Quote Originally Posted by Lurina View Post
Or to take Celertic's observation from the previous page, there's nothing to say that a culture that removed the need to eat (or rather, the threat of starvation) couldn't still engineer a means to taste and enjoy food. In the modern west, we already mostly eat for pleasure rather than necessity. The argument the writers are making, or seem to be making, relies on conflating seeking a very comfortable existence with seeking a boring one.
Would a whole planet that does not need to eat anymore (which begs the questions if they still have the necessary organs to do so) be fine with some people still consuming meals? Who would create these meals? If they are not like the Ancients who could just snap them into existence than they would need plants and animals for that. Would the others be fine that animals are still suffering for something that is not necessary? Or that nature is destroyed so that more plants that they can consume are planted?

We on earth still need to eat. Yes even here in the modern west we cant go without. That we also enjoy it on top of that is true, we dont need all these different meals to satisfy our hunger. But that is imo not the same as someone doing it when its absolutely not necessary anymore. (Without the quesiton if they are still able to do so)

There is also the question if a comfortable existence wont lead into a boring one with time. Look at some of the rich people in our world. What they are doing with their money even though they could do so much more to help others. But some of them are just so bored that they need to do stupid things to make it less so. Now take this, make everyone rich, give everyone a eternal or very long life and take away anything that makes the people suffer. How long until the first are done with it?

(And all of that without the problem that comes with taking away your emotions)