Poll: The Experience Machine.

[Living Contradiction]

Mind you, it'd make an excellent morale boost for people who are in palliative care.

An excellent use of the machine if ever there was one.

For myself, no. I like my reality, warts and all, and the notion of maximum happiness puts me in the mind of Ren & Stimpy (remember the origins of "Happy Happy Joy Joy"?) An invention akin to the Happiness Helmet gives me the creeps. I'll stick to occasional indulgence in escapism and food, thanks.

 

[boradam]

No, as tempting as it would be, I would never let myself live a lie no matter how 'real' it tries to make me think it is. Even if it can offer me what the programmer believes to be complete, and total happiness with no worries or troubles, I couldn't live that life.

EDIT for further insight: There's happiness to be had in enduring hard labor, pain, and fighting through struggles or oppression in your life, not because of those things themselves, but because if I press through those things I will have achieved something greater than I would have had before, something which I would never be able to do if I was just given 'happiness'.

You don't get to be in a position of CEO for a big company by being a broken man who wastes his money away at any point or time because of his life situation, you get it by being someone who works hard for that position despite however hard it was to make it; I don't want happiness if I'm just given it, it's meaningless, I can't appreciate it unless I myself endure what it took to get there -- it's worthless without a full appreciation for it.

 

[thesilentman]

No.

I will not have it. For me, happiness must exist alongside pain to show how much lucky we all are. A win at a tournament wouldn't mean a damn thing unless you worked your ass off and put yourself under some pain (not in the way that most people are thinking).

It's also a matter of context. If I'm happy all of the time, what's to say that I'll enjoy it? I've been tired of being happy as I know that I did nothing to deserve my happiness.

So there's my answer.

 

[freaper]

There can only be happiness if there's pain, much like there can only be light if there's darkness. That's all I'm going to say.

 

[Lord Garnaat]

I think my greatest problem with the "Happiness Machine" is that it relies on hedonistic desires. In order for the machine to be worth anything to you, you have to accept that what is most important is your own individual happiness and pleasure, and that no other experience or situation is worth not entering the machine. Personally, I think that the idea that personal pleasure is the most important thing is utterly false, and immoral besides. By entering this machine, I'm essentially cutting myself off from the world as a whole - nothing that I say or do will affect anyone else in any meaningful way for the rest of my existence. I would be living solely for my own benefit, disregarding how I may affect the world or help other people, and that strikes me as the purest form of selfishness.

I don't think that people are meant to live their lives in isolation from one another, and furthermore, the most worthwhile pursuit is to help others. By entering this machine, I'm rendering my own existence meaningless.

 

[Altorin]

I definitely would plug in. A lifetime of happiness tailored to my own definition of happiness? yes. definitely.

 

[Excelsior789]

That's a no from me. But then, happiness isn't my end goal. Mine is just to be useful and repay my debts to society before I bite it.

topic reminds me of the end of Enslaved: Odyssey to the west.

 

[Darken12]

I cannot imagine life without the possibility of it ever ceasing. The cessation of life is supremely important to me. Happy or not, life must end at some point. Existing forever, happy or not, sounds like the worst kind of hell imaginable.

 

[Arakasi]

EDIT for further insight: There's happiness to be had in enduring hard labor, pain, and fighting through struggles or oppression in your life, not because of those things themselves, but because if I press through those things I will have achieved something greater than I would have had before, something which I would never be able to do if I was just given 'happiness'.

In that case you woudn't be happy, and the machine wouldn't be 'The Experience Machine' it would be a failed experience machine. If you thought that hard work was the only way to achieve happiness, and you were right, the machine would account for that, and make you work for your happiness. Only unlike real life, it would be for maximum possible happiness, and you wouldn't risk premature death.

No.

I will not have it. For me, happiness must exist alongside pain to show how much lucky we all are. A win at a tournament wouldn't mean a damn thing unless you worked your ass off and put yourself under some pain (not in the way that most people are thinking).

It's also a matter of context. If I'm happy all of the time, what's to say that I'll enjoy it? I've been tired of being happy as I know that I did nothing to deserve my happiness.

So there's my answer.

You will enjoy it otherwise you wouldn't have been happy and the machine would have failed, breaking the hypothetical. If it were true that you needed pain too in order to be truely happy, the machine would account for that and include it. Only it would be the minimal amount of pain possible to get the maximum amount of happiness.

There can only be happiness if there's pain, much like there can only be light if there's darkness. That's all I'm going to say.

Except that's provably wrong via neruoscience. Also light and dark are not an exact analogy. Pain is a distinct feeling from happiness, rather than the absense of happiness. Darkness is merely the absense of light, not another energy form.

I cannot imagine life without the possibility of it ever ceasing. The cessation of life is supremely important to me. Happy or not, life must end at some point. Existing forever, happy or not, sounds like the worst kind of hell imaginable.

Wrong. The stipulation of the machine is that you would be happy, if you lived forever, you'd be happy forever. Also, your brain would eventually deteriorate naturally (I'd imagine) and your life would end.

 

[Darken12]

Wrong. The stipulation of the machine is that you would be happy, if you lived forever, you'd be happy forever. Also, your brain would eventually deteriorate naturally (I'd imagine) and your life would end.

Then I still wouldn't go for it. I'm not an hedonist. I don't see the point in living if all you are doing with your life is wasting it on sensory gratification. I don't consider living a happy life to be something to be proud of.

 

[Arakasi]

I definitely would plug in. A lifetime of happiness tailored to my own definition of happiness? yes. definitely.

Thing is that it would not nessecarily be talored to your own definition of happiness. It would be tailored to the scientific definition of happiness, based upon what your brain would enjoy most. Close, but not quite the same. One can have delusions about what they would/wouldn't enjoy.

That's a no from me. But then, happiness isn't my end goal. Mine is just to be useful and repay my debts to society before I bite it.

topic reminds me of the end of Enslaved: Odyssey to the west.

So basically you think your life is nothing but indentured servitude? That's rather a depressing outlook.

 

[Arakasi]

Wrong. The stipulation of the machine is that you would be happy, if you lived forever, you'd be happy forever. Also, your brain would eventually deteriorate naturally (I'd imagine) and your life would end.

Then I still wouldn't go for it. I'm not an hedonist. I don't see the point in living if all you are doing with your life is wasting it on sensory gratification. I don't consider living a happy life to be something to be proud of.

Fair enough then, that's more in line with the question.

May I ask you though, what is the point in living other than happiness?

 

[Darken12]

Fair enough then, that's more in line with the question.

May I ask you though, what is the point in living other than happiness?

I think every person defines what the point of living is (for themselves) and I have no problems with people who decide to live a life of happiness and are okay with that. My reasoning was solely applied at my own life.

Personally, I think the meaning of existence is to do good. To leave the world in a better states than you left it. I wouldn't consider my life to be something to be proud of unless I was sure I had done some amount of good in the world. Good, of course, according to my own definitions of it. The rationale I'm using might be Kantian (deontological, to be more precise), but my values differ from Kant's ethics.

Either way, I consider my life to be worthwhile only if it has adequately fulfilled my self-imposed duty to do good. The meaning of my life is altruism. I exist only to better the lives of people and nature in general. Anything else is frivolity.

 

[uchytjes]

I would plug in, but only if a very small, but VERY important list of circumstances are met.

1. I do not age.
I love my fantasies. I love dreaming. I love thinking. I would love to have more time to think. This could be an acceptable solution.

2. I can leave. What good would the machine do if I couldn't leave it with the knowledge I'd gained from thinking inside of it?

3. There is a cost. Whether it is money, a time limit, or some other restriction/payment, it would be necessary to mitigate my abuse of the machine.

If those are not met, I would not plug in. Just having your way with anything is not satisfying in any way. Yahtzee put it best in his review of minecraft. If you can just will a giant golden cock and balls into existence it isn't satisfying when you blow them up. When you have to work for said cock and balls it will make you appreciate it all the more when you have it.

 

[Spuds]

The premise here is flawed. Eternal bliss is beyond our understanding and asking someone a question they cannot possibly understand does not produce real answers. A better question would be something like would you take a drug [or plug into a machine] that made you fell as happy as you've ever felt with no repercussions and you have an unlimited supply of it. Or something similar to the situation of Brave New World.

Also ive read through all the posts and i see you asking a tough question and then making all possible arguments against the socially honorable choice. What response are you looking for here?

 

[Gormech]

I'd have to say no. There's an old saying that goes as follows:
Pleasure unearned destroys.

Think of it this way, by giving up everything around you to go on the electric version of a drug binge, you essentially would become nothing but a sensation sponge. There would no longer be any real thought, no risk, just hollow (from a third person perspective) sensation of pleasure that would slowly corrupt yourself as an individual.

 

[Arakasi]

The premise here is flawed. Eternal bliss is beyond our understanding and asking someone a question they cannot possibly understand does not produce real answers. A better question would be something like would you take a drug [or plug into a machine] that made you fell as happy as you've ever felt with no repercussions and you have an unlimited supply of it. Or something similar to the situation of Brave New World.

Also ive read through all the posts and i see you asking a tough question and then making all possible arguments against the socially honorable choice. What response are you looking for here?

I'm not looking for a specific response, I'm attempting to poke people's arguments until they fall apart. The reason I am on one side of the debate is that I can't think of a reasonable refutation of it, and therefore I can't really quote anyone who agrees with me and add anything to what they have, except that one time where the person agreed (possibly) because they missed the point.

The pleasure machine is actually a refutation of hedonism, meant to show that no one would actually choose to hook into the machine, so I really don't understand the problem you have with it, I don't think it's particularly biased, unless it is in the direction of the refutation.

 

[Arakasi]

I'd have to say no. There's an old saying that goes as follows:
Pleasure unearned destroys.

Think of it this way, by giving up everything around you to go on the electric version of a drug binge, you essentially would become nothing but a sensation sponge. There would no longer be any real thought, no risk, just hollow (from a third person perspective) sensation of pleasure that would slowly corrupt yourself as an individual.

So you live in fear of the judgement of others instead of doing what you want?
And if you enjoyed thought and risk, the machine would create an environment in which those things flourished. I suppose the key word there is 'real'. What is the difference between real thought and unreal thought? Is there unreal thought?

Fair enough then, that's more in line with the question.

May I ask you though, what is the point in living other than happiness?

I think every person defines what the point of living is (for themselves) and I have no problems with people who decide to live a life of happiness and are okay with that. My reasoning was solely applied at my own life.

Personally, I think the meaning of existence is to do good.

Would you consider yourself a utilitarian hedonist? I.e. You think that what is morally good is producing the maximum happiness for the maximum number of people (and the same but opposite for pain)?

To leave the world in a better states than you left it.

What's the point of it being better if no one uses it for their happiness?

Either way, I consider my life to be worthwhile only if it has adequately fulfilled my self-imposed duty to do good. The meaning of my life is altruism. I exist only to better the lives of people and nature in general. Anything else is frivolity.

I'd like to hear your reasoning behind this, you seem to have thought this out fairly well. The more I analyse if the more I come to altruism being pointless and even bad.