ALBERT CAMUS ON THE NOTION OF SUICIDE, AND THE VALUE OF.pdf

1
ALBERT CAMUS ON THE NOTION OF SUICIDE, AND THE VALUE OF
HUMAN LIFE
BY
OKEKE, EMMANUEL EMENIKE
(DI/476)
BEING AN ESSAY SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
PHILOSOPHY, DOMINICAN INSTITUTE OF PHILOSOPHY AND
THEOLOGY, SAMONDA, IBADAN (AN AFFILIATE OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN), IN PARTIAL FUFILMENT OF THE
REQURIMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF A BACHELOR OF ARTS
DEGREE IN PHILOSOPHY
SAMONDA, IBADAN.
JUNE, 2014.

2
CERTIFICATION
This is to certify that this work titled: ALBERT CAMUS ON THE NOTION OF
SUICIDE, AND THE VALUE OF HUMAN LIFE, submitted to the department of
philosophy, Dominican Institute of Philosophy and Theology, Ibadan, for the
reward of Bachelor of Arts Degree in Philosophy, by the University of Ibadan,
is an original research carried out by Okeke, Emmanuel Emenike.
MODERATOR
Date…………………………… Sign………………………………………….
Rev. Fr. Joseph T. Ekong, O.P.
(B.A., M. TH., M.A., Ph.D.)
Lecturer, Dominican Institute,
Ibadan.

3
DEDICATION
This intellectual work is dedicated to the two sweetest, dearest and most
influential women in my life: The Blessed Virgin Mary (Mother Thrice
Admirable of Schoenstatt), and the evergreen memory of my earthly mother:
Late. Mrs. Pauline Okeke, who until her death strove for excellence in all
things, and struggled to give me the best of love she could offer towards my
development.

4
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
It affords me great pleasure using this medium to express my heartfelt gratitude
to all those who in one way or another contributed to making this work a reality.
My unreserved gratitude goes first to the Triune God, the source, sustainer and
ultimate end of my being. Also, my gratitude goes to Mother Thrice Admirable, Queen
and Victress of Schoenstatt, the great educator whose heavenly maternal care and love is
felt every day of my life.
I am ever and forever grateful to my family, the bedrock of my formation. I thank
my father, Mr Paul Okeke for being there through thick and thin, and for supporting me
in the part of life I chose to trek. My unending love and heartfelt thanks go to my late
mum and mentor, Late Mrs Pauline Okeke. Mummy, you will forever be remembered
for your assiduous striving to cater and educate the family in the way of God. I also
appreciate the efforts of my siblings, Ejike Innocent, Chinonso Doris, Chigozie Eric. You
have always been supportive and encouraging at all times. I also thank my sister from
another mother, Gloria Arogundade for her unalloyed support and care.
My special thanks goes to the Secular Institute of Schoenstatt Fathers, represented
in Nigeria by my amiable formators, Frs. Juan Pablo Catoggio (Delegate Superior),
Reginald Ibe (Rector), Claudius Uwaoma (Spiritual Director), Kingsley Okereke (Novice
Master), Klaus Desch and Paul Nwachukwu. I say thank you for your material, moral
and spiritual support. Similarly, I thank other Fathers of the community, Frs. Kistler
Alfred, Rodriguez Andres, Magnus Ifedikwa, and a host of others, for their guidance and
assistance.

5
My warm gratitude goes to my convivial moderator, Fr. Joseph T. Ekong, O.P,
who despite my late entry, accepted to moderate this essay, irrespective of his ever busy
academic schedule. I say thank you for giving this essay a profound scholarly and
philosophical content, for a wider consumption. Likewise, I thank Terwase Famave, Dike
Henry, Dansuma Christain, Avong Cyprian and Nnadi Fortunatus for providing some of
the Relevant Martials. I also thank Odo Raymond for proof- reading this work.
I also appreciate highly the friendship and support of my ‘group brothers’ in the
community: Anumudu Henry, Ngwu John-Paul, Odo Mathias, Ameh Francis,
Onyekwelu Sylvester, Ukasoanya Stanley, Anyanwu Eustace and Okeke Cyriacus.
Together, we started this journey as one family. May this love and care, continue to urge
us on even in difficult moments. Equally, I thank the senior brothers and theologians
(nova spes sion), the novices, and the other brothers in the community from philosophy
one to three. I thank them for their unrelenting support, encouragements and constructive
criticisms, which have facilitated my striving for originality.
My life has been remarkably formed by the academic and rigorous studies
received from the prestigious Dominican Institute of Philosophy and Theology. To this,
I thank all lecturers, librarians, and students, especially my classmates.
Worthy of mention is my indefatigable parish priest, Very Rev. Fr. Matthew
Ogunyase, for his fatherly support and prayers. I cannot forget the ever-ready Frs. Gabriel
Odunaiya, Anthony Nwosu, Emmanuel Ehiedu and Rev. Onyiba Samuel, O.P for their
willingness to always assist. I also thank all members of St. Peter’s servants’ vocation
group. Your efforts are specially recognised.

6
For all whom I am unable to mention for want of space and those whom I do not
know but have been instrumental in my life, you are always cherished and appreciated. I
shall never forget your love.
Lastly, to you my beloved readers, thank you for finding this work worthy of your
attention. I acknowledge the fact that the work does not exhaust everything that needs to
be said on this topic. However, hoping that you will find it useful, I encourage you to go
through it, and explore its relevance to life-situations. Remember, it is only YOU that can
make your life meaningful and worth-while.
Emmanuel Emenike,
Solemnity of the Ascension of the Lord,
May 29, 2014.

7
ABSTRACT
Regardless of race, religion, geographical area, time or period, there are two
realities that all humans must experience: “life” and “death”. Death can be either
involuntary or voluntary. The latter, raises questions because it is the deliberate ending
of a life. To this, suicide among others, counts for the largest forms of voluntary deaths.
Of course, many people react, are puzzled and stunned when one takes his or her
life. Such attitude reflects a social situation in which motivation towards suicide is not
yet understood and thus creates serious social problems.
The purpose of this essay “Albert Camus on the notion of suicide and the value
of human life”, is to show how suicide is not an answer to escaping the topsy-turvy
encounters of life. Employing the method of exposition, first, I explain and expose Albert
Camus’ existentialist principle; that there is one truly serious philosophical problem,
which is suicide. Second, I explain how we can value and cherish human life through the
act of safeguarding the dignity of human life. Third, I expose the moral justifiability of
suicide. On this, those in favour of suicide (pro-choice), hold that the act of suicide,
though morally wrong, is a moral obligation; and those against the act of suicide (pro-
life), hold that the act of suicide is immoral. On this, the views of David Hume and
Thomas Aquinas are discussed and evaluated.
This essay, argues in favour of the pro-life position, for if the human being is the
image of God (imago Dei), then, right reason makes us realize that every act that stifles
and destroys human life is wrong and evil.

8
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page……………………………………………………………………..…..i
Certification……………………………………………………………………...ii
Dedication…………………………………………………………………...…..iii
Acknowledgements……………………………………………..……………….iv
Abstract…………………………………………………………………………vii
CHAPTER ONE: GENERAL INTRODUCTION
1.1: Background to the Study………………………………..…………………...1
1.2: Statement of Problem……………………………………………………......2
1.3: Research Aims and Objectives of Study…………………………………….3
1.4: Thesis of Research……………………………………………………….…..3
1.5: Conceptual Clarifications………………………………………………….....3
1.6: Methodology…………………………………………………………….…...4
1.7: Scope and Delimitations of the Study………………………………………..5
1.8: Significance of the Study……………………………………………….........6
1.9: Literature Review…………………………………………………………....6

9
CHAPTER TWO: CAMUS ON SUICIDE AND ABSURDITY
2.1: Existentialism……………………………………………………..….……11
2.1.1: Major Themes of Existentialism……………………………..…..12
2.2: The Existential Philosophy of Albert Camus…………………………..…..15
2.3: Absurdity of Human Life……………………………………………….….17
2.4: Suicide as a Response to the Absurdity of Human Life…………………....19
CHAPTER THREE: THE VALUE OF HUMAN LIFE
3.1: Origin of Human Life……………………………………………………....24
3.2: The Sanctity of Human Life……………………………………………......28
3.2.1: Religious Justification for the Sanctity of Human Life……….…...29
3.2.2: Philosophical Justification for the Sanctity of Human Life………..31
3.3: Meaning of Life…………………………………………………………….32
3.3.1: Meaningless Existence……………………………….…………….33
3.3.2: Meaningful Existence…………………………………….………...35
CHAPTER FOUR: ASSESSMENT OF SUICIDE AS A MORAL PROBLEM
4.1: History of Suicide…………………………………………………………..38
4.2: Defining Suicide……………………………………………………………39
4.3: Types of Suicide……………………………………...…………………….41
4.4: Causes of Suicide……………………………………………………...…....43
4.4.1: Psychological Causes of Suicide…………………………………...43
4.4.2: Sociological Causes of Suicide……………………………………..44

10
4.5: Suicide Prevention…………………………………………………………..45
4.5.1: Medical Treatment: Psychotherapy………………………………....46
4.5.2: Moral Issues in Suicide Prevention…………………………………47
..
4.6: Two Opposed Philosophies of Suicide…………………………………...…48
4.6.1: Argument In Favour of Suicide……………………………………..48
4.6.1.1: Hume’s Arguments…………………………………………49
4.6.2: Arguments against Suicide………………………………………….52
4.6.2.1: Aquinas’ Arguments………………………………………..52
CONCLUDING REFLECTIONS……………………………………………..56
BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………….…………...59

11
CHAPTER ONE
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY
Camus was influenced by a diverse collection of foreign authors and philosophies
in the 1930s. Nietzsche and Dostoyevsky had remained significant in thought since the
turn of the century; German phenomenology was flowing into France; Sartre was
struggling against the shallow rationalism of Cartesian thought; Faulkner and
Hemingway, were translated into French and that their styles and concepts made their
way into the philosophy of Camus at this time. These influences and moods helped
formulate the philosophies of Existentialism and the Absurd as associated with Sartre
and Camus.
Born in Mondovi, Algeria in 1913, Camus was concerned with the creation of
meaning in a meaningless world through the process of living life. To this, he fought
mulishly against war by publishing a number of works which have become associated
with his doctrine of the absurd. The novel, The Stranger (1942; Eng. trans., 1946), among
others, has become the quintessential work of fiction of the 20th century on the theme of
the alienated outsider. The Myth of Sisyphus (1942; Eng. trans., 1955) is an essay
dedicated to the absurd and suicide. He also published two plays consistent with this
theme: Cross Purpose (1944, Eng. trans., 1948) and Caligula (1944, Eng. trans., 1948).
More so, he published L’Homme Révolté (The Rebel), a text on artistic, historical, and
metaphysical rebellion, in which he lays out the difference between revolution and

12
revolt.1
In 1957 he was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature for his essay Réflexions
Sur la Guillotine as an influential work on behalf of human rights.2
The subsequent
discourses on this chapter shall call our attention to the following: Statement of the
problem, research aims and objectives of the study, thesis of research, conceptual
clarifications, methodology, scope and delimitations, significance of the study, and
literature review.
1.2: STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Suicide is seen as the individual’s act of giving in to the absurdity of human life.
Socrates speaking through Albert Camus puts it that many people die because they judge
that life is not worth living.3
This preceding statement shows that respect to human life
is paramount and necessary because human life in itself is a gift to treasure.
In an attempt to demystify the problems associated with suicide, Camus insists
that one must be able to revolt, like Sisyphus, who defiled all pain and sufferings in order
to defile death, showing that life itself can be cherished in full.4
To this effect, many
persons have presented arguments on the moral justification of suicide in an attempt to
quitting the hardship of life and perhaps escape the absurdities that infiltrate every aspect
of the human life.
1
Cf, Adele King, Albert Camus: Life and Times (London: Haus Publishing Ltd., 2010), pp. 1-3.
2
Cf, David Sprintzen, Camus: A Critical Examination (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1988), p.5.
3
Albert Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus and Other Essays (New York: Random House Inc., 1991), p.4.
4
Albert Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus and Other Essays, p.9.

13
1.3: RESEARCH AIMS AND OBJECTIVES OF STUDY
 To expose Albert Camus’ existentialist principle; that there is one truly serious
philosophical problem which is Suicide, by bring to limelight Camus’ intent in
stating and analyzing problems on suicide especially as it regards downplay of
human life.
 To show the value of human life via safeguarding and upholding the sanctity and
dignity of human life, through the act of re-examining our daily activities of life,
bearing in our consciousness that life has a purpose that must be fulfilled.
 To show the current stands of moral assessment of suicide in the world, via the
pro-choice and pro-life supporters of suicide, particularly that of David Hume and
Thomas Aquinas respectively.
1.4: THESIS OF RESEARCH
This essay argues that suicide is not an answer to escaping the higgledy-piggledy,
the wailings, the hustles and bustles of life in this world. Thus, the ability to persevere in
one’s life endeavours, like Sisyphus, shows the extent at which one is willing to curb and
revolt against the absurdities of life in this world, and is the proper philosophical attitude
to cultivate.
1.5: CONCEPTUAL CLARIFICATIONS
The key concepts to be clarified in this research are as follows: Albert Camus,
notion of suicide, and value of human life.

14
In the first place, Albert Camus (1913-1960) was a celebrated twentieth century
French-Algerian novelist, playwright and philosopher. His writings addressed the
isolation of man in an alien universe, the estrangement of the individual from self and the
absurdity of life. By philosophical orientation, he was an existentialist. The range of his
works are wide, mostly plays and dramas, but he is best known for his work on the myth
of Sisyphus and the stranger. Though, he understood the nihilism of many of his
contemporaries, he argued the necessity of defending the values of truth and life.
Suicide (from Latin sui caedere, self-killing) is the act of ending one’s own life,
which has been considered a sin and crime in many religions and societies because it
contradicts the natural inclination of humans to preserve and perpetuate life.5
In connection, value of life, is expressed in the love, respect, and care, protection
given to self or to another in times of difficulties and uncertainties, especially where life
is weak and defenceless. This implies that whatever is opposed to life itself such as any
present day threats to human life (murder, war, suicide, euthanasia, abortion and so on),
violates the integrity and value of human life.6
1.6: METHODOLOGY
The method applied here is basically that of exposition of Albert Camus view on
suicide and the value of life in relation to meaningless and meaningful existence. To
achieve this, we set out with four chapters. Chapter one which is basically the
introductory part, we shall begin by highlight the statement of problem, research aims
5
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Respect for Human Life Suicide, #2281.
6
Cf, John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae (30 March 1995), #3.

15
and objectives of study; give the thesis of research, clarify the basic concepts as contained
in the topic under discussion, state our methodology as well as the scope and
delimitations of the study; and finally, we shall discuss significance of the study (the
relevance of our research) and then make a textual evaluation of some the primary and
secondary texts to be used. Chapter two, rests upon Camus’ notion of suicide and
absurdity which will be achieved by looking at existentialism and its major themes, the
existential philosophy of Albert Camus, the absurdity of human life, and thus suicide as
a resolution to the absurdity of human life. Chapter three hinges on the value of human
life. In other for this to be achieved, we shall discuss the origin of human life, the sanctity
of human life, and the meaning of life. This chapter shall end by presenting the question
of its meaningfulness or meaninglessness. Chapter four focuses on the assessment of
suicide as a moral problem. To achieve this feat, we shall look at the history and definition
of suicide, narrowing it down to its various types, causes of suicide and suicide
prevention- presenting our views in an attempt to curb, reduce and resolve the thought
and act of suicide; and lastly, expose the opposing views of David Hume and Thomas
Aquinas on suicide. The concluding reflection follows after this.
1.7: SCOPE AND DELIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
Since this essay aims at exposing the views of Albert Camus on the notion of
suicide, and the value of human life; The Myth of Sisyphus, The Stranger, The plague,
The Rebel, among other primary sources, shall define the boundaries of this essay. More
so, in these books, are many themes which focus on the subject matter-suicide and the

16
value of human life, meaningless and meaningful existence, and the moral assessment of
suicide. In conjunction with the primary sources, we shall make use of other relevant
sources where necessary, but they shall be only supplementary to the primary sources.
1.8: SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
This work is significant in the following ways:
 It reminds us that “life is worth living”. Even in the face of uncertainties, Camus
opines that life, remains a magnificent enterprise; and “suicide”, as a resolution
of the absurdities of this world, would be a defeat, a denial of the very condition
of man’s existence.
 Life is precious, and thus, it should be guarded like an egg. Since each man’s life
has an aim and a purpose, he freely decides to make the condition of his life either
meaningful or meaningless.
 The question of whether suicide can ever be morally justified has been
extensively discussed both by secular philosophers and by religious moralists;
and that suicide presents unresolved moral problems about the value of life; which
indeed have prompted many philosophers to argue about the moral permissibility
or impermissibility of suicide.
1.9: LITERATURE REVIEW
We shall make a textual analysis of the relevant sources of materials to be used
for our work. To begin with, The Stranger (1952) by Camus presents the story of
Meursault (just like anybody else), who lets himself get involved in a sordid affair at the

17
end of which he becomes a murderer. He is brought to trial. At that moment, everything
he has or has not done before the murder becomes a charge against him. He expresses no
regret and thus, he is condemned to death for his crimes.7
Thus, for Camus, Meursault is
an existential hero: encompassed in a world of total subjectivity, regarding his own
existence of the moment as the only reality, denying the possibility of supernatural reality
and its consolations, living under the shadow of death, and operating on the premise that
life itself is the highest value. Yet despite the lack of meaning, Meursault knows that life
is worth living. According to Adele King, “The Stranger was unusual in the literary
climate of the first half of the 20th century. Its hero was neither bourgeois nor aristocratic,
neither an aesthete nor an intellectual”.8
In the same vein to curbing the thought of meaningless life, and to promote the
value of life, Camus in The Myth of Sisyphus (1955), defines the absurd. He does this by
offering up a model in his work for good living, in the face of unavoidable notion of
absurdity. Through Sisyphus, Camus shows that man has a freewill in finding meaning
in any situation despite the challenges faced in the world. In starting this essay, Camus
presents two options: to commit suicide in the face of absurdity, or to live in denial.9
The
first, explains Camus’ definition of absurd. Again, the first option in response to the
absurd offered is suicide. Camus, therefore presents that to choose suicide in the face of
absurdity in not legitimate, because the free will has been negated by the concept of the
absurd. The second, explains Camus definition of value of life. This he claims is to rebel
7
Albert Camus, The Stranger (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), pp. 73-74.
8
Adele King, op.cit., p. 39.
9

18
against the absurd by choosing life to be meaningful. In other words, it is to rebel against
the meaninglessness of life which absurdity proposes upon our lives, and to find
fulfilment in continuing on by our own free will, rising above the essential
meaninglessness of life presented by the concept of the absurd.10
In all, perseverance in
the face of the absurd is to rise above it, and to live well.
Similarly, in Man’s Search for Meaning: An Introduction to Logotherapy (1959),
Victor Frankl exposes man’s hope to living a good life. From his autobiographical
fragment of this book, he shares his experience as a prisoner in the concentration camps
of the Nazis. Apart from his sister, he lost his entire nuclear and extended family to the
gas chambers at Auschwitz’s concentration camps. Despite losing everything and his
loved ones, he strives in finding life worth preserving and meaningful. Thus, out-living
such horrors, the Austrian psychiatrist and psychotherapist developed a psychological
approach known as Logotherapy.11
His quest is to help re-define and encourage all those
who face similar problem as he, that there is still a purpose in life.
Next, Hume’s approach to morality is of a piece with the rest of his philosophy.
He puts it that human morality is not founded in nature but founded in the pain and
pleasure that arises from the consideration of self-interest.12
In part III of essay IX, “of
Suicide” in Essays, Moral, Political and Literary (1742), David Hume proposes to prove
that suicide is no transgression of our duty to God. More so, he provides some
10
11
It is based on the theory that all healing and wisdom is derived from our noetic dimension and therein
lays the cure for all of our negative harmonies, relationships and emotions.
12
Cf, David F. Norton, The Cambridge Companion to Hume (Edinburgh: Cambridge University Press,
1993), p. 148.

19
constructive arguments in support of the moral permissibility of suicide. His major
argument is based on the principles of utility and autonomy.
In opposition, the Angelic doctor of the church, Thomas Aquinas’ treatises on
cardinal virtues, which also captures issues on moral philosophy can be found in his
Summa Theologiae-Secunda Secundae, questions 47-170. Aquinas in these treatises
centres on pursuing and living the moral life of the good. With focus on question 64,
murder is a sin, as long as it involves the deliberate act of terminating one’s life or
another. More so, the 8 articles in this section, gives insight into his moral teachings and
that of the Catholic Church. In article 3, Aquinas proposes three primary moral arguments
against suicide as a sin contrary to the virtue of justice, and the value of life because it is:
firstly, a sin contrary to natural law and charity; secondly, it is a sin that injures the
common good; and thirdly, because it is a sin against God. This implies that suicide
affects the eternal, immutable soul.

20
CHAPTER TWO
CAMUS ON SUICIDE AND ABSURDITY
On 29 October 1945, Sartre delivered a public lecture entitled ‘Is Existentialism
Humanism?’ that was soon to become the manifesto of the existentialist movement. It
summarized briefly what came to be known as the defining characteristic of Sartrean
existentialism: the claim that ‘existence precedes essence’. In other words, it seemed to
follow that individuals were left to create their own values because there was no moral
order in the universe by which they could guide their actions; indeed, that this freedom
was itself the ultimate value to which one could appeal. Thus, this Sartre’s view of the
absurdity and futility of human existence was carried along and thus elaborated upon by
the twentieth century French philosopher cum novelist and Nobel Prize winner, Albert
Camus (1913-1960).
Pondering why humans are faced with this parable of the ultimate futility of life,
Camus counsels that our only hope is to acknowledge that there is no ultimate hope. That
is, Camus tries to rationalize why people often result to suicide in the face of obvious
absurdities in life. Thus, Camus further posits that the world has no ultimate meaning and
thus to that effect, no beliefs are absolute. This means that for him, one belief is as good
as another in an absurd world. Perhaps, this geared Camus’ thoughts towards the position
that the only really philosophical problem is suicide. However, he does not deny the fact
that objections and reactions might be raised as to counter the authenticity of suicide not
being a problem or a question, rather than an act.

21
2.1: EXISTENTIALISM
Existentialism is known as an ‘individualistic’ philosophy. Each existentialist will
treat this subject in his or her own way. But their underlying theme is that the pull in
modern society is away from individualism and towards conformity.13
Existentialism is also a term applied to those philosophers who consider the
nature of the human condition (choice, freedom, existence and so on) as a key
philosophical problem. In other words, it is the philosophy that recognizes these
problems, and tries to address them. More so, existentialism as a movement has its root
as far back as the time of Pascal Blaise, Augustine and Socrates,14
and gained prominence
in the nineteenth and twentieth century. It is also a historical movement which focuses
on revolt against the nature of our technological world-the subordination of an individual
to a machine or a tool, against scientism and positivism, and the mass movement of our
time. Walter Kaufmann puts it thus:
The refusal to belong to any school of thought, the repudiation
of the adequacy of any body of beliefs whatsoever and
especially of systems, and a marked dissatisfaction with
traditional philosophy as superficial, academic, and remote
from life- that is the heart of existentialism.15
Prominent among contemporary existentialists are: Soren Kiekegaard (1813-
1855), Freidrich Neitzche (1844-1900), Gabriel Marcel (1899-1973), Martin Heidegger
13
Cf, Thomas Flynn, Existentialism: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006),
p.24.
14
Alasdair MacIntyre “Existentialism”, Encyclopedia of Philosophy vol.3, edited by Donald Borchert,
2006 edition, p.500.
15
W. Kaufmann, Existentialism from Dostoyevsky to Sartre (New York: World Publishing Company,
1956), p.12.

22
(1899-1976), Jean Paul Sartre (1905-1980), Simeone de Beauvoir (1908-1986) and
Albert Camus (1913-1960).16
Others such as: Fyodor Dostoyevsky (1821-1881), Meister
Eckhart (1260-1327), G.W.F Hegel (1770-1831), Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778),
Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860), Voltaire (1694-1778), Franz Kafka (1883-1924) and
Leon Chestov (1866-1938), portray some existentialist themes and ideas.
2.1.1: MAJOR THEMES OF EXISTENTIALISM
There are many themes associated with existentialism. However, we have
abridged them to five: Existence, Individuality and worldly Conformity, Freedom,
Choice and finally Absurdity.
The first major theme of existentialism is that of existence, which hinges on
humans. Many philosophers have connected the concept of existence with that of essence
in such a way that the former signifies merely the representation of the latter. They posit
that If “essence” designates what a thing is and “existence” that it is, it follows that what
is intelligible about any given thing, what can be thought about it, will belong to its
essence. It is from essence in this sense that one can say that the human being as a rational
animal ought to draw its prescriptions for a re-evaluation of an individual's way of life,
its estimation of the meaning and value of existence.17
16
Douglas Burnham, “Existentialism” http:// www.iep.utm.edu/existent/(24 Nov. 2013).
17
Steven Crowell (2004), “Existentialism”, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/existentialism/#ExiPreEss(24
Nov. 2013).

23
The second major theme of existentialism is that of individuality and worldly
conformity. The nineteenth century Danish philosopher, Soren Kierkegaard insists that
the highest good for an individual is to his or her own unique vocation. This idea of
finding a unique vocation is an attempt to understand one’s individual existence in line
with the conformity of the world that would exhibit a logically necessary connection
between one’s individual part and the conceptual scheme of the whole world. In other
words, people who live out a stereotyped role, are people who upon reflection, understand
themselves-knowing their weaknesses and strengths.
The third major theme of existentialism is Freedom. The concepts of freedom is
central to any understanding of what a human being is.18
Freedom entails something like
responsibility, for myself and for my actions. Many atheist-philosophers posit that one’s
freedom is in part defined by the remoteness of one’s decisions from any determination
by a deity, or by previously existent values or knowledge.
The fourth major theme of existentialism is Choice. This perhaps is the most
prominent theme in the doctrine of existentialism because choice is the central fact of
human nature. Human primary distinction is the ability to be free in choosing. Choice
therefore, is inescapable for even the refusal to choose, connotes choice. Nevertheless,
choice is governed by some criteria (thoughts, reflexivity, and personal satisfaction)
which are employed when choosing. Moreover, existentialists have argued that
18
Frederick A. Olafson, “Freedom and Responsibility” In A Companion to Phenomenology and
Existentialism, Edited by Hubert L. Dreyfus and Mark A. Wrathall (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.,
2006), p. 263.

24
individuals are free to choose their own path; they must accept the risk and responsibility
of following their commitment wherever it leads.
The last major theme of existentialism is Absurdity. “Absurdity,” or,
alternatively, “the Absurd,” generally refers to the experience of groundlessness,
contingence, or superfluity with respect to those basic aspects of “the human condition”
that seem as if they should be open to rational justification.19
Although first coined by
Kierkegaard, the father of existentialism, and largely associated with a select group of
existential philosophers, novelists, playwrights, and poets, the philosophical problem to
which absurdity refers arose with modern philosophy and has continued to persist beyond
the existentialist moment proper.20
Human existence, the existentialists claim is absurd. There are basically two
connotations to the term ‘absurdity’. The first concerns the meaninglessness of human
existence that is derived from its lack of ground or ultimate purpose in life. The second
concerns the transcendence of limitations of the rationale which requires our whole
power of conviction.21
Camus for example, argues that the basic sense of human
existence is its confrontations by stating that “the divorce between man and his life, the
actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity”22
.
19
David Sherman, “Absurdity” In A Companion to Phenomenology and Existentialism, Edited by Hubert
L. Dreyfus and Mark A. Wrathall (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2006), p. 271.
20
David Sherman, loc. cit.
21
Nicholas Bunnin and Jiyuan Yu, The Blackwell Dictionary of Western Philosophy (Oxford: Blackwell
publishing, 2004), p.14.
22

25
Finally, these above-mentioned themes of existentialism, places its centrality on
this point: to live is to suffer, to survive is to find meaning in suffering. To be precise, if
there is a purpose in life at all, then, there must be a purpose in suffering and in dying.
But no human can tell another what this purpose is. Each for find out for himself or
herself, and find out the responsibility that his or her answer prescribes.23
If successful,
growth will be his or her watchword in spite of all indignities.
2.2: THE EXISTENTIAL PHILOSOPHY OF ALBERT CAMUS
The idea of life being absurd could be strongly questionable, but for Albert
Camus, absurdity has become his philosophy. Unlike Sartre, Albert Camus wrote no
technical philosophy, but in his Myth of Sisyphus, The Rebel, and his plays and novels he
did enunciate an ethical view that has been called the ethics of the absurd.24
In analyzing the works of Camus, one can immediately be thrown into a clash of
a picture of a man with his position. That is, man is divorced from the world yet is
ironically plunged into it. The world as we find it, given our hopes, our expectations, and
our ideals, is intractable. It is disproportionate with our moral and intellectual demands.
In other words, Camus’ fundamental questions revolve around man and the relation of
man to the world. Yet man has a blind but overpowering attachment to life as something
more powerful than any of the world’s ills or any human intellectualization. In all, Camus
wants to know the answer to the question: What is it to be a man?
23
Viktor E. Frankl, Man’s Search for Meaning: An Introduction to Logotherapy (Mumbai: St. Paul Press,
2012), p.14.
24
Nicholas Bunnin and Jiyuan Yu, op. cit., p.105.

26
More so, given this situation, all moral commitments are arbitrary. Reason will
only show us the arbitrariness of human valuations, which will lead one to a leap of faith
in the face of the absurd, which is indefinable. It is indefinable because reason is to
consent to absurdity rather than to face up to it, recognizing it for what it is.25
Man’s
dignity comes in his refusing to compromise. His very humanity is displayed in his
holding on to his intelligence and in recognizing, that there is no metaphysical unity that
can overcome the absurdity of human existence.26
Furthermore, in his novels and in his essays, Camus writes with passion and
conviction in defense of human freedom and intelligence. Camus’ impulse for this is that
we become engaged because we see that life has no ultimate meaning and that, finally
free from a search for cosmic significance, we can take the diverse experiences of life for
what they are in all their richness and variety. That is, as in Resistance, Rebellion and
Death, Camus repeatedly defends human freedom, equality, and the alleviation of human
misery and deprivation. However, in this involvement Camus urges a reliance on human
intelligence in facing the problems of men. To this, Camus felt he could only resolutely
refuse to accept despair and “to fight against eternal injustice, create happiness in order
to protest against the universe of unhappiness.”27
This means that even within the limits
of nihilism, it is possible to find a means beyond nihilism.
25
Herbert Hochberg, “Albert Camus and The Ethics of Absurdity”, Ethics, Vol. 75, No. 2 (January, 1965),
p. 89.
26
Ibid., p.91.
27
Fedrick A. Olafson “Albert Camus”, Encyclopedia Of Philosophy vol.2, edited by Donald Borchert,
2006 edition, pp. 20-23.

27
2.3: ABSURDITY OF HUMAN LIFE
Human existence, Camus claims, is absurd. This absurdity arises out of our
attempts to make sense of a senseless world. That is, the absurdity of life; despair; the
impossibility of accepting general solutions; the evil in man-all these are questions, rather
than answers. They would become meaningless the moment they were not faced with
integrity. This threatens suicide because, from time to time, it produces the “feeling of
the absurd”.28
Camus tells us that the absurd is born of the confrontation between human
need and the unreasonable silence of the world. The pathos of absurdity does not suffice
to make us fully aware of the sometimes dangerous consequences facing those who try
to hold on to it. Camus says, and reemphasizes several times, that the absurd is not a
property the world has by itself. Rather, it is the product of a confrontation between
“human need,” on the one hand, and “the unreasonable silence of the world”.29
Camus
delineates for us its terminological map and consequences, stating that:
The climate of absurdity is in the beginning. The end is the
absurd universe and that attitude of mind which lights the world
with its true colours to bring out the privileged and implacable
visage which that attitude has discerned in it.30
This is what Empedocles means when he asserts that “the important thing,
therefore, is not, as yet, to go to the root of things, but, the world being what it is, to know
28
Cf, Julian Young, “Life Worth Living”, In A Companion to Phenomenology and Existentialism, Edited
by Hubert L. Dreyfus and Mark A. Wrathall (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2006), p. 516.
29
Julian Young, loc. cit.
30
Jacob Golomb, In Search Of Authenticity: From Kierkegaard to Camus (London: Routledge, 1995), p.
121.

28
how to live in it”31
. Philip Stokes posits that Camus’, ‘absurd’ is meant to be taken in its
original comic sense, which arises out of a comparison of the ridiculous with the
sublime.32
Homer tells us that Sisyphus was punished by the gods because of his
disobedience; hence, he was punished by raising a huge stone, to roll it, and push it up a
hundred times over.33
By and large, The Myth of Sisyphus is purportedly, an examination of the
Absurdity of man’s condition, and an attempt to provide a rationale for not committing
suicide in the face of that absurdity. One thing that is clear is that it is a need that used to
be satisfied, for humanity. To this, Julian Young asserts that Camus cites no less than
three different, supposed human needs as needs which used to be satisfied, but which, in
a post-death of God-universe, no longer are.in fact, he dealt in three types of absurdity
which, prima facie at least, are quite distinct from each other. Young further affirms this
claim, stating that:
The first of the alleged needs which Camus takes to be
fundamental to the human being is the desire for a “meaning of
life”, for “a great idea that will transcend (life) and give it
meaning”. The second supposed need that figures prominently
in the Myth is the desire that reality should be intelligible
through and through. The third fundamental desire, the one
most obviously left unsatisfied by the death of God, is the
desire for an assurance of the non-finality of death.34
31
Albert Camus, The Rebel (New York: Random House Inc., 1991), p.7.
32
Philip Stokes, 100 Essential Philosophers (New York: Enchanted Lion Books, 2006), p. 155.
33
34
Julian Young, op.cit., p. 517.

29
Furthermore, unlike “everyday man” who “lives with aims,” the absurd man has
none. Camus names ‘the absurd man’, is the master of his own fate. In connection,
Camus, used Drusilla’s death as a moment of epiphany for the grieving Caligula wherein
he recognizes the absurdity of human existence, an absurdity captured in his line “Men
are dying and they are not happy”. This leads to Camus’ rejection of any theory that
argued that the ends justify the means. If the ends justify the means, what then can justify
the ends? His answer is the means - because they are simply more proximate ends in the
service of a transformed quality of life that must always be lived concretely in the
temporally unfolding present, ever confronted with injustice and exploitation, envisaging
a transformed future that action may aspire to bring into being.
2.4: SUICIDE AS A RESPONSE TO THE ABSURDITY OF HUMAN LIFE
The absurdity of human life, which led the existentialists to reject life, is the same
one that led Camus to reject suicide. As an existentialist-atheist, Camus accepted life
without any support, transcendent or otherwise and so refused to accept the evil nature
of things as they are, but made effort to bring together the abstract and the concrete. One
could say that Camus has rejected only “philosophical” or “metaphysical suicide”. In
other words, he opines that suicide is based on a misunderstanding of the human life.
In this light, suicide for Camus is a philosophical problem because, one has to
judge whether life is or is not worth living. Whether suicide has a valid escape? Whether
life has a meaning? These among others, are the problems that Camus considers. Camus
believes that the act of suicide originates from thought and is just another attempt at

30
resolution. When a human being is unable to create meaning out of the absurdity that
surrounds him or her, he or she lives the typical life of pain, suffering, and death and thus
makes suicide a natural act of existence. In this act, killing oneself results confessing that
life is too hard and so can’t be understood. Thus, having the thought of committing
suicide, as history shows we can see that there is a great connection between this feeling
and the longing for death. More so, Philip Stokes acclaims that Camus is the only
existentialist who seeks to understand the rationale behind the thought of committing
suicide; other existentialist, stokes claim, failed to stay faithful to the original premise of
their existentialist philosophy, which is that the absurd is a consequence of the encounter
between a rational human being and an irrational world.35
Man is the only animal conscious of his own consciousness. Man only gains
consciousness when he evaluates himself and thus pops the question “why”, as to what
he does regularly in the same rhythm. For one to arrive at a conclusion upon self-
evaluation, consequence begins to flow. This consequence is suicide recovery,36
which
is underlined in the three consequences of the absurd: freedom, revolt and passion.
In relating this issue to suicide he tells a fiction on the Myth of Sisyphus. In this
fiction, Sisyphus was the wisest and prudent of mortals. However, having been praised
by the gods, he was punished for disobedience. This punishment was to push a boulder
up the mountain. In this, Camus points out that man keeps struggling with torments of
35
Philip Stokes, op.cit., p.55.
36

31
everyday life in which he never knows the end. However, he posits that “one must
imagine Sisyphus happy”37
.
Using Dostoyevsky’s character, Kirilov, Camus in an attempt to resolve suicide
showed that suicide is not the logical answer, but the avoidance of an answer. Kirilov
said he wanted to take his life because that was his idea. Having an idea, indeed, implies
a motivation. Kirilov arrived at his idea with absurd reasoning by maintaining two
contradictory beliefs: “I know God is necessary and must exist. I also know that he does
not and cannot exist”.38
Apparently, the paradoxical existence of God entails a logical
suicide. For Kirilov, this realization was enough to make him kill himself, because he
inferred that he was God: “If God does not exist, I am God”.39
However, Kirilov didn’t
just think he was God, for that was insufficient. To be God required Kirilov to kill
himself. However, Kirilov realized the divine freedom by bringing it down to earth. For
several years he had sought the attribute of his divinity and he found it. The attribute is
freedom. He refused to maintain the universal delusion that everyone up to him in history,
all men and women, had invented God in order not to kill themselves. Kirilov thought
that was the summary of the entire history up to the moment of his suicide.
In short, Kirilov wanted to demonstrate his suicide to show others the yellow
brick road. Not only was it a metaphysical suicide, it was also pedagogical. Since
Dostoyevsky was a Christian whose Christian beliefs forbid suicide, because it is sinful.
Thus, Kirilov’s act was intended as a lesson. But Camus forbids suicide for different
37
38
Albert Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus and Other Essays, p, 106.
39
Albert Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus and Other Essays, p, 106.

32
reasons and gave us a solution: by maintaining absurdity, never denying it or adopting
metaphysical delusions.40
In all, Camus’s aim, however, is to show that in spite of the menace of the nothing,
life is still worth living. Even in the face of a clear and distinct knowledge of the abyss,
life remains a magnificent enterprise, and suicide absolutely “not legitimate”.41
Camus therefore rejects suicide as an option. He is of the view that we cannot
solve the problem of the absurd by negating its existence. Suicide, as a resolution of the
absurd, would be a defeat, a denial of the very condition of man’s existence.
40
41
Julian Young, op.cit., p. 518.

33
CHAPTER THREE
THE VALUE OF HUMAN LIFE
The word ‘Human Life’ is a term used to summarize the activities characteristic
of all organisms-Nutrition, Respiration, Excretion, Movement, Sensitivity, Growth and
respiration-ranging from such primitive forms as cyanobacteria to plants and animals.42
More so, the word ‘Human’ goes with ‘being’ in this context. To this, a human being is
described or named as a living entity with the qualities of personality and life that
distinguishes “homo sapiens” from all other creatures.43
By this, it shows that human life distinguishes itself from that of other animals by
the spiritual level which it obtains, and by the social dimensions which it reaches.44
Moreover, humans distinguish themselves by the new attitude they possess when
confronted by life.45
They can have the concept of a perfect life; for they are the masters
of their lives and can in a large measure control, direct and perfect it.46
Furthermore, the current efforts to provide a theory of the value of human life
have sought to identify those features of the most valuable creatures (humans) which
might explain their peculiar value. To this, most theories combine autonomy, self-
consciousness and intelligence as the relevant features.47
Thus, humans with such
42
Sarojini T. Ramalingam, Modern Biology: For Senior Secondary Schools (Onitsha: Africana First
Publishers), pp. 5-6.
43
D.P Simmons, Birth and Death (Philadelphia: Westruenster Inc., 1973), p. 88.
44
Cf, Mark .R Leary, The Curse of the Self: Self-Awareness, Egotism, and the Quality of Human Life (New
York: Oxford Press, 2004), p.4.
45
Ibid., p. 7.
46
Albert Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus and Other Essays, p. 13.
47
Richard Norman, On Humanism (New York: Routledge Inc., 2004), p.53.

34
capacities have often been termed ‘persons’. Different accounts of how to apply such
criteria of personhood have emerged. To this, philosophers of consequentialist position
have claimed that only creatures who actually possess the relevant characteristics count
as persons. A major difficulty for such accounts is their counter-intuitive conclusion that
creatures which most people do regard as valuable (fetuses and neonates) either are
valuable not in virtue of any intrinsic properties that they possess, but only in so far as
they are valued by persons properly so called (their parents), or will be valuable only in
terms of future expected utility.48
Others, accepting broadly the same criteria for personhood, have argued that
creatures structured to possess such capacities or members of a natural kind that typically
possesses such capacities, are valuable whether or not particular individuals (fetuses)
actually possess them. Another approach rests content with stipulating that humans are
more valuable than others simply in virtue of their species membership.49
Philosophers faced with the sorts of problems considered so far often produce
common-sense modifications to their general theories to overcome difficulties with hard
cases. With these, we focus on the origin of human life.
3.1: ORIGIN OF HUMAN LIFE
One of the central questions about human life is how it originated. There are
distinctions concerning the origin of life. These distinctions are religious, scientific and
48
Cf, Donald Van Deer, “Whither Baby Doe”, In Matters of Life and Death: New Introductory Essays in
Moral Philosophy, edited By Tom Regan (New York: Random House Inc., 1986), pp. 231-233.
49
Erich H. Loewy and Roberta Springer Loewy, Textbook of Healthcare Ethics (New York: Kluwer
Academic Publishers), p. 221.

35
philosophical. Throughout history, philosophers, religious thinkers, and scientists have
attempted to explain the history and variety of human life on Earth.
Philosophically, life origins does not present any prominent difficulties. Briefly
speaking, the influence of Aristotle on subsequent attitudes toward life and its origin in
has been profound. By this, Aristotle felt that the embryo was initially “vegetative”
(none-animated) and only later became “animated” as it was entered by the soul. Aristotle
equated animation with “quickening”: a criterion that has since been appealed to
persistently but one that, with today’s understanding, is no longer viable.50
In Christianising this, Aquinas proposes that the first principle of life is the soul.51
This is so because to be the first principle of life, does not belong to a body as such; since,
if it were the case, everybody would be a principle of life. Though we have not explored
the ultimate nature of those principle and its origin, one thing is clear: it cannot have its
origin at the bottom, from matter, because if made, it would not include itself, because
only one part of matter is endowed with soul.52
In this connection, there is a need to
acknowledge that the soul finds its origin from above, through the action of an intelligent
being. This hypothesis connotes that to claim that man (human being) succeeds in
synthesizing life, constitutes an argument in favour of the thesis that the soul arises
through the action of an intelligent being.53
50
Erich H. Loewy and Roberta Springer Loewy, op.cit., pp. 218-219.
51
Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q.75, a.1.
52
Batista Mondin, Philosophical Anthropology (Bangalore: Theological Publications, 1985), p.40.
53
Ibid., p. 41.

36
Furthermore, the thesis on ‘origin of species’ by Darwin, gave rise to hostility,
which in turn gave way to commendation as scientists enthusiastically debated, explored,
and built on Darwin’s theory of natural selection. As the 20th century unfolded, scientific
advances revealed the detailed mechanisms missing from Darwin’s theory. New methods
emerged from this theory which provided insight into how populations remain adaptable
to changing environmental circumstances and broadened our understanding of the
genetic structure of populations.
With the unfolding of these methods, the scientific question is: When does human
life begin? One could say that human life begins at birth, namely, when the fetus has fully
emerged from his or her mother’s body. This position, however, usually is based on
seeing human life as a continuum from the terminus a quo of birth to the terminus ad
quem of death.54
Thus, there has to be a designation of a certain point in the history of
the human body as an organism that will have to be designated as the terminus ad quem
of the life of the human person, thereby distinguishing a human person from a human
corpse.55
Despite these propositions, reactions trailed, in that there was uproar among
religious factions, philosophers and scientist on the basis that scientists’ knowledge of
science was incomplete, and their theories left too many questions unanswered. As a
54
David Novak, The Sanctity of Human Life (Washington: Georgetown University Press, 2007), p.66.
55
David Novak, loc.cit.

37
result, some scientists of the day remained swayed that the variety of life on earth could
only result from an act of divine creation.
These reactions exhibited by the philosophers had long wondered how to account
for essences. From where did they appear? The obvious answer had always been that they
were the work of a grand designer. God designed the forms of things which are used as
blueprints for the production of individuals. Darwin’s work would show that complex
design could arise naturally without the need to posit either a designer or a scheme.56
More so, religious factions, hold that the biblical story of creation chose to reject
evolutionary theory because it contradicts the book of Genesis, which describes the
creation story; how God created the world and all its plant and animal life, in six days.57
These reactions also in turn, created a lot of problems. To this, new theories to
the origin of life were given, hoping to give probable answers and solutions to the
problems created. This theories, can be reduced to three fundamental types: 1) direct
creation from God; 2) Spontaneous generation; and 3) Generation or Evolution by pure
chance.
The first answer, that of direct creation on the part of God, is typical of the
mythical mentality, but also supported by many past scientists, and has been vigorously
restated also by some contemporary scientists, in particular by Jacques Servier, a French
doctor. The second answer, that of spontaneous generation, was introduced at the
56
Philips Stokes, op.cit., p.119.
57
Genesis 1, 2:1-4.

38
beginning of the modern era, unexpectedly, conquering the entire scientific world. This
answer opines that life (human) traces its origin from the spontaneous inert matter into
living matter. The third answer that of generation or evolution by pure chance, has been
proposed and reposed by various scientists. This theory states that through a casual
combination of chemical elements, the first living cell formed itself;58
a genetic code by
series of DNA molecules.59
However, one theory which follows the middle road between the concept of the
origin of life by direct creation on the part of God, and the opposite, that of its origin by
pure chance or spontaneous generation, is that professed by various Christian authors: it
states that life has origin by programmed evolution: by this, it does says that evolution
realises itself according to a programme pre-established by God, and that God has
stabilized that, from the forces which matter was originally gifted with, life.60
Philosophically, this theory seems acceptable, in that it respects the principle that
every effect has a proportionate cause, and God here, is indubitably the One who
intervenes with direct or indirect actions.
3.2: THE SANCTITY OF HUMAN LIFE
Recent developments in bio-ethical issues such as cloning, embryo research, stem
cells therapy, euthanasia and abortion have altogether engendered a reconsideration of
58
Batista Mondin, op.cit., pp. 41-43.
59
DNA, or deoxyribonucleic acid, is the hereditary material in humans and almost all other organisms. It
is also a molecule that encodes the genetic instructions used in the development and functioning of all
known living organisms and many viruses.
60
Batista Mondin, op.cit., p.48.

39
the value of the human life both in philosophical, medical and theological circles. David
P. Gushee’s definition aptly captures the doctrine of the sacredness of human life:
The concept of the sanctity of life is the belief that all human
beings, at any and every stage of life, in any and every state of
consciousness or self-awareness, of any and every race, colour,
ethnicity, level of intelligence, religion, language, gender,
character, behaviour, physical ability or disability, potential,
class, social status, etc., of any and every particular quality of
relationship to the viewing subject, are to be perceived as
persons of equal and immeasurable worth and of inviolable
dignity and therefore must be treated in a manner
commensurate with this moral status.61
Explaining this definition, Gushee highlights three points. Firstly, the sanctity of
life doctrine is a moral conviction. Secondly, it is a moral conviction about how human
beings are to be perceived and treated. Thirdly, it is a doctrine with a universal
significance because it cuts across board, and is indiscriminately applicable to every
human person. In a nutshell, the sanctity of life represents a moral conviction of the
inviolability of the human life in every stage of its existence, wherever human life is
found, and in whatever situation human life exists. It is also a moral conviction that every
human person ought to be perceived, addressed, and treated with every degree of respect
and care that upholds human dignity.
3.2.1: RELIGIOUS JUSTIFICATION FOR THE SANCTITY OF HUMAN LIFE
The doctrine of the sacredness of human life is deeply rooted in religious
convictions. Both the Bible and the Qur’an do agree that human life is sacred because
61
David P. Gushee, “The Sanctity of Life,” The Centre for Bioethics and Human Dignity.
http://www.cbhd.org/content/sanctity life (January 10, 2014).

40
God, the creator and owner of all things, created it sacred and forbids its wilful
destruction. There are, of course, several passages in the Bible that reveal this
understanding. To begin with, the biblical account of creation speaks of God creating
man in his own image: God created man in the image of himself, “in the image of God
he created him, male and female he created them”62
. Since of all that God created, the
human being is the image of God (imago Dei) and God himself is sacred (in a sense
inviolable), the human being, therefore, shares or partakes of God’s sacredness. By solely
sharing in God’s sacredness, the human person, thus, has an exalted and dignified
position above other created things.
While proclaiming the belief that the human being is the image of God, the Bible,
in clear terms, condemns the destruction of human life in these passages: “He who sheds
the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for in the image of God was man
created”63
, and “You shall not kill”64
. Biblical scholars, in the light of the prevalent
situation of the abuses on human life, have gone as far as affirming the personhood of
fetuses. These biblical scholars contend that such passages as “remember, I was born
guilty, a sinner from the moment of conception”65
and “thus says Yahweh, your
redeemer, he who formed you in the womb” implicitly claim personhood for fetuses.
The sanctity of human life is also a basic concept in Islam. The Qur’an explicitly
forbids the unjust and unlawful termination of human life in these verses: “whether open
62
Genesis 1:27.
63
Genesis 9:6.
64
Exodus 20:13
65
Psalm 51:5.

41
or secret; take not life, which God hath made sacred, except by way of justice and law”66
and “Eat not up your property . . . nor kill (or destroy) yourselves: for verily God hath
been to you Most Merciful”.67
In fact, with regard to abortion, Islamic clerics would
remind us that one of the traits of the believing women in Islam is that they “will not kill
their children”.68
Islam abhors abortion and teaches that there is no such thing as
“unwanted pregnancy” and that every child is a great gift from God.69
3.2.2: PHILOSOPHICAL JUSTIFICATION FOR THE SANCTITY OF HUMAN
LIFE
Our philosophical justification for the sanctity of the human life is predicated on
the obvious fact that it is against nature to stifle or take away human life once it begins
to exist. The human person is a substance of rational nature. As substances of rational
nature every human person exists by himself or herself, and no human life is substantially
dependent on another. Not even the dependence of the fetus on its mother for nutrition
and growth makes it ontologically dependent on its mother. The fetus is at best materially
dependent on its mother. So long as the fetus has its own being separate from that of its
mother and cannot be confused with that of its mother, the fetus cannot be said to be
ontologically or substantially dependent upon its mother. Since by nature every human
person (including a fetus) is a substance that can ontologically exist on its own distinct
and not confused with others, it will be presumptuous of any person to act against nature
66
Surat Al-‘An`ām (The Cattle): Chapter 6 verse 151.
67
Surat An-Nisā’ (The Women): Chapter 4 verse 29.
68
Surat Al-Mumtaĥanah (She that is to be examined): Chapter 60:12.
69
Cf. Majid A. Katme, “Islam and Abortion”, In Society for the Protection of Unborn Children.
http://www.spuc.org.uk/about/muslim division/prohibit (January 10, 2014).

42
by the performance of acts that either debase or destroy the ontological status of any other
human person (fetuses included). If it is contra natura to debase or destroy human life,
it therefore means that nature has given man a life that is inviolable. With this understood,
only right reason will make us realize that every act that stifles or destroys human life is
evil.
However, the question that arises is this: how then do we know when reason is
right? The determination of the rightness or wrongness of the dictates of reason is done
by a rational critique of reason itself. In that critique we must inquire whether reason
points to the right path or right course of action; whether reason conforms to our
habitually possessed code of rationally derived moral principles, whether it is consistent
with the human being’s rational nature objectively viewed; and whether it is oriented
towards the human being’s ultimate end, which is happiness.70
3.3: MEANING OF LIFE
The question whether life has any meaning is difficult to interpret and the more
you concentrate your critical faculty on it the more it seems to elude you, or to evaporate
as any intelligible question.71
In other words, the question of the meaning of life gets
inevitably raised before any person who matures in his or her development, moving up
from the instinctive-reflexive stage to the really human one, at which the intellect begins
to dominate in choosing one’s way of living and conduct.72
This is so because search for
70
Ibid.,p. 85.
71
Viktor E. Frankl, op.cit., p.151.
72
“The Meaning of Human Life”, http://ecopsychology.swami-center.org/the-meaning-of-life.shtml (20
February 2014).

43
the meaning among humans is a primary force in life, and not a ‘secondary
rationalization’ of instinctual drives.73
It is also important to ask the question: what does it mean to say that life is
meaningful or meaningless? Indeed, it is not easy to say because the question itself is
difficult to interpret. Life must have a Purpose. The person must understand the purpose
and choose it freely-“our own creation”. The purpose must be true, real and finally,
achievable. Sequel to this, Richard Taylor proposes that it might be easier to imagine that
the human life would make for a meaningless existence. In buttressing this, he opts for
The Myth of Sisyphus, to give a better understanding of a meaningless life.74
3.3.1: MEANINGLESS EXISTENCE
Meaningless is a condition, according to Viktor Emil Frankl, in which the mind
finds it hard to tolerate. It leads to boredom, depression, neurosis and even suicide.75
Having life or being a living thing does not guarantee that the life will have meaning. It
follows that being a living human being does not guarantee meaningfulness. Conversely,
having a desire to continue to live does not mean that the person’s life has meaning. In
other words, having the instinct of self-preservation, as all animals have, does not mean
that a person’s life has meaning.
Meaningless existence according to Camus can be expressed in men, who live
merely on hope, without putting much effort in daily deeds and thriving of the universe,
73
Viktor E. Frankl, op.cit., p. 137.
74
Cf, Richard Taylor, “The Meaning of Life”, In Good and Evil (New York: Prometheus Books. 2000), p.
21.
75

44
where kindness yields to generosity, affection to virile silence, and communion to solitary
change.76
Similarly, In Greek mythology, Homer tells of Sisyphus as the wisest and most
prudent of mortals.77
However, it will be remembered that he betrayed divine secrets to
mortals, and for this he was condemned by the gods to roll a stone to the top of a hill
again and again, forever.78
This account of Sisyphus for Taylor, is a perfect picture of
meaningless toil because it never gets anywhere, never accomplishes anything.
Accordingly, it makes the life of Sisyphus meaningless because nothing ever comes from
what he is doing. In explication, Albert Camus narrates that:
…one sees merely the whole effort of a body straining to raise
the huge stone, to roll it and push it up a slope a hundred times
over; one sees the face screwed up, the cheek tight against the
stone, the shoulder bracing the clay-covered mass, the foot
wedging it, the fresh start with arms outstretched, the wholly
human security of two earth-clotted hands. At the very end of
his long effort measured by sky-less space and time without
depth, the purpose is achieved. Then Sisyphus watches the
stone rush down in a few moments toward that lower world
whence he will have to push it up again toward the summit. He
goes back down to the plain.79
Apparently, life is meaningless Taylor claims, if it is lacking in a real (not merely
illusory) purpose. In other words, it must be one that is genuinely significant and not
merely believed to be so: capable of attainment, and not forever eluding its pursuer;
created and chosen by him whose goal is to achieve it, and not imposed from without.
76
77
78
79
Albert Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus and Other Essays, pp. 120-121.

45
However, putting the whole matter positively, we can say that life is truly
meaningful only if it is directed to goals of one’s own creation and choice and if those
goals are genuinely noble, beautiful, or lastingly worthwhile and attained.80
3.3.2: MEANINGFUL EXISTENCE
Camus, notes that there are those who see existence as meaningful. This is so
because they are conscious of their strength to be sure of living constantly on high and
fully aware of an amazing grandeur of the human mind.81
However, for those who see
life as meaningful, they will rejoice, while others who see life as meaningless would
continue to live by the mandated restrictions because they cannot imagine life being
otherwise.82
In other words, life is meaningful to those who are conscious of fulfilling
their tasks, amid stupidity of wars, without considering themselves in contradiction.83
This indicates that being ‘responsible’ should be our motto.84
By declaring that being ‘responsible’ should be our motto, implies that we are
responsible creatures, and must actualize the true potential meaning of his or her life. It
is necessary to note that the true potential meaning of one’s life is to be found in the world
rather than one’s own psyche, as though it were a closed system. Furthermore,
meaningful existence, in this sense enables people to interpret and organize their
experience, achieve a sense of their own worth and place, identify the things that matter
80
Richard Taylor, op.cit., pp. 19-20.
81
Albert Camus, The Stranger, p. 39.
82
Albert Camus, The Plague (New York: Penguin Publishers, 1948), p.4.
83
84

46
to them, and effectively direct their energies.85
Seemingly, Viktor Frankl’s ‘theory of
meaning’ has heavily focused on the idea that each person has some unique purpose or
overarching aim for his or her life, comprehended in light of one’s values, and enacted in
reflection of one’s community. Here, meaning is experienced as what people are trying
to do to enact their values. Thus, meaning refers to people’s pursuits of their most
important strivings and aims in life. This shows that man puts efforts in things and so
achieves these things through interest and will, which is hinged on the state of mind and
the feelings we put in our efforts in determining and thus giving life meaning.86
Our lives, according to Taylor, resembles that of Sisyphus. However, we are not
infinitely bored by them and so, find them meaningful to the extent that we are pursuing
our interest. Taylor admits that boredom can arise if after making something, one relaxes
and contemplates on the efforts utilized rather than doing something else.87
This
retrospection, could be sad or meaningless, which may eventually lead to the destruction
of that thing. That is, it is the doing of things and the viewing of our activities from within,
while we are engaged in them that gives them meaning.
85
www.michaelfsteger.com/wp.../08/Steger-HOPP2-Chapter-in-press.pdf.
86
Cf, Viktor E. Frankl, op.cit., p.144.
87
Richard Taylor, op.cit., p. 27.

47
CHAPTER FOUR
ASSESSMENT OF SUICIDE AS A MORAL PROBLEM
Over the years, the question of the rightness or wrongness of committing suicide
has generated heated and controversial debate among scholars and even among men on
the street. Some scholars are convinced that it is an act which is the exclusive preserve
of the individual to commit such an act or not. Others however, do not see reasons why
an individual should intentionally take his or her life via intake of pills, self-hanging,
explosion and even gunshots. Such attitudes they claim, reflects a social situation in
which motivation towards suicide is not yet understood and thus creates serious
dimensions of the social problem which are in fact seldom confronted.
By and large, the question of whether suicide can ever be morally justified has
been extensively discussed both by secular philosophers and by religious moralists.
According to Plato, Aristotle, St Augustine, St Thomas Aquinas, Kant and Hegel, suicide
is always morally wrong. It is argued that suicide defies the will of God, that it is socially
harmful and is opposed to ‘nature’. This is why Kant writes in his Metaphysics of Morals,
that we have a duty not to commit suicide in the service of self-love, and by extension,
the duty to love one’s neighbour.88
More so, suicide presents unresolved moral problems
about the value of life; which indeed have promulgated many philosophers arguing about
the moral permissibility or impermissibility of suicide.
88
Cf, Sally Sedgwick, Kant’s Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals: An Introduction (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2008), p. 123.

48
4.1: HISTORY OF SUICIDE
Suicide has been honoured and respected in eastern culture, especially in Japan
with the famous Hara-kiri89
(often called seppuku), while in most western societies,
suicide has been negatively considered the most destructive and evil thing a human being
can do and something that should be avoided at all cost.90
From a philosophical point of view, no philosopher has ever claimed that suicide
under every circumstances is lawful. Among the many famous people throughout history
who have committed suicide in ancient Rome, and Greece personalities are: Queen Dido
of Carthage, Lucretia, Socrates, Hannibal Barca, Marcus Junius Brutus, Mark Antony
and Queen Cleopatra, Seneca, Emperor Nero, Cato the younger, Marcus Salvius Otho,
among others.91
More so, the stoics of Rome, especially Seneca, maintained that a wise
man could take his life if fortunes proved very adverse. In other words, only a wise man
ought to commit suicide because he is endowed with perfect happiness.92
In the same
vein, Plato best expressed his position in his Phaedo:
Cebes, I believe ... that the gods are our keepers, and we men
are one of their possessions. Don’t you think so? Yes, I do, said
Cebes. Then take your own case. If one of your possessions
were to destroy itself without intimation from you that you
wanted it to die, wouldn’t you be angry with it and punish it, if
89
Hara-kiri is a ritual and honourable suicide with Japanese origins. Traditionally, it is done in a simple
spiritually clean temple by cutting open one’s abdomen with a wakizashi (traditional Japanese sword of
about 50 cm), thereby releasing the soul. The traditional form is one deep cut down and one across. Hara-
kiri was used as the ultimate protest, when one’s morals stood in the way of executing an order from the
master.
90
Merrick Joav and Soren Ventegodt, “Philosophy of Life and Suicide” In Suicidal Behaviour in
Adolescence: An International Perspective, Edited by Merick Joav and G. Zalsman (Tel Aviv: Freinbd
Publishing House, 2005), p.9.
91
Scott Mcculloch, 10 Famous Greek and Roman Suicides from the Ancient World,
http://www.Ancientl.Com/Roman/Famous-Suicides-Ancient-World/ (20 March 2014).
92
Cf, Brad Inwood, Reading Seneca: Stoic Philosophy at Rome (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005),
p. 131.

49
you had any means of doing so? Certainly. So if you look at it
in this way, I suppose it is not unreason-able to say that we must
not put an end to ourselves...93
Equally, Aristotle (384-222 BCE) believed that suicide was an act against the state and
was, therefore, wrong-a forbidden action. In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle further
noted that:
...to die to escape from poverty or love or anything painful is
not the mark of a brave man, but rather of a coward; for it is
softness to fly from what is trouble-some, and such a man
endures death not because it is noble but to fly from evil.94
In other words, Aristotle, calls suicide a kind of laziness, an act of escapism, an act of a
coward who is not ready to face the difficulties of life. More so, all Christian philosophers
condemned suicide as the violation of the right of the creator who gives life not as an
absolute gift to us, but a gift to be used according to His direction. In opposition, David
Hume defended the lawfulness of suicide in his essay “of suicide”. Bentham, Haeckel,
Nietzsche, held the same view as David Hume.
Today, in the so-called civilized world, suicide is on the increase. According to
the World Health Organization (WHO), it is estimated that in the year 2000, more than
800,000 people worldwide had died by suicide.95
4.2: DEFINING SUICIDE
Various human actions are easily and correctly classified as acts of suicide. The
exact date of its first use of the word ‘suicide’ is, questionable. According to the Oxford
93
E. Hamilton and H Cairns (Edited), “Plato’s Phaedo”, In The Collected Dialogues of Plato (Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1961), p. 45.
94
Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book III, 1116a, 10.
95
Cf, W.H.O, World Report on Violence and Health (Geneva: WHO, 2002).

50
English Dictionary, Walter Charleton first used the word in 1651 when he said: “To
vindicate one’s self from . . . inevitable Calamity, by Suicide is not . . . a Crime”.96
Some
claim that Sir Thomas Browne used the word first in his book, Religio Medici, first
published in 1642.97
Others acknowledge Edward Philips, for taking credit for coining
the term, in the 1662 edition of A New World of Words. Before “Suicide” became part of
the vernacular, such terms as self-destruction, self-killing, self-murder, and self-slaughter
were used to describe “the act”.98
However, in the turn of the twentieth century, three
definitions have been widely accepted as ways of understanding suicide. The first is
simple and might be called dominant definition:
Suicide occurs if and only if there is an intentional termination
of one’s own life.
The second definition by divergence, supposedly does not rely on the intent to terminate
life. This is derived from sociologist, Emile Durkheim who notes that:
The term suicide is applied to all cases of death resulting
directly or indirectly from a positive or negative act of the
victim himself, which he knows will produce result”.99
This second definition broadens the scope of suicide. However, the third definition is
broader than the other two. Contemporary Sociologist Ronald Maris states it that:
Suicide occurs when an individual engages in a life-style that
he knows might kill him- and it does kill him. This is the
omnibus definition of suicide, which includes various forms of
self-destruction, such as risk-taking and many so-called
96
Compact Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd Ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998), p. 1956.
97
Antoon A. Leenaars, “Suicide and Human Rights: A Sociologist’s Perspective” In Health and Human
Rights, Vol. 6, No. 2 (Harvard: The President and Fellows of Harvard College, 2003), p. 128.
98
Antoon A. Leenaars, loc.cit.
99
Emile Durkheim, Suicide: A Study in Sociology, Trans. By John A Spaulding and George Simpson (New
York: Free Press, 1951), p.44.

51
“accidents”.100
From the aforementioned definitions, the first seems steady with ordinary
linguistic usage, as most dictionaries define “suicide”. Durkheim, thus accepted the
second definition and rejected the first because the first appeals to an intention to die-
something not easily verifiable. Erwin Stengel, a contemporary psychiatrist, supports the
third definition of suicide. He contends that majority of “suicides” have indecisive
intentions about whether to take their lives or not and so, cannot be easily said either to
want to live or die.101
These three “standard” definitions lead to the study of suicide into two main
threads of investigation: the sociological, associated primarily with French sociologist
Emile Durkheim (1858-1917), psychological, linked mainly to Sigmund Freud (1856-
1939).
4.3: TYPES OF SUICIDE
Durkheim focused his studies on trying to figure out what makes people
committed to this life ending choice and what factors in their lives may have given them
the final push. Durkheim thought that economical, religious, marital, and military factors
would influence his findings. After his study he concluded that there are four different
types of suicide.
The first type is the ‘Egoistic suicide’. This type of suicide occurs when the degree
of social integration is low. When persons commit this type of suicide, it shows they are
100
Roland Maris, “Sociology”, In A Handbook for the Study of Suicide, Edited by S. Perlin (New York:
Oxford University Press), p.100.
101
Emile Durkheim, op.cit., p.81.

52
not well supported in a social group. They feel like they are outsiders or loners and the
only people they have in this world are themselves. They often feel very isolated and
helpless during times in their lives when they are under stress.102
The second type is ‘Altuistic suicide’. This type of suicide occurs when the degree
of social integration is too high. When persons commits this type of suicide, it shows they
are greatly involved in a group. All that they care about are the group’s norms and goals
and they completely neglect their own needs and goals. They take their lives for a cause.
A good example of this would be a suicide bomber.103
Durkheim’s third type of suicide is ‘Anomic Suicide’. This kind of suicide is
related to too low a degree of regulation. This type of suicide is committed during times
of great stress or change. Without regulation, a person cannot set reachable goals and in
turn people get extremely frustrated. Life is too much for them to handle and it becomes
meaningless to them. An example of this is when the market crashes or during economic
meltdown.104
The final type of suicide is ‘Fatalistic suicide’. People commit this suicide when
their lives are kept under tight regulation. They often live their lives under extreme rules
and high expectations. These types of people are left with the feeling that they have lost
their sense of self.105
102
Cf, Emile Durkheim, op.cit., pp.105-125.
103
Cf, Emile Durkheim, pp.175-200.
104
Cf, Emile Durkheim, pp. 201-239.
105
Cf, Emile Durkheim, p.239.

53
4.4: CAUSES OF SUICIDE
There are ‘many’ causes of suicide viewed under the two main threads of
investigation (as mentioned above: see definition of suicide). They are: frustration,
poverty, impotence, fear, shamefulness, disagreements with parents, hopelessness, loses,
alcoholism, drug abuse and terminal illness. However, we shall focus on those that are
commonly observed among psychologists and sociologists.
4.4.1: PSYCHOLOGICAL CAUSES OF SUICIDE
Psychologists may have difficulty determining the relative importance of various
factors when assessing individuals for suicide risk. This is so because each individual is
unique, the nature of assessment and measurement is difficult. This arises from the fact
that a measure or observation that may determine suicide risk in one person might have
different significance or no relevance at all for another.
Suicidal thinking is common among drinkers of alcohol; alcoholism is the most
common diagnosis among those attempting or completing suicide. Moreover, twenty five
percent of alcoholics commit suicide. Often, these suicidal thoughts subside within days
of abstinence from alcohol.106
Intoxication on the other hand, is involved in
approximately fifty percent of all suicides, and alcoholics are six times more likely to die
by suicide than are non-alcoholic.
Furthermore, the America Association of Suciodology (A.A.S), using DSM-IV-
TR notes that people take their lives for many reasons. Linked with personality and
106
Norman S. Miller, “Alcohol Dependence”, Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, edited by Charles D.
Spielberger 1983 edition. p.126.

54
emotional factors, majority of those who die by suicide had experienced an emotional or
mental disorder, with the most common ones being: Mood or Substance Use Disorders,
Bipolar Disorder, Affective Disorder, Schizophrenia, Substance Abuse, Generalized
Anxiety Disorder (especially Panic Disorder, which also was found to be associated with;
and predictive of Suicide Risks), Manic Episode and Depression. They posit that people
with major depression are at all times greater risks of making a suicide attempt.107
4.4.2: SOCIOLOGICAL CAUSES OF SUICIDE
Suicide is related to the degree to which an individual feels connected to society.
Studies consistently show that although suicidal people do not appear to have greater life
stress than others, they lack effective strategies to cope with stress. In addition, they are
more likely than others to have had family loss and turmoil, such as the death of a family
member, separation or divorce of their parents, or child abuse or neglect. The parents of
those who attempt suicide have a greater frequency of mental illness and substance abuse
than other parents.108
One factor that Durkheim sees as “protecting” individuals from suicide is social
integration. When individuals are married, have children, are members of a church that
provides a high degree of social integration or live at a time when their countries are in
crisis, they are seen as more integrated into social, religious, and political society and less
likely to commit suicide.109
In simple terms, Durkheim wanted to explain the ‘social glue’
107
Lauren B. Alloy, Et Al, Abnormal Psychology: Current Perspectives (New York: McGraw-Hill
Publisher, 2005), pp. 262-264.
108
Berman, Alan L. “Suicide”. Microsoft Encarta 2009 (DVD). Redmond: Microsoft Corporation, 2008.
109
Cf, Robert. O’Brien. “Level of Analysis”. Encyclopedia of Sociology, Volume 3, edited by Edgar F.
Borgatta and Rhonda J. V. Montgomery, 2001 Edition. p. 1565.

55
that seemed to bind individuals together as a society and the answer to this problem (that
which holds various individuals together in some form of common bond) was to see
social systems as moral entities; things to which people feel they morally belong. That
is, society appeared to be something that existed in its own right, over and above the
ideas, hopes and desires of its individual members.
4.5: SUICIDE PREVENTION
The suicide prevention agencies aim at attracting people who are at a loss to know
whom to turn to for help. The International Association for Suicide Prevention was
officially established in 1965. It developed from an inter-disciplinary working group
founded by the Viennese psychiatrist and Professor E. Ringel in 1960. Its main purpose
is to serve as a forum for the interchange and the advancement of knowledge of suicidal
behaviour.110
Suicide prevention involves: educating people to help themselves, educating
families to deal with the ebb and flow of conflicts in a healthy way, educating
communities such as schools, companies and neighbourhoods to foster self-efficacy in
their people. This will eventually be a recipe for eradicating feelings of hopelessness or
helplessness that form the breeding ground of demoralization, fatigue of life, depression
and self-destruction. Thus, with the help of medical treatment especially psychotherapy,
proper education on suicide prevention will be achieved.111
110
Primdore, S. “Prevention Suicide”, British Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 182, November, 1969. p. 384.
111
Cf, Rene F. Diekstra, “Reflections on the State of Suicidology”, In Suicide Prevention: A Holistic
Approach, edited by D. De Leo et al, (New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002), p.1.

56
4.5.1: MEDICAL TREATMENT: PSYCHOTHERAPY
There are studies that demonstrate that anti-depressant use has been associated
with lower rates of suicide, but the effect has not been proven causative. More so, Electro-
convulsive therapy or ECT has been shown to reduce short-term risk for suicide, as
measured by suicidality, but not long-term risk as measured by actual deaths.112
Furthermore, Professor Erwin Ringel, in his research and clinical work, tried to
elucidate an important question: whether any specific anti-suicidal psychotherapy exists.
His answer was that it does. However, in spite of their psychological needs, most suicidal
patients lack motivation for psychotherapeutic treatment. On the contrary, they want to
take their own lives and escape from all earthly problems. Ringel further states that it is
the doctor’s duty (according to the Hippocratic Oath) to do his utmost to enter into a
therapeutic process and dialogue with a suicidal patient. In Ringel’s view, there are no
contra-indications for psychotherapy of suicidal patients (neither age, intellect, diagnosis,
asocial tendencies nor psychopathy).
Ringel’s anti-suicidal psychotherapy paved way for psychotherapy. With this,
many psychotherapies for suicide prevention, concluded that short-term cognitive
therapy was effective in reducing suicidal thoughts, depression and hopelessness, but
not necessarily suicide attempts, nor death by suicide. The same study concluded that
longer-term psychotherapies might be required to reduce suicidal behaviours. These
treatments would target specific life skills deficits including problem solving and anger
112
Cf, Barbara D’Orio and Steven J. Garlow, “Suicide Prevention: A Vital National Public Health Issue”
In Journal of Health and Human Services Administration, Vol. 27, No. 2 (March, 2004), p.137.

57
management, as well as improved affective regulation.113
4.5.2: MORAL ISSUES IN SUICIDE PREVENTION
Arguments have trailed on the justifiability of suicide prevention. This is so
because confrontation rests on four principles. Autonomy principle and utility principle
support non-prevention of suicide, while respect for life and theological principle
suggests prevention of suicide.114
Proponents in support of non-prevention claim that
when one is acting autonomously, the burden of proof in defending an attention shifts
dramatically. That is, the whole point of the individual rights, is erected on the basis of
the principle of autonomy. In accordance with this principle, the will of an individual
should never be subjected to the will of another. For instance, trying to save a person who
is terminally ill against his will by insisting to leave the respirator on. The reason given
is hinged on the cost for services rendered by the respirator.
In contrast, proponents in support of prevention claim that one is justified in
intervening or preventing suicides in the lives of certain individuals who intend to commit
suicide. This justification, warrants an obligation to deter suicidal individuals.115
This
obligation in turn, leads to both preventing, and promoting life. For instance, if one
suddenly comes upon another person attempting to commit suicide, the natural and
humane thing to do is to stop the individual, for the purpose of asserting the cause of the
individual’s distress, and thus attempting to remedy it. Since suicidal persons are often
113
Danuta Wassermana “Critical Evaluation of Psychotherapy in the Treatment of Depression and in
Suicide Prevention”, In Suicide Prevention: A Holistic Approach, edited by D. De Leo et al, (New York:
Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002), p. 173.
114
Cf, Tom L. Beauchamp, op. cit., p.113.
115
Cf, Tom L. Beauchamp, p. 114.

58
under some temporary crises, mostly under the influence of drugs, alcohols and other
related causes, it is then advised that the principle for respect of life should be applied.
After all, Aquinas and Durkheim both stress that love of one another and social
integration in the society is one factor in reducing suicidal acts.
4.6: TWO OPPOSED PHILOSOPHIES OF SUICIDE
Some reasons have been adduced in defense of suicide. This is because some
people see it as an act of courage, a choosing of a lesser evil of two evils, a voluntary
relinquishing of the gift of life, an exercise which is a removal of a member of the society,
in order to save the whole; and sometimes an act done in extreme necessity.
From these claims, evolved two main positions that are sided by historically
prominent philosophers. They are: in favour (pro-choice), those who say that the act of
suicide, though morally wrong, is a moral obligation; and those against (pro-life), who
say that the act of suicide is immoral. To buttress more on this positions, we shall use
“David Hume” as a point of focus for those in favour of suicide and “Thomas Aquinas”
as a point of focus for those against suicide.
4.6.1: ARGUMENT IN FAVOUR OF SUICIDE
In his essay “on suicide”, David Hume presented the strongest set of arguments
for the moral permissibility of suicide in the classical history of the matter. He proffered
arguments against the Thomistic contention that suicide is morally condemnable and was
especially critical of theological views such as St. Thomas’.
Hume identified with pre-Christian, classical writings, especially those of Greek
origins, where suicide had been considered an honourable and praise worthy act in the

59
instance of persons facing painful and chronic diseases. What Hume identifies here is
that since suicide is one of the ways in which people exercise a right to die, people in this
situation see any form of prevention of their intention to die as a breach of their right to
die.116
4.6.1.1: HUME’S ARGUMENTS
Hume’s method of opposition was not that of challenging the belief in the
existence of God. Rather, he critically analyses the theological proposition that “the act
of suicide violates an obligation to God and provokes divine indignation because it
encroaches on God’s established order for the universe”.117
Hume, argues as follows:
If Suicide be criminal, it must be a transgression of our duty
either to God, our neighbor, or ourselves; and to prove that
suicide is no transgression of our duty to God, the following
considerations may perhaps suffice: In order to govern the
material world, the almighty Creator has established
general and immutable laws by which all bodies, from the
greatest planet to the smallest particle of matter, are
maintained in their proper sphere and function. To govern
the animal world, he has endowed all living creatures with
bodily and mental powers; with senses, passions, appetites,
memory and judgment, by which they are impelled or
regulated in that course of life to which they are destined.
That is, the powers of men and all other animals are
restrained and directed by the nature and qualities of the
surrounding bodies and the modifications and actions of
these bodies are incessantly altered by the operation of all
animals.118
Hume’s argument seems to focus on the claim that it is wrong to disturb the
116
Cf, Friday Imaekhai, “Suicide: A Moral Evaluation” In Kpim of Morality Ethics: General, Special and
Professional, Edited by Pantaeleon Iroegbu and Anthony Echekwube (Ibadan: Heinemann Publishers,
2005), p.135.
117
Cf, David F. Norton, op.cit., pp. 334-335.
118
David Hume, “Unpublished Essays: Of Suicide” In Essays Moral, Political and Literary, Vol. II, edited
by Eugene F. Miller, 1742. pp. 406-414.

60
operation of any general causal law, because all causal law taken together, constitutes the
divine order.119
This ‘natural law’ thesis for Hume is construed to mean that human
beings must be absolutely passive in the face of natural occurrences, for otherwise, they
would disturb the operations of nature by their actions.120
He further argues that unless
we resisted some natural events by counteractions, we could not subsist for a moment
because exposure to natural events such as weather, would destroy us.121
But if, it is
morally permissible to disturb some operations of nature, Hume reasons, then would it
not be morally permissible to avert life itself by diverting blood from its natural course
in human vessels?122
In addition to the criticism Hume offers, he provides some constructive arguments
in support of the moral permissibility of suicide. His major argument is based on the
principles of utility and autonomy. Hume shows that in some cases, resignation of one’s
life to the community ‘must be both innocent and laudable’.123
To prove his point, Hume
begins with an analogy: A man who retires from life does no harm to society. He only
ceases to do well; which, if it is an injury, is of the lowest kind. He further notes:
All our obligations to do good to society seem to imply
something reciprocal. I receive the benefits of society, and
therefore ought to promote its interests; but when I
withdraw myself altogether from society, can I be bound
any longer? But allowing that our obligations to do good
were perpetual, they have certainly some bounds; I am not
obliged to do a small good to society at the expense of a
119
Cf, Stephen Buckle, David Hume: An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding and Other Writings
(Cambridge: Cambridge University press, 2007), p.182.
120
Tom L. Beauchamp, op. cit., p.98.
121
Cf, Stephen Buckle, op. cit., p. 183.
122
123
Cf, David F. Norton, op. cit., pp.136-138.

61
great harm to myself; why then should I prolong a
miserable existence, because of some frivolous advantage
which the public may perhaps receive from me?124
Furthermore, Hume considers a series of both hypothetical and actual cases of
suicide. Each case, contains some new element not contained in the previous case that
increases the personal or social value of death for suicide. In his first hypothetical case,
Hume envisages a sick person who is still marginally productive in the society. If his
social contributions is small in proportion to the largeness of his misery, then there is no
social obligation to continue in existence.125
Conceivably, one can detect that Hume is
not only a sceptic and a utilitarian, but a particular type of utilitarian called ‘a rule-
utilitarian’, who believes that the principle of utility justifies the moral rules that should
be operative in society, and that particular acts are right if and only if they conform to
these rules.126
Accordingly, he claims that if the value of removing misery by taking one’s
life, is greater than the value of the community of one’s continued existence, then suicide
is justified.127
In conjunction with the first, Hume moves to his second and third hypothetical
cases. In the second, the potential suicide’s existence is so bleak that he is not only
miserable and relatively unproductive, but a complete burden to society. In the third, a
political patriot spying in the public interest is seized by the enemies and threatened with
a rack, and is aware that he is too weak to avoid exposing all he knows. In both cases,
124
David Hume, op. cit., pp. 406-414.
125
126
Cf, David F. Norton, op. cit., p. 190.
127
Cf, Samuel E. Stumpf, Philosophy: History and Problems (New York: McGraw-Hill Inc., 1971), p.
287.

ALBERT CAMUS ON THE NOTION OF SUICIDE, AND THE VALUE OF.pdf

ALBERT CAMUS ON THE NOTION OF SUICIDE, AND THE VALUE OF.pdf

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to ALBERT CAMUS ON THE NOTION OF SUICIDE, AND THE VALUE OF.pdf

Similar to ALBERT CAMUS ON THE NOTION OF SUICIDE, AND THE VALUE OF.pdf (20)

More from Karen Benoit

More from Karen Benoit (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

ALBERT CAMUS ON THE NOTION OF SUICIDE, AND THE VALUE OF.pdf