Method Methods im thinking about

[lostmilo]

Right now I'm considering two methods.

The first is scarf/bedsheets around a door handle for partial suspension but it's hard as I live with my family and won't have the opportunity to be away from them for a LONG time.

The second is jumping off a bridge. There is one bridge roughly 50 minutes away from me that a jump from is from all reports completely fatal however massive barriers have been installed and ever since then no one has been successfully so i don't want to bother trying :(

There is another bridge roughly 2 hrs away from me that has also had alot of successful suicides and I'm thinking of making an excuse to travel to that city by the end of the month so my parents dont get suspicious and then walk roughly 30 mins from the train station.

I'm just worried that my survival instinct will kick in and i will have travelled all that way for nothing. Any tips to get over SI would be appreciated.

 

[Marco77]

I don't believe in survival instinct. In reality I believe that human beings are devoid of any instinct. Many also talk about maternal instinct and then you see mothers throwing their children in the garbage or worse killing them. I think they are just fearful beliefs that we absorb from the outside and make our own. These beliefs hold us back on many things including suicide which is certainly not included among society's values.

 

[sevennn]

I don't believe in survival instinct. In reality I believe that human beings are devoid of any instinct. Many also talk about maternal instinct and then you see mothers throwing their children in the garbage or worse killing them. I think they are just fearful beliefs that we absorb from the outside and make our own. These beliefs hold us back on many things including suicide which is certainly not included among society's values.

yeah i also don't believe in it. its just a fear of what comes after death plus fear of physical and mental pain plus a fear of not suceedikg (last one in case of suicides) that's what i think is meant by SI (and i'm not a biologist but i do remember our teacher told us humans have no instincts)

 

[Valhala]

I don't believe in survival instinct. In reality I believe that human beings are devoid of any instinct. Many also talk about maternal instinct and then you see mothers throwing their children in the garbage or worse killing them. I think they are just fearful beliefs that we absorb from the outside and make our own. These beliefs hold us back on many things including suicide which is certainly not included among society's values.

Instincts are proven to exist and they are an indisputable fact. The fact that in some people certain instincts are weakened to a greater or lesser extent, perhaps due to some somatic disorder, illness, altered state of consciousness, etc., does not mean that they do not exist in the vast majority of people. SI is the instinct that has been discussed the most on this forum, and yes, it exists in the vast majority of people and represents a real challenge to defeat it and neutralize it, at least to a certain extent.

 

[Rhizomorph1]

I don't believe in survival instinct. In reality I believe that human beings are devoid of any instinct. Many also talk about maternal instinct and then you see mothers throwing their children in the garbage or worse killing them. I think they are just fearful beliefs that we absorb from the outside and make our own. These beliefs hold us back on many things including suicide which is certainly not included among society's values.

Erm... Mother's who throw their children into the garbage are usually sociopathic or similar. Sociopaths generally have very distorted instincts, especially regarding antisocial behavior such as violence.

Survival instinct and prosocial behaviour are both natural inborn instincts in the vast majority (99.99%) of the population.

 

[Marco77]

Erm... Mother's who throw their children into the garbage are usually sociopathic or similar. Sociopaths generally have very distorted instincts, especially regarding antisocial behavior such as violence.

Survival instinct and prosocial behaviour are both natural inborn instincts in the vast majority (99.99%) of the population.

An instinct must be present in individuals of the same species. Complex actions derived from an instinctual drive are so primal to the bearer that they often occur without a purpose always being evident. The survival instinct is a mystery that not only neuroscience is dealing with today. We don't have an explanation of what it is that keeps us alive. They are all theories without scientific basis. Instinct is the rigid response to a stimulus, this is the heritage of the animal world, except man. Man has simple drives with an indeterminate goal. Precisely due to the lack of human instinct, humans find themselves in need of institutions. Animals do not need these guides, precisely because they are guided by instinct, from when they are born until death.

 

[Rhizomorph1]

An instinct must be present in individuals of the same species. Complex actions derived from an instinctual drive are so primal to the bearer that they often occur without a purpose always being evident. The survival instinct is a mystery that not only neuroscience is dealing with today. We don't have an explanation of what it is that keeps us alive. They are all theories without scientific basis. Instinct is the rigid response to a stimulus, this is the heritage of the animal world, except man. Man has simple drives with an indeterminate goal. Precisely due to the lack of human instinct, humans find themselves in need of institutions. Animals do not need these guides, precisely because they are guided by instinct, from when they are born until death.

I'm not sure where you got the idea that instinct is just a theory. There is plenty of empirical evidence effectively proving we have instincts.

Just because humans have a complex frontal cortex doesn't mean we are without instinct; the subcortical areas of the brain responsible for instinct communicate with the cortex to influence behaviour, attention/salience and decision making.

The transactional nature of these two networks (which could also be considered the salience/attention network vs default mode network) suggests that it is a trade off depending on circumstance. Emotionally valent circumstances can reduce the activity of the cortex and in the face of dying, or low cognitive resources/high cognitive load (such as dying, trauma, stress, etc.) the instinctual part kicks in and can effectively shut off the prefrontal cortex almost altogether.

Humans who are threatened by lethal stimuli become almost inherently instinctive.

 

[Marco77]

I'm not sure where you got the idea that instinct is just a theory. There is plenty of empirical evidence effectively proving we have instincts.

Just because humans have a complex frontal cortex doesn't mean we are without instinct; the subcortical areas of the brain responsible for instinct communicate with the cortex to influence behaviour, attention/salience and decision making.

The transactional nature of these two networks (which could also be considered the salience/attention network vs default mode network) suggests that it is a trade off depending on circumstance. Emotionally valent circumstances can reduce the activity of the cortex and in the face of dying, or low cognitive resources/high cognitive load (such as dying, trauma, stress, etc.) the instinctual part kicks in and can effectively shut off the prefrontal cortex almost altogether.

Humans who are threatened by lethal stimuli become almost inherently instinctive.

Smokey talk! Everything that is EMPIRICAL is foreign to SCIENTIFIC RIGOUR... consequently it is not scientific. It's worth nothing! Present me a scientific study complete with genes involved in the survival instinct, but I think you won't even find genetic loci.

 

[Rhizomorph1]

Smokey talk! Everything that is EMPIRICAL is foreign to SCIENTIFIC RIGOUR... consequently it is not scientific. It's worth nothing! Present me a scientific study complete with genes involved in the survival instinct, but I think you won't even find genetic loci.

Aren't molecular genetics empirical? If so you're contradicting yourself. (Also... Epigenetic expression?!)

I'm going to humbly apply Hitchen's razor to your statement that empiricism is foreign to science since you provided no premises for the sort; given it is common knowledge that the scientific method applies empiricism, hitchen's razor naturally dismisses your claim.

I'll share some studies once we're on the same page epistemically; without a standard episteme (the scientific method), sharing scientific articles will be useless due to the self-evident difference in interpretation.

Just like how asking you for something in Japanese would be futile if we don't both speak Japanese; we need a shared epistemic norm for the research to have any effect.

 

[LunarLight]

Everything that is EMPIRICAL is foreign to SCIENTIFIC RIGOUR... consequently it is not scientific

Utter bullshit. Where are you drawing this idea from?

 

[Marco77]

Survival instinct and prosocial behaviour are both natural inborn instincts in the vast majority (99.99%) of the population.

You will not be able to provide any scientific evidence to confirm these statements.

 

[Rhizomorph1]

You will not be able to provide any scientific evidence to confirm these statements.

Refer to my last comment re: futility which already addressed this statement. And so on, and so on. Take care

 

[Marco77]

Refer to my last comment re: futility which already addressed this statement. And so on, and so on. Take care

Confuse culture and genetics. You stated 2 things as innate in human beings. The funniest one is prosociality. You hid behind vague expressions (empirical evidence). What is empirical has changed its meaning many times in history. If now it is based not only on observation, but in a broader spectrum on facts. Show this evidence of: - genetic survival instinct - genetic prosociality *innate in human beings* I simply said that you cannot scientifically prove either one or the other. But if you bring me just one scientific fact (Galilean method), I'm ready to change my mind.

 

[Rhizomorph1]

Confuse culture and genetics. You stated 2 things as innate in human beings. The funniest one is prosociality. You hid behind vague expressions (empirical evidence). What is empirical has changed its meaning many times in history. If now it is based not only on observation, but in a broader spectrum on facts. Show this evidence of: - genetic survival instinct - genetic prosociality *innate in human beings* I simply said that you cannot scientifically prove either one or the other. But if you bring me just one scientific fact (Galilean method), I'm ready to change my mind.

And so on, and so on

 

[Intoxicated]

I don't believe in survival instinct. In reality I believe that human beings are devoid of any instinct.

Even if we assume that survival instinct exists, it's rather easy to notice how useless this notion is, as it doesn't explain anything precisely in detail. It's just an abstract reason that is presumed to be responsible for maintaining survival (without explaining how it doesn't prevent suicidal thoughts in the first place, lol). Fear and pain are particular factors that can motivate someone to reconsider CTB-ing at the moment, and it often makes sense to think how to mitigate each of these factors separately in order to improve your chances of making the job done. Whether these factors are attributed to an existing SI or not is rather unimportant for finding possible mechanisms of coping with them. Whether SI exists or not, it's a good subject for applying Occam's razor, since it only distracts attention from really valuable more precisely worded factors that contribute to decision making.

 

[Marco77]

Even if we assume that survival instinct exists, it's rather easy to notice how useless this notion is, as it doesn't explain anything precisely in detail. It's just an abstract reason that is presumed to be responsible for maintaining survival (without explaining how it doesn't prevent suicidal thoughts in the first place, lol). Fear and pain are particular factors that can motivate someone to reconsider CTB-ing at the moment, and it often makes sense to think how to mitigate each of these factors separately in order to improve your chances of making the job done. Whether these factors are attributed to an existing SI or not is rather unimportant for finding possible mechanisms of coping with them. Whether SI exists or not, it's a good subject for applying Occam's razor, since it only distracts attention from really valuable more precisely worded factors that contribute to decision making.

Okay. However, this PRESUMPTION has been passed off (by some) as an established genetic human condition. And this is madness!

 

[Intoxicated]

Okay. However, this PRESUMPTION has been passed off (by some) as an established genetic human condition. And this is madness!

Yeah, it would be difficult to determine the proportion between innate and learned programs that lead to a particular behavior under CTB conditions. If some learned habit can prevent you from CTB-ing in an altered state of mind, it cannot be considered an instinct by definition, but it would still be a rather important factor.

I think, the popularity of mentioning survival instinct on this forum is related to the need in finding a noble excuse for the weakness that doesn't let some people overcome their fears and/or physical discomfort on the way to CTB. Without mentioning SI, the influence of those particular factors wouldn't sound so noble. Survival instinct sounds like a mighty beast, and being stopped by it doesn't look so shameful, this is why people keep referring to it non-stop.