|
Post by theoncomingstorm on Jul 26, 2017 3:48:13 GMT
False dichotomy.
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Jul 26, 2017 5:29:35 GMT
Wouldn't it depend on the situation of the individual? Technically, to one extreme..... Somebody throwing themselves on a grenade, to save others, is suicide. No, that would be "sacrifice". Sacrificing oneself to save the lives of others would generally not be considered in the same light as what we typically call suicide. Most suicides involved a person taking their own lives in a senseless way, for no purpose other than as a means to end their own suffering. Like I said... It's an extreme view, but... You are willfully killing yourself.. It is still technically suicide. You invalidating it as such simply because it's the "good kind" of suicide is moving the goalposts in your favor... Hell, it's demanding that the opposing goalposts don't even exist. Once again, I stated that it would probably depend on the person and his circumstance... I'm not "PRO-Suicide" or anything remotely close to it... but, in the vein of your question... A person might choose suicide over forcing his family to watch him slowly decay in front of them... or does so in order to prevent him from depleting his family savings in a futile, but extremely costly, battle with some disease. I can't decide for them whether or not they are actually being "selfish".. or even if it's "okay".
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Jul 26, 2017 8:32:01 GMT
If it meant saving others? Sacrifice doesn't count. The definition of suicide is: The act to willfully take your own life. It says nothing about the motivation. So, intentionally jumping on a grenade, or in front of a trolley in order to save 5 people on the track, is suicide. It is also sacrifice. It's not a coincidence that in action movies, where the heroes embark on a very difficult task, they often call it a "suicide mission". It is also telling that people who want to have the moral high ground and be judgmental about depressed people need to create special pleading in order to maintain their self-righteousness; since they can't justify their stance rationally.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Jul 26, 2017 11:29:41 GMT
No, that would be "sacrifice". Sacrificing oneself to save the lives of others would generally not be considered in the same light as what we typically call suicide. Most suicides involved a person taking their own lives in a senseless way, for no purpose other than as a means to end their own suffering. Like I said... It's an extreme view, but... You are willfully killing yourself.. It is still technically suicide. You invalidating it as such simply because it's the "good kind" of suicide is moving the goalposts in your favor... Hell, it's demanding that the opposing goalposts don't even exist. I'm not moving the goalposts and I have expressed no particular favor on this thread. I'm merely pointing out that sacrifice was clearly not intended to be considered due to the fact that most people would obviously be okay with it. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few (or the one). If someone sacrificed themselves to save others, most people would find that praiseworthy. I'm asking where people stand on senseless suicides (the typical usage of the word) which serve no social good. But it seems like that question has also been satisfied based on the poll results. Apparently suicide is an acceptable means to an end for many people here.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Jul 26, 2017 11:32:16 GMT
Is suicide an acceptable method of dealing with depression? It would depend on the individual who is suffering depression and what was\is the catalyst. Is the depression just a state of mind where we are getting down because the world is not pandering to us with the things we want or wish for— which could be a form of selfishness and arrogance in itself—or is it because people are burdened by physical and mental disabilities and it just gets too much to deal with? Perhaps it could be a mix of all of these things. Our emotions can tend to take control of situations in many circumstances and we can get too attached or led astray by them. It takes discipline and resilience to know how to deal with them appropriately and accordingly, or even just to ignore them. The ego mindset is the culprit most of the time. I feel it is also selfish of others to claim that somebody who commits suicide is selfish because of how their action may make them feel. It is then making it out to be all about them. No one can possibly know or fully understand what is going on inside someone else's head. Your poll and questions are a bit b&w to give a definitive answer, and something like suicide always lurks around in the grey realm. Someone who is so depressed to want to kill themselves, have to actually come forward and seek assistance\help with how they are feeling and they may not even want to buy into whatever options and form of help that is made available to them. Perhaps killing themselves was written in their cards. Do you believe in fate?
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Jul 26, 2017 11:45:53 GMT
I'm starting to think you want to only partially read my posts. Let's see which part you leave out this time... If someone wants to assist them, then so be it. They should not expect the help. You are just playing semantic games, you are suggesting that assistance is fine as long as the person assisting did not initiate the conversation? What about people who are incapable of ending it by themselves, can they expect help to have their wishes carried out, or is it just the fit and healthy who should be allowed to end their suffering? You are using semantics wrong for the sake of staying outraged on a statement I never made. My statements were quite clear and you willfully chose to ignore large points from them. As I said, no one who wants to kill themselves for any reason should have an expectation for help. There's no reason for anyone to feel obligated to help someone else kill themselves. Technically, it's not even suicide at that point. Assisted suicide is pert near an oxymoron. I'm sure there will be a profitable business surrounding the killing of people who want to die, but there's also plenty of people who would never kill someone regardless of the reason and there's nothing wrong with them refusing the request.
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Jul 26, 2017 11:46:27 GMT
Like I said... It's an extreme view, but... You are willfully killing yourself.. It is still technically suicide. You invalidating it as such simply because it's the "good kind" of suicide is moving the goalposts in your favor... Hell, it's demanding that the opposing goalposts don't even exist. I'm not moving the goalposts and I have expressed no particular favor on this thread. I'm merely pointing out that sacrifice was clearly not intended to be considered due to the fact that most people would obviously be okay with it. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few (or the one). If someone sacrificed themselves to save others, most people would find that praiseworthy. I'm asking where people stand on senseless suicides (the typical usage of the word) which serve no social good. But it seems like that question has also been satisfied based on the poll results. Apparently suicide is an acceptable means to an end for many people here. Yeah, but.. That's like asking "Is killing someone wrong or is it okay?" And then someone pointing out that self-defense and the protection of others are deemed legitimate reasons for killing and wouldn't be considered wrong... and then, saying "No... I'm only asking about senseless killings." There are degrees to everything. Each example is its own example. It stands in its own place where it lies on the spectrum of "good/bad" and whether people find it "selfish" or not....
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Jul 26, 2017 14:52:15 GMT
Why should it matter whether the motives are selfish or not? This distinction isn't brought up when the topic is slavery or women's suffrage. A person should be free to choose their own fate and not be challenged because others think that person is deficient in selflessness. I didn't say that it mattered. I'm just asking if that is in fact the case. Whether or not it matters is up for debate. And if you choose to compare suicide (a personal choice to take one's own life) to slavery (a state institution designed to forced others into servitude), then good luck making your argument. If you think of it in the context of right to die legislation (such as Oregon's Death with Dignity Act), I think it makes a strong argument. The issue being compared is Does the state have authority to prevent people from exercising their free choice to end their lives? That's pretty comparable to Does the state have the authority to maintain institutions that allow forced servitude?
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Jul 26, 2017 14:56:14 GMT
I didn't say that it mattered. I'm just asking if that is in fact the case. Whether or not it matters is up for debate. And if you choose to compare suicide (a personal choice to take one's own life) to slavery (a state institution designed to forced others into servitude), then good luck making your argument. If you think of it in the context of right to die legislation (such as Oregon's Death with Dignity Act), I think it makes a strong argument. The issue being compared is Does the state have authority to prevent people from exercising their free choice to end their lives? That's pretty comparable to Does the state have the authority to maintain institutions that allow forced servitude? But that's a completely separate issue that doesn't address my actual question. My question doesn't concern States rights vs individual rights. It's merely asking for opinions as to whether suicide is morally/ethically acceptable or not, and whether people consider it a selfish act.
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Jul 26, 2017 15:08:08 GMT
If you think of it in the context of right to die legislation (such as Oregon's Death with Dignity Act), I think it makes a strong argument. The issue being compared is Does the state have authority to prevent people from exercising their free choice to end their lives? That's pretty comparable to Does the state have the authority to maintain institutions that allow forced servitude? But that's a completely separate issue that doesn't address my actual question. My question doesn't concern States rights vs individual rights. It's merely asking for opinions as to whether suicide is morally/ethically acceptable or not, and whether people consider it a selfish act. And yet your poll is structured to suggest that if you believe that suicide is a selfish act, then one cannot find it acceptable (since you can only vote for one).
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Jul 26, 2017 15:23:33 GMT
But that's a completely separate issue that doesn't address my actual question. My question doesn't concern States rights vs individual rights. It's merely asking for opinions as to whether suicide is morally/ethically acceptable or not, and whether people consider it a selfish act. And yet your poll is structured to suggest that if you believe that suicide is a selfish act, then one cannot find it acceptable (since you can only vote for one). What does that have to do with state vs individual rights (the point you brought up?) You can question the methodology of me asking this question, but still one thing has nothing to do with the other.
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Jul 26, 2017 15:32:02 GMT
And yet your poll is structured to suggest that if you believe that suicide is a selfish act, then one cannot find it acceptable (since you can only vote for one). What does that have to do with state vs individual rights (the point you brought up?) You can question the methodology of me asking this question, but still one thing has nothing to do with the other. I wouldn't say that, they both relate to suicide. I sensed an anti-suicide agenda in the framing of the poll. Would I be way off?
|
|
|
Post by Cinemachinery on Jul 26, 2017 16:35:14 GMT
Is chronic depression or mental illness selfish or OK?
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jul 26, 2017 16:37:29 GMT
The poll is a false dichotomy.
Also, whether something is selfish is purely a matter of how someone is thinking about the act in question. There are no universal meanings to acts.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Jul 26, 2017 16:48:13 GMT
Is chronic depression or mental illness selfish or OK? Chronic depression and mental illness are not "acts" in the first place, and therefore couldn't logically be described in terms of selfishness. Suicide is a choice!
|
|
|
Post by Cinemachinery on Jul 26, 2017 17:18:25 GMT
Is chronic depression or mental illness selfish or OK? Chronic depression and mental illness are not "acts" in the first place No, they're mental conditions that drive the act. It seems their nature would comment on the act. "You need to be less selfish" isn't generally heard in response to people suffering mental conditions, mostly because the actions taken are due to the mental condition, not a personality aspect we'd ascribe to a more balanced individual. For instance, dubbing a chronically depressed narcoleptic "lazy" would sort of ignore the nature of the issue.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Jul 26, 2017 18:16:56 GMT
You are just playing semantic games, you are suggesting that assistance is fine as long as the person assisting did not initiate the conversation? What about people who are incapable of ending it by themselves, can they expect help to have their wishes carried out, or is it just the fit and healthy who should be allowed to end their suffering? You are using semantics wrong for the sake of staying outraged on a statement I never made. My statements were quite clear and you willfully chose to ignore large points from them. As I said, no one who wants to kill themselves for any reason should have an expectation for help. There's no reason for anyone to feel obligated to help someone else kill themselves. Technically, it's not even suicide at that point. Assisted suicide is pert near an oxymoron. I'm sure there will be a profitable business surrounding the killing of people who want to die, but there's also plenty of people who would never kill someone regardless of the reason and there's nothing wrong with them refusing the request. You did not answer my question. What about people who are incapable of ending it by themselves, can they expect help to have their wishes carried out, or is it just the fit and healthy who should be allowed to end their suffering?
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Jul 26, 2017 18:23:37 GMT
I stand corrected, however a person in that stage cannot make the decision to kill themselves, a sufferer must make that decision before the effects have progressed beyond them being able to make decisions. A) I'm glad that you conceded that you were in fact wrong about Alzheimer's. Not everyone here has such humility. B) What's your point? b. My point is that there are circumstances where one chooses suicide although they are not yet unwell, the do it to avoid the future when they will not have that opportunity, or to avoid the pain entirely. Tony Scott for example.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Jul 26, 2017 18:50:36 GMT
You are using semantics wrong for the sake of staying outraged on a statement I never made. My statements were quite clear and you willfully chose to ignore large points from them. As I said, no one who wants to kill themselves for any reason should have an expectation for help. There's no reason for anyone to feel obligated to help someone else kill themselves. Technically, it's not even suicide at that point. Assisted suicide is pert near an oxymoron. I'm sure there will be a profitable business surrounding the killing of people who want to die, but there's also plenty of people who would never kill someone regardless of the reason and there's nothing wrong with them refusing the request. You did not answer my question. What about people who are incapable of ending it by themselves, can they expect help to have their wishes carried out, or is it just the fit and healthy who should be allowed to end their suffering? I answered that quite clearly.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Jul 26, 2017 18:54:12 GMT
You did not answer my question. What about people who are incapable of ending it by themselves, can they expect help to have their wishes carried out, or is it just the fit and healthy who should be allowed to end their suffering? I answered that quite clearly. I must confess I do not think it was very clear, let me see if I understand: A person who is depressed but physically capable is able to end their lives because they do not require assistance, but a person who is bedridden and in extreme pain that will not end is not able to end their lives because they would require assistance. Does that sum up your view point?
|
|