Project Reason is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit foundation devoted to spreading scientific knowledge and secular values in society. The foundation draws on the talents of prominent and creative thinkers in a wide range of disciplines to encourage critical thinking and erode the influence of dogmatism, superstition, and bigotry in our world.
Haven’t you ever been of two minds about something, Bruce? Is any human personality internally consistent?
For the self-deception of compartmentalization to work you have to be able to deny the inconsistencies of that compartmentalization, so believers tend to be pretty good at denial—at least that kind of denial. Sometimes if you can’t help but see it in someone else, that’s both too obvious and too close to home, so it offends the whole plausibility structure, and that can be threatening.
Also, Bruce, I don’t see human psychology as being necessarily amenable to what you suggest. Or is it possible that most people are so secure in their opinions, ideas and arguments that they’d commit suicide just because some rhetorical logic indicated its inevitable need? Aren’t people more complex than that? To attempt a bit of Nhojian analysis, we’re all inundated with nyeep flow pretty much any time we’re awake, aren’t we? How do we control where all of those nyeep arrive from, especially for those individuals who’ve had a truly chaotic upbringing, such as the author of the essay? Some nyeep might arrive via terribly damaged (psychologically) areas of neurocognition. You can be sure they won’t all arrive in logical alignment with each other, and they might extend their stay at unexpected times—enough time to write a creative essay at least. An inherent positive attitude—optimism—can allow a person to live a fully satisfying life, but a ton of nyeep may need to be redirected for such an outcome, which is not always possible to manage. Nyeep flows can rise and fall with changes in mood and circumstance. Nyeep can be persuasive even if you know they don’t actually add up to anything that you agree with philosophically.
For instance, although I’m not a theist philosophically speaking, I grew up in a largely theistic society and was in fact a practicing Christian for most of my adult life. Plus I attended Parochial schools from 1st through 4th grade, certainly a formative time. As a result of all the wayward nyeeps contained within my head, I can’t imagine ever committing suicide. I can’t explain exactly why, except that that’s the way I’m wired up as a result of my upbringing and early adult ways of looking at things. I’m stuck with what I have.
I don’t know if this makes any sense, Bruce. Do you see what I’m saying, though?
I think this is making it more complicated than I intended. I’m simply saying that existing is better than not existing. I’m glad I have the experience of my nyeep pools and flows. If I decide that my nyeeps are so rotten that it’s better to cease to exist, so be it. But at least I have that chance and choice. The author we are discussing wanted to go back and wipe herself out ab initio (legal term), so that she would have never existed. I find that disingenuous, at best. My simple point was that if she despises her own existence so much, then prove it by eliminating herself. But she won’t do that, because in fact she values her existence, thus undermining her entire argument. I don’t want her to kill herself, but that’s the logical choice if she thinks her existence is so rotten. She obviously doesn’t really believe what she’s saying.
You’re missing the point of the essay, or maybe you didn’t read it. She doesn’t despise her existence. She states that right up front. She recognizes that her mother’s life would have been better if she’d had an abortion. She also recognizes that if her mother had aborted her, she herself never would have known the difference and would therefore be no poorer for it.
You say she’d miss living as if it that were a bad thing, yet when pressed you admit that every hypothetical being that never existed missed living in the sense of “miss” you’re using. Missing in that sense is meaningless, isn’t it? It’s a red herring, albeit an effective one in the sense that it completely sidetracked the debate. Lawyer.
I guess I don’t understand what positive effects you’re referring to or who the others are with respect to this author, or which community, or which burdens. Or why it would make any difference if she’d never existed. Your comment is pretty vague.
That may be because you’ve been shifting context between her mother and the community, and between individuals’ behaviors functioning as burdens that ultimately contribute to the overall health of the community and some sort of responsibility to provide those burdens specifically ... things like that.
If I’ve been shifting context it’s only because I still don’t understand what point you’re trying to make.
You accuse the author of being self-aggrandizing and dogmatic with a poor understanding of people and community. I think she hit the nail on the head. I think you’re the one with a poor understanding of people and community—at least, people and communities outside your own.
The world would not be a darker or poorer place without me. Actually, in terms of contributions to the world, I am a net loss. Everything that I have done – including parenting, teaching, researching, and being a loving partner – could have been done as well, if not better by other people. Any positive contributions that I have made are completely offset by what it has cost society to help me overcome the disadvantages and injuries of my childhood to become a functional and contributing member of society.
She’s exactly right. And this paragraph doesn’t just apply to her, it applies to lots of people. There’s no shortage of human beings in this world. We can afford to be a little more selective.
I guess I don’t understand what positive effects you’re referring to or who the others are with respect to this author, or which community, or which burdens. Or why it would make any difference if she’d never existed. Your comment is pretty vague.
That may be because you’ve been shifting context between her mother and the community, and between individuals’ behaviors functioning as burdens that ultimately contribute to the overall health of the community and some sort of responsibility to provide those burdens specifically ... things like that.
If I’ve been shifting context it’s only because I still don’t understand what point you’re trying to make.
You accuse the author of being self-aggrandizing and dogmatic with a poor understanding of people and community. I think she hit the nail on the head. I think you’re the one with a poor understanding of people and community—at least, people and communities outside your own.
Haven’t you ever been of two minds about something, Bruce? Is any human personality internally consistent?
Yes, of course I have been of two minds, and no, nobody is internally consistent all the time. I suppose my main objection to this whole idea, against which I have probably reacted too strongly, is that life is constantly being devalued here. That’s my impression, anyway. People seem all to cavalier about death and unappreciative of life. I’m going to die - meh. Life, even with all its difficulties, is a gift, and anything that falls short of an endorsement of life’s wonder seems to me to be the essence of ingratitude. But, perhaps I’m over-reacting and am being too harsh on the author. I’ll retreat to my cave.
Haven’t you ever been of two minds about something, Bruce? Is any human personality internally consistent?
Yes, of course I have been of two minds, and no, nobody is internally consistent all the time. I suppose my main objection to this whole idea, against which I have probably reacted too strongly, is that life is constantly being devalued here. That’s my impression, anyway. People seem all to cavalier about death and unappreciative of life. I’m going to die - meh. Life, even with all its difficulties, is a gift, and anything that falls short of an endorsement of life’s wonder seems to me to be the essence of ingratitude. But, perhaps I’m over-reacting and am being too harsh on the author. I’ll retreat to my cave.
I think you’re mistaking fear denial with actually being cavalier ... at least in some cases, can’t help but thinking probably the majority. Even still, that’s about the fact of death, not ending life. There’s a very important difference. In fact I’d argue that when we accept death for what it really is we tend to appreciate life far more, and that the whole afterlife thing has had the opposite effect, in spades.
Even still, that’s about the fact of death, not ending life. There’s a very important difference. In fact I’d argue that when we accept death for what it really is we tend to appreciate life far more, and that the whole afterlife thing has had the opposite effect, in spades.
You’ve been about the only one who consistently argues for the value of life - you’ve said many times that you don’t want to stop living, or you don’t want to miss what comes next. It’s not just a fear of dying itself, it’s a sadness about it all being over. That’s lacking here. In a group that thinks there is nothing after, I find that lack of sadness to be evidence of a cavalier attitude about the whole thing, which devalues life. Anyway, that’s my $0.02.
Well, that’s a good response. My rejoinder is that Job said this in the midst of his suffering. When we hurt we all say shit. The author of the article wasn’t in the midst of her suffering when she wrote that she wished her mother had aborted her. It came after reflection. But ASD says I’m missing the whole point, so maybe you’re right.
My mother spent a huge portion of her life feeling guilty about her role in my suffering, and suffered herself through long periods (sometimes years) when I’d disappear and stop communicating with anyone in the family. She became so stressed at one point she had a psychotic break and had to be hospitalized. So my burden was added to that of a woman who was already dealing with the burden of having been abused as a child, and with having been neglectful as a young mother whose youngest children ended up being abused and seemingly damaged for life as a result.
Don’t know your mom, but I would imagine that she probably valued your existence, and on final analysis was probably glad that you existed, notwithstanding the suffering. Otherwise she wouldn’t have cared. Just speculation on my part, however.
Well see, I should have read the entire essay. I’ll make any revisions to my comments when I do. I have to go.
I see the entire context of the story now, but I can’t say that it changes my initial assessment much (about her, not abortion), if at all. The title could just as well have been, “I Wish My Mother Gave Me Up for Adoption,” or “I Wish My Mother Didn’t Have Mental Issues,” or “I Wish I Could Have Had Sleepovers,” or “I Wish __________.” Also, abortion was illegal then, so in all likelihood, it would have been a back alley clothes hanger job and her mother could have very likely died.
I don’t know, in some ways there are good points for the pro-choice argument of course, but some of those are unrealistic (I mean sleep-overs, come on.); others help the anti-choice argument, the very thing she says fires her up. If she had a totally miserable life up until the essay, if it were a suicide note, then it would be quite convincing ... about her mother and her. I suppose her story from her perspective reflects on women’s rights to choose, but does it so much emphasize women plural? Everybody’s situation is different, as is everybody. That’s why choice is the central issue, regardless of what anyone else “Wishes.”
I can only support that she wishes her mother would have had the legal option and would have made the best choice for all concerned, but expecially herself (mother) at the time, with the proper resources available to help her do that sans the negative religious and political stigma attached. And now, realistically, this woman can only make the choice for herself in that regard.
Be courageous. If you really don’t think life is worth living, end it. I guess I’m calling her out. She thinks it would have been better if her mother aborted her. Well?????
I don’t think she’s being honest. She obviously likes life enough to state an opinion about it, which means to me that she thinks it has some value.
You are calling me out, fair enough. But what you are saying, “go kill yourself” is the exact same thing that the Christian Right says to me on a daily basis in hate-mail after hate-mail. So your challenge is hardly original. It is, however, phrased in a more respectful and thoughtful way, so I will answer.
By the way, I know that this is belated, but this thread was just recently brought to my attention.
Here is the answer: if I were to kill myself today, it would be an act of gross selfishness and one of the most damaging things that I could do to those who love me. My husband would be utterly crushed, and my children would be scarred beyond belief. My mother, who I have no wish to hurt, would be devastated. My students and colleagues would be deeply shaken. And on a practical level, it would greatly inconvenience my boss. While suicide might have the same result for me as having been aborted -non-existence - it would not have the same result as an abortion on those whom I love dearly.
But if my mother had aborted, none of those negative things would have happened. My husband would have met and married another. My mother would have had other children. Another person would have taken my job as a teacher and researcher. The world would have gone on just fine without me.
So you see, there is a very big difference between dropping off the world without a trace and disappearing a way which leaves a gaping hole. Here is a great illustration, and one that I have used repeatedly since this story came out. A friend of mine has two half-sisters that he loves dearly. But he only has those two half-sisters because his father cheated on his mother and abandoned him and his brother for the mother of his half-sisters. Does he wish his father had never hurt his mother so badly? Of course. Does he wish his father had stayed with their family and not run off with the younger woman? Of course. But by wishing those things, he is wishing his sisters out of existence. He loves his sisters, and he is not going to murder them just because he wishes they had never been conceived.
Asking my friend to murder his half-sisters just because he says he wishes his father had never had the affair that led to their birth is the same as “calling me out” asking me to kill myself (which if I were as mentally ill or depressed as some have suggested would be an act of grave immorality on your part.)
My article started life as a 3,000 word essay. My editor cut it for brevity, and we should all be grateful for how well she wields her editorial scalpel. But that has led to some misunderstandings. . For example, when I wrote about the world not being darker or poorer without me, I was saying that I have not invented penicillin, solved the crisis in the Middle East or written an epic piece of poetry like Shakespeare. I am an average person, living an average life, or at least it was average until three months ago when this thing went viral. I was saying that if I had never existed, the world would still have revolved around the sun, and life would still have been for most people exactly as it is now. I am not so full of hubris as to believe that my not being born would have left some hole in the universe that would have made the world so much worse. I meant my reference to “A Wonderful Life” to explain that concept. If you will recall, the point of the movies is that the main character discovers that the whole town would have been darker and poorer had he not been born. I have the good sense to know that reality does not work that way. The world does not go darker or become poorer because one person is not born. No one is that important, not even those who make great contributions to our society. If Shakespeare had not been born, it is likely that we simply would have learned the wonderful work of John Donne in high school instead. The thoughts and words of Shakespeare are not so precious that the world would have truly been a darker or poorer place without him. And frankly, I will say of his work what I have said of my own: Others could and in fact have done it better.
One last thing, many have asked why the child of professors would have been left to sink into bone-crushing poverty. In the article I stated that my mother’s mother was dead and that my mother had both witnessed and been subjected to domestic violence. Based on those two statements, the answer should be obvious. My mother’s one remaining parent, my grandfather was an abusive man who was disinclined to help anyone but himself. Professors are not always good people. In fact, in my experience, they quite often are not.
You should know that I stopped explaining myself in all forums, but I admired the true thoughtfulness and logic displayed by some of the posters here, and that is why I answered.
[ Edited: 25 November 2012 04:55 AM by Lynn Beisner ]
