The Hedonistic Imperative

[honest intellectual]

I've found an intriguing website called The Hedonistic Imperative (http://www.hedweb.com). It's written by a guy called David Pearce about his plan for 'paradise engineering'. You absolutely must check it out. Whether or not you agree with it, you can't deny that it's fascinating.

Basically, the aim is to create a utopia, a state of universal bliss through nanotechnology, drugs, cerebral implants, genetic engineering etc. He says, "It is predicted that the world's last unpleasant experience will be a precisely dateable event."
This guy has definitely done his homework with regard to the science of this vision. There is extensive material on the site about experiments with drugs, 'wireheading' (i.e. implanting electrodes in the brain) etc.

Dig this:
“This manifesto outlines a strategy to eradicate suffering in all sentient life. The abolitionist project is ambitious, implausible but technically feasible. It is defended here on ethical utilitarian grounds. Genetic engineering and nanotechnology allow Homo sapiens to discard the legacy-wetware of our evolutionary past. Our post-human successors will rewrite the vertebrate genome, redesign the global ecosystem, and abolish suffering throughout the living world.”

Thoughts? Comments? Objections?

[Nickademus]

if we are implanting electrodes in our brains, if we are genetically engineering human beings, are we still truly human beings? will choice remain? or will humans simply become robots, programed to act and feel a certain way? i accept suffering because it is based on something i see as fundamental ... choice ... i don't think a true utopia can exist without it. sure we can believe we are happy when we have been altered, but are we still truly human?

[cormacobear]

Does he intend to eradicate the millions of people who would refuse to allow tech. such a controlling influence in their lives?

Perhaps it would lead to two seperate branches of evolution?

[The idealist]

I will fight to the death for my right to suffer.

No I am don't have sadistic tendencies, but my point is this;
Without pain, we would have nothing to compare our pleasure to.

Anybody been or felt crossed in love? Nobody...? Well my point is, if we simply could feel pleasure all the time we wouldn't feel that pain. Somehow I feel that that would be a great scar in love itself.

I am not trying to press any stupid ideas of what love is or ought to be.

By mass producing pleasure you would destroy it's uniqeness, and it would become worthless. And living in a world where pleasure is worthless is not something I intend to do.

After that philosophical gabble I herby admit to not liking that idea.

[BuyOurEverything]

if we are implanting electrodes in our brains, if we are genetically engineering human beings, are we still truly human beings?

Who cares? Why the need for "racial (speciesal?) purity"?


will choice remain?

Choice doesn't exist now, it is simply an illusion.


or will humans simply become robots, programed to act and feel a certain way?

That is currently the nature of all animals, humans included.


accept suffering because it is based on something i see as fundamental ... choice ...

Explain how suffering is based on choice and why that matters.


i don't think a true utopia can exist without it

This is probably true. Without suffering, people could never learn anything. Unless a suffering-free society was tightly controlled by a group of people who did feel suffering, the society would be short lived.

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

Choice doesn't exist now, it is simply an illusion.

How is choice ever and illusion, I dont get you here?

[honest intellectual]

Let's not get sidetracked here, kids; this thread isn't about the existence of free will.

All the points raised above are addressed in the 'objections' section of the website.

[BuyOurEverything]

It doesn't seem like a great idea, as the society would be incredibly vulnerable and unable to adapt. However, I have no moral objections to eliminating suffering.