- Thread Author
- #1
I did see a thread on .org that talked about it, where there were arguments about how religion viewing it as a sin essentially made it "evil", or utilitarianism argument on it.
I see it a bit differently. It's bit of a nuanced argument and maybe you could say it's too philosophical, but someone said it was somewhat interesting, so I'll share it briefly.
My take:
I think it's seen as "taboo/evil/stigmatized", as it's essentially a reversal of moral obligation. When you're born, you're assigned obligations to life before you even know how to think. These obligation I would categorize as:
1. Biological Debt: Your heartbeat is a loan -> repay it through perseverance
2. The Social Debt: Others invested in you -> suicide would betray that
3. Potential Debt: Your unwritten future binds you to the present
These aren't natural laws, but stories we tell to make suffering bearable. Suicide forces us to question, what happens when these fail?
And the core of my argument, inversion of moral obligation happens when, some fundamental human needs remains chronically unmet.
And suicide disturbs us as it exposes the machinery of our suffering-justification
And the uncomfortable truth is that our entire moral economy depends on suffering being convertible into meaning. When someone demonstrates by suicide that their suffering couldn't be be converted. It threatens the currency we all trade in. That's where the stigma comes from, not just fear but threat to narrative collapse.
END
Maybe this is a bad take idk, I don't read any philosophy other than watch random videos, or read a small snippet. But yeah, share your own views or criticize this as you want.
I see it a bit differently. It's bit of a nuanced argument and maybe you could say it's too philosophical, but someone said it was somewhat interesting, so I'll share it briefly.
My take:
I think it's seen as "taboo/evil/stigmatized", as it's essentially a reversal of moral obligation. When you're born, you're assigned obligations to life before you even know how to think. These obligation I would categorize as:
1. Biological Debt: Your heartbeat is a loan -> repay it through perseverance
2. The Social Debt: Others invested in you -> suicide would betray that
3. Potential Debt: Your unwritten future binds you to the present
These aren't natural laws, but stories we tell to make suffering bearable. Suicide forces us to question, what happens when these fail?
And the core of my argument, inversion of moral obligation happens when, some fundamental human needs remains chronically unmet.
- Freedom from unrelenting pain (physical/mental)
- Capacity for meaningful connection
- Future seems too bleak
| Society's story | The reversed truth |
| "You owe life endurance" | "Life owed you livable conditions" |
| Suicide as a moral failure | Suicide as a evidence of systemic failure |
| Duty to suffer | Right to refuse unredeemed agony |
And suicide disturbs us as it exposes the machinery of our suffering-justification
And the uncomfortable truth is that our entire moral economy depends on suffering being convertible into meaning. When someone demonstrates by suicide that their suffering couldn't be be converted. It threatens the currency we all trade in. That's where the stigma comes from, not just fear but threat to narrative collapse.
END
Maybe this is a bad take idk, I don't read any philosophy other than watch random videos, or read a small snippet. But yeah, share your own views or criticize this as you want.
