Would You Eliminate All Suffering in the World at the Cost of All the Happiness in the World?

Sounds bad

Sure. Being content is underrated.

Then there's no point to end suffering. I wanna be happy, being happy is what drives people to live. Some sort of satisfsction or something. If there isn't that then a lot more people would probably kill themselves wondering what their purpose of living is for if they don't get any joy out of it.

Sounds like the society in Lois Lowry's "The Giver"

And honestly, I still prefer the world today over that dystopian society.

@spareheadone: @ifdcruledtheworld: @batmanplusjay: @johncena69swag

The movie Equilibrium is based on this.

In the movie citizens take daily injections of drugs to suppress their emotions. Feelings and artistic expression are outlawed. The benefit to that is that wars don't exist anymore. Everything is order. A top officer enforcer of the government accidentally misses his injection and begins to experience emotions, which makes him question his own morality and moderate his actions while attempting to remain undetected from the government he works for.



So basically the moral of the story is if you take away happiness/ emotions you get no war, disease, starvation, jealousy, rage, murder, etc. But everyone is basically a robot in behavior. So idk. No more suffering is great but there seems to be no point to existing then if you can't feel anything.

Eh, sure.

Not like it makes a grand difference in anyway.

@rustlingjimmy: interesting. I've never heard of that movie before but I might have to give it a watch

@rustlingjimmy:

Great movie though (that is, movie with great stuff in it)

What are emotions good for in the evolutionary scheme of things?

that i have no idea. emotions seem to govern our behavior. But do we actually need to feel anything to continue/abide by the process of evolution/nature? I guess not. But nature obviously wants us to feel or we wouldn't have emotions in the first place.

@rustlingjimmy:

Thanks Nature : D

@rustlingjimmy: Lol my point exactly

Without happiness, what's the point?

I'm gonna say no, though I suspect that the ''correct'' answer would be yes, because humans by and large experience sadness and pain much more frequently and powerfully than happiness. But you could probably make the same point about just destroying the world, so I'll pass.

No. We would essentially be robots, and there would be no point in life.

No way dude. The result of ending suffering should be happiness so what's the point?

No. Suffering as it currently exists is temporary for most people. Exchanging that for eternal misery is extremely counter-intuitive.

^

No.

No suffering would mean no point of life as it is suffering that gives it meaning

What makes you think taking away all happiness isn't suffering? Also some suffering is good for us. We grow. heal and become better for it.

Then you're destined for the world without chores and sweating. The eternal hell of boredom in heaven.

Mike Skinner