/sci/ - Science & Math

>>7415292
It must be a right to a peaceful death but it will be unlikely the case because of the principle of life from all humanist doctrines, doctrines which have been in power for the last centuries.

Until, of course, 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.

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, 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.


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.

>>7415295
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.
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.

>>7415295
is your pic related a good movie? i hear french movies are good. synopsis please?

>>7415298
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 the drug 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 drug 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 beginning 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.

>>7415301
i am not a vitalist à la Nietsche or Deluze, Camus, though . I think that the humanity's essence is to work on reflexivity (relating to the concciousness), solipsism. For instance. I see the animals as having poor reflexivity, and good solipsism. They are what they feel. They are not detached from their emotions, nor thoughts, nor self. They are as close as their skin as it can be. Idem with the women.

men are the same during infancy, but my bet is that our job is to be like those buddhists (not the hippies buddhism) to become selfless, to be in control of our body and mind.

A burning animal would scream and run in every direction. A burning man would not do this, because it has reached a higher essence than the one of its animosity

>>7415302
>essence, reflexivity, solipsism
C'mon man, this is not /x/. Just consider that a burning man is probably cognizant that running around would be harmful to other people around him. If he put himself on fire, he wouldn't even be surprised and shocked, and he wouldn't try to put the fire out.

Suicide is a product of civilisation and malevolent social order. Other animals rarely kill themselves and suicides must've been less common in hunter gatherer tribes than in modernised society.

>>7415292
suicide is what happens when coping resources are not enough to deal with shit anymore. it has nothing to do with being a "loser" it is having acquired more shit than you can deal with.

>>7415351

I do not see how suicide in cases of extreme, unrelenting, and progressive pain such as various kinds of cancers are a product of social order or civilization.

>>7415326
It's a way to define some emotions and states.

Don't be a close-minded bitch.

>>7415380
that is true. but that is usually called euthanasia and treated separately from suicide ( I think )

>>7415418
nah, euthanasia is if you need help with dying and can't do it yourself for some reason.

>>7415380
Things like chronic pain and cancer have also become more prevalent in modern times due to increased average lifespan and other factors. If you got severely injured or ill in the stone age you were shit out of luck but more importantly no massive ethical debate formed around the condition. People could accept death and move on back then. And like that other anon said, euthanasia for irreversible medical reasons cannot be lumped with what we refer to when we use the term 'suicide'.

I know /sci/ sees sociology as a bunch of poofters wanking over nothing but a study on suicides in the 19th century basically defined the field. Since suicide is a ritualistic act, it's been primarily studied by social sciences.

>>7415371
amen

Suicide booth, when?

Suicide is usually the result of depression. People no longer think rationally about their situation, and believe that the only way out is death.

You can't reason with them because they'll just find a way to rationalize what you're saying to fit into their worldview. They don't do this deliberately, mind you. This is why we need to treat depression as a disease of the mind and not simply a lack of resolve.