Suicide-The Other Side
Whenever a tragic act of suicide takes place, humans are at their wits’ end to offer explanations.
Some of us take the easy way out- first, aim at the financial situation of the victim. If the finances are all right, blame the spouse or the fiancé, castigate the employers or the peers. Then we try to delve into psychology (depression, paranoia, schizophrenia and the like) or the sociology (loneliness and lack of social interactions) or the economics (how job losses are claiming young lives).
Not all of these explanations are hollow or superficial. In fact, some of them cover a lot of ground. Yet, we are never satisfied with any of them. The truth of the matter is that the real question of suicide is philosophical. When somebody commits a suicide, all other living human are challenged with the question — Why do we live? What is the purpose of life? Thus, when we explain a suicide of the other person, we need to justify our own existence. And that becomes an extremely challenging task.
Thus, when we explain a suicide of the other person, we need to justify our own existence.
Sociologists believe that there are four common types of suicide — Egoistic, Altruistic, anomic, and fatalistic. Egoistic suicide usually takes place when the victim finds that he or she is unable to belong to the society. Sometimes our social structures are not adequate to develop a sense of belonging in these individuals. As a result, people who are not ‘normal’ according to the majority may be pushed to end their lives.
The second type of suicide is called Altruistic. Usually terrorists and fundamentalists fall in this group. These victims are misled to believe that suicide is a noble act and they are working for a higher cause such as nation, religion, or a fundamentalist group.
Anomic suicides usually spring from a high level of financial stress, social disappointment, or a high level of frustration. Since the individuals do not see any way out of the situation, they mistakenly choose suicide as a means of escape. Farmers’ suicides in some Indian states may be attributed to this group.
Fatalistic suicides are a result of excessive social regulations that restrict individual freedom. Such social regulation can be permanent (such as a dictatorship) or temporary (a social lockdown). When individuals find that they are too tightly controlled and have run out of all options, they may take the extreme way out to escape and may end their lives.
To Be or Not to Be?
For centuries, thinkers and philosophers have tried to address the question of suicide. Shakespeare’s Hamlet tries to do this in a poetic fashion- “To be or not to be that is the question!”- he exclaims and then tries to investigate why we do not end our lives full of agony. Let us see what the agonies of life are, as mentioned by Hamlet?
The first agony that Hamlet mentions is “the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune.” Indeed, some of us may suffer from a long series of events what we may call as ‘bad luck’. When an individual believes that he or she has not received a fair share of good luck, they may feel disappointed or frustrated. Yet, more than this, Hamlet finds that the life in general is not only unfair, but ugly and indecent.
Life is full of “The oppressor’s wrong, the proud man’s contumely, the pangs of dispised love,the law’s delay, the insolence of office…”, says Hamlet. Thus, at least for some time, Hamlet thinks that suicide is a far better option than to live such life full of disgrace.
“To die, to sleep
No more
And by a sleep to say we end the heartache.”
He then wonders why most us do not choose this ‘comfortable’ way to sleep, to end our lives. He then finds the answer. We do not end our lives because we are not completely sure that death and life after death are completely peaceful.
“For in that sleep of death, what dreams may come,
…. Must give us a pause.”
Thus, Hamlet thinks that we do not commit the peaceful act of suicide only because we are not brave enough to enter the dark, unknown world of after-death. We are not sure whether the ‘sleep’ after death is really peaceful. Hence we continue to bear the grunts and agonies of our mortal life.
The Absurdity of Human Life
To solve the problem of suicide, the French existentialist philosophers took it upon themselves to explain human existence. One of of them was Jean Paul Sartre. (1905–80) Sartre believes that humans, unlike other animals, are born with what we may call a ‘manufacturing defect. “Consciousness is hole in being.,” says Sarte. He further explains that our existence (being) itself is faulty or imperfect because it has a hole. What is that hole? It is consciousness. Humans, unlike other organisms, are constantly aware (conscious) of their existence. This consciousness makes them ponder about the purpose of their existence. Thus, humans are constantly restless to find or attribute some ‘meaning’ to their life. In fact, we can never find such meaning since human life, according to Sartre, is fundamentally meaningless or absurd. We all know how frustrating this exercise is. We are trying to find something that does not exist! This search can be tormenting for all of us. Some of simply cannot bear this torment and decide to end their life.
Philosophical Suicide
The tormenting quest for the search of meaning is further explained by another French existentialist- Albert Camus.
“There is one truly serious philosophical problem and that is suicide”, Says Camus. To decide whether life is worth living, despite the absurdity of life, is the fundamental question of philosophy.
Camus does not agree that suicide is an act of cowardice. The real cowardice, for him, is the non-acceptance of the meaninglessness (or absurdity) of human existence. Trying to attach any kind of meaning or purpose to human existence is a vain or pompous act. (Sartre calls it “bad faith.) To engage in this pompous act and to continue to live such hollow life is ‘philosophical suicide’ according to Camus
It seems that Camus is against organized religions, since they try to create a false and rigid structure of meaning to explain the purpose of life. Some regions provide commandments while others try to provide ‘lessons’ through myths and symbols. In the opinion of Camus, accepting such ‘bad faith’ would be a philosophical suicide.
Does that mean that all non-religious persons and atheists lead an authentic life? Not really. Bad faith can exist even outside religions. In fact, rationalism and empiricism can very closely lead to bad faith.
Camus condemns both forms of suicide- the physical suicide and the philosophical suicide. The only form he recommends is the authentic existence devoid of any bad faith that bravely embraces absurdity and meaninglessness of human existence.
The Absurd
When Camus declares that human life is ‘absurd’ and ‘meaningless’, he does not use these terms in a negative or derogatory sense. However, some readers misunderstand Camus and tend to interprete that by declaring human life as ‘absurd’, Camus reduces life’s value and indirectly advocates suicide. This is simply incorrect. In fact, Camus describes three features of the absurdity of human life. The first of these Is Revolt. Humans should not accept any simple answers to the question of absurdity. Religion, Philosophy and Science sometimes provide simplistic answers to the question of purpose of life. Any simple answer to the question “What is purpose of my life?” is simply incorrect.
The second feature of the ‘absurd’ human life is Freedom. “We are condemned to be free.” Says Sartre. Since humans are absolutely free to think and behave as we choose, this freedom can be unbearable at times. Human beings therefore consistently try to give away some part of their freedom by obeying the structures of family, institutions, religion, and the government. Thus, human beings simply objectify themselves by turning themselves into objects such as “a good husband”, “a good mother” or “a patriot”. Living such life is reducing the authenticity of one’s being and existence.
Lastly both Camus and Sarte advocate that we must pursue an authentic life. The authenticity will come from a bold acceptance of the fact that life is essentially meaningless. Authentic existence implies that we no longer search for the purpose of our life and we longer attribute any meaning to it. We continue to live in the present enjoying the rich and diverse experiences that the universe offers us.
The Hero of Humanity
Camus gives an example of a human hero who lives authentic life. He tells us the story of Sisyphus.
According to a Greek myth, Sisyphus was condemned by the gods and was given a punishment for life. He was punished for all eternity to do just one task — to roll a rock up a mountain and then again roll it back to the bottom! This punishment is similar to the condition of human beings. Sisyphus must struggle forever without any hope for meaning. He should just accept the absurdity of the task and celebrate the fact that there is nothing more to human life. Only then we can say that he leads an ‘authentic’ life, says Camus.
Fundamentally, Camus denounces any sort of ‘leap of faith’- even faith in rationalism and empiricism. Rationalism is fallible. So is logic and empiricism. This is why when somebody ends their life, they may be simply rejecting to take such a ‘leap of faith’. They may have been unable to reconcile with the absurdity of human existence. Further, they might have rejected the option to commit a philosophical suicide and may have accepted the alternative of physical suicide.
This is why when somebody ends their life, they may be simply rejecting to take such a ‘leap of faith’.
As humans we will continue to feel sad and tormented when one such human life ends prematurely. We will continue to seek answers to prevent such tragic incidents. It is imperative that we ourselves do not fall in the trap of a philosophical suicide while engaging in such meaningful exercises.
