Do you know we’re all just a bunch of junkies? Everyone of us. Not a single human being has existed who is an exception. Why? Because our brains work under the influence of chemicals like adrenaline, dopamine and seratonin. Without ‘drugs’ like these, we’d be extremely logical computers.
There are so many sources of these chemicals: worship, food, sex, love, adventure sports, classical music, playing video games also does the same. Why can’t life be about unrestricted enjoyment of these things that pump those chemicals into our brains?
Actually we could take it a step further. Why not just take in pure and concentrated dopamine? Or at the very least put everyone on Prozac? But does this mean we remove the taboo on drugs and go for a free-for-all? Drugs like ecstacy, dope and coke ultimately increase the amount of dopamine in our heads - isn’t that what most people’s lives are about? To enjoy as much as possible? “The pursuit of Happiness”?
I know the obvious answer is - but those drugs are dangerous. They’re addictive and the side effects are destructive. What if they weren’t?
Would you do it? Take drugs to be happy? If there was a drug that could allow you to be happy instantaneously and achieve the level of pleasure that people get from chocolate after sex? Most people would say no and their answer would either be something about being too noble to resort to such “low” measures, and that there shouldn’t be any shortcuts in life, and there are “always consequences”. Well, we take drugs to heal our bodies. Aren’t those shortcuts? We take coffee (which has another drug - caffeine) just for headaches and other trivial reasons like needing to focus on work or studying for an exam all night.
You can justify Caffeine, but you cannot justify ecstasy if it came with no strings attached?
In the book “The Happiness hypothesis” Johnathan Hadt asks his students - what if a brother and a sister decide to try making love, while on birth control. Is there something wrong with that?
Most people will come up with all kinds of responses to why that is just wrong - despite the fact that genetic dilution isn’t happening due to no progeny being created. Where are these reasons coming from and why?
People are born with a set of emotions that go back to caveman times. Disgust is one of them. Its something seen even in other animals - ever see an elephant come across a dead body?
Why is ‘disgust’ there? Most vegetarians are ‘disgusted’ with even the sight or smell of meat. And then there are the majority of the world, who feast on meat and cannot live without it being a part of every meal. Some of these carnivores ironically were born vegetarians. And even more funny are those who go from being carnivores to vegetarians. But the last category do it seldom out of disgust - unless they’ve stepped into a meat factory. What function does disgust play?
I’m going to take a step back here and look at the whole picture:
1) We’re a collective of machines controlled by computers
2) There’s either a higher intelligence - or just a series of scientific laws governing the universe (whichever it is, let’s call this entity ‘Max’ and it could be just a framework of science and math)
3) ‘Max’ is pushing everything in a certain direction. The big bang caused the universe to form in a distinct way based on the laws of physics, chemistry and math - and caused us to form from evolution
4) If ‘Max’ had a purpose of doing so, it’d try and design the project so that it’d succeed in the equations of probability
5) ‘Max’ has embedded in us also elements of those design to help us succeed. Things like love, fear, disgust, anger… (Max - as god, or as evolution has definitely put them there)
6) Why?
Would Max have brought us this far to be in a perpetual state of dopamine induced high?
That’s a pretty damn powerful question. The answer is obviously a no, because we didn’t need to get to the phase we are at if that was the goal. It sort of negates the idea that we’re here for “the pursuit of happiness”. But then is happiness the same as a dopamine induced high? Too hard to say. Regardless, man is going at spectacular speeds to progress at science. He’s constantly bettering himself. It’s safe to say, despite the odds of disease, global warming, and everything else - man is probably going to make it to “star trek” level growth. Was that the purpose? Or is our purpose even beyond that?
What if our purpose hasn’t been revealed to us yet? What if only when we reach a certain point of evolution, is our real purpose revealed to us?
OK. But what now? There are billions of people who live today who have nothing to do with that purpose, or at least cannot see it - even if the hypothesis is correct. What do they do? As far as they are concerned, they want to live a selfish life in the “pursuit of happiness”. Should they?
Billions have come and billions have gone from this earth. Did all of them help in furthering the progress of mankind? The question is like asking do you need every single cell in your body? Did you really need those nails on your fingertips? No. Life doesn’t work in absolute perfection. It works with risks and probabilities and majorities and minorities. Without the majority of a population that was working like normal, at jobs that in some small way help an economies that supports countries, which each have universities, that house the minority of the population - research scientists who further mankind’s knowledge - we wouldn’t be going forward. Everyone’s a cog in a machine.
Each cog needs to be well oiled and serviced to work well. Which is probably why the pursuit of happiness is relevant. However for each cog to continue working without getting too oily and too serviced, it needs to draw a line - at what exactly it does to continue to be in working condition. Hence the religion, love, disgust, anger, fear, hatred… and the inner workings behind those being adrenaline, dopamine, serotonin.
But each person must draw the line between how much is optimal and how much is excess when it comes to injection of dopamine into their computers. For optimal performance.
