Scan barcode
marsdengracie's review
3.0
The first few chapters were interesting, but the last few chapters were incredible. Hecht uses arguments from modern philosophers to argue for a reason to choose to stay, and uses statistics to back up her claims that suicide harms community and ought to be an issue we are concerned with as a group. A great read to begin research on how to fight suicide.
arnizach's review
5.0
Interesting, thought-provoking and above all powerful book about suicide and against suicide. Starts out as a history lesson and morphes into a sustained argument against killing oneself. As a religious reader, I found the chapter on religious thought about suicide especially interesting. And while I didn't, so to speak, have need for the secular arguments against suicide in the final chapters of the book, I could appreciate them for what they were employed to do. I agree with the author that our culture, having left religion behind to a significant extent, is left without the conceptual resources required to argue persuasively against suicide. The author's attempt to erect such an argument is to be celebrated. I hope it is heard widely.
jananih's review against another edition
challenging
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
2.5
theramblingreader's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
sad
medium-paced
4.5
This book is a comprehensive overview that surveys the intellectual and cultural history of suicide in Western civilization.
The author does a great job selecting passages across a variety of thinkers, showing how suicide was lauded in certain cases in Greek and Roman history, how it came to be strictly forbidden and punished harshly within Christian communities, and how secular thought, particularly during the Enlightenment, came to take a permissive stance of suicide.
Most importantly, the second half of this book focuses on the philosophical arguments against suicide. The author presents arguments which are secular in nature and focus on community, on the duty to one's current and future self, and to how one can find the motivation to stay.
This book was written for a very specific audience. However, I think future work building on this could include an analysis of suicide in Eastern cultures. Who are the thinkers and what are the stories that have heavily influenced the narrative of suicide in Eastern cultures? Have the Buddhist, Hindu, and Taoist religions cultivated a similar taboo against suicide as Christianity, or provided religious arguments enabling it?
Perhaps the scope of that survey is too broad, and would dilute the authors intention to provide the philosophical grounds for Staying.
The author does a great job selecting passages across a variety of thinkers, showing how suicide was lauded in certain cases in Greek and Roman history, how it came to be strictly forbidden and punished harshly within Christian communities, and how secular thought, particularly during the Enlightenment, came to take a permissive stance of suicide.
Most importantly, the second half of this book focuses on the philosophical arguments against suicide. The author presents arguments which are secular in nature and focus on community, on the duty to one's current and future self, and to how one can find the motivation to stay.
This book was written for a very specific audience. However, I think future work building on this could include an analysis of suicide in Eastern cultures. Who are the thinkers and what are the stories that have heavily influenced the narrative of suicide in Eastern cultures? Have the Buddhist, Hindu, and Taoist religions cultivated a similar taboo against suicide as Christianity, or provided religious arguments enabling it?
Perhaps the scope of that survey is too broad, and would dilute the authors intention to provide the philosophical grounds for Staying.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Murder, Sexual violence, Self harm, Mental illness, Grief, Torture, Suicidal thoughts, Injury/Injury detail, Suicide, Suicide attempt, and Violence
Moderate: Death of parent, Child death, and Death
toffishay's review
challenging
informative
slow-paced
3.0
A really interesting topic and worth a read if the topic sounds even a little interesting to you. To see the different perspectives on suicide throughout time was something that I hadn't learned of before and that gave me a new insight into how we talk about suicide now. The writing style was a little tough and the chapter structure became repetitive.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Blood, Murder, and Suicide
Moderate: Sexism, Racism, Misogyny, and Xenophobia
roaming_enn's review against another edition
4.0
I attempted suicide twice when I was 18. And some people told me that I was selfish for doing so. It was such a hurtful comment that made me feel even worse about myself, that when this book came out in 2013 and I bought it, I decided not to read it for fear that it will only tell me what a bad person I was for having attempted and even considering suicide. At the same time, I made the decision to not kill myself (anytime soon) precisely because of the arguments for community and the future self that are found in this book. I didn't want to hurt my family and friends even more, and there was still so much in life that I wanted to learn and experience, that killing myself too soon would deprive me of those opportunities.
Last month, November 2019, I told a close friend whom I met in 2014 that I had been a patient in a psychiatric hospital for being suicidal. (I thought that they already knew.) They told me that they were glad that I was still here. This interaction made me think of this book, and I decided to pick it up and read it, feeling that I was ready to encounter those arguments that I was selfish, and at the same time knowing that the author probably would not be so harsh. Lo and behold, after reading it, I did not get the feeling that the author resented her friends that have killed themselves or wants to make the suicidal feel bad for being suicidal. I honestly don't know why I didn't just buckle down and read it when I had first bought it. Probably when I needed it more than I do now.
I was also surprised at how many non-religious writers have argued against suicide, even the pessimistic ones. Although I have encountered most of the arguments from most of the philosophers mentioned in this book, nobody had put it all out for me in one place like this book has (although I do feel that some of her interpretations of some of the philosophers are wrong--which is expected, since she isn't a philosopher). I find this book to be very valuable just for that reason. I agree that there is this misconception that non-religious writers often seem to argue in favor of suicide, but this book argues against that misconception. As someone who is no longer religious and no longer has those religious arguments, it's important to have secular arguments against suicide as well. And I thank the author for providing them in this book.
This book goes through the history of the Western discourse on suicide, from ancient to contemporary. Both the ancients and contemporary thinkers, both religious and non-religious, have argued both in favor of and against suicide. This book highlights the thinkers and writers that are non-religious and argue against suicide. I recommend this book to even those who have suicidal thoughts.
Last month, November 2019, I told a close friend whom I met in 2014 that I had been a patient in a psychiatric hospital for being suicidal. (I thought that they already knew.) They told me that they were glad that I was still here. This interaction made me think of this book, and I decided to pick it up and read it, feeling that I was ready to encounter those arguments that I was selfish, and at the same time knowing that the author probably would not be so harsh. Lo and behold, after reading it, I did not get the feeling that the author resented her friends that have killed themselves or wants to make the suicidal feel bad for being suicidal. I honestly don't know why I didn't just buckle down and read it when I had first bought it. Probably when I needed it more than I do now.
I was also surprised at how many non-religious writers have argued against suicide, even the pessimistic ones. Although I have encountered most of the arguments from most of the philosophers mentioned in this book, nobody had put it all out for me in one place like this book has (although I do feel that some of her interpretations of some of the philosophers are wrong--which is expected, since she isn't a philosopher). I find this book to be very valuable just for that reason. I agree that there is this misconception that non-religious writers often seem to argue in favor of suicide, but this book argues against that misconception. As someone who is no longer religious and no longer has those religious arguments, it's important to have secular arguments against suicide as well. And I thank the author for providing them in this book.
This book goes through the history of the Western discourse on suicide, from ancient to contemporary. Both the ancients and contemporary thinkers, both religious and non-religious, have argued both in favor of and against suicide. This book highlights the thinkers and writers that are non-religious and argue against suicide. I recommend this book to even those who have suicidal thoughts.
ptrmsschrs's review against another edition
4.0
interesting, but not convincing case against suicide
The subtitle 'A history of suicide and the arguments against it' is a correct indication of what the author's intentions are: building a case against suicide by exploring how philosophy, religion and science has viewed suicide in Western Europe since against Greece.
She relies heavily on [b:History of Suicide: Voluntary Death in Western Culture|2140657|History of Suicide Voluntary Death in Western Culture|Georges Minois|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1266576881l/2140657._SY75_.jpg|2146145] by [a:Georges Minois|202208|Georges Minois|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1559494201p2/202208.jpg], which -in my opinion- is a more comprehensive and objective view of the historical perspective. Nevertheless this book offers a well written and concise view.
However the two main arguments against Mrs. Hecht puts in the spotlight, don't sit well with me:
1. suicide is contagious : the evidence that suicides happen in clusters or that there is a "Werther" effect are circumstantial at best. In my opinion suicides don't occur, because a friend, family member, public figure, etc.. took their own life. The author herself relates the case of Kurt Cobain, whose suicide did not cause an increase in suicide in youths. I do believe that there is a genetic component to personality traits that might lead to suicide (mood swings, addiction, impusivity, etc) Hemingway is probably a good example of this. Moreover we can't be held responsible for the actions of others, if we haven't purposely instigated them.
2. suicide is contrary to societal norms and is an evasion of one's responbilities towards family, friends, society. No man ever asked to be born, no man has ever had control over the way he was raised or the environment in which he grew up. We are 'thrown in this world', like it or not. Some people will call this a blessing, but others will call it a curse. There is no right or wrong here. Nobody should feel obligated to live a life of misery, because society says it's the right thing to do. Everyone should have the right to decide for themselves if they find their lives are worth living.
The reason why I still give this book 4 stars is that the author mentions some very interesting and unexpected philosophers at the end of her book: e.g. Emile Cioran (known for his anti-natalism); Albert Camus (the existential philosopher); Arthus Schopenhauer (notable pessimist). All these thinkers had a decidedly negative view of life and the author tries to make the point that even they argued against suicide. However the arguments she quotes are notable the weakest elements of their philosophy. To give Schopenhauer as an example: it is true that he denied that suicide was a solution to a miserable life; Schopenhauers posited that the 'Will' is all encompassing and that one suicide one make any difference. It is better to try to combat the Will by -and this if where his philosophy becomes muddled- adhering to Eastern techniques to try a conquer the Will and all its manifestations.
In conclusion: a challenging and interesting book that didn't convince.
The subtitle 'A history of suicide and the arguments against it' is a correct indication of what the author's intentions are: building a case against suicide by exploring how philosophy, religion and science has viewed suicide in Western Europe since against Greece.
She relies heavily on [b:History of Suicide: Voluntary Death in Western Culture|2140657|History of Suicide Voluntary Death in Western Culture|Georges Minois|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1266576881l/2140657._SY75_.jpg|2146145] by [a:Georges Minois|202208|Georges Minois|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1559494201p2/202208.jpg], which -in my opinion- is a more comprehensive and objective view of the historical perspective. Nevertheless this book offers a well written and concise view.
However the two main arguments against Mrs. Hecht puts in the spotlight, don't sit well with me:
1. suicide is contagious : the evidence that suicides happen in clusters or that there is a "Werther" effect are circumstantial at best. In my opinion suicides don't occur, because a friend, family member, public figure, etc.. took their own life. The author herself relates the case of Kurt Cobain, whose suicide did not cause an increase in suicide in youths. I do believe that there is a genetic component to personality traits that might lead to suicide (mood swings, addiction, impusivity, etc) Hemingway is probably a good example of this. Moreover we can't be held responsible for the actions of others, if we haven't purposely instigated them.
2. suicide is contrary to societal norms and is an evasion of one's responbilities towards family, friends, society. No man ever asked to be born, no man has ever had control over the way he was raised or the environment in which he grew up. We are 'thrown in this world', like it or not. Some people will call this a blessing, but others will call it a curse. There is no right or wrong here. Nobody should feel obligated to live a life of misery, because society says it's the right thing to do. Everyone should have the right to decide for themselves if they find their lives are worth living.
The reason why I still give this book 4 stars is that the author mentions some very interesting and unexpected philosophers at the end of her book: e.g. Emile Cioran (known for his anti-natalism); Albert Camus (the existential philosopher); Arthus Schopenhauer (notable pessimist). All these thinkers had a decidedly negative view of life and the author tries to make the point that even they argued against suicide. However the arguments she quotes are notable the weakest elements of their philosophy. To give Schopenhauer as an example: it is true that he denied that suicide was a solution to a miserable life; Schopenhauers posited that the 'Will' is all encompassing and that one suicide one make any difference. It is better to try to combat the Will by -and this if where his philosophy becomes muddled- adhering to Eastern techniques to try a conquer the Will and all its manifestations.
In conclusion: a challenging and interesting book that didn't convince.
socraticgadfly's review against another edition
2.0
NOTE: This is a preliminary rating, going by the publisher's blurb AND the excerpt that's in American Scholar.
That said, on to the review, and adding to it in noting ways Hecht is wrong.
While I find it admirable for Hecht to write about her friends' suicides and how to prevent them, that shouldn't be done at the expense of inaccuracy.
I would at least partially disagree with Hecht, based on what the blurb says, and also, the excerpt I read in American Scholar In the Christian Old Testament, Samson and Saul both commit suicide without approbation. At the start of the New Testament era, in the Jewish Revolt, Josephus tells us about the mass Jewish suicide at Masada. (And, that's a mass suicide officially lauded today by the modern state of Israel.) And, the Stoics certainly did not have a blanket condemnation of suicide. As a historian of philosophy, she knows the story of Seneca quite well. She also knows that Stoics even had an official checklist of when suicide was morally permissible. (Update: Therefore, her book's title is wrong, at bottom line.)
Secondarily, how much research did she do in cultural anthropology? Is suicide always equally mourned? What about environmentally necessitated suicide, such as Inuit elderly deliberately laying down on ice floes? Or, tying back to religion again, suicide bombers? Or, purely anthropologically, seppuku in Japan?
The issue of suicide, around the world and in various religions and cultures, is more nuanced, I think, than she portrays it. History and philosophy tell us more nuanced things than she does. Many cultures see suicide as neither a grievous moral wrong nor as an unpreventable illness.
So does religion. Anything that has ideas of a higher good, whether a metaphysically based one or not, will be open to fostering the idea of a noble suicide. As I noted with the Tamil Tigers (the Palestinian bombers are often driven by nationalism more than religion, too), this need not be a metaphysical motive.
Third, the issue of selecting people like Milton as examples would seem to be good. At the same time, it could be seen as veering close to committing the fallacy of "survivorship bias."
Next, suicide is often rationally planned out, even if one is not a Stoic philosopher. I know this is just an excerpt that I read (in addition to the blurb!), but here at least, Hecht doesn't appear to comprehend that.
Fourth, she indicates, or so I infer, that there's been a surge in suicide rates. But, in this excerpt, there's no statistics cited. Nor is there anything about statistics now in different parts of the world, etc. That's getting even more problematic.
Again, the project is laudable. But, going by the blurb, not necessarily well done in terms of accuracy.
And, more on that issue. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy's entry on suicide shows just how much cherry-picking Hecht does on her philosophical claims, and even on her religious ones within the Christian tradition. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/suicide/ (A bit sadly, from the intellectual side, the SEP entry only looks at "Western" philosophical and related thought on suicide. It does have brief comments and a link to more, but quasi-dismissing Eastern thought because it's too complex or outside of Western monotheism, even as the modern West in many places becomes more influenced by the East doesn't come off well.)
Update: And, within the US, the suicide rate actually was declining 1981-2000 before starting to rise again. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_in_the_United_States A mix of the "eternal war on terror" (which need not be so) and an aging population appear to be primary causes.
That said, on to the review, and adding to it in noting ways Hecht is wrong.
While I find it admirable for Hecht to write about her friends' suicides and how to prevent them, that shouldn't be done at the expense of inaccuracy.
I would at least partially disagree with Hecht, based on what the blurb says, and also, the excerpt I read in American Scholar In the Christian Old Testament, Samson and Saul both commit suicide without approbation. At the start of the New Testament era, in the Jewish Revolt, Josephus tells us about the mass Jewish suicide at Masada. (And, that's a mass suicide officially lauded today by the modern state of Israel.) And, the Stoics certainly did not have a blanket condemnation of suicide. As a historian of philosophy, she knows the story of Seneca quite well. She also knows that Stoics even had an official checklist of when suicide was morally permissible. (Update: Therefore, her book's title is wrong, at bottom line.)
Secondarily, how much research did she do in cultural anthropology? Is suicide always equally mourned? What about environmentally necessitated suicide, such as Inuit elderly deliberately laying down on ice floes? Or, tying back to religion again, suicide bombers? Or, purely anthropologically, seppuku in Japan?
The issue of suicide, around the world and in various religions and cultures, is more nuanced, I think, than she portrays it. History and philosophy tell us more nuanced things than she does. Many cultures see suicide as neither a grievous moral wrong nor as an unpreventable illness.
So does religion. Anything that has ideas of a higher good, whether a metaphysically based one or not, will be open to fostering the idea of a noble suicide. As I noted with the Tamil Tigers (the Palestinian bombers are often driven by nationalism more than religion, too), this need not be a metaphysical motive.
Third, the issue of selecting people like Milton as examples would seem to be good. At the same time, it could be seen as veering close to committing the fallacy of "survivorship bias."
Next, suicide is often rationally planned out, even if one is not a Stoic philosopher. I know this is just an excerpt that I read (in addition to the blurb!), but here at least, Hecht doesn't appear to comprehend that.
Fourth, she indicates, or so I infer, that there's been a surge in suicide rates. But, in this excerpt, there's no statistics cited. Nor is there anything about statistics now in different parts of the world, etc. That's getting even more problematic.
Again, the project is laudable. But, going by the blurb, not necessarily well done in terms of accuracy.
And, more on that issue. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy's entry on suicide shows just how much cherry-picking Hecht does on her philosophical claims, and even on her religious ones within the Christian tradition. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/suicide/ (A bit sadly, from the intellectual side, the SEP entry only looks at "Western" philosophical and related thought on suicide. It does have brief comments and a link to more, but quasi-dismissing Eastern thought because it's too complex or outside of Western monotheism, even as the modern West in many places becomes more influenced by the East doesn't come off well.)
Update: And, within the US, the suicide rate actually was declining 1981-2000 before starting to rise again. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_in_the_United_States A mix of the "eternal war on terror" (which need not be so) and an aging population appear to be primary causes.