= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Prismattic comments on Open Thread for January 8 - 16 2014 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (344)
(My thoughts are still not sufficiently organized that I’m making a top level post about this, but I think it’s worth putting out for discussion.)
A couple of years ago, in a thread I can no longer find, someone argued that they valued the pleasure they got from defecation, and that they would not want to bioengineer away the need to do so. I thought this was ridiculous.
At the same time, I see many Lesswrongers view eating as a chore that they would like to do away with. And yet I also find this ridiculous.
So I was thinking about where there difference lay for me. My working hypothesis is that there are two elements of pleasure: relief and satisfaction. Defecation, or a drink of water when you’re very thirsty bring you relief, but not really satisfaction. Eating a gourmet meal, on the other hand, may or may not bring relief, depending on how hungry you are when you eat it, but it’s very satisfying. The ultimate pleasure is sex, which culminates in a very intense sense of both relief and satisfaction. (Masturbation, at least from a male perspective, can provide the relief but only a tiny fraction of the satisfaction – hence the difference in pleasure from sex.)
I can understand the desire to minimize or eliminate the need for functions that serve only to provide relief, but I think the “let’s subsist on Soylent” people are throwing the satisfaction baby out with the relief bathwater. I suspect lack of awareness of the possibility of satisfaction as well as relief may also explain the comments I’ve seen here from people who are asexual and happy about that (but I’m less confident in this case because the inferential distance is large.)
I would like to drink Soylent when I want to focus on something else, and to eat at a restaurant when I want to feel the pleasure of eating. Or maybe sometimes cook at home... but only when I decide to.
If I may borrow your analogy, it would be like moving from compulsively masturbating three times a day to having great sex once in a while and doing something else the rest of the time.
Some subset of rationalists just don't seem to value pleasure at all. I know one who used to say his only goal in life was the acquisition of information; relief was appreciated in that it eliminated a distraction, but satisfaction just didn't count for anything. Struck me as Puritanical.
Interesting distinction, it makes intuitive sense, and it's certainly good to be aware that there is a possible satisfaction component to something - but it's still easily possible to value the satisfaction less than you would value being free from the need for the relief component.
I feel that both of these can provide satisfaction as well, though I'm less sure about the water.
Or they just get more satisfaction from other things than eating.
I can enjoy drinking water. I'm not sure where this fits on the relief-satisfaction spectrum, but I seem to be optimally hydrated (in terms of mood) if I keep drinking until drinking is no longer a pleasure-- it's a good bit more water than just taking the edge off.
I've found that when I mention this to people, they're apt to try to get a measurement out of something which is based on sensation.
I would rather get rid of eating but keep defecation, though I don't know that I could say why. The relief/satisfaction thing is certainly interesting.
I once had a conversation in this vein that went like this:
If nothing else, the parent got me to evaluate my preferences and realize that I was using them hypocritically in situations such as the above.
I expect that this is a tiny but expressive minority.