For this argument, I will define suicide as the successful act of deliberately killing oneself.
The World Health Organization believes that nearly one million people kill themselves every year. The WHO, which regards suicide as a disease, also believes that a large percent of suicide is due to pesticide poisoning. For this argument, I will not be discussing suicide that comes as a byproduct of pesticide poisoning. Although it is generally believed that high self-esteem, “connectedness,” social support, stable romantic relationships, and religious commitments tend to diminish the risk of suicide, these factors nevertheless do not wholly account for causes. Some argue that some suicides are triggered by media reporting of suicides.
Unlike other “diseases” suicide afflicts the younger half of the population, and is in all countries one of the “three leading causes of death for people aged 15-34 years.” For all but some countries, suicide rates are higher than homicide rates.
Why do people choose to kill themselves, or choose not to? Although the question of pesticide poisoning is not central to my argument, it does posit one almost undeniable factor: suicide will often have a physiological element.
Some of us have more control of our brains than others. Some people are cursed with brains that have problems distinguishing fantasy from reality, with fatal delusions prompting them to leap from tall buildings. Some, for whatever reasons, consume brain-altering drugs that cause similar problems. Not all decisions for suicide are made from the conscious part of the mind, and even in the cases where it is, often that desire will be rooted in other physiological problems. People suffering from chronic pain, or from a sense of extreme isolation might feel compelled to kill themselves.
But, many of those 15-34 year olds who kill themselves are not sufferers of chronic pains. They are not delusional. Their impulse for death is rooted instead in something else.
One of the shaping features of such a decision may very well be a belief in the afterlife. Interpretations of the afterlife often shape social conceptions of suicide. To some Japanese individuals, suicide is often regarded as an “honorable way out.” In Christianity, official dogma often argues that suicide will cause the individual to go to Hell. In certain Muslim sects, suicide, if used to attack one’s enemies, is a guarantee for a paradise after death.
We have very few compelling documents detailing post-death experience. Some people who have experienced near-death have described several similar phenomena: the bright-light, the tunnel, a movement away from the body, the majority of which you will likely have seen depicted in some television show or movie. Our accounts of this, however, are not post-death, and these experiences likely are the brain’s response to being critically threatened—not divine visions.
You may disagree. The argument, if you made one, would likely fall toward the closest analogy: the dream. If you believe that dreams have divine origins, then you may also believe that near-death experiences are also supernatural phenomena. Or, you might believe that you have personal knowledge of the afterlife. If so, you may not find the following arguments compelling. If this is the case, please leave a comment or e-mail me, as this essay will not engage with those arguments at this point.
What is known of the afterlife is anti-knowledge: we know that we cannot know if there is or is not an afterlife, positive or negative, nor can we know whether suicide will have no impact on the afterlife, will result in a negative experience in the afterlife (Christianity), or will have a positive experience in the afterlife (Islamic martyrdom).
Some argue that suicide should always be regarded as the “merciful option” in cases of extreme pain. Jean Amery, for instance, argued that suicide represents the ultimate freedom from society. Schopenhauer argued that suicide was justified, and compared it to being allowed to wake from a bad dream (the dream metaphor again).
There is no evidence to suggest that there is any reason to commit suicide, nor is there evidence to suggest against it. Regardless of religious or lack of religious belief, there is no convincing argument one way or the other that suicide is “good” or “bad.”
The analogy of Schopenhauer to that of waking from a dream is erroneous, because it assumes that “waking up” (death) is inherently better than the worst dream. There is no evidence for this. The worst dream may be positive and better than the waking life. Suicide could be regarded as the ultimate freedom, but so could it also be regarded as the ultimate slavery, for in death one may be totally and completely restricted by the confines of one’s body, or lack thereof.
The void is neither better nor worse than existence. It is incomparable.
The arguments of those like William Godwin, that more pleasure is gained in life than in death and therefore life is preferable, too do not mount compelling arguments. Happiness does not collects or last in death. The amount of happiness one achieves in life is irrelevant once one is dead.
The arguments of those like Valinda, an online friend of mine, also would do little to sway me away from death if I felt compelled to embark upon it. She argues that one should not kill oneself because others will be forced to clean up your body. That might work for her, but I imagine that most of those considering suicide aren’t too thrilled with the people around them, and probably don’t particularly care whether others have to clean them up or not. But I’m sure there are exceptions.
What I do believe is that many of those who commit suicide hold a high premium on their own life, and that their views on the afterlife, one way or the other, hold a meaningful weight in shaping such a decision. Whatever you believe suicide will bring you, consider the simple possibility that it won’t. I for one am not convinced that there are empirical arguments, one way or the other, that suicide is ever a “right” or a “wrong” choice. Just the same, I can mount few abstract arguments to someone in terminal pain about whether they should or should not commit suicide. But, to a young man or woman who feels that suicide is something important that they should do, I have simply to ask: Why? If your best response is “Why not?” then I have only to wonder if that response is really good enough for you.
Friday, January 4, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Interesting essay.
I disagree with your category of "anti-knowledge", and on the afterlife in general, but I am not sure how much I want to argue the point.
There is also the possibility that one who commits suicide did so out of curiosity. As improbable as this may sound, the appeal of exploring post-life (if indeed it can be explored), as though it is a grand adventure, could be enough to compel one to end life.
Then there's the celebration of death as the ultimate means to life. To put a somewhat Nietzschean spin on this, the concept of life is derived by what is not dead, so in some sense, life is death, and in reality they are no different from each other. In fact, they may be one and the same. The only difference perhaps is that death is eternal, and some celebration of the eternal could justify suicide.
Bizarre? Maybe. But as someone who have had many episodes of suidical thoughts, regardless of mental state, I must say that suicide is not a two-sided coin, nor does it even have sides.
Post a Comment