Experience machine

The experience machine is a thought experiment put forward by philosopher Robert Nozick in his Anarchy, State, and Utopia.[1] It is one of the best known attempts to refute ethical hedonism, and does so by imagining a choice between everyday reality and an apparently preferable simulated reality.

If the primary thesis of hedonism is that "pleasure is the good", then any component of life that is not pleasurable does nothing directly to increase one's well-being. This is a view held by many value theorists, but most famously by some classical utilitarians. Nozick attacks the thesis by means of a thought experiment. If he can show that there is something other than pleasure that has value and thereby increases our well-being, then hedonism is defeated.

Contents

The thought experiment

Nozick asks us to imagine a machine that could give us whatever desirable or pleasurable experiences we could want. "Superduper neuropsychologists" have figured out a way to stimulate a person's brain to induce pleasurable experiences that the subject could not distinguish from those she'd have apart from the machine. He then asks, if given the choice, would we prefer the machine to real life?

Nozick also believes that if pleasure were the only intrinsic value, people would have an overriding reason to be hooked up to an "experience machine," which would produce favorable sensations.

Initial concerns

Who would run the machines if everyone plugs in? Nozick asks us to ignore this concern, since it does not adversely affect the thought experiment. One could simply stipulate that the machines have been so well designed as to be fail-proof.

The experiment is also open to multiple interpretations. For instance, Nozick claims that you could either map out the rest of your life in the machine before plugging in, or you could unplug periodically to choose your programming for the next cycle. While interesting, these variations do not directly affect the argument.

The argument

The argument is along these lines:

Reasons not to plug in

Nozick provides us with three reasons not to plug into the machine.

  1. We want to do certain things, and not just have the experience of doing them
    • "It is only because we first want to do the actions that we want the experiences of doing them." (Nozick, 43)
  2. We want to be a certain sort of person
    • "Someone floating in a tank is an indeterminate blob." (Nozick, 43)
  3. Plugging into an experience machine limits us to a man-made reality (it limits us to what we can make)
    • "There is no actual contact with any deeper reality, though the experience of it can be simulated." (Nozick, 43)

Criticisms

A counter-argument to this thought-experiment was brought up by Elliott Sober. He offers an egoistic explanation for our motives: that we find the idea of the ignorant life repulsive, whereas we find the idea of the real life appealing. He believes there is a distinction between the idea of a pleasant state and the pleasant idea of a state. Even though it is the case that we would be happier in the ignorant life, at the time it would make us happier to choose the real life, which is why we choose that.

It can also be argued that, even if feeling good in the short-term is not always the best option, the reason we would choose to do other things instead is because they could make our feelings better in a long-term perspective, or (if the machine were really equivalent to paradise, giving the best theoretically possible experience to everyone and forever) because of a habit of thinking this way, due to life experiences, social and evolutionary reasons.

In literature

Before it became a philosophical thought experiment in the mid seventies, the pleasurable but simulated experience versus reality dilemma had been a staple of science fiction; for example in the short story "The Chamber of Life", published in the magazine Amazing Stories in October 1929. The novel Infinite Jest by David Foster Wallace involves a similar formulation of the experience machine. The novel revolves around a film titled Infinite Jest that is lethally pleasurable: the film is so entertaining that, once watched, the viewer will desire nothing else but to watch the film over and over. It also is a running theme of the 1999 film The Matrix. Agent Smith's account of the early history of the Matrix includes the idea that humans reject a virtual reality that offers them paradise; however, later his informant Cypher is willing to betray his colleagues because he would prefer to be reinserted into an (arguably less perfect) Matrix as a wealthy and successful man than continue to live in the harsh realities outside the simulation. While this later version of the Matrix is not a paradise-like reality in the literal sense, it may be argued that it is a lot like a pleasure-inducing Experience Machine, since Cypher is given the opportunity to have a prominent position of power and wealth in this new simulation. As he says while dining at a simulated restaurant:

"You know, I know this steak doesn't exist. I know that when I put it in my mouth, the Matrix is telling my brain that it is juicy, and delicious. After nine years, you know what I realize? Ignorance is bliss."[2]

Footnotes

  1. ^ New York: Basic Books, 1974, 42-45.
  2. ^ "The Matrix Transcript Part 05". The Matrix. The Matrix Truth. http://thematrixtruth.remoteviewinglight.com/html/transcript-of-the-matrix-5.html. Retrieved June 22, 2011. 

See also

References

Nozick, Robert. Anarchy, State, and Utopia. Basic Books, New York, 1974, pp. 42–45. ISBN 0-465-09720-0.