Posted: Nov 14, 2014 10:45 am
by Sendraks
TMB wrote:Your response misses the fundamental and overwhelming simple question. Is it better to be dead or alive?

I don't think any is arguing is that, for most, life is definitely better than being dead. However, this simple statement falls down when applied to specific scenarios. Men who sign up to become soldiers, in the modern era, do so knowing that they may be prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice. For anyone signing up with a wife and/or children, they do so knowing what they are prepared to sacrifice. Accepting that, as a partner, is not an easy thing to live with.

TMB wrote: It does not mean or imply that life is always a good place, there is plenty of suffering and I have doubt there are people who would rather be dead who cannot end their lives and I suspect this is due to the finality and our deep and abiding desire not to be dead.

As Fall has explained, in those suffering from depression, there is a point where even having the energy to end ones own life becomes impossible. They are beyond choice at this point.

TMB wrote:The difference is that living people have some degree of choice, while the dead do not, in fact they (as has been so excruciatingly debated by some here) cannot even be said to have nothing, because things that no longer exist cannot be said to 'have' anything.

Well the question behind Hilary's statement is one of "Is ongoing suffering better than no suffering at all?" Which is a pretty loaded statement, because it precludes the possibility that one's life might get better.

There is an interesting discussion to be had here, but as this is one that has nothing to do with feminism or equality (the same as male suicide), it should be split off into it's own thread.