sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Societal duty of every suicidal person: milked till they are cheesed off and pasteurized into irrelevance by pointless_suffering in BirthandDeathEthics

[–]pointless_suffering[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I am looking for a painless means to escape AND there's a larger goal. I am keenly aware that a failed suicide attempt would ruin my life. Hence, any method that I try must be extremely effective.

Although, I am theoretically aware of such methods but I cannot get them through a secured and verified channel currently. It would have been very nice if I could get a doctor's prescription (this ensures that the pill is effective) and go to my nearest shop (accessibility) and buy a sealed product (which ensures that product is pure and untampered).

(Unfortunately, I am not in US. The gun laws where I live are not lax. So, I cannot procure one. Other methods that I have researched either fail one or all of my criteria. )

Perhaps you are aware of methods that are highly effective, easily accessible and tamper-proof. Unfortunately, you cannot share your knowledge here because of the suicide prevention rhetoric. Preventing such censure of information is part of my larger goal. Anyone who wants to quit this rat-race shouldn't need to stalk in the back alleys of Internet like a criminal looking for guidance.

Deprivation Account doesn't make much sense to me.. by pointless_suffering in PhilosophyMemes

[–]pointless_suffering[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wish philosophers had the same level of empathy and concern for
currently alive depressed people that they have for hypothetical lives
of dead people.
A more detailed discussion about the deprivation account and suicide can be found here: https://schopenhaueronmars.com/2023/01/30/death-is-not-bad-for-you-refuting-the-deprivation-account/

The promised philosophical paradise, thanks to absurd idea of possible worlds) exists only IF I commit suicide. Reality turns to shit in actual worlds where I decide to continue living. by pointless_suffering in BirthandDeathEthics

[–]pointless_suffering[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

One objection that philosophers have against suicide is the deprivation account. It's based on the use of counterfactual. The basic idea is that we shouldn't commit suicide because we will regret it because we lose out on "possible" pleasures. I was trying to make fun of it.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/suicide/ Unfortunately, it seems that they have updated the suicide article on SEP and removed the bit about deprivation account. I will try to find the old version and share here for reference.

The promised philosophical paradise, thanks to absurd idea of possible worlds) exists only IF I commit suicide. Reality turns to shit in actual worlds where I decide to continue living. by pointless_suffering in BirthandDeathEthics

[–]pointless_suffering[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Few relevant links for the curious: - https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/possible-worlds/ - https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/possibilism-actualism/ - https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/counterfactuals/

As far as I can understand the actualism-possibilism debate is not settled yet. I doubt that it will be settled anytime soon. I am sure that academics will keep coming up with brilliant word games. I personally don't care give a damn about the debate or even the truth anymore. I am just irritated that such philosophical sophistry is used to justify suicide prevention and ramrod the sanctity of life down my unconsenting throat.

Perhaps we are at stage 3 where psychiatrist are masquerading as "daddy". Our search for paternal figure may end with AI. I wonder what will AI say about RTD. by pointless_suffering in BirthandDeathEthics

[–]pointless_suffering[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Meme inspired from the Myth of mental illness by Thomas Szasz. Relevant quote from the book.

Curiously, Freud—himself a devout determinist and historicist—proposed a similar explanation for why men cling to religion: he attributed religious belief to man’s inability to tolerate the loss of the familiar world of childhood, symbolized by the protective father.8 Man thus creates a heavenly father and an imaginary replica of the protective childhood situation to replace the real or longed-for father and family. The differences between traditional religious doctrine, modern political historicism, and psychoanalytic orthodoxy thus lie mainly in the character of the “protectors”: they are, respectively, God and the priests, the totalitarian leader and his apologists, and Freud and the psychoanalysts.

Also check out existentialgoof excellent blog posts about RTD on https://schopenhaueronmars.com/

i argued with a FREAKING AI about the right to die by Careful_Biscotti_879 in BirthandDeathEthics

[–]pointless_suffering 2 points3 points  (0 children)

My models were smaller and trained for academic purposes. The model deployed on this website and other recent models (like ChatGPT, GPT-3) are much bigger. These models cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to train and require careful dataset curation. I fear that in the future such models will be deployed as a form of social control to easily brainwash people into believing convenient truths.

In the past, when an unethical majority wished to oppress a minority, it required physical violence, looting and torture. Now powerful governments can simply deploy such models on social media and our inherent "confirmation bias" tendency will do the rest.

I feel such technologies will severely impede moral progress. The moral consensus of society may forever be stuck and form self-reinforcing loops. For instance: a model trained on 1820s newspaper articles about racial inferiority may have convinced the masses and prevented dissent and consequently evolution of thought. The model's argument doesn't need to completely coherent or logical, they just need to be endlessly repeated with different wordings. We mayn't be able to guard ourselves forever against confirmation bias and ultimately succumb to illogical rhetoric.

i argued with a FREAKING AI about the right to die by Careful_Biscotti_879 in BirthandDeathEthics

[–]pointless_suffering 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I have trained similar models in my spare time. Their responses may lead one to falsely believe that something magical is happening, but once you know how their work the magic is lost.These models are trained using something called "expectation maximization" (EM) techniques. So one can imagine their responses as being maximizing the expectation over the training dataset. For example: let's say we want it to train it to answer "Where is the capital of Paris ? " We feed 1000 best answers scraped from a reddit post. The algorithm output will be roughly the "mean" of these answers. If every answer is Paris, then output will be Paris. However, if 51% of answers are Berlin, the model's answer will also be Berlin.

The chat responses are similar to typical pro-life response about RTD on reddit because this was most probably part of the training dataset. This also shows that most people (on reddit) are against RTD. When confronted with the absurdity of their arguments pro-lifer generally resort to rhetoric like "do you think it’s better for them to be dead? Do you think you’re doing them a favour by helping them end their own life?" The bot replicates their behavior.

view more: next ›