I have to say that this podcast is quite eye-opening for me to some extent. I particularly like the comparison that you draw between how we view the pre-Socrates world and how future generations will likely view us. But one thing I want to point out is that just because human progress has so far been an exponential growth doesn't mean this will always be the case; it might even be a logistic growth after all. In other words, technology might not go as far as we'd like to imagine and bring an end to psychological pain. Even if science were to pull it off, negative feelings might disappear for a short period of time, but in the long run they would still be alive and well. This is because that constant feeling of bliss would soon become the normal state of human emotion. Slowly humans would wish for even more bliss, and with this renewed craving the negative feelings that we are experiencing right now would undoubtedly follow.
I think so too, it's called the hedonistic baseline IIRC. Even if that theory is not true, the lack of meaning in that new world would be excruciating.
I see suffering as a necessary process; that is, a process is necessary in the relationship humans have with the universe. I've only thought about this a few weeks so it's a work in progress :) but if the universe is singular, a single energy (energy field) or consciousness, and an individual has the perception of being singular, there's usually a good connection to meaning. This needs a process to happen. So a one to one relationship that has some sort of process going on - philosophy or art for instance being pure process - avoids or mitigates suffering, since total involvement with this process leaves no mental space or energy for suffering. Otherwise, the suffering fills a need. The need comes from being in a too large group. Small groups are good since they offer safety and resource gathering, yet allow meaning. With large groups a singular entity emerges (this is the funky part) but it's one that isn't complex enough (no brain) to allow this necessary process, the one that allows a relationship to the universe and accesses meaning through process. Suffering would enter as a process that would allow the relationship and meaning: the more a social single entity is defined or perceived, the more suffering is needed to open the conduit between the two entities (the social entity and the universe) so to speak. Luckily suffering comes on a scale...I quite like melancholy at certain times of the year. This allows us to tweak the suffering.
My two cents: Regarding the dream spanning an entire human life: you know what'd be great? I'd love to spend those dreams on scientific progress, like neuroscience or cancer research. That way, when you die, it doesn't matter if your research was pointless or becomes obsolete in a few years, because it wasn't a real human life you spent on it. It was just a dream. (Of course, it wouldn't work of you cant remember the dreams afterwards.) Then when you wake up, you'll know which avenues not to follow within the field of neuroscience or cancer. 😉 I know that the research would ease human suffering, but they're also fascinating fields of study. I think the intellectual joy of research would still motivate people, even in a post-Darwinian world. There's such a feeling of accomplishment that comes with studying a complex system like the human body.
Rainforest Alliance and similar organizations that link fair trade and the environment is my view and a good start for the solution we are now struggling with
We suffer mostly because of our neediness desires. Which is y i will never breed another sentient being that will just create a bunch of needs that did not need to exist.
Suffering couldn't cease to exist in the "posdarwinian".... That's because it would be needed a constant biochemical pleasure state to be in... And thats impossible, i think... Given that there are biochemical ups and downs... That means that the new bottom level of pleasure would be a new suffering state or at least a less pleasant state... Even if there is a possible biochemical constant state of pleasure untill death... In the long run it would cease to be pleasant cause it's always the same... Thinking about the esthetic in Kierkegaard... The esthetic man is always in the search of novelty... So the posdarwinian constant pleasure state would turn into a more complex way of suffering...
Philosophize This! thanks for the reply. philosophy has been part of my life since i was a child. I accidentally got in to my parents lsd when i was 4. i was plagued with the idea thst i was the only real person ( now understood as solopism) Now 32. I've been working to frame my experience and the human experience in the most accurate and reasonable terms possible. your show has been an amazing help and truly insightful.
I'd love it if you do!! some of my favourite ones are the old ones,... When I want to share them in an approachable platform so people listen you I do it through youtube!
I don't think we would accept life without suffering. All that would be left would be boredom, we need obstacles to evolve into something better, we need pain and suffering to understand one another. It's like this, if you had cancer, would you be treated by a doctor and lived through cancer and survived, or by a doctor who did not? It's like Yin and the Yang, everything is as it should be.
TheLandOfTears s only because of our psychological constitution as human beings. if you can conceive of a reality free of suffering, then you can conceive of conscious beings in said reality unable to experience boredom, hardship, or affliction of any sort.
you're talking of this post darwinian conscience and what the future humans will say about us , well... they won't be human anymore , they'll become a different species which evolved from humans
Ehhhhhh! How can you know the rat is happy from its actions? How do you distinguish a happy rat from another rat? It is impossible the tell a given rat"s internal emotions by applying human happiness criteria. How do we know rats and humans have the same definition of happiness
I've considered this from different angles, and certainly content to 'die' without transforming into some binary instructions on a computer chip, or even some quantum information in a new quantum processor. Will also recommend to my children to exist as is. Assuming there are other dimensions and cycles I am happy having played my part in this one or continuing in a new cycle. Who knows. But perhaps the transhumanist actual lock themselves into this 4D realm and can't escape. The ultimate mistake. Hmm.
Autoplay turned this on while i was doing something else and within 2-3 minutes realized it was going to be about dostoyevsky. Say what you will about the man, his flair and style can be smelled from a mile of way.
This is surely the most stupid podcast you ever done. Have you even considered the amount of great things humans have achieved trought history motivated by their suffering? Have you considered the beauty the can come out of suffering? That suffering permits us human to connect with each other and form more intense bonds? This podcast makes me think of the movie Inside out (2015). I don't remember the movie quite well, but I remember that after the characters she had in her mind finally realized how sadness was important to her, she could finally have a happier life. Think of the movie The Truman Show. He had everything. His life was perfect. But as a human being he yearned for bigger things and realized that his suffering was a motivator to rebel against a world that controlled him. Think of the movie Eternal sunshine of the spotless mind and how the characters who tried to eliminate suffering out of their lives by submitting themselves to a brain operation felt that they had lost something of extreme significance - and that made them feel even worse. I also think about Kierkegaard listening to this podcast. He thought that we should no try to forget our past suffering but remember it, so our lives could be filled with meaning and a sense of purpose. Our history is important to build our character and make us strong. It seems to me that science and technology can alienate us from our true nature, to make us deformed incomplete creatures. Suffering makes us human and beautiful. We shouldn't get rid of it
Pain is one thing, suffering is another Mental pain cannot be removed simply by the removal of physical stress after all Imagine a person who wants world domination. He will never be able to achieve it in a peaceful world. Can this mental pain be removed? And it is just this simple fact that wanting is not something that science can address. Because it is not based on anything physical or tangible
