While I respect your perspective on the value of suffering (which seems to arise from our sense of self and what we associate with “I”) and figuring out life, I think you judge Kahneman as an outside observer without access to his inner thoughts, state and factors that went into his decision.
I'm not sure if you even read the article nor his books, and I disagree with your interpretation of his actions because they have very extravagant presumptions, judging from your comments.
I don't think he was afraid. I think he mapped out his late age future, and wanted to fast forward to what his next adventure even in post-death while leaving his last touches on the world a good one. Leaving the world a better place than when he started, as they say.
> I’m less concerned about what was in his head than the message that he sends.
As quoted from the article: Daniel Kahneman did not want to make a statement or start a debate. "I am not ashamed of my decision," he wrote, "but I don't want it to be discussed publicly either."
Yes, presumptions is all of have, it is all we have of anyone since we cannot get inside their heads. But his actions do reveal something, about which I can make assumptions. Even a hermit is known to be a hermit, so he is not ever alone in his hermitage. So he was even a fool thinking his actions would not be debated.
I read a bit about him after I read the article. He was a behavioral economist and he treated his life like a piece of capital. This is why I do not want economists running the world. And I also saw he had a lot of trauma in his life.
His thoughts: "Predicted utility is the predicted experienced utility for a future experience."
Did he see no predicted utility in his life? Should we adapt this to judge others lives or our own? Are we as great reasoners than him? But what kind of fool tries to measure, tries to quantify, happiness! Economics is not a science, and behavioral economics is just a cold psychology.
He evens seems not to be able to live up to his own words: "Nothing in life is as important as you think it is when you are thinking about it."
But thank you for making me read more about him. It seems even his friends thought he was a pessimist, and who can blame him living through the holocaust.
Interesting that his son had schizophrenia, I have Ashkenazi Jewish heritage and think this is why it runs in my family. (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26198764/)
I agree with you. All I can judgment is his actions. And his words. This man was afraid of future suffering. And he was so afraid of it that he would rather die than face it. But the truth is, he could’ve tripped and fell down the stairs the next day and died on his own. So not only was he afraid, but he was arrogant. He thought he could predict the future. This man certainty took whatever life he had left away from his “partner“.
I’m less concerned about what was in his head than the message that he sends. The message he sent was that perceived future suffering is not worth enduring. He killed himself because he was afraid of suffering. He was afraid of the natural process of dying.
Is that the message we want to send about old age and dying? That it’s unnatural? Can anyone choose what age they think is old enough? Maybe it should be 65 years old, the retirement age. That would save the United States a lot of money for sure.
Is this setting up the president for some sort of real life version of Logan‘s run?