I watched the trilogy, only twice though; still haven't figured out how it all hangs together.

Would you still chose to escape it?

If yes, would you say that is the rational choice? — TheMadMan

I'd say it's neither rational nor irrational. It's a question of values, which are non-rational.

Would you still chose to escape it? — TheMadMan

If I didn't know it was fabricated, on what basis would I decide whether to escape it? It's not rational to escape from a satisfactory environment.

If the matrix will give you all that you want and could ever want, without ever being aware that it is fabricated, would you chose the red pill? — TheMadMan

We may already be in that situation and we may never know.

If I was comfortable I would stay in the most comfortable scenario because I don't like suffering. I place a lot of value on my comfort I suppose and see no value in suffering.

This is like the Free Will issue to some extent. If we don't have free will nothing will change because we would already be living without free will.

In the matrix scenario if you left the matrix what would the alternative be? It could be better it could be worse or a completely mindf*ck.

If I didn't know it was fabricated, on what basis would I decide whether to escape it? — Vera Mont

Fair enough but that's beside my point.

It's not rational to escape from a satisfactory environment. — Vera Mont

I'll take that as a 'yes' to the title question.

We may already be in that situation and we may never know. — Andrew4Handel

Maybe.

In the matrix scenario if you left the matrix what would the alternative be? It could be better it could be worse or a completely mindf*ck. — Andrew4Handel

The current real world.

Ok. Which value would you attribute to each choice?

Fair enough but that's beside my point. — TheMadMan

What is the point? If I don't know there is a choice, how do I define "rational option"?

I'll take that as a 'yes' to the title question. — TheMadMan

If you like. It seems arbitrary.

The current real world — TheMadMan

There are a lot of scenarios I would happily chose over the current world.

but I would not exchange the current real world for an identical world in a simulator because that would seem pointless.

I would like to know what the truth is and live in a truthful situation.

I don't think a simulation could be identical to this world otherwise we couldn't know if the "real world" was another simulation ad infinitum.

The truth seems illusive under any scenario.

On the issue of rationality I think it is a hard concept to defend. Like morality it seems to require preexisting rules otherwise it descends into subjective preference.

On what grounds are we deciding what is rational? Maybe only choosing the truth is rational.

What is the point? If I don't know there is a choice, how do I define "rational option"? — Vera Mont

Its a hypothetical where you are outside the matrix. The point is on the nature of the choice. Not the possibility of making it.

If you like. It seems arbitrary. — Vera Mont

I neither like nor dislike. It seemed pretty clear from your quote. I may have misunderstood it.

On what grounds are we deciding what is rational? Maybe only choosing the truth is rational. — Andrew4Handel

This is a good point. I myself am not clearly set on what to call rational. That's why I put it in such a question. To arrive at what you are alluding to: Is seeking truth rational or irrational, or maybe something beyond both?

That's only because i don't understand how I can be outside of something, not know it's fabricated and also escape it. Guess I just don't get how "the matrix" works. So, better not put me down as either; just write me off as N/A.

Which value would you attribute to each choice? — TheMadMan

I'm not sure what I would do in a situation like that.

Hypothetical: You have learned that your partner who you love has cheated you multiple times.
I give the chance to press a button and completely forget that he/she has cheated on you. So you continue your relationship blissfully unaware and you are happy.
Would you push the button?

. To arrive at what you are alluding to: Is seeking truth rational or irrational, or maybe something beyond both? — TheMadMan

I feel that rationality is a value statement about beliefs and behaviours.

On one account rationality could require consistency between belief and behaviour.

If someone says "I hate getting wet" but goes out in the rain without an umbrella that could be considered irrational. But we could argue that peoples beliefs and behaviour don't need to compliment each other we just value that personally.

I think how you respond to a choice like staying in the matrix or not would reflect your values and preferences probably. If you value living in the truth you might want to get out of the matrix.

I try to myself to some extent by challenging my perceptions and received information. At some stage it can get to the point of rejecting society, getting confused or having lots of unanswered questions.

Would you push the button? — TheMadMan

I wouldn't push the button, but that doesn't change my answer to the previous question.

If someone says "I hate getting wet" but goes out in the rain without an umbrella that could be considered irrational. — Andrew4Handel

Unless they found out his reason for going out in the rain on that particular occasion. We do lots of things we hate for lots of reasons - some of them quite rational.

I think this dilemma comes down to "Which is most reasonable to prioritize: happiness, knowledge or understanding? and which is least reasonable?" For me, it's understanding (then² happiness, then³ knowledge); so I'd take "the red pill" understanding that it merely presents an alternative possible version of what "the blue pill" presents: a higher level of "systems of control" (i.e. that the Matrix¹ is (always) nested within a larger, more complex, Matrix⁰ ... sort of like strange-looping Matryoshka dolls) because this insight is the one thing that the vanilla "blue pill" cannot provide – in fact, is designed to occlude.

Would you say that pursuing happiness and well-being is rational behaviour and denying yourself the opportunity for it, is irrational?

Doesn't that imply that you value truth in the expense of happiness?

Do you make a distinction between reasonable and rational?

If the matrix will give you all that you want and could ever want, without ever being aware that it is fabricated, would you chose the red pill?
All you are striving for in life is achieved in the matrix in the appropriate way and you'll die thinking that it was all real.
Would you still chose to escape it? — TheMadMan

The plot of the first movie does not suggest that life in the matrix 'gives you everything you want and ever could want.' In fact, I think that's what caused the first attempts at the simulation to fail.
I think matrix world is something similar to our current world. So I think that the movies are suggesting a situation where the real world is much tougher than matrix world.
The plot doesn't make much sense, as a creature such as an electric eel produces much more electricity than humans do, so if the machines want a good organic battery, they could do much better than using humans. Electric eels would give them much fewer problems and much more power.

So, we are left with the modern dilemma, in the future, will we prefer to live in a star trek style holodeck or the 'real' world? For me, I return to the question of what is pleasure without pain?
To quote Captain Kirk in 'The undiscovered country,'"I need my pain."
We need to escape to the holodeck sometimes, so we need to experience 'unreal' and 'real' to feel human. We need both pills, and we need to be able to switch between them. We don't want either to be a permanent immutable state of being.

Mr. Anderson is mad of course, but shhh, don't tell anyone! :cool:

Do you make a distinction between reasonable and rational? — TheMadMan

My rule of thumb: rational is inferential (algorithmic) and reasonable contextual (adaptive), they are complementary but do not entail one another.

The plot of the first movie does not suggest that life in the matrix 'gives you everything you want and ever could want. — universeness

I'm not using the plot of the matrix. I only borrow the idea of the matrix and red/blue pill. In my setting you can have the perfect life. Where even pain and discomfort is in appropriate proportion so you can enjoy pleasure.

Ok. What is most reasonable for you? Truth in the expense of happiness or happiness in the expense of truth?

As I've said previously

For me, it's understanding (then² happiness, then³ knowledge); — 180 Proof

... or "happiness before truth", which is not necessarily to the exclusion of "truth".

So your main complaint is about 'excessive' individual suffering that is present in our 'real' world.
This is 'uninvited' and 'unwelcome' suffering. I assume you would prefer to have more control over how, when and why you experience suffering. So would I, to an extent, but I also celebrate, uninvited and unwelcome happenstance suffering, due to the 'learning' opportunity such can offer.
I don't include sufferings such as hunger, poverty, homelessness, disenfranchisement, natural disaster, mental illness, etc, etc.
The solutions to these problems lie in the will of humans to unite and work together, pool all available resources, etc to solve these problems. That's why I am a secular humanist/socialist who believes the scientific method is our best hope for creating tech that can reduce or eliminate the current extreme forms of unjustified human suffering as well as correct our ecological mistakes and offer humans more options (more lifespan, more robustness (via transhumanism)).

which is not necessarily to the exclusion of "truth". — 180 Proof

In reality it may be not. But in my hypothetical it is.

happiness before truth — 180 Proof

Got it.