Discussion What do you think are the STRONGEST arguments AGAINST suicide?

[Alexei_Kirillov]

Here on the forum, there's no shortage of discussion about all the reasons why CTB is sometimes/always a valid choice, nor any lack of (justified) griping about all the weak arguments pro-lifers trot out. So I'd like to propose a different kind of thought experiment, where we ask ourselves what the strongest, or most compelling, anti-suicide arguments are, mainly inspired by atheist YouTubers who have been putting out tier lists of theist arguments [1,2]. Doesn't mean you have to be convinced of it, just that you think the point has merit.

(As an aside, in general I think it's crucial for pro-choice advocates to have a very refined understanding of what the "other side" thinks, to the point where you should be able to make the pro-life case better than even they can.)

I'll start: to me the most compelling is what I would call the "argument from irreplaceability." Factually speaking, every single human being is a unique organism -- there has never existed and will never exist another person out there with your exact genetic makeup, physical appearance, upbringing, life experiences, neural configuration, etc. By killing yourself prematurely, the argument would go, you have therefore irrevocably destroyed the only copy of something in existence, thereby impoverishing the world just that bit more; rarity confers greater value. Ultimately this is not enough to convince me for various reasons, but I definitely think it's one of the better arguments, maybe A-tier in tier list jargon.

What about you guys, which anti-suicide arguments speak to you most? (Btw if your answer is "None," don't bother commenting; this is intended to be a good-faith, philosophical discussion).

@derpyderpins would love to know your answer

 

[derpyderpins]

So, for the FCs or other [redacted] "NEET or rope" crowd who argue that everyone should suicide for one reason or another - be it life is an abomination or because living is helping the "system" or because you're just too stupid to know how miserable you're supposed to be - the best argument imo is simple and pretty boring:

It's a personal choice, if someone prefers life they should do what they prefer with their own body. Individuals have autonomy.​

It's gotten weird to me how much people dismiss others' experiences considering we're a pro autonomy suicide website that complains people won't let us have our own view of things. The reaction to that should not be to call everyone who is not on your side worthless and stupid and weak , etc., etc.

However, I'm sure what you mean is if I'm talking to someone considering suicide and they ask me to basically make my best good-faith argument to talk them out of it. So I'll walk through that:

1.) I'm throwing out all religion and reincarnation, etc., so let's not worry about that. Assume after death there is just nonexistence. If you believe in religion I shouldn't need to make an argument because you should do whatever your religion tells you will get you into the Good Place because that is for eternity, which dwarfs our puny human existence.

2.) Similarly, I'm not making any arguments about the good of the world. I don't want people staying alive just for others. This is just why life can be good for you personally.

3.) You've only got one life, which is temporary and fleeting. "For how you live and high you fly, smiles you'll give and tears you'll cry, all you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be."
​

a.) If you are capable of feeling any good, any connection, any warmth, enjoyment, interest, curiosity, amusement, anticipation, love, or even bittersweet feelings like nostalgia, longing, lovesickness, hopes and dreams, this is your one chance. This life is yours. Your conciousness, thoughts, and inner monologue are the only thing that will ever be yours and give you identity.​

​

b.) Like the good things, pain is also temporary. We all die someday.
​

Think about anything you've ever made. A fingerpainting when you were young. A class science project. A Rollercoaster Tycoon park. A minecraft . . . mine, or whatever. A song. A term paper. Seriously, anything. And when you're done making it, you look at it and you just get this feeling that is hard to put into words. Not pride, necessarily: you could be aware that others did much better than you. Something more like familiarity: "this is mine. It's an expression of me."

Your life is that fingerpainting times 30,000 days. It's something that you can look at even if it's ugly in some spots, and you can see where you mixed up colors, and once you're done you have all these ideas of what you should have done . . . but it's still yours. You made it. It's not going to stand the test of time. In fact, it's going to get thrown in the trash at some point. But . . . isn't it kinda nice that you made it? Do you think you'd prefer making it and seeing how it turns out even if it's a hard process? That's where I am.

4.) Most people are able to be happy/satisfied with life. That means you theoretically could be, too, under some circumstances. Again, though, if you CTB you won't get to try any more approaches to improving your life satisfaction. There are no second chances. This is typically my main argument for younger people who have not experienced parts of life: never been out of high school, college, mom's house/financial thumb, etc. But, there are people who don't figure things out until much later in life, so it is always worth considering.
​

That's really it. For me, love, independence, and curiosity keep me around. Also, I'm glad I looked at this because I didn't get pinged.

 

[abe]

Very interesting topic. For me, the idea that suicidal ideations being a curse of societal advancement—something you really didn't have time to consider during hunter-gatherer eras—is crucial in establishing the fact that compared to our ancestors, most of us have a substantial amount of free time, which we can then use for ruminations and soul-searching.

I hope you would agree with me in being against impulsivity in committing suicide, and that to make a rational decision, you would first need to be well-informed. The question now would be, how do you know you are not being impulsive? Well, if you suspect your suicidality to be sourced by a 'corruption' in your mind, perhaps from some sort of trauma, then the first step to becoming well-informed would be to understand it and study the psychological/physiological theories behind it.

The second step would be trying your best to gather forms of counter-arguments (why you shouldn't kill yourself), because one can only be sure of their conclusions after extensive critical evaluations. Most would point you to philosophical readings, which is more than fair, as from my experience, discussions of suicide with friends and family are often quite disenchanting. I must also add that by creating this very thread, you have already taken part in this pursuit of rationality.

The problem here is that I think there is simply too much reading to do. It would take magnitudes more than a lifetime to understand both yourself and challenge the views you disagree with even if you read every day. Of course, not everyone is physically well and privileged, and most of your deductive premises on why living is worse than dying would be purely idiosyncratic (that is, you always should have the right to die because I really can't know exactly how you feel). But if there is a semblance of truth in what I have just written, wouldn't it suggest that for the average urban dweller (who is probably somewhat physically healthy, depressed, and has a meaningful amount of free time) living in an average location, they will never in their lifetime reach a rational conclusion on why they are not being impulsive, and thus never a rational argument for suicide?

Other than that, I think if you are going to die anyway, why don't you live for another while and do some crazy shit? Assuming you are living in an environment where dying is possible, and you have been on this website thus educated on the methods of dying, you can always do it tomorrow, and that's how I have coped :)

 

[UnluckyBastard]

Against it? Probably the possibility of pain and fucking up whatever method you're trying to do. I don't want to be a on life support if I fail.

 

[LifeQuitter]

Your life could become worse as result of failed attempt.

 

[Dr Iron Arc]

It boils down to the Diamond miner meme. For many of the people who've committed suicide they probably really could have died right before something really good was about to happen for them or at least right before some light of hope could have surfaced.



Technically though you can argue against this philosophy by pointing out it's the same mentality as one with a gambling addiction would have but it's still the best argument I got.

 

[Alexei_Kirillov]

You've only got one life, which is temporary and fleeting. "For how you live and high you fly, smiles you'll give and tears you'll cry, all you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be."

​

a.) If you are capable of feeling any good, any connection, any warmth, enjoyment, interest, curiosity, amusement, anticipation, love, or even bittersweet feelings like nostalgia, longing, lovesickness, hopes and dreams, this is your one chance. This life is yours. Your conciousness, thoughts, and inner monologue are the only thing that will ever be yours and give you identity.​

​

b.) Like the good things, pain is also temporary. We all die someday.
​

Think about anything you've ever made. A fingerpainting when you were young. A class science project. A Rollercoaster Tycoon park. A minecraft . . . mine, or whatever. A song. A term paper. Seriously, anything. And when you're done making it, you look at it and you just get this feeling that is hard to put into words. Not pride, necessarily: you could be aware that others did much better than you. Something more like familiarity: "this is mine. It's an expression of me."

Your life is that fingerpainting times 30,000 days. It's something that you can look at even if it's ugly in some spots, and you can see where you mixed up colors, and once you're done you have all these ideas of what you should have done . . . but it's still yours. You made it. It's not going to stand the test of time. In fact, it's going to get thrown in the trash at some point. But . . . isn't it kinda nice that you made it? Do you think you'd prefer making it and seeing how it turns out even if it's a hard process? That's where I am.

4.) Most people are able to be happy/satisfied with life. That means you theoretically could be, too, under some circumstances. Again, though, if you CTB you won't get to try any more approaches to improving your life satisfaction. There are no second chances. This is typically my main argument for younger people who have not experienced parts of life: never been out of high school, college, mom's house/financial thumb, etc. But, there are people who don't figure things out until much later in life, so it is always worth considering.
​

That's really it. For me, love, independence, and curiosity keep me around. Also, I'm glad I looked at this because I didn't get pinged.

Looks like I tagged the right person (without actually apparently tagging you correctly lol)! Thanks for engaging.

If I continue with the tier ranking theme, for me personally I'd put this argument, which I'll call the "experiential argument" in C-tier. I can see how others find it compelling though.

I hope you would agree with me in being against impulsivity in committing suicide, and that to make a rational decision, you would first need to be well-informed. The question now would be, how do you know you are not being impulsive? Well, if you suspect your suicidality to be sourced by a 'corruption' in your mind, perhaps from some sort of trauma, then the first step to becoming well-informed would be to understand it and study the psychological/physiological theories behind it.

I would break this down into two similar, but separate, arguments:
1) you are unable to clearly evaluate your situation and make an informed decision about whether or not to kill yourself because your mind is "corrupted" or "sick"
2) you are unable to clearly evaluate your situation and make an informed decision about whether or not to kill yourself because you are not knowledgeable enough

I'd place both in B-tier. As you pointed out, both arguments have some definitional problems, ie. how do we establish whether someone is "sick" or "ignorant"? Where is the line between functionality and dysfunctionality, sickness and health, ignorance and knowledge and further, expertise?

It boils down to the Diamond miner meme. For many of the people who've committed suicide they probably really could have died right before something really good was about to happen for them or at least right before some light of hope could have surfaced.

Technically though you can argue against this philosophy by pointing out it's the same mentality as one with a gambling addiction would have but it's still the best argument I got.

Hadn't heard of that "diamond miner" concept, it's a good way of visualizing hope. But ultimately I think this is just another version of the experiential argument (although you could debate that).

 

[HarryCobean]

Best argument against suicide? Don't kill yourself and we'll give you a guaranteed hundred grand a year for life.

 

[Forever Sleep]

For me, it's the affect it has on other people. I hear the argument here that suicide is just like any other death- so- what's the big deal when we die? I don't think that's true though. You only have to look at the responses of people left behind. They're not only devastated but they can also be guilt ridden and even angry.

That's not to lay all the blame on either the act itself or the person though. Part of the reason it likely causes so much devastation may be because of the way it's seen- or rather- not seen. It's simply this forbidden thing- even to talk about, so- it comes out the blue and no one knows how to deal with it.

If we could at least discuss it openly, perhaps people would be more prepared and start to see it from the point of view of someone who is suicidal and sees no other way out. Ideally, it would be best I imagine, if our loved ones were able to accept our decision before we did it.

As for all the other reasons- that's going to depend on how much you value life and the human race as a whole. Beyond the emotional connections described above, I have very mixed feelings. Sure, humans have accomplished incredible things. Sure, life can feel valuable to some people.

Still- most of what we achieve is to either further the human race or try and exercise damage control on stuff we've already destroyed. Taken as a whole, I don't think we've been very beneficial to all the other unfortunate creatures that have to share this world with us. I'm not at all keen on our species so, I don't have so much of a feeling that we all need to stay and contribute our unique qualities to the world. Unless we want to- of course.

Plus- suicidal people I imagine already aren't living up to their full potential. They may not particularly want to participate even. So- what kind of life will they be living if they are forced to stay?

As for life itself having value. I imagine that idea often comes from religion so- that's going to hinge on personal beliefs. I believe our lives need protecting- as in- I don't support murder or genocide! (Obviously.) But... from ourselves? No- I think we should have the right to choose- so long as we can demonstrate that we understand the choice. Personally, I think choice is our most important gift. It's what gives us freedom.

 

[derpyderpins]

Looks like I tagged the right person (without actually apparently tagging you correctly lol)! Thanks for engaging.

If I continue with the tier ranking theme, for me personally I'd put this argument, which I'll call the "experiential argument" in C-tier. I can see how others find it compelling though.

No problem. Love the devil's advocate discussions.

Yeah, that's fair. It's an argument directed at people who have heard all the common ones. I guess it's my best impersonation of Camus' "I could commit suicide or get a cup of coffee." I've never quite been able to connect with him on that but I do find it interesting.

 

[Alexei_Kirillov]

No problem. Love the devil's advocate discussions.

Yeah, that's fair. It's an argument directed at people who have heard all the common ones. I guess it's my best impersonation of Camus' "I could commit suicide or get a cup of coffee." I've never quite been able to connect with him on that but I do find it interesting.

True, it can definitely work in a certain context. There was a time in my own life where I wasn't quite ready to CTB yet but I still struggled with suicidal urges, and I found Camus' reasoning in The Myth of Sisyphus--the whole "should I CTB or have a cup of coffee" thing--to be surprisingly helpful. The same argument is uncompelling to me now not necessarily because it's weak or poorly formed, but because I'm in a very different context, where I actually am ready to CTB and "end my storybook," as I like to put it, and so the threshold for justifying keeping me around longer is way higher.

 

[derpyderpins]

True, it can definitely work in a certain context. There was a time in my own life where I wasn't quite ready to CTB yet but I still struggled with suicidal urges, and I found Camus' reasoning in The Myth of Sisyphus--the whole "should I CTB or have a cup of coffee" thing--to be surprisingly helpful. The same argument is uncompelling to me now not necessarily because it's weak or poorly formed, but because I'm in a very different context, where I actually am ready to CTB and "end my storybook," as I like to put it, and so the threshold for justifying keeping me around longer is way higher.

Perfectly reasonable, and why I remain in favor of suicidal choice despite trying to spread some positivity.

You thought, "should I CTB or have a cup of coffee," and then you had a cup of coffee. Now what? If you feel a sense of completeness about life it's your call when to end it imo.

 

[Alexei_Kirillov]

For me, it's the affect it has on other people. I hear the argument here that suicide is just like any other death- so- what's the big deal when we die? I don't think that's true though. You only have to look at the responses of people left behind. They're not only devastated but they can also be guilt ridden and even angry.

That's not to lay all the blame on either the act itself or the person though. Part of the reason it likely causes so much devastation may be because of the way it's seen- or rather- not seen. It's simply this forbidden thing- even to talk about, so- it comes out the blue and no one knows how to deal with it.

If we could at least discuss it openly, perhaps people would be more prepared and start to see it from the point of view of someone who is suicidal and sees no other way out. Ideally, it would be best I imagine, if our loved ones were able to accept our decision before we did it.

This one's interesting because I think its strength is the most variable of all the arguments I've seen; it depends on your specific social circumstances at that specific moment in time. For someone who's in a loving, functional 10-year marriage, it'd easily be S-tier, but for someone who's completely isolated and who comes from an abusive family, it probably couldn't even make them budge.

I think you're right that suicide is indeed a different beast than "natural death," and this effect shouldn't be minimized. But I also agree that much of the grief could be lessened if we were able to openly discuss suicide as a viable option. As is, suicidal people feel the need to operate in total secrecy, which means they aren't able to have a dignified, proper send-off that would ultimately ease the pain of both parties involved.

 

[wCvML2]

Kant argued that anytime we treat anyone as a means rather than an end is morally wrong, and in suicide we treat ourselves, our death, as the means for an end of achieving non existence. In suicide we are never the end because we don't experience peace when we die, we stop experiencing entirely. I came across this argument a while ago but I'm not sure if it's really applicable to suicide (this is my own interpretation)

this argument can be read here
and also as quoted :

Kant's first formulation of the categorical imperative describes it in terms of the very form of universal law itself. This formal account abstracts from any specific content that the moral law might have for living, breathing human beings. Kant offers a second formulation to address the material side of the moral law. Since the moral law has to do with actions, and all actions are by definition teleological (that is, goal-directed), a material formulation of the categorical imperative will require an appeal to the "ends" of human activity. Some ends are merely instrumental, that is, they are sought only because they serve as "means" towards further ends. Kant argues that the moral law must be aimed at an end that is not merely instrumental, but is rather an end in itself. Only rational agents, according to Kant, are ends in themselves. To act morally is thus to respect rational agents as ends in themselves. Accordingly, the categorical imperative can be reformulated as follows: "So act that you use humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, always at the same time as an end, never merely as a means" (4:429). The basic idea here is that it is immoral to treat someone as a thing of merely instrumental value; persons have an intrinsic (non-instrumental) value, and the moral law demands that we respect this intrinsic value. To return to the example of the previous paragraphs, it would be wrong to lie about an adulterous liaison because by withholding the truth one is manipulating the other person to make things easier for oneself; this sort of manipulation, however, amounts to treating the other as a thing (as a mere means to the comfort of not getting in trouble), and not as a person deserving of respect and entitled to the truth.

Kant believed that any self-harm act is immoral. Though I think by his standards non-consensual suicide prevention is also immoral.

 

[kinderbueno]

Everyone has potential to succeed and live a good life even if they don't believe it - this is the only argument against suicide I can think of

 

[untothedepths]

Forgive me if I'm not really answering this as I should, I've been really dull minded lately, but I think the best argument against suicide is probably if we had a globalized effort to make lives better across the board. It's more or less "getting rid of all the reasons people feel like they want to commit suicide" so we can see it happen less. I know this is still not answering the question nearly as directly, but how I see the world now...if society asks the world to live in such straits with the only response being "Just deal with it." (wars, famine, sexual assaults, greed. corruption, lack of actual good mental health...to name a few) then in retrospect the arguments for existing are on a highly individualistic basis. I still believe personally in pro-choice of ending one's own life should they choose, but it's also extremely hard to argue for appealing for existence as it is now. The best I believe people can do to support an argument against suicide is actually doing everything you can to make this life worth living for as many people as you can.

 

[amaluuk]

Ironically, I think a compelling argument against suicide can be found on this site in the way people interact with it. Go to the suicide board and you'll find a lot of posts from people procrastinating or otherwise putting off suicide, even if and arguably especially when they have access to means with decent or outright good odds of success. It's not just nervousness about it working, it's a lot of deliberate pushing that really suggests a desire to live that isn't just the unconscious SI, but an active psychological contradiction to the supposed rational and reasonable desire to commit suicide. Just now I responded to the post of somebody who is deliberately depriving themselves of sleep in order to build up the nerve, and obviously this is no mark against them or disrespect or anything like that, but it does make you wonder how many people genuinely want to go through with it even in open and non-judgemental environments.

It is amusing this site has built up an unholy reputation as some kind of evil den where minors are encouraged to CTB when the vast majority of posts even on the actual suicide board are basically this:

That said, I'm still firmly pro-choice at the end of the day and believe that simply put the magnitude of a choice like suicide is obviously going to cause some cold feet, but that doesn't invalidate people's right to choose. I also still vehemently hate suicide prevention "advocates" with a passion, and would like to give everyone their daily reminder to beat a suicide preventionist until they cry blood, and then beat them some more. They really can't suffer enough.

 

[astr4]

if i were to argue against all suicide, i would say it's a cop-out and that instead of giving up we should be trying to create the kind of world we want to live in.

i wouldn't necessarily call myself a "neet or roper" but i would consider myself closely aligned with that school of thought, ha. i think there's a third option there that no one considers, revolution, but i kind of think it's a distant hope for future generations who finally refuse to sell a kidney to feed their children for example.

for the sake of the thought experiment, though, if you're willing to die anyways, why not die fighting for something meaningful? get yourself arrested over direct action? and then you can not only die, your death makes a difference in the world. two birds, one stone.

 

[ijustwishtodie]

I think that the best argument against suicide is the risk involved in a suicide attempt and how failing a suicide attempt could lead to permanent injuries as well as a worse quality of life

 

[Throwawayacc3]

If you have a dog, cat, ferret, lizard, parrot, etc. Because they aren't complete fuck heads like people.

 

[sserafim]

If you have a dog, cat, ferret, lizard, parrot, etc. Because they aren't complete fuck heads like people.

I have a cute and chubby dog (although I'm a cat person). He's a beagle boy. Dogs are much better than people

 

[Throwawayacc3]

I have a cute dog (although I'm a cat person)

That creature isn't going to belittle you, gas light you, abuse you, blame you, nothing. They'll be next to you if you are fukcikg dying in bed from an illness or don't have money or anything. A lot of problems here seem to be from other people. 98% of those problems vanish if you start being or working with animals.

 

[Alexei_Kirillov]

Thanks for all your responses guys, this was fun. I condensed some of these arguments into a tier list and ranked them based on how compelling they are to me PERSONALLY:


Feel free to comment on which of my rankings you agree or disagree with (if you can read it; the font is a little small lol, my bad).

@kaizenmaster tagging you in case you're interested in a "devil's advocate" thread like this :)

 

[Terry A. Davis]

my argument is that you will be dead at one point anyway and death, as far as we know, will last a long long time. Being on the earth only lasts a short while by comparison.

 

[imissmycat]

Depends on each person, their feelings and reasons for wanting to die. If you have strong urges to kill yourself right now, the only argument I can think of is "why not wait until tomorrow?", and it's a good argument.

 

[Lady Laudanum]

This is probably specific to my situation but the only way you could convince me to never CTB is to prove that my parents genuinely want me to be dead. I hate my parents enough that if I have strong enough evidence that they want me to die, I'll keep living out of spite for them.

 

[ijustwishtodie]

Thanks for all your responses guys, this was fun. I condensed some of these arguments into a tier list and ranked them based on how compelling they are to me PERSONALLY:

View attachment 145790
Feel free to comment on which of my rankings you agree or disagree with (if you can read it; the font is a little small lol, my bad).

@kaizenmaster tagging you in case you're interested in a "devil's advocate" thread like this :)

This is only my opinion but I'd put the argument of permanence in F tier. That's because of the quote "suicide is a permanent solution to a temporary problem". I personally viewed all of the suicide prevention arguments as "meh" but the argument of permanence is the only argument they have which has actually encouraged my suicidal ideation rather than trying to prevent it.

Permanence isn't a bad thing in some cases. In fact I think that it's a good thing. A permanent solution to anything is more desirable than a temporary solution. The permanence of death makes me crave death even know and I know I'm not alone in this. The only way that permanence can be bad is if a permanent decision has happened which has caused a permanent negative outcome (an example of this could be getting lung cancer from smoking too much). However, assuming that after death is permanent non existence, it's impossible to regret the permanence of death

 

[sserafim]

Thanks for all your responses guys, this was fun. I condensed some of these arguments into a tier list and ranked them based on how compelling they are to me PERSONALLY:

View attachment 145790
Feel free to comment on which of my rankings you agree or disagree with (if you can read it; the font is a little small lol, my bad).

@kaizenmaster tagging you in case you're interested in a "devil's advocate" thread like this :)

Physical risk is S tier (for me)

 

[ijustwishtodie]

Physical risk is S tier (for me)

Same, it's S tier for me as well

 

[Alexei_Kirillov]

Depends on each person, their feelings and reasons for wanting to die. If you have strong urges to kill yourself right now, the only argument I can think of is "why not wait until tomorrow?", and it's a good argument.

This is D-tier for me because the longer you wait to CTB, the more suffering you'll go through. Plus I think you need to reach a "critical mass" of motivation in order to kill yourself, and if you let that critical mass dissipate without acting on it, you're effectively stuck here, wanting to die but being unable to take the steps needed to make that happen.

This is only my opinion but I'd put the argument of permanence in F tier. That's because of the quote "suicide is a permanent solution to a temporary problem". I personally viewed all of the suicide prevention arguments as "meh" but the argument of permanence is the only argument they have which has actually encouraged my suicidal ideation rather than trying to prevent it.

Permanence isn't a bad thing in some cases. In fact I think that it's a good thing. A permanent solution to anything is more desirable than a temporary solution. The permanence of death makes me crave death even know and I know I'm not alone in this. The only way that permanence can be bad is if a permanent decision has happened which has caused a permanent negative outcome (an example of this could be getting lung cancer from smoking too much). However, assuming that after death is permanent non existence, it's impossible to regret the permanence of death

I would've put it in F, too, but then I had a discussion about this slogan with another user that made me better appreciate the most charitable version of this argument, which I think has some merit (ie. the idea that death is in a different category of permanence and should thus receive special treatment). For all the reasons you listed though (permanence being a good thing in this case, inability to regret decision, etc.) I still don't find it compelling, hence D-tier. Love the way you worded this btw, "The only way that permanence can be bad is if a permanent decision has happened which has caused a permanent negative outcome."

Physical risk is S tier (for me)

Same, it's S tier for me as well

For me, as long as I've carefully chosen my method and know exactly what I'm getting myself into, namely knowing what the worst-case scenario is and how likely it is, I'm relatively sanguine about the possibility of physical risk, especially because the failure to act has just as high a cost (ie. being condemned to decades of suffering).

I've often wondered what it is that makes some people take this very seriously and others not so much. It seems at least partially explainable by MBTI personality theory (yes yes, with all the usual caveats about how MBTI is "pseudoscience"). Are you and @ijustwishtodie both INTPs? I'm INTJ so I have Se in my stack, even though it's my weakest function. This is the function that experiences the real world through the physical senses; in its extreme it's a "thrill-seeking" function. I wonder if this is what has helped me follow through with planned attempts.