5 ms·

This. Life is such a precious random occurrence that failing to protect it in the face [dementia|physical disabilities|etc] is the real tragedy.

by dkga 1y ago

paulryanrogers 1y ago
What does protecting life look like when one is literally losing everything about themselves that they value?
sillyfluke 1y ago
As I mentioned in a another comment, framing it as "how one is remembered" is leading to pointless tangents in this thread. The important point is this: are you causing emotional, psychological, physical distress in the real world to those you care about when you have this disease? Yes or no. That's what I care about. Whether they are able to remember me well despite that, or poorly because of that should be completely secondary.
- lo_zamoyski 1y ago
  That’s irrelevant here. What is relevant is that we have a contempt for human life and a lack of charity. The teacher was not at fault for his condition. We should learn magnanimity. Sure, we can think about how the burdens of caring for our family can be lessened as they age, or how we may help reduce that burden for our family, but family does have the duty to care for its members, and to place such considerations above the intrinsic value of human life is very sad indeed.
  - AlexandrB 1y ago
    > The teacher was not at fault for his condition. We should learn magnanimity. This is equally true of conditions like paranoid schizophrenia or psychopathy. Sometimes a person is just born with wiring that makes you dangerous to others. Does this mean that everyone around them must have the magnanimity and charity to them attacking people at random?
    - teiferer 1y ago
      Yes, everybody should be interested in getting them treatment, just like they are interested in getting people treatment who have leukemia, were born with a malfunctioning liver or need an artificial hip. Instead, they get thrown in prison for the rest of their life because they are evil and we all can feel good about having made the city safer.
      - watwut 1y ago
        People with leukemia want treatment and are willing to suffer uncomfortable treatment to get cured. Paranoid schizophrenia have lower compliance rates and fairly large collateral damage. Psychopathy is a trait not a disease, but again, issue is that they do not cooperate and dont want to "cure". Psychopaths are fine as they are from their point of view. It is just their victims who mind.
  - LorenPechtel 1y ago
    This is not contempt for human life. It is a recognition that sometimes as the body deteriorates that the quality of life becomes negative. I watched both of my parents deteriorate in the end. The morphine blotted out my father's ability to form long term memory, if it wasn't in front of him things were like they had been before so much morphine was needed. There can be no value in such "life". As far as I'm concerned not allowing people to end the suffering is a form of sadism. I suspect this thread will go like many have in the past: there are two camps. The first has never seen a bad death and has a lot of opposition to people choosing to end their life. The second has seen a bad death and a lot of people would choose suicide before reaching that point. If it is a contempt for human life that means people have contempt for their own life and that doesn't make much sense. I can look at myself: I have been dealt a presumably genetic killer, I saw what it did to my mother and I will not allow that to happen to me. Do I have contempt for my own life because I expect the end to be suicide?
    - jkhdigital 1y ago
      This is about assisted suicide. You can argue all day long about how you have the right to end your own life, but the real issue is whether you have the right to grant another person immunity from charges of homicide for facilitating your death. That is an entirely different beast.
      - E39M5S62 1y ago
        Now you're just shifting the goal posts.
      - LorenPechtel 1y ago
        I see no difference. What is important is whether that's your intent or not, I do not care if the means involves another person or not (assuming adequate controls to ensure it's what you wanted. That's why Switzerland has become the place to go--under their law it is not illegal for an uninvolved person to provide aid assuming the person provides the actual trigger. I recall one in a documentary, guy had almost no motor control but he could still bite--a trigger that would start a timer that would turn off IIRC a respirator. They then sedated him so he wouldn't be struggling for air when the ventilator switched off--but without his triggering the timer it was just sedation, he would wake up in time.)
darkmighty 1y ago
It's not like life stops when someone (with a grave an irreversible condition that causes suffering) dies. It goes on with the young generations (i.e. the billions of them!). I think too much clinging to a single life causes the whole (which is more important) to suffer. That's not to say we shouldn't value and respect elders, but clinging to life excessively is ignorant and potentially cruel, in my humble opinion. I defend the right to die in the face of incurable diseases that cause a lot of anguish and suffering. I think clinging to life is partially rooted in an egoist/solipsistic metaphysics that you yourself are all that matters (to yourself at least, of course). Relax, we're just a small part of the cosmos. Ancient and immortal :)
- flextheruler 1y ago
  Ancient and immortal? So eternal return?
- jonhohle 1y ago
  The alternative being when someone becomes inconvenient to others we should encourage their death? What good is compassion or empathy when the lesser in society could just go off and die, right? Why stop at incurable diseases? Political opponents, coworkers, nasty service workers, double parkers, lawyers, and many other groups cause a lot of anguish and suffering.
  - raw_anon_1111 1y ago
    No. But I think that people should be able to decide when they want to end their lives if it is because of pain that won’t get any better, a terminal illness that causes pain etc. while they have all of their cognitive functions. But we should put guardrails around if the reason for assisted suicide is not pressure from relatives, depression, etc.
    - jkhdigital 1y ago
      How many “legitimate” assisted suicides are worth one questionable case? There are no foolproof guardrails, and you’re inviting moral hazard.

This. Life is such a precious random occurrence that failing to protect it in the face [dementia|physical disabilities|etc] is the real tragedy.

by dkga 1y ago

This. Life is such a precious random occurrence that failing to protect it in the face [dementia|physical disabilities|etc] is the real tragedy.

paulryanrogers 1y ago

What does protecting life look like when one is literally losing everything about themselves that they value?

sillyfluke 1y ago

As I mentioned in a another comment, framing it as "how one is remembered" is leading to pointless tangents in this thread. The important point is this: are you causing emotional, psychological, physical distress in the real world to those you care about when you have this disease? Yes or no. That's what I care about. Whether they are able to remember me well despite that, or poorly because of that should be completely secondary.

lo_zamoyski 1y ago
That’s irrelevant here. What is relevant is that we have a contempt for human life and a lack of charity. The teacher was not at fault for his condition. We should learn magnanimity. Sure, we can think about how the burdens of caring for our family can be lessened as they age, or how we may help reduce that burden for our family, but family does have the duty to care for its members, and to place such considerations above the intrinsic value of human life is very sad indeed.
- AlexandrB 1y ago
  > The teacher was not at fault for his condition. We should learn magnanimity. This is equally true of conditions like paranoid schizophrenia or psychopathy. Sometimes a person is just born with wiring that makes you dangerous to others. Does this mean that everyone around them must have the magnanimity and charity to them attacking people at random?
  - teiferer 1y ago
    Yes, everybody should be interested in getting them treatment, just like they are interested in getting people treatment who have leukemia, were born with a malfunctioning liver or need an artificial hip. Instead, they get thrown in prison for the rest of their life because they are evil and we all can feel good about having made the city safer.
    - watwut 1y ago
      People with leukemia want treatment and are willing to suffer uncomfortable treatment to get cured. Paranoid schizophrenia have lower compliance rates and fairly large collateral damage. Psychopathy is a trait not a disease, but again, issue is that they do not cooperate and dont want to "cure". Psychopaths are fine as they are from their point of view. It is just their victims who mind.
- LorenPechtel 1y ago
  This is not contempt for human life. It is a recognition that sometimes as the body deteriorates that the quality of life becomes negative. I watched both of my parents deteriorate in the end. The morphine blotted out my father's ability to form long term memory, if it wasn't in front of him things were like they had been before so much morphine was needed. There can be no value in such "life". As far as I'm concerned not allowing people to end the suffering is a form of sadism. I suspect this thread will go like many have in the past: there are two camps. The first has never seen a bad death and has a lot of opposition to people choosing to end their life. The second has seen a bad death and a lot of people would choose suicide before reaching that point. If it is a contempt for human life that means people have contempt for their own life and that doesn't make much sense. I can look at myself: I have been dealt a presumably genetic killer, I saw what it did to my mother and I will not allow that to happen to me. Do I have contempt for my own life because I expect the end to be suicide?
  - jkhdigital 1y ago
    This is about assisted suicide. You can argue all day long about how you have the right to end your own life, but the real issue is whether you have the right to grant another person immunity from charges of homicide for facilitating your death. That is an entirely different beast.
    - E39M5S62 1y ago
      Now you're just shifting the goal posts.
    - LorenPechtel 1y ago
      I see no difference. What is important is whether that's your intent or not, I do not care if the means involves another person or not (assuming adequate controls to ensure it's what you wanted. That's why Switzerland has become the place to go--under their law it is not illegal for an uninvolved person to provide aid assuming the person provides the actual trigger. I recall one in a documentary, guy had almost no motor control but he could still bite--a trigger that would start a timer that would turn off IIRC a respirator. They then sedated him so he wouldn't be struggling for air when the ventilator switched off--but without his triggering the timer it was just sedation, he would wake up in time.)

darkmighty 1y ago

It's not like life stops when someone (with a grave an irreversible condition that causes suffering) dies. It goes on with the young generations (i.e. the billions of them!). I think too much clinging to a single life causes the whole (which is more important) to suffer. That's not to say we shouldn't value and respect elders, but clinging to life excessively is ignorant and potentially cruel, in my humble opinion. I defend the right to die in the face of incurable diseases that cause a lot of anguish and suffering. I think clinging to life is partially rooted in an egoist/solipsistic metaphysics that you yourself are all that matters (to yourself at least, of course). Relax, we're just a small part of the cosmos. Ancient and immortal :)

flextheruler 1y ago
Ancient and immortal? So eternal return?
jonhohle 1y ago
The alternative being when someone becomes inconvenient to others we should encourage their death? What good is compassion or empathy when the lesser in society could just go off and die, right? Why stop at incurable diseases? Political opponents, coworkers, nasty service workers, double parkers, lawyers, and many other groups cause a lot of anguish and suffering.
- raw_anon_1111 1y ago
  No. But I think that people should be able to decide when they want to end their lives if it is because of pain that won’t get any better, a terminal illness that causes pain etc. while they have all of their cognitive functions. But we should put guardrails around if the reason for assisted suicide is not pressure from relatives, depression, etc.
  - jkhdigital 1y ago
    How many “legitimate” assisted suicides are worth one questionable case? There are no foolproof guardrails, and you’re inviting moral hazard.