Comment on this entry
Pleasure’s perils: Why the ‘sex chip’ may not be such a good idea
Scientists have taken us one step closer to achieving permanent bliss. Neuroscientists Morten Kringelbach and Tipu Aziz recently announced that they were able to stimulate the pleasure centers of the brain by implanting a chip that sends tiny shocks to the orbitofrontal cortex. This is the same area that is responsible for feelings of pleasure induced by such things as eating and sex.
...
Complete entry
COMMENTS
Posted by Steve Elliott (alapoet) on 01/04 at 01:45 AM
"once a person decides that they've had enough of the crazy game that is life they should be able to opt into a state of permanent bliss (the same could be said for those suffering from chronic pain or illnesses)"
Absoutely. I couldn't agree more!
Posted by Christopher Harris on 01/04 at 08:06 AM
George, clearly rewarding deep brain stimulation is too addictive for unrestricted use in healthy individuals. But I'd really like to know your opinion on CONDITIONAL use of the technology - e.g. to motivate physical exercise or learning (see ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/harris20080924)
Posted by Trudy Barber on 01/07 at 06:06 AM
I created what has been described as the worlds first Virtual Reality Sex installation back int the early 1990s - I went on to get my PhD in what I called 'computer fetishism and sexual futurology' - many of the issues mentioned here were brought up at the time - We are now looking at the convergence of ecstatic states with syneasthetic orgasms and the relationship of sexual/physical pleasure with entertainment. What would be interesting is the illegal use of such stimulation - How would the fetishist react? How would the deviant react? How would we redefine notions of pleasure? The state of bliss that could possibly be attained also crosses the boundaries of religious ecstasy and the sacred hysteric.. Oh gosh.. I could go on and on.... 
Posted by George Dvorsky on 01/07 at 11:17 PM
@Christopher: I don't really have a problem with that. It's probably a good idea -- even for people who are suffering from chronic pain or who are terminally ill. Where the problem emerges is when people have control over these devices.
Posted by Stephen Delli Priscoli on 08/15 at 12:57 AM
I believe that such a device would undermine what it is that makes us human. To be human, one must experience both pleasure and sorrow. When theres an imbalance of one problems will occur. We call that perpetual state of sorrow depression and medicate accordingly so that the balance is restored. When there is an excess of pleasure, we do exactly the same thing. A drug addicts existence is purely based on achieving a state of constant pleasure and like for the depressive we treat and medicate so that their lives may be restored. To be human we need a certain purpose. This is what is lost when a healthy balance cannot be maintained.
Posted by Michael on 08/23 at 12:37 PM
To elaborate on the second comment, what if a pleasure chip was highly regulated and controlled with the use of a powerful AI computer system where pleasure is experienced only when one actively pursuits an education, works productively, exercises, eats healthy, interacts with others, does good deeds, etc. It might help mankind to evolve into something much better.
Posted by Steve Elliott ~alapoet~ on 08/23 at 02:06 PM
But, Michael -- who gets to pick which "education" is the "right one" to purssue? Who decides which work is "productive"?
Who decides which exercises are "acceptable"? Who decides which deeds are "good"?
Sounds like it could also be a way for mankind to devolve into something much more totalitarian, if used as you describe.
Posted by iPlant on 08/23 at 02:52 PM
@Michael @Steve this is discussed in some detail at http://www.iplant.eu/ethics.html and http://www.iplant.eu/programming.html and in the site's forum. The patient and the surgeon decide which behaviours need artificial motivation.
Page 1 of 1 pages
Add your comment here:
| 
IEET Blog