Imagine you had the ability to become completely happy for the rest of your life, but you would have had to give away all your perception of objective reality, thereby loosing all connection to the "real world".

It doesn't matter how it would come about...
Perhaps through a digital simulation that grants you your every whim (those who played fallout 3, think of Dr. Brauns machine). Or some super potent drug. You could be pretty much omnipotent if you wanted. Of course it would all be in your little subjective world, but it would be the only one you knew existed.

So.
Topic.

I didn't even touch on the possibility, much less announce anything...
It's just a question.


Everlasting experience of a desired state can't be a purpose in itself? Only pursuit thereof? :|
A pink fuzzy cloud of constant ecstasy exists to experience constant ecstasy, because that's what it desires


Happiness is first and foremost a state of mind.


Happiness is something that exists only in our heads. It happens when our brain enters certain electrochemical states.
So, what is so different between happiness brought about by an illusion and one brought by "the real deal"? It's the same exact feeling - not a surrogate. Only the means with which you achieved it are, arguably.

Quite clearly, i don't agree with your redundantly strict definition of happiness, nor with what you seem to understand by 'morality'. All these stipulations you put forward seem arbitrary to me.


How can one "escape from one's mind"? Impossible. We ARE our mind. I proposed escape from objective reality, not the mind.
What one can do is alter the state of mind by some means (to achieve happiness). You argue that it has to be a traditional way, i say it can be any way.
Impasse?

For the record: I myself would prefer reality to sweet illusion, but that could easily change if i was terribly discontented with my life.

As far as i see it:
1. You live your real life, maybe happy maybe not, then cease to exist.
2. You live your illusion, in extreme bliss, then cease to exist.

PS: I've never done any drugs barring alcohol ;) Just so no one gets funny thoughts.

Pure ectasy? True and eternal hapiness in a realm where I control. Completly escaping "reality"? I don't know if I would want to be stuck there for too long. I'll give you an example of why I wouldn't.

I use to love to play 2v2 Arenas in World of Warcraft. It required skill, coordination, some luck, and trust. I had a great deal of fun progressing through rankings, with it's ups and downs. The day I earned my highest 2v2 rating, I was incredibly happy. The days I would lose 6 of 10 games. I was pissed. What on earth would cause bliss for me in that realm? A true measurement of accomplishment and satisfaction from any achievement is the difficulties preventing me from meeting a goal. How hard the "pursuit" was if you will. If my friend and I had instantly acquired the best gear ever, had the highest arena rating ever, and showed it off to the other players, we would get incredibly bored very quickly and wouldn't feel very accomplished for having what we did.

It's like playing a game. Could I use cheat codes to make me win instantly, unlock all the levels, weapons, etc. etc. Sure. Would I feel good about it? Not really.

Any promise of eternal bliss or hapiness requires some form of sacrifice. A strain on your will power. Challenges which need to be achieved. Whether it be spending long hours practicing 2v2 arenas or choosing to not have sex with that prostitute in order to go to heaven. In short: overcoming challenges and receiving the benefits of rewards through missions and will-power create more bliss than any present.

If I entered that realm of bliss, it would either be incredibly boring, or nearly identical to life. I think the only difference for me would be more opportunities to help society. Opportunities which undergo the same challenges of reality would be my only motivation of joining this realm.

To people who said that happiness would lose it's appeal without suffering: i disagree.

Just like suffering wouldn't suddenly become a state of content for someone who hasn't experienced anything else, happiness wouldn't either. Here is a baby born with harlequin ichthyosis syndrome. From the moment it is born and until it dies, all it feels is sharp pain. I argue that a person in a constant state of suffering/ecstasy will never see his state as ok and matter-of-fact, regardless of whether he has felt the opposite.
Our perception of either is determined by our biological structure - it's not something we "learn" or "build" by interacting with the world.


Besides, in a simulation I am talking about it is entirely possible to make it so intensity of ecstasy just keeps going up a step, constantly (every day, for example). That way there is always something to compare: a previous step.

ffs....what is it about being productive that makes it necessary for happiness? You take a drug - you're happy. It changes your perception and your reality - but you are happy while the effects last. Sure, when the effect is over you may be back to being a miserable human being with no productive future, but that's beside the point.

People only commit suicide when they despise their state - but in my situation it's exact opposite. They love being. Since boredom is undesired state - obviously they won't be bored.

To make things easier let me lay out my gripe with your position.
Here. This is not a syllogism - just a brief outline of my thinking process:

1. Objective reality exists.
2. Subjective reality exists
3. Emotions are strictly subjective.
4. Emotions can be brought about by a simulated reality.
5. Happiness is a group of certain emotions.

Ever saw dreams? Ever felt happy in a dream? The environments and events you saw never existed in 'objective reality', but it didn't make them any less effective in altering your brain state.

We evolved happiness just like any other emotion. It pushes us to fulfill our purpose as species (which by no means is metaphysically objective). If you grant someone happiness by means of an illusion, it doesn't mean that happiness is somehow "fake". The best you can claim is that that happiness loses it's purpose from evolutionary standpoint. It still fulfills the persons desire.



Discussion has gotten pretty stale, so i thought one up.
Why? Do you see some hidden agenda/subliminal message behind this thread?

Am i allowed a quick question now?
You = hydrotoxin?

The original question was very interesting. The direction that this thread derailed in is just stupid as fuck though. A mixture of people spouting other people's theories and calling them fact, and plain inaccurate statements. Cba to write a huge tl;dr anyways, since the stupidest among us are invariably the most stubborn and blinkered among us too eh?

To touch on the actual topic of this thread, it's a very interesting situation in some ways. Once faced with this question you're either offered total bliss on the one hand, or the satisfaction of knowing that you consciously passed up a fake 'existence' for something real and flawed.
Although you've gotta note the possibilty of the proposed utopia being flawed itself, especially if created by people. If the option was a true 'perfect' world that had 0 chance of going wrong, that would be pretty cash, but if someone offered me a drug tomorrow that was designed by humans to make me happy, i wouldnt go for that. See: heroin etc.

[I've seen a guy on Ice who thought bugs were under his skin. He stripped down in a park and ran around naked scratchy holes in his skin to get the bugs out. So funny!]
same i laugh at them because its there fault for taking drugs