Would you trade your life for a happy feeling?

@Sytar Embassy,

Definitely not. not only am I damaging the lives of others, but I'm degrading my own. Even if I never got bored of happy, how can we be happy if there is no sad intertwined. Happy in that box may feel good but It's all the feelings, happy, sad, angry, afraid, that make you feel Alive.

@Sytar Embassy,

Sorry posted this one accidently.

@Sytar Embassy,

Your right, but also true happiness can only be found through mastery of the mind. You can hold yourself in a sense of happiness through examining the events that happen to you not through the hourglass of the situation you are in though rather through your own subtext. An event is only an event and no more, it is the mind the takes it in and perceives it. Being secluded from the world and living in a constant state of happiness alone (which one of the great philosophers talked about in being a recluse) brought him no more happiness than living blindly in the world and feeling only the pleasures that the physical world can bring. True happiness is not alone found in the physical world; it is in the complete transcendence from the physical world that all happiness can be found.
Every person is subject to the pains of life, decay, and death. Only through the complete transcendence of these conditions through the mind it is that one can surpass the worldly feelings of happiness. Eventually, despite the situation intended, all bodies do decay and pass away; there is no hypothetical situation that can be presented without it being completely pointless to present it at all in the first place. Nevertheless, the situation, if it could happen as presented, still would never be better because the truth in life is never found, the worldly wants of the mind are never surpassed.

@Sytar Embassy,

No.

If I just get the feeling with no source behind it, then surely that happiness is empty?

@UnMechanics,

I agree with UnMechanics, that was a short, simple answer.

@Sytar Embassy,

Yea,legions of expositions,not naive.Intractable it is when getting melancholy,forgettable it is in the aftermath of getting happiness,which is congruent to each other of the impact.It suffices not,the more thee get gleeful,the more melancholy you get.

@Sytar Embassy,

Sytar Embassy;22164 wrote:

Ok, heres the question.

"Sciencetists have invented box that you walk in, sit in a chair, and the machine shoots stimulents into your body that makes you feel happy. The box will vary the stimulent so its a new feeling of happy every so often so that you wount get borde of it. After about 10 hours, a life support system turns on to keep you alive. Its free to use for as long as you like. However, everyone that has entered the box has never come back out.:disappointed: Now, your next in line. Would you go into the box knowing you may never come out?"

I said no becuase the real happyness isn't in a metal box. It's in your backyard. I would much rather move and run than sit and feel good. In life, you can't just want to feel good 24/7. You have to feel the full range on emoutions. Anger, sarrow, ect. Thats what makes life so great, the ability to feel this range on emoution.

Input?

i would say no because i would not want to hurt the people i love who will say no.

@AWohlfarth,

AWohlfarth;36578 wrote:

Sorry posted this one accidently.

the quote you had was good anyway

@Sytar Embassy,

I think what this is raising is not so much the machine itself (drugs, sitting, details) but it really poses the question: is happiness of value to yourself through its achieving or in itself? Is the action of persueing these feelings independently (and truly) of value, to what extent? And why?? Fundamentally it is solely for the happiness. I think it seems in this case..anyone? Even if it is not attained, this is what we are keeping in mind. So to say a function of feeling (such as the eating of a meal), the appreciation; or satisfaction; or emotion is the real purpose.

This is to say that cutting out the function is irrelevant in terms of happiness the function is no longer needed. You don't roll around in the open air without experiencing it humanly with happiness and other processes. The fresh open air is nothing to you if it has no effect on you. The machine, then, giving us the same quick hit of happiness..and it's saying it IS happiness (not some synthetic creation..you are given happiness).

I still say I wouldn't go in. But that's nothing to do with not really wanting to be happy or it being the nicer thing for myself (which it sounds rationally as if it would be). But I think my emotions are more complex than this - this bitter sweetness and rough taste of living freely is something I like. I just like that the absence of happiness is there in various ways. Also, it takes away your identity as a mind.

Also, in terms of it being true happiness..it is obviously termed happiness internally so I don't see that as "up for argument"..but could we argue this is fallible through its external reality's incompatibility? That happy little comatised-to-the-world person will not be experiencing anything of our seeming reality to those outside the door.

@serendipity phil,

Ok, try this. How do you define true happieness? And does your definition fit what the box does? Hummmm, mind boggoling, eh?:shifty:

@Sytar Embassy,

Anyway, I am absolutely torn as to what I would choose.

If yes, it would be primarily because I honestly enjoy being alone. When alone, I've nothing to worry about- it's almost as if time slows indefinitely, like I'm no longer real. I often become overwhelmed with negative occurrences going on around me, so I find loneliness as very relieving. I sometimes sit alone in my rooms for hours, entertaining-- discovering myself through creativity, memory, and imagination. Being with others leaves me annoyed (sometimes without reason). So in some instances, I would choose this hypothetical box over any human interaction.

The only negative thing I could find with this choice would be the isolation. Mind you, when I speak of loneliness, I do not mean isolation. Lonely, in my eyes, is being the only human in my presence. Isolation is being the only existing thing in my presence. What I mean by this, is if I were forever in this box, I would miss sight and sound. I love the outside world- I love the stars, the trees, the sun and moon- I love listening to the music of the birds-everything. When older, I want to travel- to discover. So, the only collective bad thing about this box would be my inablility to observe the world.

@Sytar Embassy,

Sytar Embassy wrote:

I said no becuase the real happyness isn't in a metal box. It's in your backyard.

I wouldn't necessarily say that. Happiness for me is any euphoric feeling unaccompanied by any negative or unwanted feelings.

Whether or not I would walk into the box would depend on a multitude of variables. Among most important of which being:

1. How is my life going right now? If my life is fucked up at the moment, is it irrevocably so? If it isn't totally FUBAR but still pretty bad, does the benefit of endless euphoria outweigh the lack of variety? If my life is going well, does the eternal euphoria that the box provides outweigh the euphoria that my life is giving me, both in frequency (amount of happiness over time) and amplitude (intensity of happiness)?

2. What are my responsibilities? Do I have children? Are those children grown? Do I have custody of them? Do they benefit from my presence? Would anyone be particularly heartbroken if I went into the box? How important am I to society?

3. Just how good is this box anyway? Is this feeling more or less intense than an orgasm? How long is my life expectancy in there? Might this be a trap, science is usually used for the advancement of civilization, why would they go as far as to introduce what essentially could end civilization (then again why not, look at the atomic bomb)?

The way my life is going right now, I'd say "no", I still have a bit to lose and the details on this box are a bit too vague for my tastes.

@Sytar Embassy,

Sytar Embassy wrote:

Ok, heres the question.

"Sciencetists have invented box that you walk in, sit in a chair, and the machine shoots stimulents into your body that makes you feel happy. The box will vary the stimulent so its a new feeling of happy every so often so that you wount get borde of it. After about 10 hours, a life support system turns on to keep you alive. Its free to use for as long as you like. However, everyone that has entered the box has never come back out.:disappointed: Now, your next in line. Would you go into the box knowing you may never come out?"

I said no becuase the real happyness isn't in a metal box. It's in your backyard. I would much rather move and run than sit and feel good. In life, you can't just want to feel good 24/7. You have to feel the full range on emoutions. Anger, sarrow, ect. Thats what makes life so great, the ability to feel this range on emoution.

Input?

I have a question. Is it even possible to shoot chemicals into the body to deterministically get a certain emotion? Could it not just be a level of pain and pleasure?

However, I think everyone who entered the box would not come out as since we desire pleasure rather than specifically happiness (IMHO deep down this is the case) there would be no reason to leave. It is just like those who smoke, except in this case there is no pressure from society to stop smoking, and the stimulants are unknown to be harmful to the body. They'd produce no negative sensations.

If (let's imagine) every single person on the planet had their own little box then what other desires are there going to be to keep one out of the box? Does moral indecency matter in this case? Can guilt or longing be bestowed upon somebody who feels pleasure surging through his body constantly.

@Holiday20310401,

That is exactly the point. I was thinking about this question while i was on spring break come to think about it. What if a child was placed in the box from birth for 20 years. Then removed from the box and placed into the real world, disregaurd the fact of his lack of education and assume that he leaves the box with a high school education. Do you think that he would know the difference between real happiness and the simulated happiness he grew up knowing?

I know, it is a simple question with an easy answer, but think more of his future then a yes or no. I'm interested to hear what you guys think about this.:a-thought:

@Sytar Embassy,

In that mental box you can still feel those thoughts, live your life, just got in a real form. It also depends on what kind of life you live, if you live a horrible life you'd want to escape realization and go into your "mental box" which is a sign of weakness but very common.

@Paggos,

But don't we all live inside a "mental box?" Haha.

@Sytar Embassy,

Yeah, but people would moreorless give into an eternal mental box because it'd escape hard times for them. Though your thoughts are apart of your imagination, so if you don't live, you won't make new thoughts or dreams.

@Sytar Embassy,

I'd say no, I wouldn't enter. Being happy all the time would be the same as being sad all the time. It's the up's and downs that make you experience life to the fullest.

@Thanatos phil,

Thanatos;71610 wrote:

I'd say no, I wouldn't enter. Being happy all the time would be the same as being sad all the time. It's the up's and downs that make you experience life to the fullest.

Exactly my thoughts.

@Sytar Embassy,

Somebody who never experienced sadness, anger etc.. is not able to understand what EXACTLY happiness is. Your loss of happiness, for a while, teaches you how really important it is.
Going in the box, for somebody who suffered in sadness for his whole life, is the great escape. But if you have a little bit of it all in life, why would you ever need to get in there? I love cheesecake but if i eat 10 cheesecakes everday, the next day i wont be eating it even if they give it to me for free.

Philosophy Forum

Would you trade your life for a happy feeling?

Quick Links

My Account

able2know