/lit/ - Literature

The myth of Sisyphus is one
I'm sure you can find a lot of books against it.

well cowardice is a spook so.

Killing oneself because of temporary issues or concerns (I'm unhappy) is moronic and I feel little sympathy

Someone who will be trapped as a vegetable or dementia riddled or die an extraordinarily brutal/violent demise (the maidens of China after their defeat by Ghengis Khan) without cause is worthy of sympathy.

Some cultures view suicide as an honorable way to make up a dishonorable action is interesting. I don't necessarily believe it's completely satisfactory though.

>>6563083
Most people who are unable to think about it
>objectively
and thus hate it makes them uncomfortable and they just parrot some authority's opinion on it

it's too stigmatised. i feel like a compassionate society would offer resources to help people who want to end their lives to do so in a peaceful painfree way, rather than just hotlines to try and talk them into suffering for more years in order to earn more money and benefit society some more, which i guess is the real endgame and why it's not in anyone's interests to encourage it

>>6563360
But to completely detach an act of emotion from its root is a grave error. You touch on the larger issue though, which is people not willing to have uncomfortable conversations.

Also the fact that there are no political points to win by writing legislation for Assisted Suicide, similar to legitimizing sex work or any other touchy subject.

>>6563368
So you believe that anyone should be able to partake in Assisted Suicide or just those who are gravely ill and wish to go out "dignity" ro just sooner?

>>6563083
suicide as a cowardice is a myth, you gotta have balls to do it many people just drag on because they don't have the guts to do it
suicide is a form of relief

>>6563524
Perhaps the act itself takes "balls" but some would argue that its the cowardice to not face your own problems. This seems to be more a misunderstanding of suicide as a mental illness than anything.

I think this distracts from the more important arguments about suicide in general though. Should a person not have the right to their own life, or is it society's duty to stop the person and reconstruct them?

>>6563083
>Why isn't suicide considered a right like abortion?
because fo the principle of life from all humanist doctrines, doctrines which have been in power for the last centuries.

Until, ofc, the feminists dicovered that abortions are alright and must be enticed by the states since from now on, the principle of pain is more valued (if you desire something from the society, you must say, from now on, that it makes you sad and oppressed). From this, there is no longer a justification to forbid a painless manner to give death to yourself, paid by the states.

OFC, with the declining population, only the euthanasia is considered. The state does not want to give too much liberties, especially in liberal societies. The humanists of today do not understand that the philosophical suicide can be considered, since all they see is through pleasure/pain. Plus ofc, the naysayers say that it opens the door to the suicides in mass. This is really quite a dilemma for all those humanist societies who rely on consent, whereas they violate this consent on a daily basis already, even from your birth (think of your nationality where your state does not ask you if you wish to be part of it, where the states do nothing to favorize the stateless state (for individuals), or to move abroad etc.).

I think that in a few generations, probably after the century, we will come back from this life penalty, just like we came back from the death penalty. This statement is statistic, which means that a lot of countries will adopt this stance, but there will still be a few to refuse it)

the picture is the poster of an italian film on euthanasia and the last death is a form of philosophical suicide that so few understand.

>>6563083
If your life sucks and is never going to get better, or if you just don't want your life, why shouldn't you end it if you have the balls to? Unless you're leaving behind someone who's dependent on you, I can't see anything unethical about it.

>>6563546
When you say philosophical suicide do you mean a person who has fully embraced absurdism (despite the fact that Camus rejects suicide as a legitimate course of action) or some such and thus realized the futility of life directs one to suicide?

In addition do you think the state has made the active decision to deny this as a right or more so no politician has any favor to gain by taking a stance? I would think the latter but I believe government is more incompetent than the "pseudo-omniscient" that many cynics believe.

Just as a side-note saying "OFC" instead of "of course" distracts from your points.

I don't know of any books purely about suicide from a religious perspective, here's what the Catechism of the Catholic Church says:


2280 Everyone is responsible for his life before God who has given it to him. It is God who remains the sovereign Master of life. We are obliged to accept life gratefully and preserve it for his honor and the salvation of our souls. We are stewards, not owners, of the life God has entrusted to us. It is not ours to dispose of.
2281 Suicide contradicts the natural inclination of the human being to preserve and perpetuate his life. It is gravely contrary to the just love of self. It likewise offends love of neighbor because it unjustly breaks the ties of solidarity with family, nation, and other human societies to which we continue to have obligations. Suicide is contrary to love for the living God.
2282 If suicide is committed with the intention of setting an example, especially to the young, it also takes on the gravity of scandal. Voluntary co-operation in suicide is contrary to the moral law.
Grave psychological disturbances, anguish, or grave fear of hardship, suffering, or torture can diminish the responsibility of the one committing suicide.
2283 We should not despair of the eternal salvation of persons who have taken their own lives. By ways known to him alone, God can provide the opportunity for salutary repentance. The Church prays for persons who have taken their own lives.

>>6563326
Incredible facebook post, friend! You get a like from me!

>>6563083
I'm kind of scared of NOT committing suicide eventually

It's my own fucking death, I want to have a say in how it happens... I guess

I'm just afraid of not having any control over or knowledge of how I will die

>>6563505
>So you believe that anyone should be able to partake in Assisted Suicide or just those who are gravely ill and wish to go out "dignity" ro just sooner?
I think it should be available to everyone. Honestly, the terminally ill are the people who least need it.

>>6563594
So basically
>Only God has the right to kill you, you get no natural rights
>Suicide violates the commandments because removing yourself from society is not loving thy neighbor
>Using suicide as a means to avoid suffering, torture, prosecution lessens the previous burdens
>Committing suicide isn't an instant ticket to hell

Thank you, this is a very useful resource. Do you have a source I could cite?

Suicide is paradoxical. It is not a denial of anything, but the result of a frustrated affirmation of life. People only kill themselves because they cannot find life's pleasures and happinesses, and their desire to affirm life and all its vanities reaches a tipping point that is contradictory to its aims. To affirm life one needs to accept suffering and claw their way out of it. Instead, the suicidal become enchanted by the possibility of ending it all and undertake what they think is a logical end for unhappiness. But the recognition of negative happiness must come from affirmation's positive understanding of happiness in the first place, which in itself is wrong but enticing.

If you really want to deny your own existence you must realize the illusion that individuality is, and have equal compassion for all beings. Suicide is simply another manifestation of amore propre.

>>6563612
>the terminally ill are the people who least need it.
How so? Do they not have a right to end their life on their own terms facing an unavoidable end?

I suppose we all are but we have a duty as humans to continue to propagate life and thought, no?

>>6563624
I think everyone has that right, but the terminally ill are shortly going to achieve death anyway, whereas the healthy are more obviously doomed to a more indefinitely prolonged undignified life that they may wish to end.

>>6563620
Catechism of the Catholic Church, it's basically a summary of everything the church believes with a brief explanation why, if you want to go a bit deeper there are sources at the bottom of each page.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM

Suicide is under the fifth commandment section

>>6563639
Yes but the healthy get to face their obvious doom in good health, perhaps finding pleasures along the way. Friends, family, video games, what ever it may be.

The terminally ill get to do such in a an assuredly uncomfortable state, with a much more imminent death. It would seem to me they have a more inherent right than anyone to release that burden.

In actual implication I believe the terminally ill should be allowed to partake in the ritual when ever they want and the perfectly healthy should have a cooldown period, with a psychiatrist to talk to. Still having the full right to deny any drugs or what not.

>>6563653
Thank you very much, very interesting stuff.

I don't think you should care if you're considering suicide, if it's what you want, go for it. If not, don't. If you decide you will, then afterwards you won't be alive to care about repercussions, but you also won't be alive to enjoy the freedom.

>>6563664
>afterwards you won't be alive to care about repercussions
So you would wish your last act on earth to be a selfish one?

Saying that suicide is justifiable through one simple notion that its "what you want" seems almost too easy. But to deny this would be to deny that a person has a right over their own life. Kind of a difficult argument isn't it.

>>6563676
The second you pull that trigger you would no longer have concern for the nature of your last act. If the thought of a bad legacy troubles you beforehand, suicide might not be for you.

>>6563083
I'm a friendly nihilist, I have no problem with people killing themselves.

>>6563657
>Yes but the healthy get to face their obvious doom in good health, perhaps finding pleasures along the way
I don't think you understand what depression is. I also think you're wrong in identifying an imperative for life as finding pleasures along the way.

>>6563741
Depression is a mental illness that should be cured or dealt with, not forcefully, but if your only justification for suicide is "I'm mentally ill and not seeking help" then that's shaky at best.

I also don't propose that life's meaning is to find pleasure, it would be absurd to make such an assumption. But there is something to say about the journey of life itself often intersects with pleasure for most people.

>>6563762
>curing depression
kek

>>6563778
Not why you're responding too, and treatment of depression is still quite problematic these days, but it's just a matter of time before it gets fixed and sooner rather than later.

Happiness is around the corner.

>>6563784
What kind of happiness though? Hapiness through self-improvement, contribution to society or drugs and artificial realms of escape?

The latter seems more plausible, the prior would require major upheaval of every system, I think.

>>6563784
i think a more permanent solution would be preferable, if one could be found

>>6563792
Happiness through fixing the chemical management in the brain.

>>6563813
I think future solutions will be pretty permanent, kind of like cerebral pacemakers.

>>6563593
>Just as a side-note saying "OFC" instead of "of course" distracts from your points.
good to know


>>6563593
>>In addition do you think the state has made the active decision to deny this as a right or more so no politician has any favour to gain by taking a stance?

I think that there is legitimate concerns over euthanasia. Typically, that we already abandon the old in some hospices with the result of them being sad and ill. The euthanasia/suicide-for-the-old would be a bad solution to a false problem.

Now, the legitimate concern about suicide (=suicide of the young) is that the suicidant has responsibilities. It is the famous cliché that before you die, you subscribe a financial credit and never pay back. Or you conceive children, only to give death to yourself a few years later.

perhaps, some day, out of the cost of sustaining the life for the old, some country will be the ultimate utilitarian and give death to old people for financial reasons, but I doubt it.

I do not think that the state plots against the people to enslave it in some life penalty. I think the politicians talk about what the public want and can hear. The suicide is too taboo now, euthanasia is more or less hear-able, especially with such a old demography. Since I believe that the humanism will remain the doctrine in power for a few generations, once the euthanasia is accepted, it will be the turn of the suicide to be the subject of attention. I think that it just takes time and nobody can have, at once, all the liberties everyone can conceive.
>>6563593
>When you say philosophical suicide do you mean a person who has fully embraced absurdism (despite the fact that Camus rejects suicide as a legitimate course of action) or some such and thus realized the futility of life directs one to suicide?

>>6563083

I Have the Right to Destroy Myself

>>6563878


There seems to be several philosophical suicide. Typically, the nihilist person, disgusted by the state of world or its futility, as exposed in the book on history of the suicide. I think that there is another suicide, not the nihilist one nor the one out of despair, but the last one that is exposed in the film. To wit, the suicide where the suicidant is calm and serene about its death. It is a suicide full of quietude. There is a few documentaries on youtube on the swiss group which gives nembutal to the sick (who qualify). One person is at peace and is actually glad to have this opportunity. She is sick though, so perhaps she would not have taken the drug if she was healthy, since a chronic disease takes its toll. Typical suicide is Deleuze, and my bet is that he would have applied to get this drug, if it were available at his time.

From the medical staff working in geriatric wards, as well as from the the families directly concerned about the peaceful suicide, the more the suicidant talks about his death, the more it is accepted. This is why I see this suicide becoming trendy since, once more, the ageing population calls for it.

As a last note, the nembutal that is used today costs 30 euros for a lethal dose. In the grey market it is ten times more. From this, we clearly see that the technology is here, so it is all about the mentalities.

My stance is that the first step in life is to reflect on the suicide.. That is to say, that the first step in life is to reflect on its end. The first question to me is the one of the solipsism and the knowledge. To know that you will die, you must recognize that the others are a bit like your self. So it is like Camus, that suicide is one of the most relevant question, but I think that a solipsist stance does not call for a suicide. The suicide comes just after the one of the knowledge, since you have no knowledge nor proof that you will die.

>>6563883
>>6563878
My stance today is that there is no reason to live, but there is equally no reason to die. I believe that it is permanent that nothing is permanent and that nothing matters (and that it does not matter that nothing matters) so it makes the usual sadness and nagging moments quite endurable, especially when the health is here to have enough liberties to live.
I do not think that I will push my life to reach some natural death, a concept far too ill-defined to be relevant in my opinion. When I judge that I have enough lived, I will go somewhere where the nembutal is legal and take the drug.


There is a book on suicide (in western europe)
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2140657.History_of_Suicide#other_reviews

for other books on suicide, the modern era was concerned about its legalization, since the suicide was a crime, both legal and religious. For instance, all the classical liberals wanted it to no longer be under the scope of the state.

There is the famous book from Durkheim about suicide, but it is old. For more bibliography, the book on the history must have good works.

http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/75

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_suicide#References

Albert Camus has a very interesting viewpoint on suicide. I'd recommend The Rebel if you want to get deep into Absurdist philosophy on suicide.

In The Rebel, Camus essentially says that once one encounters the Absurd (realizing life/the universe has no meaning yet humans are predisposed to seeking meaning anyway), one has the choice of either not valuing life (because it's as pointless as everything else) or valuing life (because of innate curiosity of how it works). Camus says that no matter how depressed you are, after encountering the Absurd one cannot kill himself without killing others (or kill others without killing himself). At least not while being logical, anyway. Because someone who makes the decision of valuing life cannot devalue his own life (suicide without murder), and someone who makes the decision of devaluing life cannot value his own life (murder without suicide).

Camus does an expert job of linking the two together that I cannot really reflect in my midnight 4chan post after a long shift at my shitty job. If you really want to see some of this logic in action, read the book, and you'll be pretty amazed.

>>6563878
>I think the politicians talk about what the public want and can hear.
more precisely, they talk about the affairs whereof they are aware, the affairs whereof the public likes. I do not think that many people will be concious of this kind of suicide.

The peaceful suicide having nothing to do with the hedonism, I think that the suicide in general will never be discussed if the doctrine/morality in place still focuses the feeling, such as it is today. I do not see a bunch of more or less healthy persons going into the streets and asking for a drug to peacefully die in stating that somebody hurts them and oppress them. Perhaps the whole mentality of how to deal with requests in a democracy will change, but it will not be for tomorrow if the change in mentality is gradual over time. ,

bumpwe

Nobody wants to reign over a dead nation.