Humes Arguments Relating to the Lack of Wickedness in Suicide - Essay Example

On the Cogency of Hume’s Arguments Relating to the Lack of Wickedness in Suicide Table of Contents/Outline Introduction 4 Overview of Humes Arguments5 Weighing In On the Cogency of Hume’s Arguments 8 Conclusion 11 Works Cited 11 Introduction This paper weighs in on the arguments of Hume on the lack of wickedness he finds in suicide, judging from his definition of wickedness as something that contravenes ourselves, other human beings, or human duty or god. Hume concludes that suicide does not contravene any of those three categories, and the paper determines whether or not Hume’s argument above has cogency or not. This paper posits the thesis that there are some valid objections that can be made with regard to the overall logic and universal applicability of some of the arguments of Hume relating to suicide and its acceptability (Cholbi; Hume). Overview of Humes Arguments In essence Hume is arguing against Thomistic prescriptions against suicide on the theological grounds that suicide is violative of God’s order and is basically a way for man to take over God’s sole prerogative of determining when a man’s life should end. Theological arguments moreover posit how suicide is a sin, with the sinner making a very individual and private arrangement with evil, the devil himself. On the other hand, where the Thomistic position is that of suicide basically being against the will of God, Hume posits that suicide is one, not a contravention of the so-called “divine order”; that two, is it not a contravention of a person’s duties towards others; and three, that suicide is not a contravention of one’s duties to oneself. Of this latter assertion, Hume says that on the contrary, in cases of extreme pain, old age, infirmity and disease, living on may be more of a disservice to oneself than dying, and so it may be one’s duty to oneself, or of the observance of one’s duty to oneself, to choose to die. Death in these cases may be to the better interest of a person that continued existence on this earth With regard to people taking their own lives on whim, Hume posits that within men of healthy dispositions there is a natural aversion to death, and so there are natural mechanisms in place to make sure that when people choose life or death, they are doing so in the spirit of being true to their duty to themselves (Cholbi; Burton). With regard to Hume’s arguments that suicide does not contravene the will of God or the “divine order”, Hume posits three categories of arguments. One is with regard to causal laws that God made. In this regard Hume says that there are instances for instance when we contravenes against nature and natural causal laws, as in the case of calamities, and in the case of illness. It is not wrong to intervene with nature in the same way that God permits us to cure diseases, to form nature to our own purposes, and to generally do what does us good within the bounds of the powers that God gave us. In some instances it is in our best interest to intervene in nature to end our own lives, based on this same line of reasoning. Secondly, with regard to the laws of nature wiled by God, which reason allows us to discover for the purposes of securing our happiness, then certainly there are instances that it is reasonable to end our own lives, when such is in the spirit of procuring our better well-being and happiness, as in the case of extreme illness and irremediable distress. Thirdly, with regard to God’s consent, the universal principle that Hume applies is that in essence God consents to all of our actions, unless he decides to stop them, in which case suicide would not have been possible. If in the course of our lives we decide to end this life, then God must be cooperative of this decision, in the same way that he implicitly cooperates with all of our other actions by virtue of his implicit consent (Hume). Finally with regard to how suicide does not go against our duty to other people, Hume employes the principle of reciprocal benefit, and in the case where a person for instance is no longer of service or value to others, and is himself unable to care for his own self, then it becomes a virtuous act to end one’s life. Moreover, the principle of reciprocal benefit ends where on balance a person continues to benefit others and continues to exist in spite of great personal discomfort and great suffering, in which case the benefit is just one way, and therefore that man ceases to derive benefit from society. In this case then it doe snot contravene one’s duties to others to end one’s life, from the principle of reciprocally-derived value. Therefore, all things considered, and from these set of largely intellectual arguments that are based on principles of reciprocal value, self-interest, and rational appreciation of the implications of the natural laws and the will of God, Hume concludes that suicide is not an act of wickedness, and that one can therefore commit suicide without any sense of guilt or of personal blame for the act (Cholbi; Hume; Holden). Weighing In On the Cogency of Hume’s Arguments This paper weighs in on the lucidity, the logical merits, and whether the arguments by Hume have the power to persuade definitely and convincingly. This is what we mean by weighing on the cogency of Hume’s arguments, of whether the arguments above are cogent or not. There are certainly some arguments within the body of arguments presented by Hume in defense of suicide as an act that can be undertaken with no guilt. The literature notes that the perspective that Hume takes is that of a utilitarian, viewing the act of suicide from its utilitarian value to a person contemplating suicide. Looking at the arguments one by one, the arguments relating to suicide not contravening with one’s duty to others have some value, but looking at the counter arguments and the potential pitfalls of Hume’s arguments here, we can see some problems. For instance, there are cases where one’s inconvenience or sense of reciprocal value can be offset by larger concerns, for instance, concerns relating to important duties in life. A suicide can cause serious harm to the life of an infant for instance if a mother decides to take her own life. True, it may be that life is too difficult to bear for a mother for various reasons, such as that she may be sick, or that she may not be capable of financially supporting the child and may be at the end of her own life. That may be the case, but man is also capable of evading responsibilities when facing up to those responsibilities can be inconvenient, or cause great personal distress. Man is flawed in this way, and sometimes, character flaws, personality flaws, flaws in terms of owning up to a sense of responsibility, can get in the way of a man’s better senses. In this case too, it may be that a man’s sense of self-preservation may prevent him from owning up to his duties to others, for instance this child. On the other hand, we know from experience that human nature is sometimes depraved too, and weak, and that a man may too easily give up and take his own life, rather than being courageous in facing the difficulties of his life, and being there for a new child. The same may be said for instance for people who have serious responsibilities to others, such as the heads of families, whose first impulse may be to end their lives out of cowardice. Sometimes cowardice is as strong, or even stronger impulse than the instinct of self-preservation. In this sense too, reciprocal value may not be relevant as a consideration. One’s personal convenience, and the value that one derives from continuing to live, may be secondary to being there for others for instance. We see on the other hand cases of people who willingly sacrifice their own comfort, and their sense of safety and well-being, just to be there for others. On these grounds, on these aspects of human nature that are flawed and also noble, one cannot in conscience accept Hume’s arguments on suicide not contravening with one’s duties to others as wholly cogent (Hume; Cholbi). There are possible objections too, to Hume’s arguments relating to divine consent, in matters relating to all of human actions. Hume basically says that all actions are permitted, where there are no interventions from God to bar them. This is problematic too, in that this seems to be a justification for all kinds of other actions, including murder, inflicting harm on others, causing suffering and misery, not taking others into consideration when deciding on a course of action. Indeed, this sounds like a recipe for anarchy, and in the real world we know that one’s actions are to be taken in the context of how those actions either harm or benefit others. Intuitively too, all moral systems have principles that regulate what man can and cannot do to others. Man cannot kill in general, without punishment. Harming others is not good, even though God “permits” these actions. Surely silence on the part of God does not always mean consent? There is also free will, and responsibility for the consequences of one’s actions. On such grounds one cannot accept this set of arguments by Hume on God’s consent as a basis for saying that suicide is not wicked, and does not contravene the laws of God (Cholbi; Burton). Conclusion On balance one can say that some of Hume’s arguments have some logical validity, but that at least two of his arguments are logically flawed and are not cogent: one relating to one’s duties to others and the other relating to the notion of suicide not going against the will of God by virtue of the implicit consent that God gives to all of the actions of men (Cholbi; Hume). Works Cited Burton, Neel. “Can It Be Right to Commit Suicide?” Psychology Today. 22 May 2012. Web. 10 December 2014. Cholbi, Michael. “Suicide”. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2004. Web. 10 December 2014. Holden, Thomas. “Religion and Moral Prohibition in Hume’s “Of Suicide”. Hume Studies 31 (2). November 2005. Web. 10 December 2014. Hume, David. “Of Suicide”. Library of Economics and Liberty: Hume- Essays, Moral, Political and Literary. 2002. Web. 10 December 2014. Read More