Showing posts with label allegory of the cave. Show all posts
Showing posts with label allegory of the cave. Show all posts

Thursday, April 6, 2023

Blog #107 - How well does Guy fit the prisoner in Plato's Allegory of the Cave?

 

So we discussed a llittle bit of Plato's Allegory of the Cave, which he used in The Republic (his most famous philosophical work and a book I had to read as a freshman in college - which I was not ready for and should reread when I get some time this summer).  The Allegory fits for so many things, as seen in the illustrated handout on Plato's ideas that I gave to you - it can be about how mankind learns, and it can be about how humans perceive the material world (in the cave) vs. in the idealistic world (the realm of the Forms). But today, it can be used or wielded as a criticism of the dramatic tendency of people to live in the worlds they choose to see on their screeens.  The video above is a different one than the one we saw in class (that is located in Schoology if you need a refresher) and also how the Allegory has been used in popular culture recently (feel free to reference the stuff in this video for Connection to the Real World Discussion #2 due next Thursday night).  

So I was initially drawn to Free Guy because I am a huge fan of Ryan Reynolds and his work, but as I initially watched the movie, I started thinking that the movie could be the screenwriter's and director's takes on the Allegory of the Cave (and truthfully, I wanted to find an alternative to the two movies that I have been rotating for the past ten years to illustrate the Allegory - The Matrix and Source Code).  Yes, it is a subversive satire about our online world that many of us dabble in or visit on a regular basis and all of the people who profit or comment on it.    Is it a critique of corporate capitalism and the fawning belief in our tech wonder bois as represented by Antwan?  Absolutely.  Does the movie use the stereotype of the Black Best Friend as shown in Buddy, the bank security guard?  Unfortunately.  Is the film a celebration or warning about the potentials of AI?  Debatable.  Is it a perfect fit for the Allegory?  Yes, but maybe no too.  



So, after we finish watching the movie, I would like you to analyze the following with specific references to the movie AND the Allegory: 

1. In what ways (minimum of 2) does any aspect of Free Guy fit the Allegory of the Cave?  How close of a fit are your examples and why?  Provide specifics.  

2. In what ways (minimum of 2) does any aspect of Free Guy NOT fit the Allegory of the Cave?  Why do your examples not fit the Allegory?  Provide specifics.  

Minimum 400 words total for your answers.  Due Monday night, April 10th by midnight.  

(If you missed Free Guy or a portion of it, the film is available on Disney+ and HBO Max).  

Articles: 

Every Philosophical Construct Free Guy Tackles With Video Games - https://www.cbr.com/free-guy-philosophy-explained/ 

The Philosophy of Free Guyhttps://erickimphotography.com/blog/2021/11/25/the-philosophy-of-free-guy-film-2021/

The Irony of Movies About Taking Charge of Your Life: https://www.vox.com/22617231/free-guy-review-reynolds-truman-show 

Are We Living in a Simulation?  Look to Free Guy, not the Matrix:  https://www.cbc.ca/radio/tapestry/are-we-living-in-a-simulation-look-to-free-guy-not-the-matrix-for-answers-says-david-chalmers-1.6393525

Free Guy Wants to Help You Escape the Simulation: https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2021/08/ryan-reynolds-shawn-levy-free-guy-simulation 


Thursday, April 7, 2022

Blog #100 - Agent Smith's Negative Outlook on Humanity

 

During Morpheus' interrogation, Agent Smith reveals to Morpheus why humans rejected the first version of the Matrix, the perfect version of it, 1.0:


"Did you know that the first Matrix was designed to be a perfect human world? Where none suffered, where everyone would be happy. It was a disaster. No one would accept the program. Entire crops were lost. Some believed we lacked the programming language to describe your perfect world. But I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through suffering and misery. The perfect world was a dream that your primitive cerebrum kept trying to wake up from, which is why the Matrix was redesigned to this: the peak of your civilization"1

This idea that humans' lot in life on Earth is suffering comes a lot from many different religions, but it's also a very negative view of life.  Is it accurate that humans' reality DEPENDS upon suffering and misery?  That's one question I'd like you to think more deeply about.  


Smith goes on to define humans as a virus that destroys anything and everything in its path; we spread across the planet like a plague and annihilate everything.


"I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species and I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is consumed and the only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You're a plague and we are the cure" 1



This is kind of a bleak outlook on humanity, but what would you expect from a computer / artificial intelligence who had been trying to destroy our kind for 200 years? But, ironically, these thoughts didn't come from a computer but the minds of the Wachowski sisters who wrote the script. And even more levels of irony, the Agents characters (as revealed in the sequels) are essentially viruses in the system of the Matrix (think about it - they can hop from one sentient being to another, and when that being is killed, the virus / Agent looks for another host with which to do damage).  



And since we're hopefully wrapping up the Covid pandemic (fingers crossed), I couldn't help but think of the corona virus when I watched this scene again in 2022.  In the past two years, we have seen the virus kill over 1 million Americans (and 6.2 million worldwide as of April 7) and almost half a BILLION confirmed cases across the world.  If we want any evidence that humans are NOT a virus, this pandemic has shut that notion down dramatically (though some radical environmental activists point to improved pollution levels as the pandemic being a good thing since a lot of human activity was shut down for months on end).  


Questions: 
1. Do you agree w/ Agent Smith that humankind's reality depends upon suffering and misery?  Why or why not?  
2. Does mankind act like a virus in the way we consume resources and destroy our living space? Why or why not?


Due Sunday, April 10. 300 words minimum for your total answer.

Sources:
1. Internet Movie Database - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0133093/quotes


A little music to make the blog go easier: Shinedown's "Devour" - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QXNtLaOnSE plus the lyrics for the song:

Take it and take it and take it and take it and take it all
Take it and take it and take it until you take us all
Smash it and crash it and thrash it and trash it
You know they're only toys
Try it you'll like it don't hide it don't fight it, just let it out
Steal and shoot it and kill it or take another route
Take it and take it and take it
You know they're only toys
Devour Devour
Suffocate your own empire
Devour Devour
It's your final hour
Devour Devour
Stolen like a foreign soul
Devour Devour
What a way to go
You want it, you want it, you want it, you want it
Well here it is
Everything everything everything
Isn't so primitive
Take it and take it and take it and take it and take it all
Nobody nobody wants to feel like this
Nobody nobody wants to live like this
Nobody nobody wants a war like this
Devour Devour
Suffocate your own empire
Devour Devour
It's your final hour
Devour Devour
Stolen like a foreign soul
Devour Devour
What a way to go
What a way to go

Tuesday, March 26, 2019

Blog #82 - Questions concerning The Source Code

We talked a bit about the film, Source Code, and how it relates to Plato's Allegory of the Cave.  I don't know if it's a perfect fit, but what is?  I think further research is needed for this topic and if you guys can find it pertaining to the film and Plato, that would be great (don't forget to read the illustrated handout on Plato, the cave, what it means, and his ideal society for more details).

The film opens up some questions about fate that I don't think it really answered or that we really touched upon too much.  When Capt. Stevens kept being pulled out of the Source Code (SC) and back into his "capsule," he saw these glimpses - call them deja vu, precognition, whatever - of himself and Christina at Chicago's Millenium Park and the big chrome bean.  These scenes occurred even before he felt like saving anybody on the train or understood his situation - as if he was headed towards that future "alternate universe" no matter happened.  Could it be that every obstacle that Stevens ran into (or literally ran into him - see below!) kept him moving towards that unavoidable future?


Image result for source code movie

What about the morality of using Capt. Stevens as a lab rat for the Source Code?  It's obvious by the end of the movie that he's in a terrible state of physical trauma, and that only his mind is the most complete and functioning part of him.  At points in the film, it appeared that Dr. Rutledge was "torturing" Stevens by sending him back into the memories of Sean Fentress only to be blown up again and again.  We did mention that Capt. Stevens, as a member of the U.S. military, most likely, had signed away his rights to do with his remains as his parents wished.  However, it is hard to imagine a father wishing this for his son.  And by the end of the film, if it has reset and everything starts anew, Capt. Stevens will continue to be used further in the GWOT (global war on terror).

One question I kept having while first watching the movie (and occasionally in rewatching it with previous philosophy classes), is what happened to Sean Fentress's essence or soul or being?  Captain Stevens takes over Sean's body, his likeness doesn't change, but his demeanor and actions do, as evidenced by Christina noticing how different he is acting on subsequent trips into the Source Code.  Dr. Rutledge says that Sean Fentress exists in the Source Code as an electromagnetic field.  But where did his essence go?  Does Sean's essence / soul / being cease to exist as soon as Capt. Stevens enters Sean's body?  Or did it cease to exist as soon as he died and this "Sean" is just a shadow of his former self?   Does Sean's essence go somewhere else (maybe heading to heaven or hell or limbo, depending upon what you or even Sean believed)?  Is his essence maybe going some place permenantly because he doesn't come back to his body after the end of eight minutes - the bomb goes off and Sean and Christina and dozens other people die?  Or since we're watching a memory replay over and over again, is the whole point of where Sean is a moot point because at that point, Sean and many others are already dead and just live on in the memory?  Plus at the end of the movie, we see Sean and Christina walking by Millenium Park enjoying a beautiful spring day playing hooky in some kind of memory(?) that couldn't have happened because the bomb didn't go off.  Has the real Sean returned?  Or is that still Capt. Stevens in his body?

One more question that I thought of while watching the movie again was this: are all of these trips into the Source Code with all of their different outcomes just part of a multiverse?  Essentially, all of these trips have the same setting, the same laws of physics still apply, the same people in them, and essentially the same outcome (except for the last one) but the one wild card that changes every time is what Captain Stevens does within the eight minutes.  Do all of these of these trips comprise different versions of a multiverse?  And since the theory behind a multiverse states that almost all outcomes of an event are possible, that could leave room for one "reality" in which the bomb didn't go off.

Lastly, how do you explain the ending?  Goodwin and Rutledge have no knowledge of the previous day's events (if those events even occurred - but they had to have existed somewhere, b/c Stevens sent her the email - it came from somewhere, sometime, right?).  And at the end of the movie, it looked as if the whole day had been reset, Capt. Stevens was alive and in his previous "state of being," in addition to the bomber being caught and the initial train bombing never having occurred.

Questions to choose from:
1. How could the filmmakers have changed the film to make it more like Plato's cave?  Explain your reasoning.
2.  What role did fate play in this movie?  Why?  Or, did fate play no role at all and why not?
3.  Did the military cross the line with the use of Capt. Stevens' body and mind for the Source Code?  Why or why not?
4. Where did Sean Fentress's essence / soul / being go while Captain Stevens took over his body in the Source Code?  Why?
5. Is the ending a new "movie reality" (for lack of a better term)?  Why or why not?  Is it possible that Stevens' determination somehow merged the alternate universe with the movie's original reality?


Pick three of the following questions and answer it as fully as you can.  Stay in the nuances of the question as long as you can.  Your response should be a minimum of 400 words and is due Friday, March 29 before class begins. 

Here are a few interesting articles that explore some other issues brought up in the film: 
"Who is Sean Fentress? A Completely Serious Exploration of What Happened After the Ending of Source Code" - https://filmschoolrejects.com/who-is-sean-fentress-e3ddff9993a/ 
"Here I Am: The Identity Philosophy behind Source Code" - https://filmschoolrejects.com/here-i-am-the-identity-philosophy-of-source-code-78cbe40abd2f/ 
"The Philosophy Behind The Source Code" - https://maxandrews.wordpress.com/2011/06/15/the-philosophy-behind-source-code/ 

Friday, December 7, 2012

Blog #54 - Plato's Ideal State - Would it work today?

We've spent a little more time on Plato's ideal society this semester than I have in past semesters; maybe b/c this time around the world seems to be crumbling around us with roiling stock markets and the Big 3 impending collapse. Where better to look than the past when the future looks so bleak, right? Well, maybe we can learn something.

Several criticisms were brought up of this ideal society:

1. Where would the innovation come from if everyone be content? Doesn't innovation come from competition and competition come from peoples' desire to be better?

2. Why do they need soldiers if everyone is content? Is it just for protection from other city-states? Or, did Plato ever intend for this city to exist? If that is the case, why are the soldiers really there?

3. What kind of guarantee is there that the philosophers will rule in everyone's best interests? Is there an impeachment process? Can the peasants overthrow the rulers?

4. In the interests of specialization, what if you get bored with your job? What if you don't want that job? What if that job that you do best is NOT something you love doing? To use an example from 4th hour, I might do math really well, but that doesn't mean I want to be an accountant.

5. Is there no social mobility? What if we don't like the class that we're born into?


This link http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/2g.htm gives a good, brief synopsis of the first four books of the Republic in which this society is described. I have countered many of these arguments in a devil's advocate style by appealing to one of Socrates' universal questions - courage, justice, virtue, wisdom, moderation, beauty.

The question before you is: Can Plato's society be fixed to make it more ideal to fit a 21st century American audience? Why or why not?

Things to ponder while answering this question: Is Plato's society so incompatible with American ideals and tastes and traditions that it cannot be fixed?  Can Plato's society work for people of another country? What would you have to fix in order for it to work in America? Could it work on a national or state level or could it only work on a small scale? If it only works on a small scale, what's the use?
 - Also, are Americans too individualistic to give up some of our freedoms or luxuries for the greater good of society.  This will be a topic - the greater good vs. the desires of the individual - as we go on through the semester.  

250 word minimum response.  Due Thursday, Dec. 13 by class time.

Also, new philosophy books in our school media center:
      
       

     

Enjoy!

Monday, September 19, 2011

Blog #49 -Source Code blog has arrived

*******SPOILER ALERT ******* IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE FILM, DON'T READ.

We talked a lot about the film, Source Code, and how it relates to Plato's Allegory of the Cave.  I don't know if it's a perfect fit, but what is?  I think further research is needed for this topic and if you guys can find it pertaining to the film and Plato, that would be great (don't forget to read the illustrated handout for more details). 

The film opens up some questions about fate that I don't think it really answered or that we really touched upon too much.  When Capt. Stevens kept being pulled out of the SC and back into his "capsule," he saw these glimpses - call them deja vu, precognition, whatever - of himself and Christina at Chicago's Millenium Park and the big chrome bean.  These scenes occurred even before he felt like saving anybody on the train or understood his situation - as if he was headed towards that future "alternate universe" no matter happened.  Could it be that every obstacle that Stevens ran into (or literally ran into him - see below!) kept him moving towards that inexorable future? 



What about the morality of using Capt. Stevens as a lab rat for the Source Code?  It's obvious by the end of the movie that he's in a terrible state of physical trauma, and that only his mind is the most complete and functioning part of him.  At points in the film, it appeared that Dr. Rutledge was "torturing" Stevens by sending him back into the memories of Sean Fentress only to be blown up again and again.  We did mention that Capt. Stevens, as a member of the U.S. military, most likely, had signed away his rights to do with his remains as his parents wished.  However, it is hard to imagine a father wishing this for his son.  And by the end of the film, if it has reset and everything starts anew, Capt. Stevens will continue to be used further in the GWOT (global war on terror). 

Lastly, how do you explain the ending?  Goodwin and Rutledge have no knowledge of the previous day's events (if those events even occurred - but they had to have existed somewhere, b/c Stevens sent her the email - it came from somewhere, sometime, right?).  And at the end of the movie, it looked as if the whole day had been reset, Capt. Stevens was alive and in his previous "state of being," in addition to the bomber being caught and the initial train bombing never having occurred. 

Questions to choose from:
1. How could the filmmakers have changed the film to make it more or less like Plato's cave?  Explain your reasoning. 
2.  What role did fate play in this movie?  Why?  Or, did fate play no role at all and why not? 
3.  Did the military cross the line with the use of Capt. Stevens' body and mind for the Source Code?  Why or why not? 
4.  Is the ending a new "movie reality" (for lack of a better term)?  Why or why not?  Is it possible that Stevens' determination somehow merged the alternate universe with the movie's original reality? 
  

Pick one of the following questions and answer it as fully as you can.  Stay in the nuances of the question as long as you can.  Your response should be a minimum of 250 words and is due Wednesday, Sept. 21 before class begins. 

Online articles to check out if you have time:
"Here I Am: The Identity Philosophy of SC" - http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/here-i-am-the-identity-philosophy-of-source-code.php
"Who is Sean Fentress?: A (Completely Serious) Exploration of What Happened After the End of Source Code" - http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/what-happened-after-the-ending-of-source-code.php 

Wednesday, September 17, 2008

Blog#2 - Red Pill or Blue Pill?

New Due Date - Friday, Sept. 19th

Which pill would you have taken and why?

Neo is offered the red pill and the blue pill by Morpheus in the opening act of the Matrix. The blue pill allows Neo to remain in the Matrix, in essence to go back to sleep and to remember this little encounter w/ Morpheus as a dream or "believe whatever you want to believe". The red pill allows Neo to stay in the "wonderland" and discover the truth.

Here's an essay about the pills - http://www.arrod.co.uk/essays/matrix.php I like this sentence best in the essay:

"The question then is not about pills, but what they stand for in these circumstances. The question is asking us whether reality, truth, is worth pursuing."

I think since most if not all of you who are taking this class are taking this class b/c you want to dig deeper into life, you are highly curious and intelligent and want to find out what is out there, I think there's very very few who will NOT take the red pill.

So, when answering this question, consider the possible ramifications/consequences of choosing your pill.

  • Are you content with knowing that you could die at any moment from those machines that are trying to kill you?
  • What if Neo is NOT the One and you've sacrificed yourself for nothing?
  • Obviously, if you choose the blue pill and you go back into the Matrix, would you be able to live w/ yourself w/ the knowledge that you had the answers at your fingertips and you let them go (for whatever reasons - fear, apathy, etc.)?

So, when choosing, choose wisely and consider the consequences of your actions. Discuss this in your blog. 200 words minimum.