Citation

Soper CA. Omega (Westport) 2022; ePub(ePub): ePub.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2022, Sage Publications)

DOI

10.1177/00302228211073010

PMID

35199569

Abstract

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.

Language: en

Keywords

suicide; interpersonal theory of suicide; evolution; pain-and-brain; suicidology