the dungeon has...

Ethics and the Philosophical Implications of Suicide

Nor dread nor hope attend, a dying animal;
A man awaits his death, dreading and hoping all...
He knows death to the bone - man has created death. Yeats ‘Death’ (1933)

Suicide is the taking of one’s own life, or the act of intentional self-killing. It is something which is reserved entirely to humans (and definitely not lemmings). There are many different beliefs about suicide and the ethical implications behind it. Suicide can be seen as a fundamental issue in ethics, because it can be seen to also relate to such themes as, the ‘sanctity of life’, freedom of choice, and how this would apply to legislation - especially concerned with voluntary euthanasia, or assisted suicide.

In England, both parasuicide and suicide itself were still criminal offences, until the Act of Parliament in 1961. This can be seen as an objective source of morality to which people commonly refer. Until that time it had been a prevalent moral belief that suicide was wrong, and that someone who committed or attempted to commit such an act was to be looked on with strong moral condemnation. The traditional reasoning behind this belief varied. Sometimes this was due to belief in the sanctity of life, and at others for religious connotations.

In religious terms it was seen as an act against God and that those who did take their own lives were to be sent to ‘purgatory’, a waiting place until judgement day. Sometimes it was considered that the right of life or death, belongs not to the person himself, but to the Almighty, or even the king of the state who was vested with divine right. This is why, historically, if something goes wrong three times when a criminal is to be hung, then it was seen as divine intervention, and the person was released. It was believed that a man should not usurp God’s right to decide the time of his death.

The church is an objective source of morality, and underlies many of our ethical norms, because it is a world-wide institution. The church approaches the issue of suicide from a deontological point of view, which can be seen as being directly related to the concept of the ‘sanctity of life’. Therefore, suicide can be seen as intrinsically wrong.

During the nineteenth century suicide fascinated researchers, and they offered many explanations for the causes. Among these included, insanity, geographical features, such as climate, temperature and length of day; and as in cases of people imitating each other. The latter can be seen in the cases of ‘copy-cat’ suicides (for example the number of teenagers that committed suicide after the death of Kurt Cobain) although the motivations are usually more diverse.

However, there has been little distinction made between the diverse motivations for suicide, and indeed the different forms of suicide in itself:

I’m sure most of us, confronted with the sight of a man walking towards a precipice, would rugger tackle him first and seek to dissuade him second. But how about the man who is patently drinking himself to death? How about the man who, faced with the statistics, still elects to smoke? Should we also legislate to tie them down, lock them away because of their life-threatening habits? And if we did, how long before we were passing laws against those who lead too sedentary a life - for the same reason? IAN MARTIN (1974)

In this we can see that although the deliberate aim of the smoker may not be his death, he is still aware of the risk that is being undertaken. The same can be seen of bomb-disposal experts, or mountain climbers; although the are not seen as suicidal in the classical sense they are still seen as tempting death from their activities. There is an element of risk, and these people can be seen to be willingly increasing the probability of an ultimately self-inflicted death.

However, working from this theory it can be seen that we are undertaking a potentially life-threatening occupation when we catch a plane, because we are increasing our chances of death. This is therefore a question of how to define suicide, whether people who gamble with their lives can be seen to have suicidal tendencies.

This concept of risk can also be seen in many cases of parasuicide, because they are risking death, but are also laying a chance on survival and help. Parasuicide is an unsuccessful attempt at suicide, and is mostly caused, not through a desire for death, but conversely as a desperate cry for help or empathy. Thus people who attempt suicide and fail, are often considered attention seekers.

Thus they can be seen in the same light as those who use scarification (the deliberate cutting and scaring of one’s own skin) as a means to attract attention.

Durkheim had decided to study the usefulness of sociology to explain social phenomena and he chose suicide to study. He believed that the act of self-termination could be explained through social factors. He defined suicide as:

“Death resulting directly or indirectly from a positive or negative act performed by the victim himself, which he knows will produce this result.

The ambiguity of this statement is clear, and as previously stated, could refer to any act which may cause risk to those performing the act. However, suicide in itself is often committed for many different reasons, and may assume different meanings to different individuals. Durkheim’s definition was challenged by Douglas on these grounds. Suicide may be an irrational symptom of mental disturbance (and therefore purely a medical issue and a non-moral act in itself), a severe but temporary depression, a profound means of communicating a message or belief (perhaps for altruistic reasons e.g. martyrs, hunger-strikes, or throwing yourself in front of a horse to fight for the emancipation of women). It may indeed not confer a desire to die at all, instead showing a desire for help (parasuicide).

Durkheim’s starting point was an analysis of official statistics, from which he found that the rates of suicide varied according to:
different countries
different regions within countries
different social groups
different religious groups.
He also found that these rates stayed relatively stable over a period of twenty years. From these results Durkheim believed that suicide rates are affected by social factors, and therefore not an individual matter. He classified four different types of social structures; egoistic, altruistic, anomic, and fatalistic.

It has also been found that suicide rates vary according to gender, more men than women make successful suicide attempts, and conversely more women commit parasuicide. The peak age for successful suicide attempts are between the ages of 55 and 64. The peak age for parasuicides are between the ages of 24 and 44. It has also been found that suicide rates vary according to the social climate, increasing perceptibly at times of social change.

Durkheim’s main critics Douglas and Atkinson suggested that the person committing suicide may view it in one of four ways; as a means of transforming the self, as a means for transforming oneself for others, as a means of achieving fellow-feeling (e.g. parasuicides), as a means of gaining revenge. Therefore, because the motivations and the meanings people place on their suicide, there can be no single act which can be termed suicide. From this they were able to conclude that the statistical comparisons of Durkheim are worthless.

Before a death can be classified as a suicide in Britain, a coroner must investigate the death at an inquest. His decision determines, as far as the statistics are concerned, what is a suicide. The official statistics therefore only reflect coroners decisions and cannot be considered as valid.

There have been many condemnations of suicide which do not have a religious background, or based on religious beliefs. Morally suicide can be seen as a matter for a persons free-choice. It can be seen that we have the right to choose our own actions (existentialist principle of autonomy) and therefore since morality is subjective, suicide is simply a matter of personal choice, because we are free individuals. However, there are two points to be considered: ‘Ought they to risk their lives?’ and ‘Should other people intervene to prevent it?’ However, as Jonathan Glover pointed out:

One reason for thinking that to raise the question of the morality of an act of suicide is inappropriate, is the belief that an act of suicide must be done in such a state of disturbance that moral considerations stand no chance of influencing the decisions

At the time of suicide, it can be considered accurate to say, that the person is highly unlikely to be considering the moral implications of the act.

Suicide has been denounced as ‘an easy way out’, a way to escape duties or responsibilities that a person cannot cope with. However, this cannot be used as a generalisation, as there are limitations to the number of suicide cases who were merely ‘escaping’ from something. This deals with only one type of suicide case.

The teleological argument of altruism is also relevant to the ethical implications of suicide. Suicide can be seen as a selfish act which causes suffering to the living. However, this assumes that suicide invariably causes more harm then good, although it can be used as a means to decrease suffering, in reference to assisted-suicide.

In the case of the utilitarian principle of morality, were suicide to reduce the total suffering then it would be morally right, and therefore the reverse would also be true. According to utilitarianism, whatever brings about the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people is intrinsically good. However, it is purely a matter of personal judgement as to whose happiness or suffering is greater.

There appears to be much debate as to whether suicide is an intrinsically immoral act. As Wittgenstein said:

If suicide is allowed, then everything is allowed. If anything is not allowed, then suicide is not allowed. This throws a light on the nature of ethics, for suicide is, so to speak, the elementary sin... Or is even suicide in itself neither good nor evil?
This uncertainty, not just to the nature of the act but also to the permissiveness of a society which allows it, appears to be confounding for those that question the ethics of suicide. For example, Kant believed that suicide could not be universalised, and was therefore morally unacceptable. He used the principle, ‘Do only what you can universalise’. Were suicide shown as morally acceptable then we may have to be prepared for the potential eventuality of the destruction of mankind. Kant also believed that actions should be motivated by duty, and not by desires and inclinations (principle of duty). From this it can be seen that he believed suicide for a cause to be morally acceptably, whereas suicide from despair would be inherently wrong.
There is also an argument from the point of view of ethical egoism, which states that should suicide be beneficial to the individual (which presumably the individual usually believes) then it is justifiable. The principle of autonomy (that everyone has the right to govern his or her own life) also allows for the individuals privilege to commit suicide. Advocates of this belief place individual autonomy above all other moral considerations; and, in the case of suicide, this view allows the individual the right to choose, without moral obligation.

From this mention of autonomy, it is possible to go on briefly to mention the concepts of autonomy as opposed to paternalism. In suicide people are always faced with the difficulty of freedom of choice as opposed to helping people see what we believe to be the right choice. Those who believe in the ‘sanctity of life’ are more likely to tend towards paternalism, whereas those who believe in freedom of choice will tend towards individual autonomy. This is an especially large concern in relation to intervention.

To conclude, there are many different explanations for and beliefs about suicide. The many different moral explanations are especially relevant in regard to legislation. And although the church undeniably condemns suicide, there is something to be said for freedom of choice. After all, if our life is not our own to do with as we please, then what is?

The distance is nothing; it is only the first step that is difficult. Mme Du Deffand

After the first death there is no other. Dylan Thomas

Biblography:

Investigating Deviance - Stephen Moore
The Concise Oxford Dictionary
Causing Death and Saving Lives - Jonathan Glover
Ethics - Frankena
Practical Ethics - Peter Singer
Ethics - J.L.Mackie
Moral Problems - Michael Palmer

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://bluejoh.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/364

actually not a comment but a question. and oh how i detest sounding ignorant.however after reading your posting on suicide, there was a word i was not familiar with i tried looking it up in several dictionaries and no luck. if you recieve this and would not mind could you please enlighten me thank you in advance. i've always thought the most unintelligent question, was the one not asked. thanks again toni

toni on April 2, 2003 07:53 AM

I am not sure what word you mean...

I advise you go to xrefer and search for the word there. It is a very good tool and is able to explain every philosophical term.

Good luck.

joh on April 2, 2003 10:40 AM

If you don't mind i would like to use references to this paper in my final ethics paper. Im doing it on the ethics of suicide. Don't worry i will fully credit your ideas to you. If you have an objection please email me @ serendipity_421@yahoo.com

Missy on November 8, 2003 06:02 PM

hi, great resource material for my a-level coursework n would like to ask if i can use it for said purpose. any problems please email me! stew

stewart knights on January 29, 2004 12:03 AM

The material on this site is my personal work. I am happy for anyone to use it as a reference source, but please accredit it if you are planning to quote it verbatim.

Cheers.

joh on February 2, 2004 09:13 AM

i wanted to use some of your material from this source, but i don't know who wrote it or any of that good stuff. if you could e-mail me back with the necessary info to cite this source in my works cited page, it would be greatly appreciated. thanx!

Josie on April 6, 2004 02:11 AM

To cite this work:

Johanna Hunt, Ethics and the Philosophical Implications of Suicide, May 10, 1997, http://www.bluejoh.com/dungeon/archives/000380.php ( TODAY'S DATE )

joh on April 7, 2004 02:56 PM