Could we engineer a world where suffering no longer exists?

Ideas & Philosophy · Published 18 October 2026 Swipe more like this →

In short: British philosopher David Pearce proposes a radical moral obligation known as the 'hedonistic imperative.' He envisions a future where advanced biotechnology replaces the agony of pain with gradients of bliss, effectively redesigning the global ecosystem to eliminate suffering for all sentient life.

At the heart of Pearce’s philosophy is the 'abolitionist project,' a vision of 'paradise engineering.' In his 1995 manifesto, *The Hedonistic Imperative*, Pearce argues that we have a moral duty to use converging technologies—including pharmacology, genetic engineering, nanotechnology, and neurosurgery—to eradicate unpleasant experiences. He suggests that just as anesthesia eliminated the physical trauma of surgery, future tools could allow us to maintain the functional signals of pain without the accompanying agony. This vision is supported by his work with BLTC Research, a network he established to publish literature on topics like biopsychiatry and pharmacology.

Pearce’s approach is rooted in negative utilitarianism, focusing on the reduction of suffering. His vision extends far beyond human biology; he advocates for a 'cross-species global analogue of the welfare state.' This includes the radical idea of 'reprogramming predators' to limit predation and using fertility regulation to maintain herbivore populations. By doing so, he believes we can prevent the suffering caused by famine, disease, and natural predation in the wild. His ethical framework is deeply personal, influenced by a childhood spent in a vegetarian household and a lifelong concern with the problem of aging. He has even advocated for the transformation of carnivores into herbivores through scientific means.

The scale of this ambition is immense. Pearce suggests that our post-human successors could eventually rewrite the vertebrate genome and redesign the entire global ecosystem. While his ideas have inspired the 'hedonistic transhumanism' school, they remain a profound provocation to traditional ethics, challenging us to consider whether the elimination of all suffering is a reachable—and even necessary—technological goal. Pearce, who studied at Oxford, also co-founded the World Transhumanist Association alongside Nick Bostrom in 1998.

General information, not professional advice. Spotted an error? Flag the card or see corrections and complaints.

Intellect Plus is a visual educational discovery platform for exploring fascinating facts and ideas. Brain Food, Not Brain Rot. What is Intellect Plus?

Related

• The ethical boundaries of engineering our own biological evolution
• Is coming into existence a fundamental harm? A philosopher argues we should not procreate.
• Is the ultimate moral goal to end all suffering?
• Are we biologically programmed for self-destruction?
• Can we engineer nature to conquer hunger and death?
• The architecture of morality: defining what it means to be ethical
• How to uproot a culture of corruption through early intervention
• How the concept of speciesism shaped the modern history of veganism
• The moral weight of a 'yes' vote in a capital trial
• Can moral clarity fix the systemic inequalities of modern capitalism?
• Two ships are in distress, but you only have time to save one
• Would you sacrifice one life to save five others?

More in Ethics · More in Ideas & Philosophy · Latest · A–Z · All topics