Abstract
AbstractRecent meta-studies have shown that there are no known risk factors for suicidal behavior that could be used for behavior prediction, rendering the classic understanding of high and low risk for suicide questionable. The aim of this manuscript is to propose a new understanding of suicide risk that does not depend on predictive powers. In contrast, the developed Normic account of suicide risk, which is based on a possible world framework rather than probability calculations, suggests that the normalcy of an event determines whether the risk for the event’s occurrence is high or low. I suggest that this normalcy stems from the norms of practical rationality for agents who consider self-killing. The more difficult it is to make sense of possible intentional self-killing, the more abnormal the event is, which renders the event less risky. Consequently, from the Normic account of suicide risk, an individual who has weak or no life-sustaining reasons is at high risk for suicide. In conclusion, although the prediction of suicide is beyond the current scope of clinical psychology, there are still reasonable options for understanding what distinguishes individuals at high risk from those at low risk for suicide.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference63 articles.
1. Alvarez, M. (2009). How many kinds of reasons? Philosophical Explorations, 12(2), 181–193.
2. Alvarez, M. (2010). Kinds of reasons: An essay in the philosophy of action. Oxford University Press.
3. Anscombe, G. E. M. (1957). Intention. Basil Blackwell.
4. Asma, L. J. F. (2023). From causation to conscious control. Philosophical Explorations, 26(3), 420–436. https://doi.org/10.1080/13869795.2023.2223200.
5. Battin, M. P. (1995). Ethical issues in suicide (pp. xiv, 240). Prentice-Hall, Inc.