Argument 2's premise that 'there are no hindrances' assumes physical rather than ontological constraints, but the deepest hindrance may be structural: the damned lack the metaphysical capacity for self-termination.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Hindrance(the main subject of the argument—what might prevent the damned from ending their own existence): Something that creates difficulty or prevents progress toward a goal.
Ontological: "Ontological" refers to questions about what actually exists or is real. It's concerned with the fundamental nature of being—asking "What kinds of things are there?" rather than "How do we know about them?" For example, an ontological question might be whether numbers, ideas, or God actually exist as real things, or if they're just human inventions.
Premise: A premise is a statement or fact that you assume to be true as a starting point for reasoning or making an argument. Think of it as the foundation or building block you use to reach a conclusion—for example, "All dogs are animals" and "My pet is a dog" are premises that lead to the conclusion "My pet is an animal." Premises are essentially the evidence or claims you offer before drawing a final conclusion.
Self-termination(what the damned may or may not be able to do due to their metaphysical nature): The act of ending one's own existence.

Based on where you are in your exploration