Suicide and Unconditional Love

[notofthisworld]

If our loved ones and friends TRULY loved and cared about us unconditionally, why couldn't they just let us go if we wanted to leave this world? Thoughts?

 

[R. A.]

1) Unconditional love ≠ accepting all of another's desires.
2) Most love is, in truth, not unconditional.

 

[jodes2]

Part selfishness, part unable to see that it's the lesser of two evils for the person

 

[FuneralCry]

Because after all, people are incredibly selfish and they don't want to lose someone that they know to suicide as it would have a negative impact on their lives and there is also this view in society that life must be prolonged at all costs. Many people are unable to accept suicide as being a rational option as it scares them the thought of someone voluntarily choosing death over life, as it shatters their view of the world.

Other people cannot see life from our point of view as well, if they were in the same situation and are able to experience life the same way as us then I believe that they would be accepting of the decision to ctb. But after all grief and loss are simply inevitable in life and if someone wishes to leave this life behind then their decision should be respected.

 

[Pluto]

Yes, they should let us go and certainly shouldn't make it all about themselves. The only complexity is that some people are suicidal out of frustration with a situation, therefore their highest desire is getting help with overcoming a challenge. In other cases, the desire is to be supported in an end-of-life choice.

 

[notofthisworld]

Because after all, people are incredibly selfish and they don't want to lose someone that they know to suicide as it would have a negative impact on their lives and there is also this view in society that life must be prolonged at all costs. Many people are unable to accept suicide as being a rational option as it scares them the thought of someone voluntarily choosing death over life, as it shatters their view of the world.

Other people cannot see life from our point of view as well, if they were in the same situation and are able to experience life the same way as us then I believe that they would be accepting of the decision to ctb. But after all grief and loss are simply inevitable in life and if someone wishes to leave this life behind then their decision should be respected.

It seems that burning all your bridges would be the only way to solve this problem. After all, we could say to our "loved ones" that they may appear to love us and we acknowledge this fact, but we cannot "love" them back the same way because we simply cannot feel it (anymore). This is pretty much what depression does to our mind anyway, profound disconnection. In their mind it may mean that we "don't love them anymore" and they get hurt and angry with us. Self-centered? Right. That statement alone induces apathy in them, and maybe clear the way from them trying to stop us (short of faceless MDs and police force who claim altruism, when I believe they have better things to do with their time). What do you think? Easier said than done?

 

[Yuri Yurovich]

If our loved ones and friends TRULY loved and cared about us unconditionally, why couldn't they just let us go if we wanted to leave this world? Thoughts?

I see that Rounded Apathy replied, saying unconditional love is not accepting all of another's desires. I guess that might be true, but the trouble is, I am not sure I know what is meant by unconditional love (i.e. what is meant by those who think it is a good idea). Really, I'm not sure that anyone thinks through what this means well enough.

Here's the problem I see: there are multiple values that any individual might pursue in life. Justice, Truth, Meaning, Beauty and such all stand as candidates. But these can conflict with each other---I might pursue Truth but at the expense of others' feelings or my own sense of meaning (when the truth is nothing I do will ever matter in the long run). I might pursue Beauty but at the cost of Truth when I find I have to hide ugliness from myself and others.

But if we say love is unconditional, we seem to say that when love comes into conflict with any other value, love has to win. If our love is unconditional but comes into conflict with justice, we must ignore or evade justice and pursue love (e.g. you know your loved one is guilty of murder, but choose to not report them to the police). But now the question becomes, how would that be good? Would unconditional love be worth the sacrifice of any other value? If I love my friend unconditionally does that mean I shouldn't tell them their spouse/partner is cheating on them (Love vs. Truth)? If unconditional love is good, should I love someone who is unjust, to the extent even of loving their unjust acts?

There are typically two responses here: 1) "It only looks like there are conflicts between all the highest values--understood properly, Justice, Truth, Meaning, Beauty and Unconditional Love are really all in harmony with each other." This sounds good, but we would need to examine every possible conflict to see how this could be. This is Plato's claim--but I've never found anyone who can understand values properly enough to resolve all possible conflicts. Personally, I suspect that this involves so much fudging (arbitrariness) that in the end we don't know what any of these values actually implies.

The other response: 2) we qualify what unconditional love means by explaining that it doesn't require you to do this or that. This seems to be Rounded Apathy's approach: you don't have to accept all of another's desires. OK, that is what I am suggesting is needed: an understanding of what is and is not involved in unconditional love. But I get hung up on the "unconditional" part: if I love you unconditionally, why don't I have to love all of you, including all of your desires? Think how you'd feel if your partner said "Honey, I love you unconditionally, but you really have to lose weight: you don't look hot enough." Do they love you unconditionally or not? If they do, why don't they have to love your lack of hotness? How is that a qualification that is compatible with unconditional love? The problem I'm trying to point out is that this second response actually adds conditions to your love but without calling them that. As we subtract each thing you don't have to do to love unconditionally, eventually we end up with an idea empty of content.

This is similar to when it is claimed that God's love is unconditional, but then there is a long list of thoughts, feelings and actions that are called 'sins'? If a sin is something God hates, then a sin is a condition on God's love. They will turn around and tell you that God's love is so unconditional that he still loves you when he send you to hell for your sins, but this is obviously 'talking out of both sides of your mouth', if you are familiar with that expression. (aka bullshit)

Sorry for so much windbagging! Blame philosophy! but if you really loved me, you'd love my philosophy too ...