(June 8, 2016 at 5:13 am)robvalue Wrote:(June 8, 2016 at 4:56 am)RozKek Wrote: But does it really matter if you're happier in option 2?
(I'm playing devil's advocate)
I do see the apparent irrationality in my answer, and it's interesting to me. It might be to do with me being unable to properly conceptualize the idea of being constantly happy without context. Also, I value the anticipation and variety very highly.
And as has been noted, this option does include the other option. I can decide to "switch over" at any time just by removing context and cranking up the happiness to max all the time.
The answer does still seem irrational even after my explanation. I would however give up this life (ignoring the morality in that decision) for a life of constant happiness where I don't get to do anything. But I had two choices, I'd go with the one where I can control my actions and happiness.
Personally I'd still pick option 1, and I don't think it's because of us being irrational. Homeless Nutter and Alex K had good answers. Thing is I am deciding now in this moment, where I very much value my choices, power, contribution, action and such. So in this moment, I very much prefer having those and be a human rather than be happier, but be a valueless vegetable. I'd even rather have no life rather than being a happy "vegetable". I'd even rather have a worse life than be that happy vegetable because I'd at least have value if I had a normal life, I'd be able to contribute to life and my actions would have an impact on others and have a value to life which can change the world for the better. So in a way me prefering option 1 also has to do with selflessness, but that's not the only reason.
