/His/ I have a thought experiment for you.
Consider the experience machine.
It is a simulated reality in which you can expect yourself the have the most fulfilling life conceptually possible. Any dream you could ever have could be realised once you step inside the machine. Your accomplishments inside the machine will still feel real, climbing Mount Everest would be difficult but ultimately you would get to the top.
The machine is self-sufficient and has been constructed so well that it cannot malfunction. Do not consider the pragmatics.
You are offered a place in the experience machine, do you choose to enter?
You will not know that you have entered the machine. It will be impossible for you to tell that what you are experiencing is ultimately a simulation.
Do not worry about friends and family, if you worry about leaving them behind imagine they too will enter the machine. They will not experience your loss.
So, do you take the offer? And why?
Lastly, I'd like you to consider the implications this thought experiment has for ethical theories such as utilitarianism which only consider the ends in their evaluations.
No.
Because when I enjoy things I feel bad.
ye, because anything would be better then what i have now
>>925720
Perhaps the experience machine could simulate you having an the most unenjoyable life?
Is that thing gonna breakdown again?
No I read the Republic I'm not falling for that shit
>>925717
No.
I will also blow up the machine, kill all who entered it, those who maintain it and those who built and/or financed it. Then I will proceed to plant a forest on the rubble.
The machine represents our modern technological hedonistic and materialistic society, and by stepping into the machine (which we have all already done by participating in modern "progressive" society) we leave behind any chance of the survival of our species in the world
Am i doing this right?
fuck no, I may be a depressed romeaboo but I'd rather make an actual new rome than live a fake one
I am okay with machine. Plebs would say that it is unreal or something shit like this but everything that exist is real so machine is very real one too.
>>927718
and when the machines break down because no one's maintaining it?
>>927725
>"The machine is self-sufficient and has been constructed so well that it cannot malfunction. Do not consider the pragmatics."
>>927691
> we leave behind any chance of the survival of our species in the world
Wrong. Machine is self-sufficient so you clearly aren't in any danger. What you leave behind is your agenda and chance to influence outside world. Survival isn't the question. What matters here is how badly you want to bet your control over your life over chance to influence something outside the world you can perfectly control. That analogy is more about deconstruction of cultural context that makes your experience predictable and turns you into a another part of the machine that it is about hedonism. Context is what made your accomplishments feel real. Could you step outside of the scenario or do you want to be play your role as passive audience of such spectacle.
what would be the point no failure = no proggress as an individual failure drives us some people who have failed are more famous than those who have succeeded ie leonidas and his spartans at thermopaly
I guess my question is do I remember the machine deal when I get in?
If I know I'm on easy mode nothing would matter (like an rts) with cheat codes. If I instantly forget I chose that option, then to me it would be an easy choice.
>>927766
>"You will not know that you have entered the machine."
I think the correct thing to do is to refuse to enter the machine. The machine is like a perfect prison, once you are inside it, you will never want to leave it, and you can never affect the outside again. So from the perspective of a person who is outside of the machine, the person who entered it is now dead, since he will be stuck in the machine until he dies. But from the perspective of a person who has entered the machine, he is now part of a world that is objectively better and more enjoyable, where he can fulfill his dreams and recieve full satisfaction. Thus the only correct decision for any rational person is to refuse to step inside the machine.
>>927820
I wanna add this also:
Before you have entered the machine, you are aware that you will have the most fulfilling life possible after you entered the machine. But, before you have entered the machine, you are able to consider the fact that your body will actually be stuck in the machine, and that you won't have climbed the real Mt. Everest. So you can (beforehand) consider the state in which your body will be, and that nothing you achieve in the dream inside of the experience machine will be "real" only imaginative, like a spiritual experience. And i think that's why you shouldn't enter the machine.
>>927820
You are already in perfect prison called reality.
>>927869
I can't help that though. But i can prevent myself from being even further imprisoned, by deciding not to step into the machine. At least now i can affect both the material and the immaterial realm, in the machine i would only be able to affect the immaterial realm. So i make a net gain by not entering the machine.
>>927802
Glitch in the matrix, that wasn't there before...
>>927893
Berenstain or Berenstein?
If the machine is truly so well constructed that it is able to function perfectly indefinitely regardless of external events (let's say it's located on a space station constructed and maintained by a benevolent super-intelligent AI or whatever), then as someone who isn't religious and therefore doesn't really believe in "inherent value", I can't really think of a good justification for not entering the machine, even though intuitively it feels wrong. This is especially true if my actual friends and family are able to enter the machine with me, as the premise implies.
The only justification the seems valid to me on a personal level is the possibility that others are out there suffering in the real world, and are unable to enter the perfect reality of the experience machine. In that case, I may feel that I have a moral duty to assist them in entering the machine, before I enter it myself and tune out of physical reality entirely.
>>927997
>I may feel that I have a moral duty to assist them in entering the machine
Interesting, because I feel that i may have a moral duty to PREVENT people from entering the machine, as it would be a negative thing for them to do. Also I'm not trying to reduce the total amount of suffering in the world like some kind of utilitarianist.
>>928026
Why do you consider entering the machine to be negative?
>>928045
Because you are locking your physical body into an eternal prison from which you are forbidden to interact with the material world for the rest of your life.
>>928083
But how is that different than your current situation? Sure, within the experience machine you're unable to experience the material world - but in the material world, you're unable to experience the perfect reality contained within the machine. You're "imprisoned" either way; it's just that one prison is objectively more pleasant to be in.
>>928150
>but in the material world, you're unable to experience the perfect reality contained within the machine
That's wrong. The machine is part of the real world. The world which i would experience inside of the machine is not entirely the real world because it excludes the world outside of the machine. The world i would experience inside the machine is -not- perfect reality, quite clearly.
Yes, being imprisoned inside the machine is objectively more pleasant than to not be, however i can understand before going into the machine that remaining outside of it will actually be a more pleasant experience, because i will be able to keep experiencing the world outside of the machine - a higher reality than the more limited reality i would experience in the machine,
>>928194
You seem to be attaching some sort of objective value to existing in the "real" world. You WILL be happier and more content within the machine than outside of it; that's the definition of the machine.
If you would still prefer to be outside of the machine, I'm assuming you see some other source of value in existing in the material world. What is this value, and on what grounds does it exist?
>>928215
>You seem to be attaching some sort of objective value to existing in the "real" world.
Everything exists in the "real" word. You will exist in the "real" world whether you step into the machine or not. The machine exists in the real world, and the imaginary dream world that you will experience in the machine also exists in the "real" world.
>You WILL be happier and more content within the machine than outside of it; that's the definition of the machine.
Yes, but do you only care about happiness? If happiness and contentment were all that mattered to us, shouldn't we be sitting in a corner with virtual reality goggles on, with heroin being permanently injected into our bloodstreams?
>If you would still prefer to be outside of the machine, I'm assuming you see some other source of value in existing in the material world. What is this value, and on what grounds does it exist?
Remaining outside of the machine gives me access to a higher form of reality, because my experience in the real world won't be constricted to the confines of the machine. Consider two nations, nation A and nation B. Nation B lies inside of nation A, thus having citizenship in nation A would also allow me to freely travel inside of nation B's borders. Why should i seek citizenship in nation B, when citizenship in nation A would allow me to settle anywhere in both nation A and nation B? Consider the machine conundrum again. The machine will let me have "the most fulfilling life conceptually possible". If my dream is to climb Mt. Everest, the machine will let me do that. But can i not climb Mt. Everest without stepping into the machine? Whatever i can do inside of the machine, i can also do outside of it. In addition, if I stay outside of the machine, i can decide to smash the machine. I couldn't do that if i went into the machine. Thus life inside of the machine is nothing but a yoke and a constraint, and will not help me in any way.
>>925717
How can I know I'm not in a virtual reality already?
>>928264
You can do things outside of our reality. If your most fulfilling life is to be a wild west gunslinger, you could actually live in the wild west in the box, while outside you're stuck going to Cowboy Action Shooting competitions and watching Western movies.
>>928215
>I'm assuming you see some other source of value in existing in the material world
Making a positive contribution to the lives of other people in the real world. Really, this simulation machine is no different to becoming a smack addict. yes, it's incredibly pleasurable, but it's still a bad idea to do it
>>928432
So what if my most fulfilling thing in life would be to destroy the box with me in it? The box could simulate me destroying the box with me in it, but i wouldn't wake up (because i didn't actually destroy the real box with me in it), thus i would know, inside the simulation, that i hadn't destroyed the box with me in it, and thus i wouldn't feel fulfilled.
Me: 1
Box-dwellers: 0
