Maria Teresa Brancaccio, Eric J. Engstrom And Lederer

For the purpose of the current essay, suicide will be defined, as an act or instance of taking ones own life through direct, deliberate and immediate acts that lead to death life through direct, deliberate and immediate acts that lead to death (XXXXX). Importantly, one should remember that there are different forms of suicide. For example, euthanasia to end suffering or physician assisted suicide as well as adolescent suicides for individuals that are prepubescent and honor suicides which are completed to escape the shame, placed on themselves or others, of an action they did. Additionally, there are two forms of attempted suicides that should be considered. First there is para suicide, or an attempted suicide using nonlethal means (Curra). Often, these are suicide attempts or gestures such as consuming a nonlethal amount of medication or cutting where the cut is not deep enough to cause significant blood less. Although there are numerous forms of suicide, the primary focus for the remainder of this essay will be on

"Suicide, what a terrible concept. There are two types of suicide: physical, and theoretical. Physical suicide is the more commonly heard type of suicide. It entails the person actually, physically killing himself or herself. On the other hand, theoretical suicide is when the person does something that will, in turn, get him or her killed. For example, in “All About Suicide” by Luisa Valenzuela, Ismael, a man that works at a minister’s office, murders the minister, a high-ranking public official. Ismael has been forced to be quiet by the government; therefore he lashes out by killing the minister so that he can reveal the truth about the government. In doing this, Ismael technically “kills himself” because he knows the government

Durkheim proceeded to distinguish suicide into four different groups that related to the individual’s integration into society and in turn the social regulation of society over its members. ‘Consequently, we shall be able to determine the social types of suicide by classifying them not directly by their preliminarily described characteristics, but by the causes which produce them…. We will first seek the social conditions responsible for them; then group these conditions in a number of separate classes by their resemblances and differences, and we shall be sure that a specific type of suicide will correspond to each of these classes.’ (Durkheim, 1897) The four suicide groups were identified as Egotistic, Anomic, Altruistic and Fatalistic.

Feelings of isolation have been linked to higher suicide rates. Durkheim’s study on suicide during the industrial revolution supports this theory as he states that, “people were increasingly disconnected from their communities and that this social upheaval had a greater effect on suicide rates than other factors like wealth” (Winner & Collishaw, 2011). Interestingly enough, despite the increase of media attention on suicide, no studies have been published that explain why suicide rates vary among different groups. However, various factors are involved in the decision to commit suicide. As a result, suicide rates vary according to race, gender and age.

Using material from Item A and elsewhere, assess different sociological explanations of suicide. (21 marks)

Throughout this essay, we will be looking a Durkheim’s analysis of suicide and whether his ideas on suicide were right in his time, and whether they are still relevant in today’s society. Emile Durkheim described ‘suicide’ as a term “applied to any death which is the direct or indirect result of a positive or negative act accomplished by the victim himself, which he knows will produce this result” (Durkheim, Suicide: a Study in Sociology, originally published 1897, 1970). Positive acts were acts that were undertaking with the intention to produce death. Negative acts were actually the distinct lack of survival acts undertaken, with the knowledge that without these acts, death would be the result. As far as Durkheim was concerned, although suicide itself is a very individual act, the reasoning behind suicide was due to predominantly social factors (Durkheim 1970, p44). Suicide was sociological, not psychological. His research was based not on the personality traits of those who had committed suicide, but instead at the suicide rates of different countries compared to the social factors that link the countries together (Durkheim 1970, p40).

Suicide is the act of killing yourself. It is the 11th leading cause of death in America (CDC 2009). I have never had any intentions on committing suicide and I never really understood why people commit suicide that’s why I chose this topic to help me understand what problems people go through that makes them do such a thing. Sociology is the study of social behavior and the culture of humans. There are numerous reasons like financial stress, family problems or mental health disorders that lead to suicide. The number one cause of suicide is untreated depression. The issues that were just listed are some social conditions from society that results in a suicidal

The debate between Mark A.R. Kleinman and Ira Byock discuss the topic of suicide whether it should be legal or not; Kleinman is arguing for suicide to be legal, which will come to the conclusion that suicide should be allowed for anyone and not have any punishment for an attempt. Byock argues the opposing argument that suicide should be illegal, but the focus of this argument will be Kleiman’s point of view. The exigency, the problem that can be fixed, is viewed in this argument that it is the people’s right to kill themselves and this is due to the depression and/or the feeling of thinking they are better off dead. The audience directed towards this argument is people committing suicide and those who oppose the people committing the ‘crime’ of suicide. Constraints, the biases, in this situation would be ethical beliefs and the people who have witnessed or experienced these suicidal thoughts. Kleinman’s reasoning is the use of emotion and human rights are seen to enhance his argument. Therefore suicide should not be legal, it should be treated instead of encouraged.

In the study of philosophy, it is evident that there are notions that agree and disagree with each other. When we narrow down philosophical time periods, it is even more interesting to see how ideas conflict in such a short period of time. As we observe the period between Georg Hegel and Friedrich Nietzsche, we are approached with an array of beliefs as religious philosophy is combined with non-religious philosophy. The undeniable aspect is that each concept can be adequately compared. In studying Georg Hegel, John Stuart Mill, Arthur Schopenhauer, and Friedrich Nietzsche, it is evident that each takes a supreme stance on morality. Therefore, I propose the question, “Is it morally permissible to commit suicide”? By analyzing each philosophical approach to this question, each philosopher’s notion on the concept will be revealed.

On average, every day, 121 people die from suicide, which means 44,193 deaths each year just in the United States. On the other hand, for every one suicide, there are at least 25 attempts. Every attempt that “failed” is just another chance to save a life. An unknown source once quoted “Suicide doesn’t end the chances of life getting worse, it eliminates the possibility of it ever getting any better.” There are multiple methods a person can choose from to commit suicide, but this essay will be discussing two specific methods: jumping from the Golden Gate Bridge and physician-assisted suicide.

By applying the functionalist perspective to the issue of suicide, we will highlight the importance of shared social morals and bonds. “When rapid social change or other disruptive conditions occur, moral values may erode, and people may become more uncertain about how to act and about whether or not their life has meaning” (Kendall , 2014) . Suicide falls under

Durkheim does not see egoism, altruism, anomie and fatalism as types of suicide, but types of social structure that highlight the presence or lack of integration and regulation. It must be stressed that this excess/lack of integration and regulation are not seen as direct causes of suicide, rather Durkheim sees a number of voluntary deaths in society as inevitable; integration and regulation are merely prophylactic to suicidal impulses, which when taken to excess or dramatically reduced, fail to act as a preventative, and so suicides occur. This clarification is an important strength of Durkheim’s theory: it allows the biography of the individuals who kill themselves to vary, while still explaining underlying pressures/lack of to explain their deaths, and the varying suicide rates between groups.

statistics displayed that some categories of people were more prone to take their own lives,

Emile Durkheim was considered one of the greats of the sociology world. His use of scientific methodology to identify social factors which contributed to suicide has produced a foundational model for empirically based social research still relevant in sociology today. The purpose of this essay is to examine Durkheim’s study of the social causes of suicide, specifically how his theory of social integration and regulation contributed in interpreting these differences in suicide rates. This essay will argue that although heavily criticised Durkheim’s findings of the social factors which contributed to suicide are still relevant in Australia today more than a century later. In order to support this claim, firstly an overview of Durkheim’s social theory will be provided, specifically of his social causes of suicide. In addition it will then focus on how Durkheim interpreted these differences in suicide rates between various groups using his theory of social integration and discuss the two types of suicide Durkheim identified in this area. We will then discuss social regulation and its two forms of suicide. Criticism of his theory will then be discussed, before providing relevant statistics from Australia in regards to suicide rates of teen and indigenous communities and examine these figures to explain these variances in light of Durkheim’s social theory’s, to support the fact that Durkheim’s theory’s are still relevant in Australia today. Emile Durkheim was born in 1858 in a

Suicide, to Durkheim, is “an exaggerated form of ordinary practices,” and they arise from “comparable states of mind” in people, with the only difference between daily and suicidal behavior being the “chance of death” (Durkheim 20-21). Durkheim spends the majority of the work dissecting the “apparent motives” for suicide (Durkheim 151) and observing the varieties of suicide, a feat made difficult by the inaccurate reporting and misunderstandings of investigators. Thus, to understand the types of suicide, we must “reverse the order of our research” for “There can only be as many different types of suicide as there are differences in the causes from which they derive,” (Durkheim 149). He says “if they were all found to have the same essential characteristics, they would be grouped in one class” but “observations that we would need to have are more or less impossible obtain” (Durkheim