4 ms·

Strawman, and not an especially relevant one tbh. Life is generally worth living. You can have loving family. But you can also be doing nothing but waiting to

Strawman, and not an especially relevant one tbh. Life is generally worth living. You can have loving family. But you can also be doing nothing but waiting to die in a retirement home away from friends and family, in pain and hopped up on drugs. It’s really not an empathetic thing to assert that people who are comfortable with the end of their life must believe they are not loved. Ending your life does not have to come from grief. It is BETTER to have acceptance and die than to die alone in fear. It is BETTER if people talk about this difficult subject rather than stave it off as long as possible. People will be happier if they can do this. If your doctor tells you that you’re going to have an uncomfortable 3 years, it may make sense to you to just say no thanks and have an honest good bye with your family, saving you and them from the uncomfort to come. It is ok to die. Even without (but for 99% of people only with) medical circumstances.

svieira 7y ago
> It is okay to die. Dying is the one part of life we are guaranteed - I absolutely agree with you that it is okay to die. I also agree that you don't need to take extraordinary means to preserve your life - you don't have to take the chemotherapy, for example, or have your heart kept active after all other vital signs have ceased. I also know that our lives our not our own. We do not choose to pick them up and we may not choose to lay them down ourselves. People are happier when they accept this (I assert, as an _ad contra_ to your assertion). Why do you say that "for 99% of people only with medical circumstances is it okay to die"? Is it just that you think most people _will not_ choose death? Or that they _should not_ choose death?
- b_tterc_p 7y ago
  > I also know that our lives our not our own. We do not choose to pick them up and we may not choose to lay them down ourselves. People are happier when they accept this (I assert, as an _ad contra_ to your assertion). I think it depends on how you view the importance of your feelings. Dying of a heart attack on the toilet is pretty common (I think?) and probable majorly sucks. But... you also die immediately after so you don’t really dwell on it. Conversely dying peacefully surrounded by friends and family with a celebration of your life is pretty cool. One could argue that the moment of death doesn’t matter because it’s shortish and final, or you could argue that your final thoughts are going to be important to you and thus desire for them to be controlled. I’m going to bet that while people generally want to maximize time alive, they also like the idea of a warm and peaceful exit- and would value that over the assumption that you will have more days of life but a sudden and frightening exit. And while I think your point of view is also reasonable, my contention is that nobody has the ability to pick my point of view. > Why do you say that "for 99% of people only with medical circumstances is it okay to die"? Is it just that you think most people _will not_ choose death? Or that they _should not_ choose death? I’m saying 99% of people would probably not choose to end their life without a medical problem as the alternative. But there’s nothing saying you can’t decide you’ve had enough while healthy. Differentiating this from impulsive decisions made in stress and grief. Edit: I don’t know why you’re being downvoted. This seems like a good post.
  - svieira 7y ago
    > my contention is that nobody has the ability to pick my point of view. Completely agree. The question is, "should the point of view matter"? In general, in morals, we distinguish between that which is acceptable to have differing opinions on (having red shades in your bedroom) and that which it is _not_ acceptable to have a differing opinion on (killing Gypsies because they are Gypsies). Morally neutral vs. morally charged. You seem to be of the opinion that killing oneself is a morally charged act, but that it can be morally good. I agree with you that it is morally charged. I hold that it is always morally evil. We do not receive our life freely and we may not let it go freely. It is ours to put in the service of others, even at the possible expense of it, but not to reject.

svieira 7y ago

> It is okay to die. Dying is the one part of life we are guaranteed - I absolutely agree with you that it is okay to die. I also agree that you don't need to take extraordinary means to preserve your life - you don't have to take the chemotherapy, for example, or have your heart kept active after all other vital signs have ceased. I also know that our lives our not our own. We do not choose to pick them up and we may not choose to lay them down ourselves. People are happier when they accept this (I assert, as an _ad contra_ to your assertion). Why do you say that "for 99% of people only with medical circumstances is it okay to die"? Is it just that you think most people _will not_ choose death? Or that they _should not_ choose death?

b_tterc_p 7y ago
> I also know that our lives our not our own. We do not choose to pick them up and we may not choose to lay them down ourselves. People are happier when they accept this (I assert, as an _ad contra_ to your assertion). I think it depends on how you view the importance of your feelings. Dying of a heart attack on the toilet is pretty common (I think?) and probable majorly sucks. But... you also die immediately after so you don’t really dwell on it. Conversely dying peacefully surrounded by friends and family with a celebration of your life is pretty cool. One could argue that the moment of death doesn’t matter because it’s shortish and final, or you could argue that your final thoughts are going to be important to you and thus desire for them to be controlled. I’m going to bet that while people generally want to maximize time alive, they also like the idea of a warm and peaceful exit- and would value that over the assumption that you will have more days of life but a sudden and frightening exit. And while I think your point of view is also reasonable, my contention is that nobody has the ability to pick my point of view. > Why do you say that "for 99% of people only with medical circumstances is it okay to die"? Is it just that you think most people _will not_ choose death? Or that they _should not_ choose death? I’m saying 99% of people would probably not choose to end their life without a medical problem as the alternative. But there’s nothing saying you can’t decide you’ve had enough while healthy. Differentiating this from impulsive decisions made in stress and grief. Edit: I don’t know why you’re being downvoted. This seems like a good post.
- svieira 7y ago
  > my contention is that nobody has the ability to pick my point of view. Completely agree. The question is, "should the point of view matter"? In general, in morals, we distinguish between that which is acceptable to have differing opinions on (having red shades in your bedroom) and that which it is _not_ acceptable to have a differing opinion on (killing Gypsies because they are Gypsies). Morally neutral vs. morally charged. You seem to be of the opinion that killing oneself is a morally charged act, but that it can be morally good. I agree with you that it is morally charged. I hold that it is always morally evil. We do not receive our life freely and we may not let it go freely. It is ours to put in the service of others, even at the possible expense of it, but not to reject.