From Wikipedia:
If I were in a position of political power, I would make this the most major funding priority and try to get as many of the worlds government in on it as possible. It may take decades of research and trillions upon trillions of dollars to actually get somewhere useful with this, but if we succeed it would be worth it regardless of the cost. Solving the problem of suffering should be the primary objective of the human race, IMHO.
Soma.
“I don’t understand anything,” she said with decision, determined to preserve her incomprehension intact. “Nothing. Least of all,” she continued in another tone “why you don’t take soma when you have these dreadful ideas of yours. You’d forget all about them. And instead of feeling miserable, you’d be jolly. So jolly,”
Brave New World
I thought you were in favor of human extinction Blalron. Wouldn’t that be a simpler method of ending all human suffering?
Better a gram than a damn!
Personally I’d rather that we end up exploring the known universe and colonizing it all than that we end suffering.
Suffering = The desire to improve the current state of things
It would be simpler, but pragmatically speaking it’s going to be pretty tough to get people to agree to voluntary human extinction, and I think it’s unlikely that any government capable of building a Doomsday Machine to make the earth as devoid of life as the surface of the Moon (to prevent any future sentient suffering life from evolving after us) would actually use it. 
Since evolution seeks reproduction, and humans want happiness, it would seem like reproduction in the natural way, the way to maximize viable offspring should bring happiness, as happiness is a motivator.
Have you even met a woman that learned this ancient path, and truly rejoices in the raising her children?
IMHO our attempt to manipulate the natural evolutionary cycle is what is blocking happiness. We are trying to out think and outsmart how we are made to operate, and just causing misery.
One idea that Abolitionism proposes is to replace suffering with “Gradients of Bliss.” Sure, you’re happy sitting around doing nothing, but you’d be even happier actually doing something, and that would be what motivates us.
I think you need to define both happiness and suffering before you can continue this discussion.
I admit, this is tricky to define. From what I’ve been able to gather, todays Anti-Depressants (Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors) seems to make people “not depressed” but it doesn’t neccesarily make them happy. Serotonin is just a piece of the puzzle. Dopamine also plays a role in happiness. It seems to be a medley of chemical interactions of the brain. In time, science will be better able to understand how these interactions work, which will make it possible to genetically engineer happier people.
Maybe, but just because I’m doing something doesn’t mean that I’m doing something productive. If I’m happy regardless of what I do, why not choose something like farming? I’m out being productive, providing for myself, and happy.
If I enjoy work the more of it I have, why not have 80 children? I’ll just farm more!
Suffering is the result of things going unfavorably for your continued well-being. If you have no ability to sense that, then unless you’re really aware of your surroundings and crunching numbers in your head, you’re going to screw yourself and the rest of civilization over. We’d likely have overpopulated the planet in three or four generations and all dying of famine with a smile on our faces.
Even if we need a certain level of suffering to preserve ourselves, many of us have brains that generate a level of suffering far in excess of what is neccesary to motivate us and can actually be counterproductive. Depression is an example of the suffering mechanism going haywire.
Evolution is indeed rather hit-and-miss, but while as we know that evolution does work over the long run, there’s no guarantee that a human decided level of suffering will indeed be enough to preserve ourselves, regardless of your omniscience telling you otherwise.
It’s highly unlikely, admittedly, that people who suffer biological depression have any sort of evolutionary advantage, so true we’re probably safe to cure them of it if possible. But that’s entirely different from what you are proposing.
Suffering and happiness are not mutually exclusive. In fact, we often need to experience an amount of suffering (sacrifice) in order to achieve happiness. And please don’t confuse happiness with pleasure, which always happens in threads like this.
Ugh. I think it’s a horrible idea. As Sage Rat says - part of suffering is the desire to improve things.
The human race rendered blissful would just be a collection of apathetic lumps. In the longer term, this would not work out well for them.
I much prefer to struggle on without such assistance.
The idea that children will make you happy is commonly believed, but what does the evidence show? Counterintuitively enough, it seems that children actually make you less happy:
I’ll be damned before I’ll take any government sponsored “Happy Pill”. Horrible idea. My state of mind, happiness, depression, whatever, is none of anyone’s business. A nanny-state is never the answer.
You’d need to rewire the mind/brain pretty extensively and systematically; I doubt that just a drug would be enough. But I don’t see why you couldn’t in theory produce a species that bottoms out at zero happiness/pleasure and strives to increase them, rather than one that bottoms out at “mind destroying suffering and agony”. It wouldn’t really be that different in practical terms than what we are now; it would just be moved “upwards” in the emotional spectrum. And it’s not like we aren’t already willing when happy to seek out greater happiness.
At the very least some sort of floor should be added for suffering; even from a purely practical and compassionless viewpoint, suffering that’s too strong disables you, and makes it less likely that the cause of suffering will be fixed.
Eliminating emotional suffering ain’t a good idea, even when allegedly motivated by the most benign of naive do-gooder beliefs. Violation of privacy, and would kill Delta Blues, a good deal of country music, and various other art forms.
How is it a violation of privacy ?
Well, so what ? Eliminating evil always tends to eliminate art that is made in response to that evil.