You can disagree but you’d be wrong. Suicide is rooted in emotion same as philosophy. Wanting to end pain is emotional. — Darkneos

LOL as I said I disagree. Well not entirely. I do think you can make a rational case for suicide but that requires more thinking and writing then I want to put in. For maybe most of the cases it's emotionally driven. So my disagreement is with the notion it's always and entirely guided by emotion unless you are claiming that emotion cannot be separated from our any of our conscious actions including rationality and that I would have to think about as that maybe true?? Hmmm

Also I'd like a redo on my opening statement about removing emotion and ethics/morality based on what you've objected to. It's really religion, morality, ethics and maybe cultural bias that I take issue with. Emotion is more basic and perhaps it wasn't a well thought out sentence.

So my disagreement is with the notion it's always and entirely guided by emotion unless you are claiming that emotion cannot be separated from our any of our conscious actions including rationality and that I would have to think about as that maybe true?? Hmmm — philosch

It’s still not the case. Any sorta value system you would use to come to that determination is based on emotion. It’s like Hume mentioned reason being a slave to the passions. There is no pure rational case for suicide or against it.

It’s still not the case. Any sorta value system you would use to come to that determination is based on emotion. It’s like Hume mentioned reason being a slave to the passions. There is no pure rational case for suicide or against it. — Darkneos

As you have stated it and quote Hume, that would suggest what I supposed. That rationality cannot be divorced from human emotion and so the statement that there is no "purely" rational case for suicide is trivial as there would be no "purely" rational case for anything else, by Hume's own quote.(reason is a slave to the passions) And as I stated last post, I'm amending my statement with regards to emotion anyhow.

First, you don't have to do anything in life. Amputate your arm if you wish. Snort cocaine. Beat your head into a wall until you crush your nose into your face. There is nothing forcing you to do anything. So the idea that an argument against suicide has to be, "Because I have to live", is absurd.

Do you want to live? That's a perfectly fine reason not to commit suicide. Argument over. Now the greater question: Do you want to live, but currently you're not really feeling it right now? Go talk to a psychologist or friend. Try to get to the root of why you're not feeling that way when you once did. You cannot take personal emotional issues and turn them into philosophical issues. Good luck.

:up: :up:

I haven't read too much of this thread. But I've seen a lot of wrong ideas. Try to imagine being on fire. All the time. Jumping in water doesn't help. Rolling on the ground doesn't help. Nothing nothing nothing helps, and the burning goes on and on and on. If being dead is the only thing that will stop the burning, eventually, that's going to be your solution.

"Look at all the things you have to live for" is crap when you're on fire. So is "That's the coward's way out" and "You're going to hurt a lot of people if you kill yourself." It is all meaningless compared to the burning.

Obviously, burning is not a perfect analogy for mental illness. But it gets the point across of how constant mental illness is. And between physical and mental pain, mental is worse. How many of us have had something like a broken bone, bad burn, horribly painful illness, or serious cut that took weeks or months to heal? How much do we suffer from it now? How many of us were emotionally abused, even as adults; excluded by classmates when we were children; made to live in fear? Does all that go away as soon as the emotional abuser is gone? Or does it live with people for the rest of their lives?

Let's say, as a child, a parent caused you great physical pain at times, but always made it seem like an accident, always told you they loved you, and that they were so happy you were their child. Or, let's say they never caused you any physical pain whatsoever, but made it clear that they wish you had never been born, and wish you were not their child. In which scenario will you turn out happier, with better mental health?

Our minds are where it all happens. Some people's minds hurt, constantly, unbearably. Telling them to suck it up, or look at the goods things, or think of others, is not going to help them. Ever. When someone commits suicide, think of how long they were in excruciating pain before they finally stopped enduring it for others, or in the hope that it would end.

You've not made a single argument other than you know very little about Nietzsche. And that you try to be edgy "the case against suicide" here's the case against it for you: you're still here cause you're what Nietzsche refers to as a last man...

You've not made a single argument other than you know very little about Nietzsche. And that you try to be edgy "the case against suicide" here's the case against it for you: you're still here cause you're what Nietzsche refers to as a last man... — DifferentiatingEgg

I’ve read enough of him to know his philosophy doesn’t work in practice and he never lived up to it. Not to mention his care depended on people not following it

Tell me about his philosophy. Watching youtube videos about the Ubermensch certainly wont fill you in...

What is a single basic point of Nietzsche's philosophy?

You are aware that Nietzsche details the only time the Superman becomes a reality is when he points to Zarathustra suffering with others from themselves...?

No cause you're obviously too heavy handed to know the difference between pity and compassion.

You're a low disciplined nihilist with a youtube reference of Nietzsche's philosophy. Lame, and thus... not even worth "arguing" with.

See how Zarathustra goes down from the mountain and speaks the kindest words to every one! See with what delicate fingers he touches his very adversaries, the priests, and how he suffers with them from themselves! Here, at every moment, man is overcome, and the concept "Superman" becomes the greatest reality,—out of sight, almost far away beneath him, lies all that which heretofore has been called great in man. — Nietzsche

No cause you're obviously too heavy handed to know the difference between pity and compassion.

You're a low disciplined nihilist with a youtube reference of Nietzsche's philosophy. Lame, and thus... not even worth "arguing" with. — DifferentiatingEgg

No I just see through his philosophy an know it doesn't address the existential questions of meaning.

You can't even detail a single thing and obviously didn't know Nietzsche wasn't against compassion, hence:

Not to mention his care depended on people not following it — Darkneos

So his care depends on resentful people? :roll:

Nietzsche's Amor Fati is based off of the Glad Tidings of Jesus Christ...

—I shall go back a bit, and tell you the authentic history of Christianity.—The very word “Christianity” is a misunderstanding—at bottom there was only one Christian, and he died on the cross. The “Gospels” died on the cross. What, from that moment onward, was called the “Gospels” was the very reverse of what he had lived: “bad tidings,” a Dysangelium. It is an error amounting to nonsensicality to see in “faith,” and particularly in faith in salvation through Christ, the distinguishing mark of the Christian: only the Christian way of life, the life lived by him who died on the cross, is Christian.... To this day such a life is still possible, and for certain men even necessary: genuine, primitive Christianity will remain possible in all ages.... Not faith, but acts; above all, an avoidance of acts, a different state of being.... States of consciousness, faith of a sort, the acceptance, for example, of anything as true — Nietzsche, AC 39

— Nietzsche, AC 39

Kinda shows he didn't understand the teachings or Christianity, like I said, easy to see through. You seem to be bothered by this though.

So his care depends on resentful people? — DifferentiatingEgg

No, people abiding by the "slave morality" he talked about. Like I said, his philosophy doesn't work in practice, not that he lived it.

You couldn't even detail what slave morality is.

He literally defines you with its definition:

The revolt of the slaves in morals begins in the very principle of resentment becoming creative and giving birth to values—a resentment experienced by creatures who, deprived as they are of the proper outlet of action, are forced to find their compensation in an imaginary revenge. — Nietzsche, Genealogy of Morals § 10

On the other hand...

Every aristocratic morality springs from a triumphant affirmation of its own demands, — Nietzsche, Genealogy of Morals § 10

Where as we can see the slave compulsively attempts to deny the fundamental condition of life: perspective...

the slave morality says "no" from the very outset to what is "outside itself," "different from itself," and "not itself": and this "no" is its creative deed. — Nietzsche, Genealogy of Morals § 10

Not a bad summary... of the very lowest hanging fruit. What of the high schooler who kills himself because his girlfriend drops him?

Nicely put.

What is a single basic point of Nietzsche's philosophy? — DifferentiatingEgg

Who would know? What do they say about him -easiest to read, hardest to understand? I certainly can’t make any sense out of him - even the Kaufmann translations of Zarathustra, On the Genealogy of Morality, Beyond Good and Evil and others. Like any writer, his charms don’t work on everyone. How does one gain a useful reading? Perhaps if you have an aptitude for his work and study him at college? I’ve read enough to know that if I were contemplating suicide and all I had was Freddy, I’d probably go finish the job.

People often imagine they have a way out of the darkness. What they imagine would work for them doesn’t necessarily work for others. I’m not sure that pissing about with slave morality and other rococo notions are of any practical use. But I could be wrong.

If you contemplated Nietzsche's Heaviest Burden you would want to commit suicide?

The heaviest burdern: Suppose you had to live your life exactly as it were innumerable countless times... would that proposition be a teeth gnashing nightmare? Or would the proposition suddenly take hold of you, sure that you begin considering: "What in this moment, must I begin doing, how should I begin living, such that the proposition to live this life countlessly more times over and over again, infinitly exactly as it were, becomes such that it is greatest blessing you've ever heard?

That is Nietzsche's heaviest burden...

If you would commit suicide under such a contemplation, then ... one prejudges in the atomic fact of their life that suicide is the key... the only prejudice they're pursuing...which is nihilism. The prejudice that life isnt worth living is nihilism.

2.012 Tractatus...

Also cause you suck at understanding Nietzsche doesn't mean everyone does... and Kaufmann's understanding of Nietzsche is actually altered through the incipient reification of his project to move Nietzsche away from association with the Nazi. Kaufmann did a stellar job, but it also blinded some of his analysis. Like in his discussion on Borgia... Kaufmann is confused about Nietzsche's formulation for Highermen.

And Kaufmann's Translation of TSZ is so sterile it kills the dithyramb all together... a note I found recently from the Nietzsche Sub Reddit: Hitler on Nietzsche:

Of course, I value Nietzsche as a genius. He writes possibly the most beautiful language "That German literature has to offer us today, but he is not my guide." — Hitler

Kaufmann sterilizes the beauty of the tyranny demanded by the dithyrambs flow in rhythm and rhyme cause he didn't like the singsong musical feeling of TSZ. An absolutely appalling grotesquerie of a translation ... because that's exactly what a dithyramb is, music in literary form that dissolves the mind of the reader into the self abnegated state of Dionsysian Oneness...

The whole of Zarathustra might perhaps be classified under the rubric music...The whole of my Zarathustra is a dithyramb in honour of solitude, or, if I have been understood, in honour of purity. Thank Heaven, it is not in honour of "pure foolery"! He who has an eye for colour will call him a diamond. The loathing of mankind, of the rabble, was always my greatest danger.... Would you hearken to the words spoken by Zarathustra concerning deliverance from loathing?

What language will such a spirit speak, when he speaks unto his soul? The language of the dithyramb. I am the inventor of the dithyramb. Hearken unto the manner in which Zarathustra speaks to his soul Before Sunrise (iii. 48). Before my time such emerald joys and divine tenderness had found no tongue.

Before Zarathustra there was no wisdom, no probing of the soul, no art of speech: in his book, the most familiar and most vulgar thing utters unheard-of words. The sentence quivers with passion. Eloquence has become music. Forks of lightning are hurled towards futures of which no one has ever dreamed before. The most powerful use of parables that has yet existed is poor beside it, and mere child's-play compared with this return of language to the nature of imagery.

In the Dionysian dithyramb man is incited to the highest exaltation of all his symbolic faculties; something never before experienced struggles for utterance—the annihilation of the veil of Mâyâ, Oneness as genius of the race, ay, of nature. The essence of nature is now to be expressed symbolically; a new world of symbols is required; for once the entire symbolism of the body, not only the symbolism of the lips, face, and speech, but the whole pantomime of dancing which sets all the members into rhythmical motion. Thereupon the other symbolic powers, those of music, in rhythmics, dynamics, and harmony, suddenly become impetuous. To comprehend this collective discharge of all the symbolic powers, a man must have already attained that height of self-abnegation, which wills to express itself symbolically through these powers: the Dithyrambic votary of Dionysus is therefore understood only by those like himself! — Nietzsche

So when you come up in here being all "who know what N be talking bout..." well guess what, I possess a deep understanding of Nietzsche. And I can thread the production of his thoughts across the corpus of his work, fragments, and personal letters.

If you contemplated Nietzsche's Heaviest Burden you would want to commit suicide? — DifferentiatingEgg

Yes. Even sooner. Given the shorter I live, the less I have to relive.

But frankly, I have no good reasons to accept this frame as anything more than amusing waffle.

Also cause you suck at understanding Nietzsche doesn't mean everyone does... and Kaufmann's understanding of Nietzsche is actually altered through the incipient reification of his project to move Nietzsche away from association with the Nazi. — DifferentiatingEgg

I have no idea what a sentence like this means. Sorry.

But if I suck at understanding Nietzsche, I have that in common with multitudes. There's also a good chance it won't help others navigate suicide.

fair enough, the audience Nietzsche wrote for was selective. In fact the 4th part of TSZ was initially only disseminated to his close friends.

the audience Nietzsche weote for was selective. — DifferentiatingEgg

Which might also be a polite way of saying that only certain sensitive or bright people understand FN - a common tactic used to dismiss criticism.

But moving away from this -

Why should someone who is suicidal care for Nietzsche - can you make that case? I am interested. And the trick here, I think, is to explain what Nietzsche does in his work that makes it useful for this application. No quotes required.

I understand where you're coming from when you bring this up...

Which might also be a polite way of saying that only certain sensitive or bright people understand FN — Tom Storm

But, I'm more of the mind of dedication to intellectual integrity, and by that, I clear my mind and go in to see what Nietzsche says, I consider his words with extreme care to come from the angles he sets out in his philosophy and psychology. Bright has little to do with my ability, I had always prejudged in my self the dogged determination to break down, how ever slowly, through repetition through constantly discussing and reading other philosophers on Nietzsche or just reading them in general and something comes to mind to brings me back to revisit Nietzsche. I easily have over 20,000 hours handling his work across two decades. The gradation of understanding grows over time for those serious enough. The trick is to not assume Nietzsche's a dumbass simply because you're uncertain wtf he's saying at first...

Why should someone who is suicidal care for Nietzsche - can you make that case? I am interested. And the trick here, I think, is to explain what Nietzsche does in his work that makes it useful for this application. — Tom Storm

If you go back to my initial comment here, you'll see the notion I even brought up, which is the Wisdom of Silenus, did I ever say care about Nietzsche? No, what I said, was Nietzsche's observation on history about how the Greeks overcame idolizing the notion of suicide... overcame the wisdom of Silenus.

It's a hint that hey, maybe you could do the same fucking thing if entire civilizations did it... so bitching about Nietzsche as Darkneos did, was ultimately a lazy red herring.

And you... maybe there might be room for considering your disposition towards life if the following is how you feel deep down:

Yes. Even sooner. Given the shorter I live, the less I have to relive. — Tom Storm

Telling us you hate your life without telling us ...

Amor Fati

Yes. Even sooner. Given the shorter I live, the less I have to relive.
— Tom Storm

Telling us you hate your life without telling us ... — DifferentiatingEgg

Huh? I was putting this from the potential perspective of a person experiencing suicidality to highlight how your point seems to work in reverse. This is not my view.

So this is just a conversation, right? I'm not having a go at you.

But, I'm more of the mind of dedication to intellectual integrity, and by that, I clear my mind and go in to see what Nietzsche says, I consider his words with extreme care to come from the angles he sets out in his philosophy and psychology. — DifferentiatingEgg

But none of this explains why Nietzsche? Why not Camus or Aristotle? Why philosophy? What is your frame of reference for selecting this particular perspective?

No, what I said, was Nietzsche's observation on history about how the Greeks overcame idolizing the notion of suicide... overcame the wisdom of Silenus. — DifferentiatingEgg

Nietzsche's capacity to mythologise ancient Greece to serve his rhetorical purposes may not be accurate to begin with and not really have much to offer someone with real problems, right?

My question remains: so what? What does this incredibly niche and abstruse notion have to do with whether someone wants to live or not? Dealing with suicide isn’t an academic exercise in writing a paper about how art transforms nihilism. Whether the Greeks transcended despair through some balance of the Apollonian and Dionysian is unlikely to matter to someone struggling with chronic anhedonia.

The moral of the damn story is FIND SOMETHING WORTH YOUR FUCKING TIME... jesus christ...

The point from Nietzsche was a method of delivery...

That you're even focusing on Nietzsche is the mootest point ...A unicorn can say it... it doesn't matter... imagine your penis saying it:

Find a damn hobby, that makes your time on earth worth fucking while... what a mind blowing concept I know...

Learn to comprehend what the fuck is even being said, and learn to focus on the subject matter... it wasn't fucking Nietzsche...

Hey, you brought Nietzsche to this discussion and went on in great detail. Sorry to trigger you. Take care. :wink:

trigger? More like yap on and on and on completely missing the fucking point... which is why you're probably crap with understanding Nietzsche....

Hey, you brought Nietzsche to this discussion and went on in great detail. Sorry to trigger you. Take care. :wink: — Tom Storm

Trigger is an accurate word here

↪That you're even focusing on Nietzsche is the mootest point ...A unicorn can say it... it doesn't matter... imagine your penis saying it:

Tom Storm trigger? More like yap on and on and on completely missing the fucking point... which is why you're probably crap with understanding Nietzsche.... — DifferentiatingEgg

Hey, you need to lay off the language and insults like that. We're glad to have your ideas and thoughts and its ok to slip up here and there, but make an effort to tone the insults and personal attacks down. Not everyone is going to agree with or understand your points and that's ok. Don't take it personally.

I mean dude was so triggered by the name Nietzsche it's all that was under his microscope. The whole concept of the Greek overcoming their idolizing of Suicide the main point of the post and of the thread and of me coming here... completely washed over because guy saw that NIETZSCHE said it.

Not even sure one should waste their time on philosophy if they're that poor at comprehension...

Normally you slap someone twice to break them out of hypnosis... you know the meme of Batman slapping the F out of Robin?

How does "I hate Nietzsche so I wont overcome suicide through finding my own transfiguring meaning in life" make any sense? As pretty much all civilizations have done this, hence why all nations have their own table of values which are different than their neighbors... all because they've found some type of values that made life worth living.

Take the advice of every culture: "life is worth living under a certain value system..." So make one's own system, if one is too much of a lazy nihilist, well stfu and don't complain about it here... it's not appropriate here to begin with. Dorkneo projecting his self loathing onto the forums.

Regardless if Nietzsche discusses it or not. It makes no difference... Nietzsche is the remainder that's round down to zero on this.

Normally you slap someone twice to break them out of hypnosis... you know the meme of Batman Slapping the F out of Robin? — DifferentiatingEgg

Ha ha! Look, I get it. We all get supremely frustrated with other people and posters some time, it happens. We're all people here and we've likely all had a blow up at one point. Just let your points speak for themselves. If people don't agree, don't take it personally.

We're behind anonymous text and all have different backgrounds and could be in a weird mood that day. The person you're chatting to could be a minor, an elderly person, a Phd, or someone just curious about philosophy and pretty new to it all. Using harsh language or attacks often just gets the other person defensive or dismissive. You obviously have some education in philosophy and have some good things to contribute. Slap with your points, not your language is all.