Hacker News Reader

Comment by kranke155 | Hacker News Reader

I read that in some societies, if you ended up not being able to feed yourself, they would bring you to your favorite tree and leave you there.

If you ended back in camp you’d be welcomed. If you didn’t, that was your end. I found that remarkably comforting and peaceful.

View on HN

If you don’t make it back you would die of starvation and lack of water. These are some of the worst ways of dying. What do you find comforting and peaceful about it? The person has been abandoned by their community and could suffer terribly for days.

The idea is the tree is not too far from camp. It should hours not days to return. And I suspect they would check on them.

I have this childhood memory of my neighbour's dog, that grew old and one day decided to go out in the woods and die peacefully. They found it a few days later.

I wish to remain so lucid when the time comes, that I can go sit under a tree and let myself go like that old dog. Perhaps I should leave a note.

I always think of that scene from Donnie Darko - where he says when his dog got sick, she went to hide under the porch. “To die?” His therapist prompts him. “To be alone” he corrects her pointedly. [0]

That’s kind of what I want when I die too - I don’t think I want to be around other people when it happens. I want to have my final moments to face death on my own, without feeling like I have to perform for other people.

… that said, give me another 60 years to chew on it and maybe I’ll feel different.

[0] https://youtu.be/8j1IMBM-QyE?si=jfCe9YUvKW_t5m5e

Wow I’m the total opposite. I’m very annoyed to be around others most of the time, but upon dying I can’t imagine doing it alone or without the help of loved ones.

A lot of motivation to be risk averse with my physical body in this life comes from a desire to make it to old age. Furthermore, I instantly understood why having children was good when I realized that they are your insurance that you’ll (usually) have someone to help comfort you on your deathbed who is themselves still lucid.

Honestly that strikes me as a pretty fucked up and self-serving reason to have children.

You should have kids because you want to create new life, and support them as they become the best humans that they can be - not because you’re scared of dying alone.

Your worldview is even worse. At least I'm honest in my egoism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Better_Never_to_Have_Been

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benatar%27s_asymmetry_argument

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluntary_Human_Extinction_Mov...

> antinatalism, the philosophical position that coming into existence is always a harm

> a decrease in the human population would prevent a significant amount of human-caused suffering

Ridiculous. Without coming into existence there is nothing anyway - by that logic, coming into existence is always a pleasure too, it’s always a joy, it’s always a triumph and a fulfillment. Existence is always existence, nothing is always nothing. It’s a useless tautology.

If you’d rather be nothing then give up on living. I’m perfectly happy existing.

> I’m very annoyed to be around others most of the time, but upon dying I can’t imagine doing it alone or without the help of loved ones.

I'm the same but I'm trying to accept that while we are born among family, dying is a solitary journey.

(There is a saying along these lines, but search engines are utterly useless at surfacing it)

Or they'll treat you with a daily oil bath and feed you tender coconut water ... until few days later your kidney's blow out.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalaikoothal

I think people tend to underestimate the risks in allowing suicide —- here’s a blurb from the linked article:

However, social acceptance may lead to more egregious abuses: the issue gained a higher profile in early 2010, when an 80-year-old man escaped after discovering his intended fate and heard his family members discussing how they were going to "share" his lands, and took refuge in a relative's home.

Using exceptions to make rules is dumb.

Isn't it only exceptional because assisted suicide is relatively rare worldwide?

What has been described above is not suicide.

People also underestimate the risks in allowing sexual intercourse, driving a car, playing football and doing ice baths ...

That’s not suicide. That’s a conspiracy to commit murder.

Yes, and that is one of the reasons our culture has made practices like these taboo- it can give the veneer of respectability to despicable acts

And why there should be more nuance to the issue: legalizing suicide is not the same as legalizing assisted suicide.

I want to be free to die on my own terms. Conversely, I do not want the healthcare system to be allowed to even suggest it.

suicide already is legal -> if you succeed there's no one to prosecute so the question is just absurd. One can only discuss legality of attempted suicide.

You're assuming someone in shape to do it correctly. Someone who is choosing it for medical reasons might not have the strength and motor control, especially if they don't have access to suitable tools.

True, but the methods are quite gruesome.

The state tends to suppress methods which would be peaceful and effective, Such as Nembutal

The healthcare system should not be allowed to suggest it. And it should require an independent review if you request it. That doesn't mean the system shouldn't be allowed to provide it.

The healthcare system is financially incentivized to encourage you to do it. It must absolutely remain taboo for medical professionals to even think about the option.

> people tend to underestimate the risks in allowing suicide

People obsess over this risk. It—and religious opposition—are the reason it’s only an option for those who can travel to and hospice in Switzerland.

> social acceptance may lead to more egregious abuses

Do we have any evidence societies that have tolerated suicide had higher rates of murder? Switzerland doesn’t strike me as a hotbed of senior murder, for example.

Death from hunger (esp. when you're frightened and don't understand what's happening) is neither comfortable nor comforting

Fascinating that you think someone with dementia would be suffering more from hunger then from their condition sapping away at them.

If I was starving to death, the acute sensation of hunger would override everything else in my mind.

You ever hung out with someone in deep dementia ?

Unfortunately someone with advanced dementia does not know if she has eaten or not. Most of the time there will be no eating, unless someone else puts food in your mouth.

That wasn't the case with my father, who had a pretty good appetite up until his last few weeks.

That’s literally what it says in the story though. That it would only happen if the person won’t eat by themselves.

I'm sorry for your first-hand experience, but I also need to remind you that 1 first-hand experience does not translate well to the overall population of people experiencing dementia.

Why would they need to know whether they have eaten, or even what eating is? They would feel the sensation of gnawing hunger in their stomach, the same way a baby or animal does.

But seriously, how do you know that?

Neither you nor I know what the person with dementia is suffering from.

What you call "comforting" is leaving a helpless prison in the wilderness to succumb to thirst, hunger or predators

Thirst and hunger. They’re meant to die a peaceful death so pretty sure no predators involved.

Go to a dementia facility and hang out with your those people. You will see suffering.

My grandmother died of dementia.

If you think that "cannot feed themselves" is when a person is already completely gone and it's okay to "leave them under a tree to die of hunger and thirst", I've got news for you.

My mother has dementia, so maybe dementia just has different expressions and you shouldn’t generalise ?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com