LogFAQs > #947559834

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, Database 7 ( 07.18.2020-02.18.2021 ), DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Politics Containment Topic 347: The Indian in the Cabinet
HeroDelTiempo17 11/24/20 4:07:51 PM #16:	Jakyl25 posted... Societal contract shit. We cant have a functioning society without some guidelines that are in the best interest of the vast majority. If you currently dont want to die, you probably shouldnt be killed, with some exceptions. So how does suicide not also violate this social contract, with the exception of your hypothetical completely isolated person with no dependents? This person probably falls completely outside of this social contract. We also cannot have a society without at least pretending that life is valuable, with all the good and bad that entails. Also if the enforcement of the social contract is the important distinction, wouldn't it follow that it's okay to murder all those that fall outside of it? Jakyl25 posted... I believe your desires while mentally ill are still generally within the realm of agency. Suicidal people arent generally considered mentally insane, as it were. Drugs are a trickier case, but Im not aware of any drugs that would make a non-suicidal person suddenly prone to suicide. Insanity isn't really "real" in the sense that clinical insanity is a legal term, not a scientific diagnosis, so I err more on the side of ambiguity. Mental health isnt completely understood but it's generally accepted as something that distorts agency. Thats why I also bring up drugs and alcohol. My nuanced opinion here is that you can accept all these things distort agency while also not absolving responsibility but it's a grey area. And speaking from my own experience, I have a hard time trusting my own judgement regarding my own self in those areas,, and also have a hard time dissasociating my sense of self to be completely isolated within a single moment, so. I would say it does harm. Do you extend this to other forms of self-harm too, like cutting or substance abuse? Is the only reason to intervene (assuming no violation of agency) in this situation to prevent harm from coming to others? As in, there is no gain to treating mental illness as long as the person is reasonably living according to their wishes? Sorry for the inane hypotheticals by the way, I'm getting pretty rambly here. --- I definitely did not forget to put the 2020 GOTD Guru winner, azuarc in my sig! <cite>HeroDelTiempo17 posted [p:947559834] in Politics C... [t:79132949]...</cite> <quote>Jakyl25 posted... </cite> <quote>Societal contract shit. We cant have a functioning society without some guidelines that are in the best interest of the vast majority. If you currently dont want to die, you probably shouldnt be killed, with some exceptions.</quote> So how does suicide not also violate this social contract, with the exception of your hypothetical completely isolated person with no dependents? This person probably falls completely outside of this social contract. We also cannot have a society without at least pretending that life is valuable, with all the good and bad that entails. Also if the enforcement of the social contract is the important distinction, wouldn't it follow that it's okay to murder all those that fall outside of it? Jakyl25 posted... </cite> <quote> I believe your desires while mentally ill are still generally within the realm of agency. Suicidal people arent generally considered mentally insane, as it were. Drugs are a trickier case, but Im not aware of any drugs that would make a non-suicidal person suddenly prone to suicide.</quote> Insanity isn't really "real" in the sense that clinical insanity is a legal term, not a scientific diagnosis, so I err more on the side of ambiguity. Mental health isnt completely understood but it's generally accepted as something that distorts agency. Thats why I also bring up drugs and alcohol. My nuanced opinion here is that you can accept all these things distort agency while also not absolving responsibility but it's a grey area. And speaking from my own experience, I have a hard time trusting my own judgement regarding my own self in those areas,, and also have a hard time dissasociating my sense of self to be completely isolated within a single moment, so. I would say it does harm. Do you extend this to other forms of self-harm too, like cutting or substance abuse? Is the only reason to intervene (assuming no violation of agency) in this situation to prevent harm from coming to others? As in, there is no gain to treating mental illness as long as the person is reasonably living according to their wishes? Sorry for the inane hypotheticals by the way, I'm getting pretty rambly here. --- I definitely did not forget to put the 2020 GOTD Guru winner, azuarc in my sig!</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1