Plugging into the Experience Machine

Plugging into the Experience Machine Would you be happy if you were plugged into the Experience Machine? If chosen to plug into the experience machine, we can strongly agree that the agent is choosing for hedonic illusion in order to achieve happiness. As hedonist would say the simulation of pleasure is qualitatively the same as real experiences of pleasure. I will discuss the two main factors which conclude that one would not be happy when plugged into the Experience Machine. According to Haybron, hedonism is not a sufficient condition to achieve happiness and the life satisfaction theory is absent when one is the Experience Machine. First, we need to identify what happiness is. Taken by Daniel M. Haybron, Happiness A Very Short Introduction, he identifies three basic theories about happiness. Emotional state theory: happiness as a positive emotional condition, Hedonism: happiness as pleasure and Life satisfaction theory: happiness as being satisfied with your life. Both emotional state theory and hedonism identify happiness in terms of feelings, while the life satisfaction theory identifies happiness in terms of judgments about ones life. To be satisfied with ones life is to regard it as going well by ones standard. By considering all things together, one sees its life as having enough of the things one care about. Thus, life satisfaction is the overall evaluation of ones life. Haybron mentions that life satisfaction should not be taken together with pleasure. The focus of life satisfaction which Haybron describes is not about a question of pleasure as people care about other things besides their own pleasure, b ut to track peoples value. An example can be given by a high achieving artist or scientist who might be satisfied with their life even it is not terribly pleasant, she is getting what she cares about. Haybron categorized three terms to describe happiness under life satisfaction theory. Endorsement: feeling happy and other classic emotions. This is an emotional state which signifies ones life as good. Engagement: vitality and flow. This term concerns the engagement with ones life in the form of energetic, interested, and engaged. However, this can occur even when events are not going well, as an example: when struggling to accomplish a difficult goal. There are two types of engagement. The first concerns on the states of energy or vitality. An example was given by Haybron of a concentrated orchestra conductor who might be cheerful or even happy without being obviously cheerful or happy. The second concerns the notion of flow, developed by Csikszentmihalyi. Flow is the state one experience when fully engaged in an activity, typically a challenging activity performed well. Athletes and musicians describe it as being in the zone. In this state of flow, one loses the sense of self-awar eness. To the individual, time tends to pass different to reality and is not aware of feeling anything at all. Yet Csikszentmihalyi describes it as a highly pleasant state, which an individual is happy. It is opposite to boredom. Attunement: peace of mind, confidence, expansiveness. To understand this one should understand the aspect of tranquillity. It is similar to feeling at home, not entirely a peace of mind but a kind confidence, and stability. In this state, one feels relaxed, living seems natural without inhibition. One of the main arguments of Haybron is that hedonism lacks mental state, as pleasure alone cannot prove happiness because pleasure lacks causal depth. I agree on the Haybrons notion that hedonism itself does not constitute happiness. The pleasure of happiness are not the only pleasures to be had, (Haybron, 143) Hedonism focuses happiness on a matter of pleasure, and may have a certain kind of deep (Haybron, 143) pleasure, or the Epicurean pleasures of tranquillity. However, Haybron distinguishes hedonism from happiness. An important aspect of hedonisms error is that pleasure lacks what Haybron call casual depth (Haybron, 144) He states that all appearances are that happiness has deep, far-reaching, and typically lasting consequences for a persons state of mind and behaviour. Thus according to Haybron, the problem with most hedonistic theories is that they are too inclusive: all sorts of shallow, fleeting pleasures are made to count towards happiness (Haybron, 142) Intuitively, the trouble seems to be that such pleasures dont reach deeply enough, so to speak. They just dont get to us; they flit through consciousness and thats the end of it (Haybron, 143). To this extent, Haybron argues that it is a mistake to equate hedonic states, a states of pleasure with happiness. In the sense, hedonism leaves out too much of what we want to include in our concept of happiness. The problem with hedonism, on this view, centers on the way it relates happiness to time. One of the central questions we might ask about happiness is what is the time of happiness? According to Haybron, hedonisms answer is that happiness is an essentially episodic and backward-looking phenomenon. (Haybron, 143) While this may be true of pleasurable experiences, it is arguably not true of happiness. Arguably, happiness is not just about ones past but also ones present and ones attitude towards, and expectations of, the future. Thus happiness, to a significant extent, is future oriented. Haybron stat es that Hedonism does little more than skim the phenomenal surface off of our emotional states and call it happiness. But happiness runs much deeper than that. (Haybron, 144) From this, we could say, by one experiencing the Experience Machine, one is missing the emotion and feeling of psychological state. Thus, when one enters the experience machine to search for happiness, pleasure itself would not suffice because hedonism lacks the detail to handle such cases. Additionally, Nozick provides a similar assertion that the Experience Machine limits us to human-made reality; it is no deeper than the people who programmed it. Thus, both Haybron and Nozick agrees that pleasure is neither the only value nor the highest value of achieving happiness. When one is plugged into the Experience Machine, engagement would not occur as all challenge is absent in all activities one do because any action one does for a particular activity would only bring positive result in order to experience pleasure. It would be unreasonable to assume that in the Experience Machine, one would painfully spend the time and effort to master a skill. Rather one would avoid such challenge and instantly would obtain such skill. Thus the feeling of flow would not be experienced when taken the path without challenge. Attunement cannot be met when plugged into the Experience Machine because the agent is consciously aware that he is not living the reality. The opposite of attunement, disattunment, define not about anxiety but more like alienation. (Haybron, 23b) Ones circumstances seem alien to them. Unfamiliar with the surrounding environment, realizing that only outcome is to benefit ones happiness. The world would quickly seem unreal as all feedbacks would be inconsistent with any action the agent does. An example of this peculiar experience would be like committing a crime but yet receiving a medal of such action. Thus, one would never feel utterly at home (Haybron, 22b) in the experience machine. The feedback would be different from the reality even though it becomes more pleasurable, it would feel unnatural. Haybron states similar assertion: a troubled, anxious, tense, or stressed out person does not seem to be happy, however cheerful she might be. She isnt really at home in her life. (Haybro n, 23b) This itself diminishes the dimensions of happiness. Any action one does in the Experience Machine inevitably would not matter because the programmed agents who have social relation with the one in the Experience Machine would only react to bring a positive response in favour of agents desire. Thus any action one performs would not alter the future or have any meaning to ones goal. The important aspect of life satisfaction is that it is a judgment of ones life which is independent of ones emotional state. Life satisfaction is not about pleasure but how ones life measures to its value. These values are subjective; there is no objective measure for life satisfaction. Humans value actual experiences, character, achievements and their relationships with others, not solely on pleasure. Thus, when one is in the Experience machine, all pleasure one receive are an illusion, a false belief that one believes in experiencing the reality. Haybron explains that hedonism fails in achieving happiness because it lacks causal depth and it is a mistake to equate the state of pleasure with happiness. The definition of life satisfaction theory demonstrates that happiness has to include other aspects such as engagement and attunement, thus, in the Experience Machine; all these deeper senses of experience are absent. One does not feel the challenge to achieve a certain goal, and all action is immaterial because the feedback is only to bring desirable result. We could conclude that the Experience Machine is missing both emotion and psychological state and without these, one would not be happy as this structure the condition of ones well-being. Bibliography: Daniel Haybron, Why Hedonism is False, from Happiness: Classic and Contemporary Readings in Philosophy, (eds.), Steven M. Cahn and Christine Vitrano. (Oxford, 2008a). Daniel M. Haybron, Happiness: A Very Short Introduction. (Oxford, 2013b). Robert Nozick, The Experience Machine, from Happiness: Classic and Contemporary Readings in Philosophy, (eds.), Steven M. Cahn and Christine Vitrano. (Oxford, 2008). Steven M. Cahn and Christine Vitrano, Choosing the Experience Machine, Chapter 14, Cahn Vitrano, Happiness and Goodness: Philosophical Reflections on Living Well. (Columbia University Press, 2015). Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Enjoyment and the Quality of Life, from Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. (HarperCollins Publishers, 1990).

Ethnic Relations Essays -- essays research papers

Final Exam   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The question of race and discrimination has been around a long time, dating back to the slave age. So the fact that it is still an issue today is no surprise at all. In fact, you might be able to say that race and discrimination is still around today but has changed over time. Why is it important to understand the question of race and discrimination? It is important because helps you be a more well-rounded person. I have learned this and have become more aware of this because I am taking this class. I will be examining ten pieces of popular culture and show how it relates to what I have learned in this class.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The first example I would like to use is the movie â€Å"8 Mile†. The movie is about this white man that lives in a bad neighborhood in Detroit. He has a lot of good rapping skills and he works at a car garage. He knows that the only way he will get out of this bad place is if beats the black rappers and lands a record deal. The movie shows the adversity that he goes through. This movie represents how a white man struggles to get recognize in the rap industry since he is not black and since it is dominant by blacks. I think that this shows the world that it does not matter what skin you have, but the talent you have is more important. I think this ties into class on the issue of how too many times that people get categorized because the color of their skin. This shows the idea of whiteness. Black people have been used the idea of whiteness and have used it on him. Wellman quotes: â€Å"I can relate to people whose backgrounds are similar to mine† (We llman 152). Since he is white, the some black people have judged him first by his skin and looking passed his background. When in reality, he grew up with a rough childhood and the fact that he did have the talent to do what supposedly only black people could. The black people thought that just cause he had white skin that he was not able to produce the same rhythm as them because the white person did not listen to the kind of music they make.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The second example I would like to use is swing dancing. I saw a picture on the internet about swing dancing and how it showed white people dancing. Swing dance was formed by the African American people and it became very popular that it became the center of American life but... ...xist with no problem. This relates to the Min’s idea of how Asians want to be like whites and how they don’t want to be like blacks. I find this interesting because in this movie, the black people are trying to be like Asians, where as the Asians are trying to be like white people.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The final example I would like to use the James Bond movie â€Å"You only live twice†. The movie is about how Bond gets killed by the Chinese enemy in the beginning of the movie but he really was not dead. So he has a mission to stop the Chinese gang from taking control of the world. This reveals to the world how the Chinese can be dangerous too. I think this relates to the when Min talks about gangs in his book. What I find funny about this situation on gangs is that Asian want to become more like white people yet the gangs would be more a characteristics of the black people. So it is kind of ironic that Asians want to be white yet they are also like black people. I am not sure what exactly you can classify the Asian people as either white or black, but I would like to see that the Asian community be classified as their own group and not have to choose either white or black,

Political Party History

Political Party History Before the Democrat and Republican parties began their reign over American politics, political parties were constantly changing. The first parties resembled faction’s more than actual parties. The nation’s politicians were known to crowd together around a particular issue. These were usually a reflection of social living in America. A change in political parties meant a change in the way Americans were living their lives. Strong third parties also helped influence the Democrat and Republican parties after they gained control. Though the names of parties change over time, there have always been two groups of people taking opposite sides of a common cause. The political party originated when the debate of ratifying the constitution arose. There was a split in the idea of how this new country should be governed. On one side was the federalist, who were mostly supported by the upper class. The wealthy property owners felt susceptible to the open government that was starting to be formed. They wanted to protect their political power. On the other hand the anti-federalists, made up of the lower classes, felt that a stronger central government would create a great deal of corruption as well as threaten the power of the people. These two factions eventually separated into two parties. The first was pushed by Alexander Hamilton and kept the Federalist name. Hamilton believed in a strong national government having most of the authority. Hamilton wanted a strong industrialized country with close ties to the mother country of England. Thomas Jefferson fronted the second party that was named the Democratic-republicans. Jefferson believed in an unpretentious central government giving most authority to the individual states. Jefferson wanted to keep away from the possible corruption of industry and therefore promoted an agrarian based economy. The Federalist Party quickly came to an end when a split in the party occurred due to the controversial presidency of John Adams. With no opposition the Democratic Republicans gradually faded away. This time period consisting of no parties was known as the Era of Good Feelings. With the new idea of universal white male suffrage, which gave the right to vote to all white men in the United States, there was a permanent shift in power. Prospective politicians could no longer only favor the propertied classes; instead they now had to focus on the middle and lower classes concerns. This profound shift helped invigorate a new party, the Democratic Republicans led by Andrew Jackson. The Democratic Republicans believed that the country should be governed under strict adherence to the Constitution. They were against a national banking system. They were also against federally sponsored internal improvements because they felt it would be unwarranted interference and unconstitutional. The opposing side was the National Republicans and was led by John Adams. This party believed in supporting the national bank and favored all internal improvements. The National Republicans were also advocates of a strong central government. Eventually the National Republicans joined forces with many other disparate groups to form The Whig Party. The Democratic Republican Party shortened its name to the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party still favored a limited national government as well as the ideals of agrarianism. Democrats were farmers who believed in the right to own slaves and favored territorial expansion. As transportation improvements increased commercialization and the new democratic politics drew people out of localism into larger networks, questions about national unity arose. Because the Constitution left the federal structure ambiguous all sectional disagreements automatically became constitutional issues. This brought out the great issue of nationalism vs. sectionalism. The opposing side named themselves the Whig Party. The Whigs drew their strength from the growing industrial class. Most Whigs were entrepreneurs who favored urban growth and free labor. The Whigs party beliefs were that of industrialization, they wanted to expand commercially and were in favor of federally sponsored internal improvements in the form of road and waterways. Ultimately the issues over slavery caused the separation of the Whig Party. The Kansas-Nebraska Act divided the Democratic Party. The Act opened up Kansas and Nebraska to deciding their slave status based on popular sovereignty. This angered both the north and the south. By repealing the Compromise of 1820, the Act convinced Northerners that the South was attempting to ensure slavery’s dominance in the United States. The South saw Northern attempts to influence Kansas into voting against slavery as trying to disturb the balance of power. The backlash of the act caused the Democratic Party to split along sectionalist lines and created the Republican Party. This was the Nations first major party created along sectional lines. The new Republican Parties main goal was to stop the spread of slavery into the new territories. The party also wanted to establish a tariff that would protect the countries growing industry; furthermore they wanted to give poor pioneers the ability to own the land they settled in. The Southern Democrats made it abundantly clear that if a Republican won the Presidency the South would secede from the Union to preserve its rights. Shortly after the Republican candidate Abraham Lincoln won the election of 1860 the South seceded from the union. The South was afraid that a Republican President would eradicate their right to own slaves. The Democrats remained fractionalized during the Civil War. The Northern remnants of the party split into three. First was the War Democrats who supported the civil war. Second, the Peace Democrats who wanted a quick political settlement with the South. Third, the Copperheads who openly opposed the war and even betrayed the Union to help the South. During this time the Republicans formed a temporary alliance with the War Democrats, this new party was known as the Union Party. They chose a Republican Party presidential candidate with a War Democratic Party vice presidential candidate. The Union party, even though it only lasted for the duration of the war, was a unique time in American History. Never have two parties come together to support a common cause rejecting selfish notions of power and working beyond their differences to safe the nation. After the Civil war the Democratic Party rejoined as the main opposition of the Republican Party. While their presidential candidates stand little chance of being elected, strong third parties have promoted concepts and policies that were an important part of social and political lives. The Populist and Socialist parties support for reduced working hours led to the Fair Labor Standards Act. These two parties also supported a progressive tax system that would base a person’s tax liability on their amount of income. This idea led to the ratification of the 16th amendment. The Progressive party, or the Bull Moose party, promoted women’s suffrage and was eventually supported by both Democratic and Republican parties which ratified the19th Amendment giving women the right to vote. The Socialist Party furthermore supported a fund to provide temporary compensation for the unemployed. The idea led to the creation of laws establishing unemployment insurance and the Social Security Act. The American Independent party advocated getting tough on crime. The Republican Party adopted the idea in its platform and the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act was the result. From the Revolution to Reconstruction, political parties unified people sharing the same basic principles into a means for change. There has always been one party in the United States party system that was always a strict interpreter of the Constitution and wanted to limit the growing power of the federal government. The other favored a Constitutional interpretation using the elastic clause as a way of increasing federal power. Throughout the first half of American history parties evolved from mere alliances of convenience of the Federalists and Anti-Federalists to the complex political machines of the Democrats, Whigs, and later the Republicans. Though the names of political parties have changed over time there have always been groups of people united to further their own ideological ends. Bibliography USA Today. The Parties. 999-2000. Pearson Education. Presidential Elections. 1789-2004. 2007. Berg-Anderson, Richard E. A Brief History of American Major Parties. May21, 2001. http://www. thegreenpapers. com/Hx/AmericanMajorParties. html Hockett, Homer Carey. Political and Social Growth of the American People. New York: The Mackmillon Company, 1944. Garner, Richard L. Stebbins, Phillip E. Individualism and Community. The Pennsylvania State University, 1975. Hicks, John D. The American Nation. Univ ersity of California, Berkeley1941.

Essay on A Hoax in Court The Trial of Socrates - 1547 Words

Albert Einstein quoted, â€Å"In matters of truth and justice, there is no difference between large and small problems, for issues concerning the treatment of people are all the same† (Brainy Quote). Were justice and truth a part of Socrates’ trial? The primary question is: what is justice? According to Merriam-Webster dictionary, the definition of justice is: â€Å"the administration of law, especially the establishment or determination of rights according to the rules of law or equity.† Meletus brought an elder man to court for corrupting the youth and for refusing to believe in the gods of the city. 501 Athenian male residents observed as the jury to magistrate and center their decisions off Meletus’s accusations and Socrates’ defense to†¦show more content†¦Ã¢â‚¬â€œ The Councillors, also. But, Meletus, what about the assembly? Do members of the assembly corrupt the young, or do they all improve them? – They improve them. All the Athenians, it seems, make the young into fine good men, except me, and I alone corrupt them† (Apology 28). It should take the child’s peers, friends, and parents, as well as their teachers to transform their impression of a certain issue or idea of the gods. Young children are first introduced to religion by their parents, and next begin school transferring the greater influence to the teachers and friends of the student. No one person can essentially â€Å"corrupt† the youth, but instead, there must be supplementary sources at fault. Likewise, how can one elder man harm adolescents for several years, and just now endure conviction a few years before his own death? Generally, when a person commits a crime, the prosecutor representing society would bring the charge against the defendant immediately following the offense. Socrates had been preaching his knowledge and insight of the gods for many years at this point. Later in his defense Socrates states, â€Å"If I corrupt some young men and have corrupted others, then surely some of them who have grown older and realized that I gave them bad advice when they were young should now themselves come up here to accuse me and avenge themselves† (Apology 36). However, at this moment inShow MoreRelatedEssay about Socrates2048 Words   |  9 Pages SOCRATES THE PHILOSOPHER Socrates is a noteworthy and important historical figure as a philosopher, because of his and his pupils’ influence on the development of the philosophical world. His teachings, famous arguments, and ideas began the outgrowth of all later western philosophies. Born in 469 BC just outside of Athens, Socrates was brought up properly, and thoroughly educated. He was raised as most Athenians; developing both physical and mental strengths. Socrates then went on to learn fromRead MorePhilosophy and Socrates Essay2070 Words   |  9 PagesUrealysuk9@aol.com SOCRATES THE PHILOSOPHER Socrates is a noteworthy and important historical figure as a philosopher, because of his and his pupils influence on the development of the philosophical world. His teachings, famous arguments, and ideas began the outgrowth of all later western philosophies. Born in 469 BC just outside of Athens, Socrates was brought up properly, and thoroughly educated. He was raised as most Athenians; developing both physical and mental strengths. Socrates then went on to