Gotzendammerung

We may ask, as a primary critical point : Is committing suicide - productive in any way whatsoever ? Objectively, we're forbidden to only one thing : legitimize unproductive behaviours (since "unproductive" = meaningless, purposelessness) I remember unexpectedly the the way that the german philosopher Schopenhauer was addressing this situation : according to his view, - one may be eager to commit suicide since, in his specific case, to "live" is became harder or less desired than to be dead. The tricky thing, here, is that the argument, framed in that way - consider the actual situation of the desperate person as a "dead-end", or should I say, to avoid every misconception : as a "Deus ex machina", like if his pain was definitely unredeemable. This convoluted conclusion suffer from the morally and judgmental paralyzed condition of the individual ; he seems to be no more able to thinks objectively, which means : to conceive his situation as a process, mindfully optimizable. This kind of "self-bankrupcy" is to be related to the procrastination illness, - where real intentions embodying the actual behaviour are concealed to oneself. Once the point have been reach where self-sabotage is no more useful as a strategy to avoid pain - the pressurized organism is hysterically looking for new ways to express or "somatize" its discomfort. To kill yourself, - when the degenerative process going on haven't been influenced by the aesthetic "allure" that suicide can represent in our deeply-troubled culture, - means only : all the available resources being exhausted, suicide (to be dead) is now perceptively equal to shitty life itself. For the one who have followed me until this point - you understand that my premise is not based on moral, but rather on biology. And of course, it seems to me that the "morality of suicide" can be also analyse from an psycho-evolutionary standpoint : our intimate spontaneous intuition that suicide is a "bad thing" may be conditioned by the environmental scarcity, which means that we need the participation of everyone in order to stay alive. The only substantive analyse to be conceded to a straightforward and pure moral vision of the problem is that, if we accept that as an sovereign individual you own yourself (which means only, as Noesis will put - that you control (still partially) your actions) - suicide can effectively appears as an act anti-property, a contradictory move, - in which you're destroying the means you refer yourself to motivate the action. But - what precede is only pure circular, or, should I say, auto-reflexive material which doesn't even recognize the active-objective bio-environmental patterns acting through this. So, of course - if it suits you, you can absolutely use it as an argument to comfort yourself in your "morally repulsive" perception of suicide, - but you've no rights to assume that its exhausts all the possibilities, all the factors contain in the problem, objectively speaking. As stupid people often criticize my own exuberant phyiosophic-style, saying : "It's just intellectual masturbation !", - here, I almost feel to claim that the logical critic of suicide is just hand-made auto-satisficing crap which mock the fact that suicide cannot be in any way some kind of "paradox" ; in fact, there are a lot of virtuous suicidal attempts, on which I can return and debate if my actual post is "granted" by the moderators ! (cliffhanger) (using psychology to bypass the unbearable intellectual prudery going on everywhere)