Philosophy of suicide
Philosophical debate on suicide spans ethics, religion, and existentialism.
The philosophy of suicide examines the ethical and existential questions surrounding self-inflicted death, with thinkers divided on its moral status. Albert Camus famously declared it the only truly serious philosophical problem, while religious and nonreligious traditions offer contrasting judgments. The topic remains contested, with arguments ranging from condemnation to permission depending on philosophical framework.
Quick Facts
- Work
- The Myth of Sisyphus
Facts from the source article.
Arguments against suicide
Common philosophical opinion since modernization has reflected a spread in cultural beliefs of western societies that suicide is immoral and unethical. One popular argument is that many reasons for committing suicide, such as depression, emotional pain, or economic hardship, are transitory and can be ameliorated by therapy and through making changes to some aspects of one's life. A common adage sums up this view: suicide is a permanent solution to a temporary problem. However, the argument against this is that while emotional pain may seem transitory to most people, in other cases it may be extremely difficult or even impossible to resolve, even through counseling or lifestyle change, depending upon the severity of the affliction and the person's ability to cope with their pain. Examples of this are incurable disease or lifelong mental illness. Camus saw the goal of absurdism in establishing whether suicide is a necessary response to a world which appears to be mute both on the question of God's existence and for our search for meaning and purpose. For Camus, suicide was the rejection of freedom; he thought that fleeing from the absurdity of reality into illusions, religion, or death is not the way out, and instead we should embrace life passionately. Christian theology almost universally condemns suicide as being a crime against God. G. K. Chesterton calls suicide the ultimate and absolute evil, the refusal to take an interest in existence, arguing that a person who kills themself destroys the entire world. John Stuart Mill argued that since the sine qua non of liberty is the power of the individual to make choices, any choice that would deprive one of the ability to make further choices should be prevented; thus, selling oneself into slavery should be prevented, and by extension suicide would be similarly restricted.
Neutral and situational stances
Japan has a form of suicide called seppuku, which is considered an honorable way to redeem oneself for transgressions or personal defeats. It was widely accepted in the days of the Samurai and even before that, generally seen as a privilege granted only to the samurai class. Utilitarianism can be used as a justification for or as an argument against suicide; through Jeremy Bentham's hedonistic calculus, it can be concluded that although the death of a depressed person ends their suffering, the person's family and friends may grieve as well, and their pain may outweigh the release of depression through suicide.
Arguments that suicide is permissible
Some thinkers support the idea that a person should have the right to decide between living and dying by suicide. They argue that suicide is not always or even usually irrational; instead, it can be a reasonable response to genuine problems, a final option taken when the alternative seems worse. The core belief is that no being should have to endure unnecessary suffering, and suicide can offer a way out of that suffering. The ancient historian Herodotus once noted that when life becomes too heavy a burden, death turns into a refuge people actively seek. The philosopher Schopenhauer pushed back against the idea that suicide is cowardly or wrong, stating that nothing in the world gives a person a stronger claim than the one they have over their own life and body. He did not see suicide as immoral and considered it a person's right to end their life, comparing the act of dying under great suffering to waking up from a terrible nightmare. However, Schopenhauer also made a distinction: most suicides are an act of the will, happening when someone rejects life's pains, which is different from the ascetic renunciation of the will that rejects life's pleasures. For him, true moral freedom comes only from denying the will to live. Suicide, he argued, is not a denial of that will but a strong assertion of it, because the denial of the will involves fleeing from pleasures, not from sufferings. When someone destroys their individual existence, they are not destroying their will to live; in fact, they would choose to live if they could do so on their own terms, but circumstances overpower them. Schopenhauer also dismissed the argument that a person who no longer wants to live for themselves must continue living just to serve others, calling that an extravagant demand. Libertarian thought, grounded in the idea of self-ownership, holds that a person's life belongs to them alone. No one else has the right to impose their own beliefs about why life must be lived. Only the individual involved can make that decision, and whatever choice they make deserves respect.
More in Suicide
Spotted an error? Know more?
Reader corrections go straight into our review queue. Suggest an edit · How this site is sourced