Suicide as a By-Product of “Pain and Brain”

Soper, C. A.

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-77300-1_3

Cited by 2 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 268 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Advanced below is a redeployment of the desire-capability idea as an ultimate evolutionary mode of explanation, instead of a proximate mechanistic one. This reassignment connects with theoretical work on the evolution of suicide undertaken both outside of Joiner’s research group (Humphrey, 2018; Soper, 2018), and, as it will be argued, within (Rogers et al, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 65%

“…A formidable puzzle arises with suicide, “the act of deliberately killing oneself” (W.H.O., 2014, p. 12), because the behavior has almost certainly been under intense negative selective pressure, now and in the evolutionary past. It presents all three necessary and sufficient conditions—variability, heritability, and a differential effect on reproductive fitness (Darwin, 1859)—for natural selection to operate (Soper, 2018). The last of these, suicide’s impact on the propagation of genetic material across generations, is deleterious in the extreme (Gunn, Malo, & Soper, 2021).…”

Section: Evolutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Suicide might thereby be evolutionarily adaptive. This proposal has drawn interest from some quarters (e.g., Brown et al, 1999; Syme et al, 2016), but it faces considerable empirical and theoretical problems (Bering, 2018; Gunn et al, 2021; Lester, 2014; Soper, 2018). Among these, the burdensomeness hypothesis does not explain specifically suicide; even if someone were such a social liability as to require removal, genetically more logical solutions would take precedence.…”

Section: Evolutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is better taken as an ultimate, instead of a proximate, mode of explanation. Suicide may be understood as a noxious by-product of evolutionary adaptations that generate the desire and capability: ‘pain’ and ‘brain’, respectively (Soper, 2018, 2019a, 2021). Pain is an ancient stimulus that enables an animal to navigate fitness hazards in its environment.…”

Section: Survival Valuementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Ethological Problems with the Interpersonal Theory of Suicide

Soper

2022

Omega (Westport)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Joiner and colleagues’ Interpersonal Theory of Suicide (IPTS), a prominent “desire-capability” model of suicide—based on the common-sense idea that people take their own lives because they want to, and can—is critiqued from a biological perspective. Tinbergen’s ethological “four questions” guide the analysis: evolution, survival value, ontogeny, and proximate causation, each addressing a different aspect of biological understanding. Problems for ITS emerge with all four. As a parsimonious solution, the desire-capability hypothesis is reconceived as an ultimate, instead of proximate, mode of explanation. By this light, desire and capability for suicide combined in our species’ ancestral past, thus making suicide a recurrent survival threat, and driving the evolution of special-purpose defensive adaptations. This stance tallies with the pain-brain theory of the evolution of suicide, and with Joiner and colleagues’ own investigation into organismic anti-suicide defenses, which appears to conflict conceptually with IPTS. These defenses’ evolved algorithm may make suicide an intrinsically aleatory phenomenon, opaque to usefully accurate prediction. Positive implications for prevention and research are proposed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 65%

Section: Evolutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Evolutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Survival Valuementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Ethological Problems with the Interpersonal Theory of Suicide

Soper

2022

Omega (Westport)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Male emotional suppression has been strongly linked to suicidal behaviors (Bennett et al, 2023; Cleary, 2019; Meissner & Bantjes, 2017; Tryggvadottir et al, 2019). Unbearable psychological pain is foundational to many theories of suicide (Shneidman, 1998; Soper, 2019). Our ability to regulate and manage our emotions is a core process by which we can purposefully discharge and direct psychological pain.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Establishing research priorities for investigating male suicide risk and recovery: A modified Delphi study with lived-experience experts.

Bennett,

Robb,

Andoh-Arthur

et al. 2024

Psychology of Men & Masculinities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study uses the Delphi expert consensus method to work with lived-experience experts and establish research priorities to advance our understanding of male suicide risk and recovery. Items for the Delphi were generated via findings from two recent quantitative and qualitative systematic reviews on male suicide, a comprehensive gray literature search, responses to a global survey on male suicide, and feedback from a panel of 10 international academic/clinical male suicide experts. A two-round Delphi study was conducted to gain consensus among 242 lived-experience experts representing 34 countries on 135 potential male suicide research questions. Panelists were asked to rate each item on a 5-point Likert scale from should not be included to essential. Consensus was defined as 80% of respondents scoring an item as "essential" or "important." After two Delphi rounds, consensus was reached on 87 items. The final questions were then grouped by the author team and expert academic/clinical panel into thematic clusters to create a 22-point agenda of research priorities. Like all methodologies, there are weaknesses to the Delphi method, not least that the experts employed in a Delphi study do not represent all experts on a topic. We note that many items that did not make it to the top of the research agenda related to minority experiences. All the questions prioritized in this agenda can be applied to different demographics. However, minority populations may require tailored Delphi's using expert panels drawn specifically from those groups. A final agenda of 22 research priorities was developed. Questions related to 10 thematic domains: (a) relationships with others, (b) relationship with self, (c) relationship with emotions, (d) mental health, (e) suicidal behaviors, (f) early-life experiences, (g) structural challenges, (h) cultural challenges, (i) at-risk groups, and ( j) support and recovery. The three highest endorsed items related to loneliness and isolation (98%), feelings of failure (97%), and sources of stress and emotional pain (96%) for men who are suicidal. This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

show abstract

Suicide as a By-Product of “Pain and Brain”

Cited by 2 publications

References 268 publications

Ethological Problems with the Interpersonal Theory of Suicide

Ethological Problems with the Interpersonal Theory of Suicide

Establishing research priorities for investigating male suicide risk and recovery: A modified Delphi study with lived-experience experts.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About