Well to be sure, both feeling that one's life is useless and attempting suicide are pretty shitty. You should reach out a helping hand to those who might need it, but also give someone the dignity to determine their fate as they see fit.

There were some romantic German Weltschmerz philosophers who discussed suicide - Schopenhauer, von Hartmann, Mainlander, etc. Might be worth looking into. If I remember correctly, Mainlander thought suicide was the path to salvation.

Also check out Cioran and Leopardi.

The problem is that we often don't know when someone needs a helping hand. And to suggest that it's dignified to let someone determine their own life or death? As if to let them determine when they "need a helping hand"? How does that square with an outside influence "lending a helping hand"? Should we be "sensitive" enough to realize when someone doesn't "want" a helping hand and let them end it? There's no logic here.

Should we be "sensitive" enough to realize when someone doesn't "want" a helping hand and let them end it? — Noble Dust

Yes, people should be more acquainted and comfortable with suicide. It shouldn't be this "other".

Suicide is threatening to the established order of things. God, it'd be nice to live in a world where people freely discussed how much they hate life without repercussions, where life is widely seen as a huge pain in the neck, and suicide (opting-out) is as acceptable as abortion and homosexuality. Instead we have all this repression and insincere fake-it-till-you-make-it bullshit.

I sense your emotion on this subject; it seems important to state my own position: I've entertained suicide on a hypothetical level. Amongst those who have really tried, I guess I would be a greenhorn. My sincerity in committing the act would be rightly questioned.

That being said, I was calling into question what I saw as conflicting ideas of 1) "a lending hand should be offered to suicidal people" and 2) it's dignified to let people commit suicide.

Are there any good arguments to help normalize it? What can be done to normalize it?

people should be more acquainted and comfortable with suicide. It shouldn't be this "other". — darthbarracuda

Why 'should' they?

Some people kill themselves for bad reasons, and they ought to be offered help if possible. At the same time, other people kill themselves for completely rational reasons, and so helping them doesn't make any sense.

Making that distinction can be hard, which is why you should offer help. But it's not your place to interfere with someone's destiny. Ideally there would be ways to opt out that aren't so makeshift and clandestine. Just like how there should be ways of having abortions without coat hangers.

What can be done to normalize it? — Anthony Kennedy

Dialogue.

Why 'should' they? — Isaac

Because over a million people attempt suicide every year, and countless more think about it every day.

Because over a million people attempt suicide every year, and countless more think about it every day. — darthbarracuda

That's just a statement of fact, I'm asking why people 'should' take any action at all about it. I could completely ignore that fact, why should I not?

Well you're free to ignore whatever you please.

Some people kill themselves for bad reasons, and they ought to be offered helped if possible. At the same time, other people kill themselves for completely rational reasons, and so helping them doesn't make any sense. — darthbarracuda

What are "bad reasons" for suicide, versus "rational reasons"?

But it's not your place to interfere with someone's destiny. — darthbarracuda

This is way too loaded. At least for me, as a suicidal greenhorn.

Ideally there would be ways to opting out that aren't so makeshift and clandestine. Just like how there should be ways of having abortions without coat hangers. — darthbarracuda

"Opting out" being a metonymy for suicide? Or no? Correct me if I'm wrong.

Well you're free to ignore whatever you please. — darthbarracuda

I'm aware of that. I'm asking about your thought process, not asking for your permission. You said that people 'should' be more aquatinted and comfortable with suicide. In another response you say people 'ought' to help, and that people ought not to interfere. I'm wondering where you're getting all the moral imperatives from.

What are "bad reasons" for suicide, versus "rational reasons"? — Noble Dust

IDK, I think a large part of it depends on how long someone has considered it for. Is it a spurt of the moment thing that they're liable to fuck up, or is it a decision based off serious reflection and planning?

In other words, are they an amateur, or a master?

Are they sure?

"Opting out" being a metonymy for suicide? Or no? Correct me if I'm wrong. — Noble Dust

I dislike the term "committing suicide", it sounds like a crime. "Opting out" is more humane.

I'm wondering where you're getting all the moral imperatives from. — Isaac

The same place anyone else gets moral imperatives from, their own reasoning.

I'm wondering where you're getting all the moral imperatives from. — Isaac


The same place anyone else gets moral imperatives from, their own reasoning. — darthbarracuda

So your reasoning is...?

In other words, are they an amateur, or a master? — darthbarracuda

This language seems completely false; a "master" of suicide would presumably be long gone. Does the master teach the apprentice? How can he if he has "opted out"? How can a master teach an amateur how to opt out?

"Committing" followed by an action does suggest a crime, to be sure. I don't argue that.

If someone finds their life to be "useless", — Anthony Kennedy

I wonder how many suicides people have known. I have known two with some intimacy, my ex, and my current wife's niece.

Consider a hand tool - a hammer, say. It it useless to itself? It is useful to the hand that uses it, and when the hand has no use for it, it waits on the tool rack. So to be useful or useless is a relational term, just as morality is relational. So if one wants to think of oneself in terms of use, and if one wants to think of what one ought to do, one must consider others, not merely oneself. Otherwise nothing will make sense.

Suicide is totally self-centred just as the phrase I quote above indicates. And necessarily, a self-centred view cannot reach a use, a purpose, a meaning, or a reason to live.

it'd be nice to live in a world where people freely discussed how much they hate life without repercussions — darthbarracuda

I do think freedom of speach on this issue is needed. We should be able to talk about everything openly because that is the only way we can correct our thoughts and ideas if they turn wrong. There shouldn't be tabooes. Keeping dark thoughts for oneself only makes them darker and harder to understand. The one with the struggle needs to see his situation from a different angle and he could get that only from another person (if he is not able to transcend himself).

other people kill themselves for completely rational reasons — darthbarracuda

And rational is everything you plan for a long time? It is something you are sure of? I wouldn't agree. Take people with mental illnesses for example. People with suicidal thoughts are ill, whether you want to admitt that or not. I myself only thought about it hypothetically, but it was in times of my mental distortion (I'm not a loonatic, don't worry), in times of psychological instability. It's always like that. There are no rational reasons to kill yourself. There are hard times under which your mind cracks, and it can last for ages before it breaks. But if you have a strong and healthy mind, you will survive. It's all about your mental strenght. No man is purposless. There are just some week people whose head is so bent under the pressure of life that they don't see anything but dust under their feet.

Suicide is totally self-centred just as the phrase I quote above indicates. And necessarily, a self-centred view cannot reach a use, a purpose, a meaning, or a reason to live. — unenlightened

True.

One of the initial psychological assessments many clinicians make is the distinction between a cry for help, or a risk for being a danger to oneself. additionally, there is a philosophical difference between terminal illness, and feelings of suicide. For the latter, one could lose a loved one and have temporary depression or even clinical depression. This is why going to a certified therapist is important because they can decipher the problem using the DSM-5 to make an accurate diagnosis. For me it's always beneficial if we can maximize someone's happiness and potential even if they're going through suicidal ideation. The thing is psychological help is there through constructive mediation, difference between that and terminal illness is the inevitability of biological death which cannot be remedied.

Suicide is threatening to the established order of things. God, it'd be nice to live in a world where people freely discussed how much they hate life without repercussions, — darthbarracuda

This is bothersome to me, not only as a clinician, but because enabling suicidal behavior as "speech" according to you ought to be a thing.

Well to be sure, both feeling that one's life is useless and attempting suicide are pretty shitty. You should reach out a helping hand to those who might need it, but also give someone the dignity to determine their fate as they see fit. — darthbarracuda

I agree completely. There is a balance to be struck between helping those in need and respecting someones personal sovereignty.
I think the resistance you are getting is part of the stigma of suicide but also of death itself. You gotta get people more comfortable and less afraid of death before you can expect them to wrap their heads around a more open attitude about suicide.

What are "bad reasons" for suicide, versus "rational reasons"? — Noble Dust

Well a rational reason would be to end intolerable suffering or as a means to avoid future intolerable suffering. Whats intolerable is going to vary from person to person.
A bad reason should be obvious as well, for reasons inspired by mental illness for example, or as a means to hurt people (“ill show them!”).
The people with bad reasons deserve our help but the ones with rational reasons deserve our respect and understanding.

Suicide is totally self-centred just as the phrase I quote above indicates. And necessarily, a self-centred view cannot reach a use, a purpose, a meaning, or a reason to live. — unenlightened

I think its just as self centred to force a person to suffer through life just because other people aren’t comfortable with losing them. Thats just as selfish. Also, self centred views can have a use (to yourself), a purpose (service to self), meaning (very obviously, meaning doesnt disappear just because the meaning is self centred) and “reason to live” can be self centred, in fact reasons to live are often self centered (“i enjoy life!”).
So I think you are wrong from start to finish here, on every level.

This is bothersome to me, not only as a clinician, but because enabling suicidal behavior as "speech" according to you ought to be a thing. — Anaxagoras

You ate equating speech with behaviour here. The point made was about being able to talk about suicide or how shitty life is, not about the act of suicide itself.
Its about not being judged as mentally ill or immoral just because a persons projecting their own fears or discomfort about death and suicide onto you.

I think its just as self centred to force a person to suffer through life just because other people aren’t comfortable with losing them. — DingoJones

Does that happen much in your experience?

What does that matter? A lack of frequency alone doesn't justify ignoring the instances if it happening.

What does that matter? A lack of frequency alone doesn't justify ignoring the instances if it happening. — DingoJones

Well it seems to me that it doesn't happen much at all. Institutions obviously can't be seen to allow suicide, prisons, mental health institutions, etc, but apart from cases of incarceration, there seem only to be some rare cases where suicide is impossible without assistance, and one cannot demand assistance, so i am wondering what cases you are talking about and how they relate to what I have said.

Who said anything about assisted suicide? The quote of yours I responded too was about suicide being “totally self centred”.
This is non-sequitur to both the posts you’ve responded to.

This is non-sequitur to both the posts you’ve responded to. — DingoJones

So your response to my pointing out that the line of thinking that sometimes leads to suicide is self-centred is, speaking of non-sequiturs, to point out that other things can be self-centred too?
Cool.

No, i wasnt making a general statement about some unrelated example of being self centred. Also, you didnt say “sometimes”. The words you used were “totally self centred”.
I wasnt pointing out that other things are self centred too, I pointed out how the specific instance of forcing someone to suffer because you are not comfortable with their death or suicide is just as selfish. This is relevant and sequitur because that accusation of being self centred is being made (in the context I provided) in an act of being self centred. (Putting your own desires ahead of the suffering of the person).
This does not exclude cases where the person is actually putting the welfare of the person ahead of their own such as in the cases of mental illness leading to suicide. (Rather than some intolerable suffering leading to suicide).

the specific instance of forcing someone to suffer because you are not comfortable with their death or suicide is just as selfish. — DingoJones

Except it doesn't happen. Forcing someone to stay alive is difficult even when they are incarcerated. I keep asking you what is your experience of this or what cases can you cite, and you don't come up with even a description of an instance.

And again, even if it were commonplace, what is the relevance to my description of the nature of suicide? I'm certainly not forcing anyone to stay alive, I'm posting on a philosophy site and I wouldn't have a clue how to go about it.

About the only cases I can think of that might fit the bill are the force-feeding of the suffragettes to prevent their hunger-strikes in prison. Which no one would attempt these days in any country I know. Again, once they are unconscious, medical ethics would probably mandate treatment, as with anorexics, but that is not what you are describing either. Who is forcing people to suffer? What situation are you talking about? Tell me about it and I'll join your protest.

The Stoics view of suicide is interesting. The felt that death is nothing to fear, that there's nothing "wrong" about death; it's merely a part of life, an "indifferent" which shouldn't disturb us. So, suicide wasn't a horror for them, nor was it a sin. Epictetus felt that it was improper if done for "childish" reasons, and generally the Stoics believed taking one's own life in, e.g., anger, or despair, or for unrequited love wasn't justified. However it was considered proper when one is unable to act virtuously. So, for example, certain Roman senators who were Stoics committed suicide when commanded by an emperor to do something unworthy and threatened with execution unless they complied with the command.