But to continue the discussion, I think that to argue suicide in logical terms is to not understand it's very nature as an illogical act. It is an act of desperation and irrationality. The people who commit suicide are in a desperate place, and things like condemning people who commit suicide doesn't prevent people from reaching that place. Instead, it just hurts the people whose loved ones committed suicide even more. In this sense, I agree with <Karpova>.

<Gufeld Student>, to say that you dislike Jessie Gilbert because of how her life ended is not fair to her and does not do her life justice. I understand your emotions towards your sister, and I also think it is necessary to realize that these emotions of anger towards Jessie Gilbert are simply a deflection of those, and I think that should be realized.

I think you fail to realize that <Gufeld> is deliberately using his sister's death as a tool to gain our attention and pity because he feels completely empty and needs human acknowledgement to fulfill some sense of self-loss. He tries to cover up this self-loss by acting like he is better off without his sister and takes a "sour grapes" attitude towards it. He sees that Jessie is gaining all this attention, and feels disgraced that his late sister isn't gaining the same kind of attention.

I find it horrible that he's using his sister's death as a tool to further his ends (whether it be winning this argument or to refill his percieved loss of self-worth mentioned before). Isn't it obvious that that's what he's doing? Why would he just HAPPEN to drop the fact that his sister committed suicide in a discussion about suicide?

Even if you don't believe anything I've said, you can look for yourself: his further comments have shown the attitude that "I have experienced this: I know more than you, so I win this argument."

I should TOTALLY feel sooooo bad for someone that exploits another like that...

Oh, get over yourself <blingice> Are you a mind reader?

<OhioChessFan: You previously said <I honestly looked at all the responses and I see nothing. You're the only one insulting anyone.> Look in the mirror, and you'll see who's doing the insulting.>

Without taking either side in this altercation i just wanted to point out that <GufeldStudent> blamed others for insulting him before <blingice> even posted here. So your comment doesn't refute <blingice>'s point.

1. Suicide is a complex and tragic human behaviour, that can have a variety of antecedents - to dismiss it as being simply "the result of cowardice" is not only factually wrong, but offensive.

2. There is some evidence to suggest that increased media coverage of certain suicides (celebrities, such as Kurt Cobain for example) does result in a temporally related, slight increase in the number of suicides in a similar age group - a "suicide cluster". In view of this, some psychiatrists have recommended guidelines that the media should follow in covering such deaths. All the reports I've read so far on Jessie Gilbert did not really sensationalize the issue. (And if they did, that's because of the failings of the media, not the individual concerned.)

3. People who are mentally ill, especially those who are depressed, get the short end of the stick from society at large. Because depression is an emotion that all of us experience at some point in our lives, we have trouble imagining that it could also be the result of a common (5% of men, 10-15% of women) and lethal illness (to quote an example: diabetics who are depressed are 5 times more likely to die early, even if not by suicide). As a mental health professional, I am disgusted by the attitude of people like <GufeldStudent>, but recognize that they, too, have to deal with unresolved issues of anger, grief, and the like. Labelling those who attempt or complete suicide "cowards" (i.e, stigmatization) merely leads to less people seeking help for genuine psychological problems, and leads to a foreshortened life of poorer quality for them.

4. There is a well-documented association between sexual abuse and several conditions that could explain Ms. Gilbert's demise (depression and borderline personality to name just two.) What's sad is that certain people like <GS> end up blaming the victims, rather than the perpetrators, of such acts.

In conclusion: It's clear that <GufeldStudent> has troubles - his outburst here, like another man's suicide attempt, is essentially a cry for help, repellent as it may be. And that does not in any way make the tragedy of a young and in all possibility mentally ill suicide (whether or not her father actually abused her) any less tragic, or any more cowardly.

Claiming an argument lacks logic is itself not a logical argument unless you back it up with reasons. And yes, in a court of law, people are frequently condemned for manslaughter if they make use of violent actions to save themselves when they could have used nonviolent means---please look at the case law.

I would also like to point out (while legality is not exactly the same thing as morality) that suicide is a felony. I am certain it is also illegal to attempt suicide in England: This ought to show that commmunity standards are generally on my side.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicid...

Please:

1 Check your facts before you make definite claims,

2 Realise that your outbursts on this page are tasteless and not appreciated by the vast majority of people. How do you think people who knew Jessie Gilbert would feel to read your comments on her?

There is no cry for help, by the way. I was simply looking to condemn something that I saw others as failing to condemn. Perhaps I overreacted, but a reaction that might have been reasonable would be, "I think the action she took was deplorable, but it was tragic and unfair that these horrible circumstances drove her to it". Besides, my own subjective reaction to her suicide ought to be considered separate from my arguments that they deserve condemnation.

Also, do you think most criminal acts are unmotivated? There are almost always causes that drive men to action, but there is still free will and choice.

<GufeldStudent>
1. "If you do it, there will be those who revile you for it".....bit late in the day for them, isn't it? At the point when an individual contemplates suicide, I don't think that's really the first thing on their minds. And while I agree with you that seeking help is the "courageous" thing to do, most people contemplating suicide aren't really in a state of mind to do so.

2. About the law: it varies from country to country, depending on the balance between state paternalism and civil liberties (and neither is an unmixed blessing). In my country, suicide is still a criminal act and punishable by law, but that edict is a dead letter because medical professionals scarcely report most attempts. On the other hand, our mental health act does authorize forcible treatment, if authorization is given by the patient's guardian or next-of-kin, provided qualified professional feels that there is a risk of harm to oneself or to others.

3. "Saying something is tragic is a form of praise" - that doesn't sound very logical to me, unless we're talking about literature! Compare the following two statements - * "Romeo and Juliet is a classic tragedy" is praise, because here we're referring to tragedy in the Aristotlean sense. * "Child abuse is a tragedy of our times", to most people, is not praise of any sort.

4. Terms like "courageous" and "evil", especially the latter, are moral judgments, and depend on one's own personal sense of ethics: to a conscientious objector, for example, evading the draft is "courageous" and war is "evil", whereas many people believe the opposite. Using them to settle this argument won't help, because individual opinions are not absolutes.

5. Using the term "condemnation" - and the kind of language you've used in general - puts one on rather shaky moral ground, because those acts that are condemned by society in general are - as you pointed out - those that do not meet the ethical or moral standards of the community or culture concerned. People's attitudes to suicide have changed, and in my opinion they have generally changed for the better. (The reaction of the "public" on this board to your comments, by itself, demonstrates this.) While I appreciate your intentions, I very much doubt that your line of action would truly save lives. Remember, you're talking about people who are already dealing with guilt and shame; adding to them wouldn't really help.

That's about all for now, I guess.

Hah, no, I'm just not a total idiot.

<OhioChessFan: Look in the mirror, and you'll see who's doing the insulting.>

Really, please do point out a point that's insulting. My statements take place in a no-tolerance mode. Just because they take place in that mode doesn't mean I am being offensive--it certainly doesn't mean that I'm ready to accept someone's statements as fact.

<GufeldStudent: <Blingice>, I see that your sympathy extends only so far. Good, I want none of it.>

I don't extend dripping amounts of sympathy to people I don't know, because sympathy-giving requires knowing background.

<GufeldStudent: I wonder what your personal motivations are. Of course, you are a little more guarded in discussing them. Quite sad, really. At least I am providing people with a background against which they can evaluate my objectivity: I guess you could not stand for people to see your biases.>

My bias is anti-crap.

Good day, happy Thanksgiving, and I have once again been totally repulsed from this otherwise fantastic site whose admins can be shamefully spineless in controlling discussion.