>>> an old woman approached Duignan and said, “That’s not a movie, that’s a weapon against suicide.” <<<
It's amazing what a compelling movie can do. It's a delicate act, but when done correctly it encourages people to use their compassion and empathy as weapons for a cause. We're so attuned to human faces and voices that movies directly and emotionally engage us in ways that are far beyond mere paper.
My friend attempted to do something like this with homelessness. He actually found a camera, went out there, and just tried to talk to homeless people and helped them to get off the streets while chronicling their journey. Although it sounds simple and, well, uninteresting, what he captured on film ended up being a fascinating, compassionate look into this complex world. I really recommend it;
The suicide rates by nation in the article are likely higher than reported. I lost a sibling to what I believe was suicide but it was recorded as an accident. I also think under-reporting happens more in countries where there is a stigma against it. Nations with a high Catholic population in particular may under-report (my parents being Catholic would never accept suicide as a cause of death for their daughter). Suicide is viewed as a sin and many Catholics believe it leads to hell.
Also interesting is that many of the countries listed as having the lowest suicide rates are also the most Catholic according to wikipedia (Phillipines, Brazil, Mexico and Italy).
Good point. On the other hand, I would say most places have a stigma... I know China does. The major difference with Japan being, people don't tend to live alone.
Unfortunately, suicide will never be stopped. And what is suicide anyway? People later in life that are disease ridden and in pain would sometimes like to end their lives in peace without causing someone else to automatically become a criminal. Depending on who you talk to this is either a natural right or absolutely off the table.
These are not simple subjects and every case is as different as people are different.
It will never be completely stopped without some seriously dystopian measures, but it can be very much decreased by disseminating information, investing in preventive measures, etc.
No. Assisted suicide is when someone kills himself with help from somebody else. For example, one could bring someone (who, typically, isn't capable of getting them by himself) a gun or pills.
Euthanasia is when someone ends the life of somebody else upon that other person's clear and well-considered request.
People will differ in their opinion whether there is a difference with murder here.
Perhaps you mean it in a different sense, but it's not possible to not have the option for life, you can choose not to experience life, you can say the reasons against it are too much for you, but there's never a time when life is no longer an option.
I'm probably still very uninformed about Japanese society (it's complex), but they are probably more prone to suicide than others. From what I understand there is a huge emphasis on obligations to others, perfection, and the shame of failure. Traditional Japanese culture frowns on entrepreneurship, preferring obligation to a large corporation (who is in turn loyal to you), where it can sometimes be hard being so disconnected from the value you provide to society.
Most of hacker news will be lucky in this regard. Despite the occasional existential crisis, as entrepreneurs we're self selected eternal optimists. Sadly not everyone turns out so lucky.
Did you just suggest that Japanese are committing suicide because they can't be entrepreneurs? (o_O)
In general, if you're wondering what causes high suicide rates, it's a lot more useful to look at societal motivators than race. As everywhere, there's a strong correlation between depression and suicide, and it's not hard to find the main causes. In Japan's particular case, the largest group committing suicide are the elderly, who have devoted their lives to their company and feel they have nothing left when they retire. The second-largest group is the unemployed, particularly those who have fallen into debt traps that very often ensnare family and friends as guarantors, with life insurance providing an "easy" way out. And the final group is students, who commit suicide to escape bullying or the immense pressure of their final exams.
What I find shocking is life insurance companies paying out the family of the insured if he/she commits suicide. As far as I know, there is no such clause on life insurance contracts in the Europe (and I believe the U.S. as well).
Surely , as one of the first steps towards reducing the suicide rate in Japan, insurance companies should stop incentivizing suicide.
When I was going through a dark period financially and emotionally, I specifically looked for life insurance policies that did not exclude suicide and had only a two year exclusion period. They do indeed exist in the US; I hold such a term life policy at the moment.
I get why you're saying this, but it bugs me when people tell those with an inclination to commit suicide to not do it.
It's not your life, and your judgments about its current and future value are meaningless. The person living the life, and that person alone, can meaningfully judge the value of continuing to be alive. It's arrogant and dickish to tell a person about the value that continuing to live has, even if well intentioned, and doubly so in the case of a person you (likely) do not know.
Naturally, you are correct, when taken to logical extreme. However, the bread and butter of communication is assumption (shared meaning of words, etc.). It's probably fair to assume that most people within this community can look forward to some relative happiness and achievement in life, and I don't think it's bad to support one another in "powering through" bad times. I'm no hard-line pro-lifer: if my grandma asked me to help her suicide, like she quietly mentioned she might many years earlier as the two of us watched her mother die, I'd certainly consider it.
Oh no no no no no, those plans are well past. I was just commenting that life insurance plans do exist where they pay out in the event of suicide (although they're conditional).
I think he's saying that their culture is very different from the American/Western European culture in some ways, which has nothing to do with race. That perhaps the elements of their culture that make them relatively prone to suicide are related to the ones that make them less interested in entrepreneurship.
Somehow, I feel it is within people's right to self-determination to be free to choose suicide. And yet, I think I'd be very sad if a close friend committed suicide.
The problem is that most of the times suicide is not a rational decission taken by someone with terminal cancer to stop their fisical suffering.
Most of the times is the reaction of a malfunctioning brain. Most suicidals wouldn't have taken the decission in a normal situation (not depressed) , and those who failed to kill themselves are happy to be alive.
That's why it's so important to know the factors that trigger suicide compulsions, and the measures to better fight them..
A depresed person suicide brings a big suffering to the family and friends of the deceased, who most of the times don't know of the intentions.
It doesn't have to be a terminal cancer.
Sometimes it's just the loneliness, or the facts that led to it - for example unwillingly hurting people I care about because I'm a bit ... deficient when it comes to social skills and no matter how much I fret, I will, eventually but invariably, say something stupid that will make someone hurt.
Stuffing me full of antidepressants won't solve the underlying problem
Neither will a chat on a hotline - you hang up and the soulcrushing memories of those hurt people are back right away
But comiting suicide is not a logical decission in that situation. I don´t know you, I don´t know your case nor how to improve the situation. But being dead will not resolve the problem, and it will hurt the people you love much much more than any harsh comment you are able to do.
There is always the possibility to find a way out, and then realice that that dark hole you where in, was just a solvable problem.
You seem a techical guy, don´t use your analytic capabilities to rationalize and confirm your feelings, use them to get new information that is able to help you.
Suicide is something that can never be fully controlled. It may be illegal to do it, but it's a literal inalienable right, no matter how strong the law against it.
If any law would make suicide illegal, or any government would exert any control over you should you fail, then it stands to reason that those people making those laws, and those people in those governments, own your body.
"Designed to soothe and calm, the specially-designed blue LED lights have been suspended above the platforms of dozens of Tokyo railway stations in order to stem the nation's spiralling suicide rate."
It is a sort of a societal placebo. Or maybe the subconscious message is "someone cared to put these here for me to prevent me from killing myself, someone cares at least, maybe today is not the day".
In other words I wonder if the color of lights would have been violet or yellow but some "research" had been disseminated that yellow lights are calming and prevent suicide, that combined with the action of someone to install them, then I suspect yellow lights would have worked just as well.
While light has proven an effective treatment for Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD), an optimal wavelength combination has not been determined. Short wavelength light (blue) has demonstrated potency as a stimulus for acute melatonin suppression and circadian phase shifting.
CONCLUSIONS:
Narrow bandwidth blue light at 607 microW/cm2 outperforms dimmer red light in reversing symptoms of major depression with a seasonal pattern.
There must have been some hypothesis or they wouldn't have studied the result. Probably got lost in translation.
EDIT: When an english speaking reporter can't figure something out in a foreign country they often say "nobody knows ..." but really they mean "I couldn't find a source to tell me ..."
EDIT 2: I'm sorry, I didn't realize this was discussed in the movie. I just got to that part. Clearly the author of the film knows plenty of Japanese people and knows this subject well. At the same time there was still a scientific reason for installing them: other posters are pointing out that there have been studies measuring blue light showing it is a "stimulus for acute melatonin suppression" . Interesting!
> When an english speaking reporter can't figure something out in a foreign country they often say "nobody knows ..." but really they mean "I couldn't find a source to tell me ...
Same is true in English-speaking countries with English-speaking reporters :)
This is an unusual and insightful post for HN. Thank you for it.
"The power of regret," what a powerful force. It's not often that we are able to use it in such a tangible way. The filmmaker's attempt to make amends may help us all to stop ignoring our neighbors.
This really is the driving force of the filmmaker and I really can't blame him for ignoring his neighbour after having listened to her on so many occasions... It's not like he was insensitive towards her but as humans we all have a threshold that determines our capacity for empathy.
Still I wonder what kind of problems his neighbour had to justify putting an end to her life.
Hofstede conducted a study in the 60's 70's by submitting questionnaires to IBM employees all over the world in order to compare the responses for cultural differences.
Japan ranked highest in the world for masculinity, [masculinity-femininity (task orientation versus person-orientation)]
Assuming Hofstede's reflect reality. Could this have something to do with the high suicide rate?
Another musing,
Could it have something to do with Confucian cultures and a great deal of pressure to fulfill one's filial piety?
Could it have something to do with Confucian cultures and a great deal of pressure to fulfill one's filial piety?
Precisely. China, Japan, South Korea are all seriously Confucian influenced. Chinese suicides are often young people with poor families who fail to enter university. SK was the most depressing place I've ever been. Vietnam's another place that's historically a heavily Confucian society, I wonder if they collect realistic suicide statistics? (Last visit, last year, the mood in Hanoi seemed to be very strong compared to, say, 10 years ago.)
Or could it have to do with the higher intelligence, introspection and desire for order of Japanese people, versus for example people in Miley Cyrus videos?
My Grandfather completed suicide when I was 13 years old. It was an awful experience for our whole family which includes his wife, their children, and their children's children.
His suicide was caused by extreme depression, something he fought his entire life. In my opinion, now, its not different than losing a battle with cancer, except that outwardly it appears he "chose" to end his life. Having experienced depression myself, I know it was not really him who made that decision. Tools like this will hopefully help us find new "cures" or at least support structures for those who are seriously mentally ill.
I've been grieving two years now. She was "brutally murdered" by a Greek student, in Hamburg, Germany.
I had nightmares for 3 months. Insomnia and loss of love for code ensued, as I created barriers with the world.
All my community could say is "it happens to anyone." And I take things too literally, perchance. I doubt I could live through this again, in a world where we are killing everyone from autistics to Jewish peoples to student tourists with cameras.
But what is more I am now hyperaware. I long for sincere eyes. Some see it, others simply attack. Others notice this of me as well, and they must discover the mystery...with all sorts of tests. Yes, so I have sensitive hearing and I rock when hungry. Does that make me a predator? I want the staring to stop. But the basic fear: it could happen to anyone. Now I am reminded quite frequently here in Austin that random and bad people are simply picked up off of the street and killed, randomly, when all I have is a broken heart.
Until they run me off with that one last death or racist joke that makes upper society's configurable moral compass quite unappealing, and its fascination with tastelessness and unchecked chauvenism as the lingua franca of capability.
People are often too ugly inside to warrant participation in this "fear market."
I couldn't help but notice an apparent contradiction. You complain about racism and chauvinism, and yet, you identify the murderer as a "Greek student" instead of as a "deranged student".
This is ridiculous. If he had said that the murderer was a male student, would you be complaining about sexism? Identifying someone's race is not racism. He didn't imply anything about Greeks in general.
"Greece's economy" is a non-racism. Am I thereby attributing a cause simply by mentioning its state of affairs?
You are forcing a racist interpretation where there isn't one. You are not giving benefit of the doubt. No one is saying "boy those greeks sure screwed themselves." And even if one were, that's an assessment of their political and economic dealings, though we all know Greece is embedded in a complex arrangement with the EU and the US's pig-headed foreign policies.
"X's ecomomy is crumbling" can be said without racism. And "madness" can be similarly used I hold this true of any peoples subject to the human condition with an economy so described. Look at Morocco, etc. Sometimes environment is the cause, and when the environment is arbitrarily caused.
Again, as the commenter noted, nothing was said about Greeks [in general]. Economy of country and that as an alternative explanation to an individual of that country, yes. The articles on the story state that he is Greek so I figured I should as well.
In fact by saying "look at the economy" I am even further emphasizing the arbitrariness of a cultural explanation, which psychologizing does not do but rather lends to something about Greekness or Greek social thought. I'm saying "yes, he happens to be Greek, and he is from a failing economy that may have caused his distress." And so, "How did this happen to the economy in question that might cause people subject to it to respond in all of these ways?"
Again, I don't know about the verdict on the man. I withhold opinion. I don't think he'll be able to enjoy life given a majority of the options allotted him. He's deprived of life either way, and this too is saddening. So there's nothing to say about his "manipulating the system in his favor." He is in a bad spot regardless, but I think saying that he is deranged is an intuitive response, rather than a critical one. How did he become deranged? He clearly was at some point not deranged. I'm saying the state of Greece's economy, embedded in a global economy, is where we should look.
> The articles on the story state that he is Greek so I figured I should as well.
I believe you.
> I'm saying the state of Greece's economy, embedded in a global economy, is where we should look.
This is where I think you're jumping the gun. There are insane people everywhere. Sometimes some of them do brutal things. That's a sad fact of life. Implicating his Greek-ness will, I believe, lead to unnecessary bitterness against Greeks.
I'm sure you've come across Grice's Maxim of Relevance. Going by that, I tend to include "Greek" if his being Greek led to some racially motivated action, I'd include "male" if his being male led to some sexually motivated action, etc.
Please learn the difference between racialism and racism.
Greece's economy has been crumbling, and many all over the world are succumbing to madness. This feels like another test, but how am I to know if someone is deranged?
Don't force me to accept some verdict by law. I don't deserve that...
I have become sensitized to race after coming across numerous narratives by friends and strangers, where they mention race or nationality though that has nothing to do with what they are saying.
> Greece's economy has been crumbling...
Your point? Did you mean that Greeks are succumbing to madness?
> how am I to know if someone is deranged?
I am not a psychologist, so I can't pass diagnoses either. But some words of lay language express anger or contempt.
> Don't force me to accept some verdict by law.
I have no idea what you meant by that. I did not imply any force.
Why are you doing that? The sentence is "Greece's economy has been crumbling, and many all over the world are succumbing to madness."
Why would I respond to something you're explicitly divorcing from context? If you preserve what I say, you see that I clearly have an assessment nearing to the judgment that [many] in Greece are succumbing to madness.
Do I have a scientific basis for using words like "madness"? Well, would "deranged" be any better?
How about this?: Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must passover in silence.
"But some words of lay language express anger or contempt."
wat ?
"I have no idea what you meant by that. I did not imply any force."
It is coincidence, then, that you suggest "deranged" which is in line in actual fact with his sentence: He was assigned to a mental institution. I can acknowledge that it happens, but I need not say it was the right thing to do. I can withhold opinion on the matter. "Deranged" suggests that he should be treated in a certain way — I have no opinion on how he ought to be treated, I just do not know, barring any generalization to similar cases.
But again: I say [Many] are succumbing, which translates to a statement like [Some] are succumbing, not [All] are succumbing, which is what [Greeks] are succumbing is most often interpreted as[1].
> Do I have a scientific basis for using words like "madness"? Well, would "deranged" be any better?
No. My point was that words like "mad" and "deranged" are part of lay language, and in lay use, only expresses a personal opinion, rather than a medical diagnosis.
> Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must passover in silence.
The irony is killing me.
> "Deranged" suggests that he should be treated in a certain way
It doesn't suggest any such thing. I'd use that word for any brutal murderer.
> Why would I respond to something you're explicitly divorcing from context?
Wat? I questioned the context. Not the same as "explicitly divorcing from context". I asked the question, just so you'd make your bias explicit.
"No. My point was that words like "mad" and "deranged" are part of lay language, and in lay use, only expresses a personal opinion, rather than a medical diagnosis."
Yes, personal opinion but of different models of analyses for explanation. "Mad" is a vaguer term than "deranged" (see Foucault's descriptivist/presciptivist politics). "Mad" is a pointing to "the cause is more complex than we think." "Deranged" is a pointing, most probably, to the DSM (for instance) as a guide.
"The irony is killing me."
This is not irony. You're taking my words out of context to re-purpose them as ammunition within an already complicated topic. If I said "this sentence is false" you very well might say that I'm invalidating everything I'm saying.
"It doesn't suggest any such thing. I'd use that word for any brutal murderer."
No, sir. "Deranged" and "mad" may have many overlaps, but they are not substitutible salva veritate.
You have not proved any bias. I'm saying that madness is prevalant, and sometimes can explain more than a quick leap into psychologizing. "Madness" does not mean that it was utterly free of will to manipulate the circumstances. Madness may have a causal basis as well, if not stronger than "psychological laws." (So here I am blocking the idea that because he was "just mad" he thought it convenient to manipulate the circumstances in his favor. I am saying that "madness," though vaguer than "derangement," has a stronger force that "derangment."
So your determination is that because people in a failed/failing economy are acting irrationally and succumbing to their baser instincts, that the aggressor in this case became mentally ill due to the economy? Are you going to claim next that mental illnesses are transmittable diseases? Are you of the mind that the aggressor was not mentally ill and was just 'faking it' to get out of jail?
Mereological study of parts and wholes applies here, along with small-world network algorithms. Internal causation is a real thing, and best explains various seemingly "utterly chance-like" statistical problems. I'm saying that the environment coupled with internal measures ultimately explain what occurred; from an outside perspective, all I can really depend on is an "external description" of the problem which attributes political and legal descriptions of the result, rather than strictly psychological. "Deranged" suggests a narrow line to the psychological; "mad" suggests a combination of issues which similarly seems to mirror the structure of "depression" which itself is a result of a combination of issues.
I subscribe to legal realism. Like I said, I don't know how we ought to treat him, which implies that I don't know much about the man himself. Legal systems analyze intention to come to (public) justice, not to ensure that the victim is redressed.
My position or statements are a comment on the adjacent, failing legal system. These governments and trade unions (via pharmaceutical industries) have become so thick with corruption that the theoretical construct of the "Observation Statement," emergent from Logical Positivism and Scientific Philosophy, is subjective to game-theoretical quantum systems.
Am I saying that ontologically mental illnesses are diseases?[1] That's a debate. However, Copycat suicide has warrantability or assertability conditions, and we can employ strategies that minimize the spread of disease to minimize the fluctuation of social statistical norm deviation, along time paradigmatic cycles.
If an American student commits a crime in Turkey, we wouldn't call this student a "Turkish student." Some universities in Turkey may not be wholly funded by the Turkish government, nor culturally and financially indebted to a Turkish family.
I think the question would more be of an American who moves to Turkey, then ten years later goes to Russia and commits the crime there. Is this person a Turk or an American? They don't live in the USA; it doesn't make sense to call them an American.
The overall point here is that Depression has gestalt cause, and sometimes a society, upon depriving us of a raison d'être à vie (work, family, etc.) while emphasizing or even prescribing a monothematic lifestyle, that society limits the capabilities of our imaginations to perceive opportunities, of which opportunity discovery is itself a creative endeavor afforded by those justifications to life (work, family, etc.) being normalized.
Actually to be quite contrary, and just to hear people's ideas, how can anyone judge whether death is right or wrong? Or in a different light, how do you say that the promotion of human beings is a good thing? I'm a human being, and all of us talking are, so perhaps we're inclined in that sense to believe that human life is precious. But can one prove what death is? Is it always better for someone to live, is it always better for someone to die? Death in my poorly conceived view is just a moment in which we choose to no longer accept this world, but I don't believe that I'll cease to exist. In fact no matter how large or how terrifying the experience may be, it will still pass. Yes, in a sense I'm making a relativistic argument, but it's interesting to me to hear people's views on death.
Where do people get off telling others what they can and can't do with their life. Who better then the ACTUAL PERSON to decide when and if it's the right time to call it quits (for whatever reason - once again it's nobody elses business on the why).
With 7 billion people and counting, why are people making such a big deal when someone decides their time on the ride called "human life" should be over. For most, there is little choice, you live, then you die. For some, they would rather take personal control over the when. Why is that a bad thing?
The world has turned into a huge nanny - butting into the smallest of things that should remain completely in control of the individual.
Over the last 12 years, twice I've fought with cancer and won (or at least had it declared a tie) but you can bet that I have a exit plan in hand (and yes, that includes taking care of the people I'll leave behind). Withering away in excruciating pain is not for me (does that make me weak? a coward? or just prudent in deciding how I WANT to end MY LIFE).
On the other hand there are plenty of people who are depressed, tries to kill themselves, survives and are later happy to be alive, in those cases it would be a bad thing if they had succeeded. It is such suicides that most people try to prevent when they are talking about preventing suicides.
It's amazing what a compelling movie can do. It's a delicate act, but when done correctly it encourages people to use their compassion and empathy as weapons for a cause. We're so attuned to human faces and voices that movies directly and emotionally engage us in ways that are far beyond mere paper.
My friend attempted to do something like this with homelessness. He actually found a camera, went out there, and just tried to talk to homeless people and helped them to get off the streets while chronicling their journey. Although it sounds simple and, well, uninteresting, what he captured on film ended up being a fascinating, compassionate look into this complex world. I really recommend it;
https://itunes.apple.com/us/movie/but-for-the-grace-of-god/i...