[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/adv/ - Advice


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: pp,550x550.jpg (48 KB, 550x550)
48 KB
48 KB JPG
Is suicide selfish?
>>
Only if you have family that care about you.
>>
Not as selfish as forcing life on someone by bringing a baby into the world.
>>
>>20320836
>>20320829
It’s a person’s own right to end their life. Though, most suicides aren’t for good reasons, in my opinion.
>>
>>20320842
Having a child is probably the most immoral thing you can do in the world.
>>
>>20320829
Highly depends on your circumstance. But I do agree with >>20320846 that most are in the heat of the moment and not for good reason.
>>
>>20320829
In a vacuum where there are no other people involved, no. However almost no one fits this description so in all real-world cases, yes.

It's selfish because it forces it puts a financial burden on others. Even if you have no family, it puts a burden on the state. You more or less can't avoid this unless you pay for everything for your funeral up front, have no debts, and have some amount of money to give to whoever takes care of your estate after death.

And if you have family or friends of any sort, it puts an emotional, life-long toll on them. Of the two, this is the far more egregious burden in my opinion. Anyone who cares about you will wonder if they could've done anything to stop it. It doesn't matter that they couldn't have stopped it, they don't know that and you can't reassure them. If you say nothing could've prevented it in a suicide note, they'll wonder when it started and how they could've done something early on. Your survivors will always put a non-zero amount of blame on themselves.

Suicide is, in all practical considerations, completely selfish. But I do get it. If things are bad... it's hard to want to live. There is always a chance for things to turn around, but if you don't see how that chance could occur, or have strong reasons to believe it never will occur... It's hard to make a case for life. And it's even harder to bear the thought of doing this just to stand up to some moral code of "not being selfish". And that's just if it's bad now, let alone for those who fear future events.

But in the end we need to carry on, and hope that things turn around. If we go into the rest of our lives doing the best we can... Then at least no one, in this life or the next, can say we didn't try. We tried, and nothing could save us.
>>
>>20320883
But isn't it selfish for someone to want another to continue living if they themselves don't want to or are in so much pain, they just want to end it?

For example: Everyone loves grandma dearly. But she's very sick and only the machines keep her alive. If the family decides that she continue living, are they not selfish?
>>
>>20320829
No, its your life.
>>
>>20320900
Not the person you're responding to but here's my two cents. In that situation, sure. However, suicidal people are rarely actually at the end of their lives or even struggling as much as an elderly person (can't clothe self, can't feed self, memory shot) in their daily lives. This makes for example a pretty clear straw man dude, otherwise it'd be euthanasia.
>>
>>20320913
So what your saying is that physical suffering is more important/valid/etc. than mental suffering? What about the mixed-up teen suffering from abuse? The vet suffering from PTSD so bad that he can't sleep yet the VA doesn't recognize him as "injured".

The funny thing with pointing out "obvious edge cases" and strawmen is that it immediately gives a wedge from which to dig up other just-slightly-less extreme examples.

Before you know it, you're on the slippery slope.
>>
>>20320923
>So what your saying is that physical suffering is more important/valid/etc. than mental suffering?
Please point out where I said that. The teen or veteran have ways to genuinely improve their life quality, their physical and mental health. A very sick elderly person on support does not. You don't have a "wedge", you still have your straw man buddy.

Also as the child of someone who was both of your examples, you probably want to find a different space to argue from.
>>
>>20320883
Assuming you're financially independent the first one is null.

And the second one can be minimized. I always thought that if I killed myself I'd probably just try to vanish and pretend I went somewhere else to make it less painful.

I do agree the second point is probably the strongest, though. My mom, dad and sister are probably the only things still stopping me.
>>
Yes it is selfish. Life is hard but we endure. We don’t know what our interaction with others and the world will do. You might be the guy who cures cancer, because you get it, live and unlock the solution. There is a woman that died of crevical cancer decades ago and to this day they use copies of her cells to develop new medical advances. Without her we wouldn’t have nearly the medical advances that we do.

Live your life to the best of your ability, knowing that you are allowed to have some fun along the way but your mission is to make your little patch of the world a better place. Often that starts with getting your shit together first.
>>
>>20320846
It's your right to kill someone who's trespassing on your property, but that doesn't mean you should shoot whoever comes to your doorstep.
>>
>>20320940
>Assuming you're financially independent the first one is null.
Funeral costs. Missing work costs from having to pack up your shit accordingly to your will (if you have one, if not it'll take even longer). Real estate fees if you have a house.

I've been there man. My family are my pillars and I could never ever kill myself because the concept of what I would do to them emotionally would kill me. But there are definitely other reasons not to do it too and it's important to admit that.
>>
>>20320829
I think whitewashing the issue to be black or white is selfish, rather than the act itself-- like you're asking for people to simplify their problems and internal conflicts to a layman's level that the average dumbass can understand.
It just doesn't work any one way and the important thing is to approach it with an open perspective so that you do not needlessly brand people with labels they do not represent
>>
>>20320937
Maybe not in so many words, but you are distinguishing between suffering types. The physical/mental was just an example I guess.

However, you are assuming that in any of my other cases that these people are fixable. This may not be the case. And so deciding on who can and can't / should and shouldn't commit suicide is a judgement call, not a clear-cut case. And it seems to me that others really can't/shouldn't make that decision (unless of course the person in question is incapable of action/communication).

Don't get emotional, though. I'm just a guy that likes the process of a rational argument.
>>
>>20320900
I'm who you replied to originally.

Your question brings up why we need a word or phrase to describe someone able-bodied ending their life versus someone being left with no possibility of recovery.

The scenario you describe leaves out an important detail. Is the grandma of clear mind? Can she communicate? If she is not and is living off machines, suicide is not part of the scenario. And I've experienced first hand that doctors in these cases will offer to "turn things off" and let nature take its course.

If she is of clear mind, and can communicate with others, then she can mitigate the selfishness by explaining her situation. Explaining that she wants off the machines, and discussing with her family beforehand that she's in constant pain and it's time for her to go. If there are options for her, her family and her doctors will explain them to her. If there are no options and her pain is debilitating, and she can clearly state that she's lived a full life but is in too much pain to go on, then and only then would it be selfish for the family to ask her to keep living. And it would only make her suicide unstandable, but it wouldn't remove the burden from her family and it wouldn't make her less selfish. Her family is asking her to live, and she is selfishly deciding to handle things herself. It's understandable, sure, but selfish. It's hard to go much further into the scenario without getting into specifics of the situation.

In the end, suicide is practically always selfish. And if it applies to some old grandma, then you can bet it applies to some 20-something who thinks their life is over because they lack perspective.

>>20320940
>My mom, dad and sister are probably the only things still stopping me.

Mom, brother and sister for me. Keep on trucking anon. We're all in this together.
>>
>>20320974
>but you are distinguishing between suffering types.
Please show me where I did this, for the second time.

Fortunately for people with mental problems, there are very few that have no treatment or cure. Nobody cannot be helped into improving their quality of life, from the abused teen, to the PTSD vet, to the randomly depressed Joe on the street. To pretend otherwise is dishonest.

Nobody is making judgement calls on who can or cannot commit suicide. I am arguing that the scenario you initially brought up is an unfair comparison to trying to keep a suicidal person alive. There's no 'emotion' here, I was trying to warn you to change your strategy as your previous direction wouldn't work.
>>
depends how much of a critical piece you are to your families functioning..
>>
>>20320974
I just thought of something. What if suicide isn't just because of suffering? Is it justified if someone feels like their life is simply over? Like in the case of Hunter S. Thompson? I think his note said that he was simply done that there was nothing left for him to accomplish.

>>20320997
I guess in this scenario, yes, the grandma would have to be lucid. But my point is that it's selfish on both sides. The grandma is selfish for wanting to die, but the family is also selfish if they wanted her to live.

>>20321000
You are drawing a line between fixable and unfixable problems. That's all I'm getting at.

>>20320997
>Your question brings up why we need a word or phrase to describe someone able-bodied ending their life versus someone being left with no possibility of recovery.
But that's just it. Recovery isn't binary and it's almost impossible for a line to be drawn between acceptable and unacceptable suffering. Even the most advantaged and lucky of us have suffering in our lives. But that doesn't mean we should all give up. It's up to the individual to determine if their quality of life is acceptable, assuming they're capable of decision.

Not only that, but the same situation can be acceptable to one but unacceptable to another. Here's another story, albeit contrived: A father loses his arm in an accident. But his family is his greatest joy and wants to see his children grow up. An arm loss is a tragedy but not unacceptable so he chooses to proceed with his life after his recuperation. But another man, an olympic-level gymnast, also loses his arm. This loss destroys his life and livelihood and it can be argued that the arm objectively meant more to him than the other man. So he has more of a justification if he took his own life.

Interesting arguments here, folks.
>>
>>20320829
if you pay your dues to your family and country - no
>>
>>20320950
It’s not legal to shoot a nonviolent trespasser in my state. Suicide is the lowest here, too.
>>
>>20321056
>But my point is that it's selfish on both sides.

Good. So there is no argument that suicide is itself, selfish. It is not an intellectual feat to figure out some moral relativism to make it seem less so, but I wanted to get across that it is, in fact, selfish. That's the starting point of the thread, after all.

> The story about different people losing their arm

What bearing does this have on someone being selfish in commiting suicide? You try to relate it to what I said about non-recoverable vs able-bodied, but you're talking about two able-bodied people. If someone is not intelligent enough to see that they have options, it doesn't excuse their selfishness.

You seem to want to imply that there is some sliding scale of suffering that could make suicide acceptable (because honestly, you seem to be moving on from the selfish component anyway) and that because it can't be pinned down there is a wiggle room. This isn't the case. It has to do with options, combined with honest effort. This does mean that it varies from person to person, but it doesn't mean that the criteria are flexible or broken.

If someone has no options, no hope for change, suffers from the act of living itself, and can openly communicate their desire to die and have it be understood by others, only then can the selfishness of suicide be mitigated.

If any of those conditions are broken, then the selfishness is there.

Honest effort is the other factor. Because for the person committing suicide, they have to honestly believe they're out of options *and be confident in their knowledge of their situation* to be able to mitigate selfishness. If they go to a doctor they believe to be a good doctor and are misdiagnosed, in a way that leads to suicide - that isn't on the person committing suicide. Scenarios like this are fairly trivial to come up with.

In the end it's very simple, if you have options to turn your situation around and instead commit suicide, you are selfish.
>>
>>20321265
Yes, I seemed to have strayed a bit from the initial question of selfishness.

>if you have options to turn your situation around and instead commit suicide, you are selfish
That's a good way of putting it. So, rather than a "sliding scale" of acceptability, we have an exhausting of options. If someone has honestly tried everything that they can think of to improve their situation but still cannot bear life (for whatever reason) then it's not selfish for them to end themselves. And the more able they are to exercise valid options, the higher the bar is for determining if the act was selfish or not.

So, to go way back to many posts ago, under this examination, the suicide of Hunter S. Thompson (or maybe it was Hemingway) would be considered selfish.

This seems like a very personal issue to you. Do you work in the mental health field or have you had people in your life taken from you in this way? Just curious.
>>
Of course suicide is selfish - it cant be classified as altruistic after all, right? However, does it really generate more pain than continuing living would?

For some reason it seems as if generating pain within yourself was seen as an okay thing, while only generating pain outwards (so causing it to others) was seen as immoral and then i guess selfish. The thing is though, sometimes living is so painful stopping it outweighs the pain accuring in others after you die. And so in this way you actually minimize the pain existing in the world globally. Is it selfish? Well it still is cause then ur the only one not suffering.

Another point is though that a person not believing in the worth of their own life must cause pain in some way to others already, must cause pain to the world by keeping living without recognizing the worth of it. Somebody who recognizes their worth knows the impact they put on the world. Maybe thats why they wont let themselves vanish. But then if somebody already sees themselves as worthless they think their disappearance wont make any difference. With such approach how is suicide even selfish if those ppl cant even claim their own life as sth holding value? Theyre selfishness is non existent.
>>
It's selfish in the sense that your ancestors suffered for thousands of years to make you what you are today, to give you this life. In duty to your ancestors hard work, you hold the torch to carry on this life (make babies). If you fail to do so, then the thousands of years of suffering your ancestors endured was ultimately used up so you could feel a bit of pleasure and throw your life away. You're like the last link in a really long chain. Or the top of a pyramid. If you die childless, then it's all about you. All that work was all for this, whatever your life is now.

So yeah technically it is selfish.
>>
>>20320957
Well, you're kinda right but still "ordering my will will be a mess" isn't really something that makes you feel attached to the earth, if you know what I'm saying. For me it's feeling that there are people out there who give a single shit about me, and for me it's just those 3, and I'm still here due to those 3.
>>
>>20320829
Yes. I saw a thread on /k/ a while back. It was about some anon's nightmare in a WW1 setting. The dream had an actual narrative, a British soldier attempting to get anon out of the dream while germans attempted to get him to die there with them. There were some memorable quotes, the British soldier, near the end of the dream "It's too late for me, but not for you" and the germans "Die here with us".
I think the whole thing serves as a metaphor for suicide. Those who fought in wars gave their lives so that we can live, to throw that away is to spit on their sacrifice.

Ultimately though, I still feel the inexorable tug on my life that begs me to just stop existing, and I can't really reconcile these ideas.
>>
No if you aren't bringing harm to others in your method of doing it. So the people who do it privately and discreetly are choosing to escape a painful reality of their life and their mental state. If the people who say they miss them weren't helping them then they are just crying because of guilt and not love.
>>
>>20321600

There are infertile people and people unfit to carry a child to term and raise it.

Dumb argument desu.
Ancestors were not thinking about their great great great grandbabies at all.
>>
Suicide is selfish, but on the part of the person killing themselves, but the people around them that have no better comfort to offer than telling the person who wants to die what a terrible person they are for wanting to die.

People care about their personal loss. If you have value to them, they care about losing that value, even if it's value they're not willing to contribute back into or otherwise cultivate. You can have people 'torn up' over your suicide that only really care because they lost their taxi or emotional tampon. Maybe it's the guilt of that catching up. So you'll get people that are upset at their own personal loss, because they feel robbed, even if it's not something they cared enough about to put work into it.

Very prevalent in society. Everyone here will tell you to nut up and ignore your problems, because they're indoctrinated into that selfish and asinine trail of thinking that 'self improvement' is the means to acquiring sustainable relationships. If people don't give a shit about you beyond your use to them, self improvement only serves those people further.
>>
>>20322845
>but on the part of the person killing themselves
*but not on the part
>>
Yes, suicide is selfish- you inflict unimaginable pain the people who love you. Living is selfish too- you're consuming all sorts of food and shit and taking up peoples time and breathing air and wasting space and clogging up the sewers with all your doodoo. Everything is fucking selfish, so no matter what you do, you're a fucking prick
>>
>>20320873
If your white lol.
>>
>>20320940
/thread
>>
>>20320829
Yes, and cowardly.
>>
>>20320829
everything is selfish. people who blame people for committing suicide are selfish. people who commit suicide are sad. :(
>>
What if you want nothing, have no goals, no desire to keep going, ect and just keep tumbling forward and downward because despite everything you want to think, you know your death will hurt people, but one day you're just done and end it anyway. Who's being selfish then?
>>
People who say committing suicide is cowardly are fuken morons. I have lived with this need to die my whole life, it's absolute torture. At last, I have my answer. Hydrocodone is mass, and a rope. And you know what? I'm afraid. I'm relieved that I at last have the courage, but still, suicide is not for cowards. It's the hardest thing of all.
>>
who cares your dead
>>
In a way, I do believe that it's a right that people should have to their own lives. If you don't have the right to end it, then you're being forced to live it.

That said, I think most suicides are just people who get too caught up in a heated moment, and end up making a mistake.

Is suicide selfish? Well, of course. You're unlikely to commit suicide just to brighten somebody's day, so yes it's selfish. Is that a bad thing? No. There's a lot of negative connotation with the word selfish, but I think sometimes people just aren't selfish enough. Whether or not somebody else is worth living for is entirely up to you. It's not a reflection of who they are, or who you are, but a reflection of circumstances. Just a point in time where things didn't quite make sense.

Bad or good, that's impossible to say. At any moment life could get better. When you end it, you forfeit all future possibility for an unknown rest. For all you know, you could be reborn as a fat kid, only to be forced to eat yourself to the grave once more. There's no guarantee that anything better awaits us, but we do have a fair guarantee that the life we've been leading can go on a bit longer, and possibly change in ways we never could have imagined.
>>
>>20326398
>At any moment life could get better.
That is a lie. Life doesn't just get better. Life doesn't just get worse. It is what you make of it, and for some people it just isn't worth the effort.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.