>>979890
What is The Matrix?

>>979896
I'm talking a virtual heaven, that was a simulation of life as we know it now

Focus on the present. There are more pressing matters that require your attention.
Transferring consciousness from your neurons to a machine would take probably thousands of years.

>>980088
it's a philosophical conundrum that interested me
what kind of shit-tier response is this

>>980088
>thousands of years

It bothers me when people just assume it's actually this difficult. It may be, but trends suggest otherwise.

OP: There's only normative/religious arguments against using an experience machine. VR is the logical conclusion of hedonism, so it's really just a matter of accepting or rejecting hedonism. I would also claim though that transhumanism could lead to more virtuous persons as well, if virtue and vice are interpreted as having neurological conditions.

The issue with this technology is that it could be used to torture just as easily, which given humanity's track record seems likely.

>>979915
>he doesn't know that there are more than one iterations of the Matrix

>>980186
>Get Royed into revealing your mother country's military secrets
>Military fucks with their own troops' concepts of a solid reality to trick fuckers who would VR them into letting out secrets
>The line between reality and brain-in-a-jar VR is further thinned
>Teen angst will be about existing
>With the extra assurance that you cannot know that you're surrounded by a simulation, Egoism becomes more grandiose and radical.

horrible

>>980186
OP here,
I like the inclusion of transhumanism; I'd imagine we'd either have the capability to create this ideal heaven or have the intelligence to come up with something even better, so it seems like the ultimate goal more so than just virtual heaven
but assuming the tech wasn't used negatively, and a better alternative doesn't arise, what reasons are there to object to accepting hedonism's ultimate goal?

boing

I suppose that with the idea that you wouldn't care about neglecting the real world, nothing would stop you.

Nozick's arguments against plugging ourselves into the machine comes from the fact that you would prefer to DO things instead of simply experiencing them. Also, some of us wants to the world to BE in a certain state of affair. Forgetting about the real world wouldn't refute those ideas, but, again, not caring about reality does.

>>980719
I wasn't convinced by Nozick's statement that there was a practical difference between "experiencing" something and "doing" something if you took it the same way, as everyone else would. Following this, what some people "prefer" can simply be emulated exactly as they prefer it.

>>980719
thanks for replying btw, I don't go on /his/ much but it seems quite slow or just not as into philosophy as it is national history

There is no point to pleasure without pain to remind you of its worth familiam.

>>980832
I personally have to agree with this statement

>>980832
>>980857
this scenario isn't based on reality, it's just hypothesising
I'm asking you to presume that it emulates an everlasting sense of bliss, and you will feel as good at the start as you would forever after, without needing pain

>>980822
You are welcome.

You bring up a good point : fulfillment of our preference would be what we are looking for as human, and the emulation machine could emulate our preferences.

Even so, I personally think that there would be a problem. Consider this example : A mother wishes for her actual child to succeed in school. But she wouldn't prefer this if this case was only emulated. She wants it to happen in real life, even with the possibility to forget about the real world when plugged in.

My answer shift slightly the debate on the viability of hedonism, and I do not wish to move out of your scenario. Those are only my intuitions.

"Men don't desire happiness, only the English do" -Friedrich Nietzche

We should reject the machine.