I've been thinking about the rationality of suicide from a purely philosophical angle and wanted to get some takes that aren't just the usual "it gets better" cope or moral panic. Here's where I'm at: if you accept that death is inevitable anyway, that meaning-frameworks can genuinely collapse (not just "depression lying to you") and that someone might reach a state where both continuing and ending lack any real justificatory weight, what's left? The standard objections seem to reduce to either sneaking in unstated premises about duty/potential or pointing to epistemic problems (your judgment is compromised so you can't trust your reasoning) which just creates a paralyzing regress rather than solving anything. The finality asymmetry argument (you can't revise a final decision) has some teeth but it's a structural constraint on action, not a normative prohibition. It raises the bar for justification but doesn't make the act incoherent. What I'm trying to figure out is whether there's a rigorous philosophical case that neither reduces to disguised moralizing nor collapses into pure subjectivism where "I endorse nonexistence" just ends the conversation. Interested in hearing if anyone's worked through this seriously or if there are frameworks that handle the neutral zone where neither option has authority without just defaulting to "well, keep living I guess".
>>24932694>...if adversity and hopeless sorrow have completely taken away the relish for life; if the unfortunate one, strong in mind, indignant at his fate rather than desponding or dejected, wishes for death, and yet preserves his life without loving it—not from inclination or fear, but from duty—then his maxim has a moral worth.-Kant, Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals
>>24932694There’s nothing left except the fact that the person isn’t dead yet so they’re hiding hidden premises themselves. The people who actually die aren’t the ones going on long philosophical expositions about it. Presumably you expect to be able to make sense of the question and get a level of definitiveness that doesn’t actually exist.
>>24932844>The people who actually die aren’t the ones going on long philosophical expositions about it.What about Philipp Mainländer, Albert Caraco and Mitchell Heisman?
>>24932948Jean Améry too, he died shortly after writing this.
>>24932694How does Boris Kilian know? Did he test them all? Did he interview the ones who succeeded? Sounds like bullshit if you ask me.
>>24932975If you ask people who survived opioid overdoses they all say it's peaceful.
>>24932694How about you stop being a fucking pussy?
>>24933008In my experience, it was terrifying. It did not feel good at all.
>>24933008>just be doped up ayy lmao pass the bong bruh
>>24933077next time you just have to go with it. don't be afraid. it's your fear that made it terrifying. if you think of it as sleep, that's all it is. most opioid overdosers don't think anything about their experiences. they just say in a matter of fact way. "I died three times already." and each time some sucker brought them back with the shot of narcan
why come i feel so sad and tired and depressed?
>>24932694Good post. Don't have anything, but I wish I did.
>>24933439Try to get enough sleep, sunlight and make sure you're eating enough.
>>24933544i do. i even take depresso meds and still wanna kms.
if suicide is fine, are other people allowed to kill you on your behalf?
>>24933549Have you exhausted all options? There's things like ECT (electroconvulsive therapy) and ketamine therapy that work for treatment-resistant depression and they don't have too many side effects. There's also psychedelic therapy if you have access to that.
If you conceptualize yourself as an atomistic individual, I can't think of any argument against it.From an evolutionary/genetic perspective however, if you conceptualize yourself as a member of a group, then you have duties to further the continuation of your group, and your absence would be a harm to the biological project of the continuation of life most similar to your own.
>>24933664 Also, it seems that it would be biologically advantageous for life that has developed the capacity to reason, and thus has the potential to reason against its biological imperatives, that it would come to enjoy life and thus not end itself even if it can't come up with a rational basis for why they must.
>>24933664>your absence would be a harmYou won't be there to see the harm you've done, because you'll be dead.
>>24932694kys
