TAW122
Emissary of the right to die.
- Aug 30, 2018
- 7,607
Throughout many years as I was debunking arguments as well as coming across various threads on different platforms on the Internet (Reddit, other MHP platforms, other blogs, etc.), one of the most bad faith arguments that was made by pro-psychiatry and pro-psychotherapy advocates or people are that "[The act of] CTB is a medical emergency!". Technically, things that result in death and/or severe injuries (especially if someone doesn't wish to die for instance, such as a heart-attack, or severe blood loss whatever the cause, or any other thing that causes physical harm for said individual), would indeed be a medical emergency in need of imminent and immediate medical attention.
However, the real issue is how these pro-psychiatry and pro-psychotherapy advocates take the act of CTB, especially for individuals that have made up their minds and unilaterally decided that the cost of continued sentience (or one's individual life itself) is not worth the price for oneself to continue to do so and decides it is better for said individual to check out (on said individual's own terms), then these pro-psych (both psychiatry and psychotherapy) advocates will aim to treat the act as an emergency even if said individual has yet to do anything (but either hinted or is thinking of doing said act) and such assertions and prejudiced assumptions are based on hasty generalizations of actual irrational actors, and then unfalsifiable, infallible circular reasoning that cannot be disproven (it's all up to the people who are in power to decide using a 'subjective' criteria only to what they believe to be).
This infact, proves that most 'suicide prevention' policies and efforts (especially actual intervention including the use of physical force, incarceration, and/or actively interfering with an individual's attempt) are akin to those of blasphemy laws of the older times. It isn't done because of an actual harm, but rather even suspected potential for actual harm.
For example, suppose the act of physically ripping/tearing a piece of paper (that was going to be binned/trashed and either burned or put into a landfill) offends some people (there is at least more than zero people in this world who may take some 'offense' to doing that versus crumpling paper/folding paper/cutting the piece of paper itself), it really affects nobody (e.g. an particular odd individual(s) who gets offended at witnessing or learning of that someone else tear/ripped the paper to shreds versus using a shredding machine or cutting the paper with scissors). The point of the example, isn't that the paper was going to be binned/trashed, but the method/manner of how it was 'disposed' even if the outcome or end goal was the same! Therefore if those said offended people (more than zero) decided to label paper rippers/tearers as irrational, it would just be both an unfalsifiable, infallible circular reasoning based on the prejudice against paper rippers/tearers. Then it would also be a pathologication of the act of ripping paper instead of cutting/shredding (through a machine)/crumpling said piece of paper. As ridiculous as the example may be, the core argument is about the unfalsifiable circular logic and reasoning based on prejudice against a certain label of group of people as well as the pathologication of certain normal (non-medical actions) just based on one's own autonomy [to rip/tear a piece of paper]!
So back to the main counterargument about the right to die and act of CTB (suicide) itself. The act of suicide itself is considered one of the most difficult and courageous acts that an individual can take, especially when fighting against one's own survival instinct/self-preservation instinct, but the pro-psych advocates like to pathologize what is considered one of the ultimate acts of self determination while also relying on unfalsifiable circular logic predicated on existing prejudices and discriminatory views on 'said group of people'. In the end, while any meaningful change is not likely to happen anytime soon, at least this article will debunk and expose the callous, bad faith, and disingenuous argument that pro-psych advocates (who are also forced-lifers too) use! Furthermore, to bring light to why it is not only disingenuous, but also unethical for these people to not only presumptuously and hastily label those who are simply attempting to escape long term suffering unilaterally by one's own choice! Unlike a real medical emergency, the pathologization of the act of suicide (the ultimate act of self-deliverance and exercise of bodily autonomy, by determined and serious individuals) is not only immoral, but effectively an act of discrimination as well! Unfortunately such discrimination by society is not condemned like almost most other forms of such, but even sanctioned (said to be for one's own good…) as well, which makes the world we live in tyrannical by default as well!
However, the real issue is how these pro-psychiatry and pro-psychotherapy advocates take the act of CTB, especially for individuals that have made up their minds and unilaterally decided that the cost of continued sentience (or one's individual life itself) is not worth the price for oneself to continue to do so and decides it is better for said individual to check out (on said individual's own terms), then these pro-psych (both psychiatry and psychotherapy) advocates will aim to treat the act as an emergency even if said individual has yet to do anything (but either hinted or is thinking of doing said act) and such assertions and prejudiced assumptions are based on hasty generalizations of actual irrational actors, and then unfalsifiable, infallible circular reasoning that cannot be disproven (it's all up to the people who are in power to decide using a 'subjective' criteria only to what they believe to be).
This infact, proves that most 'suicide prevention' policies and efforts (especially actual intervention including the use of physical force, incarceration, and/or actively interfering with an individual's attempt) are akin to those of blasphemy laws of the older times. It isn't done because of an actual harm, but rather even suspected potential for actual harm.
For example, suppose the act of physically ripping/tearing a piece of paper (that was going to be binned/trashed and either burned or put into a landfill) offends some people (there is at least more than zero people in this world who may take some 'offense' to doing that versus crumpling paper/folding paper/cutting the piece of paper itself), it really affects nobody (e.g. an particular odd individual(s) who gets offended at witnessing or learning of that someone else tear/ripped the paper to shreds versus using a shredding machine or cutting the paper with scissors). The point of the example, isn't that the paper was going to be binned/trashed, but the method/manner of how it was 'disposed' even if the outcome or end goal was the same! Therefore if those said offended people (more than zero) decided to label paper rippers/tearers as irrational, it would just be both an unfalsifiable, infallible circular reasoning based on the prejudice against paper rippers/tearers. Then it would also be a pathologication of the act of ripping paper instead of cutting/shredding (through a machine)/crumpling said piece of paper. As ridiculous as the example may be, the core argument is about the unfalsifiable circular logic and reasoning based on prejudice against a certain label of group of people as well as the pathologication of certain normal (non-medical actions) just based on one's own autonomy [to rip/tear a piece of paper]!
So back to the main counterargument about the right to die and act of CTB (suicide) itself. The act of suicide itself is considered one of the most difficult and courageous acts that an individual can take, especially when fighting against one's own survival instinct/self-preservation instinct, but the pro-psych advocates like to pathologize what is considered one of the ultimate acts of self determination while also relying on unfalsifiable circular logic predicated on existing prejudices and discriminatory views on 'said group of people'. In the end, while any meaningful change is not likely to happen anytime soon, at least this article will debunk and expose the callous, bad faith, and disingenuous argument that pro-psych advocates (who are also forced-lifers too) use! Furthermore, to bring light to why it is not only disingenuous, but also unethical for these people to not only presumptuously and hastily label those who are simply attempting to escape long term suffering unilaterally by one's own choice! Unlike a real medical emergency, the pathologization of the act of suicide (the ultimate act of self-deliverance and exercise of bodily autonomy, by determined and serious individuals) is not only immoral, but effectively an act of discrimination as well! Unfortunately such discrimination by society is not condemned like almost most other forms of such, but even sanctioned (said to be for one's own good…) as well, which makes the world we live in tyrannical by default as well!
