Truthfully, I only scanned through the essay but it's certainly a question I've posed myself- how does suicide fit in with our most basic primal evolutionaty drives to survive long enough to reproduce? Clearly- it doesn't. It seems to defy all of them in some cases.
I got the general gist that the essay argued that suicide can be seen as an altruistic act- to remove poor genes from the overall pool and to remove ourselves as burdens to family and society. I imagine sometimes, this can indeed be correct. I think it's only a part of the picture though.
Plenty of people kill themselves after they have reproduced. So- they've already duplicated their genes. Perhaps poor quality genes even, if they knew they were carrying hereditary illnesses. I don't think people always are that altruistic! Even when life is terrible, their own health is terrible, I think the urge to parent and experience that love is overwhelming for some it seems.
As for the people who kill themselves because they can't attract someone- I doubt they are primarily removing themselves for the good of the human race! I think it's more of a personal loneliness and even resentment they feel that they weren't picked and don't want to go on alone. Although, I suppose the end result could be the same. The sadder thing to contemplate though is- were they actually defective in the first place? Are the qualities we apparently go for even all that good?
I think people do kill themselves when they feel themselves to be a burden. It definitely isn't the motive for everyone though. I don't feel a burden. I feel burdened by this shit life and the expectation to pay for it! I personally don't want to pass that burden on to my would- be children.
I'd also strongly question whether we are even that natural anymore. We've found ways to circumvent nature. We live in hostile environments we couldn't survive in the wild. We extend life way beyond our natural lifetimes. We use IVF to make people pregnant if they can't do it naturally. We ignore natural selection completely. If a baby is born disabled, we don't leave it to die. We spend shit loads of money trying to help it and then, we allow it to pass on its genes eventually. We are taught not to pick on the 'weakest' of our species. In the wild, they are often left to die, get picked off by predators and in some cases, their own tribe will kill them! We see that as terribly cruel. We're beyond all that (apparently.) We wear clothes. We feel moderately free to follow our own sexuality (depending on where we live.) We (mostly) obey laws to stop us raping one another. Many of the laws we're taught to abide by are to try and restrain our natural tendencies- don't try to f*ck everyone in sight, don't steal from one another, don't murder one another.
I'd argue that we are at least as much 'animals' influenced by culture as we are natural bilogical creatures. It also seems like we are more capable of deeply inquisitive thought about existence, compared to other animals. That's not to say they're stupid or unemotional but I'm not sure they contemplate existence and choice like we do. So- I'm not convinced it even occurs to animals that they can and maybe would be better off killing themselves! Otherwise- surely, they would- given how tough their lives are.
I suppose I feel like we share parts of the primal brain they have- with that natural survival instinct. But, it's like we've developed another 'programme' running on top of that- that can effectively overwrite the primal brain. As for what gets us to that stage. I think that's more nuanced than simply not being able to reproduce and, feeling like a burden. But, I'd say the decision itself sits outside of evolutionary law. Just like IVF, protecting the weak, non straight sexuality does. We are able to break other 'natural' laws, why not that one too?
One thing I have pondered on though is- whether it's somehow still for the greater good. There are clearly too many people on this planet for it to support us. By not reproducing and removing ourselves early, we spare resources for everyone else so, we maybe 'help' the race as a whole. That doesn't really work though either.
Let's say a person cares intensely about the environment. They choose not to reproduce in order to protect the world. That also means that their environmentally friendly genes don't get passed on though. While another person who doesn't give a shit has three children who then have children of their own and, so on.
Besides, how do we even decide what is of value? Not meaning to hate on all people with NPD but, my life first took this suicidal course because of a (suspected) narcissist. Being so full of self love, it seems as if they are only too glad to replicate themselves multiple times and it sounds like their children are carbon copies of them. I can envisage that they will now go on to hurt many other people.
So- what genes do we actually prize in this world? I have this fantasy that it will only be sociopaths, psychopaths and narcissists left- seeing as no others will be strong enough to survive and, they'll all devour one another. I'm afraid I do have a strong bias against them- whether they can help their behaviour or not. Not of course if they're aware of it and do their best to moderate it. In which case, I have massive admiration.
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
