More than Myth: Suicide

Albert Camus once wrote, “There is but one truly serious philosophical problem, and that is suicide. Judging whether life is or is not worth living amounts to answering the fundamental question of philosophy.” There is much stigma attached to the act of suicide; people think it is an action reserved for the mentally unstable. After all, why would any sane person actively decided to literally destroy their own life? Others I have heard suggest that suicide is simply the end result of losing all hope—it’s what comes of being overcome with sorrow and suffering and having no other hope, coping mechanism, or alternative left. Camus simplifies matters a little in his essay, The Myth of Sisyphus; he suggests that the absurd is an inescapable essential force in life—that man is inevitably faced with the dialectic of on the one hand wanting meaning, significance, and clarity and on the other hand facing the silence and coldness of the universe. In effect, individuals are left with a choice between suicide, taking a leap of faith, or recognizing the absurdity of our live/situations and embracing that.
Choosing the first option results in an immediate escape of absurdity—it’s a confession that life is not worth living. It’s here that on some level I have difficulty discussing more, as very recently I was informed of Mike Penner’s suicide. I doubt any readers are unaware of who Mike Penner was or of his suicide. The news has affected me more than I initially thought. Speaking as someone who has walked to the brink of suicide—who has had two hospital visits because of suicide attempts—I know what it’s like to conclude, albeit temporarily, that life is not worth living. Mike recently came to that same conclusion, only his decision was much more final than mine once had been. In the existential use of the term, I cannot think of many things more absurd than the transsexual narrative—the need to be one thing when the world tells us we’re something else, the need to find our identity when there are no immediate answers to the question, “Who am I?”—the need for acceptance and stability, clarity and meaning in a society that offers none. Suicide in Camus’ view is an admission that life is meaningless and therefore not worth living. For what it’s worth, when one is in the grips of a depression or is otherwise not able to accept the absurd, suicide becomes an understandable, although unfortunate, option.
The second option—the leap of faith—is equally controversial. I hesitate to write much on this if only because many of my friends and family (and some of you super awesome people reading this) are religious. I, on the other hand, am anti-religion. Like Camus, I find leaps of faith to be a denial of the absurd. Abstract beliefs are assumed and a set of hopes is established to bypass dealing with the absurdity of the reality of human existence. In effect, it’s a denial of the reality of the human condition, a deferment to the hope that some absolute meaning or purpose exists. Often, this takes the form of a belief in God, though not always. It’s more a leap of faith that, despite rational observation, refuses to accept the absurdity that individuals experience, instead trusting that there is a universal something more—a blind faith that life is not meaningless. Camus described this as a kind of philosophical suicide because it is an active choice to escape rationality. Do you see why I feel awkward talking about it (given the strong religious views of many family/friends—sorry if it offended anyone)?
The third choice is to embrace the absurdity—embrace the suffering. In the myth, Sisyphus is punished by the gods, forever made to push a boulder up a hill, each time he reaches the top the boulder rolls down the other side and Sisyphus must begin his toils anew. His life is a constant struggle, much like our lives are constant struggles. What Camus notes, however, is that in becoming aware of our circumstances, and aware of the hopelessness of our situations, we become free. Our lot in life—our suffering—only is horrible so long as we juxtapose it with something more preferable. On the other hand, if we accept our lives without any preferable alternative, suddenly things aren’t quite so terrible. Instead, in the acceptance of our life and our fate as entirely our own—as all we have and all we’ll be—we can be truly happy. This is owning our fate, being above it, taking control of life and giving it whatever meaning we personally designate.
I recognize that a lot of what Camus puts forth in The Myth of Sisyphus is highly controversial. It is, however, something I turned to when I was going through my gender dysphoria-spurred existential crisis. This wasn’t really meant to be about Mike Penner’s suicide, nor is it any kind of remembrance post of his behalf. Honestly, I’m some emotionally spent that I doubt I could write such a thing right now. Instead, it’s a summary of Camus’ argument about dealing with the fundamental philosophical question. The awareness of absurdity begets freedom and genuine happiness. What Camus describes is, in actuality, a radical acceptance of our suffering. He asserts that through this embrace we become free.