of existence. Thus I think there is catharsis in pessimism- in the realization that life is structural suffering regarding human life, and contains contingent suffering for individuals.

I don't think life is intrinsically negative. I just think some people created that sort of metaphysics as the easiest answer to life which to me has no either quality of positiveness or negativeness. I think that accepting that life cannot be reduced to such properties is the main problem given the huge influence of pessimist thinking nowadays. Also, the fact that we actually have to build/create our own vision of life might be challenging, not to mention the fact that we might also have to change things actively is also more challenging.

I like your quote by Schoppenhauer. That's exactly the way I feel about suicide. I think death in that way is seen as relief just because that's the closest thing we think we can experience but since death cannot be experimented there's no point in in thinking there's something similar to it.

I just think some people created that sort of metaphysics as the easiest answer to life which to me has no either quality of positiveness or negativeness. I think that accepting that life cannot be reduced to such properties is the main problem given the huge influence of pessimist thinking nowadays. Also, the fact that we actually have to build/create our own vision of life might be challenging, not to mention the fact that we might also have to change things actively is also more challenging. — Alan

Three things.
1) Pessimists do NOT have that much influence. Quite the opposite, there are more positive self-help, articles, and advice columns than ever before. As an experiment, start complaining about life's inherent flaws to people, and see what their reaction will be. Not joyous high fives that we are all on the same page, I'm afraid.

2) As for inherent negative- I did not mean that the "universe" is structurally negative, but human existence in the universe. I see as structurally negative as being put in a situation of always "dealing with" and being deprived at almost all times. On top of this are the contingent harms (not structural or inherent but probabilistic to each individual and their circumstance). So we have two forms of suffering or harm right there that inform us about existence. See past post about the idea of deprivationalism here: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/5981/schopenhauers-deprivationalism

3) Creating or dealing with life's challenges is exactly the type of thinking I am opposed to. Actually, ironically, this is EXACTLY the thread I am posting about right now. Check it out:

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/6434/the-mild-torture-of-do-something-about-it-assumptions

Three things.
1) Pessimists do NOT have that much influence. Quite the opposite, there are more positive self-help, articles, and advice columns than ever before. As an experiment, start complaining about life's inherent flaws to people, and see what their reaction will be. Not joyous high fives that we are all on the same page, I'm afraid. — schopenhauer1

When I discuss about the good things in life and in people we are not on the same page either.
I think pessimism is easy because confirmation biases arise very easily as well when it comes to the bad things. In fact, there are several cognitive biases and fallacies related to pessimism. In the end we are kind of wired to look for menaces to ensure survival but this does not mean everything that resembles a threat is gonna kill us and we'll most likely be fine. You may be right about the influence of pessimism but also much self help material has dubious basis.

2) As for inherent negative- I did not mean that the "universe" is structurally negative, but human existence in the universe. I see as structurally negative as being put in a situation of always "dealing with" and being deprived at almost all times. On top of this are the contingent harms (not structural or inherent but probabilistic to each individual and their circumstance). So we have two forms of suffering or harm right there that inform us about existence. See past post about the idea of deprivationalism here: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/5981/schopenhauers-deprivationalism — schopenhauer1

Guess Schoppenhauer had this ideal of life which was stomped continuously to death by the reality at the time. Of course if there's an ideal you'll soon realize things are very much different. I sometimes ask myself what exactly was Schoppenhauer's drive for living. To me the solution is to think causally and realistically. If I talk about OCD I try to get to its scientific causes and realize the human brain is not necessarily perfect, it just is, it was not designed and it has problems because I had an ideal version of it but it is not like that. Without human judgement things just are and problems or things to be dealt with do not exist. On the other hand ideals have also helped improve our way of living. In science we use ideal models i.e lossless transmission lines; massless springs; 100% efficient thermal machines etc. which helped us model real systems later by using computer simulations.

3) Creating or dealing with life's challenges is exactly the type of thinking I am opposed to. Actually, ironically, this is EXACTLY the thread I am posting about right now. Check it out:

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/6434/the-mild-torture-of-do-something-about-it-assumptions — schopenhauer1

Very interesting topic and I answered in that thread.

Idk, listening to "Rock and Roll Suicide" has gotten me through some tough times. Maybe there is something to those posters?

You always see things like that and think it's kind of disturbing for them to be so public, but when it actually relates to you, it can have the effect of causing you to stop and think about your general way of going about and doing things.

Why is it disturbing that they are so public? Things like suicide need to stop being considered as taboo to be prevented more effectively. I do agree in publishing suicide prevention help, I do not agree that people commit themselves to help someone not kill himself when he or she is about to do so because most people, myself included, know little about that situation. Rather, suicide prevention telephones should be published.

I always just think that that should be personal or something. It's kind of garrish. I don't know. It's just a feeling that I get about those things.

Posting on Facebook is a bit of a nebulous territory. I don't know that there's anything wrong with sharing the posts, but, then you have to cope with the comments somehow. That is probably a situation that you just shouldn't put yourself in if you don't know what you're doing. I bet that that does help some people, though.

I think you're right. I was saying stuff from my point of view but I'm sure you look at the issue differently since you were closer to it. And yes, I agree that Facebook is a nebulous territory: too many points of view, maybe people trying to be heroes or something. Luckily, I haven't put myself into the situation and now I'm more sure about that because of this discussion.