Atheistic Theories On The Moral Permissibility Of Suicide
The Moral Permissibility of Suicide
Student Name
HZT 4U1
Mr. White
May 31, 2013
The Moral Permissibility of Suicide
The act of taking one’s life and the absence of morality in doing so has been argued since the time of Plato. Whether one approaches the argument in a Deistic perspective or an Atheistic perspective, there are various views surrounding the argument. This essay will explore philosophers from the various periods and their theories on the moral permissibility of suicide.
Suicide cannot be definined singularily as suicide. According to the Marriam-Webster dictionary, “suicide is the act or an instance of taking one’s own life voluntarily and intentionaly especially by the person of years of descretion and of sound mind.” The act of self-killing can be caused by an accidental death, an intentional death, or an intentional death for a righteous cause. An accidental death is the instance where the individual does not intentionally take their life but do so in an unintentional fashion. For instance, if a man were cleaning a loaded firearm and accidentally sent a bullet through his skull you could not categorize the circumstance as suicide. He did not intentionally fire the weapon that sent a pellet of lead into his cranium; therefore the event …show more content…
cannot be defined as suicide. The intentional self-killing is classified as suicide for suicide is defined as intentional self-killing. Lastly there is the intentional self-killing for a righteous cause. A relevant example of this form of self-killing is the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, for He intentionally and knowingly permitted himself to be crucified upon the cross for the sake of humanity.
The ancient philosophers Plato and Aristotle were some of the first philosophical thinkers and theorists to question whether it was morally permissible to take one’s own life. Plato stated that suicide is disgraceful and its perpetrators should be buried in unmarked graves. (Cholbi, 2004) Although his words are harsh, Plato stated four exceptions to this statement:
“(1) When one 's mind is morally corrupted and one 's character can therefore not be salvaged, (2) when the self-killing is done by judicial order, as in the case of Socrates, (3) when the self-killing is compelled by extreme and unavoidable personal misfortune, and (4) when the self-killing results from shame at having participated in grossly unjust actions.” (Cholbi, 2004 Sect. 2.1)
Aristotle on the otherhand wrote a very miniscule amount of work on the morality of suicide and was slightly vague with regards to the topic. He states that self-killing does not treat oneself unjustly so long as it is done voluntarily because the harm done to oneself is consensual. Aristotle later concludes that suicide is wrong towards society but as the philosopher Miehael Cholbi describes, Aristotle does not explain what exactly the wrong the individual commits. In conclusion both Plato and Aristotle have parallel views on suicide being a wrong towards society. Cholbi made an interesting comment on both Plato’s and Aristoltle’s views on suicide by stating that they both had no concern for the suicidal individual’s well being. They largely focus on the individual’s role and affect on society and not the individual themselves. (Cholbi, 2004 Sect. 2.1)
The next period we will dive into is the Christian Prohibition. During this period Christian philosophers like St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas collectively agreed that suicide is not morally permissible and is a sin towards God. Although the Christian Scripture does not directly condemn suicide, Augustine saw the restriction of self-killing as an extension of the fifth commandment:
God 's command ‘Thou shalt not kill,’ is to be taken as forbidding self-destruction, especially as it does not add ‘thy neighbor’, as it does when it forbids false witness, ‘Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor’ (Cholbi, 2004 Sect. 2.2).
Nevertheless, Augustine believed that suicide was a sin towards god. Aquinas also defended the belief and stated that:
(1) Suicide is contrary to natural self-love, whose aim is to preserve us. (2) Suicide injures the community of which an individual is a part. (3) Suicide violates our duty to God because God has given us life as a gift and in taking our lives we violate His right to determine the duration of our earthly existence. (Cholbi, 2004 Sect. 2.2)
In conclusion, both Augustine and Aquinas shared parallel beliefs on the permissibility of suicide within Deistic grounds. The only issue within their beliefs is the fact that the Christian Scripture does not directly state that suicide is a moral sin against God. Due to this fact, they cannot initially back up their argument.
During the enlightenment period, philosophers like David Hume arised and opposed the traditional and Christian beliefs towards the moral permissibility of suicide. Hume argued the Thomistic argument which states that “suicide violates the order God established for the world and usurps God’s preogative in determining when we shall die.” Hume took this statement and provided these principles:
1. If by the ‘divine order’ is meant the causal laws created by God, then it would always be wrong to contravene these laws for the sake of our own happiness. But clearly it is not wrong, since God frequently permits us to contravene these laws, for he does not expect us not to respond to disease or other calamities.
2. If by ‘divine order’ is meant the natural laws God has willed for us, which are (a) discerned by reason, (b) such that adherence to them will produce our happiness, then why should not suicide conform to such laws when it appears rational to us that the balance of our happiness is best served by dying?
3. Finally if by ‘divine order’ is meant simply that which occurs according to God 's consent, then God appears to consent to all our actions (since an omnipotent God can presumably intervene in our acts at any point) and no distinction exists between those of our actions to which God consents and those to which He does not. If God has placed us upon the Earth like a “sentinel,” then our choosing to leave this post and take our lives occurs as much with his cooperation as with any other act we perform. (Cholbi, 2004 Sect. 2.3)
Nevertheless, Hume disagreed that suicide is morally unacceptable towards the self and stated that the misfortunes of life such as old age, sickness, and other calamities that are far worse than death can be permissibly eradicted by suicide. In conclusion, Hume stated that suicide “may be free of imputation of guilt and blame.” (Cholbi 2004, Sect. 2.3)
In conclusion, I collectively agree with Hume’s beliefs on the moral permissibility of suicide.
He provided valid reasons that gave the suicidal individual free choice in taking their life. The classical philosophers Plato and Aristotle made interesting points for being the first to question the moral permissiblility of suicide but did not provide clarity and acknowledgement of the individual’s well being. The enlightenment period philosophers St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas also made valid points on how suicide was a sin towards God but was initially flawed due to the fact that the Christian Bible does not provide any statement that self-killing is a
sin.
In my opinion the individual should have the right to have a choice in taking their life or not especially in circumstances where the individual is in a state of physical/emotional pain that is far worse than death itself. Nevertheless, I agree with Hume’s philosophy on the moral permissibility of suicide and that the individual should have the choice to decide their fate.
List of References
Cholbi, M. (2004, May 18). Suicide. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/suicide/ Cholbi, M. (2011). Suicide the philosophical dimensions.
Toronto: Broadview Press.
Hume, D. H. (1963). On suicide. In R. Wollheim (Ed.),Hume On Religion London : Wm.
Collins Sons and Co. Ltd.
Pateron, C. (2001). Natural law theory, suicide, assisted suicide, & euthanasia . Boca
Raton: Dissertation.com
Staunton, H. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://jonelin.tripod.com/philosophy/suicide.htm Whether suicide can be permissible. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.life.org.nz/suicide/suicidekeyissues/suicidekeyissues28
Student Name
HZT 4U1
Mr. White
May 31, 2013
The Moral Permissibility of Suicide
The act of taking one’s life and the absence of morality in doing so has been argued since the time of Plato. Whether one approaches the argument in a Deistic perspective or an Atheistic perspective, there are various views surrounding the argument. This essay will explore philosophers from the various periods and their theories on the moral permissibility of suicide.
Suicide cannot be definined singularily as suicide. According to the Marriam-Webster dictionary, “suicide is the act or an instance of taking one’s own life voluntarily and intentionaly especially by the person of years of descretion and of sound mind.” The act of self-killing can be caused by an accidental death, an intentional death, or an intentional death for a righteous cause. An accidental death is the instance where the individual does not intentionally take their life but do so in an unintentional fashion. For instance, if a man were cleaning a loaded firearm and accidentally sent a bullet through his skull you could not categorize the circumstance as suicide. He did not intentionally fire the weapon that sent a pellet of lead into his cranium; therefore the event …show more content…
cannot be defined as suicide. The intentional self-killing is classified as suicide for suicide is defined as intentional self-killing. Lastly there is the intentional self-killing for a righteous cause. A relevant example of this form of self-killing is the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, for He intentionally and knowingly permitted himself to be crucified upon the cross for the sake of humanity.
The ancient philosophers Plato and Aristotle were some of the first philosophical thinkers and theorists to question whether it was morally permissible to take one’s own life. Plato stated that suicide is disgraceful and its perpetrators should be buried in unmarked graves. (Cholbi, 2004) Although his words are harsh, Plato stated four exceptions to this statement:
“(1) When one 's mind is morally corrupted and one 's character can therefore not be salvaged, (2) when the self-killing is done by judicial order, as in the case of Socrates, (3) when the self-killing is compelled by extreme and unavoidable personal misfortune, and (4) when the self-killing results from shame at having participated in grossly unjust actions.” (Cholbi, 2004 Sect. 2.1)
Aristotle on the otherhand wrote a very miniscule amount of work on the morality of suicide and was slightly vague with regards to the topic. He states that self-killing does not treat oneself unjustly so long as it is done voluntarily because the harm done to oneself is consensual. Aristotle later concludes that suicide is wrong towards society but as the philosopher Miehael Cholbi describes, Aristotle does not explain what exactly the wrong the individual commits. In conclusion both Plato and Aristotle have parallel views on suicide being a wrong towards society. Cholbi made an interesting comment on both Plato’s and Aristoltle’s views on suicide by stating that they both had no concern for the suicidal individual’s well being. They largely focus on the individual’s role and affect on society and not the individual themselves. (Cholbi, 2004 Sect. 2.1)
The next period we will dive into is the Christian Prohibition. During this period Christian philosophers like St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas collectively agreed that suicide is not morally permissible and is a sin towards God. Although the Christian Scripture does not directly condemn suicide, Augustine saw the restriction of self-killing as an extension of the fifth commandment:
God 's command ‘Thou shalt not kill,’ is to be taken as forbidding self-destruction, especially as it does not add ‘thy neighbor’, as it does when it forbids false witness, ‘Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor’ (Cholbi, 2004 Sect. 2.2).
Nevertheless, Augustine believed that suicide was a sin towards god. Aquinas also defended the belief and stated that:
(1) Suicide is contrary to natural self-love, whose aim is to preserve us. (2) Suicide injures the community of which an individual is a part. (3) Suicide violates our duty to God because God has given us life as a gift and in taking our lives we violate His right to determine the duration of our earthly existence. (Cholbi, 2004 Sect. 2.2)
In conclusion, both Augustine and Aquinas shared parallel beliefs on the permissibility of suicide within Deistic grounds. The only issue within their beliefs is the fact that the Christian Scripture does not directly state that suicide is a moral sin against God. Due to this fact, they cannot initially back up their argument.
During the enlightenment period, philosophers like David Hume arised and opposed the traditional and Christian beliefs towards the moral permissibility of suicide. Hume argued the Thomistic argument which states that “suicide violates the order God established for the world and usurps God’s preogative in determining when we shall die.” Hume took this statement and provided these principles:
1. If by the ‘divine order’ is meant the causal laws created by God, then it would always be wrong to contravene these laws for the sake of our own happiness. But clearly it is not wrong, since God frequently permits us to contravene these laws, for he does not expect us not to respond to disease or other calamities.
2. If by ‘divine order’ is meant the natural laws God has willed for us, which are (a) discerned by reason, (b) such that adherence to them will produce our happiness, then why should not suicide conform to such laws when it appears rational to us that the balance of our happiness is best served by dying?
3. Finally if by ‘divine order’ is meant simply that which occurs according to God 's consent, then God appears to consent to all our actions (since an omnipotent God can presumably intervene in our acts at any point) and no distinction exists between those of our actions to which God consents and those to which He does not. If God has placed us upon the Earth like a “sentinel,” then our choosing to leave this post and take our lives occurs as much with his cooperation as with any other act we perform. (Cholbi, 2004 Sect. 2.3)
Nevertheless, Hume disagreed that suicide is morally unacceptable towards the self and stated that the misfortunes of life such as old age, sickness, and other calamities that are far worse than death can be permissibly eradicted by suicide. In conclusion, Hume stated that suicide “may be free of imputation of guilt and blame.” (Cholbi 2004, Sect. 2.3)
In conclusion, I collectively agree with Hume’s beliefs on the moral permissibility of suicide.
He provided valid reasons that gave the suicidal individual free choice in taking their life. The classical philosophers Plato and Aristotle made interesting points for being the first to question the moral permissiblility of suicide but did not provide clarity and acknowledgement of the individual’s well being. The enlightenment period philosophers St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas also made valid points on how suicide was a sin towards God but was initially flawed due to the fact that the Christian Bible does not provide any statement that self-killing is a
sin.
In my opinion the individual should have the right to have a choice in taking their life or not especially in circumstances where the individual is in a state of physical/emotional pain that is far worse than death itself. Nevertheless, I agree with Hume’s philosophy on the moral permissibility of suicide and that the individual should have the choice to decide their fate.
List of References
Cholbi, M. (2004, May 18). Suicide. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/suicide/ Cholbi, M. (2011). Suicide the philosophical dimensions.
Toronto: Broadview Press.
Hume, D. H. (1963). On suicide. In R. Wollheim (Ed.),Hume On Religion London : Wm.
Collins Sons and Co. Ltd.
Pateron, C. (2001). Natural law theory, suicide, assisted suicide, & euthanasia . Boca
Raton: Dissertation.com
Staunton, H. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://jonelin.tripod.com/philosophy/suicide.htm Whether suicide can be permissible. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.life.org.nz/suicide/suicidekeyissues/suicidekeyissues28