Why are people so afraid of suicide?

[Byron]

What is the truth of suicide? For the individual, society, and spirit?

The modern views of suicide are based on dogma of religion, law, or medicine, but neglect the personal, moral, natural, and spiritual views.

So, what is the truth of the subject?


Regarding the cost to society-- it is often more costly for society to sustain a life that does not want to be lived, than it is to let it go.

It is also more energetically costly to keep someone pushed in 'life' whose spirit is not entirely in life, and their work and energy that they give off to others that are fully in life, is energetically draining. It is better for a light to be on or off, not halfway on or draining electricity inefficiently, if it does not want to be on.

Societally, if abortions are so widely accepted and progressive, that it is generally better not to give life to something that cannot be sustained,
then why not the same for those who are already alive outside of the womb, who feel their own lives can no longer be sustained?

And naturally, injured animals would rather die than live impeded lives in sanctuaries or zoos.



It is healthier for the body to release cells that are no longer functioning, even if their life span is not yet finished.
And for the diseased branches of a tree to be pruned, rather than to be sustained simply for the sake of living.



The current model of applying a blanket statement that suicide is bad and no one should commit suicide, is to overlook the nuances and individual circumstances surrounding a contemplated suicide.

Often, the contemplator faces a spiritual or moral dilemma, or circumstances that cannot be reconciled.

The current view of society is that the person should keep on living, despite his spiritual or moral pain.


There is a difference between rash suicides, done out of anger or impulse, or reaction to temporary circumstances,
and those that are really thoughtful, in which the contemplated suicide has gone through counseling, and already explored suitable options for living
(this includes dealing with irreconcilable circumstances, maintaining moral and spiritual integrity, dealing with terminal mental or physical illness, and euthanasia). Most impulsive suicides probably should be prevented, so that the individual can think clearly and act in a rational manner only. But here we can talk about thoughtful potential suicides.

Sometimes morally and circumstantially, life is better to be ended in a thoughtful manner, than to be sustained in an inferior or unacceptable manner.



So, what is best for the individual, spirit, and humanity as a whole? Are the current views accurate and in accordance with higher moral truths, both universal and individual?

Will suicide one day be more accepted in society?

[Maguru]

Are you speaking from experience of being suicidal or attempted suicide? Or are you just an observer?

[Parthon]

Firstly: the religious, legal and moral standings against suicide stem from the fear of death almost all people have, because noone faces their mortality. It's just an outward expression of an internal struggle.

Will suicide be more accepted? I hope not.

I believe every life is sacred and full of potential. There are very few suicides that aren't impulsive, considering that most suicides are based on societal and personal circumstances, they can't be anything but impulsive. Can someone actually stand there in full consciousness and say "My life isn't worth it. I should be dead."?

There's only two circumstances that would actually fit that bill. If the person was terminal and in servere pain, or completely unable to act, then it would be a wise and conscious choice to use euthenasia. If there was no hope of recovery, and the person could say "I can do nothing else while I'm here except suffer." then it would probably be better if they passed quietly, quickly and painlessly.

The other circumstance would be if someone had a complete and total, uncurable mental defficiency that caused them to harm others directly. I don't believe there is any psychosis like that, because with enough treatment and willpower anything can be overcome. It could be a long, hard and possibly mentally and spiritually agonising path, but if travelled the person would come out the other end renewed and redeemed.

What I would like to see is way more compassion being brought to those people that wish to die. We are all one humanity together, so for one of us to kill themselves would be like a part of a body just dying. It doesn't serve the body for healthy cells to be randomly killing themselves, and it wouldn't serve humanity for people to be killing themselves either. We are all here on our own path to learn, experience and grow. The depression that leads to suicide is caused when that path is not followed.

[Cran]

I'd also say that suicide should be an accepted option to end one's life.
Currently, the opinion seems to stem from religion (God does not allow it, or in the secular version, it is not allowed because of the waste of potential) or medicine (suicidal intentions are always a sign of mental illness, which is wrong).
This is a modern view anyway, think about all those Romans who prefered to kill themselves instead of facing defeat, or samurai who killed themselves rather than facing shame. This was accepted and lauded, not shunned.

I believe that life belongs to the person that lives it. If the person thinks it not worthwile, or imagines life after death to be BETTER, why shouldn't he commit suicide, if he has thought it through and is not acting rashly?
A concept corresponding to abortion appeals to me: Mandatory counseling, and then you can go ahead with it, no hassle.

Better Cleopatra than Marie-Antoinette...

[fellowtraveler]

Completely selfish in most circustances. But one is free to be selfish. In that case I imagine that kharma would dictate that at some point the suicidist would be provided the same feelings of loss, abandonment and fear that he caused others by his suicide.

Euthanizing a psychotic person as described is murder, unless he is killed in the process of doing damage and cannot be restrained. From study and secondhand experience, the extreme psychotic is in no distress and not suffering, all appearances to the contrary.

[Parthon]

Most of my beliefs around suicide are actually reflected in this great article:
The Spiritual Consequences of Suicide

The main problem for me is that I think about who chooses suicide, and why. A healthy, wise person who is living their desires and dreams certainly wouldn't want to cut their experience short. So if someone does want to, then they either aren't healthy, aren't wise or aren't living the life they want to live. Now, most of the time, health, wisdom and quality of life can be improved. If it can't though, then that's another matter.

It all comes down to accepting the consequences of actions. That person's unique presence in the world will be lost, thei path will never be travelled and their expression to the world will never be experienced. There will be a gap. Not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing, but it's something that will happen.

[Mato Kinze]

Originally Posted by Byron

And naturally, injured animals would rather die than live impeded lives in sanctuaries or zoos.

All of the other stuff aside, I'm curious just how many animals have told you this...

[Byron]

It seems the animals can speak for themselves

[Mato Kinze]

Originally Posted by Byron

It seems the animals can speak for themselves

Sorry... I guess I just don't quite make the connection between a few articles pulled off the internet referencing escaped zoo animals and the comment that animals "would rather die than live impeded lives in zoos or sanctuaries." Firstly, that significantly anthropormorphsizes the animal psyche and secondly I could probably find just as many articles describing an animal chewing its own leg off to get out of a trap - an act that would seriously limit it's ability to survive in the long term yet performed nonetheless for immediate survival.

Suicide is, at least so far as I can find, a strictly Human expression. If someone can show me where I'm wrong, I'd welcome the correction.

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by Byron

What is the truth of suicide? For the individual, society, and spirit?

The modern views of suicide are based on dogma of religion, law, or medicine, but neglect the personal, moral, natural, and spiritual views.

So, what is the truth of the subject?

truth is that it is murder. self murder. it is killing someone.

Regarding the cost to society-- it is often more costly for society to sustain a life that does not want to be lived, than it is to let it go.

It is also more energetically costly to keep someone pushed in 'life' whose spirit is not entirely in life, and their work and energy that they give off to others that are fully in life, is energetically draining. It is better for a light to be on or off, not halfway on or draining electricity inefficiently, if it does not want to be on.

the judgments needed to sort out who is worthy of living or not is like... well genocide thinking.

Societally, if abortions are so widely accepted and progressive, that it is generally better not to give life to something that cannot be sustained,
then why not the same for those who are already alive outside of the womb, who feel their own lives can no longer be sustained?

might as well conclude all human life should be killed off.

It is healthier for the body to release cells that are no longer functioning, even if their life span is not yet finished.
And for the diseased branches of a tree to be pruned, rather than to be sustained simply for the sake of living.

again- who would be able to make these judgements?

The current model of applying a blanket statement that suicide is bad and no one should commit suicide, is to overlook the nuances and individual circumstances surrounding a contemplated suicide.

Often, the contemplator faces a spiritual or moral dilemma, or circumstances that cannot be reconciled.

if this is a reason for killing (self), then most people would have offed themselves by now!

The current view of society is that the person should keep on living, despite his spiritual or moral pain.

no it isn't - the current view is these people work on getting better - not sit around in pain.

There is a difference between rash suicides, done out of anger or impulse, or reaction to temporary circumstances,
and those that are really thoughtful, in which the contemplated suicide has gone through counseling, and already explored suitable options for living
(this includes dealing with irreconcilable circumstances, maintaining moral and spiritual integrity, dealing with terminal mental or physical illness, and euthanasia). Most impulsive suicides probably should be prevented, so that the individual can think clearly and act in a rational manner only. But here we can talk about thoughtful potential suicides.

thoughtful suicides don't exist. no one thinks they should kill themselves without being really emotional about it, imho.

Sometimes morally and circumstantially, life is better to be ended in a thoughtful manner, than to be sustained in an inferior or unacceptable manner.

easily extended to genocide...

So, what is best for the individual, spirit, and humanity as a whole? Are the current views accurate and in accordance with higher moral truths, both universal and individual?

yes current views are in line with moral truths - not sure your views of these issues are.

Will suicide one day be more accepted in society?

huh? no.

[Michael Chui]

The problem with suicide is that it means society has failed to incorporate and encourage the distinct worldview and perspective the suicidal person could have provided.

The only case where suicide is acceptable is when there is an acknowledgement that one's continued existence is inequal to one's continued life. Cases where medicine is incapable, brain rot, and the like.

And this would include societal ills as well, where a person can be so thorougly abused and outcast they find more solace in death than in society, except that such acceptance is an acceptance of its own failure. This is not a good thing.

[A.K.Light]

I don't think it's that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things. Just count up all the deaths caused by obesity, tobacco, and traffic accidents. At least the people who commit suicide aren't pretending like they want to live.

[Brutha]

I think that human life has value.
There's a thin line between not doing something to prevent from one who might suffer under depression from death to not helping someone who might suffer under something other from death.

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Michael Chui

The problem with suicide is that it means society has failed to incorporate and encourage the distinct worldview and perspective the suicidal person could have provided.

The only case where suicide is acceptable is when there is an acknowledgement that one's continued existence is inequal to one's continued life. Cases where medicine is incapable, brain rot, and the like.

And this would include societal ills as well, where a person can be so thorougly abused and outcast they find more solace in death than in society, except that such acceptance is an acceptance of its own failure. This is not a good thing.

Symptoms of society. I couldn't agree more. It's becoming an epidemic.

[Andrew Brunelle]

Suicide is a violent act on the self and even most of those people who do not want to live are afraid to do it, not only because they fear it won't work, but also because of the people they'll leave behind to clean up their "mess." If you really want to commit suicide and you are fully committed to it, after you do the act, there will be no one on Earth to judge you for it. I don't believe there's judgment anywhere in the universe. The only judge is yourself, in life and in death.

Suicide is a personal choice, but a very disempowering and selfish one. Sure, you could argue that a dead human who doesn't want to live is better than that human living to use up more resources, but that's kind of grim. If we all raised our consciousness, we could figure out a way to meed everyone's needs and have plenty to spare. It's just too few people are doing it today. Killing yourself is the easy way out. I guess that's why it is so negatively conditioned.

If someone is dying or in debilitating pain all the time, then they have the option to end their life. But ending your life is very hurtful to those you leave behind on Earth.

[sk8joyful]

Originally Posted by Byron

What is the truth of suicide?

It's committing murder, of a life you personally have the power to change... for the better.

Originally Posted by Byron

And naturally, injured animals would rather die than live impeded lives in sanctuaries or zoos.

When did you last successfully communicate with animals?, discovering each of their preferences

Originally Posted by Byron

Societally, if abortions are so widely accepted and progressive,
that it is generally better not to give life to something that cannot be sustained

Actually, medical science continues proving just how much earlier, life outside the womb can be healthily enjoyed: Amillia Sonja Taylor was born 10-24-6, at 22 weeks after conception. (Full-term births are 37-40 weeks.) She weighed less than 10 ozs. & was less than 10 in. long. -
Four months later, she weighed over 4 lbs. and did well.
http://www.incrediblebirths.com/worlds_earliest_pre-term_baby.html

Originally Posted by Byron

then why not the same for those who are already alive outside of the womb,
who feel their own lives can no longer be sustained?

Their feelings can, and should be helped, to change...

Originally Posted by Byron

The current view of society is that the person should keep on living, despite his spiritual or moral pain.

For centuries it's been known how easy pain can be stopped, and more Individuals guided into healing, and living happily...

Originally Posted by Byron

There is a difference
between rash suicides, done out of anger or impulse, or reaction to temporary circumstances,
and those that are really thoughtful, in which the contemplated suicide has gone through counseling.

Agreed, there's a difference; but it isn't in what sort of self-murder.

The difference usually lies in whether the "counseling" is abysmally incompetent; or
successful in life-empowering each individual, so they can enrich... her/himself.
What life-enjoyments, best for the individual, spirit, and humanity as a whole, do you want?
.

[Happybird]

Originally Posted by Byron

Regarding the cost to society-- it is often more costly for society to sustain a life that does not want to be lived, than it is to let it go.

That is certainly not always true. I personally know someone who has -repeatedly and seriously- attempted suicide but failed. Now she dragged herself back up from the depths she was in, and is in many ways adding value to society again. I find it strange that you assume that in most cases someone that wants to commit suicide will never want to live again. It is a plainly false assumption.

Originally Posted by Byron

It is healthier for the body to release cells that are no longer functioning, even if their life span is not yet finished.

I would not call it healthy to cut off body parts that are sick may can be healed. If your leg was infected with a disease, and there was even a twenty percent chance of it recovering, would you cut it off anyway?

Originally Posted by Byron

The current model of applying a blanket statement that suicide is bad and no one should commit suicide, is to overlook the nuances and individual circumstances surrounding a contemplated suicide.

Just lacking a desire to live at a certain time in one's life is not a valid reason for me to accept suicide. In some cases I see euthanasia as a right, loving and just thing to do for someone who suffers physically badly, without any chance of improving his or her life. But that is usually a mariginal case.

Originally Posted by Byron

Often, the contemplator faces a spiritual or moral dilemma, or circumstances that cannot be reconciled.

Most people considering suicide are completely and utterly unable to judge whether or not their perceived problems can be solved.

Originally Posted by Byron

The current view of society is that the person should keep on living, despite his spiritual or moral pain.

And why should society expect any less? Suicide is in some ways a cowardly, easy way out. I have little respect for someone committing suicide (I have also known some who succeeded). Society is justified in expecting from humans to face their problems and handle them, not to run away from them.

Originally Posted by Byron

and those that are really thoughtful, in which the contemplated suicide has gone through counseling, and already explored suitable options for living (this includes dealing with irreconcilable circumstances, maintaining moral and spiritual integrity, dealing with terminal mental or physical illness, and euthanasia).

What are these irreconcilable circumstances? I mean, other than terminal physical illness (as fas as I know, terminal mental illness does not exist?).

Originally Posted by Byron

Sometimes morally and circumstantially, life is better to be ended in a thoughtful manner, than to be sustained in an inferior or unacceptable manner.

That, I agree with. There are very limited circumstances in which I would find ending a life the better alternative, however. Such would include:
- physical suffering with no chance of improvement (i.e. someone who would be mortally ill and face the choice of dying today in relative peace or dying after a month of agonizing pains and zero quality of life).
- elderly who lost their will to live and who face serious mental or physical illness. This category is unavoidable as far as I can see, as the day comes closer in which medical science will be able to keep our elderly alive almost indefinitely, even with an unacceptable (i.e. inhuman) quality of live.

Apart from these two categories, I see little reason to find suicide or euthanasia acceptable.

[magi13]

Originally Posted by Byron

What is the truth of suicide? For the individual, society, and spirit?

The modern views of suicide are based on dogma of religion, law, or medicine, but neglect the personal, moral, natural, and spiritual views.

So, what is the truth of the subject?


Regarding the cost to society-- it is often more costly for society to sustain a life that does not want to be lived, than it is to let it go.

It is also more energetically costly to keep someone pushed in 'life' whose spirit is not entirely in life, and their work and energy that they give off to others that are fully in life, is energetically draining. It is better for a light to be on or off, not halfway on or draining electricity inefficiently, if it does not want to be on.

Societally, if abortions are so widely accepted and progressive, that it is generally better not to give life to something that cannot be sustained,
then why not the same for those who are already alive outside of the womb, who feel their own lives can no longer be sustained?

And naturally, injured animals would rather die than live impeded lives in sanctuaries or zoos.



It is healthier for the body to release cells that are no longer functioning, even if their life span is not yet finished.
And for the diseased branches of a tree to be pruned, rather than to be sustained simply for the sake of living.



The current model of applying a blanket statement that suicide is bad and no one should commit suicide, is to overlook the nuances and individual circumstances surrounding a contemplated suicide.

Often, the contemplator faces a spiritual or moral dilemma, or circumstances that cannot be reconciled.

The current view of society is that the person should keep on living, despite his spiritual or moral pain.


There is a difference between rash suicides, done out of anger or impulse, or reaction to temporary circumstances,
and those that are really thoughtful, in which the contemplated suicide has gone through counseling, and already explored suitable options for living
(this includes dealing with irreconcilable circumstances, maintaining moral and spiritual integrity, dealing with terminal mental or physical illness, and euthanasia). Most impulsive suicides probably should be prevented, so that the individual can think clearly and act in a rational manner only. But here we can talk about thoughtful potential suicides.

Sometimes morally and circumstantially, life is better to be ended in a thoughtful manner, than to be sustained in an inferior or unacceptable manner.



So, what is best for the individual, spirit, and humanity as a whole? Are the current views accurate and in accordance with higher moral truths, both universal and individual?

Will suicide one day be more accepted in society?

In the Japanese culture it is a revered form of self sacrifice.

Morally speaking it depends on your culture and conditioning. Why people fear it? The church and other religious dominations scared the living hell out of people when they were kids. In our genes too, genetically speaking we are programmed to try to survive. So if you seek death, it's either you are mentally conditioned for it or there is something wrong with you.

@thread starter, seek help as soon as you can and get this problem fixed. Good luck