• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

If you could only pick two pills?

West Texas CEO

GAF's Nicest Lunch Thief and Nosiest Dildo Archeologist
frick-all-that-steve-buscemi.gif
3715b541d0726a5356996dda27f07dfa.gif
 

IFireflyl

Gold Member
1 and 2.

Addiction doesn't just mean drugs and alcohol. It means any addiction. Do you spend too much time playing video games instead of spending time with your kids? Do you overeat? Do you have gambling problems? There's so much that pill number 1 would resolve that would make people's lives better. Pill number 2 leads to the effects of pill number 6. Pill number 1 and 2 combined, along with the effects of pill number 6, leads to the effects of pill number 5.
  • I wouldn't pick pill number 5 because always feeling happy can cloud your judgement and have other psychological effects.
  • I wouldn't pick pill number 6 because I could get there with pill number 2, and pill number 2 gives added benefits of being better instead of just rich.
  • I wouldn't pick pill number 9 because it only prevents you from gaining weight, but that means that if you ever start to lose weight you can't get it back for any reason. That could be potentially deadly.
  • I wouldn't pick the rest because they simply don't appeal to me personally over the other options.
 
Last edited:

Razorback

Member

I have a strong ideological aversion to the message of this book. Basically it says a life of happiness is a life devoid of meaning. And to prove that point he conjures up a society where he makes up the rules and then points and goes "see, see how meaningless their lives are?!" Thats not an argument, you just wrote it that way!

Anyway. Pill 5 of course. With a side of pill 2.

  • I wouldn't pick pill number 5 because always feeling happy can cloud your judgement and have other psychological effects.

See, this was pretty much the same thought process as Aldous Huxley's when he wrote Brave New World. Happiness is bad actually because of reasons I just decided.
 
Last edited:

sedg87

Member
I'd go for 6 and 9.

6. Have a lot of money. I'm assuming it's enough to allow me to live very comfortably for the rest of my days, without needing to ever leave the house. I could spend my days drawing, listening to music and everything else I enjoy.

9. Eat without gaining weight. If I look at someone eating a piece of chocolate I tend to put on weight. Plus if I had the pill that I chose above, then I could just scoff all ofmy favourite foods without financial worry.
 

IFireflyl

Gold Member
I have a strong ideological aversion to the message of this book. Basically it says a life of happiness is a life devoid of meaning. And to prove that point he conjures up a society where he makes up the rules and then points and goes "see, see how meaningless their lives are?!" Thats not an argument, you just wrote it that way!

Anyway. Pill 5 of course. With a side of pill 2.



See, this was pretty much the same thought process as Aldous Huxley's when he wrote Brave New World. Happiness is bad actually because of reasons I just decided.


Sorry for not including a source. I thought Google was pretty easy to use, but I guess some people need to be spoon-fed.

 

gimmmick

Member
6 and 9. Me and my wife are pretty happy with a living a modest life but who would love to have a lot of money? Would be beneficial for sending out kid to private school and saving up for the future. Who wouldn't want to gain weight no matter how much you eat as well?
 

Razorback

Member
Sorry for not including a source. I thought Google was pretty easy to use, but I guess some people need to be spoon-fed.


Wow this Google site incredible. It gives you exactly what you search for. Thanks for the tip!




 

IFireflyl

Gold Member
Wow this Google site incredible. It gives you exactly what you search for. Thanks for the tip!





You provided links saying that happiness is good. Nobody argued otherwise. The argument was that too much happiness is bad. Way to completely miss the goal while being a condescending jerk.
 
Last edited:

Razorback

Member
You provided links saying that happiness is good. Nobody argued otherwise. The argument was that too much happiness is bad. Way to completely miss the goal while being a condescending jerk.

Sorry for comparing you to world famous author Aldous Huxley :messenger_tears_of_joy:. Maybe you interpreted the Metal Gear Rising meme as me mocking you? It was done in a tongue in cheek way to make a point about brave new world. It wasn't about you. Given the unserious nature of the thread I assumed it was fine. I apologize for coming across as a jerk.

Your reply basically called me an idiot for not knowing google is a thing, but I took it in stride and used the opportunity to make a point about how anyone can find studies using google that confirm any argument they want to make. Boring. No one reads them anyway.

You think too much happiness is bad? Well let's discuss it.
First of all, by saying "too much" there's already something being smuggled in. By definition too much of something is always bad. The pill didn't say it was too much happiness. Answering the pill question in the spirit it was intended one has to assume that you would be happy for having chosen pill number 5. If if turned out there were side effects that would make you less happy, then the pill didn't work as advertised.
 
Last edited:

Rran

Member
Time is super valuable and 2 and 6 guarantee the most time available, I think.

5 is weird. It sounds good on the surface but I'd be concerned about too many weird side-effects. For instance, if I always feel happy, will I actually be trying to better myself or helping others, or just lounge around feeling blissful? A fulfilling life means more than just the pursuit of hedonism, after all.

2 and 6 sound like they have very little in the way of being Monkey's Pawed. You can invest or donate big chunks of the money if it's too excessive, or help out family members, and 2 would just be cool getting on the fast-track to knowing how to play the violin and speak Japanese.
 
Last edited:

Razorback

Member
5 is weird. It sounds good on the surface but I'd be concerned about too many weird side-effects. For instance, if I always feel happy, will I actually be trying to better myself or helping others, or just lounge around feeling blissful? A fulfilling life means more than just the pursuit of hedonism, after all.

Isn't it more often the case that people with depression lack motivation and isolate themselves from others? And what about the opposite, wouldn't you say people doing volunteering work seem disproportionally cheerful?

Regarding a fulfilling life I would distinguish two things. There's the experiencing self, and the remembering self. The experiencing self is how you feel right now in this moment. The remembering self is how you feel about your past.

People often refer to happiness as it just being sensory pleasure. And they say meaning is more valuable. But I'd say that meaning is just feeling happy about your past accomplishments. If happiness didn't exist, you could maybe intellectualize why you thought your past accomplishments had value, but you wouldn't feel anything about it. And evolutionarily speaking we would never get to such a point because if people didn't value the good feelings they get from meaningful experiences, they wouldn't seek out meaning in the first place.

Happiness is always our terminal goal. It's our reward function. It's the container of all value.
 
Last edited:

Rran

Member
Isn't it more often the case that people with depression lack motivation and isolate themselves from others? And what about the opposite, wouldn't you say people doing volunteering work seem disproportionally cheerful?

Regarding a fulfilling life I would distinguish two things. There's the experiencing self, and the remembering self. The experiencing self is how you feel right now in this moment. The remembering self is how you feel about your past.

People often refer to happiness as it just being sensory pleasure. And they say meaning is more valuable. But I'd say that meaning is just feeling happy about your past accomplishments. If happiness didn't exist, you could maybe intellectualize why you thought your past accomplishments had value, but you wouldn't feel anything about it. And evolutionarily speaking we would never get to such a point because if people didn't value the good feelings they get from meaningful experiences, they wouldn't seek out meaning in the first place.

Happiness is always our terminal goal. It's our reward function. It's the container of all value.
I think a lot of that is on-point, but the OP doesn't make it clear what exactly "happiness" entails in this case. I'd still be worrying about it conflating pleasure with true happiness.

The only thing I'd really disagree with is that happiness is our ultimate goal. For instance, for followers of many of the biggest world religions, the goal is to serve a creator and others, with happiness being sort of a by-product of that (and not even necessarily that, in Book of Job like situations).
 

Ikutachi

Gold Member
6 and 9.

2 sounds great, but has the paradox of choice problem. I'll likely regret my skill choices if I realize better ones later.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom