Choose your form of wealth

[Architect]

No, we're on the same page. I was just relating to the OP. If you choose genius, you can't have happiness (the way the poll reads).

Yeah that's more or less the way I meant it. Mutually exclusive. Otherwise it would be too easy. "I prefer genius, but would like to be happy and have friends (having some money wouldn't hurt too)"

 

[StevenM]

I think it was meant that for the rest of your life, you would be poor in the other selections. However, while parsing the question, it is still hard to tell. Perhaps a grammatical error? :P

 

[Grayman]

Yeah that's more or less the way I meant it. Mutually exclusive. Otherwise it would be too easy. "I prefer genius, but would like to be happy and have friends (having some money wouldn't hurt too)"

If I chose genius then would it be the absence of happiness or sadness?

 

[Cherry Cola]

It gets a little weird if you can't have nothing but the option you pick. Wouldn't it make more sense for the other things to just remain unchanged? That fucks up the option to have good friends but it makes it so that you get to answer from your own individual viewpoint which is more interesting imo. Otherwise it'd be better to just rank the options top to bottom.

 

[Helvete]

Genius

Happiness

Richness

3 most voted for.

Genius is swamped by less intelligent people, ultimately causing frustration and unhappiness.

Money detracts from every form of quality.

Happiness is a feeling which, when constant makes everything else irrelevant.

What's wrong with y'all? Or the majority of y'all...

 

[kris]

Wealth is a relative concept. If I was the only person alive, I'd be the smartest and stupidest human in existence with an intelligence quotient of 100. 'Genius' pertains to intelligence quotient. Being a genius refers to one's intellect compared to the general population. I'm fine with the mental computing power I have presently regardless of how it stacks up to that of others. I think being too much smarter than the average person would only increase feelings of isolation and frustration with the world, and at the end of the day would not take me that much deeper into understanding the universe and the myriad thingamajigs contained therein.

Happiness is seems to have some objective properties as a neurological state, but it's not my favourite emotional state. I want a balanced measure of happiness along with a host of other mental and emotional states.

Friends? I want a handful of meaningful connections in life. They don't have to be friendships per se.

I do want to be healthy and live a long life, but I don't know how to characterize this as wealth. There are a lot of variables at play in terms of longevity and well-being, some of which are under my control and many of which are not. I don't ever want to start taking it all for granted.

Monetary wealth is perhaps the item I find most interesting on the list because it is the most alien option to me. In terms of global standards, I do quite well with money and quality of life largely because I live in a reasonably wealthy nation, but I don't posses the kind of wealth which moves anything in the world. On the chessboard of the world, I'm still a pawn. I have to admit that I'd get a kick out of being a queen, bishop, knight or rook. If life is a game, we're all being manipulated and pushed around to some extent, but some pieces on the board clearly get to stir shit up more than others. Money isn't the only variable when it comes down to the ability to effect change, but it is a rather significant factor. The people who wield it now seem so... boring.

 

[Grayman]

Wait, is this like pick your favorite color?

If we are strictly speaking preference...

I dont have preferences often. I base my preferences on a higher value system. In other words, I dont give a shit unless it produces a desired outcome. One could argue that the outcome is a preference but I feel it is better defined as a core value. The core value can also be considered core principles. These are things I cannot change without changing who I am.

For short... I have no preference for any of these except in relation to a larger context.

 

[Dormouse]

So here's how I find it most easily conceived:

A) You're the unlucky offspring of an incestuous line of blue-bloods, with all the physical and intellectual defects one could reasonably expect. Isolated in shame to protect the family reputation, your barren and lonely childhood leaves you emotionally stunted and depressed. Realizing it's all you have in the world, you zealously cling to your wealth, rejecting any attempted friendships for fear of exploitation. To distract yourself from the multi-layered pain of existing, you seek greater and greater thrills, but ultimately no amount of depravity satisfies you.

B) Fate has dictated you're born into a poor but loving family. Deaf, mute, and afflicted by a terminal illness, your cause serves as a rallying point for your local religious organization. Despite your extreme misery, you're tepid and quiet enough to be very well liked. Before your death, a couple of youths will claim you're an "inspiration", and a respectable sum will be raised in your name for research into your affliction. You'll be well (though modestly) cared for, but that doesn't change the fact that your life will mostly be spent in extreme agony and confusion, confined to a hospital room.

C) You're brilliant, but your health begins to decay before anyone takes notice. Your disease very gradually takes away your mobility, and soon deprives you of any means of communication. You have your thoughts to entertain you, but over the years you grow more and more focused on your misery and less on the mysteries of the universe.

D) You're pitiful and subliminally repulsive to others, but you're barely aware of the outside world. You live in a deeply personal delusion that satisfies you completely.

E) Not too bright, emotionally numb, never can seem to have enough money... High social anxiety and insecurities prevent you from interacting much with others. You have projects but they never really go anywhere: your life is spent entirely in a vague stasis of confusion. On the bright side, you live quite long and never experience any real physical discomfort.

 

[Grayman]

Maybe we should define genius. I don't see it as a higher level of intelligence but instead an entirely new of thinking.

 

[Architect]

Maybe we should define genius. I don't see it as a higher level of intelligence but instead an entirely new of thinking.

KISS. It means you're Einstein.

 

[The Void]

I think parlaying one to get all the other ones is against The Rules.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!
I choose the void.
I dont care about this poll anymore.

 

[Grayman]

KISS. It means you're Einstein.

But that way of thinking has already been done.

 

[Bock]

Questionable poll, happiness makes the rest of the choices irrelevant. Happiness implies some form of contentment, yes?

You want to be a genius? Ultimately you could just have chosen instant happiness instead.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Questionable poll, happiness makes the rest of the choices irrelevant. Happiness implies some form of contentment, yes?

You want to be a genius? Ultimately you could just have chosen instant happiness instead.

Why would it? Just because if you were happy you'd be content that don't mean being happy is more desirable than everything else. If all you want from life is to be happy then sure it's a given but if you want to live a rich life, learn and experience as much as possible then happiness is a no go.

There's a reason why people sit down and do nothing after they inject themselves with heroin, just as there's a reason why monks have to sit down and do nothing to achieve happiness. When everything is just right there's no reason to act, because you act in order to change yourself or things for the better.

Kings and Emperors rarely want to give up their rules, but they aren't necessarily living the lives they would have wanted before they came rulers.

 

[Polaris]

As with Walkyria, this poll hurts mah brain on so many different levels. But I guess it sparked interesting discussion, and if that was the purpose, I guess the poll was clever.

I find it impossible to choose, but for the sake of picking one option I find Adaire's logic to be the most rational, so I'd go with a healthy and long life.

 

[paradoxparadigm7]

Why would it? Just because if you were happy you'd be content that don't mean being happy is more desirable than everything else. If all you want from life is to be happy then sure it's a given but if you want to live a rich life, learn and experience as much as possible then happiness is a no go.

There's a reason why people sit down and do nothing after they inject themselves with heroin, just as there's a reason why monks have to sit down and do nothing to achieve happiness. When everything is just right there's no reason to act, because you act in order to change yourself or things for the better.

Kings and Emperors rarely want to give up their rules, but they aren't necessarily living the lives they would have wanted before they came rulers.

That's a good point. With happiness, you're likely not motivated to act. The yin is always dependent on the yang and vice versa.

 

[Absurdity]

So here's how I find it most easily conceived:

A) You're the unlucky offspring of an incestuous line of blue-bloods, with all the physical and intellectual defects one could reasonably expect. Isolated in shame to protect the family reputation, your barren and lonely childhood leaves you emotionally stunted and depressed. Realizing it's all you have in the world, you zealously cling to your wealth, rejecting any attempted friendships for fear of exploitation. To distract yourself from the multi-layered pain of existing, you seek greater and greater thrills, but ultimately no amount of depravity satisfies you.

B) Fate has dictated you're born into a poor but loving family. Deaf, mute, and afflicted by a terminal illness, your cause serves as a rallying point for your local religious organization. Despite your extreme misery, you're tepid and quiet enough to be very well liked. Before your death, a couple of youths will claim you're an "inspiration", and a respectable sum will be raised in your name for research into your affliction. You'll be well (though modestly) cared for, but that doesn't change the fact that your life will mostly be spent in extreme agony and confusion, confined to a hospital room.

C) You're brilliant, but your health begins to decay before anyone takes notice. Your disease very gradually takes away your mobility, and soon deprives you of any means of communication. You have your thoughts to entertain you, but over the years you grow more and more focused on your misery and less on the mysteries of the universe.

D) You're pitiful and subliminally repulsive to others, but you're barely aware of the outside world. You live in a deeply personal delusion that satisfies you completely.

E) Not too bright, emotionally numb, never can seem to have enough money... High social anxiety and insecurities prevent you from interacting much with others. You have projects but they never really go anywhere: your life is spent entirely in a vague stasis of confusion. On the bright side, you live quite long and never experience any real physical discomfort.

"A" still sounds like the best option. I am enjoying the rationalizations in this thread as to why money doesn't matter, though.

 

[paradoxparadigm7]

"A" still sounds like the best option. I am enjoying the rationalizations in this thread as to why money doesn't matter, though.

Inferior Se...oh the seduction!

 

[Absurdity]

Inferior Se...oh the seduction!

Nice try. I figure I'll take this as an opportunity to explain my reasoning.

Vast sums of money can allow for for near-limitless freedom. Also, as CC pointed out, money can also buy a quality education and top of the line healthcare which makes the options of genius and perfect health trivial. Being well educated and hard-working trumps obscure intellectual eccentricity (which is what genius usually ends up as) any day of the week in my book.

Eternal happiness is banal and overvalued by our society. Other seemingly "negative" emotions and states such as sadness and melancholy are not necessarily "bad," and can serve a purpose in inspiring action and reflection. Further, the absence of any suffering at all leads to weakness and atrophy.

Friends and family are the only possible alternative but given the bleak scenario that Dor laid out in line with the constraints of the OP I'd say it would be better not to have any ties at all than be a sick idiotic drag on your loved ones for the entirety of your brief but intensely painful life. A lifetime spent being pitied sounds revolting.

 

[Cavallier]

Edit: Should those have been "You're" instead of "Your"? I have trouble with that.

Fixed.

 

[BigApplePi]

Try this re-do of the OP.

You get a choice, you can be wealthy in any of the above for the rest of your life, but poor in the other categories. Which is it?

Rephrasing the Q:

You get a choice, you can raise yourself in any of the above for the rest of your life, but just be your self in the other categories. Which is it?

I would choose genius because then I could do what limits me now: my reach exceeds my grasp. If I did it right, I think the other things would come.

 

[paradoxparadigm7]

Nice try. I figure I'll take this as an opportunity to explain my reasoning.

Vast sums of money can allow for for near-limitless freedom. Also, as CC pointed out, money can also buy a quality education and top of the line healthcare which makes the options of genius and perfect health trivial. Being well educated and hard-working trumps obscure intellectual eccentricity (which is what genius usually ends up as) any day of the week in my book.

Eternal happiness is banal and overvalued by our society. Other seemingly "negative" emotions and states such as sadness and melancholy are not necessarily "bad," and can serve a purpose in inspiring action and reflection. Further, the absence of any suffering at all leads to weakness and atrophy.

Friends and family are the only possible alternative but given the bleak scenario that Dor laid out in line with the constraints of the OP I'd say it would be better not to have any ties at all than be a sick idiotic drag on your loved ones for the entirety of your brief but intensely painful life. A lifetime spent being pitied sounds revolting.

Your reasons are your own and I have no argument with it, but consider that you and cc are Se inferior and the scenario painted by Dormouse for option one: Depravity, thrills, possibly status as a result of money to ease the pain seems on the mark no?

 

[Absurdity]

Your reasons are your own and I have no argument with it, but consider that you and cc are Se inferior and the scenario painted by Dormouse for option one: Depravity, thrills, possibly status as a result of money to ease the pain seems on the mark no?

What point are you trying to make?

 

[Duxwing]

I would choose happiness because, by definition, I would value no other outcome. Were happiness given, I would choose genius to cause the Singularity, thereby obsoleting wealth and longevity; I want only a small family.

-Duxwing

 

[Variform]

With money I can buy education, nice friends (I give lots of money away to charity so that nice people start liking me, I also give lots of money to scientific endeavors to get some brainy friends as well), I can also get plastic surgery and drugs. Happiness will come naturally. Money is the safest bet.

But the choice of happiness incorporates all that. No matter how you put it, if you are happy, you are happy, whether it came out of money or being a genius etc.

Isn't it better to go for the happy option? Because from a position of happiness you can achieve much more. In that case, happiness is a start, enabling you to build on it. Whereas your road through money leads to happiness in the end. But when will it be achieved?

And there are no guarantees you will be liked because your scatter money about. Some will actually dislike you for it and be jealous.

Ah it is all semantics.

 

[Hadoblado]

How poor in the other categories?

Does being happy necessitate retardation?

Does being healthy and living a long life mean that the entirety of that life will be abject misery?

The only ones I can see having value are happiness and genius. Happiness if you're selfish, genius if you're not.

 

[~~~]

False choice.

 

[Hadoblado]

Hypothetical =/= false.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Your reasons are your own and I have no argument with it, but consider that you and cc are Se inferior and the scenario painted by Dormouse for option one: Depravity, thrills, possibly status as a result of money to ease the pain seems on the mark no?

Yeah well your tertiary si+fe makes you a feel-good traditionalist when it comes to these matters. You dont want money because its a cheap and wholly selfish pick. But the truth of the matter is that morally speaking money wins hands down if used right. You can buy yourself a good life but you can also buy other people better ones.

For an altruist money is the given pick.

 

[Bock]

Why would it? Just because if you were happy you'd be content that don't mean being happy is more desirable than everything else. If all you want from life is to be happy then sure it's a given but if you want to live a rich life, learn and experience as much as possible then happiness is a no go.

There's a reason why people sit down and do nothing after they inject themselves with heroin, just as there's a reason why monks have to sit down and do nothing to achieve happiness. When everything is just right there's no reason to act, because you act in order to change yourself or things for the better.

Kings and Emperors rarely want to give up their rules, but they aren't necessarily living the lives they would have wanted before they came rulers.

Why do you want to act? I guess my angle is rather pessimistic but honestly, isn't the ultimate goal of everything, some sort of happiness?

Doing something to recieve something, even if it's charity (the reward being feeling good about oneself etc). I see life as defiance of the natural state. We ARE the need to act, any other "viewpoint" was beaten into extinction (logical chain of cause -> effect, considering the nature of existance itself, is struggle?).

The natural emotional base being stressed out and forced to look for the next "fix", i view the thought of being unconditionally happy, as something supernatural/divine etc. Compare that to the other choices given.

That's a good point. With happiness, you're likely not motivated to act. The yin is always dependent on the yang and vice versa.

You don't need to act if you are already content.

 

[Cherry Cola]

The ultimate goal of everything is getting what you want, but what you want doesn't have to be happiness. If all we wanted to get was happiness humans would've died out long ago, there are plenty of other concepts defying nature: omnipotence, freedom, nirvana for instance.

Sure when in a state of complete happiness no one would want to leave it, but that doesn't mean such a state is desirable. If people were given the choice of being put into a drug induced bliss, kept alive by machines for millenia but reduced to containers of happiness then plenty of people would decline the offer despite the fact that none who accepted it would ever regret it.

 

[Bock]

The ultimate goal of everything is getting what you want, but what you want doesn't have to be happiness. If all we wanted to get was happiness humans would've died out long ago, there are plenty of other concepts defying nature: omnipotence, freedom, nirvana for instance.

Sure when in a state of complete happiness no one would want to leave it, but that doesn't mean such a state is desirable. If people were given the choice of being put into a drug induced bliss, kept alive by machines for millenia but reduced to containers of happiness then plenty of people would decline the offer despite the fact that none who accepted it would ever regret it.

We strive for "rewards" (why do we even "enjoy" dopamine and serotonin to begin with...? slightly offtopic), our nature and existence in itself is defined by nature/the enviroment and as such, unconditional happiness is surely desirable?

Isn't this similar to how death/not existing most likely is preferable to existing, but that it doesn't necessarly mean that you want to die? An evolutionary self-preserving barrier that we can only "see" indirectly.

I'm arguing that saying no to a "brain-in-a-dopamine-vat"-existence is irrational. Not sure if i'm being coherent though...

 

[BigApplePi]

"Happy" demands a more realistic definition. The other conditions can be defined. The human organism is an energy functioning machine. That means it uses energy and demands replenishment. It will suffer if it doesn't get it or else die. Continually taking drugs* will wear out the machine. Therefore inaction won't work to stay happy.

This reasoning demands a little more work. What is missing?
_________________________

*This is a passive activity.

 

[Cherry Cola]

We strive for "rewards" (why do we even "enjoy" dopamine and serotonin to begin with...? slightly offtopic), our nature and existence in itself is defined by nature/the enviroment and as such, unconditional happiness is surely desirable?

Isn't this similar to how death/not existing most likely is preferable to existing, but that it doesn't necessarly mean that you want to die? An evolutionary self-preserving barrier that we can only "see" indirectly.

I'm arguing that saying no to a "brain-in-a-dopamine-vat"-existence is irrational. Not sure if i'm being coherent though...

Yeah but what desire is not irrational? Desiring anything at all is irrational afaik. The values we assign to things like truth, good and evil, happiness, beauty etc.. none are rational. But too arbitrarily ignore all except happiness just seems more irrational too me.

 

[BigApplePi]

Yeah but what desire is not irrational? Desiring anything at all is irrational afaik. The values we assign to things like truth, good and evil, happiness, beauty etc.. none are rational.

Desire means going after input. Who NEEDS input anyway?

But too arbitrarily ignore all except happiness just seems more irrational too me.

Happiness is GETTING that input on a timely basis.

 

[Bock]

Yeah but what desire is not irrational? Desiring anything at all is irrational afaik. The values we assign to things like truth, good and evil, happiness, beauty etc.. none are rational. But too arbitrarily ignore all except happiness just seems more irrational too me.

We are machines, products of a chainreaction, i find your argument to be too abstract/detached (relative to how low you seem to value the more "biological views"). Eventually though, i guess my opinion lands on the same level as

"the closest to any form of meaning or purpose we can come, is to procreate"

I... don't know...

 

[Cherry Cola]

We are machines, products of a chainreaction, i find your argument to be too abstract/detached (relative to how low you seem to value the more "biological views"). Eventually though, i guess my opinion lands on the same level as

"the closest to any form of meaning or purpose we can come, is to procreate"

I... don't know...

I don't think we are mere machines (we are sentient after all) though we are certainly products of a chainreaction. All that we experience as meaningful and desirable, all our values, are the result of our need to procreate and survive as a species. That doesn't necessarily mean that we experience procreation in itself as meaningful. Indeed many don't (hence existentialism), so we look to truth, to justice, goodness, power, understanding, beauty etc.. in an attempt to find meaning.

For those that are intuitive we look beyond these concepts, we try to see what they imply as a whole, fruitlessly of course, the vanishing point at which they all come together is forever outside our reach. The door is closed forever more, if indeed there ever was a door. All of these things end up seeming like poor substitutes for what we thought they were, paper moons and stand in stuntmen, rehearsal wedding dresses. They aren't the real deal but they are what we have. I would say that the mistake we make is thinking that there is meaning beyond experience. We experience profoundness and awe in the face of beauty and truth, great emotions of sadness and happiness, so great that certainly there must be something sublime resonating throughout the cosmos. We see it the faces of other people. But as the wise Leonard Cohen once said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rvj1WSzFgyQ

Really, just because what we experience as meaningful isn't so on a cosmical scale, that don't mean we are machines whose sole purpose is to procreate. Evolution doesn't have a purpose, it doesn't experience, it just happens, why should we care about it and not the that which it has given us which we do genuinely care about?

And how does happiness fit into this? Eternal bliss does not allow for evolution.

 

[Red myst]

I choose to be healthy and live a long life.

Because a component of being healthy is having good physiological, and emotional health. So, this means to me that I have to be competent and content enough with my circumstances are as it relates to the other choices. It not about using one to get the others, Its about having a good attitude about what you already have.

 

[Cavallier]

In the extreme these options are boring well worn tropes.

However, in the middlins there is room for some interesting discussion.

You have a few friends but they aren't close. You have a lover at some point but you drift apart. You are smart enough to get through school but not really smart enough to accomplish anything noteworthy. You have small moments of happiness but they are transient and not very strong. You are average in every concievable way except for the way in which you are wealthy. Really it comes down to boredom for me. What would make me less bored when dealt an utterly average life. (I suspect most people don't actually want an utterly average sort of life even though I think it would probably make them happiest if they accepted it.)

Now, how do you choose to add that spark to your life? With Love, Healthy, Money, or Brains? I choose to cut out the Happiness option because it's not really an option. Everybody would choose to be happy I think.

 

[WALKYRIA]

HAHA, although I hate bad and simplistic questions like these(The kind of question teachers(or people) ask at school and than wonder why we are resistant to give answers !) it seems that this kind of question is interesting because it makes people think in ways they are not used to do...
- Happiness--> and you die now, happy but dead.
- Good friends hat love you--> and you die now, good friends, but short life.
- Rich--> but you die now and alone, rich but dead.
- Genius--> and you die now, today or tomorrow(we don't car,e you die anyways!), smart but dead.
- Long life and healthy life--> alive, good but you spend the rest of your life in jail, alone and unhappy.

Seriously !

 

[Variform]

We strive for "rewards" (why do we even "enjoy" dopamine and serotonin to begin with...? slightly offtopic), our nature and existence in itself is defined by nature/the enviroment and as such, unconditional happiness is surely desirable?

Isn't this similar to how death/not existing most likely is preferable to existing, but that it doesn't necessarly mean that you want to die? An evolutionary self-preserving barrier that we can only "see" indirectly.

I'm arguing that saying no to a "brain-in-a-dopamine-vat"-existence is irrational. Not sure if i'm being coherent though...

Coherent enough for those who understand.

Basically the issue is a Zen concept. How can you know happiness, know what it is, if you do not also experience unhappiness?

Happiness exists by the grace of the opposite. You can 'dual' any emotion to another. Love, hate. The whole Yin and Yang principle.

But in reality any emotion, in the real world, with all its conflicts and diversions, can be 'dualed' with many others. So you get if you like, a network structure of opposing states.

The reason why people would not choose to be in The Matrix even when they are happy all the time is because happiness becomes meaningless without the unpredictability of life that will knock you down occasionally.

It is like the economy, a curve in a graph going up and down, boom, recession, high conjuncture, low conjuncture.

 

[Koosy]

I want to be happy, it's just very, very hard for me.

 

[grayskies]

Interesting results.

 

[Reluctantly]

I think I'd just like to be alone; and then I could choose when I want anything to do with people and on what terms. I guess that would be my happiness. I'll choose happiness then.

 

[Cognisant]

You're rich

Money is a current concern, I would like to have more of it and soon but I've got more than enough for my needs and I'm pursuing ways of obtaining more so I wouldn't waste a wish on mere financial gain.

You have lots of friends who love you

Tempting.

You're a genius

Surefire way to make myself miserable.

You're happy

Be unmotivated, nope.

You're healthy and live a long life

The healthier I am and the longer I live the easier life extension will be, I choose this.

 

[Solitaire U.]

Rich = power to buy all the other choices = no contest.

 

[Valentas]

I choose health. In my opinion, healthy body hosts healthy mind.

 

[Xopata]

I chose happiness, but I'm kind of regretting that now. The logic went that all the other options would only contribute towards my aim in life of being happy/receiving pleasure, so I may as well just go straight for happiness. But the way I was becoming happy was never said, so the happiness may simply be a product of drugs. This forgoing of actually experiencing life would be almost intolerable, for while I may be happy I would not experience. In the end it would be dull.

Dammit, I've gone and over thought this. It would appear that all of these supposed wealths are in fact akin to the forbidden fruit of Christian mythology, while appearing to be beneficial silently condemning you to die unfulfilled.

 

[Nick]

I like to think about everything.
I do not know what its like to not experience this awesome super power we intps have in us already.

every other 4 choices dumbs you down too or leaves you at your current capacity already?

I can't imagine the rush of increased thinking power.