The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
Please vote in the Forum Structure Poll. Polling will close at 2PM EST on January 21, 2025.
You know, I have no problem at all with a hedonistic lifestyle involving copious amounts of promiscuous sex and mind-altering drug use. In fact, that sounds pretty damn good to me.
I do have a problem with the implication in BNW that these things are diametrically opposed to artistic creation or other meaningful pursuits.
Personally, I also enjoyed Fahrenheit 451, but that's not related beyond information control.
And I'm not convinced that BNW's society would have to halt art and deeper thought. Clearly they had a solid grasp of genetics and psychology, however blunt.
Promiscuous sex and mind-altering drug use are meaningful pursuits.
That depends how you define meaningful. Personally if we've finished the GUT and invented super-technology then woo! Else, there are more important things to do.
You get on that and I'll concentrate on the sex and drugs - we can get both done at once.
Gorak on
0
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
You know, I have no problem at all with a hedonistic lifestyle involving copious amounts of promiscuous sex and mind-altering drug use. In fact, that sounds pretty damn good to me.
I do have a problem with the implication in BNW that these things are diametrically opposed to artistic creation or other meaningful pursuits.
You sound like you think BNW is written from some puritanistic point of view; I think it's just being realistic. There were both in Huxley's time and today plenty of people with nigh-unlimited access to sex and drugs, and the money to mitigate most of the unpleasant consequences, and yet they don't strike me as the happiest or most fulfilled people in the world.
I think the biggest issue I have with a Brave New World is that it is unrealistic in its outlook on progress and advancement. It presents a static world that hasn't really advanced in 600 years, and that's what makes it such an abhorrent society. I cannot imagine that people take issue with a culture that is open and free of taboos regarding sex. Rather, it seems like most people dislike the fact that the book presupposes this culture has decided to stop advancing and only engage in frivolious persuits.
Imagine if a Brave New World had been written in a utopian mirror of, for example, the 40k universe while keeping the same hedonistic culture. Humanity controls hundreds of millions of planets instead of just solitary earth and is spreading more every day. An Epsilon Minus is twice as intelligent and three times as strong as the average person today; an Alpha Plus can effortlessly memorize ten times the library of congress and is so stunningly beautiful as to make current hollywood actors look like Quasimodo. Art and Sciences put ours to shame, etc; instead of reserves for the savages they live in their own solar systems. All the while, each caste continues to get smarter/stronger with each generation born and arts/sciences continue to advance.
See, it doesn't sound so bad now does it? It's still a hedonistic society that has sex purely for pleasure and takes copius amounts of Soma to maintain permanent happiness. It doesn't change the fact that the highest goal of the society is to continually stay in a state where you never stop feeling pleasure. However, when you start adding to the fact that people and sciences are getting better with each generation, it goes from being a dystopia to a true utopia. I suppose you could argue that the basis of Huxley's arguement is that in a culture like this, advance will halt as a result of the culture. I don't think he goes within 1000 yards of adequately proving this though. Edit: And I'd also like to say that the whole of human history seems to disaggree with Huxley when it comes to happy people creating technological and artistic innovation.
tl;dr - the fact that the people of a Brave New World haven't fucking improved genetics/technology/spacetravel/art/anything in 600 years is what makes it a dystopia. It certainly isn't the fact that people live carefree lives while continually happy working in jobs they love and having tons of sex.
You know, I have no problem at all with a hedonistic lifestyle involving copious amounts of promiscuous sex and mind-altering drug use. In fact, that sounds pretty damn good to me.
I do have a problem with the implication in BNW that these things are diametrically opposed to artistic creation or other meaningful pursuits.
You sound like you think BNW is written from some puritanistic point of view; I think it's just being realistic. There were both in Huxley's time and today plenty of people with nigh-unlimited access to sex and drugs, and the money to mitigate most of the unpleasant consequences, and yet they don't strike me as the happiest or most fulfilled people in the world.
That's because most drug-users are already screwed up to the point that even mind altering drugs can't provide lasting comfort. One of my teachers in high school made the statement that the more advanced a society becomes, the more stressful life in that society becomes. Depression is a result of modern society.
Personally, the society depicted in Brave New World seems to be the ultimate in freedom. You have the free time to do whatever you want: fly a plane, go on vacation, go to the movies, take some soma, have freaky-deaky sex, etc. All without the stress of family problems, trying to pay the bills, religious dogma, etc...
So what if you're programmed to enjoy that life? So what if it isn't truly freedom? Are we so free right now? As unsatisfactory as it is to some of you, the argument "You wouldn't care if you were in that society" seems adequate to me.
I think the biggest issue I have with a Brave New World is that it is unrealistic in its outlook on progress and advancement. It presents a static world that hasn't really advanced in 600 years, and that's what makes it such an abhorrent society. I cannot imagine that people take issue with a culture that is open and free of taboos regarding sex. Rather, it seems like most people dislike the fact that the book presupposes this culture has decided to stop advancing and only engage in frivolious persuits.
Imagine if a Brave New World had been written in a utopian mirror of, for example, the 40k universe while keeping the same hedonistic culture. Humanity controls hundreds of millions of planets instead of just solitary earth and is spreading more every day. An Epsilon Minus is twice as intelligent and three times as strong as the average person today; an Alpha Plus can effortlessly memorize ten times the library of congress and is so stunningly beautiful as to make current hollywood actors look like Quasimodo. Art and Sciences put ours to shame, etc; instead of reserves for the savages they live in their own solar systems. All the while, each caste continues to get smarter/stronger with each generation born and arts/sciences continue to advance.
See, it doesn't sound so bad now does it? It's still a hedonistic society that has sex purely for pleasure and takes copius amounts of Soma to maintain permanent happiness. It doesn't change the fact that the highest goal of the society is to continually stay in a state where you never stop feeling pleasure. However, when you start adding to the fact that people and sciences are getting better with each generation, it goes from being a dystopia to a true utopia. I suppose you could argue that the basis of Huxley's arguement is that in a culture like this, advance will halt as a result of the culture. I don't think he goes within 1000 yards of adequately proving this though. Edit: And I'd also like to say that the whole of human history seems to disaggree with Huxley when it comes to happy people creating technological and artistic innovation.
tl;dr - the fact that the people of a Brave New World haven't fucking improved genetics/technology/spacetravel/art/anything in 600 years is what makes it a dystopia. It certainly isn't the fact that people live carefree lives while continually happy working in jobs they love and having tons of sex.
I don't think that the society's progress has any impact on whither it is a dystopia or not. In a bnw they've already cured all disease, created flying cars, and engineered all people to be beautiful and happy from birth, so the society has pretty much reached the limit of its technological evolution. Also space travel hasn't yet occured at the time the novel was written so you really can't blame Huxley for not including the colonization of other planets. But even if he did include everything that you have mentioned, it still wouldn't be a utopia because of its lack of the moral, emotional and artistic aspects of society which make us human.
A true utopia would be one where the artist would not fear the censor, where the great would not be constrained by the small, where the scientist would not be bound by petty morality. Aparadise where I get what I earn by the sweat on my brow. The man in the white house says that it belongs to the poor, the church says that it belongs to god, Soviet Russia says that it belongs to everyone. I deny this sentiment, but where in the world do I belong? There is no god, only man.
You belong at Ayn Rand Conventions.
Heh. Someone didn't get the reference. He's quoting Ryan's introduction to Rapture from BioShock.
Seriously, that's the part I love most about the setting - it's Objectivism gone feral. And now you have to clean up the mess.
A true utopia would be one where the artist would not fear the censor, where the great would not be constrained by the small, where the scientist would not be bound by petty morality. Aparadise where I get what I earn by the sweat on my brow. The man in the white house says that it belongs to the poor, the church says that it belongs to god, Soviet Russia says that it belongs to everyone. I deny this sentiment, but where in the world do I belong? There is no god, only man.
You belong at Ayn Rand Conventions.
Heh. Someone didn't get the reference. He's quoting Ryan's introduction to Rapture from BioShock.
Seriously, that's the part I love most about the setting - it's Objectivism gone feral. And now you have to clean up the mess.
So it's pretty much that Bob the Flower comic, only instead of tilling the soil you shoot things in the ruins of an underwater paradise?
I think the biggest issue I have with a Brave New World is that it is unrealistic in its outlook on progress and advancement. It presents a static world that hasn't really advanced in 600 years, and that's what makes it such an abhorrent society. I cannot imagine that people take issue with a culture that is open and free of taboos regarding sex. Rather, it seems like most people dislike the fact that the book presupposes this culture has decided to stop advancing and only engage in frivolious persuits.
Imagine if a Brave New World had been written in a utopian mirror of, for example, the 40k universe while keeping the same hedonistic culture. Humanity controls hundreds of millions of planets instead of just solitary earth and is spreading more every day. An Epsilon Minus is twice as intelligent and three times as strong as the average person today; an Alpha Plus can effortlessly memorize ten times the library of congress and is so stunningly beautiful as to make current hollywood actors look like Quasimodo. Art and Sciences put ours to shame, etc; instead of reserves for the savages they live in their own solar systems. All the while, each caste continues to get smarter/stronger with each generation born and arts/sciences continue to advance.
See, it doesn't sound so bad now does it? It's still a hedonistic society that has sex purely for pleasure and takes copius amounts of Soma to maintain permanent happiness. It doesn't change the fact that the highest goal of the society is to continually stay in a state where you never stop feeling pleasure. However, when you start adding to the fact that people and sciences are getting better with each generation, it goes from being a dystopia to a true utopia. I suppose you could argue that the basis of Huxley's arguement is that in a culture like this, advance will halt as a result of the culture. I don't think he goes within 1000 yards of adequately proving this though. Edit: And I'd also like to say that the whole of human history seems to disaggree with Huxley when it comes to happy people creating technological and artistic innovation.
tl;dr - the fact that the people of a Brave New World haven't fucking improved genetics/technology/spacetravel/art/anything in 600 years is what makes it a dystopia. It certainly isn't the fact that people live carefree lives while continually happy working in jobs they love and having tons of sex.
I don't think that the society's progress has any impact on whither it is a dystopia or not. In a bnw they've already cured all disease, created flying cars, and engineered all people to be beautiful and happy from birth, so the society has pretty much reached the limit of its technological evolution. Also space travel hasn't yet occured at the time the novel was written so you really can't blame Huxley for not including the colonization of other planets. But even if he did include everything that you have mentioned, it still wouldn't be a utopia because of its lack of the moral, emotional and artistic aspects of society which make us human.
Would you really miss those things if you never had any idea they existed?
Would you really miss those things if you never had any idea they existed?
You could say that about pretty much anything.
All right, what if suddenly the world became identical to Brave New World? Then would people miss those things? Maybe, just like people miss anything they once had that's gone now.
Would you really miss those things if you never had any idea they existed?
You could say that about pretty much anything.
I don't think that's true - remember, the strong case of Sapir-Whorf is disproven.
It is impossible to miss something you don't know exists. I can't miss indoor plumbing if I have never conceived of it.
All right, what if suddenly the world became identical to Brave New World? Then would people miss those things? Maybe, just like people miss anything they once had that's gone now.
You could also say this about pretty much any fictional world.
That's the trouble with the Brave New World idea. It's nearly impossible to concieve of it's start since it's whole system revolves around people simply not knowing anything else. It would have to be preceeded by a 1984 type knowledge purge to erase any record of another way of living. Also once it starts it's impossible to concieve of it ever changing back since people are programmed to perpetuate the system forever.
You know, I have no problem at all with a hedonistic lifestyle involving copious amounts of promiscuous sex and mind-altering drug use. In fact, that sounds pretty damn good to me.
I do have a problem with the implication in BNW that these things are diametrically opposed to artistic creation or other meaningful pursuits.
You sound like you think BNW is written from some puritanistic point of view; I think it's just being realistic. There were both in Huxley's time and today plenty of people with nigh-unlimited access to sex and drugs, and the money to mitigate most of the unpleasant consequences, and yet they don't strike me as the happiest or most fulfilled people in the world.
I know Huxley wasn't a straightedge puritan.
What I'm saying is that whether your life is happy, meaningful, or hedonistic are three different axes each with their own set of poles. They are inter-related, but not deterministically so. It's possible to have any combination of the above, so to say "I'd rather engage in meaningful pursuits than fleeting physical pleasures" is to gore oneself on the horns of a false dilemma.
I think Huxley probably understood that this was a false dilemma, but this understanding was not particularly well-communicated in BNW.
The sex and drugs stuff in BNW isn't purtaniacal. It's about the government using entertainment as a method of distraction. It's about them taking things that mke us most human and using them to turn us into robots.
tl;dr - the fact that the people of a Brave New World haven't fucking improved genetics/technology/spacetravel/art/anything in 600 years is what makes it a dystopia. It certainly isn't the fact that people live carefree lives while continually happy working in jobs they love and having tons of sex.
The stasis that technology is locked into is deliberate. Anything threatening stability has been eliminated. Basically the only advances that are made are ones that ensure greater stability.
That's the trouble with the Brave New World idea. It's nearly impossible to conceive of its start since its whole system revolves around people simply not knowing anything else. It would have to be preceded by a 1984 type knowledge purge to erase any record of another way of living. Also once it starts it's impossible to conceive of it ever changing back since people are programmed to perpetuate the system forever.
This is exactly what happened. No one knows any history from before the time of Ford. Huxley was inspired by Ford's famous quote, "History is bunk."
forbis316 on
0
HarrierThe Star Spangled ManRegistered Userregular
I think the biggest issue I have with a Brave New World is that it is unrealistic in its outlook on progress and advancement. It presents a static world that hasn't really advanced in 600 years, and that's what makes it such an abhorrent society. I cannot imagine that people take issue with a culture that is open and free of taboos regarding sex. Rather, it seems like most people dislike the fact that the book presupposes this culture has decided to stop advancing and only engage in frivolious persuits.
Imagine if a Brave New World had been written in a utopian mirror of, for example, the 40k universe while keeping the same hedonistic culture. Humanity controls hundreds of millions of planets instead of just solitary earth and is spreading more every day. An Epsilon Minus is twice as intelligent and three times as strong as the average person today; an Alpha Plus can effortlessly memorize ten times the library of congress and is so stunningly beautiful as to make current hollywood actors look like Quasimodo. Art and Sciences put ours to shame, etc; instead of reserves for the savages they live in their own solar systems. All the while, each caste continues to get smarter/stronger with each generation born and arts/sciences continue to advance.
See, it doesn't sound so bad now does it? It's still a hedonistic society that has sex purely for pleasure and takes copius amounts of Soma to maintain permanent happiness. It doesn't change the fact that the highest goal of the society is to continually stay in a state where you never stop feeling pleasure. However, when you start adding to the fact that people and sciences are getting better with each generation, it goes from being a dystopia to a true utopia. I suppose you could argue that the basis of Huxley's arguement is that in a culture like this, advance will halt as a result of the culture. I don't think he goes within 1000 yards of adequately proving this though. Edit: And I'd also like to say that the whole of human history seems to disaggree with Huxley when it comes to happy people creating technological and artistic innovation.
tl;dr - the fact that the people of a Brave New World haven't fucking improved genetics/technology/spacetravel/art/anything in 600 years is what makes it a dystopia. It certainly isn't the fact that people live carefree lives while continually happy working in jobs they love and having tons of sex.
I don't think that the society's progress has any impact on whither it is a dystopia or not. In a bnw they've already cured all disease, created flying cars, and engineered all people to be beautiful and happy from birth, so the society has pretty much reached the limit of its technological evolution. Also space travel hadn't yet occurred at the time the novel was written so you really can't blame Huxley for not including the colonization of other planets. But even if he did include everything that you have mentioned, it still wouldn't be a utopia because of its lack of the moral, emotional and artistic aspects of society which make us human.
Would you really miss those things if you never had any idea they existed?
I wasn't arguing that I would miss them. Of course one can't miss something if they have no concept of it ever existing, but at the same time we (the readers) can judge the world based on the fact that we are aware of the emotions that the world is missing. This is why I believe that its difficult for one to catagorize bnw as either utopian or dystopian because the citizens in the novel are happy but their lives lack any sort of depth or spirtual fillment.
I think the biggest issue I have with a Brave New World is that it is unrealistic in its outlook on progress and advancement. It presents a static world that hasn't really advanced in 600 years, and that's what makes it such an abhorrent society. I cannot imagine that people take issue with a culture that is open and free of taboos regarding sex. Rather, it seems like most people dislike the fact that the book presupposes this culture has decided to stop advancing and only engage in frivolious persuits.
Imagine if a Brave New World had been written in a utopian mirror of, for example, the 40k universe while keeping the same hedonistic culture. Humanity controls hundreds of millions of planets instead of just solitary earth and is spreading more every day. An Epsilon Minus is twice as intelligent and three times as strong as the average person today; an Alpha Plus can effortlessly memorize ten times the library of congress and is so stunningly beautiful as to make current hollywood actors look like Quasimodo. Art and Sciences put ours to shame, etc; instead of reserves for the savages they live in their own solar systems. All the while, each caste continues to get smarter/stronger with each generation born and arts/sciences continue to advance.
See, it doesn't sound so bad now does it? It's still a hedonistic society that has sex purely for pleasure and takes copius amounts of Soma to maintain permanent happiness. It doesn't change the fact that the highest goal of the society is to continually stay in a state where you never stop feeling pleasure. However, when you start adding to the fact that people and sciences are getting better with each generation, it goes from being a dystopia to a true utopia. I suppose you could argue that the basis of Huxley's arguement is that in a culture like this, advance will halt as a result of the culture. I don't think he goes within 1000 yards of adequately proving this though. Edit: And I'd also like to say that the whole of human history seems to disaggree with Huxley when it comes to happy people creating technological and artistic innovation.
tl;dr - the fact that the people of a Brave New World haven't fucking improved genetics/technology/spacetravel/art/anything in 600 years is what makes it a dystopia. It certainly isn't the fact that people live carefree lives while continually happy working in jobs they love and having tons of sex.
I don't think that the society's progress has any impact on whither it is a dystopia or not. In a bnw they've already cured all disease, created flying cars, and engineered all people to be beautiful and happy from birth, so the society has pretty much reached the limit of its technological evolution. Also space travel hadn't yet occurred at the time the novel was written so you really can't blame Huxley for not including the colonization of other planets. But even if he did include everything that you have mentioned, it still wouldn't be a utopia because of its lack of the moral, emotional and artistic aspects of society which make us human.
Would you really miss those things if you never had any idea they existed?
I wasn't arguing that I would miss them. Of course one can't miss something if they have no concept of it ever existing, but at the same time we (the readers) can judge the world based on the fact that we are aware of the emotions that the world is missing. This is why I believe that its difficult for one to catagorize bnw as either utopian or dystopian because the citizens in the novel are happy but their lives lack any sort of depth or spirtual fillment.
This was exactly the role the character of The Savage fulfilled in bnw. He was horrified by bnw's lack of culture because he knew of Shakespeare and culture, he was disgusted with technological pragmatism because he had known of beauty in nature. With that being said, hell yes I would live trade all that this world presents, good and bad, for the utopia of Brave New World. I'm sick of hate, hurt, and fear. I'm ready for my sex, drugs, and rock and roll.
lunasea on
0
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
edited August 2007
More like sex, drugs, and "The Girl from Ipanema" over and over until you die.
Jacobkosh on
0
FandyienBut Otto, what about us? Registered Userregular
Frankly, I find the entire idea pretty appealing. Living life in a blissful, sex-filled stupor doesn't sound so bad to me.
Consistent, uninterrupted pleasure is not the same thing as happiness.
Maybe not, but it helps!
Precisely. I mean, an Alpha Plus is perfectly capable of many of the pursuits that we today consider intellectual; they have access to advanced technology, are neurogically superior to people today, and are free to generate a certain amount of indepent ideas and art.
And if they choose not to, a state of constant happiness - artificial, drug induced happiness, though the distinction probably wouldn't exist to a person who had been properly indoctrinated - is provided for them by the government. Philosophically, I find the idea mildly repulsive in a lot of ways, but from a practical, personal standpoint, it's incredibly appealing.
Well, it looks like I should read some Culture novels.
Post-scarcity would be fun.
@jacobkosh: The Girl from Ipanema is now looping in my mind. I hate you.
First step towards a post-scarcity society would be the development of insanely cheap energy.
Solar cells look to be the right direction right now.
A 42.8 percent efficiency cell is in existence, but it's currently being co-opted by the US military to make their war machine more efficient.
Kind of disappointing if you ask me, but an amazing step forwards towards a technological Utopia. A high power solar cell that can pay for itself and supply enough power to construct more is an incredibly disruptive technology.
Once you've got a near infinite energy economy, you're more than halfway there.
Money = Power
What happens to that equation when Power = Infinite?
Well, it looks like I should read some Culture novels.
Post-scarcity would be fun.
@jacobkosh: The Girl from Ipanema is now looping in my mind. I hate you.
First step towards a post-scarcity society would be the development of insanely cheap energy.
Solar cells look to be the right direction right now.
A 42.8 percent efficiency cell is in existence, but it's currently being co-opted by the US military to make their war machine more efficient.
Kind of disappointing if you ask me, but an amazing step forwards towards a technological Utopia. A high power solar cell that can pay for itself and supply enough power to construct more is an incredibly disruptive technology.
Once you've got a near infinite energy economy, you're more than halfway there.
Money = Power
What happens to that equation when Power = Infinite?
Yeah, you're an idiot. The rule with solar cells is everytime some new milestone was reached they did it by rubbing up the exotic materials tree and seeing what falls out. Which is fine when you have hundreds of thousands of dollars to throw at this one solar cell.
EDIT: Also in case you hadn't noticed, there's no money in solar power for anyone else to bother with it, and that cell was developed precisely because the US military are one of the few people who have genuine needs for things like it. See, this sort of bullshit is why no one actually cares what the left have to say when they're trying to say something important.
Actually, they did it through multipanel cells and spectral splitting. High, medium and low frequency cells each absorbing their own frequency directly rather than stacking the elements and absorbing them through successive layers. They're calling it a 'breakthrough design paradigm' and the first generation of solar cells that really works. Completely DARPA funded, but built by about a dozen universitys and corporations spread out over the States and (gasp?) Australia. %2 increase over the last milestone, but a 30% total increase over the previous multigap cell design.
Of course, you could just jump to the conclusion that it's some sort of super expensive exotic process and it's complete and utter bullshit which is meaningless... or you could remember the original intent of this thread which is in reference to post-scarcity societies and had nothing to do with your political opinions or random rantings.
Posts
Yes. Yes you do.
Personally, I also enjoyed Fahrenheit 451, but that's not related beyond information control.
And I'm not convinced that BNW's society would have to halt art and deeper thought. Clearly they had a solid grasp of genetics and psychology, however blunt.
I thought that the point of the book was that although they engaged in these activities, that it was kind of Joyless.
You get on that and I'll concentrate on the sex and drugs - we can get both done at once.
You sound like you think BNW is written from some puritanistic point of view; I think it's just being realistic. There were both in Huxley's time and today plenty of people with nigh-unlimited access to sex and drugs, and the money to mitigate most of the unpleasant consequences, and yet they don't strike me as the happiest or most fulfilled people in the world.
Imagine if a Brave New World had been written in a utopian mirror of, for example, the 40k universe while keeping the same hedonistic culture. Humanity controls hundreds of millions of planets instead of just solitary earth and is spreading more every day. An Epsilon Minus is twice as intelligent and three times as strong as the average person today; an Alpha Plus can effortlessly memorize ten times the library of congress and is so stunningly beautiful as to make current hollywood actors look like Quasimodo. Art and Sciences put ours to shame, etc; instead of reserves for the savages they live in their own solar systems. All the while, each caste continues to get smarter/stronger with each generation born and arts/sciences continue to advance.
See, it doesn't sound so bad now does it? It's still a hedonistic society that has sex purely for pleasure and takes copius amounts of Soma to maintain permanent happiness. It doesn't change the fact that the highest goal of the society is to continually stay in a state where you never stop feeling pleasure. However, when you start adding to the fact that people and sciences are getting better with each generation, it goes from being a dystopia to a true utopia. I suppose you could argue that the basis of Huxley's arguement is that in a culture like this, advance will halt as a result of the culture. I don't think he goes within 1000 yards of adequately proving this though. Edit: And I'd also like to say that the whole of human history seems to disaggree with Huxley when it comes to happy people creating technological and artistic innovation.
tl;dr - the fact that the people of a Brave New World haven't fucking improved genetics/technology/spacetravel/art/anything in 600 years is what makes it a dystopia. It certainly isn't the fact that people live carefree lives while continually happy working in jobs they love and having tons of sex.
That's because most drug-users are already screwed up to the point that even mind altering drugs can't provide lasting comfort. One of my teachers in high school made the statement that the more advanced a society becomes, the more stressful life in that society becomes. Depression is a result of modern society.
Personally, the society depicted in Brave New World seems to be the ultimate in freedom. You have the free time to do whatever you want: fly a plane, go on vacation, go to the movies, take some soma, have freaky-deaky sex, etc. All without the stress of family problems, trying to pay the bills, religious dogma, etc...
So what if you're programmed to enjoy that life? So what if it isn't truly freedom? Are we so free right now? As unsatisfactory as it is to some of you, the argument "You wouldn't care if you were in that society" seems adequate to me.
I don't think that the society's progress has any impact on whither it is a dystopia or not. In a bnw they've already cured all disease, created flying cars, and engineered all people to be beautiful and happy from birth, so the society has pretty much reached the limit of its technological evolution. Also space travel hasn't yet occured at the time the novel was written so you really can't blame Huxley for not including the colonization of other planets. But even if he did include everything that you have mentioned, it still wouldn't be a utopia because of its lack of the moral, emotional and artistic aspects of society which make us human.
Heh. Someone didn't get the reference. He's quoting Ryan's introduction to Rapture from BioShock.
Seriously, that's the part I love most about the setting - it's Objectivism gone feral. And now you have to clean up the mess.
So it's pretty much that Bob the Flower comic, only instead of tilling the soil you shoot things in the ruins of an underwater paradise?
Sold!
Would you really miss those things if you never had any idea they existed?
I don't think that's true - remember, the strong case of Sapir-Whorf is disproven.
All right, what if suddenly the world became identical to Brave New World? Then would people miss those things? Maybe, just like people miss anything they once had that's gone now.
It is impossible to miss something you don't know exists. I can't miss indoor plumbing if I have never conceived of it.
You could also say this about pretty much any fictional world.
I know Huxley wasn't a straightedge puritan.
What I'm saying is that whether your life is happy, meaningful, or hedonistic are three different axes each with their own set of poles. They are inter-related, but not deterministically so. It's possible to have any combination of the above, so to say "I'd rather engage in meaningful pursuits than fleeting physical pleasures" is to gore oneself on the horns of a false dilemma.
I think Huxley probably understood that this was a false dilemma, but this understanding was not particularly well-communicated in BNW.
Oh really?
Do you know most drug-users? Or is this simply a generalization pulled out of thin air?
Have you never discovered something new only to realize that your life had been incomplete without it all along?
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
The stasis that technology is locked into is deliberate. Anything threatening stability has been eliminated. Basically the only advances that are made are ones that ensure greater stability.
This is exactly what happened. No one knows any history from before the time of Ford. Huxley was inspired by Ford's famous quote, "History is bunk."
Maybe not, but it helps!
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Gotta mix it up and keep it interesting or people will get bored.
I wasn't arguing that I would miss them. Of course one can't miss something if they have no concept of it ever existing, but at the same time we (the readers) can judge the world based on the fact that we are aware of the emotions that the world is missing. This is why I believe that its difficult for one to catagorize bnw as either utopian or dystopian because the citizens in the novel are happy but their lives lack any sort of depth or spirtual fillment.
This was exactly the role the character of The Savage fulfilled in bnw. He was horrified by bnw's lack of culture because he knew of Shakespeare and culture, he was disgusted with technological pragmatism because he had known of beauty in nature. With that being said, hell yes I would live trade all that this world presents, good and bad, for the utopia of Brave New World. I'm sick of hate, hurt, and fear. I'm ready for my sex, drugs, and rock and roll.
Precisely. I mean, an Alpha Plus is perfectly capable of many of the pursuits that we today consider intellectual; they have access to advanced technology, are neurogically superior to people today, and are free to generate a certain amount of indepent ideas and art.
And if they choose not to, a state of constant happiness - artificial, drug induced happiness, though the distinction probably wouldn't exist to a person who had been properly indoctrinated - is provided for them by the government. Philosophically, I find the idea mildly repulsive in a lot of ways, but from a practical, personal standpoint, it's incredibly appealing.
I should really read BNW some day.
I also think any post-scarcity post-mortality world would look more or less like the Culture.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Post-scarcity would be fun.
@jacobkosh: The Girl from Ipanema is now looping in my mind. I hate you.
First step towards a post-scarcity society would be the development of insanely cheap energy.
Solar cells look to be the right direction right now.
A 42.8 percent efficiency cell is in existence, but it's currently being co-opted by the US military to make their war machine more efficient.
Kind of disappointing if you ask me, but an amazing step forwards towards a technological Utopia. A high power solar cell that can pay for itself and supply enough power to construct more is an incredibly disruptive technology.
Once you've got a near infinite energy economy, you're more than halfway there.
Money = Power
What happens to that equation when Power = Infinite?
RE: the topic:
I could never be happy in a society where I did not have an impact on it's course or a possibility of impacting the populace.
Actually, they did it through multipanel cells and spectral splitting. High, medium and low frequency cells each absorbing their own frequency directly rather than stacking the elements and absorbing them through successive layers. They're calling it a 'breakthrough design paradigm' and the first generation of solar cells that really works. Completely DARPA funded, but built by about a dozen universitys and corporations spread out over the States and (gasp?) Australia. %2 increase over the last milestone, but a 30% total increase over the previous multigap cell design.
Of course, you could just jump to the conclusion that it's some sort of super expensive exotic process and it's complete and utter bullshit which is meaningless... or you could remember the original intent of this thread which is in reference to post-scarcity societies and had nothing to do with your political opinions or random rantings.
You mean like today's society?