There is even an Empirical analogue to this. Contemporary suicide research distinguishes suicidal desire from capability for suicide: fearlessness about death, tolerance of physical pain, and the practical capacity to cross from contemplating death into acting upon it. Most people who experience suicidal ideation do not attempt suicide, and researchers have repeatedly found these capability dimensions associated with attempt history. That is considerably closer to what ordinary English calls Physical Nerve than to cowardice.

And think about what the act psychologically entails. You must cross an Irreversible threshold while understanding that you are closing every door simultaneously: every pleasure not yet experienced, every person not yet met, every reconciliation, every ridiculous accident of fortune, every morning on which the present catastrophe might finally look smaller. There is no option value afterward. You are voluntarily extinguishing the Entire probability distribution of future good because the left tail has temporarily occupied the whole fucking screen.

For the religious person the abyss can be larger still. If Hell is regarded as even a genuine possibility, death is not necessarily conceived as oblivion but as entry into an unknown judgment from which there may likewise be no exit. Science obviously cannot adjudicate Hell; the relevant psychological fact is that a person who believes in damnation may nevertheless have to overcome terror of that possibility as well. That is not a trivial psychic hurdle imho.

None of this makes suicide noble, rational or admirable. That is precisely the conceptual mistake worth avoiding. Courage is an input, not a verdict. Empirical psychology can tell us that fearlessness about death and pain tolerance help distinguish some people who act from many more who only contemplate acting; philosophy can then observe that formidable nerve can be placed in the service of a disastrously narrowed judgment.

The stronger criticism of suicide is therefore not “Coward.” It is that acute suffering can collapse temporal perspective until a contingent condition masquerades as an eternal one. The mind prices the entire future off Today’s information and assigns every unseen state a value of zero. Philosophically it resembles liquidating an asset with Unbounded Optionality because the current mark is intolerable.

Calling that cowardice is not profound. It is merely easier than admitting the darker proposition: human beings can possess enough Resolve to do something irrevocable and still be catastrophically wrong about what comes next.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5905244&forum_id=2#50144361)

do you know which Liberal Artist said this

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5905244&forum_id=2#50144367)