DREIESKIVA​|Roald Kvam

David Hume’s essay “On Suicide” is a provocative philosophical exploration of the morality, rationality, and theological implications of taking one’s own life. Writing in the 18th century, a time when suicide was widely condemned both by religious institutions and civil law, Hume sought to challenge conventional wisdom and argue that suicide is neither necessarily immoral nor irrational. His approach is empirical and grounded in his broader philosophical skepticism, where he questions received opinions and calls for rational analysis of human behavior.

This is a tough one, I know, but still – let’s explore…

The rejection of religious prohibitions

One of Hume’s central arguments is that religious prohibitions against suicide are unfounded. Many religious doctrines, especially in Christianity, claim that human life is given by God, and therefore only He has the right to end it. Hume challenges this idea by arguing that if God governs the universe through immutable natural laws, then human actions, including suicide, must also be part of this divine order. If people use their reason and agency to decide their fate, it is no different from using their skills to modify their environment, such as constructing houses or curing diseases.

Hume further criticizes religious objections by noting that many natural occurrences lead to premature deaths, such as storms, earthquakes, and illnesses. If God allows these events to take lives, then human agency in bringing about death should not be viewed as inherently blasphemous. He contends that nature provides individuals with the means to end their lives when circumstances become unbearable, just as it provides animals with instincts for survival.

The argument from free will and autonomy

A key theme in Hume’s essay is human autonomy. He argues that individuals have the right to determine their own existence, especially when life becomes unbearable. If a person suffers extreme pain, misery, or despair with no hope of improvement, forcing them to continue living would be cruel. He compares this to cases where a person willingly chooses to die in battle for the greater good; society honors such sacrifice rather than condemning it.

Hume maintains that people should be able to exercise their reason in choosing death, just as they use reason to make other significant decisions. He likens suicide to stepping out of a dangerous river rather than allowing oneself to be swept away to destruction. If reason leads a person to conclude that continuing to live serves no purpose or entails excessive suffering, there is no moral justification for compelling them to endure life.

The question of social and moral duties

Critics of suicide often argue that individuals have obligations to society, their families, or their communities. Hume responds to this by stating that obligations only exist when they are beneficial to all parties involved. If a person’s suffering is so great that they are incapable of contributing meaningfully to society or their loved ones, then the argument of social duty loses its force. He reasons that society does not demand individuals stay alive when they are gravely ill and near death, so why should it demand their continued existence when they are in emotional or existential agony?

Furthermore, Hume suggests that those who believe their existence is a burden to others may even be performing a service by choosing to end their lives. If an individual is unable to provide for their family, for example, and sees their suffering as a financial or emotional drain on loved ones, the decision to end one’s life might be seen as an act of responsibility rather than cowardice. He questions whether the obligation to live should be considered absolute or whether it should be assessed in context.

Suicide and the laws of nature

Hume explores whether suicide violates the laws of nature. Some argue that since self-preservation is a fundamental natural instinct, suicide must be an unnatural act. Hume challenges this by pointing out that many other actions that modify natural processes, such as medical interventions or technological advancements, are not deemed immoral. Humans constantly alter their environment and circumstances to improve their conditions, and suicide, in some cases, can be seen as an extension of this capacity.

He also asserts that if nature provides people with the means to end their own lives—through intelligence, reason, and agency—then suicide must be part of the natural order. Just as a tree might wither and die when it can no longer sustain itself, a person, when faced with insurmountable suffering, might see death as a natural conclusion.

The role of reason in suicide

Hume argues that reason must guide decisions about suicide. He acknowledges that many suicides are committed in states of extreme distress, impulsivity, or irrationality, but this does not mean that all suicides lack reasoned justification. He proposes that in cases where suffering is prolonged, irreversible, and devoid of hope, suicide can be a rational choice.

He contrasts this with cases where people take their lives due to momentary despair or misjudgment, acknowledging that these cases may be regrettable. However, he insists that the existence of irrational suicides does not invalidate the reasoned decision of individuals who calmly and deliberately conclude that death is preferable to continued suffering.

The societal response to suicide

Hume critiques the harsh treatment of suicide by society, particularly the legal and religious sanctions imposed on those who attempt or succeed in taking their own lives. In his time, suicide was often met with criminal penalties, including the confiscation of the deceased’s property and the denial of proper burial rites. Hume sees these punishments as both cruel and illogical. If a person is suffering so much that they take their own life, punishing them posthumously or harming their family only adds to the overall suffering.

Moreover, he challenges the idea that suicide should be stigmatized. He compares the act to a traveler who, upon realizing that a road leads to certain destruction, chooses to turn back or take another path. Just as we do not condemn someone for avoiding disaster, we should not condemn individuals who, after careful reflection, choose to end their suffering.

---

Hume’s essay “On Suicide” is a groundbreaking and controversial work that challenges traditional moral, religious, and social perspectives on suicide. He argues that taking one’s own life does not necessarily violate divine laws, social obligations, or the natural order. Instead, he asserts that individuals have the right to exercise their reason and autonomy in deciding whether to continue living. He critiques the harsh treatment of suicide by religious and legal institutions and calls for a more compassionate, rational approach to the issue.

His work remains relevant in contemporary discussions on euthanasia, mental health, and personal autonomy. While his views continue to be debated, they have contributed to a broader, more nuanced understanding of suicide as a complex moral and philosophical issue. By treating suicide not as an inherent evil but as a subject worthy of rational discourse, Hume opened the door for more compassionate and reasoned approaches to the subject in modern times.