Besides the fact this is literally impossible (a magical drug and the ease to distribute it to literally everyone.)
I don't think it would really work that well either, yes although irrational aggression does cause its fair share of violence the greatest acts of violence are simply people acting out in self-interest that leads to war. Taking away aggression won't change that there are cases where one can turn to bloodshed as the most effective mean to get what one wants.
War isn't started on urges, you hypothesis is based off a really naive opinion of human tragedy. War is bred from inequality, misinformation, fear, desperation, etc. all those negative nuances of fear that prey on the human mind and drive one into a corner.
There currently is a great amount of violence in the world, and there has been for centuries, even millennia; not only are there military wars, there are also random acts of violence (i.e., school shootings and other massacres) and athletes being abusive toward their spouses.
Some people are certainly making an attempt to reduce violence, and I believe that efforts have been successful (for example, there has not been a full-scale war since World War II, seventy years ago), but violence still remains, which means that those efforts are not the ultimate solution.
I myself have been wondering how to reduce global violence, and I had an idea: what if scientists developed a chemical that, when inhaled or ingested, altered the chemical balance of the human brain to reduce aggressive and violent behavior, and perhaps increase compassion and sympathy, as well? They could then disperse that chemical into the air and across the entire planet, which would, ideally, affect every living person, and hopefully reduce acts of warfare and other violence by reducing aggressive urges.
What does everyone else say about this? How feasible is this idea, and might any scientists ever actually attempt it?
I support that removing free will, will remove what makes humans, well humans. But I have to be the guy to say it. Wouldn't society be more efficient and perfect if humans didn't possess free will? And I think that's the point that the OP was trying to point out.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"When people thought the earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together." - Michael Shermer
... what if scientists developed a chemical that, when inhaled or ingested, altered the chemical balance of the human brain to reduce aggressive and violent behavior, and perhaps increase compassion and sympathy, as well?
Scientists have been developing, and testing, drugs capable of doing so many things on the human mind for decades.
> Only people are mostly prescribed these for an ailment, like depression for example.
For reason's of allergic reaction alone, having a drug for everyone would never work. You know, Anaphylactic shock and all that...
And drugs DO often have quite different effects on people due to tolerances, weight, sex, genetic differences etc.
That said;
This is a horrific idea.
Why subdue everyones' minds? Most people are peace-loving individuals...
And what about professions where a bit of aggression is a good thing? Like a professional sportsman/woman?
If you're using the example of wars like WW2 > wars don't usually start due to a politician being literally violent, but because they see the opportunity for influence, power and/or money/reward. Reducing someone's aggression won't do anything here...
I don't accept the free will argument because I don't believe dampened aggression actually compromises my free will. Aggression is not an essential aspect of it.
That said, aggression is not inherently immoral and completely removing a tool from our social toolbox could have untold cumulative effects on a societal level. So no, obviously not a worthy experiment.
How the flying **** is that not a valid argument? How is a government getting to mess with your head to control what you feel not something that anyone would object to?
I support that removing free will, will remove what makes humans, well humans. But I have to be the guy to say it. Wouldn't society be more efficient and perfect if humans didn't possess free will? And I think that's the point that the OP was trying to point out.
Yes, society would be a lot more efficient if you removed the free will from people.
But then it wouldn't be a free society.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Oath of the Gatewatch; the set that caused the competitive community to freak out over Basic Lands.
I don't think it would really work that well either, yes although irrational aggression does cause its fair share of violence the greatest acts of violence are simply people acting out in self-interest that leads to war. Taking away aggression won't change that there are cases where one can turn to bloodshed as the most effective mean to get what one wants.
War isn't started on urges, you hypothesis is based off a really naive opinion of human tragedy. War is bred from inequality, misinformation, fear, desperation, etc. all those negative nuances of fear that prey on the human mind and drive one into a corner.
Does such a chemical exist?
Scientists have been developing, and testing, drugs capable of doing so many things on the human mind for decades.
> Only people are mostly prescribed these for an ailment, like depression for example.
For reason's of allergic reaction alone, having a drug for everyone would never work. You know, Anaphylactic shock and all that...
And drugs DO often have quite different effects on people due to tolerances, weight, sex, genetic differences etc.
That said;
This is a horrific idea.
Why subdue everyones' minds? Most people are peace-loving individuals...
And what about professions where a bit of aggression is a good thing? Like a professional sportsman/woman?
If you're using the example of wars like WW2 > wars don't usually start due to a politician being literally violent, but because they see the opportunity for influence, power and/or money/reward. Reducing someone's aggression won't do anything here...
That said, aggression is not inherently immoral and completely removing a tool from our social toolbox could have untold cumulative effects on a societal level. So no, obviously not a worthy experiment.
Playtesting | Karador, Ghost Chieftain | Narset, Enlightened Master | Ephara, God of the Polis
Established | Gahiji, Honored One | Shirei, Shizo's Caretaker | Opal-Eye, Konda's Yojimbo | Rubinia Soulsinger
Retired | Medomai the Ageless | Diaochan, Artful Beauty
Yes, society would be a lot more efficient if you removed the free will from people.
But then it wouldn't be a free society.