Going for the unknown of death. Is the absence of the bad the good despite not being able to enjoy such goodness? I think that's an ethical question. There's also the psychological part but I'm even more naive in that respect. Regarding suicide prevention, that's also a philosophical question. Are you doing good to the person by trying to stop him or her from suiciding? I cannot think beyond some ethics. I would rather have the philosophical debate instead of an advice but to me they are both welcome. At the end of the day I think advice also requires philosophy as backup. — Alan
Suicide may also be regarded as an experiment — a question which man puts to Nature, trying to force her to an answer. The question is this: What change will death produce in a man’s existence and in his insight into the nature of things? It is a clumsy experiment to make; for it involves the destruction of the very consciousness which puts the question and awaits the answer. — Schopenhauer, On Suicide
I take this as somewhat similar to Schopenhauer, the damage is already done by being born and enduring the suffering that drove you to suicide. There would be no actual relief from the death itself.“It is not worth the bother of killing yourself, since you always kill yourself too late.” — Emil Cioran, The Trouble with Being Born
I just think some people created that sort of metaphysics as the easiest answer to life which to me has no either quality of positiveness or negativeness. I think that accepting that life cannot be reduced to such properties is the main problem given the huge influence of pessimist thinking nowadays. Also, the fact that we actually have to build/create our own vision of life might be challenging, not to mention the fact that we might also have to change things actively is also more challenging. — Alan
Three things.
1) Pessimists do NOT have that much influence. Quite the opposite, there are more positive self-help, articles, and advice columns than ever before. As an experiment, start complaining about life's inherent flaws to people, and see what their reaction will be. Not joyous high fives that we are all on the same page, I'm afraid. — schopenhauer1
2) As for inherent negative- I did not mean that the "universe" is structurally negative, but human existence in the universe. I see as structurally negative as being put in a situation of always "dealing with" and being deprived at almost all times. On top of this are the contingent harms (not structural or inherent but probabilistic to each individual and their circumstance). So we have two forms of suffering or harm right there that inform us about existence. See past post about the idea of deprivationalism here: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/5981/schopenhauers-deprivationalism — schopenhauer1
3) Creating or dealing with life's challenges is exactly the type of thinking I am opposed to. Actually, ironically, this is EXACTLY the thread I am posting about right now. Check it out:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/6434/the-mild-torture-of-do-something-about-it-assumptions — schopenhauer1
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.