life is not rational

[ksp]

wanting to live is not rational
wanting to die is rational


i'm forcing myself to reflect on my life, self-analyze; pros and cons for life - balanced view

i'm finding countless, deep reasons to end my life - all rational, and intellectual

---

life is irrational, and death is rational

'It is still not rational for a person to want to die' - then, why is it rational to want to live?

the only reason to support life is irrational: survival instinct (it's an instinct!)
all instincts are irrational - are built-in (forced by nature)

death is rational - when you want to end your life you are rational
in fact i'm overthinking it, and it's been going on for much longer than it needs to…

this survival instinct (from the smallest organisms to the biggest) is not a rational reason - animals don't need human intelligence to survive; humans need rational reasoning for wanting their own death

every motivation is intended to support procreation: directly or indirectly - however far removed, everything leads to sex; beauty, suffering, health, struggles, social interactions, jobs, wealth, friend, family, love songs / movies, paintings, etc. the end result invariably targets relentless, mindless, animal procreation (regardless of subjective feelings such as romantic love, hate, hope, despair). even morality and ethics are use to support all instincts

there are rational, philosophical, and intellectual reasons to support death

what are philosophical reasons to support life, without mindless procreation and survival instinct?
why would you enjoy life, without procreation?

what would be one reason (just one!) to support life, which doesn't directly or indirectly support natural instincts: there is no single reason to support life, without the end-result of procreation

what are rational and intelligent reasons to support life? (what am i missing?)

ps. full disclosure: i am a nihilist, just looking for balanced views

 

[Forever Sleep]

Creativity, invention, discovery, achievement.

If we're to disregard our primal instincts to reproduce and sustain our young- then I suppose we are left with our intellect, emotions and sense of self.

Granted- it may seem utterly worthless to you (because ultimately- the majority of things we 'achieve' are to help our own race.) Still- for the individual Scientist, Engineer, Artist, Archeologist, Athlete, Philosopher- what they are doing with their brains and bodies may be enough (for them) to justify their existence on this planet.

Bear in mind- your own intellect and powers of reasoning have allowed you to come to the conclusion that YOUR life feels meaningless. I'm assuming that's because nothing gives YOU a sense of purpose or fulfillment anymore?

What if a scientist just last night found a new renewable energy source? Do you suppose they also feel the same sense of meaninglessness? Of course I know the argument will be- well- that will only sustain more life and all life is bad. Still- I hope you'd accept the majority of people don't see it that way.

I think it's going to be a stalemate again to be honest. Fact is- some people's bodies and brains do find life worthwhile (despite all it's difficulties) and some don't. It's a bit like trying to tell everyone that they shouldn't like strawberry icecream anymore because it gives you brain freeze, makes you fat and exploits cows... Some people are still going to like strawberry icecream...

 

[ksp]

Creativity, invention, discovery, achievement.

What if a scientist just last night found a new renewable energy source?

thank you! i'm still having a problem (maybe i'm fixating on basic instincts):

all progress, creativity, discovery, achievements, etc - all result in:

- making life 'better' for self

• self comfort (environment)
• accumulation of wealth (money)
• health / reduction of pain and suffering
• personal success

all of the above results in encouragement to procreate (basic instinct)

i'm thinking about being on an tropical island (by myself - without a life partner), and enough food & water

what would keep me going? what would be a compelling reason to live?
my driving motivation to experience life, without interference from 'love', and prospect of children

(maybe i'm exaggerating…)

 

[Forever Sleep]

thank you! i'm having a problem (maybe i'm fixating on basic instincts):

all progress and creativity, discovery, achievements, etc - all result in:

- making life 'better' for self

• self comfort (environment)
• accumulation of wealth (money)
• health / reduction of pain and suffering
• personal success

all of the above results in encouragement to procreate (basic instinct)

i'm thinking about being on an island (by myself - without a life partner)

what would keep me going? what would be a compelling reason to live?
my driving motivation to experience life, without interference from 'love', and prospect of children

(maybe i'm exaggerating…)

I love your desert island thinking...

Ok- well- I'm creative. It's the one thing that has gotten me through this far... but I don't have children and don't intend to. I don't think our desire to create is necessarily linked with our desire to procreate. In fact- one quite often stands in for the other I find. Childless adults are quite often very fixated on their careers and achievements. (Which they may or may not find fulfilling.)

We sort of strive for achievement for self fulfilment but we also do it to impress others. What's the point of writing a beautiful piece of music unless people listen to it? I'd say the sense of fulfilment is diminished if the 'achievement' isn't shared but that also depends on the person. Some people are perfectly happy just creating for themselves.

I still don't think this has much to do with primal instincts though- or- procreation. It's one of the major things that separates us from the rest of the animal kingdom. Of course- animals DO create beautiful things but I suppose they have less time to do it! They spend so much time just surviving. We have invented all sorts of systems to make survival (for those of us lucky enough to be in first world countries) relatively easy. So- our mighty brain can devote itself to doing other things. Including becoming Artists, Engineers, Athletes or Philosophers studying Nihilism.

If you plonked just one of us on a dessert island- all that person's time I suspect would be spent on the basics of survival again. They may or may not enjoy this. Depends if they are Bear Grylls I suspect. (He's a British adventurer.) If they don't die within the first few days and manage to work out a survival plan- again- it depends on what that person is like... Do they like sunbathing? Swimming? If they have built a basic shelter- will they then start to embelish it with a garden and make decorations?

If it's just them- well- they'll die without procreating at some point. As to when and how- again- it will depend on the person... Some people WANT to live offgrid and will do anything to survive as long as possible. Others just won't and will likely die from writting HELP! in big letters on the sand and drinking sea water.

REALLY depends on the person. Some people want to survive, some don't. Some people enjoy life, some don't. Not sure it makes one more rational than the other. If someone hates the outdoors, hates physical labour, has no clue how to survive- they likely won't enjoy the desert island experience. That's rational. For an adventurer though- maybe they can think of nothing better- EVEN if they get bitten by a snake the third day in- they died doing what they love! You may not be able to convince ALL people that life is cruel and worthless by pointing out the horrible things if that person still has things they find worth in.

 

[FuneralCry]

It's simply not rational to support and glorify life. Through rational thinking one can come to the conclusion that to not exist is the objectively more beneficial option, as it's irrational to wish to suffer and to continue to exist in a world where there is no limit as to how much we can be tortured. For that reason continuing to stay alive is the ultimate risk and it makes sense to wish to not delay our inevitable fate.

I think that people place value on something so useless as life as after all, it's all that they know and they cannot comprehend what it's like to not exist, maybe the thought of death scares them and this is all irrationally linked to the instinct to survive. The reality is that life is just an insignificant cycle of meaningless and endless suffering that only exists as a consequence of evolution in the first place, it's something that would had been better off never existing at all. There was never a need for something so disturbing as life to exist but the tragedy lies in the fact that it does.

 

[ksp]

Ok- well- I'm creative

i know you are creative ! in fact your mind is overly creative - in most of your posts, you're touching 100+ creative subjects, lol (i don't know how you manage not not be overwhelmed )

this is why i really appreciate your input - my mind is extremely boring :)

so then, if we eliminate all reasons that cause suffering:
- deserted tropical island (similar to Hawaii - including beautiful mountains)
- all modern utilities (100 million dollar house, from glass - ultra comfortable)
- all food that you like, and crystalline waters
- no need to work - ever
- ability to publish all your creative work: literature, paintings, songs, etc, to billions (feedback)

you're saying that you'd be content to live 70+ years just creating art? (i envy you :)

 

[pthnrdnojvsc]

i know you are creative ! in fact your mind is overly creative - in most of your posts, you're touching 100+ creative subjects, lol (i don't know how you manage not not be overwhelmed )

this is why i really appreciate your input - my mind is extremely boring :)

so then, if we eliminate all reasons that cause suffering:
- deserted tropical island (similar to Hawaii - including beautiful mountains)
- all modern utilities (100 million dollar house, from glass)
- all food that you like, and crystalline waters
- no need to work - ever
- ability to publish all your creative work: literature, paintings, songs, etc, to billions

you're saying that you'd be content to live 70+ years just creating art? (i envy you :)

You can't eliminate all reasons that cause suffering. The Law of Entropy is the supreme law of the Universe. And there will always be boredom. Even with all that you could still get a stroke, or lewy body dementia like Robin williams had, cancer, alsheimers, maiming car accident, a 1000 other hells at any second.

Terry Semel yahoo ceo billionaire got alsheimers and was put in a nursing home and was seen crying with alshiemers.
They had millions of dollars. didn't Help them

The lifetime probability of cancer is around 40% and for stroke 25% . This is just 2 nightmares out of thousands that can happen to a human while alive . So the odds are something horrible is going to get almost every human especially in old age as dementia, alsheimers and lewy body dementia hit. Any day a human can have a maiming accident where part of the body like the face is cut off and remain alive as through a car accident. There are hundreds of such painful diseases, kidney stones, gall stones, tapeworm infection

80 years of boredom.Amazes me people want to and believe that a human animal can have afterlives and so live for trillions to the quadrillion power years , a small animal outliving the Sun , the Earth and heat death of the Universe

Former Yahoo CEO Terry Semel's Son Accuses Jane Semel of Abuse of Authority

Eric Semel files for temporary conservatorship, says Jane Semel has acted against his father's wishes in moving him to a care home

www.thewrap.com

Who hasn't suffered bad physical pain, disease, grief, accident, kidnapping, heart break or at least one of these? I think practically every human has. or will. Every day I and any human opts into life they risk extreme pain and torture. However after Death non-existence forever there is no chance of pain , suffering , diseases , old age , grief, kidnapping heartbreak, cancer , alshiemers , maiming car accident. and 1000's of other hells.

The lifetime probability of cancer is around 40% and for stroke 25% . This is just 2 nightmares out of thousands that can happen to a human while alive . So the odds are something horrible is going to get almost every human especially in old age as dementia, alheimers and lewy body dementa hit. Any day a human can have a maiming accident where part of the body like the face is cut off and remain alive as through a car accident. There are hundreds of such painful diseases, kidney stones, gall stones, tapeworm infection

No one can guarantee something horrible will not happen today to a human while alive. However if you believe death is non-existence forever then non-existence is a guarantee of never suffering pain nor disease , work , problems 5000 other things i hate about life

 

[ksp]

Through rational thinking one can come to the conclusion that to not exist is the objectively more beneficial option

unfortunately, i completely agree with you - i don't see any point in life

however, i'd be glad if other people would be content with the small pleasure offered by normal life (i fully respect personal autonomy)

but the fact is that not many people have have 100% health (mental and physical), so society should allow dignified and peaceful voluntary euthanasia

 

[Forever Sleep]

i know you are creative ! in fact your mind is overly creative - in most of your posts, you're touching 100+ creative subjects, lol (i don't know how you manage not not be overwhelmed )

this is why i really appreciate your input - my mind is extremely boring :)

so then, if we eliminate all reasons that cause suffering:
- deserted tropical island (similar to Hawaii - including beautiful mountains)
- all modern utilities (100 million dollar house, from glass)
- all food that you like, and crystalline waters
- no need to work - ever
- ability to publish all your creative work: literature, paintings, songs, etc, to billions

you're saying that you'd be content to live 70+ years just creating art? (i envy you :)

No, I don't think anyone's mind is boring- we just all think differently.

Hell- I'd even accept living where I am if I could create stuff that was used/published and not be utterly exploited all the time! Yes- that would I think be enough for me. It's got me through the past 32 years...

Stick me on a luxury island- even better! I barely saw anyone but delivery drivers the 3 years of covid. Yes, I reckon I could hack it. (I'm abnormal though! I developed this obsession as a coping mechanism to get through some unpleasant stuff in childhood.)

To be honest, most creative people I've come across are this obsessive too. We have to be really. It's a very hard thing to sustain. Chances are you won't earn the money to have a family- I've known people leave relationships to pursue this. A property is kind of unwise too because you'll likely have to travel freelance- I've known people couch hop with friends. Some jobs require 16 hour days (say goodbye to sleep.) Sounds like a nightmare doesn't it?!!

Yet- if you are able to create and express yourself- even a bit- people will do ALL that and more. It's a drive- it's difficult to explain but on the flipside- if you have it and can't be creative- you'll be utterly miserable!

 

[ksp]

You can't eliminate all reasons that cause suffering

i completely agree with you too - happiness is an impossibility; life and perceived 'happiness' is defined by suffering and pain

'The Law of Entropy is the supreme law of the Universe. And there will always be boredom'
^^^ - this - and absolutely !!!

Stick me on a luxury island- even better!

amazing - with all comforts in life, i wouldn't be able to tolerate too many years…

 

[Forever Sleep]

i completely agree with you too - happiness is an impossibility; life and perceived 'happiness' is defined by suffering and pain

amazing - with all comforts in life, i wouldn't be able to tolerate too many years…

Actually- this thread is really making me think- as your threads always do @ksp . Thanks for posting it...

Life is VERY likely to contain suffering- I agree with that 100%. So rationally:

1: It seems kinder to not have children in the first place- agreed.
2: People already here ought to be given access to assisted suicide when their lives have become intolerable- agreed.

So- that sorts out new life and people living lives that they don't want to. What about the people still living who DO want to keep living? (For whatever unfathomable reason.)

How are you going to stop them procreating? Try and enlighten them about all the terrible things that might happen to them and all the suffering they inflict on others? They likely already know about some of them. Yet- either their primitive instinct to breed coupled with their notion of love or simply that they HAVE enjoyed the majority of their lives may lead them to thinking creating a new life is a good idea. If they enjoy a good quality of life and desperately want children- why would it not be rational to THEM to have them?

I think we're going to have to wait a while longer for conditions here to be SO bad that EVERYONE suffers before people will start agreeing that ALL life is bad. We're selfish creatures. If our own needs are met, we don't care ENOUGH about other creatures to agree on mass extinction.

 

[ksp]

Life is VERY likely to contain suffering- I agree with that 100%. So rationally:

1: It seems kinder to not have children in the first place- agreed.
2: People already here ought to be given access to assisted suicide when their lives have become intolerable- agreed.

So- that sorts out new life and people living lives that they don't want to. What about the people still living who DO want to keep living? (For whatever unfathomable reason.)

so we are in complete agreement:

all governments should listen to us, and respect all individual autonomy:
- give all people access to nembutal (at least to all people on this site) and let them decide
- respect individual choices, without any judgment whatsoever
- let normal people live their own lives

i think this sounds more than reasonable

 

[Forever Sleep]

so we are in complete agreement:

all governments should listen to us, and respect all individual autonomy:
- give all people access to nembutal (at least to all people on this site) and let them decide
- respect individual choices, without any judgment whatsoever
- let normal people live their own lives

i think this sounds more than reasonable

Absolutely... I'll save you a place in the N queue if I get there first...

 

[Rainy_days]

First of all, it seems to me like you are kind fetishizing rationality. The process of reasoning you worship so much is a result of life, taught to you by other living people, in language created and refined by many living generations. It is kind of paradoxical to put such a premium on intelligence and rationality, all while using it to disparage the foundation it is built upon.

Also, why do you need to "support" either life or death exclusively? I see no rational reason why one must choose to justify either one. Death is going to occur regardless (just as surely as the "natural instincts" you disparage so much), so I think there is some irrationality in forcing it immediately, creating unnecessary social disturbance, rather than accepting it whenever it comes.

 

[ksp]

First of all, it seems to me like you are kind fetishizing rationality. The process of reasoning you worship so much is a result of life, taught to you by other living people, in language created and refined by many living generations. It is kind of paradoxical to put such a premium on intelligence and rationality, all while using it to disparage the foundation it is built upon.

Also, why do you need to "support" either life or death exclusively? I see no rational reason why one must choose to justify either one. Death is going to occur regardless (just as surely as the "natural instincts" you disparage so much), so I think there is some irrationality in forcing it immediately, creating unnecessary social disturbance, rather than accepting it whenever it comes.

i don't understand what you are saying

i'm not trying to be disrespectful, i simply don't understand your post

- are you saying life is rational?
- are you saying life is irrational?
- are you saying i shouldn't support life or death?
- are you saying that my thread is causing a 'social disturbance' (if so, i'm sorry you feel forced to reply)

please use simple concepts - i don't mind constructive criticism

i'm simply trying to evaluate my life, objectively
(and i'm encouraging others to do the same, others can ignore it - their choice)

 

[Rainy_days]

- are you saying life is rational?
- are you saying life is irrational?
- are you saying i shouldn't support life or death?
- are you saying that my thread is causing a 'social disturbance' (if so, i'm sorry you feel forced to reply)

It's possible my post doesn't make sense, my brain is pretty scrambled. But I will try to reword.

I think you are placing too high a value on rationality. It seems to me (I could be wrong) that you believe rational = good, irrational = bad. But we couldn't even achieve rationality without all the irrational processes that make it possible.

And yes, I don't think it makes sense to support life or death unconditionally. It is like saying one supports gravity or some other force of nature. They will happen regardless of what we think of them. And no I didn't mean your thread was a social disturbance, I was referring to committing suicide as opposed to dying in a natural manner.

Sorry if I come across as aggressive or contrarian. I am unhappy and post compulsively even though my thinking is unclear.

 

[ksp]

I think you are placing too high a value on rationality. It seems to me (I could be wrong) that you believe rational = good, irrational = bad. But we couldn't even achieve rationality without all the irrational processes that make it possible.

And yes, I don't think it makes sense to support life or death unconditionally. It is like saying one supports gravity or some other force of nature. They will happen regardless of what we think of them. And no I didn't mean your thread was a social disturbance, I was referring to committing suicide as opposed to dying in a natural manner.

thank for clarifying, and i respect your view

i just feel that i need to rationalize my existence (to myself), and maybe i'm overthinking it
this process works for me - it makes me calmer. obviously, it will not work for others the same way

ps. sorry for misunderstanding your initial post

 

[Rainy_days]

thank for clarifying, and i respect your view

i just feel that i need to rationalize my existence (to myself), and maybe i'm overthinking it
this process works for me - it makes me calmer. obviously, it will not work for others the same way

ps. sorry for misunderstanding your initial post

No worries, I think I may have misunderstood your post as well. Using rationality to try and achieve calmness makes sense.

 

[artificial_ineptness]

I think the boring and unsatisfying answer is that it's complicated and you might as well get no answer that "makes sense" to you (well, outside people agreeing with you). As I see it you're saying:
A. If something is based on an instinct, it is irrational. If not, it's rational.
B. Staying alive is based on an instinct (to reproduce, more specifically).
C. There exist reasons to ctb that aren't based on an instinct.

A + B + C, therefore wanting to be alive is always irrational, and wanting to die is sometimes rational.

The structure of the argument seems okay, but all of the premises don't come off as some fundamental truths of reality that most people would agree with (even only considering somewhat reasonable / intelligent ones) / that couldn't be argued against.

When I think about the rationality of suicide, I think of it in terms of ethics. I assume that I could interpret your rational reasons for suicide as an ethical statement, but if not, and it is somehow "pure reason", then I don't think I can really engage with you (or I just don't care to).

About "pure reason": Ever read Kant (or about deontology)? I think that could be more of your way of looking at the world, although, fyi, Kant argued that suicide is always bad (irrational?), so I guess he had an answer to your question.

 

[ksp]

A. If something is based on an instinct, it is irrational. If not, it's rational.
B. Staying alive is based on an instinct (to reproduce, more specifically).
C. There exist reasons to ctb that aren't based on an instinct.

A + B + C, therefore wanting to be alive is always irrational, and wanting to die is sometimes rational.

thank you ! yes, this is the essence of the original post

you made it cleaner even for me - i'm having communication problems, and my recovery is very slow

for example, i read multiple times this part, and i'm still having problems:

but all of the premises don't come off as some fundamental truths of reality that most people would agree with (even only considering somewhat reasonable / intelligent ones) / that couldn't be argued against.

i'm not criticizing your phrasing - my comprehension is the main problem - but i find the logic too convoluted

'fundamental truths' - i was interested in arguments against my logic - what are the fundamental thruths that support life in a rational way? i'm afraid i'm too fixated on instinct: 'If something is based on an instinct, it is irrational. If not, it's rational.'

yes: i think life is based only on instinct, and the reason to support life is not rational

---

about death:

everyone on this website has very rational and intelligent reasons to stop their suffering
everyone here put in the effort to make an account, and is looking for support to their reasoning
(other people are too impulsive to care about their reasoning - this is why there are so many failed attempts)

they go about ending their lives in a very rational and deliberated way - put o lot of thought into it, and is understandable why

so, why is my logic invalid: how is life supported by reason (as opposed to just basic instinct)

Kant argued that suicide is always bad (irrational?)

i would like to read more about it, just because i would come up with very solid rebuttals

but i have to limit myself to very simple and straightforward logic (i'm trying to push myself, but i have to make small steps and exercises - and all this effort is needed just to end my life in a dignified way)

and again, thank you for the input - it helps me

 

[my-end]

Life is not created from reasoning and perhaps the natural antithesis to intentionally end life is to reason.

There are likely no beautiful lives who wish to end themselves.
I believe there are beautiful lives; lives of happy childhoods, successful personal development brought about by intelligent, loving parents, extended families, and community. There are lives full of talent, intelligence and wisdom that have no regard of dying because there is no pain.

There are lives full of pain who continue to suffer; lacking sufficient reason or sufficient pain to intentionally end themselves. If it were not for pain, or the thought of something they'd be unable to live with, would anyone choose death?

If one were in the middle, so to speak, without cause to not live any further and little to experience in the way of a beautiful life, imo it would be even more difficult to end it. Although just going through the motions without any impulse to enjoy life could eventually be enough. This person's likely only logical path is to gather and embrace experiences. Selfish experiences and unselfish experiences alike. Would this person simply do nothing to bring a smile to her/his or another's face?

 

[ksp]

Life is not created from reasoning and perhaps the natural antithesis to intentionally end life is to reason.

i like your post (don't understand it fully) but it shows you to be open minded about it:

'There are likely no beautiful lives who wish to end themselves.'

i believe that there are no beautiful lives: suffering is the only motivation to live and improve to perpetuate
if your life is pure bliss - you'd simply die (no reason to strive, no reason to exist)

'lives of happy childhoods, successful personal development brought about by intelligent, loving parents, extended families, and community. There are lives full of talent, intelligence and wisdom'

perception of 'happiness' is dictated by the amount of suffering - the greater the suffering, the greater the happiness is (overcoming the misery)

also: 'intelligent, loving parents, extended families, and community' and 'talent, intelligence and wisdom'
life is pure lottery / luck: there are extremely intelligent people with great capacity to improve billions of live, but had the bad luck to not have the optimal conditions, so their lives are unsustainable (tortured souls)
i hate life and human condition

'There are lives full of pain who continue to suffer; lacking sufficient reason or sufficient pain to intentionally end themselves. If it were not for pain, or the thought of something they'd be unable to live with, would anyone choose death?'

yes, life is imposed on people by instincts, and more specifically survival instinct
'If it were not for pain' - that my main question: why would someone in paradise would choose to live - reason to exist, without the natural instincts

without cause to not live any further and little to experience in the way of a beautiful life, imo it would be even more difficult to end it.

survival instinct

This person's likely only logical path is to gather and embrace experiences.

not sure i understand this (why?)

thank you for the input !

 

[artificial_ineptness]

i'm having communication problems, and my recovery is very slow

I'm sorry to hear. I don't have an issue with the way you communicate, I just wanted to clarify.

i'm trying to push myself, but i have to make small steps and exercises - and all this effort is needed just to end my life in a dignified way

Are you planning on using this reasoning to explain your decision to someone? Not judging or anything, but since you brought it up I guess it could help to know where you're going with this. Or did you just mean in general about planning etc.?

i'm not criticizing your phrasing - my comprehension is the main problem - but i find the logic too convoluted

My main hold-up is that I am not sure how to approach this or how to best get into your point of view, so, yeah, sorry, in that sense I haven't really answered your question. My point there was that those premises didn't seem obviously true to me, and that I could argue against them. If they're not true, then the final statement isn't true, and that either both living and dying is irrational, both can be rational etc. or at the very least we have to admit that we don't really know.

I just see the rationality of suicide quite differently. To me, rationality in ethical subjects is more about having a system of what is good (pleasure, enjoyment, desire fulfillment) or bad (pain, suffering) and then being rational is doing things that get you good outcomes. So, if someone knows their life will have more good things than bad, then it seems rational to live on, if there is more bad - then maybe not. That is the most direct (although oversimplified) way I can answer why I think living can be rational.

Here are some explicit issues I have with your reasoning, if that's useful:

Spoiler: some issues

For example, I'll take that A and B are true, and the way you go about B is something like: "all of these perceived good things were just evolutionary adaptations. They are there to ensure survival and reproduction". But then:
1. Wouldn't rationality itself be based on instinct? Where else does it come from if not as an evolutionary adaptation (that also seems to be pretty beneficial for survival). Is rationality irrational then?
2. In my eyes, pretty much everything we experience could be explained that way, and this would include many of the issues people have. Isn't pain, loneliness, and the ability to feel other kinds of suffering also adaptations? If we strip out these things, what even is left? Are the reasons people want to die detached from all of this?

What I'm saying is, in short, that it's hard for me to see B and C both true at the same time, because the positives and negatives seem to be treated differently and I don't really know why.

I also think sentient beings have some agency, which would go contrary to a belief that we only do things and value things because of instinct.

If you think that people on SaSu are rational and their reasoning to die is sound, then what about the members that changed their mind and decided to live? At least some must have rationally reasoned about it, no? Or do you think it is always about succumbing to our survival instinct?

I can't really think of much else right now and I'm feeling tired and unsure how to fully be on the same page as you. Might try to elaborate more tomorrow.

 

[ksp]

very constructive discussion! (i'm exhausted - a lot of mental effort)

Are you planning on using this reasoning to explain your decision to someone? Not judging or anything, but since you brought it up I guess it could help to know where you're going with this. Or did you just mean in general about planning etc.?

i'm only looking for different perspectives (i reserve the right to judge myself)
so my reasoning is to myself - i have come to terms with my own death:
my life wasn't worth the effort - my existence didn't have a purpose, just suffering without any benefits

To me, rationality in ethical subjects is more about having a system

i have a problem with ethics and morality; i prefer philosophy and metaphysics
but i understand your point, and thanks for keeping it simpler !

you make a lot of very good points (too tired to address them all)
but this in particular stands out to me:

Is rationality irrational then?

you made me think !

i'll go over more details in your post later, but your views are very intriguing !

 

[my-end]

No worries, I think I may have misunderstood your post as well. Using rationality to try and achieve calmness makes sense.

I agree w your original response. My initial take is ksp is perhaps overly analytical. I like what you said about valuing rationality despite all of the irrational processes it's built on (or something like that). Only through wrong decisions can we come to the right conclusion.

 

[CTB Dream]

Life absurdi see all scince math logic say that. This not mention suffer philosoph etc
only prob need peace method,life tell you truth all lie all flow nonsense see injury damage know