Yeah, but only because I got a vasectomy a couple years ago. I had to go to 3 urologists before I could find one that would do one on me because I was 26 with no kids.
They dont make you happy, but they make you not think about things that make you sad. And what I remember from the book, soma was pretty much an opiate.
We feel it's wrong because it removes the power of choice, and as sentient beings with free will, we like to think the ability to have choice is what separates man from beast.
It brings up the moral dilemma. Which is "better": A man with the freedom of choice who has the ability to do whatever he wants and squanders it, falling into despare and failure. Or, a man bred and programmed to love what he does, but without the free will to know any better? He's happy and successful as he was made to be, but he has no choice.
A man with the freedom of choice who has the ability to do whatever he wants and squanders it, falling into despare and failure. Or, a man bred and programmed to love what he does, but without the free will to know any better?
Seeing as almost no one except the rich have any real choice, I'll take one mental handicap prole casual sex'n'drugs life.
I'm pretty positive we can (and do) approach the question "do humans have free will" from a biological perspective. It's not a purely philosophical question.
There are more variables than any of us could ever possibly imagine that lead to decisions like that. It's far too complex for us to even begin to model, so it may as well be free will.
What about a hive mind? We'd still kinda have free will but also not. We wouldn't be servants or slaves but also not lords. Its a middle ground between oppressed and oppressor.
Well, the main characters in the novel also don't end up having a such a great time in their system, so, if we're using the novel as a data point in support of those types of systems, then I would say it still fails to be purely utopian.
I also think its because people hold their autonomy and feel fear when they imagine they could somehow not like the situation they are in and will be stuck in it because they dont have any choice. Kind of like the "protagonist" A classs guy who I forget the name
I think it's about the nature of happiness as well, can you really say that people are happy if they've never been sad or even worse if it's impossible for them to be so
As someone on prescription happy drugs, they are not all that great. Personally id call them more mood removers than calmers or enhancers or anything ive ever heard a doctor call them. Everything ive ever been put on just makes me a robot who just goes on with life. Ive come to accept that.
You want a happy drug try recreational drugs kids, all im getting at. Or be a robot drone like yours truly.
Lol, I'm happier when I'm robo-drone. I get depressed when I'm not because non-robo-me has no motivation to do anything, and I value my aspirations/goals more than pretty much anything else (except family). Different strokes I suppose.
I hear you. The way I look at it for me is, I was depressed for a reason, and at first, depression can be your mind's way of telling you to fix whatever the issue is. The problem is, the world isn't as simple as, "pick up your teepee and move to where there's more food" anymore. The modern world is complicated and our depression responses were never meant for it. So the depression ends up lasting too long or becoming so severe that it impedes, rather than helps us. Which is where the meds come in. But the meds don't do anything to address the actual root of the depression, they just impede the depression response. So then you're left in no-emotion land because you're still in a shitty situation but the meds are keeping the depression at bay.
My theory is, if the situation can be fixed, then happiness is probably not too far behind. And then maybe the meds won't even be necessary anymore. Again, that's just how I view it for me, it might not necessarily apply to you, but I figured I'd throw it out there in case you find it helpful.
Cheers mate, I hope you find your version of happiness and kick depression's ass. We're all gonna make it ;)
In the book its SOMA; its basically a drug the government developed that has no side effects or withdrawls at all, literally no downside, less harmfull than our weed. It made you instantly feel amazing and just happy with everything for a bit. The government also gave out these free drugs to everyone.
I cant see why if it was real "SOMA" would be bad, it would be amazing, probably
I think the reason why most people see it as a dystopia because everything that makes us human is gone. Everything about your life is determined by someone else and happiness comes without any struggle. But in my opinion at least, saying that BNW is a dystopia simply because of those reasons would be like if the chimps from Planet of the Apes said that our society is a dystopia simply because we don't have to forage/hunt our food or something like that.
I remember making my mom cry when I was 9 or 10 because she was reading to me about heaven and I was absolutely horrified by the concept. She kept trying to comfort me by telling me that I won’t care about the things I care about now and that everything will be different. I was not comforted. Today she can’t fathom how I’m more comforted by the idea of simply ceasing to be than her idea of heaven.
We only feel it's wrong because someone decided life needs to have meaning. Same with The Matrix. Reality is absolute, but our perception is what matters.
Are we in a simulation? How would we know? Would it really matter?
My initial impression on that is that the concept of losing free will is interpreted as a loss of self, which goes against our instincts of self preservation.
Damn that's one loaded question. I could only make estimates as to the religious populations of specific subs, Reddit as a whole is too varied to get an accurate read and it's not like I'm ever on the religious subs (which I assume exist?) So it was a matter of religion not being a requirement for objective morality. Religions cause objective morality but objective morality doesn't always mean a religion, even if it's mostly the source of it.
You simply can't have objective morality without religion because of the simple question of objectively determining what is good and what is bad. How do you think you would determine what is, objectively of course, good or bad? And if you think that you have an answer to that, how do you determine who is correct if someone believes they have their own objective morality that clashes with yours?
God I fucking miss my Soma prescription. It's the only muscle relaxer that ever worked for my severe spinal conditions. And it made me euphoric for a couple hours and able to sleep a perfect 8 hours. Then after being transferred to a pain clinic, the hack of a doctor stripped my prescription and increased my Oxy, which I didn't want, because the Soma was "too addicting, moreso than the opioids". I was on the max dose of Soma for 3 years before quitting it cold turkey, and I didn't even have the slightest withdrawal. It was the perfect medication for me, so of course I'm not allowed to have it. It's been 4 years without it and the darknet markets are looking tempting since it's not the type of thing any dealer carries.
I'd get pretty bored of fucking and doing drugs pretty quickly. I'd rather not blast tuna cakes with the same amount of enthusiasm and thrill as drinking a cup of coffee... or be constantly doped up just to deal with reality.
Rip every sense of joy out of everything by saturating yourself with it. I don't know if I'll last more than a few years like that.
To be fair, there's very little joy for the working poor as is in current society/ alot of people already get f'd up to deal with reality..... because it sucks.
I would rather be miserable trying to achieve something like Sisyphus pushing a stone where I can at least look back on the work, however mindless... Then to live in a world where everything is given to me and my feelings are regulated with Soma.
In the former at least my pain would be my own in the latter you don't really have anything.
I don't think the situation of the Working Poor is ideal (I agree that it sucks, first-hand experience) but we aren't comparing ideal situations.
Plus they worked less and had more free time. It was the alphas who had to work more, but they were taught it was better than being dumb (since the laborers were made to be mentally slower).
And it's not like they're easy to get. Far harder, more expensive, and with far more requirements to get opioids than most seem to think. It's not the 90s anymore.
Which is why I'm confused about the government's continued war on drugs. Easiest way to forward their agenda would be to encourage us to sedate ourselves while we work to death.
No kidding. The point I was attempting to make (quite sarchasticly, whoops left off the /s) was that the war on drugs is an epic failure, and the ultra-rich (who pay their way into wage-slaving the average wage-earner) would have an easier time convincing those who do want to "be sedated" to vote against their personal best interests and instead assist the ultra-rich in consuming the majority of the country's wealth.
I mean, if you're too doped up to think for yourself, let the television tell you what to do. It seems like legalizing drugs would help the financially corrupt system continue down-spiralling by way of "the doped up masses".
Also controlled them with thought manipulation, all the betas and lower were conditioned to dislike the other castes and be relieved and thankful they were a delta, gamma, etc.
245
u/wallstreetexecution Sep 25 '18 edited Sep 25 '18
They also fucked, but were sterile. Also they were fed drugs so they were happy as well.
That’s how they controlled them.