Jump to content

Is Suicide right or wrong?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 76
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This is morally unacceptable to society. The politicans that allowed a person to commit suicide must resign or, better, kill themself

The right to commit suicide ought not to be taken away from mature citizens. Consultation houses have to be established especially for this purposes to give Pause and Reason enough to the suicidal(s).

At my current age of 76 years, I'm still enjoying life and have no real health problems. In actual fact I plan on living forever: So far, I'm doing OK. 😉 

38 minutes ago, VenusPrincess said:

No, since it is a matter of morality rather than law, I am referring to natural rights, not legal ones.

No, you were not. You were referring to state powers. It’s right there in writing:

1 hour ago, VenusPrincess said:

By killing yourself you are robbing the state

1 hour ago, VenusPrincess said:

You do not have a right to damage the state's investment [of resources into you]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, VenusPrincess said:

It is wrong. By killing yourself you are robbing the state of your future productivity after it has already invested many resources into you. You do not have a right to damage the state's investment.

It is right. By killing yourself you are saving the state resources so that they don't have to invest them in you in a nursing home after your productivity is gone.

You have a duty to kill yourself to protect the investment the state put into you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, iNow said:

No, you were not. You were referring to state powers. It’s right there in writing:

No, recognizing the state's natural right to pursue it's interests that involve harvesting your productivity along with the investment it has made in you should compel you to serve the state out of gratitude for all it has given you. By killing yourself you display such ingratitude for all you have been given by the state, and it is not your natural right to behave in such an ungrateful way.

11 minutes ago, zapatos said:

It is right. By killing yourself you are saving the state resources so that they don't have to invest them in you in a nursing home after your productivity is gone.

You have a duty to kill yourself to protect the investment the state put into you.

Wrong. It is your natural right to exist, and the state has no natural right to display such ingratitude by discarding you after you have served it so dutifully.

Edited by VenusPrincess
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, VenusPrincess said:

Wrong. It is your natural right to exist, and the state has no natural right to display such ingratitude by discarding you after you have served it so dutifully.

I didn't say the state is discarding me. I was following your assertion that I have a duty to protect the state's resources. What better way to do that than by killing myself?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, VenusPrincess said:

By killing yourself you display such ingratitude for all you have been given by the state, and it is not your natural right to behave in such an ungrateful way.

What does gratitude to the state have to do with natural rights? You act as if our rights should get surrendered if for some reason we don’t display some arbitrary level of gratitude for them, and that’s absurd. Rights don’t vanish just because someone isn’t thankful enough to have them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, VenusPrincess said:

It is wrong. By killing yourself you are robbing the state of your future productivity after it has already invested many resources into you. You do not have a right to damage the state's investment.

You have national healthcare, correct? The argument doesn't hold up as well in countries where the state hasn't expressed that much concern for overall health. The resource investment is mostly in things like roads and ports, which aren't really investments in the citizenry. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't agree much with the Princess, but suicide is just as wrong as murder is.
It is actually doubly wrong because the murderer gets immediate capital punishment, without a trial.

edit
Am I joking ?

Edited by MigL
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, MigL said:

Don't agree much with the Princess, but suicide is just as wrong as murder is.
It is actually doubly wrong because the murderer gets immediate capital punishment, without a trial.

edit
Am I joking ?

You haven't really stated with clarity whether or not you think suicide can be moral. Do you think it is ever moral to take your own life?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MigL said:

No, I don't think it can be morally justified.

Then again, neither can stealing.
But if I was put in a situation where I had to, I might.

Just a few examples:

1. You have information on where your WWII agents are in France. The Nazis are about to catch you and if they do, they will extract the location of your compatriots from you in a gruesome manner and kill them, right after they kill you. You've been supplied with a cyanide pill. 

2. You have an incurable painful disease that you've been suffering with for two years. It will be another six months before you finally succumb. 

3. You are elderly, family history of Alzheimer's disease, it is getting bad for you and you know it is only a matter of time. You don't wish to impose the financial or emotional burden on your family, not to mention having to live your final months having your diaper changed by a stranger making minimum wage.

If you don't think suicide in any of these situations can be morally justified, can you tell me why? 

Is your moral objection only for you, or do you feel it cannot be morally justified for anyone?

Link to post
Share on other sites

For your first example, Zap, I would think if you put people in an immoral situation, you can't expect the results to be moral.
I would ask you why you think war and torture are moral.

For your second and third examples, you should keep in mind that immoral acts don't affect you; they affect others.
The perceived 'crime' of suicide doesn't affect you ( you simply die ) but it causes unmeasurable grief to family, friends, and all who care about you.

These are merely opinions.
And as I've previously said, this is what I think now, being of sound mind ( ? ) and body.
I don't know what I'd do if I was in a situation that made me 'consider' suicide, so I don't judge others who may do otherwise, but I feel for their families.
( had a friend who took his life, due to a work situation, by cutting his throat with a box-cutter; his wife and kids found him in the garage in a pool of blood )

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, MigL said:

I would ask you why you think war and torture are moral.

 

Hmm. I'd have to ask why you think that I think war and torture are moral. I don't think I said or implied that.

 

4 minutes ago, MigL said:

For your second and third examples, you should keep in mind that immoral acts don't affect you; they affect others.

So is it safe to say that suicide in itself isn't immoral, it is the fact a person has done something that profoundly hurt others that makes it immoral?

(My brother-in-law contracted AIDS back when it was a death sentence. He killed himself in a bathroom in his parent's home.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry to hear about your brother-in-law, Zap.
I'm sure his passing wasn't easy for your wife or sister, their family, you and your extended family.

As I said , It is not something that I'd ever consider, but, I've never been in a situation where I've had to consider it.
I don't think anyone should feel that suicide is their only remaining option.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MigL said:

I am sorry to hear about your brother-in-law, Zap.
I'm sure his passing wasn't easy for your wife or sister, their family, you and your extended family.

Thanks. Unfortunately you had to go through the same. It's not something I'd wish on anyone.

1 hour ago, MigL said:

I don't think anyone should feel that suicide is their only remaining option.

For people who are depressed, in dire financial straits, etc., I agree. Seems we just need to get them over the hump so to speak.

For some though it's not much of a choice. If death is fast approaching and guaranteed to be unpleasant I think suicide should be a viable option, and not one where someone else has to go through the trauma of 'finding' you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What if you are woman with a healthy fetus, one week before due date?

Amazingly in some places a woman in this state has a right to choose to end the life of the fetus, but not her own.

The argument being in the first case that she has the right to control her own body, and no one has the right to intervene against her will, and in the second quite the opposite rationale.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’d say there is or should be a distinction between sacrificial suicide and not.  If you are killing yourself to prevent information getting out, or even to prevent a gruesome torture where you’d likely die anyway, then that may be morally correct.  If you are down on your luck and take your own life it’s definitely less so and we should actively prevent this when possible.

Of course you could make the argument some people’s lives are gruesome just due to being alive, such as people dealing with great amounts of pain or just getting a bum wrap all around since birth, and this is the reason Ethics is the only class I ever dropped.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s nobody else’s choice but mine. End program.

There are clearly issues with survivor pain or trauma, and financial issues with the loss of benefits to family when cause of death was suicide, but even then... the choice is still mine. End program.  

As I jokingly implied earlier... If I kill myself, what are you gonna do... kill me? Get the hell out of here with that stupidity. As if you could stop me. Lol 

This is all academic and the core issue is really about how we allow the state or allow insurers to punish survivors, not about stopping people from terminating their alive time. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

But this isn't about stopping you; I realize there is nothing we can do.
In my city they just spent a couple of million putting up metal catch poles on either side ( and between the two spans ) of a bridge that has been used quite a few times for jumping. Seems kind of useless; instead of jumping from the walkway to one side and off the bridge, you jump the other way in front of a truck. Same result.

This is about moral justification for such actions.
And I also realise they are going to be different for people with differing morals.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read with utmost interest all your comments, and I have to say that, to me, trying to judge the matter of suicide under the scope of ethics is hopeless, pretty much like looking at a compass needle on one of Earth's magnetic poles. The needle goes round and round in circles.

Just declaring some action right or wrong in the abstract doesn't do it for me, while the regular dilemma punishment vs rehabilitation doesn't even begin to get a handle on the problem.

Ethics, I would say, is about mending your ways or making you responsible for something you did. These concepts don't seem to apply here at all.

I tend to think all concepts have a limit of applicability. To me suicide is not within the realm of ethics. It may be for those around, but not for the person who commits suicide.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
7 minutes ago, GodRays said:

A person is not free to decide if he wants to be born or not. Let the man at least decide to die. 

Symmetry would suggest that if our births are not ours to decide, then our deaths should be treated the same way. Many would claim both of these statements to be common sense, yet they're completely opposed.

Just as we have an "age of consent", below which one is assumed to be incapable of deciding to explore the responsibilities involved in sexual intercourse, perhaps we need an "age of resignation", below which one is assumed to be incapable of deciding to end their life. I would suggest somewhere in the 150-200 year range.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/9/2020 at 3:00 PM, VenusPrincess said:

It is wrong. By killing yourself you are robbing the state of your future productivity after it has already invested many resources into you. You do not have a right to damage the state's investment.

If a person is in severe pain and his condition is terminal anyway, he/she should be able to decide that they have had enough, sad as that may be.

Which sort of raises another question...A few years ago, my Mum at 86 years of age, who was still living in her own apartment, [not far from my house] and under my care, had a fall. We called the Ambulance and she was transported to Hospital. A couple of days later, I got a call that there was no hope for her survival, and that the medical team needed my OK to switch off life support. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.