CC BY
104
Секция 11. Философия
Terekhova Liubov, Institute of The Criminal-Executive Service (Kyiv, Ukraine)
PhD, Scientific worker, Scientific research center E-mail: [email protected]
The philosophical and psychological issues of the problem of suicide
Abstract: The evolution ofphilosophical and psychological understanding of suicide is represented in the article. It is substantiated the right to death according to philosophical issues of suicide.
Keywords: suicide, committal of suicide, suicidology, stoic, existential, situation, right to death.
It is quite easy but hardly right to concern that committal of suicide can be the result of mental illness only. Suicide should be considered as involved in the complex of psychological, social, biological, cultural and environmental factors.
Some kind of resume to the all of these factors is philosophical discovering of suicide. The attitude to suicide in society greatly depends from cultural experience (for medieval and not only medieval Japan the suicide through seppuku has been understood as the action of dignity, but not like tragedy) and even from the level of evolution of civil society (in the questions of euthanasia). That is why it could not be the only one explanation of the problem of suicide. The most valuable are the philosophical and psychological approaches to understanding of this problem. The visions of philosophers and psychologists differ from each other for a first sight, but how essential this difference is?
The aim of the article is to investigate the difference between philosophical and psychological points of view in understanding of suicide and to find the heuristic sense in both of them.
The effectuation becomes possible through the involving into analysis of the problem of suicide two types of philosophical discourses. First of all it is the history of philosophy discourse in which different kinds of outlooks represent the types of approaches to the problem of suicide. Here we should represent the consistent patterns in the Antique (Socrates, Plato, Seneca), Medieval (Patristic, Scholar philosophers and Catholic mystics: Augustine, Aquinas, St. Hildegard of Bingen, St. Francis of Assisi and others), the period of Enlightenment (D. Hume, Voltaire, J.-J. Rousseau) and modern (A. Camus, K. Jaspers, J.-P. Sartre, J. Deles) attitudes according to the investigating question.
The second type of discourse is connected with the issues of philosophical suiddology (the scientific study of suicide). Among the scientists, who had explored this approach are both foreign and domestic researches: S. Avanesov, M. Battin, N. Burton, M. Cholbi,
P. Edwards, A. Mohovikov, T. Kashtanova, A. Kornetov, E. Shelehov, E. Tolstoles and others.
Among the scientists who had researched the psychological issues of suicide are the classic psychologists, like S. Freud, W. Shtekel and modern researchers: K. Erdineeva, N. Maksymova, L. Malcinski, Y. Polischuk, V. Philipova, G. Starshenbaum. Of course the major role here belongs to suicidology of American thanatologist E. Shneidman.
The philosophical understanding of the problem of suicide greatly depends from religiosity or non-religiosity of philosophical paradigm which had characterized the concrete historical epoch. We are not really sure what exactly Socrates had been thinking about suicide, but we can concern some opinion according to Plato’s works. The suicide in unacceptable from position metempsychosis, because the person by killing himself or herself ruins all the order of life, all future appearances of one’s soul. Socrates in some way agreed with this Pythagorean conception, for him suicide did not seem the right way. But his belief in evilness of suicide does not look very strong — he prefers to commit suicide by the verdict of the Court of Athens, than to escape as he was advised. For Ancient Greeks and Roman Philosophy the death is not a big deal. From that point of view philosophy is actually the art of dying. A good life matters. If your life was good, you should not afraid of death. For Socrates the contempt to avoid of death meant the betrayal of his study and of all way of his own life. Plato lived through the loss of his teacher, but later (in “The Laws") he had agreed that in some ways suicide is acceptable especially when it serves for common (civic) good. Roman Stoic Philosophy has proposed the whole apology of suicide. The great role in this process belongs to Seneca. He argued that in some circumstances the most ugly and disgusting way to kill one’ self has more dignity than to stay alive [1]. The slavery seemed to Seneca quite serious reason for suicide. Greek and Romans were sure that slave is person who had frightened at the war. Someone who was to rabbit-hearted to die at the fight, and to coward to commit suicide for avoiding the slavery. Ancient philoso-
131
Section 11. Philosophy
phers did not divide personal and social, it was impossible to them to say and to do different things. That’s why suicide was the method helped to stay clear with his study — to die, but not to betray. At the case of Seneca this rule fully worked. He preferred to cut his veins, but be honest in his life.
The ancient society was religious, but it had characterized with relative freedom in the choice of gods. From the one hand Socrates was blamed for telling about the signs of new gods, but this accusation was so strong together with accusation in spoiling the youth. The state had priority status in person’s life. If the state thought that citizen had been pernicious to it, it become enough to commit suicide. If the person realized that he or she became a bad citizen, she could decide to kill oneself.
This situation had radically changed in the Middle Ages. The social life of the human being had started to apprehend like less important than life of spirit. The top priority belonged not to the virtue ofbeing the good citizen, but to the virtue of being the good Christian.
In religious Christian society the suicide was inappropriate and sinful. The last one term means that person is no more empowered to determine something according the length of own life and must work hard on the sense of life. It is often argued that forbidding of suicide in Christian philosophy is connected with the commandment “Thou shalt not kill” and has its background in the prescription not to ruin the order of God. But the Medieval understanding of self-murder has strong ontological basis. In Medieval Christian philosophy the statement of Christ’s embodiment and sacrifice had bring the idea about the part of sanctity in human being. This idea flourished especially in the mysticism of High Middle Ages — trying to commit suicide, human being is attempted on the part of God in himself or herself. Another important reason which forbids to person even daring to think about taking one’s own life is the sin of anxiety. The thoughts about suicide are the evidence of doubt in the power of mightiness of God. So there is no logic way to support the admissibility of suicide for religious conscience which is oriented on future immaterial life. Even free will, which is substantiated by Augustine and Tomas Aquinas as major part of the ethics and ontology could not understand as an argument for voluntary decisions. The true free will reveals only when person do the right choice. But when someone is doing something wrong or sinning he is neglecting with the gift of free will.
The change of philosophical paradigm together with substantiating of native law in the period ofEnlightenment had bring the indulgency to person’s possibility to decide
something about the time of own life. The great ideologist of the right for suicide was David Hume, who desired to prove that person has right for suicide committal, which depends from native liberty of human being [2]. Hume had found the opportunity to support the suicide without obj ection the power of God in the world. The Hume’s position is quite close to agnosticism: “There is no being, which possesses any power or faculty that it receives not from its creator; nor is there any one, which, by ever so irregular an action, can encroach upon the plan of his providence, or disorder the universe... When the horror ofpain prevails over the love of life: When a voluntary action anticipates the effect ofblind causes; it is only in consequence ofthose powers and principles, which he has implanted in his creatures. Divine providence is still inviolate, and placed far beyond the reach of human injuries.” [2]. Hume was absolutely sure that nobody had refused from life, at the time it was worth keeping. When for some reasons life become burden, suicide could be connected with our duty to ourselves. An “enlightenment mind” of Hume in this speculation brings us as close as possible to the one of the main modern philosophical questions formulated by Camus: “There is but one truly serious philosophical problem and that is suicide. Judging whether life is or is not worth living amounts to answering the fundamental question of philosophy. All the rest — whether or not the world has three dimensions, whether the mind has nine or twelve categories — comes afterwards. These are games; one must first answer” [3]. If there is no sense and supernatural being, why person should live and suffer from absurd? Camus has no absolute answer like none from existential philosophers. He decides the problem of suicide like initially personal problem — there less sense life has the more it is worth living. Suicide is not a logical answer for meaningless of life, but only escape from comprehension ofabsurd. Suicide committal is confession that being could not be understood anymore. The real answer is metaphysical rebel against absurd. The beautiful essay of Camus is quite tricky—he says that it is braver to live, but not insist that to prefer suicide is inappropriate. Nevertheless Camus analyses suicidal situation connected with outlook ideals and personal disasters with some cold consciousness, irrespectively to personal problems which could provoke the idea of suicide. Actually he only persist that suicide for the reason of meaningless of life is ridiculous.
The attempt to understand correlation between philosophical and psychological issues of suicide could be done through the experience of KarlJaspers. His opinion about suicide had radically changed in different periods of life. Like psychologist in his early works Jaspers investigates
132
Секция 11. Философия
suicide as psychiatric symptom of illness and his attitude to it is negative [4].
K. Jaspers was not alone in such sureness — in psychology the prevalent explanation of suicide before the second half of XX century was psychopathological conception. According to it suicide comprehends as the autoaggressive action of mentally diseased person [5, 305]. Wilhelm Shtekel from the position of psychodynamic approach explains appearance of suicide because of depression and anger directed by person for herself or himself. The background of suicide is desire to kill someone or desire of someone’s death. The psychoanalytical version of Sigmund Freud is fit in with this approach. A lot of people learn to direct their “instinct of death" — “Tanatos” against the others, not against themselves, but those who disposed to suicide, blinded with anger, turns this instinct for themselves. Therefore suicide is extreme expression of self-hate.
In our times psychodynamic approach in explanation of suicide has more historical than theoretical value. It is accepted now understand suicide trough the conception of non-pathological suicidal dangerous situational reactions. The main idea is that often mentally healthy people commit suicides in condition of normal psychological reaction on extraordinary circumstances or events [5, 305]. The psychological issues of suicide could be resumed in the point that circumstances were stronger than person. But there are scientists who doubt in possibility of exclusively psychological interpretation of suicide. Y. Polischuk is among them. He concerns that removal of phenomenological data from analysis of suicide leads to substitution of psychopathological phenomena and assessments with psychological. Y. Polischuk emphasizes that mental condition of suicidal persons in the pre-suicidal and in the period of committing suicide has lack in description. The reason of that is in absence of phenomenological, psychological and clinical analysis of the person’s pre-suicidal status. The question about pathological or non-pathological nature of psychological forms of one’s person disadaption depends from reasonability and comprehensive keeping of self-control and adequacy concerning outward influences. The psychological suicidal situational reactions according to Polischuk are reactions with rational background — reaction for incurable disease, reaction of self-punishment for committal crime and some others. Meanwhile the scientists K. Erdineeva and V. Philipova insist that the reason for suicide is the loss of the meaning of life together with inadequate reaction for failure in love, marriage, hurting one’s pride especially in the situation of men-
tal instability [5, 306]. Thus every person is exposed to the risk of suicide in every period of life. But conclusion to the almost all types of psychological explanations of the problem of suicide is the point that committal suicide is the mistake, the result of mental “evil” (disease), or the result of “rational evil”: desire to hasten unescapable death from incurable disease or to suppress the remorse.
Jaspers had overcome such prejudice thanks to existential philosophy. Suicide is a quite logical answer to border situation, which has in its background fear and depression; it is “a temptation in the situation of anxiety” [6], but not disease, he had decided later. We must admit that Jaspers actually had come to conclusion of modern philosophical suicidology (for example philosophy of suicide by S. Avanesov) — suicide could not be describe by empirical methods, for that reasons scientists, who tries to find explanation of suicide in statistical patterns deal only with social sensation of suicide, but have nothing to say about self-murder. From that point of view for Jaspers suicide will always has some mystery, like every person in some way is hidden from us. Suicide is an action which free from all other actions, it’s a strong answer for pressure and every kind of power, which try to dominate on person; the possibility of suicide makes person free.
For support ofsuchJaspers’ position we should admit that a lot of psychologists who understood self-murder as disease had rej ected themselves by committing suicide in pure reflection like Shtekel or in unbearable pain from cancer like Freud. They simply couldn’t stand anymore. Let us remember Shneidman’s conception of psychache (terrible psychological pain) as main reason of suicide for explanation of these deaths.
In modern suicidology philosophical and psychological issues of suicide a closer than it seems, psychologists ask: what could we do to prevent decision to kill oneself, meanwhile philosophers ask: should we force person to live against his or her will? The history of philosophical understanding the problem of suicide brings us to the statement in which the right to death is the sequel of right to life. If the decision to die is not the result of mental disease or alcohol disorder, and continuation of life bring to person only new psychological and physical suffering who will dare to judge? There is always a personal existential situation, which is open for individual human being much more than for his or her therapist. If humankind insist that every person has right to live with dignity, than we should suppose the right to die with dignity.
133
Section 11. Philosophy
References:
1. Seneca Moral Letters to Lucilium/Letter 17 [Electronic resource]. - Access mode: https://archive. org/stream/Seneca/Seneca_djvu.txt
2. Hume D. Ofsuicide/Two essays [Electronic resource]. - Access mode: http://www.davidhume.org/texts/suis.html
3. Camus A. The Myth of Sisyphus. - Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1975. - 170 p.
4. Косилова Е. Ясперс и самоубийство [Электронный ресурс]. - Режим доступа: http://www.krotov.info/libr_ min/11_k/os/osilova_3.html
5. Эрдынеева К. Г., Филиппова В. П. Суицид, как психологический феномен//Фундаментальные исследования. - 2007. - № 12. - С. 304-306.
6. Ясперс К. О самоубийстве/Философия [Электронный ресурс]. - Режим доступа: http://www.krotov. info/libr_min/28_ya/sp/pers_3.html/
7. Аванесов С. С. Философия суицида. - Томск, 1998. - 148 с.
8. Shneidman Edwin Suicide as Psychache: A Clinical Approach to Self-Destructive Behavior. - Northvale, 1993. -258 p.
134
