Is there a sound philosophical defence for suicide? If so, who wrote it?

[Nauyaca]

There are a lot of philosophical takes on suicide out there, but a concrete and serious defence for the act? Can someone point me to any author? I would greatly appreciate some guidance, thank you in advance

 

[flightless bird]

i could tell you, but then you'd go and read them, implement those ideas into your brain, and your suicide would be guaranteed.
i can't have that on my conscience, so i'm sorry.

but since you asked, here's some guidance: don't read those philosophers, you can't unlearn any of it. instead, try to create your own meaning and values for life. language is more dangerous than you think.

p.s. ever heard of pandora's box? there is a good reason it's best kept closed.

 

[QuinineGuy]

Not sure. But something to consider, which I've always thought about, is the harm caused when someone does die by suicide. The decision does have moral consequences for other people in your life, those who knew you, friends, family, etc. It causes them trauma, and leaves them "holding the bag."

So if we look at...like...basic moral philosophy- the general consensus is that one ought not to do harm. So if death by suicide causes trauma to others, and you therefore cause harm to them... it becomes difficult I think to defend from an "a priori" moral level.

 

[Nauyaca]

i could tell you, but then you'd go and read them, implement those ideas into your brain, and your suicide would be guaranteed.
i can't have that on my conscience, so i'm sorry.

but since you asked, here's some guidance: don't read those philosophers, you can't unlearn any of it. instead, try to create your own meaning and values for life. language is more dangerous than you think.

p.s. ever heard of pandora's box? there is a good reason it's best kept closed.

Well, like Emil Cioran said.

"It is not worth the bother of killing yourself, since you always kill yourself too late."

He also said.

"The fact that life has no meaning is a reason to live, moreover, the only one"

Schopenhauer, Zapffe, Cioran... all very pessimistic, and still lived to the end of their lives, so don't sell me short on that one.

Ironically, i found the best argument for someone so angry and disillusioned with the world to the point of committing suicide in the words of G. K. Chesterton.

"Not only is suicide a sin, it is the sin. It is the ultimate and absolute evil, the refusal to take an interest in existence; the refusal to take the oath of loyalty to life. The man who kills a man, kills a man. The man who kills himself, kills all men; as far as he is concerned he wipes out the world. His act is worse (symbolically considered) than any rape or dynamite outrage. For it destroys all buildings: it insults all women. The thief is satisfied with diamonds; but the suicide is not: that is his crime. He cannot be bribed, even by the blazing stones of the Celestial City. The thief compliments the things he steals, if not the owner of them. But the suicide insults everything on earth by not stealing it. He defiles every flower by refusing to live for its sake. There is not a tiny creature in the cosmos at whom his death is not a sneer. When a man hangs himself on a tree, the leaves might fall off in anger and the birds fly away in fury: for each has received a personal affront. Of course there may be pathetic emotional excuses for the act. There often are for rape, and there almost always are for dynamite. But if it comes to clear ideas and the intelligent meaning of things, then there is much more rational and philosophic truth in the burial at the cross-roads and the stake driven through the body, than in Mr. Archer's suicidal automatic machines. There is a meaning in burying the suicide apart. The man's crime is different from other crimes -- for it makes even crimes impossible."

That is the closest i have heard someone describe revenge on the universe, funny, admonishing against the act and instead giving you a metaphysical "weapon" against existence. but it's still not a justification...

So, don't be afraid, if you are in a position to tell me please do, i will be careful with the box

Not sure. But something to consider, which I've always thought about, is the harm caused when someone does die by suicide. The decision does have moral consequences for other people in your life, those who knew you, friends, family, etc. It causes them trauma, and leaves them "holding the bag."

So if we look at...like...basic moral philosophy- the general consensus is that one ought not to do harm. So if death by suicide causes trauma to others, and you therefore cause harm to them... it becomes difficult I think to defend from an "a priori" moral level.

Albert Camus said.

"There is but one truly serious philosophical problem, and that is suicide."

And then just dismissed suicide as invalid and a rejection of the "absurd" as he called it, not dwelling or offering further explanation, I get it, it is a very taboo subject, more so on his time, but still, it sounds like he just chickened out.

Aren't we the owners of our life? Shouldn't we have agency over it? This are valid questions, I have heard all the arguments against taking your own life, you mentioned a strong one yourself, don't cause harm unto others, but the arguments FOR agency over your own life are just buried, it is a very one sided argument, that's the reason I came to this forums, if we can't explore this ideas here, where then?

 

[Alexei_Kirillov]

Check out Jean Améry's On Suicide: A Discourse on Voluntary Death.

 

[Nauyaca]

Check out Jean Améry's On Suicide: A Discourse on Voluntary Death.

Awesome, will do, thank you very much.

 

[WhatCouldHaveBeen32]

I'd give you a philosophical defence for suicide, I'm not some writter or anything like that.

The universe is random and uncaring, it can't care because it's an amalgamation of stellar objects and planets, you were born out of pure chance, the only thing holding you from suicide most of the time is your brain which over hundreds of thousands of years has developed a survival instinct because like your universe, the human body is uncaring and an amalgamation of organs and cells which do different things and cannot question their existance. But you can, for some odd reason, we as humans CAN question our existence , and choosing suicide is just rebelling against life itself, showing that you beat the game , that you were born being able to defy everything it has put in place for millions of years.


And once you die, the universe can do nothing to bring you back, even if it gained consciousness and all the stars and planets begged for you to come back and acknowledge them, you don't exist anymore and from your perspective the universe doesn't either, and without someone to acknowledge it's existence, the universe's existence is pointless, as you said, you take revenge on the universe.

Of course you won't be there to experience it, I'm talking about the abstract idea, not that the universe will care but yeah.

 

[bleeding_heart_show]

Read the philosophy of redemption by Philipp Mainländer. It is the closest thing I can think of to what you are asking for. Unlike his contemporaries Mainländer actually committed suicide, so I cannot help but view him more favorably than them.

Ultimately justifying suicide is life affirming, so I see no need to do so.

 

[Nauyaca]

Thank you, I will read it

 

[Forever Sleep]

Well, like Emil Cioran said.

"It is not worth the bother of killing yourself, since you always kill yourself too late."

He also said.

"The fact that life has no meaning is a reason to live, moreover, the only one"

Schopenhauer, Zapffe, Cioran... all very pessimistic, and still lived to the end of their lives, so don't sell me short on that one.

Ironically, i found the best argument for someone so angry and disillusioned with the world to the point of committing suicide in the words of G. K. Chesterton.

"Not only is suicide a sin, it is the sin. It is the ultimate and absolute evil, the refusal to take an interest in existence; the refusal to take the oath of loyalty to life. The man who kills a man, kills a man. The man who kills himself, kills all men; as far as he is concerned he wipes out the world. His act is worse (symbolically considered) than any rape or dynamite outrage. For it destroys all buildings: it insults all women. The thief is satisfied with diamonds; but the suicide is not: that is his crime. He cannot be bribed, even by the blazing stones of the Celestial City. The thief compliments the things he steals, if not the owner of them. But the suicide insults everything on earth by not stealing it. He defiles every flower by refusing to live for its sake. There is not a tiny creature in the cosmos at whom his death is not a sneer. When a man hangs himself on a tree, the leaves might fall off in anger and the birds fly away in fury: for each has received a personal affront. Of course there may be pathetic emotional excuses for the act. There often are for rape, and there almost always are for dynamite. But if it comes to clear ideas and the intelligent meaning of things, then there is much more rational and philosophic truth in the burial at the cross-roads and the stake driven through the body, than in Mr. Archer's suicidal automatic machines. There is a meaning in burying the suicide apart. The man's crime is different from other crimes -- for it makes even crimes impossible."

That is the closest i have heard someone describe revenge on the universe, funny, admonishing against the act and instead giving you a metaphysical "weapon" against existence. but it's still not a justification...

So, don't be afraid, if you are in a position to tell me please do, i will be careful with the box

Albert Camus said.

"There is but one truly serious philosophical problem, and that is suicide."

And then just dismissed suicide as invalid and a rejection of the "absurd" as he called it, not dwelling or offering further explanation, I get it, it is a very taboo subject, more so on his time, but still, it sounds like he just chickened out.

Aren't we the owners of our life? Shouldn't we have agency over it? This are valid questions, I have heard all the arguments against taking your own life, you mentioned a strong one yourself, don't cause harm unto others, but the arguments FOR agency over your own life are just buried, it is a very one sided argument, that's the reason I came to this forums, if we can't explore this ideas here, where then?

I'm not at all well read on Philosophy. However, just in terms of numbers, I'm sure there are strong statistics on how much environmental damage a single human causes in their lifetime. Doing quick Google searches, it's approximated the average American for example will consume 7,000 animals. The average human apparently generates 140 tonnes of rubbish. It's simply common sense that the way a great many of us live is hugely damaging to the world.

I think someone did actually manage to get AI to come to the conclusion once that, environmentally speaking- it would be better for them to kill themselves.

The quoted passage by G. K. Chesterton absolutely boiled my blood. I guess really- saying suicide was a worse sin than rape- in any sense was enough I really needed to read to know I wasn't going to enjoy his perspective. I wonder if he would have felt differently if he had been a women. I wonder if he was against abortion, even in the case of rape.

It's obvious he was speaking from a religious, Christian perspective. I don't believe anyone could look at this universe alone and worry it might be squemish about death! There's death all around. Hideous deaths too.

I took his view more to be that a God would be offended by suicide. Really though- an insult to flowers? Do flowers need us to appreciate them in order to be beautiful? They don't need us at all! They've evolved to be bright and smell in order to attract insects- not us! In fact, they'd likely be doing better if we weren't so attracted to them. When we 'like' something- we very often kill it ultimately. We cut flowers, effectively killing them- to declare our love/ appreciation to another human. But, this guy seemed to be fine with the rape of the natural world and people apparently- to some extent.

It's so arrogant too- to believe the world or even a God needs us to appreciate it. This world didn't always have human beings on it. I'm sure it was just as beautiful back then. Of course, I suppose his God would need worshippers. Can a God exist without worshippers? If they do exist, they should be able to regardless but, apparently they'd be offended. Again though- why? Why does such an omnipotent being even need a fan club?

I can only say personally that to a thinking, sentient being, autonomy is surely so very important. In that context, the ability to be able to choose and enact choice is a 'gift'. I personally think it's the greatest gift we have. It's surely what we aspire to as a civilisation- for an individual to be able to be who they want to be. While it isn't a choice that so many would take, the choice to not participate- to suicide, sits within that context I believe. So, from that perspective, that's my own philosophy. That suicide ought to be respected as an expression of autonomy/ choice.