Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Utilitarianism and its flaws
Utilitarianism philosophy
Discussing utilitarianism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Utilitarianism and its flaws
The Experience Machine and the Inclusion of Meta-Pleasure Robert Nozick is a philosopher who seeks to disprove the utilitarian notion of hedonism through a thought experiment that he has entitles “The Experience Machine” (Nozick 646). I will first explain the concept of utilitarianism and hedonism, then the experience machine before I give a reply about the inclusion of a third category of pleasure which I have called “meta-pleasure”. Finally, I will show how technology may be disproving the entire experience machine thought experiment altogether. Utilitarianism is a moral theory that seeks to define right and wrong actions based solely on the consequences they produce. By utilitarian standards, an act is determined to be right if and only if it produces the greatest total amount of happiness for everyone. Happiness (or utility) is defined as the amount of pleasure less the amount of pain (Mill, 172). In order to act in accordance with utilitarianism, the agent must not only impartially attend to the pleasure of everyone, but they must also do so universally, meaning that everyone in the world is factored into the morality of the action. However, utilitarianism is not without its critics. One notable critique about the notion of hedonism, or the utilitarian concept that states that pleasure and freedom from pain are the only meaningful ends, is the thought experiment wherein there exists machine that can simulate any experience (Nozick 644). The “experience machine” would be able to cause the user to experience anything they choose, all while keeping them unaware that they are plugged into the machine. If “pleasure, and the freedom from pain are the only thing desirable as ends” (Mill 172) then it should not matter whethe... ... middle of paper ... ...xperience machine, it would still seem that people should not want to log on to second life when they could be experiencing things in reality. However, Second Life boasts that millions of accounts have been created (Second Life Official Site). It remains to be said just why they are doing this, but it appears that the conclusion one could draw from this is that virtual experiences do have meaning to us, insofar as people will choose them over certain real life experiences. So would people actually choose to log into a total life simulation? Nozick would say that they would not and I agree, however I do not see this as a refutation of hedonism but rather a proof because of the inclusion of meta-pleasure. Recent advancements in technology such as Second Life, though, might prove that humans would be willing to tune out of reality in favour of a virtual life.
Many theorist believe that happiness is the only important in people's life, and all that should matter to a person is being happy. The standard of assessing a good life is how much or quantity of happiness it contains. This openness of happiness, its generosity of spirit and width of appreciation, gets warped and constricted by the claim pretending to be its greatest friend—that only happiness matters, nothing else. Robert Nozick does not on the side of hedonistic utilitarianism, he gives several examples to show that there are other elements of reality we may strive for, even at the expense of pleasure. In this essay, I will focus on Nozick's opinion of the direction of happiness and the experience machine, and finally how do I answer the question What is happiness.
As humans we are constantly in search of understanding the balance between what feels good and what is right. Humans try to take full advantage of experiencing pleasure to its fullest potential. Hedonism claims that pleasure is the highest and only source of essential significance. If the notion of hedonism is truthful, happiness is directly correlated with pleasure. Robert Nozick presented the philosophical world with his though experiment, “The Experience Machine” in order to dispute the existence and validity of hedonism. Nozick’s thought experiment poses the question of whether or not humans would plug into a machine which produces any desired experience. Nozick weakens the notion of hedonism through his thought experiment, claiming humans need more than just pleasure in their lives. Nozick discovers that humans would not hook up to this machine because they would not fully develop as a person and consider it a form of suicide.
In the following essay, I will be discussing the similarities and differences that exist between the ethical philosophies of Hedonism and Utilitarianism, and how these moral theories relate to Nozick’s Experience Machine thought experiment. Both of these theories hold a fundamental value that is to find that which is “good” in their own ways, but slightly differ in the meaning of what the “good” is. Hedonism defines this value to be pleasure of the self, whereas Utilitarianism values the happiness of the greatest number of people, even if the self happens to be unhappy or ill-fated. Nozick’s thought experiment gives the reader the task
In The Experience Machine by Robert Nozick brings up the idea of having a machine which you are hooked up to that will make you feel like you are experiencing certain desires. Someone who is a hedonistic that tries to maximize pleasure on how you feel on the inside, while reducing pain will think this is would be a great idea. What more could you want? Having the feeling of accomplishing all of your dreams while doing virtually nothing. Nevertheless, I believe there is more to life than just the feeling of pleasure. During those years that you are plugged in may seem appealing and pleasurable, but spending the rest of your life plugged into a machine while everyone else around you is living their life in the moment and accomplishing their dreams
As we examine the consequences of Utilitarian actions, we see an emphasis on the theory of intrinsic value. Intrinsically valuable actions are described as morally good in themselves and are in some cases a means to an end like helping the poor after a natural disaster. Extrinsically valuable actions are similar in that one would still help the poor, but not because it is the right thing to do, rather because it makes them feel good to help people. It is said that all we place value on today has worth because of it’s close relationship to what is intrinsically good. For example, some people including consequential hedonists view happiness itself as emphasizing pleasure before pain, and hold close to them that such emotions are both intrinsically invaluable and valuable. Additionally, Utilitarians believe we can compare intrinsic values created by opposing actions to calculate the least harmful outcomes. An English philosopher, Jeremy Bentham, held the belief that moral beings could determine the total amount of pleasure and pain, and from that, could determine the amount of good or evil in certain actions.
I believe that creating a world that allows you to fulfill your fantasies makes us more human in a sense. In the final chapter, Boellstroff sums up the argument that this virtual world actually creates new people and in creating this new world, people become more human. He also tells us what Second Life is and isn’t: Second Life may seem like it creates a world similar to ours, but it does not replicate the actual world. It is nothing like social media because it is a place where people interact. In Second Life, you can actually do typically everyday things like find friends, meet a significant other, attend events, make money, buy and sell things, etc. This is not something that you can do through a television program or a
In Tom Boellstorff’s ethnology “Coming of Age in Second Life” the world of second life is explored. Second life is a three dimensional online world in which users interact. The world of second life is created with user-generated content, which means that users design different types of dwellings, and can customize many aspects about their avatars including gender, appearance, and body modifications. Boellstorff also talk about the idea of techne, which is human action, in second life, which engages with the world and thereby results in a different world. Boellstorff states on page 31 that, “it is in being virtual that we are human (Boellstorff, 2008, p. 31).’ He uses his research in second life to present an argument that despite drawing on
His thought experiment is addressed in such a way where it skews the response of people into appearing that they are refuting pleasure when in reality they are refuting the artificialness of all the experiences they would get with the “experiment machine”. After analyzing the decisions that someone would choose to use or not use the machine, it was distinguished that each decision would be based on what a person perceived to be more pleasurable. Therefore, proving that humans are in fact hedonists. Humans will always have the tendency to seek pleasure. As long as their pursuit of pleasure has no cost, the opportunity to experience greater pleasure will always be
hedonism as a valuable worldly truth was not only dangerous, but also silly, saying, “The ideas of life on which X
Utilitarianism is a normative ethical theory which has been established and defended by two renowned philosophers named Jeremy Bentham and John Stewart Mill. It falls under the branch of normative ethics, which deals with a lower-level examination of ethical questions and addresses questions about what actions are morally right or wrong, and the moral correctness of actions and the standards that govern them. Utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory which endorses that an action is morally acceptable if it has the right kind of outcome or consequence. The intent of an action or the reasoning behind it is disregarded in utilitarianism. Happiness is simply quantified in terms of the satisfaction of a majority, independent of the beliefs of the majority or their intentions.
If the previous statement were to be false, then it would suggest that someone’s experience could have more pleasure but not have as much hedonic value. They could do this, as Gregory explained it, by claiming that a life inside the machine is as valuable as a life outside of it, and that humans are deluded in thinking otherwise because of their moral obligations to other people (p. 119). The issue with this refutation of the objection is that it seems intuitively unconvincing. In spite of that, when the experience machine is compared to Kagan’s businessman (1994, p. 311), this response seems more plausible.
I had many mixed views after finishing my most recent read of The Best Things in Life: A Guide to What Really Matters, by Thomas Hurka. I agree with his idea that the value pain is greater than the value pleasure. I oppose Hurka’s views more than I agree with them. I disagree with the idea that only pleasure is good and only pain is evil and the idea of ethical hedonism.
Utilitarianism is a view that was adopted by John Stuart Mill. This is a view that goes by “the greatest good for the greatest number.” This means that the more people who are happy and can benefit from a certain action is the morally right thing to do. Happiness, in utilitarianism, comes from pleasure and the absence of pain, and unhappiness comes from the deprivation of pleasure which then would equal pain. The utilitarian approach to morality insinuates that no moral act or rule is essentially right or wrong. Instead, the rightness or wrongness of either an act or rule, is entirely a matter of the overall nonmoral good (pleasure, happiness, satisfaction of individual desire) produced in the consequences of doing that act or following that rule. In a nutshell, morality is a means to an end, but it is not an end in itself. Despite the popularity of utilitarianism, I believe there are many problems within it.
One can say that there is a general tendency towards the experience of pleasure that is often in conflict with other drives. An example of such a drive is the reality principle, which is a result from the ego’s impulses towards self-preservation and forces pleasure to be postponed or attained in different way.
Nozick uses “the experience machine” to prove this. This imaginary machine is one that, once entered, allows us to live our happiest life without actually experiencing it in real life. This machine allows for a person to enter information and personalize their happiest life, once this information is entered, they will enter the machine and electrodes will be connected to their brain. Once they are connected to the machine, they will not be able to get out and they will not be aware that they are not actually living their lives out in reality (Shafer-Landau