Not really, no, because society isn’t a monolithic Thatcherite boogeyman character. It’s just a shorthand for all the ways that people need things from each other at varying degrees of separation. And those needs still exist whether or not they’re being met.
If you’ve ever counted on another person, then you’ve disregarded their sovereign right to not be there for you. Everyone does this to everyone. So if you see a stranger on the railing of a bridge, I think it’s acceptable to intervene to some extent, a.k.a. “society weighing in”.
He designed a whole city, and there are many, many beautiful architectural renderings. I don’t know if there are any prints, but I wouldn’t be surprised. He would design portraits in architectural form of people he knew and admired; translating what he saw as their characteristics into imaginary buildings.
I’m not sure why it has to be irrevocable. A living will is created and can be changed as needed. There is no reason why a living will could not be used to clearly layout my future wishes (assuming I could even legally do it) as it relates to how my life should end or be ended.
As far as my future self, I don’t see a lot of change there being middle aged currently. It really sounds like you are asking for a one time statement that would be legally binding forever. Considering this document would be created by me I see no reason I couldn’t change it. Now if we are talking about some form of governmental regulations concerning resource or population control, that is a completely different concern.
Of course it isn’t, but that doesn’t mean that society as it is now isn’t monstrous.
The difference is that such situations are consensual. Forcing someone to suffer for economy or other benefit to society is not.
It depends on what you mean by intervention. Offering help - definitely. Forcibly rescuing that person only so they can be further victimized by society is in my opinion questionable and depends on situation.
I’d like to bring up the point that whenever we’re talking about someone with a physical ailment, everyone is able to be sympathetic to wanting the pain to stop.
But when it comes to depression or mental illness, everyone’s got a lot of hubris to decide what kind of pain someone else should or shouldn’t be able to bear.
I know that the depression lies. I understand how it distorts things. I get that the hopelessness and isolation are a product of faulty neurotransmitters rather than objective reality.
But that does not change the fact that they are very fucking real to me. I live in a state of near constant pain, and fuck anybody who presumes how long I should be able to bear it for.
And yes, for the record, I get therapy. I take meds when I need them. I have a support network of friends and family who know my warning signs. I’m not in any immediate danger.
But I resent the implication that the chronic illness I’ve dealt with for the last 30 years somehow doesn’t count because it’s not physical pain.
I know it’s all in my head. That doesn’t make it any less real or debilitating. If and when I decide I’ve had enough, that’s my decision to make.
