How to end / reduce suicide? hard mode: no labor-related

The reality is that suffering is a social phenomenon, and work is only a small part of it. Most people do not find their job terrible. Only a minority do. And of that minority, an even smaller minority truly has a shit life (in the developed world). Even then, the problems are still social, not economic. It is way way easier to be a lower class normalfag than a "rich" person with no friends, job or relatives, who is mentally ill.
Discuss this. Hard mode:
-no marxism and related stuff, or keep it to a minimum at least
-solutions must be "realistic" in a sense
-solution must be practical, public policy oriented
-must be semi-convincing to normies
I'd like to offer a "solution" but I can't, I am a sort of technocratic futurist myself, my views are unpalatable to almost everyone sadly

Attached: 3a4d3c8944366ef700c50931411d69ececca31a6f785a9b3a912031fdf007302.jpg (474x632, 51.41K)

Other urls found in this thread:

There is no solution in this hard mode, the alienation produced by our economic system spreads to all other facets of life so attempting to address such issues without considering labor is going to be a band-aid at best.

Destroy industrial technology.

Suicide is caused by depression which is caused by lack of meaning in existence. There is no future to look forward to in the neoliberal dystopia.

Simply put let the suicidal kill themselves. Anything otherwise would be the wrong way of doing things.


And why would you want to do that? If anything, certain people may be encouraged to suicide, and you have to of course vet people on psychological fortitude when assigning them on responsible roles.

Suicide is literally a natural and positive component of human society - stigmatized only because of some stupid mythological concepts of some desert-borne religions.

How is suicide even a bad thing? It eliminates the suffering if the individual involved, and it creates selection pressure against genes that predispose people to depression, lower happiness, mental illness, etc.

Attached: sufferingbrains.png (1400x650 39.39 KB, 228.01K)

LoL @ dumbass transhumanist doesn’t know suffering is not only just a chemical reaction
LoL @ dumbass transhumanist doesn’t know we will never understand how consciousness or happiness or suffering works

Pretty much. The western world has an epidemic of men whose lives are "objectively" okay – you're living in an apartment, you have a computer, a job, things are kinda boring but alright – though they're offing themselves anyways.

Reading an article now about rising suicide rates in the U.S. and the one state to see a decrease since 1999 was Nevada. Nobody seems to really know why, though one theory is that the state is more pro-active in preventing it and encouraging people to talk about it.

Apparently the national suicide hotline began there, as Nevada historically has a high suicide rate (a lot of lonely white guys in the desert with guns).

Go outside, get off social media for a few days and go for walks.
If you have any books, read them. They'll keep you occupied. Want to draw and doodle? Do it, you'd be surprised how cathartic it is.

One thing I do is try and organise D and D campaigns or quests. Looking for inspiration to build worlds, characters etc while planning your classes moves, spells etc actually helps take your mind off things.

Human interaction and movement will make you feel better.

Pursuing long-term activites, hobbies. Exercising regularly, have future things to look forward to. Make friends, people you genuinely like and put in high esteem. Acknowledge being gifted if you are. Develop creative skills.

i havent talked to anyone besides my parents (or doctor etc) in 10+ years
i never had an actual friend
i was always ostracized and ignored
i have extreme social anxiety and depression, social interaction is like mountain climbing for me
im 23 and no degree
I hate where I live, i do NOT want to go outside, super anxious about stuff from the past
i may or may not have a permanent injury/disability, have to wait for a doc
i do read books though, trying to get into philosophy and trying to educate myself on public policy stuff, thats my main goals for now, plus programming stuff

Reform the education system to move away from mass public schools and towards a pre-colonial style of schooling.

Attached: 529067._UY630_SR1200,630_.jpg (1200x630, 65.55K)

you're talking to us tho and I'm sure you talk to people online all day
have you ever actually tried
prove it
ok so practice anyway. there's nothing to loose by just interacting with people knowing that the stakes are only as high as you make them
degrees are meaningless so that's ok
bottling yourself up inside isn't going to make that any better; just go sit in a park and ask yourself how long you plan on letting memories control you. at least you'll be suicidal in the sun for a little bit
find a reading club. use your interest in books to interact with people about stuff that's not entirely you since that's difficult. you'll have to talk to people about that stuff (especially public policy obviously) at some point anyway so you'd might as well practice. it'll give you some purpose too.

Attached: virgin-transhuman-vs-chad-overman.jpg (960x401, 100.36K)

Then what do you think causes suffering? Magic?

Except that suffering being caused by materialistic mechanisms and chemical reactions within the brain is something that's actually testable. Do you think that the entirety of neuroscience is pseudoscience?

Building a 747 from scratch is not easy. But is it easier to:
• Start with the existing design of a biological bird,
• and incrementally modify the design through a series of successive stages,
• each stage independently viable,
• such that the endpoint is a bird scaled up to the size of a 747,
• which actually flies,
• as fast as a 747,
• and then carry out this series of transformations on an actual living bird,
• without killing the bird or making it extremely uncomfortable?
I’m not saying it could never, ever be done. I’m saying that it would be easier to build
the 747, and then have the 747, metaphorically speaking, upgrade the bird. “Let’s just
scale up an existing bird to the size of a 747” is not a clever strategy that avoids dealing
with the intimidating theoretical mysteries of aerodynamics. Perhaps, in the beginning,
all you know about flight is that a bird has the mysterious essence of flight, and the
materials with which you must build a 747 are just lying there on the ground. But you
cannot sculpt the mysterious essence of flight, even as it already resides in the bird, until
flight has ceased to be a mysterious essence unto you.
The above argument is directed at a deliberately extreme case. The general point is
that we do not have total freedom to pick a path that sounds nice and reassuring, or
that would make a good story as a science fiction novel. We are constrained by which
technologies are likely to precede others.

This is true. Suffering is, BY DEFINITION, a perception. Suffering while also not perceiving suffering is a complete contradiction. For suffering without perceiving suffering to make any sense, you have to completely change the definition of suffering.

Still not a problem in a post-Singularity future. If you did get shanked, you could potentially either have some kind of exoskeleton made from nanoengineered materials like graphene that is virtually impossible to damage, or have superhuman healing capabilities. Either way, your scenario almost certainly wouldn't happen.

Having a slave class is pointless if complete automation is achieved. If your scenario actually happened, and some elite group obtained that much power, they would probably just kill everyone off, rather than waste resources keeping them alive.

Read about David Pearce's philosophy. Suffering is ultimately caused by Darwinian biological design, and nature is full of retarded designs. With transhumanism, we could potentially design a better system that accomplishes the same things that pain does, but without suffering, such as the gradients of bliss proposed by Pearce.

Attached: eyeevolution.gif (1024x576 63.32 KB, 208.6K)

Enjoy Ivan hacking your robo-body.

As opposed to aging deteriorating your organic body?

Attached: aubreydegrey.jpeg (2048x1152, 596.2K)

That “graph” of human happiness is BS, not the post singularity, but the idea things were better in the serfdom days

…so you already know that pushing tyrosine and tryptophan like we currently "fortify" other vitamins would solve it, regardless of environmental conditions?
Enough precursor, and one can be happy in a god-damn concentration camp. Which is my plan, incidentally.

Read Industrial Society And Its Future

Attached: tedkaczynskigloweyes.jpg (555x414, 127.6K)

uncle ted was wrong about quite a few things

Ok prove it kiddo

ur mom

ted btfo

jesus christ if you asked those questions to a poor person you'd be accused of social darwinism
I always knew "marxists" were only reactionary Randians on the inside

Maybe, but he was probably mostly right about human psychology.

Not an argument

This sounds like a liberal-tier solutionto depression/depressive disorders but making a greater education system would go a long way. So much of people's self-identity and self-image is made in schools and is mad worse by pressure and the like. Not to mentions to bs "when you grow up you can be anything" shit.

lmao its 120 degrees with 12+ UV exposure

no thanks

His "most people lived in anarchy thorough history before the industrial revolution" is outright wrong. The peasants in almost every civilization were subjected to taxation, jurisdical power, possible conscription or mandatory work. Opening a history book makes it simple to see this, but the guy is blinded too much by his own ideology to see this.
No. Let's take for the sake of the argument as a fact the the lord is most of the time absent. In feudal europe you would hardly have been free from the church control, which had symbiotic relationship with feudal power. Apart from the church you could find for a lot of epochs different control organizations, sometimes local pseudo autonomus sygstems framed in a imperial structure or similar stuff.
I am not knowledgeable enough of the most archaic human societies to talk about them. But advanced tribe systems were often federated into social and cultural systems with strict rules and roles. For example the merovingian franks were "freeman" (frank means free man in their language) but had very strict rules about oaths, or livestock property, or war roles just to name some stuff. Also only the free warriors had some freedoms, the peasants could eat shit if they didn't have the possibility to buy military equipment
Ted's freedom is a "false freedom" in the sense that it appeals to vague irrational concepts to promote a worldview that forces you to surrend the current society for something that materially makes you live worse. An example of his fallacious way of thinking:
Let's make a similar reasoning, but with something considered less acceptable
The problem with these arguments are the same: they first cook up an impossible, but imaginable condition, then draw their own conclusion about it, making it sound reasonable.
This argument too is but a mere illusion. Ted doesn't take in account 1 the exploitative nature of capitalism, which injects into society a shit load of different tech stuff without responsible management, leading up to the state making patches when it is the technology that should be fixed. 2 the fact that technology often leads to extreme situation of taking freedoms away exactly because of capitalism. But ted tries very cleverly to link your neighbour annoying you with a lawnmawer to the gubmint spying you.
In the end ted was right about two things (also others but this post is getting too long) for sure: technology is NOT neutral and it is NOT an irreversible run towards "progress". Fr thw first point, the problem is that "technology" is such an abstract concept that it can't really be considered with clear pragmatic weight, it is neutral because of its shapelessness, while the real crafts of men ALWAYS reflect their minds. For example, p2p is communist technology, on the other hand, since technology can be lost or it can regress, we should defend it.
tl;dr: ted is full of shit

ah, thats why 99.99% of population is against birth licenses and genetic enhancement

so fucking what lmao that's gonna be the situation pretty much everywhere soon

Unironically go vegan, capitalist culture is depriving people of proper nutrition and health.

Attached: go stirner.png (500x500, 11.07K)

Did you even read his manifesto? He never claimed anything you’re arguing about. He only says that the industrial revolution put quite the pressure on both the environment and the human psyche.

I read almost all of his fucking books m8 I used to be a kekzynskite too, all I have talked about in that post is points he makes in the book, if you are such a retard to read some facebook images or whatever and then put the flag on and shitpost like a faggot than please kill yourself my man

He never mentioned anything about anarchy in preindustrial times, nor did he mentioned anything about tribes. Read ISaIF LARPer. You can also read his critique of anarcho-primitivism.

Ok fag I'll stop arguing with you since it seems you didn't read the exact same books you are recommending, books I used to read and study. I hope you either die or get some reading comprehension, because you are either in bad faith or dumb as fuck and read the book upside down or something

Force all people into modern day gulags to perform coerced labor and have a strong police force and security state that makes it impossible to commit suicide

We were talking about ISaIF. There’s nothing you talked about in ISaIF. Kill yourself.

Give people something they can serve that’s more important than themselves.

So become a slave?

A good majority of suicides are comitted by men these days, and the biggest reasons are divorce and the lose of children from said divorce. I suggest we make divorce outcome money/resources wise, based on how much that individual makes, with the person who makes more getting a higher percentage of the money/rescources afterwards. Because most women marry up this will discourage them from seeking divorce because there wouldn't be any gain out of it in many cases. I would also suggest awarding the children to the person who makes the most, for the simple fact she/he would have the most resources to raise the kid than the other parent.

Mate, most people don't become depressed over that.

By that logic so are psychopathic killers.

Because most sucides are done by people depressed over something they can get over. Now in cases like illnesses I'd agree, but most people aren't committing suicides because of that.

Because living as a soy boy, or as a mother who can't breastfeed their kid without help is so much better.

Attached: faf24ba48dc534a449b6459ef43a4bf9098b953078923810c4707a148458edee.png (686x767, 410.9K)

I agree, Hitler was a soy boy, another reason veganism shouldn't be.