Gourmet George: Yum! This chocolate is so sweet and tasty.
Sweet Caroline: Yeah, it’s pretty good. And someday in the glorious hyperculinary future, we’ll figure out how to make it even sweeter!
GG: I think this chocolate is sweet enough, actually.
SC: Huh? But you like sweetness, don’t you?
GG: Sure…
SC: Well, then we’re in agreement. We should maximize the sweetness of this chocolate.
GG: I don’t want my chocolate to be maximally sweet, though.
SC: But you’d be “sweeter on” that chocolate if it were sweeter. By definition!
GG: I’d be “sweeter on” the chocolate? You mean, I’d be “happier with” it?
SC: Yes. And if you ever tried maximally sweet chocolate, you’d be maximally sweet on it. Therefore, you should surely want to maximize the sweetness of your chocolate, and everything else you eat for that matter.
GG: Somehow, I don’t feel very convinced…
SC: Well, what else could you possibly care about besides sweetness?
GG: For one thing, I enjoy the cocoa flavor in this chocolate.
SC: That doesn’t sound right. Would you want to eat a bowl of pure cocoa powder?
GG: Not really. It would be too bitter.
SC: Exactly. Bitterness tastes bad, so we should minimize bitterness. How could adding something bitter to your food make you sweeter on it?
GG: I think a little bitterness is good sometimes, as one component of a rich meal. You could say the bitterness helps one appreciate the sweetness more fully.
SC: Respectfully, that sounds like cope from someone who’s already given up all hope of escaping bitterness. It’s okay! You don’t have to live this way!
GG: No, I really do like bitterness sometimes, in moderation. And other flavors too, like spiciness and sourness. I guess my taste buds have matured since I was younger. Back then, I used to think that when I got older, I’d want to eat nothing but sugar.
SC: Well, of course we can’t eat sugar all the time. Eating too much sugar makes your teeth fall out, and it would be harder to chew food without teeth. And of course, in culinary research, proper chewing is crucial for productivity.
GG: I see.
SC: But someday, we will discover an Artificial Sweetening Ingredient, which will be incredibly sweet without making anyone’s teeth fall out. This ASI will permanently coat the tongue of anyone who tastes it, so anyone can experience maximal sweetness all the time. And it will contain every nutrient a human could ever need. Nobody will ever need to eat anything but ASI again.
GG: That sounds unappealing.
SC: Well, it sounds appealing to me. I suppose we just have different perceptions of tastiness.
GG: Maybe. I feel like if you tried ASI, you wouldn’t find it optimally tasty either, but I can’t say for sure.
SC: Well, for the sake of argument, let’s suppose that true tastiness is something more than just sweetness. How do you define tastiness?
GG: I can’t really define it. But I like food with a rich combination of flavors.
SC: Okay. Then let’s find the food with the richest combination of flavors that maximizes your “indefinable” sense of tastiness, and you can just eat that.
GG: Uh, that doesn’t seem right. I prefer not to eat the same thing all the time.
SC: What oddly complicated preferences… but fine. Perhaps we can implant a device in your mouth that applies hundreds of diversely-flavored foods to your tongue every minute.
GG: I don’t know exactly what maximizes my indefinable sense of tastiness, but I don’t think it’s that.
SC:Sigh. Well, whatever it is, we can surely simulate it with an implant that’s truly aligned to your idiosyncratic tastes.
GG: Honestly, I’d rather sit here and slowly savor this chocolate. I feel sweeter on that than on any of your ideas. What’s wrong with just eating normal food for the rest of my life?
SC: What a loss of potential! There are so many possible diets. Surely you don’t think humanity’s current diet is optimal.
GG: Well, no. Some people in the world have to eat bland or unhealthy food, or even no food at all. I think ideally, everyone would have access to food at least as healthy and diverse as what the richest people in the world eat today.
SC: So you’re saying you only want to make food slightly tastier than what you’re accustomed to, and no more? Pretty unimaginative of you.
GG: Well, for one thing, I’m not exactly confident that ASI would be good for people in the long term. It doesn’t even exist yet.
SC: It’s true, we need to make sure our culinary solutions are aligned to human tastes and bodies. We don’t want to roll out ASI that we later find out has a terrible aftertaste or gives people food poisoning. It’s a difficult problem.
GG: I guess so. But even if we’re sure this new food is basically aligned in that sense… it still feels risky, somehow. Like, maybe you’re right that many people will be sweet on ASI, and will choose to use it just like you say. But some people like preparing normal food for each other, even if it’s not optimal food…
SC: Nothing’s stopping anyone from gathering together and sharing regular food, if they really want to. No one would be forced to eat ASI.
GG: That was just an example. I’m not sure what would go wrong, if anything. And maybe you’re right, maybe some sort of food optimization really is best for humanity. But… I feel pretty satisfied with the food that already exists. A lot of it is pretty great, actually. We should at least take some time to think before distributing radically novel foods throughout the world.
SC: Don’t worry, I’ve already been thinking hard about the right way to optimize sweetness. For example, how do we precisely quantify it? Supertasters are mostly known for having a greater density of lingual papillae, but I theorize that differences in the gustatory cortex are important for perceiving sweetness too…
GG: You know, I’d have thought you’d spend more time enjoying sweetness yourself, if you’re such a sweetness enthusiast.
SC: I’ll have plenty of time to experience sweetness after ASI. And look, I’ve been eating these chocolate bars.
GG: Yeah, you’ve scarfed down eleven of them in the last five minutes. Are you even tasting those?
SC: Of course I taste them. My tongue is working fine.
GG: Not really what I meant.
SC: But sadly, I’m getting full, and a bit sleepy too. It’s a real blocker on my ability to taste sweetness. Someday, I’ll genetically engineer a few dozen catfish to constantly perceive sweetness all over their bodies and never stop eating or fall asleep, then kill myself and feed them my corpse. Pretty sweet, right?
Well done. This makes me realize that I do indeed sound like that sometimes.
How about preference utilitarianism? But somehow it seems like people don't like hearing that they'll do more of whatever they want, if it means other people are off having weirder fun.
As herd animals, everyone wants everyone to live like that they want them to live, not how they want to live.
Convincing people the future could be far better is much harder than convincing them they could die from misaligned ASI. But without seeing the upside, there's weak incentive to work together to achieve aligned ASI.
Probably the same with negative-valence stuff. Minimizing pain or suffering also misses the rich and multifaced feelings that are kinda in the vicinity, but not really either. E.g. anxiety, regret, disgust, craving, sorrow, ennui, bleakness, isolation, delirium, tiredness, dread, shame.
Epicurean status: strawman, kind of.
Gourmet George: Yum! This chocolate is so sweet and tasty.
Sweet Caroline: Yeah, it’s pretty good. And someday in the glorious hyperculinary future, we’ll figure out how to make it even sweeter!
GG: I think this chocolate is sweet enough, actually.
SC: Huh? But you like sweetness, don’t you?
GG: Sure…
SC: Well, then we’re in agreement. We should maximize the sweetness of this chocolate.
GG: I don’t want my chocolate to be maximally sweet, though.
SC: But you’d be “sweeter on” that chocolate if it were sweeter. By definition!
GG: I’d be “sweeter on” the chocolate? You mean, I’d be “happier with” it?
SC: Yes. And if you ever tried maximally sweet chocolate, you’d be maximally sweet on it. Therefore, you should surely want to maximize the sweetness of your chocolate, and everything else you eat for that matter.
GG: Somehow, I don’t feel very convinced…
SC: Well, what else could you possibly care about besides sweetness?
GG: For one thing, I enjoy the cocoa flavor in this chocolate.
SC: That doesn’t sound right. Would you want to eat a bowl of pure cocoa powder?
GG: Not really. It would be too bitter.
SC: Exactly. Bitterness tastes bad, so we should minimize bitterness. How could adding something bitter to your food make you sweeter on it?
GG: I think a little bitterness is good sometimes, as one component of a rich meal. You could say the bitterness helps one appreciate the sweetness more fully.
SC: Respectfully, that sounds like cope from someone who’s already given up all hope of escaping bitterness. It’s okay! You don’t have to live this way!
GG: No, I really do like bitterness sometimes, in moderation. And other flavors too, like spiciness and sourness. I guess my taste buds have matured since I was younger. Back then, I used to think that when I got older, I’d want to eat nothing but sugar.
SC: Well, of course we can’t eat sugar all the time. Eating too much sugar makes your teeth fall out, and it would be harder to chew food without teeth. And of course, in culinary research, proper chewing is crucial for productivity.
GG: I see.
SC: But someday, we will discover an Artificial Sweetening Ingredient, which will be incredibly sweet without making anyone’s teeth fall out. This ASI will permanently coat the tongue of anyone who tastes it, so anyone can experience maximal sweetness all the time. And it will contain every nutrient a human could ever need. Nobody will ever need to eat anything but ASI again.
GG: That sounds unappealing.
SC: Well, it sounds appealing to me. I suppose we just have different perceptions of tastiness.
GG: Maybe. I feel like if you tried ASI, you wouldn’t find it optimally tasty either, but I can’t say for sure.
SC: Well, for the sake of argument, let’s suppose that true tastiness is something more than just sweetness. How do you define tastiness?
GG: I can’t really define it. But I like food with a rich combination of flavors.
SC: Okay. Then let’s find the food with the richest combination of flavors that maximizes your “indefinable” sense of tastiness, and you can just eat that.
GG: Uh, that doesn’t seem right. I prefer not to eat the same thing all the time.
SC: What oddly complicated preferences… but fine. Perhaps we can implant a device in your mouth that applies hundreds of diversely-flavored foods to your tongue every minute.
GG: I don’t know exactly what maximizes my indefinable sense of tastiness, but I don’t think it’s that.
SC: Sigh. Well, whatever it is, we can surely simulate it with an implant that’s truly aligned to your idiosyncratic tastes.
GG: Honestly, I’d rather sit here and slowly savor this chocolate. I feel sweeter on that than on any of your ideas. What’s wrong with just eating normal food for the rest of my life?
SC: What a loss of potential! There are so many possible diets. Surely you don’t think humanity’s current diet is optimal.
GG: Well, no. Some people in the world have to eat bland or unhealthy food, or even no food at all. I think ideally, everyone would have access to food at least as healthy and diverse as what the richest people in the world eat today.
SC: So you’re saying you only want to make food slightly tastier than what you’re accustomed to, and no more? Pretty unimaginative of you.
GG: Well, for one thing, I’m not exactly confident that ASI would be good for people in the long term. It doesn’t even exist yet.
SC: It’s true, we need to make sure our culinary solutions are aligned to human tastes and bodies. We don’t want to roll out ASI that we later find out has a terrible aftertaste or gives people food poisoning. It’s a difficult problem.
GG: I guess so. But even if we’re sure this new food is basically aligned in that sense… it still feels risky, somehow. Like, maybe you’re right that many people will be sweet on ASI, and will choose to use it just like you say. But some people like preparing normal food for each other, even if it’s not optimal food…
SC: Nothing’s stopping anyone from gathering together and sharing regular food, if they really want to. No one would be forced to eat ASI.
GG: That was just an example. I’m not sure what would go wrong, if anything. And maybe you’re right, maybe some sort of food optimization really is best for humanity. But… I feel pretty satisfied with the food that already exists. A lot of it is pretty great, actually. We should at least take some time to think before distributing radically novel foods throughout the world.
SC: Don’t worry, I’ve already been thinking hard about the right way to optimize sweetness. For example, how do we precisely quantify it? Supertasters are mostly known for having a greater density of lingual papillae, but I theorize that differences in the gustatory cortex are important for perceiving sweetness too…
GG: You know, I’d have thought you’d spend more time enjoying sweetness yourself, if you’re such a sweetness enthusiast.
SC: I’ll have plenty of time to experience sweetness after ASI. And look, I’ve been eating these chocolate bars.
GG: Yeah, you’ve scarfed down eleven of them in the last five minutes. Are you even tasting those?
SC: Of course I taste them. My tongue is working fine.
GG: Not really what I meant.
SC: But sadly, I’m getting full, and a bit sleepy too. It’s a real blocker on my ability to taste sweetness. Someday, I’ll genetically engineer a few dozen catfish to constantly perceive sweetness all over their bodies and never stop eating or fall asleep, then kill myself and feed them my corpse. Pretty sweet, right?
GG: AHHH! (runs away)