Apart from the pure sentimental reasons, nobody has proven their righteousness and free-will until they decide to end it all.
This schema is an explanation for this syntice where I argue that acting with the expectation of worst-case scenario is much more practical, especially in a technical context, than the other way around. I shamelessly call it "Eray's Wager", which is a blatant reference to Pascal's Wager . Here is the schema: The Schema of Eray's Wager Explanation Assuming we are in a context that we need to conduct a process that has at least a little societal side effect. In this case: Assume that we conducted the process as if it will result in the worst case and it resulted so . This means we were right all along. We are also prepared for the current consequences of the process and also prepared for the future consequences since we have gained experience and analyzed the patterns during the process. Assume that we conducted the process as if it will result in the worst case again and it did not . This means we were wrong , but also we are happy at the moment of the c