Main content
Course: Wireless Philosophy > Unit 3
Lesson 1: Ethics- Ethics: The Problem of Evil
- Ethics: Problem of Evil, Part 1
- Ethics: Problem of Evil, Part 2
- Ethics: Problem of Evil, Part 3
- Ethics: God and Morality, Part 1
- Ethics: God and Morality, Part 2
- Ethics: Moral Status
- Ethics: Killing Animals for Food
- Ethics: Hedonism and The Experience Machine
- Ethics: Consequentialism
- Ethics: Utilitarianism, Part 1
- Ethics: Utilitarianism, Part 2
- Ethics: Utilitarianism, Part 3
- Ethics: The Problem of Moral Luck
- Ethics: The Nonidentity Problem
- Ethics: The Nonidentity Problem, Part 2
- Ethics: Symmetry Argument Against the Badness of Death
- Ethics: Promising Against the Evidence #1
- Ethics: Promising Against the Evidence #2
- Ethics: Know Thyself #1 (The Examined Life)
- Ethics: Consent #1 (What is Consent?)
- Ethics: Consent #2 (Consent and Rights)
© 2024 Khan AcademyTerms of usePrivacy PolicyCookie Notice
Ethics: Hedonism and The Experience Machine
What makes our life go best? Is being happy all that matters? Is a life of blissful ignorance a good life? Or is there more to a good life than this? Richard Rowland discusses whether we should take the blue pill in 'hedonism and the experience machine’.
Speaker: Dr. Richard Rowland, Departmental Lecturer, Somerville College, University of Oxford
.
Want to join the conversation?
I am not a proponent of hedonism, but I find the argument here against it to be weak.
At3:24Professor Rowland says, "But this seems wrong to us." That's not proof; that's his opinion. I won't ever be a world class actor or athlete; but the experience of feeling as though I am could be a positive one. I have a wife and a child and am glad that I do. But wouldn't someone who couldn't have a child be happier with the feelings that came with having one, than never knowing the feeling. In a somewhat scary future world, a person could experience what it would be like to have a family as a trial period prior to decide to engage in the experience for real.
He ends by opting against hedonism but only because he says so. I'd like to hear a stronger argument from the professor. What does he have to say?(39 votes)
I agree completely. At the end of the video, statement 2 contradicts statement 1 without giving a shred of evidence, explanation, or rational argument and then draws the conclusion that statement 2 is correct. It seems to me to be similar as saying: 1) Belief "X" states that it is better for us to do "A" than to do "B". 2) But it IS better for us to do "B". Therefore, Belief "X" is false.(18 votes)
I think that useing the "machine" would be like cheating. Not having made the required sacrifices to obtain the experiance. Therefore much less satisfying. Not sure if this matters to the argument.(8 votes)
That's exactly the point of the thought experiment. Pleasure is not the everything. Reality is also important. Some would prefer real suffering to illusory pleasure. Subsequently, the philosophy of hedonism takes a blow.(6 votes)
Am I the only one here who wouldn't hesitate to hook into the machine?(7 votes)
I also would like to know whether I can get out or not.(2 votes)
Willingly entering into a fictional reality in which you intend to lose track of the illusion would be immoral and dishonest. All good done for the sake of others would be meaningless as there are no conscious others benefiting. All the self sacrifice made to bring a child into the world and raise them would be empty. The machine is an extreme example of wish thinking which any honest intelligent person should want to avoid like a plague.
However, If there were a person who truly only cared about themselves and who only saw others as means to their ends, I think the machine would be a great place for them. Psychopaths, corrupt politicians & unscrupulous CEOs come to mind.
Can anyone find reason to object to my first assertion?(0 votes)
While it is true that people would wish to avoid the experience machine, what if you turned it around and instead were told that you are already in the experience machine, and your entire life has actually been an illusion, and no conscious person has ever benefited from your kindnesses. But it still is nice here. Would you wish to leave it?
If you are like most people, then you would decline to leave, not because you only care about yourself, but because you would like to keep things the same as they already are. That's really the same reason that people avoid the machine in the first place.(9 votes)
The comments made by @donsspa and @Wudaifu sum up the flaw of the argument as it was presented in this video.
I am relatively new to Khan but I must say that this is the first time I had to stop, shake my head and think to my self "what just happened there"
In my opinion this video should be removed and a new and improved video put up in its place.
The logical fallacy here is to great to ignore. To quote Wudaifu "Belief "X" states that it is better for us to do "A" than to do "B". 2) But it IS better for us to do "B". Therefore, Belief "X" is false." That is just plain weak at best.
At no point does the speaker go into whether or not we will ever leave the experience machine or anything of the sort. Think about it, if you could stay in the machine, indefinitely, then what difference would it make? It would be exactly like the film The Matrix.
Point here being that perhaps if the speaker goes into more detail and explains things a bit better then maybe this example could be used and made to make sense but as it stands, this is not a quality argument.
Thanks!(4 votes)
Was it just me, or did anyone else notice while talking about the experience machine @1:28draws the code from the movie "The Matrix", and then the "Blue Pill"? Am I projecting, or was that intentional?(2 votes)
You are exactly right. The artist who animated the video wanted to demonstrate how philosophical concepts have permeated different parts of pop culture (even if the argument doesn't happen explicitly). The Matrix is a pretty great example of the experience machine in action. What is particularly nice about the matrix is that you get both sides of it (that is, one of the characters chooses to stay in the experience machine and endorse hedonism).(4 votes)
- As much as I love Khan Academy, I must agree with other comments stating that the argument has flaws. If nothing else, arguments for why it is better to actually do somethings, rather than experience it, must be put forward. If the experience machine is indistinguishable, as such includes necessary suffering in order to triumph, then reality vs subjective experience are one and the same.(3 votes)
- Epicurus was also a hedonist, but het practiced an whole other form of hedonism. You couldn't compare the hedonisme mentioned in this episode with his livestyle, right?(3 votes)
Isnt hedonism and what he asks a contradiction?(1 vote)
One of the ways that you can easily choose the "real" experience over the experience machine is thinking about WHY you do the things you do. For example, one of the reasons most people (or at least me) do the things we do is because we want our actions to be a reality for those who are conscious of their own realities...a.k.a - the real people.(1 vote)
3:24
Video transcript
(intro music) Hi, I'm Richard Rowland. I'm a lecturer in philosophy
at the University of Oxford. I want to talk about Hedonism
and the Experience Machine. Hedonism is a view about
what things are good for us. According to hedonism, the
only thing that is good for us is pleasure and the only thing
that is bad for us is pain. One good reason to accept Hedonism is that if doing something
doesn't give you pleasure or enable you to avoid pain, then it doesn't seem that
that thing is good for you. Suppose that you've made
a promise to a friend, but that keeping that promise wouldn't give you any pleasure at all. In fact, it would cause you pain. In this case, although
it might be morally good for you to keep your promise, and because it's morally good
for you to keep your promise, there might be some reasons
for you to keep your promise, it doesn't seem that it
would be good for you at all to keep that promise. The most serious problems
that hedonism faces comes from a thought experiment. This thought experiment
is due to Robert Nozick. Imagine that there is a machine, and you can get into this
machine and experience doing whatever you want to do. And once you're in the machine, you won't know that
you're only in the machine having the experience of
doing what you want to do. Rather, you'll believe that you're in fact doing what you want to do. And so you can get into
the Experience Machine and have the experience
of being a fantastic actor or actress, performing
in some amazing plays and winning lots of awards for
your fantastic performances. You can have the experience
of, the mere experience of being an author and writing the next great American novel. You can have the experience of
being a world-class athlete. Now crucially, your
experiences in the machine and actually doing these things
will be indistinguishable. If you actually did these things, they'd feel just like
they feel in the machine. And in virtue of this,
you'll get the same amount of pleasure from having
the mere experience of doing these things as
you would from in fact doing these things. Now the question is, is it
better for us to do these things outside of the machine or
is it just as good for us to have the mere experience
of doing these things? That is, is it better for us to in fact be a fantastic actor or actress, play lots incredible roles, and win lots of awards, or
is it just as good for us to have the mere experience of being a fantastic actor or actress? Is it just as good for us
to have the mere experience of being a world-class
athlete or is it better for us to in fact be
a world-class athlete? And is it just as good for us
to have the mere experience of having a child, of having a family, or is it better for us
to in fact have a child and in fact have a family? If hedonism is true,
it's just as good for us to have the mere experience
of having a child and having a family as
it is for us to in fact have a child and have a family. But this seems wrong to us. It seems to us that it's better for us to in fact have a child, have a family, or say in fact be an actor or actress, and in fact be a world-class athlete, than it is for us to
have the mere experiences of doing these things. We can put this into
a more formal argument against hedonism. According to hedonism,
it's no better for us to have a family or to
be an amazing athlete than to have an illusion
of having a family or to have an illusion of
being an amazing athlete. But it is better for us to do these things than to merely have the
illusion of doing these things and so hedonism is false. Subtitles by the Amara.org community