Your reasons are valid if the result is to live/Your reasons are not valid if the result is to die

[Not Being]

Your reasons are valid if the result is to live/Your reasons are not valid if the result is to die.

If the conclusion is to consider life, then your reasons are valid.
If the conclusion is to consider death, then your reasons are not valid.

For example:

The reason I live is because I like to drink coffee every day. For people in general, especially pro-lifers, it is acceptable because it implies that he/she will live and no one has the right to judge him/her because life is good and it does not need a justification.

On the other hand:

The reason I'm dying is because I won't be able to drink coffee every day anymore. What do people say in general (especially pro-life)? "It is an absurd reason to die, do not exaggerate", ah but yes, it is not an absurd reason to live.

Another example:

I live because I love and take care of my partner, what do others say in general? It is valid or simply nobody questions it.

On the other hand:

I die because my partner passed away and I miss her/him a lot, what do others say in general? It is not valid, you are exaggerating, it is not worth dying for.

Do you get the idea?

The idea is that If the conclusion is to live/consider life as a result, your reasons are valid, even if they are superfluous, in fact, it is not necessary to justify life because they have given it an inherently good and valuable value. But if those same reasons are to die/consider death as a result, they are not worth it, you are exaggerating, you are sick, it is not worth dying for.

What justification do i need to die? Do I have to suffer a lot to get out of here? Do I have to be kidnapped, raped or tortured to get out?
Who are the others to decide for my death?

The answer is that nothing and no one can decide for us, it is our life, our existence, if someone wants to stop us at all costs, that implies that our life is not ours and is the property of others.

I wonder about the following: if the reason why someone lives is to lick the floor (literally, without metaphors) I am very sure they will accept it, maybe they will offer to help him/her to stop doing it, but they will NEVER recriminate him/her, nor will they will shame or judge him/her because he/she lives on.

I can have the most superfluous reasons to live and no one will judge me.
I can have the most deliberate reasons to consider dying and everyone will judge me mercilessly.

I also want to clarify that any reason is valid to live or to die, everyone has their own life and can do anything with it, I only expose that logic that people have of giving value to things, they change the value depending on the result, if it is life = it is valid (they won't even judge you), if it's death = it's not valid, it's not worth it ...

This is all my personal opinion.
I am in favor of the choice.

What do you think?

 

[BeansOfRequirement]

Wow, that's a follow right there. 100% based.

 

[jusbug]

nobody want to die because he/she want to die

 

[FuneralCry]

I agree. I think many people are brainwashed into thinking that living has value when it simply doesn't. Many people therefore see death as the worst possible outcome, this is seen as society places value on long lives rather than quality ones. Life is literally meaningless, all we are doing is waiting to die. Staying alive is just delaying the inevitable.

If people were justified in their reason to die, that would be like accepting suicide which society is against at all costs (or at least where I live). There is just too much stigma against wanting to die, it should be a basic human right. Many people's reasons to die are technically more valid than their reason to live, for example if someone wants to die because of extreme suffering vs wanting to live for something pointless.

 

[Ame]

As my boi, Algerian philosopher, Albert Camus so aptly put it in his work The Myth of Sisyphus and Other Essays: "What is called a reason for living is also an excellent reason for dying." You did an excellent job of outlining the rationale that underlies this conclusion.

 

[scarletohara]

Your reasons are valid if the result is to live/Your reasons are not valid if the result is to die.

If the conclusion is to consider life, then your reasons are valid.
If the conclusion is to consider death, then your reasons are not valid.

For example:

The reason I live is because I like to drink coffee every day. For people in general, especially pro-lifers, it is acceptable because it implies that he/she will live and no one has the right to judge him/her because life is good and it does not need a justification.

On the other hand:

The reason I'm dying is because I won't be able to drink coffee every day anymore. What do people say in general (especially pro-life)? "It is an absurd reason to die, do not exaggerate", ah but yes, it is not an absurd reason to live.

Another example:

I live because I love and take care of my partner, what do others say in general? It is valid or simply nobody questions it.

On the other hand:

I die because my partner passed away and I miss her/him a lot, what do others say in general? It is not valid, you are exaggerating, it is not worth dying for.

Do you get the idea?

The idea is that If the conclusion is to live/consider life as a result, your reasons are valid, even if they are superfluous, in fact, it is not necessary to justify life because they have given it an inherently good and valuable value. But if those same reasons are to die/consider death as a result, they are not worth it, you are exaggerating, you are sick, it is not worth dying for.

What justification do i need to die? Do I have to suffer a lot to get out of here? Do I have to be kidnapped, raped or tortured to get out?
Who are the others to decide for my death?

The answer is that nothing and no one can decide for us, it is our life, our existence, if someone wants to stop us at all costs, that implies that our life is not ours and is the property of others.

I wonder about the following: if the reason why someone lives is to lick the floor (literally, without metaphors) I am very sure they will accept it, maybe they will offer to help him/her to stop doing it, but they will NEVER recriminate him/her, nor will they will shame or judge him/her because he/she lives on.

I can have the most superfluous reasons to live and no one will judge me.
I can have the most deliberate reasons to consider dying and everyone will judge me mercilessly.

I also want to clarify that any reason is valid to live or to die, everyone has their own life and can do anything with it, I only expose that logic that people have of giving value to things, they change the value depending on the result, if it is life = it is valid (they won't even judge you), if it's death = it's not valid, it's not worth it ...

This is all my personal opinion.
I am in favor of the choice.

What do you think?

society conditions us this way, to think the alternative is taboo, cant see it ever changing

 

[WornOutLife]

Yes, I totally agree!

 

[omoidarui]

when people have mentioned their suicidal thoughts to me in the past (this being outside SS), I've assumed them to really mean they want me to give them reasons to think it's going to be ok. I don't think a world where the social norm would otherwise be to validate i.e. say, "yeah, that's a really good reason to die" is a better one, even though I agree with your logic.

I hate empty platitudes, but many people who suffer but don't really want to die are "saved" by them. I'm cringing trying to write in defence of meaningless pro-life slogans ("Your life is worth it!") but SS represents the minority of suicidal people, and the rest, people outside SS do actually seem to want to be told that stuff

 

[LakatosDiogenesz]

I wish more people were this logical about the issue.

 

[Aloken]

I cannot even begin to describe how much I agree with this, so I'm not even gonna try. I agree 100%

 

[Grave]

Wow, that there is a great post, you have put that so well.

I think part of the problem is that the base for most people is living, and because they don't really think about dying, then it's like "well of course that is a bad thing". Idk, I can't put it as well as you, I'm shit with words sorry. But just essentially - yeah, I totally agree with what you're saying.

 

[killedbypsychiatry]

I so agree with this, I really don't understand why does society feels the need to deny others their right to die and label us mentally unwell simply by wanting to exercise out right to no longer be here.

Life doesn't even have a purpose and we are all going to die. Life can't be preserved only prolonged, what's the point of prolonging my suffering?

"my life, my choice, at my time, for my reasons, my right"... I don't understand why it's so hard for society to understand this

 

[Wrennie]

I mean, I was sectioned shortly after I jumped out a window and had sustained serious injuries, yet the staff at the psych ward had utterly absent empathy for me when I expressed my desire to die. Even though I was in constant pain and could barely move, those healthy able-bodied professionals thought I was out of my mind for wanting to escape the 24/7 physical torture.

I'm sure that a person could literally become a quadriplegic and have their entire face torn off and pro-lifers would still do everything in their power to obstruct that individual from attaining a peaceful end to their suffering.

 

[Deleted member 8579]

Your reasons are valid if the result is to live.

If the conclusion is to consider life, then your reasons are valid.

I don't believe this holds in such generality. If your only reason to stay alive are the next installments of a comic book series, you will be looked down upon as a pathetic failure. I'm sure there are more than enough people, especially in the right-wing pro-life camp, who believe that anyone whose main reason to live is anything outside of achieving success by society's standards (e.g. raising a family, being financially successful) is a "degenerate" hedonist, a drain on society; they surely wouldn't mind if someone like that died.

The problem is not if your reasons result in living or dying, the problem is that you need a reason to live in the first place. Most people simply live; they don't need to find any reason to keep going, because they just do. If you ask them what reasons they have to live, they will repeat the usual platitudes, as they have never given any thought to this question. Why should they? There was no need to.

it is not necessary to justify life because they have given it an inherently good and valuable value.

This is precisely my point: If you need to justify staying alive, society will deem you defective. They will not consider your reason to be valid, since you needed to artificially create a justification to stay alive. They will prefer you staying alive due to your chosen reason, but they will not accept it as being valid.

What justification do i need to die?

In their eyes, dying can not be justified.

The answer is that nothing and no one can decide for us, it is our life, our existence, if someone wants to stop us at all costs, that implies that our life is not ours and is the property of others.

This is not logically stringent. If your neighbour wants to stop you from cutting down a tree on your property, that does not imply that the tree is not yours.

I wonder about the following: if the reason why someone lives is to lick the floor (literally, without metaphors) I am very sure they will accept it, maybe they will offer to help him/her to stop doing it, but they will NEVER recriminate him/her, nor will they will shame or judge him/her because he/she lives on.

I can have the most superfluous reasons to live and no one will judge me.

They will not accept it and they will judge you for it.

 

[loopylou]

Wonderfully said. Completely agree

 

[Ironweed]

The answer is that nothing and no one can decide for us, it is our life, our existence, if someone wants to stop us at all costs, that implies that our life is not ours and is the property of others.

Many pro-lifers flat-out say this, in the sense they consider suicide to not be a choice, not be a rational choice or some such curious language. The goal is infantilize the suicide, and when you do that, you can do anything, force anything upon them.

Stuff like this is pretty typical:

Is Suicide a Free Choice or a False Choice?

https://archive.is/AqSVD

- to deny the site a click

 

[hopelessgirl]

Your reasons are valid if the result is to live/Your reasons are not valid if the result is to die.

If the conclusion is to consider life, then your reasons are valid.
If the conclusion is to consider death, then your reasons are not valid.

For example:

The reason I live is because I like to drink coffee every day. For people in general, especially pro-lifers, it is acceptable because it implies that he/she will live and no one has the right to judge him/her because life is good and it does not need a justification.

On the other hand:

The reason I'm dying is because I won't be able to drink coffee every day anymore. What do people say in general (especially pro-life)? "It is an absurd reason to die, do not exaggerate", ah but yes, it is not an absurd reason to live.

Another example:

I live because I love and take care of my partner, what do others say in general? It is valid or simply nobody questions it.

On the other hand:

I die because my partner passed away and I miss her/him a lot, what do others say in general? It is not valid, you are exaggerating, it is not worth dying for.

Do you get the idea?

The idea is that If the conclusion is to live/consider life as a result, your reasons are valid, even if they are superfluous, in fact, it is not necessary to justify life because they have given it an inherently good and valuable value. But if those same reasons are to die/consider death as a result, they are not worth it, you are exaggerating, you are sick, it is not worth dying for.

What justification do i need to die? Do I have to suffer a lot to get out of here? Do I have to be kidnapped, raped or tortured to get out?
Who are the others to decide for my death?

The answer is that nothing and no one can decide for us, it is our life, our existence, if someone wants to stop us at all costs, that implies that our life is not ours and is the property of others.

I wonder about the following: if the reason why someone lives is to lick the floor (literally, without metaphors) I am very sure they will accept it, maybe they will offer to help him/her to stop doing it, but they will NEVER recriminate him/her, nor will they will shame or judge him/her because he/she lives on.

I can have the most superfluous reasons to live and no one will judge me.
I can have the most deliberate reasons to consider dying and everyone will judge me mercilessly.

I also want to clarify that any reason is valid to live or to die, everyone has their own life and can do anything with it, I only expose that logic that people have of giving value to things, they change the value depending on the result, if it is life = it is valid (they won't even judge you), if it's death = it's not valid, it's not worth it ...

This is all my personal opinion.
I am in favor of the choice.

What do you think?

Very well written. Thank you for this insight. I think you're right that it is so.

Might it be that the "state of being alive" rather than the "state of being dead", is given more value? That the mere fact that you're alive, is considered to be valuable in itself, and society thinks that we ought to be grateful for this very fact. On the other hand, I guess society does not appreciate and show the same gratefulness toward the state of death. Even many people fear death, as a part of the survival instinct and our fear of the unknown and fear of pain. So maybe it's just a cultural thing. Here on SS though, we seem to be able to look forward to the rest awaited in death. I don't think we're wrong in that, but society portrays us as being delusional. Why is the "activity in life" worth more than the "rest in death"? "Less is more" a simple expression proclaims. Are we allowed to choose our values? To live for coffee, or die due to the longing of it? Or is it the society choosing for us? Where do our preferences even come from? What makes a life meaningful? Or unbearable?

Personally, I am quite confused, as to what the answer is. It seems to me that we all choose for ourselves, and you are right: as long as the right goal is behind the value (life), we are supported by humanity. If death is the goal, we are not. I tried to make a math equation of my life. But it doesn't seem that simple. On my list FOR life, I only have simple things like: music, food, going to the store, clean clothes, cleaning/tidying the house, reading, my dog, watching movies, sleeping, going for walks. I'm mostly home and I don't work and I don't know if I ever will again because I chose a profession I never want to do again, because I just hate it and didn't realise it during my studies. When I look at my list FOR life, those are just reasons I had to create for myself... Many of them at least, are ridiculous things I've learned to like. In the lack of liking anything, I now "pretend" I guess to like cleaning the house. It keeps me busy and the dread away. On my list FOR death I have things like: anxiety, impending doom, existential dread, panick attacks.

Who's to decide what is worth more? I guess we are to decide for ourselves, but even that I cannot do properly. Should I just keep being alive like a simple animal? Up until the day I die naturally? Or can I say that I've had enough coffee already, and could that be a reason enough? Or that I am soon turning 30, and my face will start to wrinkle, so I might as well go now that I'm in my prime age? Or, that I have no dreams left, I won't be an olympian as I always dreamed of, and I already tried all I could to reach my dream, and came very close, but I gave up and now the dream is over. What is left is this dreadful, ordinary life. Maybe 50 more years, of waking up, having a coffee, having a shower, brushing my teeth, putting on clean clothes, feeding the dog, taking the dog out, reading a book, watching YouTube videos, listening to music, cooking, watching a movie, sleeping. What for, is this cycle? Atoms experiencing atoms collide. For what feels like an eternity. If life, when I really felt alive, was for me life as an adventure... And that adventure is now over. If that was what life was for me. The world as an adventure, is over. Then shouldn't I be allowed to decide for myself that my life is over? Because now I feel like I am already dead. And I wish that I'd died on one of those mountain tops. When I was at my best. Why not?

 

[Lautari]

I don't think that the world is out to get us and judge us mercilessly.

There being valid reasons to die is a popular view I would say. I however think that suicidal people are judged incapable of sound thought regarding their own death (except very old people). Thus their reasons are perceived invalid because of their frame of reference, not the reasons. That is too broad a statement to cast over all suicidal people. Ironically this leaves only other people possibly qualified to determine if we should kill ourselves.

I don't think that you are judged for suicide because it is socially considered outside of your own control. It is considered the natural product of extreme stress or other ailments.

I would say what are considered valid reasons can be extreme.