It’s ironic, the perfect utopia is no utopia at all
So if you think about books like the giver, where everyone has everything they need and everything is fair, and no one suffers, it really seems strange how the characters refuse to accept the world they have, which comes down to a fundamental part of us humans. We humans are designed to appreciate the work that went into getting to the goal, which could be food or money or power, etc., but having that joy or pleasure for extended periods of time becomes boring to people, so it becomes impossible for people to accept a perfect world. If we want people to get exactly what they want (and arguably what we were meant to get) we cannot have a utopia, because if it was a utopia, then we wouldn’t accept it. So what is this non utopia? It’s going back to how we were when we learned these mechanisms which reward accomplishments, which were learned when we were hunters and gatherers living by a fire.
I am not saying that we should abandon all innovation, but that there is a certain paradox in utopian ideas.
Please point out any problems in my stance, like an example of a functional utopia where it would be accepted, or a reason why we we would be able to function inside one. I did not use ai to write this (just in case)