Is death the only way out?

@rambo phil,

I am going way out on a limb here and say, IMO, selfishness is by far the least among reasons why people commit suicide. I will also say those who do commit suicide for selfish reasons is an abomination. Adding to that those who do, lived such a selfish life and it should come as no surprise to anyone if they do took the ultimate selfish exit.

After all, we live in a selfish world. We can barely take care of ourselves much less anyone else who needs it. As much as we would like to think we are all made of the same stuff, we most definitely are not. There are the strong, resourceful and resilient among us who have the where with all to wend our way through life's curves, but all are not so gifted. Some are weak, dependent and lost. They weren't born that way; they were made that way. They are screaming for help in their silence which is the number one sign of despair. No voice for fear that their weakness would be heard and ridiculed.

Between the ages of 15 and 24 is where the greatest number of suicides and attempted suicides occur. Any regard as to valuing the sanctity of life is hogwash for these young people if they can envision ending it all. My God, they haven't even begun to live yet. They have nothing to be selfish over. Something is seriously missing in these young lives and it is my belief, it is love. They have never been exposed to it. Not in a true sense. We all need a sense of "belonging" and so many have a hard time finding that slot they will fit comfortably into. In their desperation to reach out they, more often than not, grasp a hold of anything that will offer them a sense of worth no matter what that may be. Desperate people do desperate things and in that desperation find themselves in a cold reality in which what they need the most, love, does not exist. A parasitic reality that either demands they become one, or again resort back to the despair that prompted their desperate act. Some adapt, some can't. And those who can't find themselves in a no win situation.

Not all have the "crust" many do and cannot deal with the harshness of life. It's not their fault. They need help and don't have a clue as to where they can go to find it. If they did, suicide would never enter the picture. That's where we come in. But hell we are too busy messing with our own "bucket of worms" to notice that silence. Those who need the most help don't make a lot of noise. And the real shame is in that silence they become aware of how truly distant they are from the rest of the world. That's not life, that's hell. Who would want to live there. My opinion, for what it's worth.

William

0 Replies

@Icon,

Icon wrote:

Am I truly different from anyone else? Can my strengths be classified as unique?

I don't think so.

Hmmm... in their constituent elements; likely not, but that's only a small part of the story. The ratio of each strength, weakness or perception of experience is just as likely to affect the entire kaleidescope of tolerance and forebearance as what elements are at play. You make a fine point; but the perceptional differences, emotional triggers, sensitive points and untapped weaknesses in each of us are - I believe - too vastly different to draw that conclusion. How much these differ, one can't quantify, but I thinks its beyond reasonable to say that people differ widely in what they can and can't tolerate, what they will or won't bear and what might or might not break them.

So perhaps we're more alike in some ways, but I'd disagree with you that this equates to similiar 'abilities' to weather what life can toss at us.

Icon wrote:

Robert Heinlein defines a true human as capable of anything. This has been proven true time and time again. I think the biggest issue is that the current generation has not had to deal with hardship and true trouble.

Emphatically agree... good fodder for another thread.

Icon wrote:

... The problem is that the motional state of the current world is weak. I have noticed that Men and Women are very rare and instead have been replaced with children of exceptional age. A child cannot handle the full consequences of an adult because they are not prepared for them. Preperation is all in the self. It is your responsibility to be ready for what life deals to you...

This 'weakened' state of the emotional world is indeed waning. And wholly concur with all I've quoted here up to the last statement. The exception that'd I'd take is this: What life deals me is due - to the largest extent - to my actions and decisions; however, there are many elements not of my immediate control. There are vast parades of people, over time, who've suffered lots not of their own making, how might they have 'prepared themselves' for what could not have been forseen and was not of their own making?

Agree that a growing weakness is a contagion that's getting progressively worse - as is a lack personal responsibility. But disagree that we can be prepared for all life might throw. It's not so far fetched I'd think.

Nice exchange, and you bring relevant points to bear. I simply believe that not all can be forseen, not all is a product of our actions and therefore it's simply not possible for one to be prepared. Some are, I'm sure, its simply too wide-sweeping a generalization for me to adhere too, not with the wide diversity of personalities and people I've come by in my time.

Thanks; and again, excellent response.

1 Reply

@Khethil,

Khethil wrote:

Hmmm... in their constituent elements; likely not, but that's only a small part of the story. The ratio of each strength, weakness or perception of experience is just as likely to affect the entire kaleidescope of tolerance and forebearance as what elements are at play. You make a fine point; but the perceptional differences, emotional triggers, sensitive points and untapped weaknesses in each of us are - I believe - too vastly different to draw that conclusion. How much these differ, one can't quantify, but I thinks its beyond reasonable to say that people differ widely in what they can and can't tolerate, what they will or won't bear and what might or might not break them.

I would challenge you to provide me with a hypothetical situation in which there was seemingly no solution. Also, I would ask that you provide another which one may consider hopeless.

I understand that there are several elements which influence a situation but I am also aware that the individual chooses which elements to consider and which to ignore. Choice is everything. If you go to the store and get shot by a man robbing it, you still chose to go to the store. Elements such as blame, fault, regret, reluctance and so on are all considerations which occurs completely within the self. Sometimes, situations require going beyond the self. A self centered person would not understand this as a self centered person has never tried to go beyond their own capabilities. Being self centered prevents such thought and such ability.

Khethil wrote:

So perhaps we're more alike in some ways, but I'd disagree with you that this equates to similiar 'abilities' to weather what life can toss at us.

Everyone is capable of action and everyone is capable of inaction. These are the only two things which can occur. The outcome is never certain and you would be a fool to think you can control the outcome. Again, this comes back to self centered thought processes.

You can only control what you do and how you interact with a situation. Sometimes it works out like you hope and sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes it goes the completely opposite way.

Where Robert Heinlein defines a true human as capable of anything, I define one as the summation of all experience. The more you experience, the more prepared you are. The more outcomes you witness, the more evaluation you can do and the more possibilties you can prepare for.

Khethil wrote:

This 'weakened' state of the emotional world is indeed waning. And wholly concur with all I've quoted here up to the last statement. The exception that'd I'd take is this: What life deals me is due - to the largest extent - to my actions and decisions; however, there are many elements not of my immediate control. There are vast parades of people, over time, who've suffered lots not of their own making, how might they have 'prepared themselves' for what could not have been forseen and was not of their own making?

I think that the issue here is that we are trying to assign blame. Blame does not exist in nature. Blame is something which man kind has invented to escape personal responsibility. You take the action of getting out of bed and going outside. You have, at that point, accepted the responsibility of the possibility of a plane engine falling from the sky and killing you, or getting struck by lightning, or hit by a truck, or getting shot to death. These are all possibilities. No, these are not likely to happen which means they are not at the fore front of thought but they ARE possible which means you must be prepared for them. By prepared, I am talking only of emotional security. Emotional security is something close to acceptance. You MUST accept personal responsibility for all actions and consequences in your life, regardless of how the events came to be. You went somewhere, something bad happens. You chose to go there, with no knowledge of the events which would occur. In other words, you chose to be there at that time and you chose to do so blindly, hoping for the best. If the best does not occur, killing yourself is still a results of self pity and self centeredness.

You win some, you lose some. Apply this to the largest scale and you find a pattern with hope. Hope is a wonderful tool but that is all it is. The second you decide that your life is not worth living because you did not get what you hoped for is the moment that you have admitted to being a tool of a tool.

Khethil wrote:

Agree that a growing weakness is a contagion that's getting progressively worse - as is a lack personal responsibility. But disagree that we can be prepared for all life might throw. It's not so far fetched I'd think.

Nice exchange, and you bring relevant points to bear. I simply believe that not all can be forseen, not all is a product of our actions and therefore it's simply not possible for one to be prepared. Some are, I'm sure, its simply too wide-sweeping a generalization for me to adhere too, not with the wide diversity of personalities and people I've come by in my time.

Thanks; and again, excellent response.

Thank you. I am glad that we can see each others points clearly. It is making for a very productive conversation.

2 Replies

@Icon,

Ide be really interested in finding out if real difficulties make you less likely or more to take that final decision..Do those in poor countries where life is more fragile cling to life more than those who have everything? I find myself the more time i have to ponder on life the less attractive it becomes.

1 Reply

@xris,

xris wrote:

Ide be really interested in finding out if real difficulties make you less likely or more to take that final decision..Do those in poor countries where life is more fragile cling to life more than those who have everything? I find myself the more time i have to ponder on life the less attractive it becomes.

That would be an interesting statistic to dig up. Also, why do you think that it is as you say? Why does ponderance on life breed negative thoughts?

0 Replies

@Icon,

Icon, Thanks for again replying.

Icon wrote:

I would challenge you to provide me with a hypothetical situation in which there was seemingly no solution. Also, I would ask that you provide another which one may consider hopeless.

This tells me its quite likely we're talking in different directions. Is there any single situation that could not be overcome? I don't know; perhaps. If we bring this into context of the issue of suicide, I'm guessing it's causes are more than one and misfortunes many - making the question "is there any single situation..." interesting, but not relevant since virtually no situation's effects operate in a vacuum.

But after reading and re-reading your response. I think I understand where you're coming from. Taking unqualified responsibility for what happens to us, in this life, and being emotionally prepared for it is important, worthy and (without qualification) an excellent way to look at it.

But I think we're just going to have to settle for some disagreement here. [INDENT] Accepting that one can become overwhelmed with the pain of living isn't laying blame, nor is it shifting responsibility, it's just that: acknowledging the possibility that there exists very real possibilities that some may become overwhelmed by events, lose their heart and fall into black despair. These folks don't need to be labeled weak, stupid, short-sighted or irresponsible; they need help. What's more, maintaining this view imposes a sort of summary-judgment that assumes the way the judger thinks is how all people think - that knocks are taken with the same impact. I just don't think they are.
[/INDENT]So I'll leave off and thank you again for your replies. To your credit, I will say this: The more we believe we can overcome and trust in ourselves, without expectations of "life being fair", the more we can weather; the stronger we'll be and the more viable over the long term.

Thanks

1 Reply

@Khethil,

Khethil wrote:

Icon, Thanks for again replying.

This tells me its quite likely we're talking in different directions. Is there any single situation that could not be overcome? I don't know; perhaps. If we bring this into context of the issue of suicide, I'm guessing it's causes are more than one and misfortunes many - making the question "is there any single situation..." interesting, but not relevant since virtually no situation's effects operate in a vacuum.

But after reading and re-reading your response. I think I understand where you're coming from. Taking unqualified responsibility for what happens to us, in this life, and being emotionally prepared for it is important, worthy and (without qualification) an excellent way to look at it.

But I think we're just going to have to settle for some disagreement here.[INDENT] Accepting that one can become overwhelmed with the pain of living isn't laying blame, nor is it shifting responsibility, it's just that: acknowledging the possibility that there exists very real possibilities that some may become overwhelmed by events, lose their heart and fall into black despair. These folks don't need to be labeled weak, stupid, short-sighted or irresponsible; they need help. What's more, maintaining this view imposes a sort of summary-judgment that assumes the way the judger thinks is how all people think - that knocks are taken with the same impact. I just don't think they are.
[/INDENT]So I'll leave off and thank you again for your replies. To your credit, I will say this: The more we believe we can overcome and trust in ourselves, without expectations of "life being fair", the more we can weather; the stronger we'll be and the more viable over the long term.

Thanks

Without any certainty and with a long period of time, why would one not choose to see what tomorrow will be like?

0 Replies

@rambo phil,

I always think, for those people who say that life is 'not worth living', that surely if it's that pointless, it's not worth ending? Sorry to have to throw psychology into something philosophical, but therapy actually works. You talk out your problems with someone and have a new beginning, away from those things that made you decide that life was so terrible. If you can't feel a light at the end of your tunnel, remember a time when you did and draw happiness from those memories. Death may bring some answers, but that doesn't make it one.

1 Reply

@Kolbe,

Ive just seen a report in areas of deprivation the suicide rate is high and many suicides are related to drink problems.I can understand how this can create despondency.Like many terrible things they must be juged inividually.

1 Reply

@xris,

Justin wrote:

Death is not an escape. There is no escape. We cannot escape ourselves and we cannot escape existence. Death is of the body and death will come to the body however if man is not body then how do we die? This is where we become confused. We keep thinking that our body is who we are when it's who we are that creates our body. Our physical being is not who we are and therefore we cannot die. To escape ourselves via death is a fallacy. To believe that we are our bodies is also a fallacy.

So, you're implying that there is some kind of life-force outside of the physical body. This, of course, is your belief. I don't think you can say it's a fallacy when no one can verify. You aren't certain that it's not an escape.

Didymos Thomas wrote:

It is your life only in that you have agency - you make the decisions. But that's where it ends. The decisions you make influence others, and not just family, but every living person. In this way, your life is not your own. You are like the conductor of a train on which rides everyone alive. You make the decisions, but the decisions affect everyone else, too. To run that train off the rails is marvelously selfish.

I'd say if you have agency over it, it's yours. There are many things we say we have ownership of but don't even have agency over: Car, house, dog, etc. If you say you don't own your life, then what do you believe we own?

Just because our decisions affect people doesn't mean our lives aren't ours. Either our lives are ours, or our lives are no ones; they just are. And in either case, your decisions towards others are irrelevant completely.

Icon wrote:

Death is not a way out and it is not a solution to anything. The entire reason people commit suicide is weakness, short sightedness, and even worse, stupidity.

But you realize it doesn't matter how you consider those people that chose suicide, right? I mean, they're dead, they don't have a consciousness to even care about your judgment. Of course it is a solution, whether or not you respect the solution is irrelevant.

Khetil wrote:

Has it not occurred to a one of you who've judged, just how bad would your life have to get for this to become a 'good idea'? Have you not thought, at all, just how desperate and bleak your condition could possibly get? Blinders on, eyes closed... never assume things 'couldn't get worse'. So have a little heart; don't let your 'disgust' rise so high that it overwhelms your sense of humanity. Or... well, go ahead and have a ball. I fear it unlikely that one paultry post like this might help the egotistical mind think anew.

We see eye to eye. How can we presumptuously assume the act is selfish? Just because our lives affect others doesn't mean anything. How about this: Say a ruler that was considered 'evil' decided to commit suicide. I'm sure you wouldn't have as many people running around saying, "Omgz he was selfish!" than if a 'good' man that had a large family and brought hope into people's lives committed the act. That should tell you right there, it's all judgment, and silly judgment at that. We can't judge an act we know nothing about.

I'm still perplexed that people keep saying, "It's not a solution". Of course it is! Just because you have some emotional entanglement with the notion doesn't mean that the person doesn't lose consciousness; they do! It doesn't matter how you feel about the act. They don't have to feel anymore, and that's what matters.

Personally, I choose to live because I'm excited for the following day - kinda like anticipating my next masturbation session.

1 Reply

@Zetherin,

Zetherin wrote:

So, you're implying that there is some kind of life-force outside of the physical body. This, of course, is your belief. I don't think you can say it's a fallacy when no one can verify. You aren't certain that it's not an escape.

I'd say if you have agency over it, it's yours. We can make the same argument about anything that involves ownership, can't you? We say we own a house, when of course, we don't own every atom that makes up the house. You can say you own a dog, same thing. If we own anything, it's our life. Just because our decisions affect people doesn't mean our lives aren't ours. Either our lives are ours, or our lives are no ones; they just are. And in either case, your decisions towards others are irrelevant completely.

But you realize it doesn't matter how you consider those people that chose suicide, right? I mean, they're dead, they don't have a consciousness to even care about your judgment. Of course it is a solution, whether or not you respect the solution is irrelevant.

We are not condemning the individual but the act and making comment on the fact that your life is not just yours its everyone that may be close to you.When that butterflies wings flap and it creates a storm how much more does someones life ending in such a way cause so much torment.You appear to be saying dont make comments because its not relevant, of course it is..thats what a forum is for to exchange opinions views.I cant understand why you are here if debate is to be so restrictive.

1 Reply

@xris,

xris wrote:

We are not condemning the individual but the act and making comment on the fact that your life is not just yours its everyone that may be close to you.When that butterflies wings flap and it creates a storm how much more does someones life ending in such a way cause so much torment.You appear to be saying dont make comments because its not relevant, of course it is..thats what a forum is for to exchange opinions views.I cant understand why you are here if debate is to be so restrictive.

I never said don't share your opinions. I just disagree on certain points - isn't that sharing my thoughts?

Here are my thoughts: Emotions don't matter. No matter how it makes someone feel that you're dead, who cares? They will die too one day. Death is not 'bad', 'evil', 'wrong'. It is a part of this cycle. I have a disconnect when I see people attaching this profound emotion to the loss of life. Likewise, choosing to take your own life isn't 'wrong' in my opinion.

Your life is your own, regardless who it affects emotionally. These human foibles are nothing in the whole scheme of things.

Oh, and the act is attached to the individual. So if you condemn the act, of course you're condemning the individual that committed the act. You're going to condemn the pulling of a trigger of a gun, not the person that pulled the trigger? I guess that slogan: "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" was DEAD wrong! (this is in response to you saying that you're not condemning the individual)

Lastly, I actually wanted to respond directly to the question posed as the title to this thread: "Is death the only way out?"

Answer: No, any loss of consciousness will do. Hard blow to the cranium, some drugs, sleep, etc. However, if you're talking permanent: Extreme brain damage (you can go for a lobotomy), Autism (at least you won't have to perceive others emotions... but yeah, you still have to deal with a lot of bullshit), Lots of sleep (just keep sleeping so you're unconscious for the majority of your days. the good thing about this solution is it's kind of a self-fufilling prophecy because you'll soon be bed ridden and then will have to lie in bed!). There's always more than one way to skin a cat, buddy. Just tell your friend to think about the other possible ways he can 'get out' before he makes a rash decision like suicide. He may even like his new life - he could be unconscious for most of the time, and just awake whenever he wants some food or sex.

2 Replies

@Zetherin,

Zetherin wrote:

I never said don't share your opinions. I just disagree on certain points - isn't that sharing my thoughts?

Here are my thoughts: Emotions don't matter. No matter how it makes someone feel that you're dead, who cares? They will die too one day. Death is not 'bad', 'evil', 'wrong'. It is a part of this cycle. I have a disconnect when I see people attaching this profound emotion to the loss of life. Likewise, choosing to take your own life isn't 'wrong' in my opinion.

Your life is your own, regardless who it affects emotionally. These human foibles are nothing in the whole scheme of things.

Oh, and the act is attached to the individual. So if you condemn the act, of course you're condemning the individual that committed the act. You're going to condemn the pulling of a trigger of a gun, not the person that pulled the trigger? I guess that slogan: "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" was DEAD wrong! (this is in response to you saying that you're not condemning the individual)

Lastly, I actually wanted to respond directly to the question posed as the title to this thread: "Is death the only way out?"

Answer: No, any loss of consciousness will do. Hard blow to the cranium, some drugs, sleep, etc. However, if you're talking permanent: Extreme brain damage (you can go for a lobotomy), Autism (at least you won't have to perceive others emotions... but yeah, you still have to deal with a lot of bullshit), Lots of sleep (just keep sleeping so you're unconscious for the majority of your days. the good thing about this solution is it's kind of a self-fufilling prophecy because you'll soon be bed ridden and then will have to lie in bed!). There's always more than one way to skin a cat, buddy. Just tell your friend to think about the other possible ways he can 'get out' before he makes a rash decision like suicide. He may even like his new life - he could be unconscious for most of the time, and just awake whenever he wants some food or sex.

We dont agree life ,your life is not just yours just as your son is not just your son. No man is an island is what comes to mind..This individual "X" i say was just a weak self centred fool, that man "Y" had the world of sorrow and sickness laid at his feet, i cant say i blame him.Thats judgement for the individual not the act..I dont think dosing will cure his woes not unless he is rich and sick.

0 Replies

@Zetherin,

Zetherin wrote:

I never said don't share your opinions. I just disagree on certain points - isn't that sharing my thoughts?

Here are my thoughts: Emotions don't matter. No matter how it makes someone feel that you're dead, who cares? They will die too one day. Death is not 'bad', 'evil', 'wrong'. It is a part of this cycle. I have a disconnect when I see people attaching this profound emotion to the loss of life. Likewise, choosing to take your own life isn't 'wrong' in my opinion.

Your life is your own, regardless who it affects emotionally. These human foibles are nothing in the whole scheme of things.

Oh, and the act is attached to the individual. So if you condemn the act, of course you're condemning the individual that committed the act. You're going to condemn the pulling of a trigger of a gun, not the person that pulled the trigger? I guess that slogan: "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" was DEAD wrong! (this is in response to you saying that you're not condemning the individual)

Lastly, I actually wanted to respond directly to the question posed as the title to this thread: "Is death the only way out?"

Answer: No, any loss of consciousness will do. Hard blow to the cranium, some drugs, sleep, etc. However, if you're talking permanent: Extreme brain damage (you can go for a lobotomy), Autism (at least you won't have to perceive others emotions... but yeah, you still have to deal with a lot of bullshit), Lots of sleep (just keep sleeping so you're unconscious for the majority of your days. the good thing about this solution is it's kind of a self-fufilling prophecy because you'll soon be bed ridden and then will have to lie in bed!). There's always more than one way to skin a cat, buddy. Just tell your friend to think about the other possible ways he can 'get out' before he makes a rash decision like suicide. He may even like his new life - he could be unconscious for most of the time, and just awake whenever he wants some food or sex.

If someone is considering suicide, it is obviously on the list of permanent suffering. Otherwise the man is foolish for not weathering the storm.

Regardless, suicide means giving up. It means quitting life itself. I know I obviously don't speak for everyone but quitting doesn't really appear to be an option for me. I don't see the point in it. At any time, someone or something can completely change your life for the worse or the better. I promise you, no matter what you are going through, there is someone going through worse. I promise that no matter what troubles you are facing, there is someone facing troubles 100 fold.

The only constant in the world is that the world changes. You can be crawling in a gutter one day and sitting at a banquet the next. The fact of the matter is that 1) you never know what will happen tomorrow and 2) you make you life what it is.

You make choices and those choices lead to the events which occur. If your life is so terrible then why not try to figure out how it got there and fix the problem? If things are so bad that you want to die then why not take some time to figure out what you can change to turn it around? People who commit suicide do not think of this because they are too self centered. They are so concerned with their emotional state that they refuse to look at anything outside of it. Emotions aren't life. Sometimes you need to swallow some pride, turn off your emotions and wait it out. It requires dicipline, selflessness and certain a decent amount of humility but it is possible and everyone CAN do it.

All in all, people are very similar. Certain events may have altered the triggers which effect them but they are still emotional, selfish, and reactionary. This is by choice. Everyone can choose to be resilient and everyone has the same chance at it. Choosing not to is weakness and self centeredness. It is also classified as stupiity because everyone should be aware of their capabilities. To ignore them only to concentrate on emotions is weak, selish and stupid. My statement stands.

1 Reply

@Icon,

Icon,

You've reiterated everything you've already said: People have the power to change their lives for the better, and anyone that decides on suicide is swallowed by an emotional state that is weak, self-centered, and stupid.

But, what if someone doesn't apply the same meaning to life that you do? Why are you attaching this "life must go on!" protocol to all beings. Sure, things could get better, but so what? If a person chooses to die, they choose to die. And if they don't have this profound emotion towards what life is, it won't matter as much to them. You can't just lump suicide into a category that is only committed by those that are weak, self-centered, and stupid. I guess this touches on something that I'm really against: Presumptuously judging. If you say all suicide victims are weak, then I can do the same thing to you for having chosen to live. Instead of dying, you're a weak, stupid, self-centered man living another day and causing more disruption, reaping the earth. Why are both judgments silly? Because I've applied my meaning of life onto you, and then judged you accordingly. I don't think that's fair.

Xris,

Just because humans affect other humans (no man is an island!), why should they work on sticking around longer? Do you have the same feeling towards other mammals? Or even a school of fish? If one of the fish in the school dies (probably by us!), are you up in arms? Probably not. It's this profound emotion and meaning attached to our own lives that is arrogant, in my opinion. Life and death are not bad, and it doesn't matter how one dies - they were going to die eventually. And guess what? Many more will be born.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, guys.

2 Replies

@Zetherin,

Zetherin wrote:

Icon,

You've reiterated everything you've already said: People have the power to change their lives for the better, and anyone that decides on suicide is swallowed by an emotional state that is weak, self-centered, and stupid.

But, what if someone doesn't apply the same meaning to life that you do? Why are you attaching this "life must go on!" protocol to all beings. Sure, things could get better, but so what? If a person chooses to die, they choose to die. And if they don't have this profound emotion towards what life is, it won't matter as much to them. You can't just lump suicide into a category that is only committed by those that are weak, self-centered, and stupid. I guess this touches on something that I'm really against: Presumptuously judging. If you say all suicide victims are weak, then I can do the same thing to you for having chosen to live. Instead of dying, you're a weak, stupid, self-centered man living another day and causing more disruption, reaping the earth. Why are both judgments silly? Because I've applied my meaning of life onto you, and then judged you accordingly. I don't think that's fair.

Xris,

Just because humans affect other humans (no man is an island!), why should they work on sticking around longer? Do you have the same feeling towards other mammals? Or even a school of fish? If one of the fish in the school dies (probably by us!), are you up in arms? Probably not. It's this profound emotion and meaning attached to our own lives that is arrogant, in my opinion. Life and death are not bad, and it doesn't matter how one dies - they were going to die eventually. And guess what? Many more will be born.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, guys.

That is you butmany cherish their sons daughters fathers and if they kill themselves it has disastrous effects on them..you cant deny their pain..

1 Reply

@Zetherin,

Zetherin wrote:

Icon,

You've reiterated everything you've already said: People have the power to change their lives for the better, and anyone that decides on suicide is swallowed by an emotional state that is weak, self-centered, and stupid.

But, what if someone doesn't apply the same meaning to life that you do? Why are you attaching this "life must go on!" protocol to all beings. Sure, things could get better, but so what? If a person chooses to die, they choose to die. And if they don't have this profound emotion towards what life is, it won't matter as much to them. You can't just lump suicide into a category that is only committed by those that are weak, self-centered, and stupid. I guess this touches on something that I'm really against: Presumptuously judging. If you say all suicide victims are weak, then I can do the same thing to you for having chosen to live. Instead of dying, you're a weak, stupid, self-centered man living another day and causing more disruption, reaping the earth. Why are both judgments silly? Because I've applied my meaning of life onto you, and then judged you accordingly. I don't think that's fair.

I see your point and I understand where you are coming from but I have to ask simply... What is the purpose of life? Why do we have life to begin with? Consciousness is not something which all things have. It is something which we seem to have a unique interaction with, so far as we know. So what is the purpose. Nature never wastes something. In nature, all things are as they need to be to get along and progress. So why consciousness for mankind? What is the purpose?

If there is no purpose then man should not exist. That which has no purpose is not natural and usually finds itself being pushed out of the circle of nature. Example, our appendix is no longer used because we no longer eat rocks.

So why?

1 Reply

@xris,

xris wrote:

That is you butmany cherish their sons daughters fathers and if they kill themselves it has disastrous effects on them..you cant deny their pain..

You can't deny their pain, but pain doesn't matter in the whole scheme of things - it is feeble human emotion. It means nothing to the universe. We can't value someone's life based on emotions WE have.

1 Reply

@Zetherin,

Zetherin wrote:

You can't deny their pain, but pain doesn't matter in the whole scheme of things - it is feeble human emotion. It means nothing to the universe. We can't value someone's life based on emotions WE have.

Ill leave the universe to itself im mortal.

1 Reply

@Icon,

Icon wrote:

I see your point and I understand where you are coming from but I have to ask simply... What is the purpose of life? Why do we have life to begin with? Consciousness is not something which all things have. It is something which we seem to have a unique interaction with, so far as we know. So what is the purpose. Nature never wastes something. In nature, all things are as they need to be to get along and progress. So why consciousness for mankind? What is the purpose?

If there is no purpose then man should not exist. That which has no purpose is not natural and usually finds itself being pushed out of the circle of nature. Example, our appendix is no longer used because we no longer eat rocks.

So why?

If you're looking for the meaning of life, I can only provide another opinion.

Here's what I believe: We apply meaning. Nothing has innate meaning before we've applied it. That asteroid in the sky becomes an asteroid we've observed only after we've observed it. Before that, it just was. The universe just is, before we make our human judgments (and still is even after, but not to us). Therefore, it's silly, in my opinion, to overvalue our existence over anything else.

You ask, what is the purpose? I ask, why does there have to be one? Nature may very well toss us out eventually, and why is this so hard to believe? We are no greater than any of these other creatures here, despite having more developed brains. I don't believe humans are special. I'll agree that they are unique - we do have a developed frontal lobe. But actually, from a biological standpoint, we are pretty shitty for a species. Most mammals have defensible and survivable offspring by the first year; our 8-year-olds can barely do ****. Even from a sensory perspective, we aren't that great - Lions can see up to 4 times as great in darkness than we can, bats interact by emitting high-pitched sounds we can barely make out, most mammals even have a sense of touch that is much more sensitive than what we're capable etc. We exist no differently than any other species that has come before us. Did the dinosaurs have to have this profound purpose you're asking about? They're gone now, and yes, they were conscious.

Basically, whatever purpose you're contemplating for us, apply the same contemplation to every other being. We are picking one thing out (that we have more developed reasoning skills) and then saying we're special. We don't have wings, are birds special? We don't have tough hide, are hippopotamuses special? If you say one is special, say all are special, or don't say any are at all.

2 Replies

Is death the only way out?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know