10 ms·

I never liked the formulation that utopia is not worth it because people lack the creativity to imagine what could be done for fun in it. It's like we've never

I never liked the formulation that utopia is not worth it because people lack the creativity to imagine what could be done for fun in it. It's like we've never tried but hey here's an explanation as to why you shouldn't want it! It should really not be a surprise that imagination is lacking here because for a lot of people, happiness is just defined as having things other people don't have, because that's simply how we came out to be wired and because we continue to live in a world that follows those principles. Until those principles have been modified, you have no idea what a utopia is and would look like. This has never, ever, been the case, not in any society you can think of. You might think you live in some super nice societies but you have never escaped those principles. Utopia isn't about making people not have toothaches or whatever anymore. That's not the point. Utopia is about letting people live in a manner that they would want, not in the manner, currently, prescribed by the law of the powerful and the powerless. But if you really think that if suddenly your problems being solved, you'd find nothing to do, you are not thinking hard enough, and you are already too wrapped up in the thinking of having things other people don't have. It's a mindset problem of people born into a world working on that principle and it's a hard one to rewrite.

n4r9 8y ago
> Utopia is about letting people live in a manner that they would want One of the lessons I learnt from Huxley's Brave New World is that this phrasing is very ambiguous and the meaning of utopia is more complicated, if the word is indeed meaningful. The people in BNW live in the manner that they desire, but not many would call it a utopia. Sure, those desires themselves are the result of genetic and environmental conditioning, but so are ours! It seems to me that Huxley is saying that some element of struggle and overcoming of adversity is necessary for human flourishing.
- ConceptJunkie 8y ago
  Between Huxley ("Brave New World") and Orwell ("1984"), I think Huxley saw the future more accurately, although Orwell has amazing insights. I actually thought that "Wall-E" was a good, and particularly accessible, commentary on utopia. Without the need to strive, we might all just turn into human potatoes. I'm not far from that now, which is pretty frightening.
  - yojex 8y ago
    I just want to mention here for those who haven't heard of it: Huxley's "Island" explores the complement to the ideas presented in "Brave New World", i.e. it is an imagining of utopia. I highly recommend it.
  - int_19h 8y ago
    Orwell was writing about an authoritarian socialist society devolving into fascism. Huxley is less clear, but on the whole it looks much closer to a capitalist society. So one could argue that they represent different future paths - mutually exclusive, but which one is more likely than the other depends on where the wind blows at any given moment. Orwell had the advantage of seeing what Stalinist ideology is like first hand, as a member of POUM in Spain, so that's where his focus was. We live in a world that's dominated by capitalist countries, so Huxley's vision seems more likely to us. But it can all change.
- EthanHeilman 8y ago
  Dystopia's are often a form of Utopia. Thomas More's original Utopia is not necessary a perfect society, but a designed society. I would classify BNW as a Utopia even though it is a cautionary tale.
- jokoon 8y ago
  > some element of struggle and overcoming of adversity is necessary for human flourishing This sounds like "what doesn't kill me makes me stronger" or "no pain no gain". I know there needs to be work to make things better, and to come up with solutions that will always incur adaptation, but I don't see how it necessarily involves struggle and difficulty. Difficulty is not the goal, but we should not stop at difficulty if the result is worth it.
- jancsika 8y ago
  > The people in BNW live in the manner that they desire, but not many would call it a utopia. That's probably because Huxley implies an overarching force or process that is rather directly controlling the population. Also-- like 1984-- this process is strongly implied to be inescapable. Those aspects of those books scare the hell out of young people. But if you remove those aspects, I'm not sure many people would find anything wrong with getting high and dancing to algorithmically generated music when they feel the urge.
stcredzero 8y ago
It should really not be a surprise that imagination is lacking here because for a lot of people, happiness is just defined as having things other people don't have The psychological research suggests that this is how people are wired up. Just as we're wired up to consume fat and sugar whenever we come across it, we're basically wired up to start marauding our neighbors if they're way richer than we are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3XYHPAwBzE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3XYHPAwBzE
- 0x2a 8y ago
  Do you have a source aside from Jordan Peterson?
  - stcredzero 8y ago
    Look up his. He's a widely cited psychological researcher, and regarded as an authority by other researchers. His lectures like this one are based on specific research.
    - cultus 8y ago
      He is quite far outside of the psychological mainstream. Many of the ideas in his books qualify as pseudoscience. He has only become popular because he says what far right individuals want to hear. It is all banal well-trodden ideas dressed up.
      - EdSharkey 8y ago
        Yes, JBP does have quite a persuasive song and dance that bedevils his detractors - he is a slippery one! Even so, his research is widely cited as GP stated: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=wL1F22UAAAAJ&hl=en https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=wL1F22UAAAAJ&hl=en It is an inconvenient fact that scientific and scholarly study does occur whose conclusions will not agree with our deeply-held ideologies. Just take it all in and try not to take any offense when you get rude surprises. If your preconceived notions are any good, they'll survive and you can save the cheap potshots.
dclowd9901 8y ago
I've always thought of Utopia being peace insofar as a society that cannot harm an individual, and cannot allow individuals to harm other individuals, which I suppose aligns pretty closely to Orwell's notion of "brotherhood". Such simple principles would solve the issues of: * racism * homophobia * moral indignation * xenophobia * extreme economic disparity, such that those with means are actively holding down or holding back those without * lack of access to health services If we solve all of those things, we'll still have problems. We'll still have people disagreeing, people fighting. People struggling. What we might also have, however, is the desire to also work with others, rather than go to our deaths over issues because of such potent underlying bitterness. The human race is flawed enough as it is. We don't need manifest disagreements spawned by religion or dogma, for instance, to fuel the flames.
- stcredzero 8y ago
  moral indignation What if the vast majority of society wants to harm the individual, saying that, "you can't tolerate the intolerant?" In recent years, that seems to me to be a doublethink way of justifying intolerance in the name of intolerance. extreme economic disparity, such that those with means are actively holding down or holding back those without Reality is rarely black and white, 0 or 1. Very often, people using some unfair non-meritocratic means to preserve their position are also creating more wealth. Also, exactly what constitutes "unfair non-meritocratic means" is often up for debate. The human race is flawed enough as it is. We don't need manifest disagreements spawned by religion or dogma, for instance, to fuel the flames. Angry adherence to dogma is a kind of human flaw! It seems that almost anyone can convince themselves they're fighting for a good cause, as they are oppressing or even murdering people. The most used emotional-descriptive word used during the Nuremberg rallies was, "Love." If you want to judge intolerance, don't pay attention to the dogma. Note who is hating whom, and who is using violence on whom.
psandersen 8y ago
This is a great comment, and I just wanted to add that imagining what a fictional high tech utopia would look like was what inspired Iain M. Banks to write the culture series. For anyone interested in tech and the far future its a must read.
- stcredzero 8y ago
  But even there, there is conflict, unrequited desire, and death. Even among beings we could regard as godlike in comparison to ourselves. Even among super-people who lack for nothing, who can even choose genders, and who can live hundreds of years or many millennia if so chosen.
  - psandersen 8y ago
    Absolutely, its a novel and there are around 50 trillion 'baseline' humans not that different from us. Banks himself has said he has focused on writing more about people who are edge cases or less normal in the culture to keep things interesting, and at that scale there will be a lot of people at the tale ends of the distribution. IMHO the culture novel is as close to a far out tech utopia as you can write without making humanity completely unrecognizable while creating interesting stories that have general scifi appeal. It deliberately breaks tropes such as the machines having more personality than the humans and adds a good dose of British humor. I see it as inspiration for what our AI & other tech could lead to, a bit of a thought experiment and less as a verbatim ideal.
irrational 8y ago
>Utopia is about letting people live in a manner that they would want, not in the manner, currently, prescribed by the law. This is so unrealistic. If the manner I want to live is hunting and killing other people for sport, but the only thing restraining me right now is the law (such an inconvenient thing is the law), then most people would say laws are preferable to utopia. Even with laws people do crazy hurtful things, I can't even imagine what things would be like if there were not laws and the threat of punishment.

n4r9 8y ago

> Utopia is about letting people live in a manner that they would want One of the lessons I learnt from Huxley's Brave New World is that this phrasing is very ambiguous and the meaning of utopia is more complicated, if the word is indeed meaningful. The people in BNW live in the manner that they desire, but not many would call it a utopia. Sure, those desires themselves are the result of genetic and environmental conditioning, but so are ours! It seems to me that Huxley is saying that some element of struggle and overcoming of adversity is necessary for human flourishing.

ConceptJunkie 8y ago
Between Huxley ("Brave New World") and Orwell ("1984"), I think Huxley saw the future more accurately, although Orwell has amazing insights. I actually thought that "Wall-E" was a good, and particularly accessible, commentary on utopia. Without the need to strive, we might all just turn into human potatoes. I'm not far from that now, which is pretty frightening.
- yojex 8y ago
  I just want to mention here for those who haven't heard of it: Huxley's "Island" explores the complement to the ideas presented in "Brave New World", i.e. it is an imagining of utopia. I highly recommend it.
- int_19h 8y ago
  Orwell was writing about an authoritarian socialist society devolving into fascism. Huxley is less clear, but on the whole it looks much closer to a capitalist society. So one could argue that they represent different future paths - mutually exclusive, but which one is more likely than the other depends on where the wind blows at any given moment. Orwell had the advantage of seeing what Stalinist ideology is like first hand, as a member of POUM in Spain, so that's where his focus was. We live in a world that's dominated by capitalist countries, so Huxley's vision seems more likely to us. But it can all change.
EthanHeilman 8y ago
Dystopia's are often a form of Utopia. Thomas More's original Utopia is not necessary a perfect society, but a designed society. I would classify BNW as a Utopia even though it is a cautionary tale.
jokoon 8y ago
> some element of struggle and overcoming of adversity is necessary for human flourishing This sounds like "what doesn't kill me makes me stronger" or "no pain no gain". I know there needs to be work to make things better, and to come up with solutions that will always incur adaptation, but I don't see how it necessarily involves struggle and difficulty. Difficulty is not the goal, but we should not stop at difficulty if the result is worth it.
jancsika 8y ago
> The people in BNW live in the manner that they desire, but not many would call it a utopia. That's probably because Huxley implies an overarching force or process that is rather directly controlling the population. Also-- like 1984-- this process is strongly implied to be inescapable. Those aspects of those books scare the hell out of young people. But if you remove those aspects, I'm not sure many people would find anything wrong with getting high and dancing to algorithmically generated music when they feel the urge.

stcredzero 8y ago

It should really not be a surprise that imagination is lacking here because for a lot of people, happiness is just defined as having things other people don't have The psychological research suggests that this is how people are wired up. Just as we're wired up to consume fat and sugar whenever we come across it, we're basically wired up to start marauding our neighbors if they're way richer than we are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3XYHPAwBzE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3XYHPAwBzE

0x2a 8y ago
Do you have a source aside from Jordan Peterson?
- stcredzero 8y ago
  Look up his. He's a widely cited psychological researcher, and regarded as an authority by other researchers. His lectures like this one are based on specific research.
  - cultus 8y ago
    He is quite far outside of the psychological mainstream. Many of the ideas in his books qualify as pseudoscience. He has only become popular because he says what far right individuals want to hear. It is all banal well-trodden ideas dressed up.
    - EdSharkey 8y ago
      Yes, JBP does have quite a persuasive song and dance that bedevils his detractors - he is a slippery one! Even so, his research is widely cited as GP stated: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=wL1F22UAAAAJ&hl=en https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=wL1F22UAAAAJ&hl=en It is an inconvenient fact that scientific and scholarly study does occur whose conclusions will not agree with our deeply-held ideologies. Just take it all in and try not to take any offense when you get rude surprises. If your preconceived notions are any good, they'll survive and you can save the cheap potshots.

dclowd9901 8y ago

I've always thought of Utopia being peace insofar as a society that cannot harm an individual, and cannot allow individuals to harm other individuals, which I suppose aligns pretty closely to Orwell's notion of "brotherhood". Such simple principles would solve the issues of: * racism * homophobia * moral indignation * xenophobia * extreme economic disparity, such that those with means are actively holding down or holding back those without * lack of access to health services If we solve all of those things, we'll still have problems. We'll still have people disagreeing, people fighting. People struggling. What we might also have, however, is the desire to also work with others, rather than go to our deaths over issues because of such potent underlying bitterness. The human race is flawed enough as it is. We don't need manifest disagreements spawned by religion or dogma, for instance, to fuel the flames.

stcredzero 8y ago
moral indignation What if the vast majority of society wants to harm the individual, saying that, "you can't tolerate the intolerant?" In recent years, that seems to me to be a doublethink way of justifying intolerance in the name of intolerance. extreme economic disparity, such that those with means are actively holding down or holding back those without Reality is rarely black and white, 0 or 1. Very often, people using some unfair non-meritocratic means to preserve their position are also creating more wealth. Also, exactly what constitutes "unfair non-meritocratic means" is often up for debate. The human race is flawed enough as it is. We don't need manifest disagreements spawned by religion or dogma, for instance, to fuel the flames. Angry adherence to dogma is a kind of human flaw! It seems that almost anyone can convince themselves they're fighting for a good cause, as they are oppressing or even murdering people. The most used emotional-descriptive word used during the Nuremberg rallies was, "Love." If you want to judge intolerance, don't pay attention to the dogma. Note who is hating whom, and who is using violence on whom.

psandersen 8y ago

This is a great comment, and I just wanted to add that imagining what a fictional high tech utopia would look like was what inspired Iain M. Banks to write the culture series. For anyone interested in tech and the far future its a must read.

stcredzero 8y ago
But even there, there is conflict, unrequited desire, and death. Even among beings we could regard as godlike in comparison to ourselves. Even among super-people who lack for nothing, who can even choose genders, and who can live hundreds of years or many millennia if so chosen.
- psandersen 8y ago
  Absolutely, its a novel and there are around 50 trillion 'baseline' humans not that different from us. Banks himself has said he has focused on writing more about people who are edge cases or less normal in the culture to keep things interesting, and at that scale there will be a lot of people at the tale ends of the distribution. IMHO the culture novel is as close to a far out tech utopia as you can write without making humanity completely unrecognizable while creating interesting stories that have general scifi appeal. It deliberately breaks tropes such as the machines having more personality than the humans and adds a good dose of British humor. I see it as inspiration for what our AI & other tech could lead to, a bit of a thought experiment and less as a verbatim ideal.

irrational 8y ago

>Utopia is about letting people live in a manner that they would want, not in the manner, currently, prescribed by the law. This is so unrealistic. If the manner I want to live is hunting and killing other people for sport, but the only thing restraining me right now is the law (such an inconvenient thing is the law), then most people would say laws are preferable to utopia. Even with laws people do crazy hurtful things, I can't even imagine what things would be like if there were not laws and the threat of punishment.