Discussion What is the evolutionary reason behind suicidal thoughts?

[kirillbledny]

I often think about this. I get that depression or other mental illnesses aren't agents with goals, but I don't understand what the "point" of having a brain that can generate such thoughts is. If I kill myself, the depression dies along with my brain so what then? You'd think that because survival instinct is found in pretty much all living organisms, such a thought process shouldn't be possible. One thing I thought of is that since a lot of mental illnesses are hereditary, maybe it's a kind of natural selection (ie. someone like me with such shit mental health shouldn't reproduce and pass it on, so nature runs this suicidal ideation scenario to ensure survival of the fittest).

I'd love to hear your guys' thoughts on this, it's a very interesting topic to me and I'm interested in hearing different perspectives.

 

[lostinthecha0s]

The way my therapist describe it is a maladaptive survival response. If trapped with no way of survival, the brain is more likely to take itself out rather than let fate do the work. Like the 9/11 jumpers who didn't want to die in the collapse. However brains are flawed and sometimes can't tell the difference between fighting tooth and nail to survive or just a temporary issue.

Struggled with this personal issue since I was 10 and living in an abusive household, felt powerless to change the situation and felt death was the only way out. Now at 27 any minor inconvenience my first thought is "welp, this is it"

 

[imnotcreative]

I think because we are more intelligent and social animals than the rest, it can be a side effect of high emotional processing and just a byproduct of our intelligence. Since those things are good and overall do help with the survivability of the species, suicide as a derivative isn't large enough to cause our evolutionary systems to weed out those traits that can cause suicidal ideation in some people with different brain chemistry.

I could be wrong though so idk

 

[unluckysadness]

Very good question. As you, I think it may be some natural selection. Lethal diseases can also be considered like natural selection. Too much people on the planet = some people must die because they are dangerous for the planet ? It makes sense in a certain way...

 

[kirillbledny]

The way my therapist describe it is a maladaptive survival response. If trapped with no way of survival, the brain is more likely to take itself out rather than let fate do the work.

This is interesting, sometimes I think about people who live in real poverty or warzones, and I think... why not just end it? I have always thought that if a nuclear war happened, I'd want to go outside and die rather than trying to survive in a bunker eating drywall or whatever. Some people probably just have a very strong will to live, or maybe children/partners who they feel they have to fight/stay for.

Very good question. As you, I think it may be some natural selection. Lethal diseases can also be considered like natural selection. Too much people on the planet = some people must die because they are dangerous for the planet ? It makes sense in a certain way...

I agree. In a way I see suicide as the terminal stage of mental illness. Some people die of cancer, some people die of depression or other such ailments.

I think because we are more intelligent and social animals than the rest, it can be a side effect of high emotional processing and just a byproduct of our intelligence. Since those things are good and overall do help with the survivability of the species, suicide as a derivative isn't large enough to cause our evolutionary systems to weed out those traits that can cause suicidal ideation in some people with different brain chemistry.

I could be wrong though so idk

Yeah, this makes sense to me. If evolution was perfect, there would be no diseases because everyone with one would be taken out. It's like the appendix.

 

[124afun15]

It is more dysfunction than anything. Like asking "what is the evolutionary reason behind cancer"

Completely unnatural and fixable.

 

[pthnrdnojvsc]

evolution is true

but a 1 day old human has only a very few instincts. those are the only things put there by evolution. everything after a human is one hour old that they believe is taught or learned

a 1 day old human knows nothing not even that it is separate from the environment

consciousness and a sense of self develops only much later , after 18 months age a human gets a conceptual sense of self

only by about ages 7 to 9 years does a human fully understand the abstract concept of Death , that Death is certain , universal , irriversible , inevitable .

most adult humans however do not realize Death is also permanent (as in no afterlives , reincarnation , no multiverses, no other dimension as there is no evidence for any of these ) . no Death is not some kind of transition into another life. Death is actually the absolute end of a human for all time ,the complete obliteration of a human forever .in 1 trillion years it will be as if this horrible world, and DNA based life never existed in the first place .

added to these i also believe Death is imminent because time passes so fast, how fast did this year fly by, the last 5 years?

 

[kirillbledny]

It is more dysfunction than anything. Like asking "what is the evolutionary reason behind cancer"

Completely unnatural and fixable.

Well I'd have the same natural selection argument for cancer or any other illness. Any kind of medical intervention is going against nature. Obviously I'm not arguing we should therefore let people die and suffer just because the illness is natural. You're probably right that I'm trying to find something rational about it, when it just happens, like a tsunami or tornado.

 

[Forever Sleep]

I suppose it's still only a small percentage of the entire population. Plus- some people with depression and ideation still choose to reproduce or- they develop symptoms after becoming parents.

I wonder if most humans have the capacity to develop depression under the right or rather- wrong circumstances. We're living very abnormal lives when you consider our origins.

Zoo animals can exhibit signs of anxiety and depression. We don't diagnose them as being mentally ill though- at least, not initially. We recognise that they are being forced to live in stressful and unnatural environments. So- how much of it really is 'illness' compared to an understandable reaction to our modern environment?

I know what you mean though. I've felt that way about depression. What goal does it serve? Why does it survive in the gene pool? But then- we survive outside of the animal kingdom in a way. We've found 'cheats' to conceive, cheats to evade death.

Whereas the 'weakest' are left to die or are even attacked in the animal kingdom- comparitively speaking, we support 'weak' or ill humans with benefits, healthcare etc. It's almost like we're nurturing ailments in a way. Even when I was a child, there wasn't so much spoken about about mental illness. There would be one or two children with learning difficulties. One or two bullies but, not much was spoken about the causes. It's almost celebrated now.

I've seen YouTube videos where they break down the word: 'depressed' into 'deep rest'. Saying that depression is the way the mind/ body copes with being overloaded. But then- obviously, prolonged isolation probably isn't healthy either. So, maybe what starts out as a healthy coping mechanism goes wrong.

The point being though that depression and ideation isn't necessarily fatal. Especially not with the (relatively) easy availabilty of food, shelter, medicine. So, I suppose it survives long enough for some people to pass it on, through procreation.

I also wonder what our environment is doing to us. I believe they found links with leaded petrol and reduced IQ in former generations. We are breathing and injesting toxins all the time. It wouldn't surprise me if that was affecting our brains/ how we develop in the womb too.

 

[Forveleth]

I do not think this is some sort of natural selection or evolutionary mechanism or outcome. Suicide is what happens to individuals when they are pushed past a mental breaking point. It is the result of a profound hopelessness about ever having any slight positivity in the future. While it has somewhat to do with mental illness, research is finding that the biggest factor in suicidality is social connection and support systems.

I think this is one of those things that extends far beyond nature as a result of the human mind becoming so evolved and high level that it ends up with circumstances that the rest of nature never faced before and has no mechanism built around.

 

[kirillbledny]

I do not think this is some sort of natural selection or evolutionary mechanism or outcome. Suicide is what happens to individuals when they are pushed past a mental breaking point. It is the result of a profound hopelessness about ever having any slight positivity in the future. While it has somewhat to do with mental illness, research is finding that the biggest factor in suicidality is social connection and support systems.

I think this is one of those things that extends far beyond nature as a result of the human mind becoming so evolved and high level that it ends up with circumstances that the rest of nature never faced before and has no mechanism built around.

Yeah it's definitely a multitude of factors and it's hard to say what it is exactly. I think that modern society definitely contributes to it, some statistics from the UK show that 1 in 5 Brits are on antidepressants. Then again, there has been a lot of stigma against mental illness in the past, so is it that people are really more depressed now than 100-200 years ago, or do we just talk about it more openly now? People (in the West) used to be more religious, which automatically provided them with a community of like minded people who would support them through crises, everything is very individualistic now - "don't trauma dump to your friends, pay a therapist to listen to you instead."

 

[bl33ding_heart]

Intelligence is just the natural cause of suicide ideation. The more intelligent one is the more capacity one has to suffer. Humans naturally experience emotional suffering to a significantly higher extent than any animal. Because our intelligence is vastly different than that of an animal, and almost all animals run merely off of instincts. Humans are more suicidal than any creature in existence. Self harm and even suicide has been reported in few animals. But not even close to the extent it is in humans. Because almost all animals just aren't sentient enough to experience emotional pain in the way a human would.

 

[Fadenself00_]

Modern society is so vastly different from everything that came before it.
I would say it's best to think about, how, because most of the things leading to suicide are due to very complex, modern issues, we are currently going through evolution/natural selection.

 

[jdogg60]

Not being able to easily shake off trauma like a deer does after the freeze response, has something to do with it I think. Our complex minds enable us to survive better as a species with technology, but the trade-off is a disruption to that more primitive instinct.

 

[kirillbledny]

Not being able to easily shake off trauma like a deer does after the freeze response, has something to do with it I think. Our complex minds enable us to survive better as a species with technology, but the trade-off is a disruption to that more primitive instinct.

I think there's definitely something to this. When I was looking for EMDR therapy for trauma, the basis of it is that traumatic memories are stored in a different way than regular (even bad memories) are. They compare it to a wound that still has something in it, preventing it from closing and healing normally, and instead staying open and causing painful experiences (such as flashbacks with PTSD).

 

[FluffIsJustice]

I think of it more like an unintended side effect that didn't go badly enough to ruin the entire population and so it just keeps floating around. In biology, there are quite a few things that don't make sense and cause problems but persist simply because it's not bad enough to ruin the species. (as an example, the poor female hyenas who have to give birth)
Additionally, maybe I'm mentioning something unnecessary, but survival of the fittest originally meant that the most well-adapted survive, not the strongest (that is more of a cultural interpretation I think?) and here humans are completely outside the box since we change our environment to suit us instead.
From an evolutionary theory perspective I think I remember it partly being something like - a natural way to deal with individuals who were exiled from the main group and as such will die soon due to predators anyway, but I'm not sure I remember it correctly.

 

[AreWeWinning]

If you're really interested in the evolutionary reasons, you might want to take a look at this paper: A Mathematical Model of Evolutionary Pressures Regulating Self‐Preservation and Self‐Destruction (Denys de Catanzaro, 1986)

In short, the theory is that longevity, survival, and self-preservation are not the primary goal of a living organism. The primary goal is reproduction. If an organism's reproductive value is zero, or close to zero, survival in itself has no purpose. (Edit: I use the words "goal" and "purpose" here to describe the organism's central function from an evolutionary perspective, not in a philosophical sense to describe the purpose of life.)

Most of the comments here, and most people in general, try to look at suicide from the perspective of the individual, like self-preservation, the amount of pain the individual can endure, etc. But from an evolutionary perspective, and in terms of the survival of the species, these are secondary. The primary objective is the survival of the species. Survival of the individual and self-preservation are useful only as long as it aids reproduction and the creation of new generations.

Where it gets interesting is when we also start to consider family relationships. At the end of the day, survival of the species = survival of the genes and certain traits encoded in those genes. Close family members share a large portion of their genes. So if I can help a family member survive, that also means some of my genes survive too, since our genes are highly similar. This is why helping and supporting a close family member is a very strong motivator to carry on and survive. The closer the relationship, the stronger the motivation. E.g. parents fight to survive so that they can support their children. Siblings support their nieces and nephews, etc. On the other hand, if the individual has no close family relationships and their reproductive value is zero, there is no reason for them to live anymore.

The paper even has a mathematical formula for the whole thing (click to enlarge):

---

This is also why hopelessness, burdensomeness, or social rejection can trigger suicidal behaviour. To put it bluntly, if I'm not going to have kids, and I'm a burden to my family, then the species is better off if I'm dead. I'm doing others a favour by killing myself. Well, that isn't how most suicidal people feel, but from an evolutionary perspective, that's what nature is trying to say.

This is just a simplified version of the whole idea, of course. The paper is much more detailed.

The way my therapist describe it is a maladaptive survival response. If trapped with no way of survival, the brain is more likely to take itself out rather than let fate do the work. Like the 9/11 jumpers who didn't want to die in the collapse. However brains are flawed and sometimes can't tell the difference between fighting tooth and nail to survive or just a temporary issue.

I think the 9/11 jumpers were trying to escape from the flames, not from the potential collapse of the building. They weren't committing suicide. By jumping, they had a higher chance of survival than being burned alive, and that's why they probably jumped.

 

[kirillbledny]

If you're really interested in the evolutionary reasons, you might want to take a look at this paper: A Mathematical Model of Evolutionary Pressures Regulating Self‐Preservation and Self‐Destruction / Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 1986

In short, the theory is that longevity, survival, and self-preservation are not the primary goal of a living organism. The primary goal is reproduction. If an organism's reproductive value is zero, or close to zero, survival in itself has no purpose.

Most of the comments here, and most people in general, try to look at suicide from the perspective of the individual, like self-preservation, the amount of pain the individual can endure, etc. But from an evolutionary perspective, and in terms of the survival of the species, these are secondary. The primary objective is the survival of the species. Survival of the individual and self-preservation are useful only as long as it aids reproduction and the creation of new generations.

Where it gets interesting is when we also start to consider family relationships. At the end of the day, survival of the species = survival of the genes and certain traits encoded in those genes. Close family members share a large portion of their genes. So if I can help a family member survive, that also means some of my genes survive too, since our genes are highly similar. This is why helping and supporting a close family member is a very strong motivator to carry on and survive. The closer the relationship, the stronger the motivation. E.g. parents fight to survive so that they can support their children. Siblings support their nieces and nephews, etc. On the other hand, if the individual has no close family relationships and their reproductive value is zero, there is no reason for them to live anymore.

The paper even has a mathematical formula for the whole thing (click to enlarge):

View attachment 207712

This is also why hopelessness, burdensomeness, or social rejection can trigger suicidal behaviour. To put it bluntly, if I'm not going to have kids, and I'm a burden to my family, then the species is better off if I'm dead. I'm doing others a favour by killing myself. Well, that isn't how most suicidal people feel, but from an evolutionary perspective, that's what nature is trying to say.

This is just a simplified version of the whole idea, of course. The paper is much more detailed.



I think the 9/11 jumpers were trying to escape from the flames, not from the potential collapse of the building. They weren't committing suicide. By jumping, they had a higher chance of survival than being burned alive, and that's why they probably jumped.

Thank you for the answer, it's very interesting and I'll look into the paper more! This explanation does make a lot of sense. People don't like when you say that reproduction is the entire purpose we're alive, but it's true. It just so happens our brains are developed enough to also study physics or space, or ponder the meaning of life.

 

[notthatclever]

A serotonin stripped brain.. add extreme environmental factors and ta da.. you have suicide.. but a serotonin stripped brain can survive in a hope filled environment.. I think bad environmental factors are more of a contributor than just serotonin alone.. you know what they say.. you can't stick a plant in the dark and expect it to grow..

People need some sort of light at the end of the tunnel in order to keep going.. and if there is none they'll make their own.. just the light is suicide.. a lot of suicides get really happy before they die..

Because they know an end to all the pain and hopelessness is coming..

You ever see the video.. of the patient that barges in the therapists office.. the therapist is sitting there with a friend.. and all the sudden an random patient shows up and say hey doc I don't need you anymore I'm cured I feel great and then slams the door and runs off.. the therapists friend says well That's good you must have cured them.. and then the therapist says.. actually no that's a really bad sign I have to make a phone call..

That's either a bipolar in a manic state or a person about to commit suicide..

Just a heads up.. Don't get super excited about it to your shrink if you're serious about ctb.. people do that in an effort to think they're slick..

That or they're full blown manic and think they're cured and that they've cured cancer all in the same day.. which a totally different thing..

Manic depressive or bipolar are actually a lot more likely to commit suicide and get it done.. but not when they're manic.. they feel too good.. it's when they crash and burn..

Whereas the "cured" suicidal person.. they're trying to get everybody off the scent.. but until you have a few failed attempts its takes practice to get good at that..

So it's a really sloppy attempt at trying to make everybody think nothing is wrong and nothing will happen..

And Doctors and shrinks be knowing that's probably the happiest they've felt in like years too..

There is a strange euphoria around being suicidal when you're getting close..

As for me.. I've had happy moments in life.. things and events in life that were happy and I guess I felt that way.. but I've never had just a homeostasis of being generally happy.. or feeling even normal..

Ive had more normal times in life.. but it was always with an assload of stress.. but there was hope or what seemed like hope at the time..

The last decade though can go fuck itself..

My life was relatively normal in ways up until about 35 or so..

And I maintained normal for a while but after my last ex.. I mean he's done nothing but rip my life to shreds.. and the current loser isn't far off from him..

And the world caters to them because the American south is a misogynistic trash dumpster fire..

I'm giving it all one last good solid shot.. and as I've said before I don't mind things being hard I just mind them not working out..

I gave this place a solid shot. It just kept getting nowhere.. everywhere I turned.. that gets old.. add a shitty stupid relationship on top and I'm over it..

But if the next place doesn't work out.. I mean how much am I expected to suffer because they aren't getting it..

And they just aren't.. they aren't getting it..

And still.. I'll have to find some brutal gruesome way to off myself if it comes to that..

Suffer to the brutal end and for what.. because they're too stupid to figure anything in life out..

It really is.. at what point do they fuck off now.. like now..

I just broke up with my boyfriend officially today.. it's been half way done for some time but he's been in denial and I can't be polite about it anymore.. and I know all he does is talk shit about me behind my back..

I have no idea why he's been in so much denial.. no idea why he begged and cried for me to stay when I was leaving two months ago.. it makes no sense..

Why bed and cry for somebody to stay when all you're going to do is turn around and not change at all and just talk shit about me to everybody else behind my back..

He really was banking on the day I had enough never coming.. he did not handle it well..

I mean why be with somebody if all you're going to do is talk shit behind their back all the time..

And I'm sure he twisted and warped the truth.. to his favor.. as if with who he is that wasn't obvious hes that type to begin with..

He's just a piece of shit.. at the end of the day.. and if I stay much longer I will kill myself..

That's a bad way to be suicidal.. to be romantically involved with somebody and they make you so miserable you're ready to jump off a damn bridge because they're such a fucking c*nt..

I'm not suicidal to stay together.. I'm suicidal to end it..

Oh myyy gooood he's such a fucking bitch..

I mean haaaate him..

 

[sifp]

I suppose it's still only a small percentage of the entire population. Plus- some people with depression and ideation still choose to reproduce or- they develop symptoms after becoming parents.

I wonder if most humans have the capacity to develop depression under the right or rather- wrong circumstances. We're living very abnormal lives when you consider our origins.

Zoo animals can exhibit signs of anxiety and depression. We don't diagnose them as being mentally ill though- at least, not initially. We recognise that they are being forced to live in stressful and unnatural environments. So- how much of it really is 'illness' compared to an understandable reaction to our modern environment?

I know what you mean though. I've felt that way about depression. What goal does it serve? Why does it survive in the gene pool? But then- we survive outside of the animal kingdom in a way. We've found 'cheats' to conceive, cheats to evade death.

Whereas the 'weakest' are left to die or are even attacked in the animal kingdom- comparitively speaking, we support 'weak' or ill humans with benefits, healthcare etc. It's almost like we're nurturing ailments in a way. Even when I was a child, there wasn't so much spoken about about mental illness. There would be one or two children with learning difficulties. One or two bullies but, not much was spoken about the causes. It's almost celebrated now.

I've seen YouTube videos where they break down the word: 'depressed' into 'deep rest'. Saying that depression is the way the mind/ body copes with being overloaded. But then- obviously, prolonged isolation probably isn't healthy either. So, maybe what starts out as a healthy coping mechanism goes wrong.

The point being though that depression and ideation isn't necessarily fatal. Especially not with the (relatively) easy availabilty of food, shelter, medicine. So, I suppose it survives long enough for some people to pass it on, through procreation.

I also wonder what our environment is doing to us. I believe they found links with leaded petrol and reduced IQ in former generations. We are breathing and injesting toxins all the time. It wouldn't surprise me if that was affecting our brains/ how we develop in the womb too.

I've often had that same thought about nurturing and celebrating illness weakness etc. I too have wondered if medicine is making the human gene pool worse leading to a lower quality of average life. I know that this sound kind of eugenics adjacent but the thought comes more from a place of compassion than from building a superior human race or whatever. If we are keeping humans here that would have perished in our natural environment we are artificially injecting harmful material into the gene pool that will lead to worse lives for our progeny.

 

[Intoxicated]

If I kill myself, the depression dies along with my brain so what then? You'd think that because survival instinct is found in pretty much all living organisms, such a thought process shouldn't be possible.

I don't believe in survival instinct. The main drives in human behavior are wanting to achieve pleasure and wanting to avoid discomfort. In many situations, these drives help us survive (e.g., hunger motivates us to take food), but there are notable exceptions when this rewarding system works in the opposite way, demonstrating its imperfection. In particular, 1) destructive addiction to some pleasures such as getting high from consuming heavy drugs is what reduces the chances of survival, 2) overly annoying physical or mental discomfort can motivate us to get rid of it by means of killing ourselves.

If you're really interested in the evolutionary reasons, you might want to take a look at this paper: A Mathematical Model of Evolutionary Pressures Regulating Self‐Preservation and Self‐Destruction (Denys de Catanzaro, 1986)

In short, the theory is that longevity, survival, and self-preservation are not the primary goal of a living organism. The primary goal is reproduction. If an organism's reproductive value is zero, or close to zero, survival in itself has no purpose.

I don't like such teleological thinking. It's like saying that the goal of the Earth is to orbit the Sun. Goals or purposes are subjective categories, which are totally unnecessary for describing the statistical laws about survival of species. In particular, the idea that "premature" death of some individual organisms can increase the chances of collective survival may be worded without resorting to teleological language.

 

[kirillbledny]

I've often had that same thought about nurturing and celebrating illness weakness etc. I too have wondered if medicine is making the human gene pool worse leading to a lower quality of average life. I know that this sound kind of eugenics adjacent but the thought comes more from a place of compassion than from building a superior human race or whatever. If we are keeping humans here that would have perished in our natural environment we are artificially injecting harmful material into the gene pool that will lead to worse lives for our progeny.

I agree with this view, I thought it for a long time. I don't think it's really eugenics, I'm not arguing for disabled/mentally ill people to be castrated, but a lot of illnesses or diseases are hereditary. Sometimes it also ends up being a bad situation for everyone involved.

I know a couple who are both blind since birth. They decided to have a daughter, and she is sighted. What happens now is that at 9yo she's tasked with getting groceries, helping them buy clothes, etc, they cannot properly help her with homework and other problems. She's put into a role of a carer even tho she's supposed to be a child.

 

[lostinthecha0s]

I think the 9/11 jumpers were trying to escape from the flames, not from the potential collapse of the building. They weren't committing suicide. By jumping, they had a higher chance of survival than being burned alive, and that's why they probably jumped.

I didn't say they were committing suicide, I said they jumped as to not die in the collapse. If you're 90 stories up your chances of survival are slim but our brains will take that escape over sure death. Not that in a normal situation it's a rational choice that someone would make

 

[memento-mori]

some animals kill themselves but it's very rare
there are cases of animals stopping to eat, stopping to groom/take care of themselves and self harming because they're unhappy or stressed

 

[fadedghost]

multiverses

there's also no evidence against it, exactly. just because many conceptualize this incorrectly doesn't mean there isn't a multiverse

 

[wuthering_heights]

There isn't. Evolutionary psychology is a psuedoscience that takes things that can better be explained through historicism and treats them as near-eternal aspects of human biology.

 

[ardea]

something to keep in mind is that evolution does not push for a species to become "better". there are lots of things that can affect it, but the main driving factor is probability of reproduction. if a trait increases the likelihood of an organism reproducing, it is more likely to be passed on. evolution doesn't care about anything that happens after reproduction (think about all those insect species that die immediately after reproduction).

to break this down, we should identify what trait in humans allows for suicidality. the obvious difference between us and other animals is a higher cognitive capacity. to decide to kill themself, one must:
1) understand that they can die
2) understand that dying would rid them of strife
3) understand that they can take deliberate actions in order to ensure that they die

increased cognition is, in the vast majority of cases, conducive to survival and reproduction as it allows for better problem solving. therefore, it is selected for in humans. other animals don't have our level of cognitive ability because evolution doesn't push for perfection, it pushes for "good enough". a side effect of increased cognition is that it allows for points 1 and 2, and helps with point 3 (other animals have future planning as well). the increase in the probability that a human survives to pass on their traits caused by increased cognition far surpasses the effects of suicide, so the side effect of suicide being possible doesn't make a difference.

to focus address other animals with relatively high cognition, while some can recognize death and grieve for others that die (take elephants, for example), there is no evidence to suggest that they understand that it can and will happen to them. animals live in the present and take things at face value.

 

[AreWeWinning]

I don't like such teleological thinking. It's like saying that the goal of the Earth is to orbit the Sun. Goals or purposes are subjective categories, which are totally unnecessary for describing the statistical laws about survival of species. In particular, the idea that "premature" death of some individual organisms can increase the chances of collective survival may be worded without resorting to teleological language.

I see what you mean. I just used that word because it's easy to understand and gets the point across. I wasn't thinking about it in a philosophical sense. I edited my comment and added the following clarification: 'I use the word "goal" here to describe the organism's central function from an evolutionary perspective, not in a philosophical sense to describe the purpose of life.'

I didn't say they were committing suicide, I said they jumped as to not die in the collapse. If you're 90 stories up your chances of survival are slim but our brains will take that escape over sure death. Not that in a normal situation it's a rational choice that someone would make

Yes, I agree: people jumped because even a slim chance of surviving a jump is better than sure death. However, this is not what you said in your previous comment. :) You said "the brain is more likely to take itself out rather than let fate do the work", which is by definition suicide and not what happened when people jumped from the buildings after the 9/11 attacks.

I get what you're trying to say: when people face a hopeless situation or a serious personal issue, they see no way out and perceive suicide as a possible solution to the problem. It's a maladaptive response, because people do it to solve the problem, while in fact it's not a good solution. It's also maladaptive because people often think about suicide even if the situation is solvable and not especially serious.

These are valid points; I just don't think the people who jumped from the buildings after 9/11 are a good example. Theirs was a genuine survival situation, not a maladaptive response. They jumped because the flames were burning the clothes off their backs and they had no choice.

 

[Forever Sleep]

I've often had that same thought about nurturing and celebrating illness weakness etc. I too have wondered if medicine is making the human gene pool worse leading to a lower quality of average life. I know that this sound kind of eugenics adjacent but the thought comes more from a place of compassion than from building a superior human race or whatever. If we are keeping humans here that would have perished in our natural environment we are artificially injecting harmful material into the gene pool that will lead to worse lives for our progeny.

I know what you mean. I suppose it would be quite difficult to implement though. Which hereditary traits do we choose to stamp out? Should some people be prohibited from having children? If only we had a crystal ball to at least figure out whether a child would end up with a decent quality of life. I do know what you mean though. Eugenics has such awful connotations but then- like you say- so many people must be born to pretty much inevitably suffer.

 

[sacrilegeofsouls]

evolution is true

but a 1 day old human has only a very few instincts. those are the only things put there by evolution. everything after a human is one hour old that they believe is taught or learned

a 1 day old human knows nothing not even that it is separate from the environment

consciousness and a sense of self develops only much later , after 18 months age a human gets a conceptual sense of self

only by about ages 7 to 9 years does a human fully understand the abstract concept of Death , that Death is certain , universal , irriversible , inevitable .

most adult humans however do not realize Death is also permanent (as in no afterlives , reincarnation , no multiverses, no other dimension as there is no evidence for any of these ) . no Death is not some kind of transition into another life. Death is actually the absolute end of a human for all time ,the complete obliteration of a human forever .in 1 trillion years it will be as if this horrible world, and DNA based life never existed in the first place .

added to these i also believe Death is imminent because time passes so fast, how fast did this year fly by, the last 5 years?

I think even more adults don't understand that wether Death is permanent or not has no answer we do not know if it is permanent or not there is no evidence for God there is no evidence against him either it is not something you can prove or disprove it's a possibility
To try to speak with certainty on a matter so vague and impossible to know is a fools errand the only wise choice is to acknowledge that we have no idea what comes after death