The question of suicide

David Matthew · 01-07-2010 12:38pm #1

“I have never seen anyone die for the ontological argument… On the other hand, I see many people die because they judge that life is not worth living. I see others paradoxically getting killed for the ideas or illusions that give them a reason for living (what is called a reason for living is also an excellent reason for dying).”

Excerpt from The Myth of Sisyphus, by Albert Camus.

Any thoughts/feelings?... intuitions/insights?

**Note: This isn't an attempt to conduct group-therapy, but if it helps anyone here to discuss this topic from a philosophical point of view, it will have more than served its purpose.**

raah! · 01-07-2010 6:15pm

I like that quote. I was debating with myself whether I would buy this book or just deal with summaries as I felt I had enough of camus at the time. But if this exceprt forshadows more of the same in the book, then it will be well worth it... even if it is 20 pages long or something.

Ahem. Anyway, on with the discussion.

Joe1919 · 01-07-2010 8:02pm

My interpretation is this.

Camus thinks that life lacks meaning and purpose i.e. Life is absurd. However, he acknowledges that most people in fact do not commit suicide and hence there must be some reason why they continue living.
Some people, he admits, take a 'leap of faith' and find meaning in religion. Others create their own meaning (in a form of self delusion) e.g Don Juan, the Rebel or the Actor. However, there are many who live absurd lives and yet they continue to be motivated to live. This is the mystery.

Camus ends his essay with his discussion on Sisyphus.
'Sisyphus is the absurd hero........ His scorn of the gods, his hatred of death, and his passion for life won him that unspeakable penalty in which the whole being is exerted toward accomplishing nothing...... There is no fate that can not be surmounted by scorn...... he is superior to his fate..... One must imagine Sisyphus happy.'

One interpretation of this is that we do not need purpose or meaning to continue living. We can accept our fate and refuse to give in to despair.

It may be worth comparing Camus to Epicurus in that you can detect a certain spiritedness or defiance towards suffering and death. (e.g. his saying 'Death means nothing to us'.)

Epicurus also wrote this brief note while on his death-bed, refusing to let his suffering and imminent death affect his bliss (happiness).
'On this blissful day, which is also the last of my life, I write this to you. My continual sufferings from strangury and dysentery are so great that nothing could increase them; but I set above them all the gladness of mind at the memory of our past conversations.'

Camus (and possibly Epicurus) are both suggesting that we don't need a 'meaning to life'. We can accept that life is painful and absurd and that there may be nothing in the end. But we can also have courage and 'spirit' and enjoy each day for what it is.

David Matthew · 02-07-2010 7:15am

Hi Raah, the book is very 'quotable' overall in my opinion, so if the above excerpt draws you to it, then it's unlikely you would regret buying it.

Joe1919, thanks for your post. It was very interesting. I would be of a similar mind to you as regards Camus' position. It seems evident that we needn't parade meaning as a be-all-end-all solution to life if people do continue to live in spite of its (overt) absence.

But I wonder is meaning inescapable, in a sense? The act of accepting fate, for instance; that spiritedness and courage in the face of an absurd world; perhaps this, in the end, amounts to meaning?

Maybe meaning is just conceptually inescapable. I don't necessarily believe everyone must have meaning to survive. Habit can have people plod onwards in quiet despair.

I once knew someone who was so de-motivated by life, that she couldn't even find the enthusiasm to end it all.

It's possible that people may judge their own lives 'objectively' meaningless, but derive meaning from a sense of their own personal purpose.

Meaning and purpose... It would be interesting to get some feedback as to what people think is the difference (if any) between the two.

Joe1919 · 02-07-2010 8:55am

David Matthew wrote: »

Maybe meaning is just conceptually inescapable. I don't necessarily believe everyone must have meaning to survive. Habit can have people plod onwards in quiet despair.

Actually, I agree with you here. I am inclined to think that most of us do manage in the end to find (or construct) some meaning to our lives. This meaning will be satisfactory if it is in harmony with our nature.
For example, many people get satisfaction from work or having children and this gives their life meaning. Indeed, Epicurus courage was motivated by his friendships.
(An interesting link on the 'Social Construction of Life Meaning' below)
http://www.ncsociology.org/sociationtoday/v52/steve.htm

But Camus seems to be arguing that this is not necessarily the case and the meaning of life for him was its 'meaningless' (absurdity).

Incidentally, this theme (absurdity of life and perhaps the difference between meaning and purpose) is also explored in Taoist literature. Chuang Tzu discusses the 'usefulness of uselessness' in the parable of the useless 'crooked tree'.

"So for your big tree, no use? Then plant it in the wasteland, in emptiness. Walk idly around it, rest under its shadow. No axe or bill prepares its end. No one will ever cut it down."
http://www.conures.net/stories/tree.shtml

I am inclined to think that meaning and purpose are two different things. Purpose implies a 'goal' or some usefullness.( and some would argue that humans are 'goal directed animals' etc.)
Is it possible to 'live for today' ? Can our lives have meaning without a purpose?
I am inclined to say yes.

PS I love this song 'Old man river'. Has some similaties with Sisyphus.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eh9WayN7R-s

coletti · 08-07-2010 7:54am

Perhaps some of us search for, and find, a meaning or purpose to our lives. Often that might be driven by narcissism or to want to make a mark or be remembered after we die, or for a myriad of other reasons.

Is that the same thing as finding meaning? Is meaning a truth or merely a way of avoiding boredom as we all await the inevitability of death?

David Matthew · 18-07-2010 9:57am

Hi Joe1919,

Thanks for that post - not merely informative, but inspiring too... The article on the Social Construction of Life Meaning was very interesting. I'm not sure I would subscribe to his threefold division of life's fundamental sources of meaning, but if not fundamental sources, they are certainly critical factors, the absence of any one of which would certainly bore a hole into most people's sense of equilibrium/contentment.

The Chuang Tzu parable elucidates very elegantly a problem I've always had with the conclusions of many well-known existentialists - the problem of a suspected 'double-standard' game going on behind the books. Perhaps their so-called 'meaninglessness' is only a highlighted factor within a broader 'work/leisure' related meaningfulness. How eager would they be to express such convictions without, say, a publisher behind them, and the promise of critical acclaim? In pointing to the shortcomings of the crooked tree, they forget that they shelter beneath it...

Coletti:

Is that the same thing as finding meaning? Is meaning a truth or merely a way of avoiding boredom as we all await the inevitability of death?

Good question. But I wonder is avoiding boredom only meaningful to some people? I don't think your second question actually has an either-or answer, as meaning may well be a lie for some, and a very comforting one.

Cyzrane · 20-07-2010 7:27pm

Ah, good old nihilism...life, it seems, has no inherent meaning. We might argue that the purpose of life is to propagate itself, but this is obviously cyclical. Outside of that, we could propose ideas such as "to achieve your goals", "to be loved", or any number of things, but these are subjective reasons. The search for absolute and incontrovertible meaning to existence is, perhaps, one without end.

I believe the best thing is to acknowledge that nothing can truly matter in an absolute sense, and therefore to discover (or even invent) your own raison d'etre and accept it for all its subjectivity. The idea that we need validation for our own existences to be supplied to us by some all-knowing source is fatuous; we have no such requirement. At least, I do not believe we do. Anyway, meaning is not necessarily linked to happiness; in the quest of happiness, one might not necessarily first have to find meaning.

As for suicide, well, that's a difficult thing to comprehend. It contradicts the survival instinct present in all creatures. If it is linked to meaning then I can only surmise that the suicide's reasoning would be:
My life has no meaning -> Without meaning I cannot be happy -> I must escape my meaningless existence
It seems a silly thing indeed to me to face "absurdity", bow your head before this force of entropy, and submit to cowardice and despair. But I suppose any attempt to understand the problem of suicide rationally is doomed to failure, for suicide is not a rational act in the first place.

David Matthew · 20-07-2010 8:16pm

It seems a silly thing indeed to me to face "absurdity", bow your head before this force of entropy, and submit to cowardice and despair. But I suppose any attempt to understand the problem of suicide rationally is doomed to failure, for suicide is not a rational act in the first place.

Thought experiment: You are tied up, facing the prospect of being slowly crushed by a steamroller which approaches you from the distance (pardon the gruesome nature of this - it does have a point though), and in your one free hand you have a gun.
The options are: end your existence yourself, quickly, or endure a far worse suffering.

I would say in a case like this, that suicide was indeed the 'rational' choice.

And before anyone claims that such a case is ridiculously far-fetched, I would urge you to do a little more research into the background of suicides. It is usually an act decided upon, deliberated in advance, the pros and cons weighed in so far as they are perceived (no different to how a normal person weighs up their options), and hence, a rational act through and through.

What people ignore, and often do not possess adequate depth of feeling to appreciate, is the degree of suffering the suicidal person is enduring and/or anticipating. They see their future like an approaching steamroller, waiting to crush all their hopes and dreams. Or life is indeed crushing them there and then, and they can take it no more.

Of course, I'm not claiming that there is an objective 'threshold' beyond which everybody will choose to end their lives; we all have our own thresholds, consisting of infinitely complex factors. In a suicide, the threshold is felt to be broken; they would rather risk, or indeed embrace, oblivion, than endure existence any longer. Yes, it might be 'the' easy option from that point of view, but never, never is it an easy option. Suffering has the potential to take on such depth so as to overshadow everything.

Cyzrane · 20-07-2010 9:00pm

Hmm, well, maybe "rational" was a poor word for it. Perhaps what I meant was "logical"? The idea I meant to convey anyway was that suicide is not a process that makes strictly logical sense, and is influenced by emotions such as fear, anxiety, depression etc.

Your scenario above does elucidate better the anguish and trauma associated with suicide that I admit as a non-suicidal person I don't purport to understand. After all, I don't think there is any way I truly could understand, or be expected to truly understand, what powerful forces drive people to such extremes. I would, however, state that your example proposes the following two scenarios:

(a) Slow and painful death under the treads of a steamroller.
(b) More instantaneous, and probably less painful, death using a gun.

In both of these scenarios death is inevitable. The choice of a suicide would likely me more like:

(a) Continue living in emotional anguish, facing this adversity
(b) Do not continue living and therefore escape this emotional anguish.

Only one of the above situations leads to an instantaneous death. In other words, with the steamroller there is an inevitable sense of imminent death. For a suicide, it is unlikely that death is inevitable, it is chosen over life.

Anyway, I suppose it was foolish of me to try to understand. Your steamroller metaphor did emphasise the torment that a suicide must experience, though, and I probably underestimated that in my original argument.

David Matthew · 21-07-2010 9:44am

Hi Cyzrane,

I hope you didn't take my argument to be an attack on you - it's just that I was eager to get across the point that suicide is often misunderstood, and often (thanks to certain religious doctrines) blackened beyond sympathy. Many people in the past have no doubt been almost afraid to understand the motivations behind a suicide.

I appreciate your point that in my thought experiment the two scenarios resulted in death, which is hardly comparable to the actual reality of the life of a suicide (unless you stretch it out to include the fact that we're all going to die anyway). But again, what I was really trying to emphasize was that the perceived reality is actually closer in nature to my far-fetched thought experiment. The suicide will often believe, in those moments before the act, that life is indeed crushing them - that they just can't continue. The torment and anguish, as you well put it, reaches such a pitch that they conclude, rationally (but not necessarily based on fully sound premises) that suicide is the only option left that makes sense to them.

I don't want to make a blanket statement that all suicide scenarios are like this. The motivations can differ in many cases; and no doubt many who kill themselves do not believe it will end their existence per se, but only radically transform it. In some cases, life may feel meaningless, futile; in others, a dearly coveted meaning may be lost forever. The reasons may be as numerous as the people themselves, but one factor they all surely share in common; in the final choice of 'live it, or leave it', the latter entices them like a siren promising refuge, while the former seems beyond their endurance.

Joe1919 · 21-07-2010 2:26pm

Stanford encyclopedia have a good article on this subject.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/suicide/

Cyzrane · 21-07-2010 3:22pm

David Matthew wrote: »

Hi Cyzrane,

I hope you didn't take my argument to be an attack on you - it's just that I was eager to get across the point that suicide is often misunderstood, and often (thanks to certain religious doctrines) blackened beyond sympathy. Many people in the past have no doubt been almost afraid to understand the motivations behind a suicide.

No, no, I didn't consider your argument an attack on me at all. I just recognised that I was probably arguing from a standpoint where I didn't really understand the depth of emotional turmoil that a suicidal person might experience.

Valmont · 01-08-2010 8:40pm

I picked up the Myth of Sisyphus as I was very interested in the whole topic. Half way through it however, I closed it over and have never bothered with the issue since- it was that boring. Or maybe I just didn't get it. This book ended my existentialist phase of philosophising.

force majeure · 05-08-2010 5:31pm

I have being reading this with some interest and must say I find good points being made by all.
The one thing I think most about those who are suicidal is the very fact that life can be so crushing while all the time struggling to find points off optimistism. I recall once some on on RTE saying that intelligent people can sometime become overwhelmed by every day existence and small points off ill-view that most off us never see and as result fall in to despair trying to make since off it all.
To further that I believe myself that many who do go on to commit suicide do so as rather than feeling their is noting left for them that they feel their is nothing left they can do to change anything.

padz · 05-08-2010 9:06pm

prime time r doin a special on suicide in ireland now, for any who missed it you can prob get it on the rte player,

they were sayin 500 people commit suicide in ireland every year and the figure could be as high as 700, the funding for suicide prevention is 5million mean while 40million is spent on road saftey ads,

of course every death/accident is awful but it just shows the awarness isint there eventhough im sure everybody in ireland has been affected by suicide in some way,

it seams to be a mayjor issue that people are not able to talk about openly and deal with it like the way they do with road safey, the guy from concern just said they get 3000 calls a month from people who are suicidal, its a pretty serious and its rising

David Matthew · 08-09-2010 7:59pm

I very much agree padz; Samaritans are also becoming increasingly inundated.

People sympathize openly about road accidents in a way they certainly wouldn't over suicide. It is very much a 'hushed' and hidden topic in many respects. I think people are almost slightly afraid to acknowledge it collectively, for fear of digging up something in those around? Who knows, but the reluctance to discuss it openly definitely exists.

Joe1919 · 09-09-2010 1:07am

David Matthew wrote: »

I very much agree padz; Samaritans are also becoming increasingly inundated.

People sympathize openly about road accidents in a way they certainly wouldn't over suicide. It is very much a 'hushed' and hidden topic in many respects. I think people are almost slightly afraid to acknowledge it collectively, for fear of digging up something in those around? Who knows, but the reluctance to discuss it openly definitely exists.

Heres an interesting link on 'Depressive Realism'. Although what they have to say is controversal, there is some merit in the point that depressed people may have too much of a realistic view of life. Perhaps they take life too seriously.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depressive_realism

Selected · 29-09-2010 5:55pm

I guess it depends on how you define life.

I don’t think it delusional to subjectively deconstruct our present day reality, which consists mostly of man-made psychological, philosophical, ideological and emotional structures, to its purest form, that is, life is consciousness. The ability to perceive the Universe and simultaneously be aware of our own existence is more than enough for me. This thirst, hunger, quest to know everything, seems to me at least, futile in the extreme – a true Sisyphean task. We have too long identified our existence as some cosmic accident, convincing ourselves that knowledge will enable us to understand the Universe and ourselves.

The truth, however, is that we do not seek knowledge to understand, but to conquer. I for one am not proud of humankind; in fact, I would consider my attitude toward my fellow man as being, frankly, misanthropic.

This self-imposed separation from my fellow man does not however instil a sense of personal despair; on the contrary, individualism is the hope for all humanity.

The uniqueness of each individual dissipates with each altering surge of consensus and compromise, leaving vacuous vestigial entities eagerly waiting for the next surge. We think we’re so advanced living in the 21st Century that we are immune from ‘delusion of the masses’.

Humanity is on a crash course with itself once again. Wars and manufactured disasters are really just mass suicides, the inevitable collapse of human constructs.

We truly live in a very strange place indeed.

The question of suicide

Comments