Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 02-13-2008, 01:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ible

...

(You understand of course, that this is not my actual position, mainly because I believe in something beyond the theory of evolution. But I can hardly see how it would be contradictory for me to hold this view, if I believed fully in evolution.)

It is not anyone's actual position, and is not based on any understanding of evolution or medicine.

ible · 02-13-2008, 06:50 PM

Toto:

Perhaps it is no one's actual position, right now in the universe.

But I would like to know how an agnostic viewpoint could preclude such a view. What is the view that agnosticism offers up, regarding confronting someone about suicide?

If there is no such view, then certainly people could, with time, devolve into thinking like I said. Perhaps the elements of "good friendship" will dissociate with time, and there will be no basis for helping another person out of depression.

Toto · 02-13-2008, 06:59 PM

This is way off topic for this forum. But in general, suicide is not rational, but it is not the result of some genetic defect that needs to be weened from the species. There are people who have tried to commit suicide and have been stopped, and are glad that they were prevented from committing suicide. If you can't think of a good reason to prevent your friend from committing suicide, that is a failure of imagination on your part.

Johnny Skeptic · 02-14-2008, 06:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

This is way off topic for this forum. But in general, suicide is not rational, but it is not the result of some genetic defect that needs to be weened from the species. There are people who have tried to commit suicide and have been stopped, and are glad that they were prevented from committing suicide. If you can't think of a good reason to prevent your friend from committing suicide, that is a failure of imagination on your part.

If you oppose physician assisted suicide, I would like to refer you to a thread about physician assisted suicide at http://iidb.infidels.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=226918 at the MF&P Forum. I suppost physician assisted suicide. So do the majority of Americans under certain conditions. Of particular interest in that thread is Vincent Humbert, who I discussed. He lived in France. He was quadriplegic, blind, and mute. He wanted to die. He asked then French President for permission to get legal access to lethal drugs that would have allowed him to die a peaceful death. Chirac refused.

Consider the following post from that thread:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Would you have tried to prevent the person who killed Humbert at his own request from killing Humbert if you had been able to?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Champion

Yes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sabine Grant

Before giving such an audacious reply, I would suggest you document yourself as to which persons were involved in assisting 22 year old Vincent into terminating his existence. First, his mother, Marie, who administered him an overdose of barbiturates. We can safely assume that as his mother she knew him much better than you could claim to. Vincent was pronounced clinically dead but not biologically dead. He was redirected to a reanimation center where all efforts to detect any brain activity failed.

Marie was placed under arrest and kept "en garde a vue". The head of the department of reanimation Dr. Chaussoy, following the publication of Vincent's book "Je vous demande le droit de mourir" (I beg you for the right to die) and Marie's liberation, per request of Vincent's family members, injected Vincent with a solution of potassium chloride, prompting a cardiac arrest. In January of 2004, both Dr Chaussoy and Vincent's mother faced criminal charges. In 2006, the case was dismissed by judge Morvant.

According to your "yes", Champion, you would in fact have opposed Vincent's will itself. While the two persons who intervened in favor of his will were direct agents of his will. There can be no doubt that it was his will to die and be assisted as his book remains a testimony of such will. Yet, you, a stranger, would have attempted to prevent Marie Humbert and Dr Chaussoy from enabling this young man's will.

Interesting.

Few non-religious people would want to go only living if they were quadriplegic, blind, and mute, and were not terminally ill.

ible · 02-20-2008, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

This is way off topic for this forum. But in general, suicide is not rational, but it is not the result of some genetic defect that needs to be weened from the species. There are people who have tried to commit suicide and have been stopped, and are glad that they were prevented from committing suicide. If you can't think of a good reason to prevent your friend from committing suicide, that is a failure of imagination on your part.

I have my own reasons to prevent a friend from committing suicide. I was wondering if you yourself had any. I make the claim that in an evolutionary universe, it makes no difference one way or the other.

This may be even further off topic, but I'll mention it. In the naturalistic universe, everything is governed by physical laws. One of these laws, the Second Law of Thermodynamics, states that the entropy of the universe will never decrease, and tends to increase. The beginning of the universe was in a very low entropy state, and even if there is a big crunch and another big bang, it would be unlikely that the universe would revert to a low entropy state. In the high entropy state at the end of the universe, electrical energy could not be produced, furthermore, no life will be possible.

If one does not believe in God, but believes in the immutability of the laws of physics, what would stop them from enacting such pessimism as the second law yields? If everything comes to nothing, why wait? Why not be an agent of the destruction? Then at least, you would be aligned with the most powerful, since nature will have her way whether we like it or not.

If Destruction is more powerful than Creation, then why should we choose to align ourselves with the losing side?

Toto · 02-20-2008, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ible

If Destruction is more powerful than Creation, then why should we choose to align ourselves with the losing side?

This is such a strange way of thinking that I am having trouble grappling with it. Just because the whole universe may collapse in a few billion years I should be too depressed to get out of bed and/or go on some destructive tear just to align myself with a powerful force of nature ?!? This makes no sense to me, even aside from the fact that I tend to root for the underdog.

Johnny Skeptic · 02-20-2008, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ible

I have my own reasons to prevent a friend from committing suicide. I was wondering if you yourself had any.

It depends upon the circumstances. The late Vincent Humbert lived in France. He was quadriplegic, blind, and mute. He wanted to die, but euthanaisia and physician suicide are not legal in France. Consider the following post from a thread on physician assisted suicide at the MF&P Forum:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Would you have tried to prevent the person who killed Humbert at his own request from killing Humbert if you had been able to?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Champion

Yes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sabine Grant

Before giving such an audacious reply, I would suggest you document yourself as to which persons were involved in assisting 22 year old Vincent into terminating his existence. First, his mother, Marie, who administered him an overdose of barbiturates. We can safely assume that as his mother she knew him much better than you could claim to.Vincent was pronounced clinically dead but not biologically dead. He was redirected to a reanimation center where all efforts to detect any brain activity failed.

Marie was placed under arrest and kept "en garde a vue". The head of the department of reanimation Dr Chaussoy, following the publication of Vincent's book " Je vous demande le droit de mourir" (I beg you for the right to die) and Marie's liberation, per request of Vincent's family members, injected Vincent with a solution of potassium chloride, prompting a cardiac arrest. In January of 2004, both Dr Chaussoy and Vincent's mother faced criminal charges. In 2006, the case was dismissed by judge Morvant.

According to your "yes", Champion, you would in fact have opposed Vincent's will itself. While the two persons who intervened in favor of his will were direct agents of his will. There can be no doubt that it was his will to die and be assisted as his book remains a testimony of such will. Yet, you, a stranger, would have attempted to prevent Marie Humbert and Dr Chaussoy from enabling this young man's will.

Interesting.

In my opinion, no loving God would allow a man to become quadriplegic, blind, and mute, and not allow him to have legal access to drugs that would allow him to die a peaceful death.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ible

I make the claim that in an evolutionary universe, it makes no difference one way or the other.

It would not make any ultimate difference, but it would make a temporary difference.

It is your position that atheists should kill themselves because their lives do not make any eternal difference?

Johnny Skeptic · 02-20-2008, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Many criminals become honest people while they are in prison, or after they leave prison, sometimes without being influenced by religion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ible

Do you have evidence for this?

Sure, common sense. Any psychologist will tell you that he knows people, or about people who have become better persons without being influenced by religion. I have a friend who is an atheist. He is as honest as any Christian who I have ever known. There is not a necessary correlation between morality and being a Christian.

Amaleq13 · 02-20-2008, 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ible

If everything comes to nothing, why wait?

Because the wait can be quite enjoyable.

Enjoy the ride.

Johnny Skeptic · 02-20-2008, 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ible

If everything comes to nothing, why wait?

Although I am an agnostic, if I was an atheist, I would tell you that since I might be wrong, that is a good reason to wait.

I will start a new thread at the Existence of God forum with that title, and I will attribute the question to you.

Edit: Ok, I just started the new thread at the Existence of God Forum. The link is http://iidb.infidels.org/vbb/showthr...32#post5166932.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-13-2008, 06:50 PM	#92
ible Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Southern California Posts: 525	Toto: Perhaps it is no one's actual position, right now in the universe. But I would like to know how an agnostic viewpoint could preclude such a view. What is the view that agnosticism offers up, regarding confronting someone about suicide? If there is no such view, then certainly people could, with time, devolve into thinking like I said. Perhaps the elements of "good friendship" will dissociate with time, and there will be no basis for helping another person out of depression.

02-13-2008, 06:59 PM	#93
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	This is way off topic for this forum. But in general, suicide is not rational, but it is not the result of some genetic defect that needs to be weened from the species. There are people who have tried to commit suicide and have been stopped, and are glad that they were prevented from committing suicide. If you can't think of a good reason to prevent your friend from committing suicide, that is a failure of imagination on your part.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.