Comprehensive Review on Suicide

[SoldierOfTheRanks]

Hey y'all - I've been thinking for quite some time now.
So I came back here to hear feedbacks about it, to see whether it might be worth pursuing Suicide or not.

Eventually, I reached a point where I developed a Suicidal ideology that could speak for all walks of life. Especially my own.
It feels as though I solved life somehow? (Or at least my own...)
It's fascinating to see how our human bodies tend to heavily rely on socialization for physical and psychological well-being, which I haven't been getting much at all lol. This must be why I had to come up with such dangerous ideas - to find better means of living.
But I decided to look past that during my time in isolation, because I couldn't get some anyways.

This is a little more specific rather than "I wanna kms because living is pointless" so give it a thorough read. :)

Let me start... (philosophy 101 warning)

1. I noticed how every living thing does something that benefits them in whatever way, and these happen because of instincts. Things having sex, and doing the necessary stuff (like building relationships, etc...) that comes before sex seem to benefit humanity by genetic mutations through reproduction, which is like the fundamental and most basic way of progression.
2. When something progresses, it becomes a 'better' version than the previous version. It's better in that sense because it can do what the previous version can't, but wanted to.
3. But why should I commit suicide when I can stick around and try to become a better version of myself? That's because I can't become a better version of myself that I want to be. I can do pointless things that lead to little to no progression of what I want, which is to get out of this state where everything that I will ever try to do, leads to nothing that I want.
4. What do I even want? Peace. But I can't have that in this life. I already thought of what my 'next responsibility' in life would be, and I have no means of accomplishing it in this life, because of this shitty state and lacking intelligence or the means to do what is morally right. I can't have this peace because I'm not built for it.
5. What even is my 'next responsiblity'? To pursue a state of maximum happiness! As insane as it sounds, I think there is moral and logical merit to it. Because when I reach that state, my poor soul will no longer have any way to experience a terrible life again. No one needs to experience hardship just for the sake of it. Hardship is the path to goodness which I find to be maximum happiness in my case.
6. When I commit Suicide, is the aftermath any good? I think commiting Suicide would give you back the chance of getting put back into this world again, or not at all which would be absolutely perfect because there's no more suffering. But since being put back in a new body of something may be possible as well, let's consider it. I would either wake up in a worse or better position, but let's hope I get the better life, if not, then it's fine if I end up in Satan's purgatory since I already have no use for this compromised life.

I said something about a "Suicidal ideology that speaks for all walks of life" so let's get back into that:

Know how even the smallest living things pursue evolution in some form? The same applies to us humans, we're still half-baked because we haven't reached that state of maximum happiness yet. It doesn't matter what someone argues because they will always live in a state of incompleteness. But it's so easy to preach that you should desensitize yourself to your own vulnerabilities as a mortal human to make your life more bearable than to pursue a state of maximum happiness which all people aren't likely able to do, because it eventually means you'd have to become God to free yourself from potential vulnerability. Because that's impossible, what would the next option be? Suicide! Pray that you get put in another body that doesn't have the same suffering as humans because they have no concept of God. You can try becoming a God to be free from the cycle of suffering and life, but no one here knows what the process would be like, so good luck.

This may sound perfectionistic but perfection is really the only way to solve every problem. You don't have to take "God" literally, because everything has a different perception of that infinite entity. Use it as a guideline to tell whether you are doing right by trying to become like it as much as possible, because power will be the one to relieve suffering.

It's also so fascinating how this world doesn't give anti-suicide ideas a decisive answer to give to people like us. Perhaps salvation lies in the other side? :)

If you have made it this far into the post, thank you. This is a very simplified post that's based off a short, original paper of mine. But I hope I got all the relevant points across.

TL;DR: "I should kms because there's nothing good in this life"

 

[b1cycle]

Why do I need to achieve maximum happiness? What about kind of happiness? Maybe happiness isn't the word we want? Maybe being at peace or tranquil? Any time you're comparing your current state to a state of mind you could be in you're going to make yourself unhappy.

I think you're committing a naturalistic fallacy. Couldn't you also say that in this sense of pursuing perfection, a version of yourself that exists is more perfect than a version of yourself that doesn't exist, because something that doesn't exist can't be perfect?

 

[locked*n*loaded]

It is beyond the realm of possibility to be "brought back" into this world, or to be "moved forward" into "another" world. These are fantastical ideas that have absolutely no basis in reality. When you die, your are dead and you cease to exist. Nothing more, nothing less. Upon death, you become nourishment to foster future life.

 

[SoldierOfTheRanks]

Why do I need to achieve maximum happiness? What about kind of happiness? Maybe happiness isn't the word we want? Maybe being at peace or tranquil? Any time you're comparing your current state to a state of mind you could be in you're going to make yourself unhappy.

I think you're committing a naturalistic fallacy. Couldn't you also say that in this sense of pursuing perfection, a version of yourself that exists is more perfect than a version of yourself that doesn't exist, because something that doesn't exist can't be perfect?

I mentioned something about "God" being used a guideline instead in a literal sense, as a measurement of power - I must have failed to emphasize this enough.

I think it is only natural to seek more power. More is good. Because if you have less, you are more likely to have bad things coming your way. You can compare the 'here' and 'now' with the abstract idea of "God". Pursue more power and you might end up like "God" perhaps? Otherwise, it just improves your chances of living whatever is good in your eyes; to be at peace. We'll never know what lies ahead until we have the means to explore it. It might be something bad if left ignored, but can also be as great as new knowledge that will lay the foundation of a better future. One that we possibly wouldn't understand in our current selves. CTB should be morally permissible if it's clear that you have no means for further exploration. You can live your current life sedated, and in peace, but that won't bring much guarantee either. You'll eventually face death without trying to understand it.

It is beyond the realm of possibility to be "brought back" into this world, or to be "moved forward" into "another" world. These are fantastical ideas that have absolutely no basis in reality. When you die, your are dead and you cease to exist. Nothing more, nothing less. Upon death, you become nourishment to foster future life.

Yes. This is why I've discussed the ideas of being "moved forward" because it can very much occur. If you were to be in a state of nothingness after death, that would mark the end of your natural responsibility as a "soul" or "consciousness" to partake in what we call life. But knowing the potential consequences of death, and carefully weighing those variables could make our existence much easier, since it does not hurt to imagine what they could possibly be in the long run. Sure, we wouldn't know what it exactly is, it still helps us make the "better" decisions from where we are now.

 

[waterworks]

The problem with ideologies is that they assume ideas are fundamentally ingrained in the nature of reality - reflecting some true aspect of it. When really they could simply be formulations of our mind nor more relevant than a momentary dream. Overestimations to soothe our journey through life as we fail to comprehend the reality presented to us. I'd have to ask why you even need a universal suicide ideology, of which I don't believe one can be made. I think a more pertinent question is whether or not we should even try to place universal value on existence or determine it subjectively. After all, since the dawn of time, be it through politics or religion, humans have dogmatized the value of living.

With that said though, suppose there is some fundamental truth that ideologies are grasping at, and you can formulate this suicide ideology. Here are some issues I have with this:

1) I noticed how every living thing does something that benefits them in whatever way, and these happen because of instincts. Things having sex, and doing the necessary stuff (like building relationships, etc...) that comes before sex seem to benefit humanity by genetic mutations through reproduction, which is like the fundamental and most basic way of progression.
2) When something progresses, it becomes a 'better' version than the previous version. It's better in that sense because it can do what the previous version can't, but wanted to.

I don't entirely agree that instinct is purely what drives organisms to be self-serving. I think it's hard to draw a line between what is pure instinct and the product of individualized thought-processes. When for instance a wolf fights another wolf over territory; is it all just instincts driving them to this? There may be more to it, just the same as with humans, not every self-serving action we make is based on instinct.

I think you run run into a problem on point 2. With the progression you're speaking of, "it can do what the previous version can't, but wanted to" feels like an incomplete thought. Because let's talk about wanting to do; "want" implies a will or desire behind the action. I'm assuming by progression you're hinting at what we call evolution. But do organisms evolve or become "better" because they have "wants" that were not met? I don't think so, I'd say the better word is "need". Something necessary for the continued existence of an organism is lacking, so it is forced to change in order to meet those needs, supposing the environment it's in remains constant.

In this case, I don't think it became a "better" version, because it's not linear progression. It simply changed form one thing to another. I think it's easy to think evolution is progressing towards perfection because we presuppose that what survives is "better" than what dies. But that's all in our thinking; all that happened was change, no more different that when 6 AM becomes 12 PM. Things aren't better, they are just changing, in my opinion. If we were taken back to the cretaceous period, I hardly think any of us would survive that landscape, even though our ancestors did. Because we aren't better than them, we are just different.

3) But why should I commit suicide when I can stick around and try to become a better version of myself? That's because I can't become a better version of myself that I want to be. I can do pointless things that lead to little to no progression of what I want, which is to get out of this state where everything that I will ever try to do, leads to nothing that I want.

Okay, so by your own measure, you see some future possibility than you consider better. By that standard that you can't achieve, you have failed the progression. But just like before, if the progression you're talking about is evolution, then there really isn't anything better. I think you have trapped yourself in a world of ideals, and the problem with that is that idealism and reality hardly ever overlap. You formulate some perfect state to strive toward, that "coincidentally" just happens to be impossible for you to achieve, which then gives you your justification for suicide. But what happened here? The short answer is, you created an ideal to justify your suicide. You didn't discover this ideal as part of reality, you made it.

In terms of evolution, it doesn't matter what you "will" or want. What matters to the broader context of reality, is your continued survival. Whether you have to kill, then kill; steal then steal, that's what evolution is - survival. If you look at it morally, are you becoming a better person? No. Then words like better don't apply to reality because they are subjective creations. Just like the progression you think you'll be making.

4) What do I even want? Peace. But I can't have that in this life. I already thought of what my 'next responsibility' in life would be, and I have no means of accomplishing it in this life, because of this shitty state and lacking intelligence or the means to do what is morally right. I can't have this peace because I'm not built for it.
5) What even is my 'next responsiblity'? To pursue a state of maximum happiness! As insane as it sounds, I think there is moral and logical merit to it. Because when I reach that state, my poor soul will no longer have any way to experience a terrible life again. No one needs to experience hardship just for the sake of it. Hardship is the path to goodness which I find to be maximum happiness in my case.
6) When I commit Suicide, is the aftermath any good? I think commiting Suicide would give you back the chance of getting put back into this world again, or not at all which would be absolutely perfect because there's no more suffering. But since being put back in a new body of something may be possible as well, let's consider it. I would either wake up in a worse or better position, but let's hope I get the better life, if not, then it's fine if I end up in Satan's purgatory since I already have no use for this compromised life.

I think with all this in mind, these three points fall short. Because you haven't proven that there is a truth that your ideal is reflecting. In short it is no more than a dream, a subjective formulation so how can it apply universally? So the universal suicide ideology, falls short the same as many other ideologies. You have no responsibility to pursue to "maximum happiness" because responsibilities mean nothing outside the context of survival. If we assume the fundamental truth of reality is continued existence, then all that matters is that you exist. The states you maneuver through during that are just your wishes and whims. Not responsibilities.

So the progression is not towards perfection. Because if the universe remained constant, then life would not change. Evolution is the lagging effect on life of the universe. Abiotic things change (environment) and biological things slowly follows suit. Simply change, that is all there is.

Know how even the smallest living things pursue evolution in some form? The same applies to us humans, we're still half-baked because we haven't reached that state of maximum happiness yet. It doesn't matter what someone argues because they will always live in a state of incompleteness

To conclude all this, the short is, I think you're mistaking evolution for your idea of progression. Also that organism are pursuing evolution, when what is happening is that they are pursuing (in the case of sentient beings) survival or being driven-by (non-sentient beings) survival. Thus "god" or perfection or invulnerability is not waiting at the "end" of evolution, because evolution is not a conscious process striving for human ideals like that. It's just the collective process that life and indeed nonlife is involved in in order to keep existing. There is no end to it, much like time which may not be linear; but that's a whole other thing.

So I honestly have a hard time seeing how your ideology works.

 

[SoldierOfTheRanks]

The problem with ideologies is that they assume ideas are fundamentally ingrained in the nature of reality - reflecting some true aspect of it. When really they could simply be formulations of our mind nor more relevant than a momentary dream. Overestimations to soothe our journey through life as we fail to comprehend the reality presented to us. I'd have to ask why you even need a universal suicide ideology, of which I don't believe one can be made. I think a more pertinent question is whether or not we should even try to place universal value on existence or determine it subjectively. After all, since the dawn of time, be it through politics or religion, humans have dogmatized the value of living.

With that said though, suppose there is some fundamental truth that ideologies are grasping at, and you can formulate this suicide ideology. Here are some issues I have with this:


I don't entirely agree that instinct is purely what drives organisms to be self-serving. I think it's hard to draw a line between what is pure instinct and the product of individualized thought-processes. When for instance a wolf fights another wolf over territory; is it all just instincts driving them to this? There may be more to it, just the same as with humans, not every self-serving action we make is based on instinct.

I think you run run into a problem on point 2. With the progression you're speaking of, "it can do what the previous version can't, but wanted to" feels like an incomplete thought. Because let's talk about wanting to do; "want" implies a will or desire behind the action. I'm assuming by progression you're hinting at what we call evolution. But do organisms evolve or become "better" because they have "wants" that were not met? I don't think so, I'd say the better word is "need". Something necessary for the continued existence of an organism is lacking, so it is forced to change in order to meet those needs, supposing the environment it's in remains constant.

In this case, I don't think it became a "better" version, because it's not linear progression. It simply changed form one thing to another. I think it's easy to think evolution is progressing towards perfection because we presuppose that what survives is "better" than what dies. But that's all in our thinking; all that happened was change, no more different that when 6 AM becomes 12 PM. Things aren't better, they are just changing, in my opinion. If we were taken back to the cretaceous period, I hardly think any of us would survive that landscape, even though our ancestors did. Because we aren't better than them, we are just different.



Okay, so by your own measure, you see some future possibility than you consider better. By that standard that you can't achieve, you have failed the progression. But just like before, if the progression you're talking about is evolution, then there really isn't anything better. I think you have trapped yourself in a world of ideals, and the problem with that is that idealism and reality hardly ever overlap. You formulate some perfect state to strive toward, that "coincidentally" just happens to be impossible for you to achieve, which then gives you your justification for suicide. But what happened here? The short answer is, you created an ideal to justify your suicide. You didn't discover this ideal as part of reality, you made it.

In terms of evolution, it doesn't matter what you "will" or want. What matters to the broader context of reality, is your continued survival. Whether you have to kill, then kill; steal then steal, that's what evolution is - survival. If you look at it morally, are you becoming a better person? No. Then words like better don't apply to reality because they are subjective creations. Just like the progression you think you'll be making.



I think with all this in mind, these three points fall short. Because you haven't proven that there is a truth that your ideal is reflecting. In short it is no more than a dream, a subjective formulation so how can it apply universally? So the universal suicide ideology, falls short the same as many other ideologies. You have no responsibility to pursue to "maximum happiness" because responsibilities mean nothing outside the context of survival. If we assume the fundamental truth of reality is continued existence, then all that matters is that you exist. The states you maneuver through during that are just your wishes and whims. Not responsibilities.

So the progression is not towards perfection. Because if the universe remained constant, then life would not change. Evolution is the lagging effect on life of the universe. Abiotic things change (environment) and biological things slowly follows suit. Simply change, that is all there is.



To conclude all this, the short is, I think you're mistaking evolution for your idea of progression. Also that organism are pursuing evolution, when what is happening is that they are pursuing (in the case of sentient beings) survival or being driven-by (non-sentient beings) survival. Thus "god" or perfection or invulnerability is not waiting at the "end" of evolution, because evolution is not a conscious process striving for human ideals like that. It's just the collective process that life and indeed nonlife is involved in in order to keep existing. There is no end to it, much like time which may not be linear; but that's a whole other thing.

So I honestly have a hard time seeing how your ideology works.

I appreciate the genuine response - I should ask more often in forums such as this, these are all new to me.

I believe I failed to emphasize the uncertainty of what could potentially exist, and I wrote the post head-on with the brunt of my ideas. Uncertainty should definitely be unraveled, because it can be something that can not be explained that may be bad or good or whatever else. It may be seen as a phantom idealization, but life as we see it right now, really doesn't have any further "instruction" other than to function the way we are now. But when something tries to move forward, it may start to understand things that we can't, so we don't have much say in these things that are understood by other entities but not us. This is where the basis of my argument started; uncertainty of the unknown. One shouldn't assume until they become part of that reality.

Hopefully this makes sense - I will leave it at this for now at least, this is a bit to digest.

 

[Fuko1]

I never gave importance to being happy and having positive thoughts. Now once lost I realize their importance. Unfortunately for me, I think there is no going back to my situation.
I just need time to find the best path to leave this suffering behind.

 

[waterworks]

I appreciate the genuine response - I should ask more often in forums such as this, these are all new to me.

I believe I failed to emphasize the uncertainty of what could potentially exist, and I wrote the post head-on with the brunt of my ideas. Uncertainty should definitely be unraveled, because it can be something that can not be explained that may be bad or good or whatever else. It may be seen as a phantom idealization, but life as we see it right now, really doesn't have any further "instruction" other than to function the way we are now. But when something tries to move forward, it may start to understand things that we can't, so we don't have much say in these things that are understood by other entities but not us. This is where the basis of my argument started; uncertainty of the unknown. One shouldn't assume until they become part of that reality.

Hopefully this makes sense - I will leave it at this for now at least, this is a bit to digest.

You have an interesting perspective that's for sure. I can't say I fully understand all of it, but nonetheless, I believe I have a vague sense of what you're driving at. I think leaving room for uncertainty is important.

I appreciate you sharing this.