037. [Text]

[explosivecombat]

I come seeking discussion again today, which to most of you should probably be nothing new; if anything, I ought to apologize for it, but I suspect that will ring about as true as my usual apologies for the subject matter. For what it's worth, the subject is better than it usually is; take that as you will.

I'd like to discuss dreams today; I'm sure those that were here about a year ago know exactly why, but in the end that is neither here nor there, and you don't have to have experienced it to discuss this with me.

I'm sure we're all no strangers to very vivid dreams...? The sort that immerse you so entirely that they almost seem real...surely there are a few qualities here and there that mark them as dreams, but they're disregarded in favor of whatever is actually happening right in front of you. Dreams like that can hardly be said to be different from reality, can they? They invoke feelings within you; they encourage you to continue thinking about them long after you've awakened. You could even say that dreams like that have given you experiences that you might never have had, were you awake – you've gone on adventures and met people and done things that affected you, all while physically being asleep.

Say that there was a way to live like that forever.

Suppose that there's a machine that will put you under, rendering you solidly asleep and allowing you to experience whatever you want. The machine can simulate any pleasurable experience that you choose, instilling all the thoughts and feelings that would come with actually going out and doing those things for yourself in your waking life. There would be no pain or suffering; it would be an experience in pure bliss for as long as you were plugged into the machine.

Again, you could stay that way forever, if you so chose, living out the rest of your life in dreams, and it would be a pleasant experience that's custom-tailored to you. The only tradeoff is that you would be unconscious the entire time; the experience would be entirely in your mind, rather than anything you actually did.

Would you choose to go under and live the rest of your life happy but effectively comatose, or would you prefer to experience life for yourself, entirely awake, with all the imperfections and strife that may come with it?

You can answer me anonymously if you wish, because as usual, your identity doesn't interest me as much as your response does; if you really want to impress me, you'll tell me why you would answer as you did.

Comments

[cawsforalarm]

Well, maybe I would do that if I had convictions. I don't really care about morals or anything -- I just do what sounds like fun, and sometimes what people tell me to, when it's not stupid. My obligations kind of are my convictions, because they're what I care about.

[explosivecombat]

[Oh, now that's interesting.]

Most who are like that don't bother to allow obligations to form around them; may I ask what's made you decide yours are worthwhile?

[cawsforalarm]

Just because I don't care about "the right thing to do" doesn't mean that I don't have people who are important to me. Those are my obligations. To help the people I actually care about.

A lot of people have ordered me around, but I don't care about them or feel obligated to listen to them. I just do it because there's nothing better to do.

[explosivecombat]

The difference between amoral and immoral, then; understood.

Either way, I can't say that I don't understand that line of thinking, personally.

[cawsforalarm]

Sure? Vocab was never my best subject.

That's weird, though. This is a pretty moral question to be asking if you're anything like me.

[explosivecombat]

Perhaps I just like seeing how people think.

[cawsforalarm]

[There's a pretty long pause -- multiple hours -- before the next message comes.]

What you said about amoral and immoral... which one am I supposed to be?

[Because now he's curious, dang it.]

[explosivecombat]

[...Oh, well, that's...huh.]

From the sound of it, amoral.

[cawsforalarm]

So what does that mean? That I have no morals at all?

[explosivecombat]

You've mentioned repeatedly yourself that you don't care about morality and what constitutes the right thing to do, haven't you?

[cawsforalarm]

Well, yeah. Like I said, vocab isn't my best subject, so I was just making sure.

[explosivecombat]

It's not unheard of for people like that to adhere to some sort of code of honor or other personal substitute for standard morality, if that's presenting any sort of doubt.

[cawsforalarm]

Well, a 'code of honor' is basically a set of morals, isn't it? Where do you draw the line between "morals" and "incentive"?

[explosivecombat]

I think that's primarily subjective, isn't it?

Although when it comes to incentive...there are some who wouldn't care about murdering someone - there's no morality or sense of ethics preventing them from doing such. However, it's possible they have no desire to be put on trial and thrown in prison for murdering someone; they would behave for the sake of preserving their freedom as opposed to because they believe killing is wrong. I think that would be one applicable difference.

[cawsforalarm]

Oh, I get it. It's like... incentive is meant to help you and your issues, but some people don't want to do that because their conscience or holy book or whatever says so, and that's their morals. So if a moral person killed a guy, they would get all conflicted because their morals say that killing is wrong -- but if I killed a guy, well, it's just another one of the thousands of guys I've killed.

No one's ever actually explained this to me before. Everyone kind of assumes you have morals, you know? It's like "stuff you should know already".

[explosivecombat]

I've always found morality to be a vague, counterintuitive thing, really - no one can agree on one set of morals in the first place, so they obviously aren't a universal constant. I think it's more a societal thing than anything; there are basic rules that almost everyone seems to agree upon, yes, but I question why - most civilized people seem to agree that "murder is bad," for example, but I have to wonder if that's because they legitimately find it abhorrent or because they've been raised to think it's abhorrent and so they believe it to be so.

It also makes me wonder what people would be willing to do if they had complete amnesty from society's rules for a while - whether they would all remain so "moral" then.

[cawsforalarm]

I don't know the answer to that one. I guess I wasn't really raised in a normal society, either, so I don't know how they think.

[Most of the time, Henry doesn't even know how he thinks.]

[explosivecombat]

It's not anything I fault you for, for the record. I doubt anyone has a coherent answer for it that's not horribly biased.