Let's talk about The Button
Before I lay out this hypothetical scenario, I wish everyone to be informed that not only is it entirely possible, it has been done before.
If I offered to connect the pleasure centers of your brain to a button, that when pressed will directly stimulate those areas to bring you to the height of pleasure and the cessation of all pain, would you accept my offer if I gave you full control of that button? As an added bonus, I'd even agree to take care of all your other physiological needs; cleaning, feeding etc. If you wanted to have kids, I'd offer to do the same for them.
There is no catch. It could even be done in a way now, where you wouldn't even have to be bed bound. You can just have the artificial brain stimulator and go on your merry little way, happy until the end of your days.
References
Olds, J., & Milner, P. (1954). Positive reinforcement produced by electrical stimulation of septal area and other regions of rat brain. Journal of comparative and physiological psychology, 47(6), 419.
Moan, C. E., & Heath, R. G. (1972). Septal stimulation for the initiation of heterosexual behavior in a homosexual male. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 3(1), 23-30
If I offered to connect the pleasure centers of your brain to a button, that when pressed will directly stimulate those areas to bring you to the height of pleasure and the cessation of all pain, would you accept my offer if I gave you full control of that button? As an added bonus, I'd even agree to take care of all your other physiological needs; cleaning, feeding etc. If you wanted to have kids, I'd offer to do the same for them.
There is no catch. It could even be done in a way now, where you wouldn't even have to be bed bound. You can just have the artificial brain stimulator and go on your merry little way, happy until the end of your days.
References
Olds, J., & Milner, P. (1954). Positive reinforcement produced by electrical stimulation of septal area and other regions of rat brain. Journal of comparative and physiological psychology, 47(6), 419.
Moan, C. E., & Heath, R. G. (1972). Septal stimulation for the initiation of heterosexual behavior in a homosexual male. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 3(1), 23-30
Comments (87)
I’d like to always feel at least slightly on the positive side of things, but for HOW MUCH positive to still go up and down in response to other things.
For no other reason than it seems irresponsible to just trust you to take care of everything else that concerns me about the world and retire into perpetual orgasmic bliss.
Quoting Pfhorrest
Quoting Gus Lamarch
Quoting dukkha
That being said.. that's how I'd feel about the machine.. However, I have said before that a utopia would be one where you can dial in as much pain and pleasure as you want. So if this included every aspect of life, and was not just a really advanced sex toy.. Sure, I'm for it. However, the ultimate version of a utopia may be not existing at all or being completely filled (what does that look like?) that one doesn't want for want ever- pleasure, or the need to move away from pain. The closest that comes is actually sleep or not existing at all really.
I regard it a complete disregard for human intellectual and physical evolution. If we have something different from animals, it is the fact that we can fight our instincts at all times. However, people - for the most part - get carried away by the wave of the dionysian. Bah! If you want endless sensations, be then irrational animals and leave your vacant places as former humans to those who are really worthwhile.
Quoting MSC
Hm, interesting. May I know who they prey is?
Gee it's me, the evil antinatalist.. I sense trolling :roll:
Oh, ok.
Quoting schopenhauer1
Not on my regard.
At the heart of this, I just want to ask what you think would be a better use of your time. Trying to convince people not to procreate, or convincing neuroscientists to set you up with the dial? I'll accept your answer either way as your answer and this will be the last you hear of it as I didn't originally come onto this forum with the intent of only talking about antinatalism. I have discussions on Truth and falsehoods to post after this.
I'd just take it as a compliment that you've inspired me to think about your views more.
Says much about the emotive condition of humans, not that this is a surprise.
So my definition of necessary suffering is being deprived, usually based on things related to survival, comfort, entertainment. If somehow, we lived in a world where we didn't have "needs" because we were perpetually fulfilled at all times (again I don't know what that world really looks like except some sort of imaginary blissful being or more simply being in a nothing-like nirvana state), then sure that might be a world worth being born into.
I certainly don't think people should be born, to be used basically, so that there might be such a future state. I also don't subscribe to the notion that this world of pure fulfillment is somehow devoid of what it "really" means to be human. This whole trope about creating people so that they can suffer, so they can overcome the suffering is callous and cruel to cause for a future individual. Let sleeping dogs lie. Don't create drama/pain so that you can watch a person navigate through it in some social/societal/historically contexted setting/institutions.
As far as pleasure, again find it to be suspect. To say pleasure is "intrinsically good" is to not recognize that it is only relatively good in comparison to the netural/bad states. It is only "good" if temporary and usually loses its luster. So if in your supposed scenario there is a way to never lose the luster, maybe there is something there. That is not our universe though. And again, if we "need" the pleasure, then there is some residual "necessary suffering" of being unfulfilled, so there's that whole thing, thus reverting back to some nirvana or death-like state being actually the most utopian/fuliflled state. Either way, even if this world could exist, it certainly isn't this one. And to belabor the point, I don't see this universe as a magical journey to feel the heartaches, the pains, and foibles so we can be more "human" in some Nietzschan/maniacal fashion.. I think the Eternal Return scenario where you'd keep coming back to suffer as a human struggling again again, is hellish and immoral to want for others certainly.
I always admired Chmeee in the Ringworld series for his reaction to getting hit with the tasp (aka "pleasure button") for the first time and his disgust when he saw Louis had succumbed. It's stupid to admire a fictional character, but the character Chmeee and his sense of duty, loyalty, and integrity resonate strongly with me. If there is a "good life" to live, those qualities are essential.
Is it stupid to admire a fictional character? I admire loads! Even if I don't always admire the writer of that character *Cough*JKRowling*Cough*.
What you said really resonates with me and also matches surprisingly well with the Inspiration for this post. which I think you'd enjoy reading simply for it's parallels to your own words.
Sir, I love you. I'm gonna be borrowing those terms. Watch the Social Dilemma on Netflix. You. Will. Love. It!
What does equilibrium mean to you? I'm not disagreeing. I do see what you are saying, I don't necessarily want pleasure when I feel pain, I just want the pain to be gone. Just feeling balanced is a worthwhile reprieve from some forms of suffering. The forms of suffering and pain that harm me. So pain in my legs while I am exercising is a good thing and in the long run is beneficial, not harmful.
Your thought experiment is based on septal stimulation and there’s no evidence that it’s as addictive as you now suggest. Even though I admittedly have poor impulse control and the stimulation may be a challenge to deal with initially, eventually habituation would liberate and I’d be left with a free ass wiper.
People get addicted to gambling, of all things. You don't think they would get addicted to something that brings them constant pleasure to the nth degree? I think you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who didn't fall prey to it. I spent 20 years fighting booze, which made me feel kind-of-good. I would be no match for "the button".
My horrified reaction: "But that's cheating!"
Now, I think that what my wife means by "truly happy" is something different than what the button can produce, which is just raw physical pleasure.
Evidence?
Well, according to the Hearth study that I briefly scanned, the subject of stimulation was stimulated while having sex, another form of stimulation, so apparently it’s not the end-all be-all of stimulation that its being cracked up to be in this thought experiment. Sorry if I’m being a realist and spoiling the fun.
Someone has to keep things honest.
This is pure assumption.
I'm not necessarily "for the button" being an answer. The button would have to be able to dial in or out any amount of pain/pleasure as it relates to survival, comfort, and entertainment- not just mere pleasure. So, if I can dial in some amount of stress so I can feel the "high" of exercising, but then dial back pain as it relates to sickness, or dial in pain in regards to playing a game, but fastforward any tedium at work, that would be different.
However, one thing I observed with many of these comments, is the rather ubiquitous idea that human life needs pain so that we can have the pleasure of overcoming it. I just find this theory lacking in any ethical claim. To assume that people need to experience pain so as to overcome it, and then to go so far as to create a being who was not there to begin with to actually live this ethos out, is quite cruel in my estimation. I don't think that overcoming pain gets some gold star of goodness. This is what people say to pressure others into not having negative feelings towards the pain that they are supposedly supposed to overcome to feel like a better person. Putting people through a game unnecessarily, or because you want to see people overcome pain (or use weasel phrases that mask the negative aspect.. like "grow from pain") is not ethical. So yea, sue me.. I don't buy the very popular "no pain, no gain.. do the Dew" bullshit.
I’m not sure why that matters since people are capable of overcoming both kinds.
An interesting point you reminded me of. People who get addicted to powerful painkillers, opiates, morphine, really strong stuff. It changes something either in the mind, physiology, something in the body. I recall reading about people who quit stuff like that cold turkey saying the pain was unbearable literally feeling like "their bones were being crushed into dust" .. if I remember correctly they didn't start due to any injury or pain but rather just for pleasure.
To view it from this vantage, would not merely be like putting mice through a maze full of spikes and fire, it would be like creating mice for the purpose of putting them through your diabolical maze. I agree with you, such a view is not only incompetent in terms of philosophy, it is nearly sociopathic in terms of the framing of human experience. Reminds me of the same logic one finds at the heart of inquisitions.
Not really, I meant "no catch" as in I won't do anything to harm you if you agree, make you sign all your wealth and property over to me or I won't just use you for sex or something like that. So no, it's not an assumption since I'm the one creating the scenario so I'm the one creating the terms. Unless you are suggesting that I am making a pure assumption about my own beliefs and my own scenario? Which makes no sense. Try and be a bit more substantive in your responses and read carefully as to what is meant.
If I had meant what you thought I meant, then I'd just agree with you. There would probably still be negative consequences like addiction and long term physiological and psychological effects if you chose to accept the button.
All I meant by no catch, is that I won't do anything to you and in making the choice to have the button/dial you are accepting whatever long term consequences may arise from that. Since no one has ever undergone such a thing over a long period of time, there is no telling what effect it may have on a person.
Yes! :up: .
But yet people talk in these terms all the time.. "No pain, no gain"; "Life is only worth living when overcoming something painful" yadayada. How is this not possibly a social pressure to try to incorporate pain as good, so as people don't fall into pessimism? Just because one is co-opting pain, and trying to turn it on its head as "good thing" so as to downplay its negative aspect, doesn't make it any truer as an actual positive thing. Rather, it just shows the kind of thinking many people engage in in order to not see what might actually be the case. It also justifies answers to why people have kids in the light of knowing the kids will face inevitable necessary suffering and contingent, unpredictable forms of adversity.
Further, it is seemingly sociopathic to want to see "overcoming pain" carried out by another.
Yes... what is this exactly? What is the person who uses this framing trying to do? Perhaps one could try to say they are trying to cope with pain by creating a false metaphysical narrative surrounding its identity, but deep down it seems it amounts to, as you say, an attempt at justification. I mean, what happens once we adopt this view, that is, the child had to suffer abuse "because that's just part of growing up." One is trying to justify something by this logic, one is also trying to excuse something. At the most primitive point I think it is striving for the unconditional justification of life itself regardless of the poverty of conditions.
Quoting schopenhauer1
Yes, or just ignorant. I think we are right to revolt against this vicious ignorance with passion, such an ideology is itself abusive.
Some people do that with drugs and alcohol; even slot machines. (Well they don't fall off the stool and hit the floor dead in the bars and casinos, but they can go totally broke or make themselves sick and likely to die sooner.)
Repeatable intense pleasure from the push of a button is probably too perverse for animals to manage, including us. As it is, I can get lost for hours doing things that are less pleasurable than what this button is offering. Today I spent 3 hours perusing the New Yorker Cartoon Bank looking for a particular old cartoon. Didn't find it, didn't notice 3 hours passing, and didn't care. Great experience. Keep that hatched-in-hell-button away from me.
Those who are, what, philosophical zombies, soulless automata that do nothing other than exercises in pure logic for fun? Sorry, not fun, that’s a kind of pleasure. For what then?
All of the “higher” functions of humans are unquestionably of immense value, but that value is in large part instrumental for its effectiveness at reliably attaining the simple pleasures, and where it is not merely of instrumental value, its intrinsic value lies in still further kinda of pleasures.
Once we have answered all of the questions and solved all of the problems, once we are all knowing and all powerful, what then is left but just to ENJOY it? All the sound arguments against just living in pure enjoyment right now — and there are plenty — hinge on there still being unsolved problems and unanswered questions the answers to which may reveal problems that could threaten the possibility of everyone just enjoying themselves.
I don't believe human life needs pain at all. It's not really in any of our control and not a single one of us is responsible for designing this diabolical maze. We all just live in it and short of suicide there is not much we can do about it.
No parent gets any joy out of seeing their offspring suffer (well, I certainly don't at least but I can't speak for sadist parents). However, I already know that I suffered in my childhood in ways my kid has not. I was physically, emotionally and sexually abused (not an appeal to emotion just stating the facts of my childhood.) I've not repeated those cycles of abuse. Some of the things my kid has been upset about recently and has felt they have suffered over; Having to do schoolwork (which with the coronavirus has had me playing learning assistant for online learning), having to throw out what little remained of a cardboard box that we had already used for multiple arts and crafts projects, not being allowed to play video games all day.
I wouldn't make the mistake of thinking I am an optimist. I'm really not. I believe in working smart, not hard.
Life simply is. It doesn't need any justification to be the reality we find ourselves in.
I'd agree that we maybe callously have children. Even if we accept an antinatal moral position to be the only good one, it is not as if that is in any way an obvious conclusion for anyone to arrive at. It's not as if every parent internally acknowledges this position and then has a kid just to piss you or anyone else off that happens to be an antinatalist.
Don't worry, the button is hypothetical and even if I was a neuroscientist, I'd never really hook anyone up to this unless it was part of some end of life care for the terminally ill. Even then, the moral issues involved would only allow me to do that if a panel of ethicists give the green light and evaluate on a case by case basis.
If any of you really cared about reducing suffering, you would be kinder to others and wouldn't try to figuratively jerk each other off in an attempt to shame people for being alive and doing what literally every animal does.
I am curious as to where you all think free will and moral responsibility comes into play in your weird little worlds where up is down and right is wrong.
To me it looks like muddying the waters.
All suffering is bad (by definition), but in life we are constantly forced to go through some pain, to avoid bigger pain, like training to avoid physical weakness, etc.
And now they can point to that lesser pain and say "look a bad is now a good", but one only did it to stave of bigger suffering, that's what they deliberately omit.
This strikes me as one of the socially constructed biases - "pain is actually good", but the people shoving this garbage down others' throats aren't standing in their kitchen every morning and putting their hand in boiling water, so they can "grow" and "gain" from the "good" pain.
I think it comes all down to glorifying suffering (pure badness), which is one of the very core "necessaries" to get people to procreate.
Quoting JerseyFlight
I think it goes even so far as to be grateful for bad conditions.
:up: Not much more to say to this, as it makes the point well.
Quoting JerseyFlight
Yes.
Also very well-stated. Not much more to add.
Well that's good that you are not one of the ones who say "We need pain to justify our existence" or some such. If life is the diabolical maze, then surely we can prevent others from living it. We know there is suffering. We know it can be prevented for another. It is too late for us.
Quoting MSC
No one wants to think of their own kids as suffering. Remember, I define suffering in two ways: necessary, and contingent. Necessary suffering is never snuffed out of the equation. Contingent pain which is one of circumstances, is inevitable as well. Experiencing no contingent now, doesn't mean they won't in the future of course. Hopefully, that won't happen. I of course don't wish it on anybody.
Quoting MSC
But it doesn't have to be created again and again. We know the what it entails. And by now, you should know the response to (but it also entails happiness!), if not, I present you the asymmetry.. deprivation of good does not matter, unless there is an actual person for whom this can be a deprivation.
Quoting MSC
:up:
Quoting MSC
Haha, well yes of course. I agree with that. Most people have children with little antinatalist considerations in mind. It's never for the sake of the child though. A few "fun" quotes from antinatalist, David Benatar:
“It is curious that while good people go to great lengths to spare their children from suffering, few of them seem to notice that the one (and only) guaranteed way to prevent all the suffering of their children is not to bring those children into existence in the first place.”
? David Benatar , Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence
“Creating new people, by having babies, is so much a part of human life that it is rarely thought even to require a justification. Indeed, most people do not even think about whether they should or should not make a baby. They just make one. In other words, procreation is usually the consequence of sex rather than the result of a decision to bring people into existence. Those who do indeed decide to have a child might do so for any number of reasons, but among these reasons cannot be the interests of the potential child. One can never have a child for that child’s sake.”
? David Benatar, Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence
It is evident when thought through, but that doesn't mean it is instantly recognizable. There is a difference.
Quoting MSC
This seems just ad hominem.
Quoting MSC
I actually advocate Schopenhauer's idea of recognizing everyone born as "fellow-sufferers". We all suffer and we can recognize this in others and try to sympathize and empathize. We can attempt to relieve that suffering as much as possible through compassionate acts, whilst knowing it never ceases in a metaphysical way (i.e. Will in Schop's terminology). Beyond Schop though, I had an idea of forming "Communities of Catharsis". That is to say, communities of like-minded people who can discuss their rebellious stance, their worldview, can console each other, etc. There is catharsis in consolation with others. It would be okay to gripe and complain without people saying, "No pain, no gain buddy!!" or 'Think of it is a chance to grow" or simply "Stop complaining! No one wants to hear it!!" and other such sentiments. As stated earlier, these type of statements are either trying to ignore the problem or incorporate pain as good, so as not to have a negative view on things in general. But it is masking the situation so that it can seem justified in happening at all. It's a defense-mechanism, and a way to group-think away ideas of pessimism. Also, people tend to "You" pessimism away. If it's YOUR problem, then it cannot be circumstances of living in general. I call this existential gaslighting.
Quoting MSC
Just because the popular notions of things are not antinatalist notions, doesn't mean antinatalism is somehow immoral or unsound. That would clearly be the argumentum ad populum fallacy.
I'm not sure how you want that to be tied in with antinatalism. Without it being a debate about free will in general, if the assumption is that people are making their own decisions, then it is possible for people to decide not to bring more suffering into the world. I am not going to shame a pregnant lady or anything like that. I am not going to go about throwing red paint on people. I liken it to veganism. Most vegans will present their view, and aren't going to condemn you for eating a hamburger, even if they disapprove of it themselves. The goal is to not be obnoxious to others who are obviously following the majority idea on the matter, but to still present the view.
There is a chance to prevent all suffering simply by not doing something. At that point, one can perfectly prevent harm and not force the situation of having to "play the maze/game" onto another without any negative consequences to an individual (i.e. no deprivation of good things since no actual person is deprived).
It helps, when avoiding a deadly spiral into drug addiction, that drugs are not easily or legally procured.
Mostly agree but not with the legally procured part. There are a handful of chronic pain issues I could claim I have that a Dr can't reliably test for, opiates can be legally prescribed and in some cases are directly pushed onto patients who would do better with other pain management therapies.
My thinking exactly. End of life care or treatment resistant pain issues would be fine so long as there are a panel of professionals making decisions on it.
What about Mental health issues? Depression, anxiety, suicidal ideation etc
That’s the kind of thing I was thinking of.
If it can be made so that just existing at all in and if itself feels like at least a slight net positive, regardless of what else is going on, then it seems that that would go a huge way toward relieving anxiety, depression, and existential dread.
I agree to an extent in terms of if these mental health conditions are treatment resistant by way of traditional methods.
It's important to weigh up the risks between say an orally taken SSRI vs a procedure to have the dial/button installed.
No procedure is without risk and brain invasive procedures usually carry the most risk. A slip up on the part of the medical professional carrying out the procedure could leave you in a vegetative state or potentially damage ones ability to feel any positive emotions at all. This would also be a factor in if a patient whom the implant works for wishes to discontinue treatment as the procedure to remove the device would carry the same risks as implementing it in the first place.
Then you have the issue of neurological diversity and the assumption that the device would be a success for everyone.
Then we have other brain abnormalities and the dangers surrounding them. For example people without the capacity to feel pain are in danger of not knowing whether or not something is wrong with them. What that may mean is that a patient themselves who has the implant could potentially mismanage pain related to a malignant tumour. Masking that problem wouldn't eliminate it and the doctors best early warning symptom of something being wrong is actually your own ability to feel pain.
Is fraudulent reporting of symptoms to obtain heroin for recreational purposes legal?
That's fair, I'm a pragmatist though so I don't tend to divorce from the practical details as I see them as being relevant to the philosophical thought behind it.
But I don't think he was recommending this as a moral philosophy.
Humanity was not made to "enjoy" the result of its achievements. History proves that humanity only flows and grows "during" the procees of development to a goal. When that same goal is achieved, what comes into play? Nihilism, decay, the destruction of everything that took us so long to build, and why? Because we love "purpose", the objective while its not in our hands. The appreciation of your creation is a pleasure reserved only for the divine, the transcedental.
kartrashian
instacrap
yourtube
crapchat
Lots of focus on the crappyness of the people that abuse the internet
And a few other about pains in the butt in general.
I suppose you're right but from the little experience I've had not all drugs come in the form of pills, syrups, injectables, inhalants. You know what I mean, right?
I know you were addressing this to @Pfhorrest but do you mean ideas?
You know it, subconsciously or mostly you'd be made aware of it because it's a 'good' feeling. Equilibrium is not just in how we feel, but it is a measurable condition. If you want to be specific and literal, there's vital signs, for your reference. It's hard to articulate what's equilibrium for a person, but you just know it whether you're by yourself or in a crowd. The absence of apprehension, foreboding thoughts, or even loud excitement (in the form of screaming fans in a large concert arena) -- all these are nonexistent in an equilibrated state.
It's interesting when you say, pain is a good thing when you're exercising. Yes, we've learned to welcome bodily pain from workout . But mostly we are not aware that our body is designed to alleviate pain, always trying to bring our state into balance.
It's a good thing to be able to overcome pain, but I see your point. Pleasure is not the word we want, to me the word is 'satisfaction'. Normally we don't put ourselves into pain and suffering (I don't mean the kind we get from workout), but we find ourselves in one, and this is simply because we live a human life. ( Yes, I know. Bear with me) We are aware of relationships, and the eventual pain when those relationships disappear, as in death or separation. Experiencing suffering allows another dimension to a life where everything is in order and works like clockwork.
@schopenhauer1
Not for nothing, but I suffered some traumas this past week. I couldn't tell you if I deserved the suffering or if it was good for me. I have however noticed an improvement in how I philosophise for it. Take that as you will. So while no pleasure was had, writing leaves me more satisfied.
Thank you for putting what I wanted to say into perspective.
I gotta say I honestly don't understand people who think like you. (Not that there's anything bad with thinking like that, I just don't understand them)
Why should one value not being an empty shell more than being happy? What's the point of not being an empty shell if you are not perfectly happy?
The way I see it, being happy is infinitely more important and valuable than being «human» or whatever. I don't think there is anything intrinsically better about not being an empty shell rather than being one, if one gets happiness in the former case.
Maybe one of the answers is based on a prejudice, or maybe both are. Who knows.
But at any rate, is this really all that important? The idea that we could ever build such a button seems completely fantastic, so it's just a hypotetical scenario that probably will never happen.
1. What does it matter if it's «cheating» or not? It seems to me like that's unimportant in comparison.
2. I do think that happiness is obtained only from pleasure, as well as from other «good» sensations in the mind (tranquility, peace of mind, joy, etc...) which I assume could be included in «pleasure», for how else would you «feel» happy?