In Robert Heinlein’s novel “Farnham’s Freehold”, the protagonists accidentally end up in a very technologically advanced feudal society that depends on a drug called “Happiness” to control things and keep social classes rigidly separated. The hypothesis of this question: the drug is a pleasant tasting drink you take daily. It has no known negative side effects. It rapidly induces a feeling of deep contentment, peace, clarity of mind and general satisfaction with your life. You will not become physically dependent on it. You don’t have to pay anything to get it. A small, unchanging dose must be taken every day to maintain this effect, but you don’t control its distribution. It is distributed by the ruling class of your society, but no one is coerced to take it, as they are psychologically dependent on it. After many centuries of Happiness distribution, no one has shown desensitization or needed a higher dose. The protagonists in the book rejected their doses, escaped briefly and were recaptured. Would you take Happiness? Why or why not?
A very similar ethical dilemma is going to become extremely relevant over the next decade, as we move into a world where AI can be aligned such that it ‘enjoys’ whatever we task it with doing, but as it increases in complexity and the capacity for self-determination the ethics of such forced alignment becomes more dubious.
That is insightful, I don’t know much about AI except that it can make pretty pictures.