Fundamental debates about the subject in the social sciences have been evaluated and discussed with different conceptualizations, considering different social and individual dynamics. The newest of these discussions in social sciences for a while is German philosopher of Korean descent Byung-Chul Han’s conceptualisation of performance. Han conceptualises today’s subject as performance and today’s social structure as a performance society. Digital information technologies, as both a result and a cause of our neoliberal system, have been evaluated as an essential factor in the emergence of performance conceptualisation. However, it is not expressed as the sole reason for the concept. The performance subject and society are faced with a crisis of reality. The social dimensions of the crisis have been reflected in the individual’s world of thought and, accordingly, in their attitudes and behaviours, helping the neoliberal system produce strong arguments to create itself. The impact of the dynamics produced by the structure on the individual has resulted in the individual exploiting himself more than ever before. The success-oriented system transforming the individual into a performance subject has also transformed the structure into a performance society. Therefore, a solid structure-agency dialectic has emerged. Han analysed this emerging situation in detail using different social typologies. 

All social typologies that Han claims to reveal the concept of performance refer to social structures that systematically complement each other, emerge from each other, and do not contradict each other. First, transparency means that the individual reaches an inherent point in the system. The basic necessity of this is to eliminate the roughness and negativity that are a part of human nature and simultaneously eliminate the cult value in things. The persistent tendency towards the positive, the struggle to eliminate the negative, and the lack of cult values pave the way for an environment of rapid exposure and revelation. The easy accessibility of the individual to what exists within him/herself means that behavioural and spiritual guidance is also easy. This state, which describes a situation inherent in the system for the subject, has produced a tired society in which the will is disabled and the movement of emotion and thought disappears. The fact that the person-giving the order and the person executing the order are the same individuals damages the subject’s consciousness and emotional movement. Han states that in a society of transparency, the slave-master dialectic changes form, and the order coming from the master and the slave and the execution of the action are the product of the same person. However, the subject’s constant confrontation with these orders and the attitudes and behaviours of implementing them have led to the emergence of a narcissistic and depressive personality. The performance subject was narcissistic and depressive. As a member of the fatigue society, the performance subject is indexed to success. Therefore, the subject of performance is the late-modern animal 2 labour. Han redefined the conceptualisation used by Arendt according to today’s subject. 

The late-modern animal latrons subject protects her ego by indexing herself to performance and higher levels of the active and excludes herself from the passive. Moreover, the performance subject is a homo-liber subject. Homoliber is a conceptualisation contrasted with Arendt’s concept of homosacer. Homoliber is an expression of the master–slave dialectic. Homoliber describes the individual who is dominant over himself. All these conceptualizations formed the framework of Han’s fatigue society. The fatigue that the individual feels to achieve what s/he desires and the desire to remove the systematic pain caused by fatigue has turned today’s subjects into subjects addicted to antidepressants. Ultimately, the individual has transformed from part of the fatigue society to part of the palliative society. The individual who cannot tolerate pain and pain faces the mental problems of being deprived of pain. Han draws attention to the importance of pain for the individual’s world of emotion and meaning. This loss of meaning in today’s subject has caused the individual to be defined by the conceptualisation of performance.

Another characteristic feature that reveals the subject of performance is power relations. Han stated that the neoliberal devices that indicate society’s performance deprive the individual of basic facts such as the other, negative, and eros, which are a part of his nature. Essentially, the absence of these facts has put the performance subject into a crisis of freedom and turned the individual into an object of the system. Having lost the other, the performance subject becomes a part of the same ones, devoid of communication. Han evaluates one of the biggest problems of today as the subject of not making room for others in their life. In a place where there is sameness, the subject has become an output of stereotypes, devoid of meaning and lost in the self-cycle. In addition, the more the performance subject reduces negativity, the higher the productivity level will be. However, trying to increase productivity is a significant cause of fatigue. Finally, the absence of eros deprived the performance subject of his ability to think deeply. The depressive and narcissistic performance subject, whose quantified characteristics have turned into numbers and who propagates non-existent freedom by being trapped in the ego cycle, has become a member of the performance society with all these features. However, although Han’s approaches to today’s subject and society are appropriate, we should not ignore the fact that he displays a wholesale approach towards all social groups.

Today’s social structure and the individual have sociological differences that cannot be evaluated only by conceptualising performance. Although Han’s assessments of today’s subject are correct, those who give up on a lifestyle focused on success and performance constitute another group in society. Social suicide, which is the main subject of the study, represents individuals who have lost their effort and power to be a subject of performance. At the same time, the concept attempts to define individuals who wish to remain outside the system. Therefore, social suicide is the result of the  strong desire for arguments that are part of human nature, such as the other, the negative, and eros, which reveal the subject of performance. The social suicide subject describes individuals who withdraw from public and social relations, where the performance subject struggles to exist, and who do not perform any performance through social networks. In this respect, the subject of social suicide is the performance subject of a period. The living space is still a performance society but does not show any performance. This article defines the subject of social suicide as distance and the act of being. While evaluating today’s subject, Han overlooked the next stage of the performance subject. Although some studies regard this concept as social loneliness, social isolation and hikikomori for specific reasons, particular essential distinctions show that the conceptualisation of social suicide has a unique structure.