I’ve been listening to a series of lectures by The Teaching Company entitled “Great Ideas of Philosophy,” and in a couple of lectures the Professor identifies a recurring Problem known as the “Brain in a Vat” problem. It has to do with the nature of Experience and the value we place on Events in our lives. Basically it’s the same concept as The Matrix and other “virtual reality” movies that were popular in the late 90’s / early 00’s, only far older and expressed in a different way.
Consider the possibility that you could remove a person’s Brain and place it in a Vat, which could sustain its life indefinitely. Now further suppose that numerous electrodes could be attached to the Brain to stimulate it in such a way that it would seem to be having “real” experiences; it could not know that what it experienced was simulated, nor would it have any idea that it was in a Vat. Now, if you were to stimulate this Brain such that all its deepest desires were continually fulfilled — the desire for sex, power, money, success, and so forth — what would be the disadvantage of living in such a state compared to living in the real world, full of heartaches and disappointments and defeats?
I don’t remember all the Philosophers’ counters to this question, but the general gist of it was this: that it is precisely the effort and uncertainty of real life that gives value to the events which take place within it. Were you to endlessly stimulate the Brain to experience whatever it wished, those experiences would be diminished simply because no possibility of failure was ever overcome.
I find this counter to be rather weak. If we are stimulating the brain to perfectly emulate reality, there would be no way for it to know that its successes were fabricated. To suppose that its experiences are “inferior” is to suppose that there is a Brain external to the Vat which can make such value judgments. As far as the Brain in the Vat is concerned, it has overcome great difficulty in order to achieve its goals — it has experienced strife and victory, because what simulation of reality would be complete without them? It’s just rigged that the Brain always wins, which is something the Brain would never know. Possibly even the Brain’s decision-making processes could be affected by the electrodes… such that it will make a “right” decision within the simulated reality with no awareness that it was not its own decision.
I suppose I am influenced in this opinion by the views of my friend Al DeLarge, whom I have had many intellectual conversations with only to have them degenerate into his repeated statement: “But it’s all in your mind, man!” That used to be his counter for every moral question or existential problem. (Needless to say we were almost always high when we had these conversations.) Despite my yearning for some sort of absolute reality which we can all participate in at a higher level, my more realistic estimation of the universe is that of Al’s.
It seems to me that the only disadvantage for the Brain in a Vat’s experiences would be if the simulation were flawed in some way… say the brain became aware that it was winning without trying or it became burned out by the succession of continually pleasurable experiences — like early versions of the Matrix. But to claim that the simulation is inferior is to deny the presuppositions of the problem the simulation is perfect, otherwise the question is moot.
I pretty much live my life as close to a Brain in a Vat as I can get. I have experienced failure so many times that any endeavor likely to crush me further is assiduously avoided. I amuse myself with shallow entertainments in order not to think about my circumstances, and I consider any success that I were to achieve as ultimately a hollow and meaningless one. If I were given the offer to become a Brain in a Vat, I would not hesitate to take it.
The only thing that might stop me would be my connections to my family and friends — I would have to abandon them. But why do I care, if they can be simulated in every detail as well? Because they would have to live their lives without me – I would be separated from them. This suggests a possible counter to the problem of the brain in a vat: existing in your own reality, it would be impossible to bring joy or love to any other person. It would be the ultimate form of selfishness. This can be countered again by saying that the brain would never know it was selfish – and so on and so on. Maybe there’s just no good answer to the Problem.
If such an existence were offered near the end of my life, though, and all my family and friends were dead, I would have no objection.