material self-dismantle

[truth_seeker]

Hello everyone ..

quick question ...


Given that: a human being is only a collection of matter

Then what does it mean to say that it is bad for this collection of matter to dismantle itself? i.e. what is commonly referred to as committing suicide.

Imagine a group of arranged molecules ...
then there is no meaning in saying that the molecules as a group are good, but the molecules separated into their parts are bad.

What do you guys think?

Thanks.

[Esquilax]

Hello everyone ..

quick question ...

No, you're just JAQing off. The way you can tell the difference between a person actually asking a question and one "just asking questions" as part of a rhetorical stunt is that the former won't generally assume the shape of the answer with their question, whereas someone JAQing off will practically fill in the entirety of the answer with their own preconceptions, as you have. Case in point:

Given that: a human being is only a collection of matter

"Only"? No. Human beings differ from other collections of matter in that the matter they are made of is playing host to a self aware process we call consciousness. Which plays into part two...

Then what does it mean to say that it is bad for this collection of matter to dismantle itself? i.e. what is commonly referred to as committing suicide.

It is generally- though not in all cases- against the overall self interest of the conscious process that drives the matter. That's what makes it bad, in that there are more optimal paths to remedy what drove that mind to suicide that aren't the permanent full stop that suicide poses.

Imagine a group of arranged molecules ...
then there is no meaning in saying that the molecules as a group are good, but the molecules separated into their parts are bad.

Disruption of the conscious process, which has value in itself that is lost when the pieces fall apart. If you must, think of it like a computer: the pieces together can shuttle around electricity to power the processes and produce something that the pieces on their own cannot. The components torn apart are still the same pieces, but they lack an ability that they have when they're together. It's objectively less useful for a computer to be in pieces, if you cannot repair it or make it into something new.

[LastPoet]

Are you familiar with the old robot saying: "That does not compute!" ?

And welcome to the forum. Perhaps you should reformulate your question. A suicide usually does not dismantle the molecules, but ends the structural functionality of the body. The molecules themselves are only affected by the rotting process after such person died, by bacteria and the digestive processes of the bugs that eat that body, or in case of cremation, combustion.

Why do I feel your question is not honest?

[Ravenshire]

I don't believe suicide is either bad or wrong and as long as you're of sound mind, it should be your right to decide if life is worth continuing or not.

That being said, I do believe the well being of any loved ones you might have should be taken into account and dealt with before hand.

[truth_seeker]

Thanks guys for the quick reply

Sorry if it came across as JAQing or not honest. I'm genuinely trying to reach a world view that has internal consistency, hence my question.

I'll try to reformulate ...

A group of molecules is *only* a group of molecules. Whatever function or property (i.e. consciousness, "xyz"-ness, etc) we assign to them is merely descriptive or mental construct. That is, in the specific case of a human being, consciousness is matter. Its a descriptive name that we have assigned for a property of a group of molecules.

If we were to dismantle the group of molecules, of course they will lose whatever property we used to describe the aggregate. What I'm asking is why is this considered "bad" when the group of molecules is that of a human being?

I hope I was clear

[The Grand Nudger]

Bad in the moral sense of the word?  It's illegal....there's always that.

You planning something?  

[drfuzzy]

Thanks guys for the quick reply

Sorry if it came across as JAQing or not honest. I'm genuinely trying to reach a world view that has internal consistency, hence my question.

I'll try to reformulate ...

A group of molecules is *only* a group of molecules. Whatever function or property (i.e. consciousness, "xyz"-ness, etc) we assign to them is merely descriptive or mental construct. That is, in the specific case of a human being, consciousness is matter. Its a descriptive name that we have assigned for a property of a group of molecules.

If we were to dismantle the group of molecules, of course they will lose whatever property we used to describe the aggregate. What I'm asking is why is this considered "bad" when the group of molecules is that of a human being?

I hope I was clear

I think Esquilax, LastPoet, and The Gentleman Bastard have already answered this question beautifully.

[brewer]

Bad is a moral judgement. We going down the objective/subjective road again? Is it ultimate bad or sliding scale bad?

As far as the molecule angle, I feel that human life (most if not all life) is greater than the sum of its parts. The "dismantling" should not be taken lightly.

[truth_seeker]

Well, ofcourse the issue of suicide definitely has a moral angle to it. no doubt.

what I'm saying is that the computer analogy (ie hardware vs software) or the greater-than-its-parts idea does not change the fundamental nature of human beings as a collection of matter.

I guess what I'm trying to do is to whip up a rigorous grounding/explanation to help support a person thinking about committing suicide :/

[The Grand Nudger]

Don't waste your time with that, get help....and you can't get that kind of help here.