Suicide in Relation to Philosophy

Suicide is conventionally defined as intentional self-destruction (Honderich 902). It is notably freeing oneself from reality of life. The topic is often controversial since different philosophers air their different views regarding suicide. The act has been condemned, romanticized and cited on morality basis, to philosophically investigate it. Suicide was used by Socrates when he took away his life by taking hemlock. According to Plato, suicide is a better option in the case that one is sentenced to capital punishment by state, bound by misfortunes and when one is suffering permanent disgrace. All the same, Plato argued that the act should be punishable in instances when it is associated with indolence and cowardice. St. Thomas Aquinas hit the nail on the head when he stated that “it is altogether unlawful to kill oneself, for three reasons; (1) everything naturally keeps itself in being…wherefore suicide is ….contrary to the natural law and to charity. (2) Because everyman is part of the community, and by killing himself he injures the community. (3) Because life is God’s gift to man, and is subject to His power…Hence whoever takes his own life, sins against God (Honderich 902). This paper shall investigate the act of suicide and relate it philosophically.

Suicide Philosophical Investigation

Disapproval

Suicide has been opposed philosophically, where it is regarded as being immoral or unethical. This is because suicide is as a result of being depressed, emotionally hurt or even due to economic constrains. These aspects are however temporary and ones whose management is possible through lifestyle changes and therapy. Therefore, why take a lasting solution to a passing problem? All the same, it is argued that emotional agony may be temporary to some individuals, but it is often hard to resolve through therapy or lifestyle adjustment to others, since it might be too severe. This makes it hard for individuals to cope with their situations such as permanent mental disability or incurable ailments, thus opting for suicide (Singer 73).

Suicide is regarded as being absurd as viewed by Albert Carnus, who points out that the act, is prevalent in a world with no God, and portrays freedom denial. Thus, to escape from absurd of reality is not the solution but rather one should have a passionate attachment towards life (Campbell & Collinson 61 & 70). Christian philosophers as G. K Chesterton describe the act as an eventual ill, which is a renunciation in interest to exist. They point out that one who takes away his life commits destruction to the entire world (Honderich 902).

In classical liberalism, an individual’ choice, which hinders one to make further decisions is condemned by John Stuart Mill. Suicide is therefore a social ill that should be prohibited so as to evade from it impeding the potential to make more choices. Mill however, maintains that a person should safeguard their personal interests. He illustrates that is a person was to cross a wrecked bridge, he should be warned of the danger ahead, but should not be prevented from crossing it, since he is aware of his life value (Mill & Carlyle 311).

In deontological ethics, Immanuel Kant opposes suicide in that he maintains that an individual who contemplates suicide has to begin with questioning himself on his choice to end his life, in relation to humanity. He puts a key emphasis on the act and not the repercussions. Therefore, such a person has to evaluate on whether to make the act universal in that all mankind should behave in such a manner. A decision to end own life is utilizing oneself for self-satisfaction. Thus, it is not right to commit suicide for self-satisfaction (Kant 171). Some other philosophers like Jean- Jacques Rousseau argue that in accordance to the social contract, one can put his life to risk to reserve it (Craighead & Nemeroff 1652). However, Hobbes goes against the act when he points out that it is natural law, which prohibits people to destroy their own lives or the means to preserve it. Going against such a natural law is considered immoral since naturally, a person’s intuition fears death (Paterson 5).

According to David Hume, the act is a portrayal of revolt against God. He neither see it as a way of safeguarding life of an individual doomed to death, nor is it an act of altering anything in one’s environment. However, he maintains that the act is comparable to a retirement from a community to become a loner, which although not immoral, it exposes one’s dependents to become susceptible. Suicide is not the option to go for and Hume shows ridicule towards the act (Honderich 902).

Approval

Supporters of suicide embrace it on the ground that it causes an end to suffering as a result of old age, mental illnesses or incurable terminal diseases. They depict that permanent suffering is not the way to go, but rather suicide is better in order to terminate their continued suffering. This way, the act is not considered as irrational but is a way to resolve actual problems and a way to escape from suffering. Ideally, some philosophers take the act to be comforting, as indicated by Herodotus who points out that incase life becomes a burden death is always the refuge to be sought. This concept has been asserted by Schopenhauer who argues that suicide is not wrong as regarded by many people, neither does it portray cowardice but rather, every individual is entitled to his own life. He does not consider it as being immoral but as a right. He compares suicide after immense sufferings as having to wake up after an awful nightmare terming it as a solution to personal pains and that it is not in any way, a rejection of will to refuse to pleasures of life (Cholbi pr. 43).

From liberalism, an individual is given a right to life, which is their belonging and should therefore be free to handle it in the manner one wishes to, without being forced to live or die. Every person is entitled on the choice to life or death and their choices should be respected. Suicide is regarded as a basic right by Thomas Szasz, maintaining that freedom calls for possession of life and person while choosing to terminate it is a basic right, claiming that being forced to life portrays that one has no self-belonging but is owned by others (1 & 2). Additionally, a suicidal mind depicts humanity freedom as ascertained by Jean Amery, claiming that one acquires self-recognition when freely choose to die (Cholbi pr. 32).

Some societies however, have remained neutral to the issue of suicide and some like Japan embrace it as an act of redemption, to free from sins or personal weaknesses. This was common during the Samurai, who saw it as being a right for the Samurai class to portray bravery. Nihilist philosophers on the other hand, consider that a person cannot create meaning to life as they maintain that everything e.g. suicide has no meaning. From a utilitarian perspective, one can either oppose or embrace the act in that for a depressed individual, it puts an end their grief while on the other hand, one’s friends and relatives are left to mourn (Cholbi pr. 36).

In conclusion, suicide in relation to philosophy is often a controversial topic, which is justified by others while rejected by many. An existentialist for instance, award no meaning to life and therefore justifies the act of taking one’s life, claiming that one has a potential to award his or her own meaning to life (Paterson 15). Instead of misery, many philosophers opt for suicide while some like Confucians claims that if one cannot adhere to moral values, he would rather be dead. They regard loyalty and a spirit of self-sacrifice for integrity of moral values. Some philosophers question on the morality of those who are forced into the act against their will (Moreland & Geisler 94). However, in my opinion, sanctity of life itself should deter one from contemplating suicide since life itself is given freely and should therefore be taken away freely.

Works Cited

Campbell, Robert & Collinson, Diane. Ending Lives. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1988. Print.

Cholbi, Michael, “Suicide”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Jul. 2008. June 7, 2011. <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2009/entries/suicide/>.

Craighead, Edward & Nemeroff, Charles. The Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology and Behavioral Science, Volume 4. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 2002. Print.

Honderich, Ted. The Oxford companion to philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. Print.

Kant, Immanuel. The metaphysics of morals. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Print.

Mill, John & Carlyle, Thomas. Autobiography of J.S. Mill & on Liberty; Characteristics, Inaugural Address at Edinburgh & Sir Walter Scott: The Five Foot Classics, Vol. XXV (in 51 Volumes). New York: Cosimo, Inc., 2010. Print.

Moreland, James & Geisler, Norman. The Life and Death Debate. Westport: Greenwood Press, 1990. Print.

Paterson, Craig. Assisted suicide and euthanasia: a natural law ethics approach. Hampshire, England: Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 2008. Print.

Singer, Peter. Practical Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. Print.

Szasz, Thomas. Fatal Freedom: The Ethics and Politics of Suicide. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 2002. Print.