Duke4.net Forums: Suicide - Duke4.net Forums

Jump to content

Hide message Show message
Welcome to the Duke4.net Forums!

Register an account now to get access to all board features. After you've registered and logged in, you'll be able to create topics, post replies, send and receive private messages, disable the viewing of ads and more!

  • 9 Pages +
  • « First
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Suicide  "Why not?"

Poll: Suicide (49 member(s) have cast votes)

Would you consider suicide as a possible solution to one's suffering?

  1. Yes (23 votes [46.94%])

    Percentage of vote: 46.94%

  2. No (26 votes [53.06%])

    Percentage of vote: 53.06%

Vote Guests cannot vote

User is offline   CruX 

  • 691

#241

View PostMetroidJunkie, on 09 March 2014 - 01:04 PM, said:

When did I ever suggest that? I didn't say act like you're the most important thing in the universe but you should act like you were created for a reason and that your life matters in the eyes of the creator.

When you registered, I recognized your handle from the CWCki forums and wondered how long it'd be before you started derailing threads over here with your ignorant bullshit. Question answered, I guess. Did getting run off of that forum teach you nothing about keeping stuff like this to yourself?

rebel without a cause or effect
-1

User is offline   MetroidJunkie 

  • 50

#242

View PostEmerica, on 09 March 2014 - 09:00 PM, said:

When you registered, I recognized your handle from the CWCki forums and wondered how long it'd be before you started derailing threads over here with your ignorant bullshit. Question answered, I guess. Did getting run off of that forum teach you nothing about keeping stuff like this to yourself?


First of all, I wasn't run off the forum, I just haven't been going on it. Second, notice how I held my tongue so that the thread could resume its original discussion, which it was doing and then you decided to post this. Speaking of keeping things to one's self... But, since you already started, do enlighten me how what I said was ignorant.

This post has been edited by MetroidJunkie: 09 March 2014 - 09:18 PM

0

User is offline   CruX 

  • 691

#243

View PostMetroidJunkie, on 09 March 2014 - 09:16 PM, said:

But, since you already started, do enlighten me how what I said was ignorant.

No thanks, champ. Unlike you, I'm not going to kick some hornet's nest and then spend half a dozen posts prattling about crap that isn't related to the topic. I just found it funny how you did this exact same thing over there and between then and now, you apparently haven't changed your modus operandi in the slightest.

As for the actual discussion, I realized I forgot to throw a vote in, so I'm going with "yes". As in, I don't see anything inappropriate with offing yourself to end suffering, extreme or otherwise. I see people throw the word "selfish" around a lot, but that really doesn't make any sense to me. If you kill yourself, it's shitty that the act puts your loved ones through so much pain, but it's no less self-centered than somebody else's desire to keep you around in a life that you no longer believe is worth living. I think people close to a person that's committed suicide can only really start to cope with it when they realize that it wasn't about them.

rebel without a cause or effect
4

User is offline   Kathy 

  • 1,248

#244

View PostMetroidJunkie, on 09 March 2014 - 03:19 PM, said:

As an analogy, if someone told you that humans didn't actually come up with computers and that they stole the idea from a one in a billion rock formation that occurred by chance over millions of years, would you take it seriously? Probably not, its intense complexity implies an intelligent mind.

Brilliant logical conclusion.

I would never have thought this Watchmaker analogy get any traction. Its whole idea implies subjective judgement.

Windows incompatibility is a feature, not a bug.
0

User is offline   MetroidJunkie 

  • 50

#245

People who desire to commit suicide are almost always in a wrecked state of mind. Ask anyone who's survived a suicide attempt, they tend to have a new found respect for life because they realize what they almost gave up. If you don't believe in an afterlife, then you have even more reason to not go through with it because why give up the one and only life you have?

This post has been edited by MetroidJunkie: 10 March 2014 - 06:58 AM

1

User is offline   Forge 

  • 8,674

#246

nice that you decided to change your post since it made no sense. deism - having an uncaring and unapproachable god defeats the reasoning behind having a purpose in life and to not commit suicide because it may "offend" that god.

View PostMetroidJunkie, on 10 March 2014 - 06:32 AM, said:

People who desire to commit suicide are almost always in a wrecked state of mind. Ask anyone who's survived a suicide attempt, they tend to have a new found respect for life.

based off what information?
statistics show that at least 1/3 of people who attempt suicide and fail will attempt it again within a year.
some studies have shown that 80% of the people who commit suicide have tried at least once before

are you making assumptions or do you have something to back that up? link please
2

User is offline   MrBlackCat 

  • 390

#247

View PostForge, on 09 March 2014 - 06:44 PM, said:

<snip> but i believe a sense of purpose is important. even if it's nothing more than to have something to focus on as a positive when nothing else matters.
that's just me though.

I don't think that is just you for sure. I think we are in the same chapter if not the same page maybe... here is a point I wanted to make, but posts get long and I run out of time. The point I believe is the same as describe relative to purpose. It is my view and opinion that needing a purpose (as socially defined) such as being some key element to the function of the universe or even the direct creation of an interactive god of some kind, is as arrogant as the idea that the earth was the center of the universe and the sun revolved around it. It is "ok" not to matter on that scale, for me. I am happy and content with "something to focus on" as you say. Don't get me wrong, if you need to believe that there is some kind of "grand purpose" for your existence, that is not offensive to me, but in my observation such beliefs and even that need to believe such a thing seems to create a sense of superiority over someone like myself, who does not believe this way. (I am a lost godless soul etc)

However... I do enjoy many purposes such as helping those around myself enjoy their lives more, no matter how they view themselves. This includes most any animals that I am able to observe and reasonably understand response to stimuli etc. In other words, I pet the cats... when they wish it, and not otherwise. Animals love me, and I enjoy that. Beyond that, I have more hobbies than most people for sure. I don't watch television or listen to radio etc, I build things. Almost daily. From Dollhouse furniture/items, to functional models of mechanical items from my jobs or whatever... I make things. There are many other things, but those are my purpose I would say.


Forge said:

my issues are chemical. my brain is broke and i no longer produce "happy" chemical neurotransmitters (dopamine). I was under so much stress and on high alert for almost two years non-stop while i was in Iraq that the overload during such a long stretch basically shut down it's production permanently. The upside is i have an incredibly high tolerance to pain which helps offset my damaged spine.

-i'd off myself, but like everything else, i'd have to get my wife's permission first

Interesting... and sad in some ways. Stress induced damage is often reversable however. Unlike Pancreatic damage for example, most electro-chemical processes can be restored once the stress is removed... but as you say, like with addictions, it has become a pattern, and the pattern must be broken before repair can commence.
I wish you luck in whatever the resolution be it regaining your health, or your ability to cope with the damage both physical and or psychological.


Trooper Dan said:

<snip> Some doctors think that clinical depression is, or is caused by, defective thought processes.

Yes, this does seem to be the case for sure, as the brain is a patterning device basically, and patterns get stuck. Drugs are often addictive because they cause such a huge about of "patterning" the user is unable to feel normal withing said pattern running.

Trooper Dan said:

This agrees with what you were saying about its impact on memory, and also with what I have observed -- in particular, the way that depressed people have selective negative memory and seem blind to anything good going on around them.

Exactly...

Trooper Dan said:

While I have avoided severe depression, I do have bouts with unhappiness, and I don't seem able to sustain happiness for very long.

Keep in mind that it isn't so much the amount of unhappiness as it is someones ability to cope with whatever amount they are experiencing. Meaning, don't think what you feel is any less severe than someone elses as our ability to deal with stress varies greatly.

Trooper Dan said:

One thing that has helped, though, is that I try to separate my intellectual life from my life as a human being. As an intellectual, I tend to have a rather bleak outlook on things. But as a human being, I need to have goals and believe that they matter, and believe that I am working towards a better future. Rather than try to reconcile these two points of view, in the last few years I have just allowed them to exist separately, and it seems to be working (more or less).
That is an interesting view... I like it. Going to think about that a bit.


View PostEmerica, on 09 March 2014 - 09:39 PM, said:

<snip>I see people throw the word "selfish" around a lot, but that really doesn't make any sense to me. If you kill yourself, it's shitty that the act puts your loved ones through so much pain, but it's no less self-centered than somebody else's desire to keep you around in a life that you no longer believe is worth living. I think people close to a person that's committed suicide can only really start to cope with it when they realize that it wasn't about them.
Very well said... and far less verbose than my own post(s).

I will put more thought into how to convey my views more briefly here. I am painfully aware of the relative length of my posts compared to the majority. I am also aware that many people simply don't care for it. My posts are already usually dramatically shortened from what I wish to say. I often type out what I want to say and then strip each paragraph down to as small as I possibly can without losing too much of the meaning I wish to convey. I spend more time reducing than typing by far. (I'm doing it again... ending it now. :wub: )

Out of time for now. I am enjoying all the different views.

MrBlackCat

Posted Image

This post has been edited by MrBlackCat: 10 March 2014 - 04:46 PM

3

User is offline   Forge 

  • 8,674

#248

thanks for your concern, but i'm boned

https://newscenter.b...mental-illness/
http://www.psycholog...nd-connectivity
http://umm.edu/healt...articles/stress

i also had some papers with links to articles about failing neurotransmitters and non-receptive connectors, but i can't find it

to sum up the above articles if you aren't into reading about how the brain works - the long term stress basically caused permanent and/or long lasting damage.

the only way to "cope" is to learn to deal with new stressors, but i can't "fix" the damage

between the long term stress i went through coupled with the post traumatic stress i'm dealing with now, i'm in a pretty deep hole

This post has been edited by Forge: 10 March 2014 - 06:57 PM

0

User is online   Trooper Dan 

  • Duke Plus Developer
  • 3,945

#249

View PostMrBlackCat, on 10 March 2014 - 04:38 PM, said:

That is an interesting view... I like it. Going to think about that a bit.


I recommend reading this: https://philosophy.a...mas%20Nagel.pdf
"The Absurd", by Thomas Nagel. It might be hard to follow in a few places for those without a background in analytic philosophy, but on the whole it's very accessible.
It's not about depression, per se, but I found his insights to be very useful in understanding how certain intellectual thought processes can create a feeling of meaninglessness and hopelessness. If you don't feel like reading the whole thing, there's a brief summary with some conclusions in the last section (part VI).
1

User is offline   iTech 

  • -22

#250

I tried committing suicide over ten times unsuccessfully using various instruments I concocted to aid me in my goal. I tried machineguns with depleted uranium to the head (all my clips were empty after an hour and three sideburn hairs were crooked), hydrogen bomb in the anus (I had a severe case of flatulance for over three hours!) and last but not least, flying off into space and walking into a black whole, then walking back out again out of frustration. All it did was cover me in a putrid smell of intergalactic feces (yes. The true role of a black hole is acting as the universe's anus).


Seriously though, why commit suicide? You'll die eventually, just wait for it. It will happen. I've never grasped the need to ascertain the one certainty in life. Even-though you might not think much of your life, you are an autonomous being in this universe and you should be respected, especially by yourself.

Powered By Mike The Spike
-2

User is offline   iTech 

  • -22

#251

That reminds me. For people talking about the insignificance of life, I always tell the story of the Spider that saved the world (which is a parable I came up with).

When you see a spider, do you kill it? Well, you could, but that could cause the destruction of the world. How? Suppose there's a false-flag nuclear strike on the States in the future, and the president is about to push "The Button", but a spider, the offspring of a spider you did not kill, walks over The Button the moment he intends to push it and he scares away, the added time giving him time to pick up a phone call from Russia saying it wasn't them but Iraqis, if you killed that spider's ancestor, your actions would have involuntarily caused the destruction of the world. So every autonomous being, how insignificant it may seem, must be respected.

Powered By Mike The Spike
0

User is offline   Fox 

  • Fraka kaka kaka kaka-kow!
  • 5,025

#252

Or the spider could have scared away the Russia guy.
1

User is offline   iTech 

  • -22

#253

View PostFox, on 09 June 2014 - 09:32 AM, said:

Or the spider could have scared away the Russia guy.

Yes, which is the type of reasoning I get afterwards. However, since you don't know if it will save the world or doom it, it is best to wipe off responsibility, respect it, and don't intervene in its life.

Powered By Mike The Spike
0

User is online   Trooper Dan 

  • Duke Plus Developer
  • 3,945

#254

I thought your parable was supposed to be a parody of bad reasoning and that Fox wasn't getting the joke.
0

User is offline   iTech 

  • -22

#255

View PostTrooper Dan, on 09 June 2014 - 10:27 AM, said:

I thought your parable was supposed to be a parody of bad reasoning and that Fox wasn't getting the joke.

How is it bad reasoning, please elaborate. Not being sarcastic, I love to hear other views on this.

Powered By Mike The Spike
0

User is online   Trooper Dan 

  • Duke Plus Developer
  • 3,945

#256

View PostiTech, on 09 June 2014 - 10:57 AM, said:

How is it bad reasoning, please elaborate. Not being sarcastic, I love to hear other views on this.


It's bad reasoning because, while there is a (vanishingly small) probability that any given spider (or whatever) could go on to save the human race or have some other large positive impact, it is just as (im)probable that it could go on to do the opposite. The mere possibility that a spider could save the human race doesn't entail that the spider ought to be preseverd; by the same kind of reasoning, one could argue that any given spider could potentially become the vector of a disease that will wipe out the human race, and that therefore all spiders should be exterminated. If I were to categorize the parable as a common fallacy, I would say it is an example of an argument from ignorance.

There's another problem, insofar as the parable purports to show that all life should be respected because it is significant. In the parable, the spider's life is not shown to have any intrinsic value, it is only claimed to have value because of the effects that it has on others. That's not a recipe for showing that life ought to be respected, because ( A ) many living things don't have a net positive impact on other living things (often due to isolation or other circumstances beyond their control), and ( B ) positive effects on others increase value only if the others in question already value, which will lead to an infinite regress unless life has intrinsic value.
0

User is offline   iTech 

  • -22

#257

View PostTrooper Dan, on 09 June 2014 - 11:23 PM, said:

It's bad reasoning because, while there is a (vanishingly small) probability that any given spider (or whatever) could go on to save the human race or have some other large positive impact, it is just as (im)probable that it could go on to do the opposite. The mere possibility that a spider could save the human race doesn't entail that the spider ought to be preseverd; by the same kind of reasoning, one could argue that any given spider could potentially become the vector of a disease that will wipe out the human race, and that therefore all spiders should be exterminated. If I were to categorize the parable as a common fallacy, I would say it is an example of an argument from ignorance.



As said before, I usually get the argument that the spider could just as well doom humanity. The parable's message is to respect life, and best not interfere. The old "live and let live". People often argue "it's just a fly. It's just a rat; It's just a deer, ...". My message is that life could be important no matter how insignificant it is deemed by humans.


Quote

There's another problem, insofar as the parable purports to show that all life should be respected because it is significant. In the parable, the spider's life is not shown to have any intrinsic value, it is only claimed to have value because of the effects that it has on others. That's not a recipe for showing that life ought to be respected, because ( A ) many living things don't have a net positive impact on other living things (often due to isolation or other circumstances beyond their control), and


By your reasoning, my parable states that no value can be attributed to a being if it has no influence on life we deem as having value, which is correct and indeed what the parable states. That is because humans deem human life as significant and that of an insect as inconsequential. I show no life is completely inconsequential, as the being has autonomy and can cause effect at a distance due to its unpredictable influence on the world we live in so it does have some intrinsic, endogenous value.

Quote

( B ) positive effects on others increase value only if the others in question already value, which will lead to an infinite regress unless life has intrinsic value.

Human life is considered by majorities to have value, insect life is considered by majorities to have none. Whether or not human life indeed does have value, and by extent the insect which influences it thereby gaining value as well, is still a matter of opinion and always will be. I merely show that the reasoning that human life and insect life should disproportionately be attributed value by human is a fallacy.

Now, I do have a hypothesis arguing that autonomous life does have intrinsic value over inanimate objects (or "static life, as a brain in a jar that is thinking but cannot influence the outside world") but it remains a hypothesis. My parable is just the "butterfly effect" reworded, an example of chaos theory. I consider autonomous life as special, unique process in this universe, as entropy increases at specific (though not static) rates throughout specific parts of the universe even on a quantum, molecular and cellular level and this entropy is considered a stochastic process; I argue that autonomous life can cause entropy rates on a larger scale (planet, universe) to increase and decrease unpredictably as well, but deviant from truly stochastic rates. And now we're dabbling into a subject which is epitome of philosophical guessing and opinionated hypothesis... to the existence of "free will". If entropy rates stay "predictably variable" throughout the universe and due to the existence of autonomous life can be unpredictably variable, one could detect the existence of life by detecting signals in the entropy rate of the universe. It comes down to differentiating a truly random rate and a seemingly random rate. Suppose you have a hyptothetical machine measuring all entropy in all the universe, you would be able to tell if life has evolved by looking for deviations in the entropy rate. This paper kinda explains what I'm saying, but I'd like to steer away from discussing theorethical physics and chaos theory in depth of a videogame forum since that's never a good idea, so there. ^_^

Powered By Mike The Spike
0

User is online   Trooper Dan 

  • Duke Plus Developer
  • 3,945

#258

I read your replies but I think my points still stand. I wish I had more time to try and explain, but unfortunately I don't. Instead, I'll try and different angle and then maybe you will see the problem. By your own admission, your parable is variation on the "butterfly effect" hypothesis. But notice that the butterfly effect applies just as much to inanimate objects. Variations on your parable could be repeated using pebbles, furniture, cans of beans, or used condoms. And then it would invite us to conclude that any object in the universe must be "respected". But of course, just as any object could potentially have a positive effect, any object could also potentially have a negative effect -- so the butterfly effect cancels itself out. We have no more reason to believe that interacting with some random object will have a large unexpected positive outcome than a negative one, and so the butterfly effect gives us no reason to change our behavior one way or another, towards any object, be it living or not.
0

User is offline   iTech 

  • -22

#259

View PostTrooper Dan, on 10 June 2014 - 09:39 AM, said:

I read your replies but I think my points still stand. I wish I had more time to try and explain, but unfortunately I don't. Instead, I'll try and different angle and then maybe you will see the problem. By your own admission, your parable is variation on the "butterfly effect" hypothesis.


Right.

Quote

But notice that the butterfly effect applies just as much to inanimate objects. Variations on your parable could be repeated using pebbles, furniture, cans of beans, or used condoms. And then it would invite us to conclude that any object in the universe must be "respected".

Wrong. See how I specifically mention autonomous beings and illustrate the insignificance of a brain in a jar? Excluding external influence, which can only be A. caused by entropy or physical events (the weather blowing away a rock, the earth causing an earthquake knocking over furniture, the sun swallowing the earth with all the bean cans and rocks, etc. after it dies in 5 billion years, or B. Caused by an autonomous being (A human picking up a used condom and using it as bubble gum or a dog biting into a can of beans) the inanimate object may have influence on the world, but if the external influence on the object itself is just part of entropy or its physical properties the object itself falls into the standard entropy or physics model and becomes part of the entropy or physics, but (this is what I was hypothesizing) if an autonomous being is the influence, what happens to the inanimate object cannot be explained by standard entropy models (=free will is influencing it. If that exists, which I am guessing/hypothesizing does.).

Quote

But of course, just as any object could potentially have a positive effect, any object could also potentially have a negative effect -- so the butterfly effect cancels itself out. We have no more reason to believe that interacting with some random object will have a large unexpected positive outcome than a negative one, and so the butterfly effect gives us no reason to change our behavior one way or another, towards any object, be it living or not.


You would be correct if you did not leave out the cause of the interaction. Quantum mechanics predict what protons and electrons will do, molecular physics what groups of atoms will do, cellular biology what cells will do, weather analytics what the weather will do (suppose we could simulate every single elementary particle on earth and model the entire planet on a super computer, we would know with 100% certainty what the weather would be in 3000 AD if we exclude every autonomous thing on the plant as if only plant life evolved.). But what an autonomous being is going to do (scaling the cellular example previously mentioned to a group of cells making up an autonomous being), is unpredictable. We could model an ant hill and know the ants wouldn't spread out more than 100 yards from the hill using a simulation consisting of the same virtual ant, but in real life one ant could have a neurological disorder causing it to be born without the ability to sense the path other ants take and wander off several miles. Or it could just be born with a nonchalant personality, and simply not care what the other ants are doing and go "screw this, I'm out of here". A can of beans is always a can of beans, influencing its environment only when there is an external influence and even the physics engines of the day can predict what a can of beans will do... Sit there unless the player decides to kick it around in any random direction. But to predict what an autonomous being will do is much harder. In the previous example I left out the gold: We could mathematically be able to simulate the weather in a super computer from t=0 to t=Omega for the planet only simulating plant life. But once we add animals and humans in the mix (=autonomous beings), causing methane exhaust, pollution, etc. we see the weather change (global warming) which a standard simulation cannot predict (if the Kyoto agreement was accepted by decision makers more universally, the weather would be different today than when they decided to not do so)) If you are an advocate of the "Deterministic Universe" theorem you basically say "Free will does not exist, everything can be calculated an predicted given enough resources". If you believe in the "Undeterministic Universe" theorem, you say "We can predict only the inanimate, but not autonomous behavior and free will". I'm one of the last advocates. Also, if you are religious, you cannot believe in divine intervention and a deterministic universe at the same time, as that would turn it into an undeterministic universe on the spot.

Powered By Mike The Spike

This post has been edited by iTech: 10 June 2014 - 10:40 AM

0

User is online   Trooper Dan 

  • Duke Plus Developer
  • 3,945

#260

I give up. I think you are missing the point and overcomplicating the issues with a lot of extraneous claims. No hard feelings, I just don't have time to continue engaging in this particular discussion. Good luck in your endeavors.
0

User is offline   iTech 

  • -22

#261

View PostTrooper Dan, on 10 June 2014 - 11:53 AM, said:

I give up. I think you are missing the point and overcomplicating the issues with a lot of extraneous claims. No hard feelings, I just don't have time to continue engaging in this particular discussion. Good luck in your endeavors.



Lol! Thank you for stimulating my intellect, at any rate. I did enjoy it. And as I said, a gaming forum is no place to start delving into theoretical physics so I will not pursue discussion either. But thanks anyways ;)

Powered By Mike The Spike
0

Share this topic:


  • 9 Pages +
  • « First
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic


All copyrights and trademarks are property of their respective owners. Instead of reading this text, you could be playing Ion Fury! ;) © 2019 Voidpoint, LLC

Enter your sign in name and password


Sign in options