You can’t, of course, because some suicide attempts are successfully carried out. But we can surmise with certainty that free will has not utterly vanished in at least some of the cases, because of the testimony of some who’ve attempted it and were not successful.
Therefore, it is true that some who commit suicide in ways that will scar if not merely affect others – the distraught parent who hangs themself, knowing it’s highly likely their elementary school-aged kid will be the first one home to find their cold, hanging corpse; or the OP’s train kisser who some of us have called asshole – are truly assholes.
As someone who has been suicidal, I’m rather unconvinced by the idea that the train jumpers had absolutely no control over their method of exit. In my case, I decided not to commit suicide in my apartment so my roommates would not be traumatized by finding my corpse in the bedroom. I debated suicide by cop, but figured that it would be a real dick move to put the cop through that, and if i survived I’d be in prison. I’d also decided that my family would have less trouble coping if I was reported as missing before they learned I was dead, so they would at least have made some mental preparations for that outcome.
So I opted to go in the woods with a .357 magnum, planning to do it while standing waist deep in the river. If the bullet didn’t fix it, drowning would, and being carried by the water away from the pistol would make it look like a murder instead of a suicide.
Atakapa, this is one main crux of the debate here. The person attempting suicide sometimes has the power to factor in how considerate their action would be to others. Your thought process was very considerate.
I’m sorry you were in such a place in those days, hopefully long byegone days, and I hope you’re doing (much!) better.
So, in other words, the type and severity of the illness he had meets with your approval. If he had been in a state of say psychotic depression that rendered him unable to possess judgement and as a result stepped in front of a train or some other similar scenario, then you would not "approve" of his illness and he would be nothing more than an asshole? People have your feigned sympathy if they are not too sick but if they do get very sick like psychotic depression, post partum psychosis etc then they become a jerk in your eyes.
Echo7tango, one thing you said is true that sometimes, SOMETIMES,depressed or mentally ill persons retain some amount of judgment. Since we all presumably understand the fact some people who are mentally ill retain judgment and some do not, why is it assumed that ALL suicides have judgement? Why would it be assumed the jumper was fine and had judgment as opposed to not having judgment? Clearly there are persons in a profound state of depression, those in an other type of impaired state such as bipolar depression, psychotic depression, posst partum psychosis and delusional or psychotic states where in some cases the person didnt know they were for example stepping in feont of a train or jumping off a building etc. Why are you presuming it was just a mild depression for ex where the person knew what they were doing?
Again, Tollhouse, your default is that unless proven otherwise a mentally ill person is rendered completely and totally morally incompetent by his/her illness.
The rest of us default that unless proven otherwise a mentally ill person retains their ability to act as a moral agent.
Why is your stance correct? Please provide evidence. Atakapa has provided first hand testimony that even when suicidal he/she still had concern for the well-being of other people. My sister’s suicide note showed that she intended to hurt some people with her death, while apologizing to others, which again indicates an awareness of the effect of her actions on others and decision-making on her part. You, on the other hand, have not even provide the very weak evidence of an anecdote.
No one denies that some people are so far gone they truly are unaware of their actions and others, but you’re assuming that’s the majority of mentally ill people and the us are saying that’s a subset, probably a small one. Hell, if a hallucinating schizophrenic wanders in front of train and is killed he or she probably is so disconnected from reality as to be blameless for the results, but that same person may not be suicidal at all, maybe mistaking the train for a blue talking badger or whatever. But we’re not talking about that, we’re talking about people who moments before death are able to talk coherently, are aware of their surroundings, and not completely unhinged.
Or is it just that you can’t conceive of someone being in a mostly (though not entirely) rational state of mind AND still desiring death? Does it somehow comfort you, this notion that every suicide is completely and totally disconnected from his or her actions and unaware of consequences?
Your not seeming to be able to understand what I said so clearly. I very clearly said there is a spectrum, most people know that some retain jidgement and others do not. The poster above who retained judgement is not a prototype for ALL mentally ill. I dont know h)w much more clear it can be said. I never said ALL mental illness results in loss of judgement. If you didnt pick up on that earlier, for the record I never said that. What I did say is some mentally ill people clearly do have such an illness,lets take post partum psychosis or psychotic depression or bipolar with psychotic state. Clearly, there are many mentally ill persons in this category. However you are presuming that all suicides are in posession of their judgement, so right off the bat you label them an asshole…rather than considering the posibility they were not in posession of it. I will say that for most people, certain actions imply the person did not have judgement. A teenage girl who jumps off a freeway overpass, most would instinctively know tgeir was most likely something very amiss. Driving by a bus stop in downtown one morning, there was a woman kneeling with no pants or underwear on. Clearly from the nature of her actions she to most people would be considered as not being in her right state of mind. But you seem to have the stance of mentally ill people who do bizarre and sometimes lethally bizarre actions are ok, and you presume them in having judgment.
Broomstick, in a way what you are doing is making the least likely or opposite conclusion. You are assuming those who do very bizarre actions are fine, rather than at least factoring in the nature of their actions and considering the posibility they were not in their right mind. I guess this is what is so odd, that you would make an assumption based on tge least likely cause. Again I am not saying all suicides dont know what their doing. I am saying that especially in cases where they did something bizarre and extreme, there is a greater likelihood they were not in their right mind. I guess your mindset in a sense is to assume their guilty. Assuming the least likely scenario to be the default setting is odd and presumes all mentally ill people have their judgement, and are a buncha assholes. Rather than allowing for the fact there are many with serious impairments I listed. If you assume the least likely basis do you also assume a person who seems fine, works and has healthy relationships is insane? If the least likely basis is your default setting, then on the other side of the coin,that kind of default setting would make you draw the conclusion that a person who seems fine is probably insane. my default setting reflects the posibility of the most likely scenario. Lady at bus stop with no clothes on? My default setting says she is very ill. Your default says she knows what she is doing and is just an asshole?
Killing yourself via train is NOT a “bizarre” or rare or unusual action. It’s not “extreme”. As anyone who lives in an area with many trains can tell you it’s more common than, say, a train derailment or an armed robbery on a train. One of the reasons it’s so annoying is that it is so common. A train is actually a pretty effective way to destroy yourself so there is a certain twisted logic to using one.
Categorically, I don’t think anyone contemplating suicide is in their “right” mind (outside a very, very few very rare exceptions - a soldier throwing himself on a grenade to save his comrades, for example). However, just because they’re irrational in one area does not mean all rational and logical thinking has broken down. You do. I don’t know why you think depression turns the entire brain to mush or something but apparently you do.
Yes, I do believe that most mentally ill people do retain a moral compass and control of actions outside of the immediate area of their dysfunction. Someone suffering from obsessive-compulsive disorder, for example, could nonetheless be a highly functional human being most of his life (see Howard Hughes). Even many schizophrenics have long periods of lucidity allowing them to function in society (see John Forbes Nash, Jr.) and even during their worst periods refrain from harming others. Likewise, a diagnosis of depression does not excuse criminal behavior.
Don’t be ridiculous. I’m not considering “most likely” vs. “most unlikely”, I assume a person is morally competent until proven otherwise. Commission of a criminal or harmful act is not in itself proof of incompetence
Why do you think “mentally ill=completely incompetent” is the “most likely scenario”? You can be mentally ill and morally competent, mentally ill and partially impaired, and totally nuts, again, it’s a continuum and not some binary state as you imply.
I don’t see where being naked constitutes assholish behavior. It certainly doesn’t harm anyone else. If I saw a naked lady at a bus stop I’d first inquire if she had been victim of some sort of crime. Otherwise - eccentric but harmless. Or even crazy but harmless. Asshole? No. Not even if ugly.
I think I pretty much explained it as clear as I probably can. I said not all mentally ill people are incompetent or lacking judgment. I said there are though plenty with mental illness who are impaired. A mentaly ill person who does something extreme or bizarre such as hopping off freeway overpass, jumping in front of a train , riding a bicycle in the nude, kneeling in prayer nude at busstop, et, those extreme acts cause me to consider that person could be impaired. Your default setting is those people are fine. Not much more to debate that I can see, if your default setting as you described is an assumption that a person who acts in a bizarre or extreme manner is ok
It’s not that they’re fine, it’s that I don’t think they’re no longer moral agents. You can have problems and be ill and still know right from wrong and have some (if not complete) control over your actions.
I’m getting major déjà vu, except I’m pretty sure the previous thread[s?] was about highway-overpass-jumpers rather than train-smoochers. Different players, but the arguments played out exactly the same way: split between those who (absent evidence one way or the other) assume that mentally ill people retain some self-control and those who assume they have none.
The latter argument is allegedly more compassionate, but it really isn’t. I’m sure criminal defense lawyers love the idea, but the societal implications are terrifying.
Here’s one example of a problem in this thread that you’re exhibiting, Tollhouse. You are not responding to what I actually said, but to what you think I’m going to say next, but haven’t. Your assumption is incorrect.
My sympathy for Atakapa is genuine. If one were to say otherwise, it would make that person an asshole.
As for the illness, I accept it – it is what it is. The person is ill. A person can be ill and not an asshole, or can be ill and also an asshole.
And, of course, one can be an asshole, ill or not.
Funny how that seems to work both ways, I feel that way too about things I have said that some others such as yourself seem not to respond to what I actually did say.
for ex I said in clear as day terms that NOT ALL MENTALLY PEOPLE HAVE NO JUDGMENT. I SAID THAT SOME DO HAVE JUDGMENT AND SOME DONT.
and the response has been “you think all such persons have no judgment”
I allow for the possibility that a mentally ill person who does something extreme or bizarre is possibly and in some cases, probably, not in control.
In the same way if a person acts in a relatively normal manner, I allow for the very strong probability they are in fact, okay.
I am not saying not all such people are out of control, I am merely recognizing the real possibioity they may not be,…
Even though ive made it clear we dont know for sure if said person is for sure impaired, Im sure someone will now reply that I think all such persons are out of control
. there are different types and severity of mental illness. It runs the gamut. Just like some other medical conditions there is a wide degree of types and severity, Part of what we base a relative likelihood on is the manner in which their symptoms manifest. A mentally ill person who has moderate depression but has a relatively stable life, whose actions seem to fall within what soceity would consider expected and rational, there is a good probability that person has a fair to good degree of judgment
Then there is the person in a profound depression with psychotic features, whose life does not seem to be in control, they are in and out of hospitals, often times involuntarily. With this person there is a strong probability they do not retain judgment,
:smack:
Without knowing if the person had judgment or not, you presume they were not impaired, and therefore their actions were merely an asshole move, rather than considering the very real posibility that person was seriously ill
If so, then if you follow this line of reasoning, you must assume all people with alzheimers no matter how extreme or bizarre their actions, to be in full control…and basically you feel they are pulling an asshole move if they do something extreme and upset people…rather than considering the possibility or probability their not in control
Your camp is saying “we do not know the person, or the type or severity of their illnessl The person did something pretty damm extreme/bizarre, and so we will assume they knew what they were doing, and so therefore since we will assume that person knew what they were doing, we know they were an asshole to pull such a stunt”
what this side says is, "gee, we really didnt know this person, or exactly what might have been going on, except for he had a mental illness…he did something pretty damm extreme/bizarre, and so there is some real possibility that person was seriously ill, its a real possibility he might not have been in his right mind…
Personally I don’t care what their level of understanding is, if they kiss the train they are an asshole.
So they could not control themselves. They are still an asshole for what they did regardless of the reason. I don’t don’t have a motivation filter before I consider someone an asshole.
And since they have been turned into people puree by the train it is not like I am going to hurt their feelings.