(December 14, 2014 at 10:43 pm)FlyingNarwhal Wrote:(December 14, 2014 at 8:15 pm)bennyboy Wrote: I'm not. My point is that the actions we consider harmful to the self or others are ALL mediated by brain chemistry. They all involve influences beyond the direct agency of a consious person.
Why do people keep shifting the moral burden away from the one actually contemplating the act? Suicide is a violent act, and the person committing the act knows that they will leave victims behind. They have chosen to commit the act anyway, because the cessation of their own pain is more important to them than the prevention of suffering in others.
If knowingly acting in a way that will cause harm to others isn't unethical, then ethics is a meaningless term.
You're using the term 'victim' here pretty broadly, as in if someone makes another person feel bad, that person is now a victim. By that same logic, a gay person should deny their sexuality if there family isn't accepting of gay people, because it may hurt their family's feelings and make them victims. That gay person knew their family was against homosexuality, and decided to come out of the closet anyways. Fucking selfish....
That analogy is wrong, because the family should accept the person regardless of his sexual orientation. In the case of suicide, the people affected ought to feel hurt about the person dead and can't be blamed for it.
