I think it can be either. But to play devil's advocate- emotions are
very much involved when choosing or trying
not to commit suicide. Debatably- perhaps more emotions. As in- I'm so desperate to relieve my own pain but I can't bear the guilt of thinking what it would do to other people. So, I'll carry on living through this hell for them. Is that rational?
In a way- which is
more rational in that situation? The first hand knowledge that you are in a situation you feel you can't cope with and can't resolve (I'd say most suicidal people have at least tried to resolve their problems) and causes you more pain than you feel able or willing to deal with. Or, the concern for how your actions
might affect the people around you?
Which is the more 'rational' experience? Pain or guilt? Surely- it's pain. If you fall off a ladder and break your arm, you'll experience pain. If your friend falls off the ladder while you were footing it, you might experience guilt but- maybe unwarrantedly- they may not blame you at all.
Plus- all this assumes that living is the right, correct answer. Why? Because we've found ourselves lumbered with it? Because we're engineered to naturally
want to survive? Because we're told it's what we must do? Is nature always rational? Is evolution always rational? No- it's simply a process that favours certain attributes. Those attributes aren't
always in that creature's best interests. A few unfortunate examples:
Illustration: Roman Klonek 1 Sea mammal blowhole. Any animal that spends appreciable time in the ocean should be able to extract oxygen from water via gills. Enlarging the lungs and moving a nostril to the back of the head is a poor work-around. 2 Hyena clitoris. When engorged, this...
www.wired.com
Plus- we have the added problem of human society. Our human environment can easily f*ck things up for us and animals. Look at the poor old peppered moth who evolved in terms of wing colouration/pattern to match polluted areas and avoid being eaten and then was in a bind when cities cleaned up their acts- so presumably, had to revert back! Is it
really that irrational to look around at this world and look at yourself and think: 'I don't stand very good odds here'?
Of course, the majority of animals don't seem to have the choice- poor sods. They're not so good at controlling their animal instincts but... we are. We do have brains that can overide all that stuff. In fact- we'd
call that rationalising wouldn't we? As in- I'd really like to steal that TV or sleep with that person but- I better not do either because I'll likely be jailed.
At least we
know about DNA. Put it this way- is it
rational for someone with hereditary health issues- physical or mental to have children? Is it rational even for someone who knows they can't provide a stable enough environment- emotional, financial, social to have children? Surely not. There's every likelihood that child will struggle. Are antinatilists mostly rational or emotional? Maybe it is a mixture. A fair few of us have a hatred of life and dread to see it inflicted on others. But I'd say most antinatilists are rational in their approach.
Are people who are against suicide more rational or emotional in their approach? I'd say- more emotional. The rational side of it seems a bit suspect to me. 'Your life could improve.' Yeah sure- but it could also just as well stay the same or get worse! Someone who has had a shit life for 30, 40 years and been suicidal the majority of that time. How much hope are they likely to have that things
will improve? It's not to say they won't of course but, I don't think many suicidal people really want to put their all into living anymore and in my experience, good things in life don't just come to you.
Which leads to the purpose of our lives. If we're continuing down the: 'suicide is irrational because it isn't natural' then- choosing not to procreate is also against nature's laws. If we've made that decision, what's the point in us hanging around and consuming more resources? Surely, the antinatilists of us should be able to leave?
Really though- what is a 'rational' decision? It can't be one where all the variables are known. Otherwise- no decisions would be termed 'rational'. We wouldn't be able to 'rationally' accept that job offer without knowing how we'd feel working there three years later. But-
could it have been a rational decision still to take the job? Sure- it payed well, the hours were good, the commute looked manageable, a friend worked there- whatever. It could have been more emotional too off course- gut instinct and all that.
But- why can't suicide be like that? I can't see a way of improving my situation, I've tried but nothing has worked, nothing more appeals to me to try. Beyond that, surely it's other people
telling us what to do- you
can't give up. You
have to keep trying. So- is it rational to just accept what other people tell you to do? Surely not. That's simply obeying.
Of course, the problem is mental illness. That is what pro-lifers tend to use. This person simply
can't think rationally because they are mentally ill and it's that, that is
causing them to feel suicidal. Personally, I'd argue against that. I think it's possible- of course but, it isn't always the case.
Even where it is though- I suspect that person
can still rationalise in many cases. Of course- they would need to test them for competency to ascertain that.
If physically ill people can turn down treatment or decide they've had enough of dealing with an untreatable illness, then surely- mental health should be treated the same way. Why is it irrational to say- 'I don't want to live in pain?' I wish mental health doctors would concede more that some people are untreatable. If they are- they ought to be given the same rights as people with terminal or chronic, untreatable illness. They shouldn't have to hang around while they scurry around looking for a cure!
