Is suicide morally or ethically wrong?

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Path,

thank you for the post.

Originally Posted by path_of_one

I've been touched personally by suicide and my conclusion is that it is ethically wrong because it is, ultimately, a selfish act. It harms others.

in what way does it harm other beings?

Someone has to find the person who has committed suicide, and that is incredibly painful and leaves a lasting horrible memory that is difficult to deal with. In addition, family are often quite psychologically traumatized by suicide. Quite frankly, suicide is a sort of mental abuse to the people who have to live on and deal with it.

so, if i understand your point, suicide is wrong because its selfish, yes? if that is the reason that it is wrong, isn't it just as selfish to want to keep the person from committing suicide to spare ourselves pain?

is there degrees of selfishness by which an act becomes immoral or unethical or is any act which contains a degree of selfishness immoral or unethical?

I certainly feel for the person who commits suicide (or attempts it), as they are obviously dealing with a great deal of psychological distress. It is very sad. But I feel the same way about a great number of other unethical behaviors as well. It doesn't change that it is abusive to those that are closest to the person and harms them.

that seems to be placing the feelings of other beings before oneself which is an admirable quality. shouldn't that same consideration be made for the being that wants to commit suicide?

metta,

~v

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Q,

thank you for the post.

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Suicide is a failure, three fold. It is a selfish act (most of the time),

why is a selfish action a failure? i'm not sure if you mean immoral or unethical in such description so pardon the clumsy wording.

it is a failure on the part of those close to someone to see the stress, and to step forward and take control, of one who is emotionally out of control and crying for help (the signs are always there, we just miss them for what ever reasons), and it is a failure on society for allowing media hounds to tought that life is cheap.

what do you mean by "take control of one that is emotionally out of control"? do you mean to use physical means to prevent them from committing suicide?

Morally wrong? If one follows montheistic scriptures, it invariably says that life is given by a God, and is taken by a God, no one else. But we do it all the time anyway.

does that mean you think it is morally wrong?

metta,

~v

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Dauer,

thank you for the post.

Originally Posted by dauer

Vaj,

I don't think it does, just acknowledges that cultural taboo can influence members of a society. If someone is very depressed and considering suicide, and there's no taboo against suicide, they may be more willing to take their life. To me it has more to do with the effects of society on the individual than with the independent ideas of individuals.

-- Dauer

are you indicating that you think cultural taboos are ethics? i'm unclear about the idea of "more willing" is there a sliding scale of willingness that would be applicable here?

metta,

~v

[Eclectic Mystic]

People who commit suicide make the same fallacy as someone who claims that it is selfish-- that is, that there is even an incentive to commit suicide.

[Vajradhara]

Namaste EM,

thank you for the post.

Originally Posted by Eclectic Mystic

People who commit suicide make the same fallacy as someone who claims that it is selfish-- that is, that there is even an incentive to commit suicide.

are you suggesting that a person that commits suicide is doing so due to a perceived incentive to do so? perhaps i don't understand the use of the term incentive in this context.

metta,

~v

[dauer]

Vaj,

are you indicating that you think cultural taboos are ethics? i'm unclear about the idea of "more willing" is there a sliding scale of willingness that would be applicable here?

More that I see suicide as a social taboo that has been incorporated into society's system of ethics. There are a lot of taboos that are connected on some level with cultural ethics like bestiality and incest. If a man and a dog love each other, and the dog comes onto the man, why shouldn't they have sexual relations? I don't see anything explicitly unethical about that however there is a very strong societal taboo against it that is connected to the society's ethics.

-- Dauer

[Vajradhara]

Namaste dauer,

thank you for the post.

Originally Posted by dauer

More that I see suicide as a social taboo that has been incorporated into society's system of ethics. There are a lot of taboos that are connected on some level with cultural ethics like bestiality and incest. If a man and a dog love each other, and the dog comes onto the man, why shouldn't they have sexual relations? I don't see anything explicitly unethical about that however there is a very strong societal taboo against it that is connected to the society's ethics.

-- Dauer

you're suggesting that if there wasn't a societal taboo against beastiality, more people would have sex with animals? you're suggesting that more people would have incestuous relationships? that seems like the slippery slope fallacy.

leaving aside sex for a moment, let's get back to death! so i think i understand you to be saying that suicide is ethically wrong but not, per se, immoral. is that correct?

metta,

~v

[path_of_one]

Hi, Vaj and namaste-

Originally Posted by Vajradhara

in what way does it harm other beings?

Psychologically. Similar to witnessing a murder, or war, or physical abuse, or rape. Violence impacts others who witness it psychologically in a negative way.

Additionally, if the person is young (which they often are) and has children or a spouse, it causes people to be widowed and orphaned. These things are social problems and also cause psychological harm to those left behind without the benefit of their parent or spouse. It is very difficult for children to understand death; suicide causes more difficulty than anything else I've seen for kids to learn how to deal with the death of a parent. The natural tendency is for children to question themselves as causes of the parent's stress and illness and it is very hard to remove such feelings. It can harm a child into adulthood and is a lasting stigma.

so, if i understand your point, suicide is wrong because its selfish, yes? if that is the reason that it is wrong, isn't it just as selfish to want to keep the person from committing suicide to spare ourselves pain?

No. Because I am doing it for more reasons than that. People want to commit suicide because they are ill. The compassionate thing is to heal them. Death does not (in my opinion) heal the pain. It perpetuates and accelerates it.

Secondly, I argue suicide is unethical because it (like all violent acts) psychologically damages others. I do not think it is selfish to minimize psychological suffering of the group (family, friends, etc.) by insisting on ethical standards that minimize violence, including suicide.

The way I see it, suicide is mental and psychological abuse. Like other forms of mental abuse, it is selfish, yet generally unintentional-- that is, it stems from a person's own pain and not a desire to harm others. That said, I do not think it is acceptable for a being to mentally abuse another. The argument you use here could be used to argue that no mental/emotional abuse is unethical, because the desire of the abused to be free from pain is just as selfish as the desire of the abuser to have the perceived pay-off from abusing. I just don't buy that. I think people who abuse others (in whatever form) are suffering and need to be rehabilitated (healed). If that is not possible, others should be protected from their abuse. In the case of a suicidal person, that would mean inpatient care.

is there degrees of selfishness by which an act becomes immoral or unethical or is any act which contains a degree of selfishness immoral or unethical?

I think selfishness is unethical. But defining selfishness is the tricky part.

shouldn't that same consideration be made for the being that wants to commit suicide?

No. For the reasons above. To me, that is like saying society should consider the feelings of an abusive parent by allowing them to abuse their child. Considering their feelings does not mean sanctioning behaviors that harm others. Compassion does not mean agreement with a behavior.

Peace,
Kim/Path

[dauer]

Vaj,

you're suggesting that if there wasn't a societal taboo against beastiality, more people would have sex with animals? you're suggesting that more people would have incestuous relationships? that seems like the slippery slope fallacy.

Yes, I am suggesting that, though I think incest is probably trickier because I think some of that may be hardwired. However, I don't think the hard wiring applies to, say, cousins that one hasn't been raised alongside.

leaving aside sex for a moment, let's get back to death! so i think i understand you to be saying that suicide is ethically wrong but not, per se, immoral. is that correct?

Pretty much, when what is ethical is understood in light of cultural bias. There are some cultures that don't view suicide the same way, at least in certain circumstances. Their situation would be a little different.

-- Dauer

[Vajradhara]

Namaste path,

thank you for the post.

Originally Posted by path_of_one

Psychologically. Similar to witnessing a murder, or war, or physical abuse, or rape. Violence impacts others who witness it psychologically in a negative way.

Additionally, if the person is young (which they often are) and has children or a spouse, it causes people to be widowed and orphaned. These things are social problems and also cause psychological harm to those left behind without the benefit of their parent or spouse. It is very difficult for children to understand death; suicide causes more difficulty than anything else I've seen for kids to learn how to deal with the death of a parent. The natural tendency is for children to question themselves as causes of the parent's stress and illness and it is very hard to remove such feelings. It can harm a child into adulthood and is a lasting stigma.

are you are saying that the individual is not as important as the group, the groups feelings (i.e. their desire to avoid pain) take precedence over the individuals feelings (i.e. their desire to avoid pain) and for this reason a being should not commit suicide?

No. Because I am doing it for more reasons than that. People want to commit suicide because they are ill. The compassionate thing is to heal them.

what if there is no healing available, no cure so to speak?

Secondly, I argue suicide is unethical because it (like all violent acts) psychologically damages others. I do not think it is selfish to minimize psychological suffering of the group (family, friends, etc.) by insisting on ethical standards that minimize violence, including suicide.

why not? it is the group that is desiring to have their feelings spared, that seems selfish on its face. i don't have a problem with selfish actions per se as there are degrees of such.

The argument you use here could be used to argue that no mental/emotional abuse is unethical, because the desire of the abused to be free from pain is just as selfish as the desire of the abuser to have the perceived pay-off from abusing. I just don't buy that.

that is the argument. it seems that your argument is that suicide is wrong because other people suffer mental anguish. such a view clearly posits the "other people" as the more important group and their desire to avoid pain is as selfish as the person committing suicides desire to avoid pain. i realize you think that death doesn't prevent pain though for beings that do not share such a belief the fact that pain is transmitted through the physical from is a strong indicator that death stops pain.

I think people who abuse others (in whatever form) are suffering and need to be rehabilitated (healed). If that is not possible, others should be protected from their abuse. In the case of a suicidal person, that would mean inpatient care.

to prevent your own pain you would deprive others of their liberty and their choice. you don't think that such a view is selfish?

I think selfishness is unethical. But defining selfishness is the tricky part.

ah, we'd disagree on this particular idea.

Compassion does not mean agreement with a behavior.

Peace,
Kim/Path

you're not talking about disagreement, you are talking about involuntarily committing people to psychological institutions.

nevertheless, i understand that you think that suicide is immoral and unethical, is that correct?

metta,

~v

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Dauer,

thank you for the post.

Originally Posted by dauer

Pretty much, when what is ethical is understood in light of cultural bias. There are some cultures that don't view suicide the same way, at least in certain circumstances. Their situation would be a little different.

-- Dauer

let's take, for example, 11th century Japan. in what way would suicide be a little different? i would suggest that it would be quite a bit different than most cultures that are not Asian however, within most Asian cultures the practice of suicide has a very different connotation than it does in non-Asian cultures.

metta,

~v

[dauer]

Vaj,

right. That's the way in which I see it as culturally bound.

[Tao_Equus]

9 people I knew committed suicide within 24 months of each other, all were living in the same area I grew up in. I cannot know the desperation that drove them to it but I do not believe for a moment that they did not consider the anguish of their loved ones. Rational or not, they had to make the choice that that anguish was less than the alternative.

I think suicide is super-rational, or better still beyond rational. Such an unequivocal action is beyond the thoughts of anybody else. Of course there are flippant, hasty, spur of the moment and accidental suicides but the majority, I posit, are not at all like that. Suicide is the biggest, most profound decision that person will ever make. Even for the most tormented mind it is not a decision that they make with ease.

This pre-emptive guilt trip, that suicide is selfish, that is common in western religions is, as Vaj hints at, not the norm in every culture. Quite the opposite, it is the noble and courageous thing to do if one is incapable of meeting ones responsibilities not just in Japan but throughout history and across the geographical plane. The Japanese may have ritualised it for a time, but it was by no means unique to that culture. Often suicide is seen by the person as an unselfish act that frees up time and resources for those they love and that they feel they do not deserve to squander. IE.... that it is the opposite of a selfish act.

There are attention seeking cries for help but for most people choosing that path that are deadly serious there is one attempt, and it is successful. Pain, anguish, suffering are all relative and the suicide has weighed them all before he/she ever takes that final step. Social taboos are the last of their worries. Suicide is sad and very difficult for the loved ones yes, but the religious taboos that would never hinder a serious attempt do nothing at all to prevent it and only add to the pain of the relatives/friends. The only people the taboos effect are the victims loved ones. My thoughts about the people I have known, and they number more than that 9, are more respectful of the courage it takes to take such an irreversible decision. I in no way call it selfish. I just hope I never experience their anguish.


tao

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Tao_Equus

9 people I knew committed suicide within 24 months of each other, all were living in the same area I grew up in. I cannot know the desperation that drove them to it but I do not believe for a moment that they did not consider the anguish of their loved ones. Rational or not, they had to make the choice that that anguish was less than the alternative.

I think suicide is super-rational, or better still beyond rational. Such an unequivocal action is beyond the thoughts of anybody else. Of course there are flippant, hasty, spur of the moment and accidental suicides but the majority, I posit, are not at all like that. Suicide is the biggest, most profound decision that person will ever make. Even for the most tormented mind it is not a decision that they make with ease.

This pre-emptive guilt trip, that suicide is selfish, that is common in western religions is, as Vaj hints at, not the norm in every culture. Quite the opposite, it is the noble and courageous thing to do if one is incapable of meeting ones responsibilities not just in Japan but throughout history and across the geographical plane. The Japanese may have ritualised it for a time, but it was by no means unique to that culture. Often suicide is seen by the person as an unselfish act that frees up time and resources for those they love and that they feel they do not deserve to squander. IE.... that it is the opposite of a selfish act.

There are attention seeking cries for help but for most people choosing that path that are deadly serious there is one attempt, and it is successful. Pain, anguish, suffering are all relative and the suicide has weighed them all before he/she ever takes that final step. Social taboos are the last of their worries. Suicide is sad and very difficult for the loved ones yes, but the religious taboos that would never hinder a serious attempt do nothing at all to prevent it and only add to the pain of the relatives/friends. The only people the taboos effect are the victims loved ones. My thoughts about the people I have known, and they number more than that 9, are more respectful of the courage it takes to take such an irreversible decision. I in no way call it selfish. I just hope I never experience their anguish.


tao

What you are referring to is the ability of the mind to over-ride the will of self preservation. And it is selfish (self centered). They have no other that they can turn to, so they turn within and...find no answer, but that to end their pain. Cut's close to the heart of the matter, of not having something, someone greater than self, to help one, in desperate measures...

Permanent solution to a temporary problem.

[path_of_one]

Originally Posted by Vajradhara

Namaste path,

thank you for the post.

Hi, Vaj and namaste-

are you are saying that the individual is not as important as the group, the groups feelings (i.e. their desire to avoid pain) take precedence over the individuals feelings (i.e. their desire to avoid pain) and for this reason a being should not commit suicide?

In this particular case, yes. Minimizing suffering would mean that one being suffering is better than several dozen suffering. Particularly when the being who is suicidal is generally able to be healed with patience, medical support, and time. I argue for fixing the social system to allow this and to prevent severe depression to begin with, rather than simply accepting suicide. To accept suicide is to abandon both the group and the individual in their pain, rather than to fix what is broken.

Suicide for particular culture-bound reasons that are socially acceptable is still not the best option to me, but I put it in a different category of behavior. I have been assuming we are discussing suicide in first world modern societies. There are many other types of suicide in other times and cultures that have different social results.

what if there is no healing available, no cure so to speak?

Generally, there are preventative measures (socially) and cures (socially). It is quite rare that this is not the case, but in those cases, I would consider it euthanasia and not suicide. I think in such cases as severe chronic pain for which the patient attempts to find palliative care and is unable to withstand such pain, euthanasia should be an option and this should be something that the family can work through together, just as the case with terminal illnesses. But I do think that the unselfish thing is to try all options before concluding something is incurable. Most mental illness is curable or manageable (or can be prevented), as indicated by relatively low incidences of these issues in non-first-world and non-modern societies.

why not? it is the group that is desiring to have their feelings spared, that seems selfish on its face. i don't have a problem with selfish actions per se as there are degrees of such.

I think I answered this above. I am for minimizing suffering of beings. And I agree there are degrees of selfishness, but I think all selfishness is short-sighted and deleterious overall, since I believe all beings are actually one (and in that context, should work for the whole).

such a view clearly posits the "other people" as the more important group and their desire to avoid pain is as selfish as the person committing suicides desire to avoid pain.

If the group is never held as more important than the individual, then what can be said to be unethical? Why is murder a problem? Stealing? Adultery? All beings have desires to alleviate some sort of suffering and to gain some sort of pleasure. Why is any behavior unethical if everyone's desires are equally selfish? How would society function if beings were never expected to sacrifice something of themselves for the good of the group?

i realize you think that death doesn't prevent pain though for beings that do not share such a belief the fact that pain is transmitted through the physical from is a strong indicator that death stops pain.

I recognize that beings may believe this. It does not make me feel it is accurate. Humans used to believe that the sun went 'round the earth and that the earth was flat. The earth certainly appears to be flat much of the time. So while I understand that beings may not agree with my beliefs and that I could be wrong, I also posit they could be wrong and I don't agree with them. I understand why people commit suicide. I just don't think it actually helps.

to prevent your own pain you would deprive others of their liberty and their choice. you don't think that such a view is selfish?

I said nothing of myself. I was speaking of the group as a whole. A suicide rarely affects only one person. Secondly, I think that it isn't only about preventing others' pain, but also protecting the person from harming themself until they can try to be healed. Thirdly, there are circumstances where it is appropriate (in my opinion) to deprive people of liberty for the good of society. I am not saying this would be one of them, but I certainly think it is appropriate to deprive people of their freedom when they murder, rape, and otherwise harm others. We are social animals. For survival, we must have some ground rules.

you're not talking about disagreement, you are talking about involuntarily committing people to psychological institutions.

No, I'm not necessarily. My own experiences have been with people who wanted to be in institutions until they could get better and were denied care. I do think, however, there is a place for committing people to institutions if they will harm themselves or others and there is hope for healing. It's the same question of putting someone on life support for a while to see if they can make it through a coma. It is (I think) inappropriate to do it indefinitely, but for a while to see if healing can take place, it is helpful.

nevertheless, i understand that you think that suicide is immoral and unethical, is that correct?

I think it's difficult to say, because ethical and moral are diversely defined. I think suicide (as opposed to euthanasia) is unethical in most cases, unless socially sanctioned. This is apparent statistically. Most societies view suicide under most circumstances as wrong behavior (the definition of ethics). I agree, because suicide threatens others' psychological health and the social fabric. When socially sanctioned, I may not agree with it, but I would not argue that it is socially unethical. I think God doesn't punish people for suicide or anything like that, but I think we work through our sufferings until we can live without them. So I think that suicide simply moves one's suffering from one lifetime to the next, plus adds on the suffering one has caused others in the process, plus means the being misses the rest of that life's lessons and so must face all of those again. It isn't that I think God finds it immoral, but rather that it simply is pointless for the being who is suffering and detrimental to others. So it is a wrong behavior because it is out of harmony with alleviating suffering and because it is ultimately useless to all involved.