Suicide

[Forkbender]

Psychoid, who benefits from someone ending his life?

 

[IJesusChrist]

Psychoid, who benefits from someone ending his life?

I could go into darwinism, and I'm sure you can see where that would come into play.

But by you living, you destroy life. Period. That life would benefit, and thrive with that much of a greater chance if you didn't exist.

 

[Forkbender]

You are looking at one side of the coin there.

 

[Sinaeps]

I and a good friend of mine have been talking about this subject not so long ago after smoking a bowl. I thought of it like asking yourself: "Do I want there to be something, or nothing?" and choosing "nothing". I saw it like the most absurd thing in the world: to be presented with one shot at existence, and refusing it. In my view, the death of one is the end of a world.

 

[IJesusChrist]

You're very good at completely avoiding my question.

 

[Brugmansia]

Where's GOD when you need him eh?

 

[BrainEater]

you don't destroy life simply by existing. you use it: to feed your own life. you don't destroy it, you burn it. you consume it to build and sustain yourself.

the animal which you eat is alright with you eating it, it's dead anyway... you didn't kill it. it won't care anymore too whether its life was a success or not. most often others killed it for you, you just need to eat it. or be it plants that you eat which is life too, but of course there's no grief for plants like it is there for mammals like sheep, cow, dogs, cats, humans...

i think primitive cultures have indeed an innate deeper bond to nature like we civilized people and if you have seen how some people in this world live or have lived then it might seem obvious that an attitude of gratitude is what benefits you more than an attitude of arrogance, selfishness and corruption. if you slay a wild animal for surviving yourself it's the law of the stronger: eat or be eaten.


IJC one question: why are you so obsessed about the idea of giving values to distinguished lifeforms and comparing them one over another as if one lifeform would be superior or of more worth as if it deserved a certain amount of a existing nutrition source more than other distinguished lifeforms?


maybe a shark sees it like: oh there are some tasssssssty fish what shall i do ohhhhhhhhh mmmmmmmhhhhhhh well i think i will just eat em muahahahhahaaha


but well how much different are we humans from such sharks?? we as a species have achievied world domination at least in most of the land regions so we don't have natural enemies except other humans or if we go in the wilderness. i mean we need to eat something then why not just eat it and be grateful for being able to eat it in the first place. some people don't even have the possibility to worry about issues like oh do i really deserve to eat this food?? they have to damn worry about getting something between their own teeth i guess.... but well don't wanna go into a rant here....



peace :weedman:

 

[Psychoid]

Psychoid, who benefits from someone ending his life?

What I'm going to say is not my opinion, just a cold and logical statement

Let's take the same example I used before: people with mental illnesses that make them unable to take care of themselves.
Everyone who has to use almost all their time taking care of such persons (when it's not by choice) would benefits from them ending their life, as they could then go on with their own life and become more useful to the rest of society.They would also probably be much happier.

But this reasoning is only valid if their illness isn't curable.
EDIT:And what I don't like in what I just wrote is that it implies that the lives of these people are useless...

And anyway, our (or at least my) knowledge on life isn't advanced enough to be able to know wether it can be right or not to suicide in such situations.
EDIT: even for euthanasia...


But here's an opinion of mine:
For irremediable (dunno if it's the right word) recidivist violent criminals, the whole community they are in would benefit from them dying or killing themselves.
EDIT: or at least all its victims and the people close to them, which already makes something worth ending its life

You don't have the choice to destroy life. But you have the choice on what lives you destroy and how you do it.

I personally wouldn't have any problem killing from my own hands a serial killer, or a serial sexual abuser, if I knew they would do it at least one more time. Of course there's the law so I'm not doing anything, letting the justice system take take of the situation.

EDIT: The edits were made after smoking about .5 in my vape and I hadn't been smoking for a week. I feel I've got total control now, I never feel the urge to smoke, I really choose when I smoke, I'm impressed at myself ^^
:weedman:
Damn. I've had my speakers in my ears for 20 minutes and haven't started the music yet.

 

[Forkbender]

Yes, you make big assumptions, the most invisible of them being that people will be happier if they only have to care for themselves. Any sociological study will show that people are happier if they care for more people, if their social network is bigger and they pay less attention to themselves.

I personally wouldn't have any problem killing from my own hands a serial killer, or a serial sexual abuser, if I knew they would do it at least one more time.

Dude, that's sick. Since when did we start believing in the Old Testament again?

You're very good at completely avoiding my question.

you mean "Would you end your life if more people benefited from the act?" ?

I don't even see the possibility of that 'if'. But supposing I did, I still wouldn't do it. Period. Even if I'm very down and want others to comfort me and take care of me and do all sorts of shit for me, I know I can turn it around. Probably why it never happened, too.

 

[IJesusChrist]

You can believe in love and compassion forever, and it will always work, or you can believe in logic and efficiency, and it will always work.

So I guess this really cannot be talked about to a meaningful sense, except that if you want to be considered a human, suicide is ignorant.

 

[Psychoid]

I personally wouldn't have any problem killing from my own hands a serial killer, or a serial sexual abuser, if I knew they would do it at least one more time.

Dude, that's sick. Since when did we start believing in the Old Testament again?

I don't know what's the point with the old testament...
But... isn't it better that the person that is going to kill people in the future dies before he does it?
I just said that it wouldn't pose me a consciousness problem (yes, I should have been more specific). Because, although I would have killed someone, this act would have saved lives which were probably much more valuable.
Of course, in our society, it would be wrong doing so, because there's the justice system taking care of them.
But without it, it would be up to us to protect the good honest people from those sick people.

Yes, you make big assumptions, the most invisible of them being that people will be happier if they only have to care for themselves. Any sociological study will show that people are happier if they care for more people, if their social network is bigger and they pay less attention to themselves.

I think you're right. We just can't judge on those situations unless we live them. All I'm doing is speculations.
What if the person you are taking care of takes so much of your time that you can't really have a social life?
But well, nowadays you're never alone in those case, so I guess you're completely right...

 

[IJesusChrist]

And psychoid - the person that kills isn't a "Serial Killer" that is a label stamped on by society. He/She is still a person, and can be taught out of his logic... All humans are plastic.

 

[Psychoid]

Sorry, but serial killer means that you kill repetitively, so someone who kills repetitively is a serial killer.

I've talked to probation agents / monitoring agents and things like that (dunno how to call it in english) and they ALL agree that most of these recidivists are irrecuperable. Even if they talk to dozens of psychologists, psychiatrists and whatnot, as soon as they are set free they start again. Those people are called psychopaths.

Those people are rare though. But there are some of them. To deny it is to put your head in the sand.

If you think you have some secret knowledge that would make you capable to heal them, then you know what to do.

 

[IJesusChrist]

... You are seeing a killer as beyond the scope of psychology?

Do you know how easy it is to get a psychology degree? Or how uneducated you can be to be a probationary officer?

 

[Sinaeps]

I personally wouldn't have any problem killing from my own hands a serial killer, or a serial sexual abuser, if I knew they would do it at least one more time.

I don't think you would. Compassion is not something you choose to have, it's instinctive. However, you also have a protective instinct that would make you attack a person if you, your family or your close friends were to be put in danger by that person. As long as your close relatives aren't in danger, you aren't supposed to be able to kill.

 

[Psychoid]

So all psychologists and probationary officers are shit?

EDIT: Yes Sinaeps, thank you. That's exactly what I meant. I'd never be able to kill normally. BUT because someone isn't a close relative doesn't mean that his life isn't worth being saved in my opinion...

 

[DaZeD]

[youtube]IHWeuQyFouo[/youtube]

@IJC,

I know what you mean.

I just hate the fact that by existing, I am destroying life. No matter what I do - I will consistintly destroy life.

I like the way the Native Americans look at the animals and plants they eat. An attitude of gratitude helps a lot.

[youtube]swzh0ngMNJo[/youtube]

 

[IJesusChrist]

way to just slay the mood dazed, JEEZ.

 

[DaZeD]

Aaaah, come on now Jezus, it was just a joke, a very lame one, but still.
Maybe a little bit misplaced.
Sorry couldn't help myself, i had this song in my head somehow reading this thread, not kiddin'.

 

[Forkbender]

I don't know what's the point with the old testament...

an eye for an eye...

But... isn't it better that the person that is going to kill people in the future dies before he does it?
I just said that it wouldn't pose me a consciousness problem (yes, I should have been more specific). Because, although I would have killed someone, this act would have saved lives which were probably much more valuable.

Well, supposing you could predict that someone will kill in the future, I still think there are other ways to deal with the problem than to do the same. Preventing murder by killing is not going to solve the problem, because the problem isn't the killer, but our society in which killing happens. Haven't you noticed that countries that use death penalties have higher murder rates?