The small steps that lead to dystopia | Hacker News Reader

The small steps that lead to dystopia

mindmatters.ai

17 pointsmomirlan17 comments

Open articleView on HN

> it rejects all that I hold sacred and true:

* that the preservation of human life is our highest moral ideal;

* that a principal purpose of government is as a protector of life;

* that those who fight to stay alive in the face of terminal disease are powerful uplifters of the human experience.

This is deranged or juvenile. Seeking to celebrate the suffering of others to satisfy moral whims. Hard to tell which.

Exactly, it's one thing to rail against 'suicide influencers' or whatever, but he seems bent on having others suffer through their final time, aided by whatever medical tools are available.

For example, many doctors have 'do not resuscitate' orders, to prevent some extreme 'life preservation' interventions being performed on themselves, because they know first-hand how awful they are for the patient.

If people are genuinely ready to go, capable of making that decision, free from coercion or influence etc, they should be allowed to, IMHO.

I see the author’s point. His friend’s suicide affected him greatly. However I think this is somewhat a selfish point of view. His friend based on his description sounds like they were truly suffering, and he is upset about how that made him feel.

I don’t know, maybe im reading it the wrong way.

This author is a ghoul who would rather Frances have lived trapped in neverending pain than have exercised the tiniest degree of autonomy, just for the sake of his half-baked aesthetic preferences. I'd rather have a worst enemy than a "friend" like this.

It’s certainly an emotionally and ethically challenging subject, but at the same time there a Godwin’s law vibe about declaring things you disagree with “steps that lead to to dystopia”. That’s not a mindset that lends itself to compassion.

Given the substance of your comment, you're not actually complaining about "Godwin's Law", as stated, but about "slippery slopes". And your point is good in the abstract, but in practice this slope is actually extremely slippery.

Canada has legalized medically assisted euthanasia, and we've already had cases of homeless people and chronically ill people seeking medical death due to hopelessness. We've had a government employee recommend assisted suicide to a military veteran who was just looking for a disability accommodation.

This is absolutely a case of "small steps that lead to dystopia", and we've witnessed these steps over the past few years. Economic and social conditions for specific demographics have become awful, and rather than trying to remedy those conditions, we're offering assisted suicide as an answer.

  From: KVORK, Inc.//NYCNET.89.09.63.53
  To: Multiple Recipients
  Subject: SPAM: Tired of life?

  Hello Friend,

  Has life become too impersonal, too tedious, too painful for you?
  Then now is the time to exert control, to make that decision which 
  is ultimately the only real choice we ever have: the decision to die.

  Some may describe this as an act of selfishness, but with the dwindling 
  reserves of natural resources throughout the world you're actually 
  contributing to the well-being of all those around you. A recent bill 
  passed by the United States Congress even authorizes a one-time payment 
  of c10,000 to your chosen benefactor upon passing away.

  So do yourself, your family, and your friends a favor and visit any one 
  of the KVORK, Inc. clinics in a neighborhood near you. We'll help you 
  make a difference -- quickly and quietly.

  Sincerely,
  Derek Schmitt
  Director of Development, KVORK, Inc.

I should have referenced the definition of Godwin’s law. It says that all internet arguments ultimately degenerate into referencing Hitler.

My point was not complaining about Godwin’s law, or about slippery slopes. My point was almost the opposite: the tendency to trot out ultimate, extreme ends in every disagreement. Hitler for Godwin, dystopia for others.

It’s not a persuasive argument in either framing. “You’re destroying civilization” is the rhetoric of someone who, like the author of the linked piece, can’t actually articulate why someone’s actions are wrong. Seriously, the piece never gets there. It’s a lot of legitimate, honest hurt tied up with “dystopia” as if that makes the position unassailable.

So apologies for being unclear, hope that’s a more cogent representation of my distaste for this style of argument.

Indeed. I was waiting for the twist where the article would point out how thoroughly dystopian a society that refused to even let people leave it would be, but I guess that part remains implicit.

Did the author consider the fact that his friend was living in their own, personal dystopia?

From this and other threads I am faced with the conclusion that Hacker News is shockingly pro-suicide. I want to present an alternative viewpoint, one which I thought was obvious, accepted and mainstream but which I am dismayed to find absent from these comments:

Suicide is the fatal symptom of a treatable disease. Death by suicide is no less tragic--and no more noble--than death by endocarditis, diabetic ketoacidosis, or a traffic collision.

If a loved one is killed by endocarditis, we do not criticize mourners' "somewhat a selfish point of view". If a loved one dies of acute diabetic ketoacidosis, we do not say "Did the author consider the fact that his friend was living in their own, personal dystopia?"

I cannot understand the mindset that views suicidal depression as unique among--or even absent from!--the set of deaths by disease. I find all these defenses of suicide to be perplexing and, frankly, revolting.

Suicide is not the conquest of autonomy over pain, but of pain over autonomy.

i think people reflect on what would be their choice faced with acute and incurable pain, like terminal cancer. depression, being curable, is not on top of people's minds. i doubt that any pro-suicide person would prefer suicide to treatment. that said, one was never prevented from committing suicide even before these laws came out. having it institutionalized is a cowardly way out.

> Suicide is the fatal symptom of a treatable disease.

Not all suicide is a result of depression.

In a medical technical sense, perhaps not, but I can't understand a definition of "suicide" which is voluntary and not forced by adverse circumstance. There is no sense applauding--nor deriding!--folks who succumb to adversity.

If I were of old age, living in constant pain, unable to do anything I wanted, wholly dependent on others, with no chance of improvment I would probably want to die. That's got little to do with depression and more to do with accepting the inevitable whilst having some choice in the matter.

A tangential question...

If someone is suffering from an incurable mental illness, and they want to commit suicide to absolve themselves from the pain and suffering, should we just be like "Ok, go do it" and be totally fine with it?

I don't know the answer, but my inkling is that is not the position that I would take.

Does that make me selfish?

To end someone's life is a personal decision.

If you agree with that, fine. However a doctor told me once that depression is a deadly disease. It is deadly because a depressed person can decide to commit suicide, but it is the depression that is talking. We should help depressed people and find a way to treat depression.

So if I were depressive and would think about committing suicide, I would try to get treatment first if I am able at all me being in the depths of depression.

For others this is a difficult line to thread for a bystander. If asked I would tell: Yes you are free to commit suicide but I suggest to treat mental problems like depression first.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com