Is suicide bad from an evolutionary point of view?

[cowardescent]

The reason I ask is because suicide nowadays seems to be the one thing strongly stigmatized in almost all countries/cultures. It has the same taboo/perhaps even more than incest. Given that incest is clearly stigmatized for increasing birth defects in the population down the line, there's a clear biological reason for stigma. Is that the same for suicide?

I would have thought that people killing themselves might actually be good since the "weak" (not to say suicidal people are weak but less genetically fit) are removed from the gene pool. If people who were felt victimised by society (homeless, in prison) were allowed to suicide, wouldn't that be a win-win for all?

The argument I've heard against the one above is that too many people suiciding means a net loss. Society invest in someone and to have that person die as a young adult (which most suicides are at) means a loss for a nation/community not just on an emotional level but financial one. But I don't know how much I buy this since so few people kill themselves as to even be a dent on the economy. Only 1 million people out of 7 billion in the world. That's about 1/7000. Very tiny.

 

[novaveritas]

short answer no.
From an evolutionary perspective this is only true if people kill themselves before breeding and even then there is not a genetic basis to suicide from most studies and there is no evidence that suicides are any less fit than anyone else. Going further many great thinkers committed suicide, surely if your hypothesis holds then the genetic element of their intellegence would be removed from the gene pool and so humanity is doomed to become ever more dumb.

Evolutionary reductionism is not the real answer to any question, it is used to provide a pseudoscientific veneer of credibility to poorly conceived concepts and dogma. Poor people are poor because they are less fit and don't work hard enough for example, or you need to screw over your colleagues at work to get ahead because its survival of the fittest. If humans create a culture unfit for humans to live in then suicide is going to happen. Societies stigmatize suicide to try and paper over and hide the problem, because solving the problem means dealing with the causes and that is hard much easier to sweep it out of sight.

There is no such thing as the economy separate from humans, if there is then what color is the economy? is it soft and squishy or is it shiny and hard? There is also no such thing as financial level it is a false construct. On a meta level fuck utilitarianism.

 

[GaryGlisten]

Evolution.. have you met anyone with telescopic eyes.. the beginnings of wings? if anything we are devolving.. totally dependent, totally helpless.

 

[jpgrdnr]

Well, not everyone is genetically the same when we are born. The fact that you are born at all is such a huge statistical jackpot. If you are born healthy (ie no long term health consequences) that is even a larger jackpot.

Suicide should be looked at more in terms of neurological dysfunction, resulting from external sources (events effecting the psyche) or from disease.

 

[CFC]

If humans create a culture unfit for humans to live in then suicide is going to happen. Societies stigmatize suicide to try and paper over and hide the problem, because solving the problem means dealing with the causes and that is hard much easier to sweep it out of sight.

This.

Those who enjoy the rewards of our corrupt, unequal and inhumane society, or who can at least cope without it harming them or without their being forced to thinking about it too much, naturally want to ensure the rest of us put up with it. And so will ostracise or place taboos on things that may disrupt their flow of ill-gotten gains, like people killing themselves to escape this hell, drug use to escape this hell, becoming a hermit to escape this hell, etc.

If somebody isn't poor and suffering, then how can you tell you're rich and happy?

 

[Xorkoth]

This is an interesting and controversial question. I have some thoughts about it. One thing that I think is a problem for our species since the advent of agriculture and advance civilization, especially modern civilization, is that people with strongly maladaptive traits are reproducing, because they are able to survive where before they couldn't. Take things like Down Syndrome, a strong predilection for early onset cancer, much lower than average intelligence, a tendency for diabetes and obesity, and so on (granted some of this is nurture not nature, or at least partly both). Whereas during hunter-gatherer times, people with maladaptive traits would much more often die without reproducing, or if they reproduced their offspring would die, thus not furthering those maladaptive genes, nowadays these people can survive and be kept alive by society. The maladaptive traits are a nuisance instead of a death sentence. As people reproduce with these traits,m these negative/harmful genes pass through the population, producing, over time, weaker genetics. Natural selection is no longer the primary driving force of our evolution, we have artificially selected with our technology. I think this is bad from an evolutionary point of view, though I also think that from a human rights perspective, we do have a moral imperative to help lift up the less fortunate in our societies, in whatever way that means (circumstantial or genetic).

Mental health, too, seems to have a genetic component, though it is also unclear how much is nature vs nurture. For example, a lot of depression/anxiety/mental illness is caused by trauma/abuse, especially by the parents, who then pass that trauma on to their children, and so on. So perhaps just because a family has depression common in it doesn't mean it's genetic. But then again, some people have great childhoods, their families are loving, yet there is still a higher than normal incidence of depression or bipolar or whatever in their families. And even besides that, at this point, the main way we're evolving is no longer natural selection, but societally/culturally. Is there really functionally a difference between mental illness passed on through behavior/trauma, and mental illness passed on by genetics? Either way it's being perpetuated from generation to generation.

Which brings me to my thought that is just one I'm having and I hope I don't offend anyone, but I think perhaps suicide is actually good from an evolutionary point of view, because it removes someone more likely to pass that on from the gene pool/pool of people reproducing and making the next generations. But I feel kind of reprehensible even articulating that. Like I said earlier, I believe we have a moral imperative to help people who need help, that is what civilization is for, or part of it anyway. I think that with better understanding and acceptance and better tools, we could be doing a lot to help the mental health crisis we are facing. But regardless, the fact remains that happier, more well-adjusted, successful people produce happier, more well-adjusted, happier people, on average.

 

[Zopiclone bandit]

The argument I've heard against the one above is that too many people suiciding means a net loss. Society invest in someone and to have that person die as a young adult (which most suicides are at) means a loss for a nation/community not just on an emotional level but financial one.

@Foreigner

I would have thought that people killing themselves might actually be good since the "weak" (not to say suicidal people are weak but less genetically fit) are removed from the gene pool. If people who were felt victimised by society (homeless, in prison) were allowed to suicide, wouldn't that be a win-win for all?

100% YES

I've come to the end of being kind to people & feeling "sorry" for folks with "issues" in my life & the older I get the more firm I get in my view that people as a general rule are foul, the less of them around the better. When I hear people moan about how tragic their life has been as a child in the West I always think on child soldiers in Liberia for example or kids taken by Boko Haram & what they have to go through.

Some people are strong, some weak & the natural order should let some live and the rest die by whatever means possible.

 

[Zopiclone bandit]

but I think perhaps suicide is actually good from an evolutionary point of view, because it removes someone more likely to pass that on from the gene pool/pool of people reproducing and making the next generations. But I feel kind of reprehensible even articulating that. Like I said earlier,

QFT

No need to feel reprehensible for thinking that or saying it, sometimes the most bitter medicine to swallow will do you the best.

 

[Captain.Heroin]

It unfortunately is not good, evolution-perspective. Top -> down, you want generations of people to cascade without any events of self-termination. They can arise to suicide contagion, a real phenomena that would likely effect other species more heavily than our own (humans tend to be stuck in their little inner world a lot more than other species on Earth). As much of a suicide/euthanasia/civil rights proponent I am, I realize suicide/euthanasia is not what evolution wants/designed for us. Evolution occurs over multiple generations and not within a single individual so while suicide cannot/does not stall/prevent evolution, it practically does limit it and is not something that would be involved in a playbook, so to speak.

 

[TargetX]

Some people are strong, some weak & the natural order should let some live and the rest die by whatever means possible.

Just out of curiosity, how do you pay for your food, accommodation, heat and electricity? Is it paid employment or social security? If the latter, when was the last time you were self sufficient? By your own standards, you are weak and should be left to die, since you don't or can't support yourself

 

[Foreigner]

I don't believe the picture of evolution is complete. It's partially accurate. Natural selection is highly randomized and the best traits survive, but I believe evolution is also a consciousness-driven event. The activities of our lives, what we think and process, how we awaken (or not), will affect our DNA. Epigenetics is really fascinating and I think it could add huge components of missing information to our understanding of evolution. They're even discovering now that what we think about ourselves affects our DNA. Self-hatred tends to activate cancer genes.

Anyway... I look at all life as one, big aggregate organism. Humans are killing the planet and themselves, on a wide scale. Humanity is effectively committing suicide right now; the fact that some individuals are acting this out is just a symptom, not the cause. There's no real separation from humans and nature. We are nature. We are a part of nature that is committing suicide, ecocide, and homicide. Scaling the issue of suicide down to only what individuals are doing ignores the macro implications. At some level we are all feeling the death of the ecosystems. It manifests in how most humans have chronic disease now, and the ages of onset are getting younger and younger.

Any act of self-harm is part of the umbrella of suicidality, including economic activities, smoking cigarettes, etc. Just because you're not dying immediately does not mean you aren't killing yourself.

If we want to talk about strictly traditional evolution in the Darwinian sense, most of humanity is fucked because the competitive psychopaths have amassed insane amounts of power through social manipulation and now technological innovation. The rest of humanity is just chattel to them. Those psychopaths will reproduce successfully and when the world's ecology collapses and billions of people start starving to death, the psychopaths will be secure in their fortifications.

 

[Jabberwocky]

? considering how this thread started, I'm impressed by the input so far

 

[F.U.B.A.R.]

I suppose suicide could be considered as the ultimate altruistic act which confers an evolutionary advantage to the gene pool as a whole if you're that way inclined. But for the individual, murder may be the better option...

 

[Zopiclone bandit]

Just out of curiosity, how do you pay for your food, accommodation, heat and electricity? Is it paid employment or social security? If the latter, when was the last time you were self sufficient? By your own standards, you are weak and should be left to die, since you don't or can't support yourself

Yet again the most simple reply & I've lost count the amount of times people use this.
The system I live under is rotten & I refuse to help it along, I'm ore than able to do hard manual work as I've done it before such as farm work & removal of office stuff etc etc........

As towards working I refuse to do it & will take from the state as the tax I pay goes towards bad things & I want no part of it, I wish my life choice was so black & white as you put it.

 

[cowardescent]

I suppose suicide could be considered as the ultimate altruistic act which confers an evolutionary advantage to the gene pool as a whole if you're that way inclined. But for the individual, murder may be the better option...

Funny because people I've talked to speak nothing but ill of suicide. In fact, a lot view it in the opposite light i.e "suicide is the ultimate selfish act". When I told my dad I was planning on suicide, he was very angry. Don't think I've seen him that angry before

 

[F.U.B.A.R.]

Funny because people I've talked to speak nothing but ill of suicide. In fact, a lot view it in the opposite light i.e "suicide is the ultimate selfish act". When I told my dad I was planning on suicide, he was very angry. Don't think I've seen him that angry before

Yes, but that's looking at it from the perspective of society. I was referring to the evolutionary perspective where self destruction of 'faulty' genes could be considered an altruistic act for the good of the gene pool as a whole, rather than the individual.

 

[Captain.Heroin]

Funny because people I've talked to speak nothing but ill of suicide. In fact, a lot view it in the opposite light i.e "suicide is the ultimate selfish act". When I told my dad I was planning on suicide, he was very angry. Don't think I've seen him that angry before

Suicide is the literal opposite of selfishness. You will be literally less one whole self. Suicide is a selfless act. You are literally discarding yourself in the process.

You would have to explain to me, very elaborately, how suicide is "selfish" for me to believe that tripe.

 

[Captain.Heroin]

When I told my dad I was planning on suicide, he was very angry. Don't think I've seen him that angry before

What were you expecting, him to support your decision?

I'm not trying to be callous or rude but I'm well aware my pro-suicide/euthanasia opinions are not going to be taken well by someone else. Your dad likely spent the better part of one million US dollars to raise you, and invested a lot of time, effort, love and support into you. You can't seriously think he'd like hearing you talk about suicide.

I realize civil rights, i.e. the right to be gay, to have a gay marriage, to opt for euthanasia, abortion, etc. are so controversial that family often do not support these decisions. They cannot. How would you feel if your dad beat you to the punchline? Would you be proud of him or really fucking depressed?

He probably wasn't angry man he was probably really worried about you and why you'd bring up the subject.

 

[Xorkoth]

Suicide results in the loss of self, but selfless refers to something that is done with no thought to yourself, something for others at cost to yourself. I hesitate to call suicide selfish, because that is callous and I know it's a response to unbearable pain and I am not trhying to be judgmental, but it is certainly not selfless. It's prioritizing the ending of your own pain over the pain that your suicide will inflict on those you love. Because it will inflict pain on others, terrible, intractable, lifelong pain.

 

[Foreigner]

You can become selfless without suicide. Then you'll see that suicide is kind of pointless. Any activity (or non-activity) that shuts up the self, even for a short time, will bring relief. Suicide really is selfish in the true sense of the word... it's a self that's wanting to die, but the self is not "you". It's a wounded ego projection that you are believing so strongly in.

This is hard to explain. People who meditate will understand.