In my opinion, it's a matter of evaluation. If a person evaluated that their life is objectively worse than nonexistence and will remain so in the future, they will hope for death. If they evaluate the opposite, they will want to live. In both cases it isn't a result of mental illness, as such evaluation is the most rational way to look at life. The reason most people do not consider suicide or wish for death is that they evaluate life differently or could simply be in a better situation compared to someone who is suicidal. Apart from that, I feel like there isn't much difference between someone who wants to live and someone who wants to die. Suicide would technically solve their problems, but they believe that there are benefits to being alive that outweigh the problems.
I agree; and for the fact that there's a negative connotation still associated with suicide.
Self-preservation is priority number one biologically, psychologically, and environmentally, just until it isnt. But to get to the opposite side of that thinking, it takes time, as we're taught to adapt to negative circumstances and events, to be resilient to shortcomings, to problem solve solutions to issues etc. We're taught to continuously keep doing this in succession and rotation to the point of auto-pilot until the natural end. Not taking rejection or "no" for an answer, or to "find another way." But the world's pressures in the society have grown in
every facet... not limited to, but including the work force, decision-making, unlimited choices and options, societal judgements and expectations etc coupled with things like isolation, burnout/stress/anxiety, lack of satisfaction and reward, lack of ability and resources to cope with dissatisfaction and loss, etc. The lack means to cope with the stressors of the world, the wear it brings, and if it becomes continuous can at some point perpetuate the notation of "Is this worth it?" or "How much can I do/take?" Even the stable ones think of suicide, but they don't entertain it, but some do...
I think the more resilient biological genes are dying out ironically, not to any real dangerous degree; but it seems to be making the less pliable genes (people) more susceptible to their own weakened psychology and increased environmental weight, which maybe they conceptualize they cannot hold and resort to the downward spiral that, eventually can or does lead to suicide.
It's not always the perfect storm, but it starts somewhere. Too many variables to analyze, and every culture/region is different. But there are common denominators in suicide so they originate in their own fashion somehow, someway.
Makes you wonder about how relevant, or not relevant, the four P's of the biopsychosocial model are. If suicide were regulated heavily, there could be extensive questionnaires, examinations, evaluations, etc taken, and we could actually find some real answers to helping people instead of slapping mental health slogans, banners, and hotlines on everything, wasting money and resources and pretending like it makes a difference.
death cannot be comprehended, which scares people.
also, there is what i like to think of as a kind of gambler's fallacy [not exactly] at play: the belief that if bad things occur, good things will sure equalize the bad in the future. it's an implicit bias that i think a lot of people hold purely because they are centered around their own story. it is a belief which entails that one will find new friends upon moving to the big city, or that he will meet a wonderful woman in the future, or that he is working towards something which will bring him solace later in life. so for many people, they would rather not be robbed of sense data, since that is a prerequisite for 'good' periods, which they don't want to 'miss' out on as they view it is as some invariable truth.
That sounds like keeping a positive outlook (for things to come) or "distorted/delusional" (except it's considered healthy and to be hopeful in the absence of faith) to rely on the "law of averages" that things will surely turn around. We're told it's "irrational" and "negative" to think otherwise. This is a big failure in technique with therapy to me, telling people lies (without provable data) to believe in their positive sayings and beliefs. If you're going to say "The glass is only half empty." then was there ever reasonable knowledge that that glass was going to be filled to capacity? No. Saying "half" anything implies it should be filled completely or empty in this expression. So don't tell me it's "half full" if there's no way of knowing the remainder of the glass will ever be filled. Call it what it is. But you can't make something whole without the pieces, and that's to adversary and controversial to admit. Affirmations to me, are simply positive untruths, but the key is that we can program ourselves to think ourselves into believing these myths; and thus base our lives around them. If we don't, why I'm afraid we're just choosing to be defiant, difficult, dismissive, and pessimistic; and therefore we're further propelling our misery from not cultivating into the culthood. Darn us!
