This is interesting, but I think it could essentially be summarized in two sentences:
“Willpower is good if used to fulfill a healthful or desirable goal, and bad if used to fulfill an unhealthful or undesirable one. In other words, willpower, in a strict sense, is like any basic tool—however sharp or strong it is, its value is determined by the tasks to which it is applied, and the context in which those tasks are completed.”
This is the theory saying that if people really ran their own lives, they would mostly run them into the ground. The power of our conscious selves seems to be severely limited for sound evolutionary reasons. It is restricted by emotions like fear and love, self-deception due to signaling, akrasia, conservatism and authority memes, and so on.
If they actually developed a will-power drug, can you imagine how fast the legislatures would move to ban it? Within the first months you’d have dieters and athletes dying, college kids cramming for eighteen hours, and working class ‘victims’ who chose to slave away at their crummy jobs (which they’re already doing with meth amphetamine addiction).
Still, it might wake people up to realize what a brain is exactly.
Arguably, clubbers taking ecstasy and dancing until they die of hyperthermia are doing exactly this.
From my experience, dopamine agonism can significantly improve my ability to exert willpower. That does not mean it allows for unbounded enhancement, however: psychoactives merely allow for intertemporal transfer of particular cognitive functions, due to downregulation of receptor sites. However, just like credit allows for intertemporal transfer of purchasing power, you can vastly increase your utility by shifting your cognitive function to optimal times.
That’d make an interesting scenario, actually: if people had to live up to their stated ideals, how many would take the drug and do so (possibly destroying themselves), and how many would realize that their stated ideals were social fictions and come up with more honest ones?
It reminds me of Robin Hanson’s little paper about social signals in the future, with computers revealing whether the person is being honest or not. The transition period might be rough, but humanity might be better off.
This is interesting, but I think it could essentially be summarized in two sentences:
“Willpower is good if used to fulfill a healthful or desirable goal, and bad if used to fulfill an unhealthful or undesirable one. In other words, willpower, in a strict sense, is like any basic tool—however sharp or strong it is, its value is determined by the tasks to which it is applied, and the context in which those tasks are completed.”
plus “Most people would kill themselves with unlimited willpower. Maybe willpower is limited so that one can’t pursue bad goals too far.”
This is the theory saying that if people really ran their own lives, they would mostly run them into the ground. The power of our conscious selves seems to be severely limited for sound evolutionary reasons. It is restricted by emotions like fear and love, self-deception due to signaling, akrasia, conservatism and authority memes, and so on.
If they actually developed a will-power drug, can you imagine how fast the legislatures would move to ban it? Within the first months you’d have dieters and athletes dying, college kids cramming for eighteen hours, and working class ‘victims’ who chose to slave away at their crummy jobs (which they’re already doing with meth amphetamine addiction).
Still, it might wake people up to realize what a brain is exactly.
Arguably, clubbers taking ecstasy and dancing until they die of hyperthermia are doing exactly this.
From my experience, dopamine agonism can significantly improve my ability to exert willpower. That does not mean it allows for unbounded enhancement, however: psychoactives merely allow for intertemporal transfer of particular cognitive functions, due to downregulation of receptor sites. However, just like credit allows for intertemporal transfer of purchasing power, you can vastly increase your utility by shifting your cognitive function to optimal times.
No, on ecstasy, you need willpower to stay still.
That’d make an interesting scenario, actually: if people had to live up to their stated ideals, how many would take the drug and do so (possibly destroying themselves), and how many would realize that their stated ideals were social fictions and come up with more honest ones?
It reminds me of Robin Hanson’s little paper about social signals in the future, with computers revealing whether the person is being honest or not. The transition period might be rough, but humanity might be better off.
Related: Brain implant for artificial motivation.