I think that perhaps the objection is more in its over-powering nature.

Are there, we might ask, times or situations in which someone should not really be happy? At the loss of a loved one, perhaps? Or following some terrible crime or tragedy?

A good meal will not restore happiness to a man who has just lost his child, yet our hypothetical drug would. He would still quite clearly understand that his child would never again be part of his life, but under the effect of soma, he would not be unhappy about that. I think that disturbs people; it would disturb me.

Another question would be, is there a difference between something that would comfort you when you were unhappy, and something that would simply make your unhappiness disappear?


Very true.

I think it would be a curse. Enabling humans to overcome shame is likely to make this world a very ugly place very quickly. It is only our human sense of shame that prevents us from doing so many unsavory things.

I probably wouldn't use the stuff because fake happiness in other people is very annoying.

I think as a whole, society would suffer if everyone took the little euphoric pills. We learn and grow from our pain and sorrow and without it, we wouldn't feel the need to find a cure for cancer, we wouldn't care that a family was without food, and all the other things that we act on due to emotion. Sure, it'd be nice to take a little "happy" pill at this time but I think I'd rather face my grief now and find my own natural happiness through things like playing with my granddaughter, having dinner with my kids, crocheting a blanket, etc.

__________________


"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways - Chardonnay in one hand - chocolate in the other - body thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and screaming "WOO HOO, What a Ride!"

I'm not quite sure I follow.
Are you saying that the only reason we feel the need to cure cancer is to be happy?
If so, then why bother with it now that cancer no longer makes us unhappy?
If not, then why would we stop trying to cure it?

I think what she is saying is that it is our sadness at the death of loved ones from cancer that inspires us to find a cure. If no one is ever sad from taking all those happy-pills, then no one will be motivated to find a cure.

I hope I'm not misinterpreting Mrs.M's post.

No, I think you're correct. But doesn't the sadness motivate us because we don't want others to feel that same grief? We try to stop cancer so that it won't bring so much unhappiness to others as it has to us.
But, with soma, it won't bring unhappiness to others, so what's our motivation for curing it?

(just playing devil's advocate here)

You're exactly right!

__________________


"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways - Chardonnay in one hand - chocolate in the other - body thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and screaming "WOO HOO, What a Ride!"

Will the pill take away the pain of cancer? I've been in pain and happy at the same time but I would've been much happier without the pain!

__________________


"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways - Chardonnay in one hand - chocolate in the other - body thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and screaming "WOO HOO, What a Ride!"

We should probably go with no on that one. Since the drug only affects emotions, the pain would be unaffected. But as you point out, pain and happiness are not absolutely contradictory.

There are times, after a long hike, when a little pain and soreness in the legs as you lie down can even be enjoyable and satisfying. Or at least it seems that way to me.

So the pill would just eliminate any unhappiness caused by the pain (the "suffering" we might say). The awareness of the physical sensation of pain would still be there.

Generally speaking don't happy people do LESS unsavory things?


If the fake happiness feels like real happiness and looks like real happiness, how can you tell it isn't real? My experiences with fake happiness is that it's obviously not real and that's what makes it annoying.

__________________
The apocalypse is coming... we're gonna need more ammo.

Actually, disatisfaction with life is the cause of a lot of very stupid choices. If one were really able to be in harmony with self, and able to think - then the result may well be better decisions that lead to more happiness and a better life for both you and those you know.

Friends I know who have had depression have told me that going on an anti-depressent doesn't change your life - shit still happens - you just feel far more able to deal with that shit. The brain is an interactive organ - it gets used to producing what it usually produces. As the chemistry is altered, it will acclimate. Depression can become organic when it starts as situational - no reason why the opposite wouldn't work.

Hell, I considered ADHD an acclimation to a culture that requires people be able to multi-process.

Besides, i gotta say, I look at plenty of people - particularly in govt - and i think they either need to get laid or take a chill pill.

__________________
And there is distrust in Washington. I am surprised, frankly, at the amount of distrust that exists in this town. And I'm sorry it's the case, and I'll work hard to try to elevate it." --George W. Bush, Jan. 29, 2007

Namaste,

The best indicators of the unreal nature of such happiness is simple. The need for a drug(an outside source) to induce the state. The fact that the happiness disappears after the drug (an outside source) has been assimilated by your body. Of course, these perceptions only have an impact dependent on how you perceive things. If you perceive that simple body pleasure is the source of happiness then the drug will bring you happiness. If you perceive that the source of happiness is something else then you will realize that the drug does not bring happiness. To me the entire idea of using a drug to induce a euphoric sense of happiness is not different than using any other drug to do so. The simple fact that the drug does not create a physical addiction does not make it any less dangerous.

On the subject of happiness I will finish with a quote from my favorite spiritual leader, the Daial Lama:
In Peace.
Eglaelin

__________________

But aren't things like friendship, sunny afternoons and good books "outside sources" too? Is the happiness I get from taking a walk with a good friend unreal because it required something outside myself?

How is "You look depressed, why not go for a walk outside in the sun?" qualitatively different from "You look depressed, why not take on these pills?"

Namaste,

True happiness is an inner state. To be truly happy requires being happy simply to be happy. When your happiness is generated from within it is not dependent on outside sources. Friends cannot be the source of true happiness because they cannot be with you constantly. When they are gone then you will be unhappy. Sunny afternoons are the same. What happens when the skies are cloudy. I can be just as happy on a cloudy day as I can on a sunny day because my happiness is not dependent on outside things.

To paraphrase another book, Zinja: The Tales of The Shike.

In Peace,
Eglaelin

__________________

People that are wrapped up in thier own happiness are quite able to cause large misery for others.

For example, the neocons and Bush Administration seemed very happy about the opportunity to invade Iraq. Even faced with the evidence of the misery and failure of their policy, they have no shame.

Another example might be crackheads and/or cokeheads - they may be happy but they are definitely capable (and likely) to do unsavory things.

The person taking the drug might not tell the difference, but it is in the eyes of other non-drug takers that the distinction may be apparent.