When is Assisted Suicide Justified?

[Pythagorean]

Helping others has a psychological effect on the brain. For many helping others brings about purpose, motivation, a sense of accomplishment, friends, self respect etc. All of the things that can get you through mental turmoil or suicidal thoughts.

You don't need to be religious to get these perks. In my mind, an earthly world is just as meaningful as a religious one. What kind of meaningful place would a perfect world be compared to one where you can solved problems and help the suffering. On Earth where there is imperfection, there is work to do and meaningful things to accomplish in the sense that what you do has an impact on reality.

Now I don't want to put down religions, religious worlds are meaningful too, but life is at least as meaningful. Just saying that even if there is no correct religion, the meaning is still here and the reasons still justified, in my opinion.

you're kind of admitting your subjectivity though by choice of words.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but objective is to fact as subjective is to opinion.

 

[WaveJumper]

I hate to be the one who brings humour to this serious thread, but you could always find meaning to life by opting for the obvious evolutionary purpose of "life" - sex(replication). If you find replication/sex out of reach, then the Esc. button is always within reach. As uncle Einstein says - you can't kill a dead person, "death" shouldn't be that scary to a person who knows what modern physics says about reality.

 

[jreelawg]

My point is that earning friends, staying busy, having goals, et, are real objective things. Those things could help your depression. As to whether or not it has cosmological meaning, probably not, but what does?

Also, evolution isn't entirely sexual reproduction. One could change the coarse of history, and that would effect evolution. Say you prevented a biological attack on an entire continent, that would effect how the human race evolves more than having a few kids. This is why ants help build colonies etc.

If you are going to not count reality as meaningful, that is like saying nothing makes a difference. Maybe on the cosmological scale the difference is extremely small, but there is still cause and effect and to me that alone is meaning.

The meaning in religion is that you will either get to keep living, the only difference between no religion is how long and in what manner. So I think that all forms of living are equally meaningful, even if one form is limited in time. Now I respect people who are religious, but being atheist doesn't require not caring about anything as if we are just specs of sand.

 

[f95toli]

If you are going to not count reality as meaningful, that is like saying nothing makes a difference. Maybe on the cosmological scale the difference is extremely small, but there is still cause and effect and to me that alone is meaning.

That was sort of the point. As far as we know there is no objective (lets use the word "scientific", although not quite accurate) reason for why ANYTHING is meaningful, or -as you put it- makes a difference. As far as we know our universe is "meaningless", there is no objective reason for why it -or we- exists.
I realize that you can't really get far with this kind of reasoning (which I guess you could call agnostic nihilism) but I think the basic idea is important: you can't really use intellectual arguments to persuade someone that life is "worth living".

Note that this is quite a new concept in human history; only a few hundred years ago there were no atheists (it is sometimes said that Spinoza in the western world was the first atheist, but even he went to temple occasionally) and people were not even religious in the modern sense (it was not something you chose to be as it is today, since you couldn't really be NOT religious), hence "meaning" was something objective in that whatever religion you belonged to had certain rules for how you were suppose to live and die: it was either live well or go to hell (literally) when you died.

 

[baywax]

I hate to be the one who brings humour to this serious thread, but you could always find meaning to life by opting for the obvious evolutionary purpose of "life" - sex(replication). If you find replication/sex out of reach, then the Esc. button is always within reach. As uncle Einstein says - you can't kill a dead person, "death" shouldn't be that scary to a person who knows what modern physics says about reality.

You've touched on a point I was going to bring up re: this topic.

Humour may be the lifeline many depressed and suicidal people can use to crawl back out of the state of mind they've found themselves in.

If laughter is the best medicine, why not use it? Of the two or so states of mind there are, humour and serousness... why is it seriousness takes the lead among a modern population with rooves, sidewalks, drainage, free schooling etc... Can no one point out the positives and the humourous side to life for those people wallowing in self-pity etc..?

I met a girl who was slated to have part of her brain removed because it was somehow determined that part of her brain was causing her "blackouts". I personally believed the blackouts were some sort of attention getting device or an unconscious defense measure.

In fact I was with her when she had one of the episodes. She sort of crumpled up on the ground. That's when I started talking to her in a Donald Duck voice. And she started to laugh!... right in the middle of her "episode". I saw a glimpse of a way out for her... and a way to avoid surgery. But, seriousness and white lab coats prevailed and she's missing part of her brain today.

Suicide and other self destructive behaviour is a symptom of "buying into" our own and other people's beliefs. When a person has had a diverse education and experience they are able to weigh their thoughts and other's against more prevalent and proven ways of thinking that nullify and combat negative and self-destructive attitudes.

 

[WaveJumper]

Only a life lived for others is a life worth living.

-- A.Einstein

 

[jreelawg]

That was sort of the point. As far as we know there is no objective (lets use the word "scientific", although not quite accurate) reason for why ANYTHING is meaningful, or -as you put it- makes a difference. As far as we know our universe is "meaningless", there is no objective reason for why it -or we- exists.
I realize that you can't really get far with this kind of reasoning (which I guess you could call agnostic nihilism) but I think the basic idea is important: you can't really use intellectual arguments to persuade someone that life is "worth living".

Note that this is quite a new concept in human history; only a few hundred years ago there were no atheists (it is sometimes said that Spinoza in the western world was the first atheist, but even he went to temple occasionally) and people were not even religious in the modern sense (it was not something you chose to be as it is today, since you couldn't really be NOT religious), hence "meaning" was something objective in that whatever religion you belonged to had certain rules for how you were suppose to live and die: it was either live well or go to hell (literally) when you died.

I think that the problem is people tend to use the word "meaning" in this context as supernatural. Life has meaning, just maybe not a higher meaning than ordinary. Perhaps you should use the word reason instead. But, that is kind of a childish question to ask. Always asking why leads to more whys. Not knowing why you exist doesn't mean you don't exist.

Another word misused I think is "worth", "ie. life is not worth living". Certainly there is meaning and there is worth. The meaning is what you do and what happens in the world, as simple as that. The worth is the experiences and so forth. Your argument is only that the meaning is not enough. Like a spoiled kid who wants everything, people want to be the masters of the universe, they want to live forever and hold the stars in there hands. People just always want more.

If you count experiences as something of value then life is worth living because nothing has no value at all. That is why you should try and make your life more valuable by living a positive and happy life, make the most out of it for what it is worth.

If you are to say life has no meaning, or that life is not worth living, then you must define the terms and then you have an argument. Simply, if I can't have everything then I don't want anything is a poor ideal.

As to the point about reasons, maybe you intend to ask why one should do good instead of bad if your afterlife doesn't depend on it. How many people lose sleep at night over helping others or accomplishing goals? A lot more people lose sleep over hurting others and or ruining their own lives. I think that the most value in life is to be found in perfecting the science of "being able to sleep better at night" being happy with yourself and so forth. Some think things like money are better, but we are social creatures, and our minds are designed to depend on people to work best. This is scientific, no higher meaning required, it is the mechanics of the mind. You can use your observation, and you can tell what kind of people are the happiest. Maybe you should use modern technology to make sure they aren't lying though.Also, I want to make the distinction between things you like to do and things that make you happy. They are not necessarily the same. Satisfying primitive urges isn't necessarily happiness. Does shooting up make a person happy in the long run? Does smoking crack? Some things give short lived thrills, but do lots of harm to the general long term well being.

 

[f95toli]

I think that the problem is people tend to use the word "meaning" in this context as supernatural. Life has meaning, just maybe not a higher meaning than ordinary. Perhaps you should use the word reason instead. But, that is kind of a childish question to ask.

But again, I think you are missing the point. I am not saying that life does not have a subjective meaning, what I am saying is simply that there is -as far as we know- no objective reason for why one should get out of bed in the morning, or do anything at all for that matter.
"The meaning of life" has the same problem as any other philosophical question (or any problem in science for that matter); we basically have to postulate some axioms (which in this case could be e.g. "things that make me feel good makes life worth living") before we can proceed; you can't create a reasonably consistent system otherwise.

But the problem with this is of course that one has to accept these axioms in the first place and you can't persuade someone to do that just by appealing to their intellect.
Now, to a large extent these "axioms" (or whatever you want to call them) are hardwired into our us (we e.g. WANT things, food, love etc and we have reward centres in our brain that makes us feel good when we get them), but the interesting thing with the human brain is that we are aware that these things are just "hardware" meaning we can choose to ignore them or for some reason consider them to be "not enough" (as is to some extent the case in clinical depressions where the "feel good mechanism" do not work properly because of problems with seratonin levels etc).
If you are religious you can also postulate that some of the things we experience as "good" are not merely biochemistry but has some objective value.

Not knowing why you exist doesn't mean you don't exist.

No, but it does mean that I can't be SURE that I exist; which bring us back to what I wrote above about the problem with purely intellectual arguments in this case.
It would e.g. be very difficult (I would assume impossible) to persuade a computer (to be more precise a Turing machine) that life is worth living. I suspect that if we some day manage to create a true AI "life is worth living" is one of the things that will need to be postulated in its basic algorithms (and yes, I do realize that this is just Asimov's third law)

 

[baywax]

Only a life lived for others is a life worth living.

-- A.Einstein

"The shortest distance between two people is a smile."

Victor Borg

 

[tchitt]

Only a life lived for others is a life worth living.

-- A.Einstein

Nothing against Albert, but that's a load of crap. There's no such thing as a life "lived for others"... everything has its roots in selfishness, and there isn't anything wrong with that. But that's another topic.

As for the original post; the meaning of life comes from within. It's the type of thing that you need to make for yourself. We all feel a little hopeless, lost, and inconsequential once in a while... I'd be willing to bet even the more religious among us have their moments. It's never really justified, in my opinion. There aren't many things that can happen to you that time and a positive outlook won't fix.

Our "purpose" may be no more important than that of the grass in our yards. It grows to please our sense of aesthetics only to be cut down for the same reason. If the blade of grass had a consciousness how could it possibly fathom this endless cycle of death by mutilation? (Okay, maybe the grass doesn't actually DIE every time you mow the yard but you get my meaning.) Then again our purpose could be any number of things, and we'll probably never know what it is... or maybe we will. That's the problem isn't it?

My point is, basically, that to feel so overwhelmed and depressed about your life that you'd want to end it is ridiculous. I say stiffen that upper lip... we're all in the same boat.

 

[jreelawg]

But again, I think you are missing the point. I am not saying that life does not have a subjective meaning, what I am saying is simply that there is -as far as we know- no objective reason for why one should get out of bed in the morning, or do anything at all for that matter.
"The meaning of life" has the same problem as any other philosophical question (or any problem in science for that matter); we basically have to postulate some axioms (which in this case could be e.g. "things that make me feel good makes life worth living") before we can proceed; you can't create a reasonably consistent system otherwise.

But the problem with this is of course that one has to accept these axioms in the first place and you can't persuade someone to do that just by appealing to their intellect.
Now, to a large extent these "axioms" (or whatever you want to call them) are hardwired into our us (we e.g. WANT things, food, love etc and we have reward centres in our brain that makes us feel good when we get them), but the interesting thing with the human brain is that we are aware that these things are just "hardware" meaning we can choose to ignore them or for some reason consider them to be "not enough" (as is to some extent the case in clinical depressions where the "feel good mechanism" do not work properly because of problems with seratonin levels etc).
If you are religious you can also postulate that some of the things we experience as "good" are not merely biochemistry but has some objective value.No, but it does mean that I can't be SURE that I exist; which bring us back to what I wrote above about the problem with purely intellectual arguments in this case.
It would e.g. be very difficult (I would assume impossible) to persuade a computer (to be more precise a Turing machine) that life is worth living. I suspect that if we some day manage to create a true AI "life is worth living" is one of the things that will need to be postulated in its basic algorithms (and yes, I do realize that this is just Asimov's third law)

I get your point, but I don't understand what is indented to be "meaning". I guess you mean, super natural purpose, or reason for living. To say their is no intellectual reason to get up I don't agree with. I get up because if I don't I would be laying there all day. Why do you eat? You eat because if you don't you die. Is eating meaningless? I think it means something, it means that our body will digest the food and give us fuel and keep us healthy. That means something to me. It is not subjective that if you don't breath you die.

You also say that if their was a heaven then there would be a reason, or reward, but what would that reward be other than continued self awareness and "rewards of the mind". Therefore, if life itself has no meaning, then no supernatural existence would have any meaning either.

The very fact that a quantum vacuum can organize into particles, atoms, and so forth until life and self awareness is enough of a mysterious and amazing wonder that I don't need a religion to satisfy my desire for something supernatural. If there is a supernatural meaning to life, then all the better, but other wise, so what. I'm not sure I would want to live forever anyways.

 

[WaveJumper]

Only a life lived for others is a life worth living.

-- A.Einstein

Nothing against Albert, but that's a load of crap. There's no such thing as a life "lived for others"... everything has its roots in selfishness, and there isn't anything wrong with that. But that's another topic.

Homo sapiens are no longer pure dumb animals. If you think we are, you are wrong. We are animals but of a different sort. I've yet to hear of an animal that possesses altruism, beside some dogs that are willing to die for their owners. We feel compassion, we fall in love, we can't live without our children, that's what "life lived for others" means. Sure, there are pathetic idiots who never felt anything remotely similar to compassion or love toward anyone in their lives and that's why we sometimes call them "animals" or "apes"(at least in my own native language).

BTW, "others" does not signify "society" but "friends/loved ones".

 

[jreelawg]

It would e.g. be very difficult (I would assume impossible) to persuade a computer (to be more precise a Turing machine) that life is worth living. I suspect that if we some day manage to create a true AI "life is worth living" is one of the things that will need to be postulated in its basic algorithms (and yes, I do realize that this is just Asimov's third law)

A machine will be what it is. A rock will be a rock and a blender a blender. There is no reason for living needed, just as humans do, they will perform their functions. I think the opposite of you, I think that a "true AI" would need to be programmed to think life is not worth living.

I think that the belief that life is not worth living is purely a malfunction in a brain which has confused itself with arbitrary terms. If the AI was intelligent enough it wouldn't make the mistake of self terminating because of confusing terminology.

"In science fiction, the Three Laws of Robotics are a set of three rules written by Isaac Asimov, which almost all positronic robots appearing in his fiction must obey. Introduced in his 1942 short story "Runaround", although foreshadowed in a few earlier stories,..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Laws_of_Robotics

Fictional laws don't count.

 

[baywax]

Suicide is Painless
Music by Johnny Mandel Lyrics by Mike Altman

Through early morning fog I see
visions of the things to be
the pains that are withheld for me
I realize and I can see...

that suicide is painless
It brings on many changes
and I can take or leave it if I please.
I try to find a way to make
all our little joys relate
without that ever-present hate
but now I know that it's too late, and...

that suicide is painless
It brings on many changes
and I can take or leave it if I please.

The game of life is hard to play
I'm going to lose it anyway
The losing card I'll someday lay
so this is all I have to say.

that suicide is painless
It brings on many changes
and I can take or leave it if I please.

The only way to win is cheat
And lay it down before I'm beat
and to another give my seat
for that's the only painless feat.

that suicide is painless
It brings on many changes
and I can take or leave it if I please.

The sword of time will pierce our skins
It doesn't hurt when it begins
But as it works its way on in
The pain grows stronger...watch it grin, but...

that suicide is painless
It brings on many changes
and I can take or leave it if I please.

A brave man once requested me
to answer questions that are key
is it to be or not to be
and I replied 'oh why ask me?'

that suicide is painless
It brings on many changes
and I can take or leave it if I please.


'Cause suicide is painless
it brings on many changes
and I can take or leave it if I please.

...and you can do the same thing if you please.

 

[WaveJumper]

HIM - "Join me in death"

http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/him/joinmeindeath.html


... but I am in no way condoning suicide, as Paradise Lost say in "True Belief" - "I can see no good in taking your own life, when any moment death calls..."

 

[baywax]

Its like I said about killing yourself because you're in some sort of pain.

Just as your life is expiring and you drift into the unknown... the phone starts ringing and its the doctor, lottery, girlfriend, whathaveyou... with a cure for your ailment.

 

[jreelawg]

Suicide is painful to your family and friends. Plus it is a bad way to go down in history if you care about that type of thing.
Most important though, the attitude that led up to suicide is painful. You don't just go from being very happy to suicide in a moment and experience no pain. The person who wrote those lyrics must have been in some serious emotional turmoil.

Why inflict so much self emotional torment on yourself in the first place. You don't need to obsess yourself with hate and misery. Emotional pain is relative. One feels intense emotional pain if he can't keep his business going, or what not. To some who have much less they may feel the pain when they watch their family murdered. Yet their is a path to happiness for all free people, and to give into your critical negative self judgment is a weakness. The least painful path to life is a way in which you would never want to kill yourself.

Maybe the mode of thinking that leads up to suicide should be included as the process of suicide, and then suicide cannot be called painless.

 

[baywax]

Then there's always assisted suicide:

Britain's Sky TV criticized for assisted death film

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/081210/canada/canada_us_britain_death

I think the main sticking point about assisted suicide is that we don't always know someone has requested to be killed. Its very hard to prove consent in other words. Especially with the progress being made in counterfeit signatures etc.