Would Aristotle consider someone hooked into the experience machine truly happy?
From my perspective my view is that Aristotle would not agree that someone engaged in the "Experience Machine" to be truly or honestly happy. To my degree of understanding Aristotle did not see happiness as some synthetic experince manufactured in some laboratory, but rather an organic experience that a person can enjoy throughout life in the first person view. In Nicomachean Ethics by Aristotle he says,"Now such a thing happiness, above all else, is held to be; for this we choose always for self and never for the sake of something else" (1931, pg. 7).
My humble opinion on the topic at at hand is that not even if the experience is negative it's a lesson to be learned, and that lesson can translate into happiness further down the future. Plus happiness comes in many forms that in its bests form it is something organic, and not synthetic such as people taking pictures or doing video for social media to get likes/shares to me is fake synthetic happiness which is a short term desire. Additionally, living life in the moment having the organic experience is the type of experience that produce chemical change within the human body that induces euphoria which is considered to various reach as the optimum happiness such live music, winning a sports championship, getting married, and etc.
If you had the chance to be permanently hooked up to the experience machine, would you do it?
Personally I would ask for a program to be placed in the experience machine for me to know what it feels like to be extremely wealthy. I think the type of experience I may have could be both superficially satisfying, and lonesome at the sametime. The experience would only give a sense of false happiness, because to my very limited knowledge of life is that the best things are the things that come with struggle due to the appreciation once obtain. I would not consider being extremely wealthy a worthwhile experience, because the experience is only superficial and if I'm not happy with myself or appreciate the things I do have then nothing else will make me organically happy.
Plus from my own personal life things that come ease also go easy case, and point an individual can obtain a large sum of money, but with no financial literacy that money is disposed of then its back at square one.
Based on what you said so far, do you think that people can be wrong about happiness? Does your answer align with Aristotle's view of happiness? Why or why not?
The thing is happiness can be subjective to me it is based on an individual bases, and each person experience is different. Furthermore, some people feel materials pleasures such as brand new car, clothes, house, and jewelry plus status in society is happiness while others feel helping other people, having love the community, being self-reliant, and investing in substantial things is happiness so to me it is bias to the individual. My answer seem to align with Aristotle for one main reason like in most fields experience is the best teacher, and to me happiness is something
best done organically just like lifting weights a person can take steroids then get big for a short term satisfaction then later in life the effects of false satisfaction begin to manifest in negative ways so it is best to work hard and do it the natural organic right way which last longer plus feel happier. The end results of living the experience trumps fake experience any day to me.
Reference:
1.) Aristotle. (1931). Nicomachean ethics (W. D. Ross, Trans.). Retrieved from http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.html
2.) Mill, J. S. (2008). Utilitarianism, In J. Bennett (Ed. & Rev.) Early Modern Philosophy. Retrieved from http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/pdfs/mill1863.pdf
