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.
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?
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 as the movie suggested? 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.
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 each one 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 total and is due Wednesday, Sept. 23 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/
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 each one 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 total and is due Wednesday, Sept. 23 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/
I believe that Sean Fentress's essence/ soul/ being was dead in that reality/ universe as soon as the bomb went off in real life. As soon as the source code began it was just a simulation to Captain Stevens and his soul was the only one present. Sean’s essence/ soul/ being went to the afterlife as soon as the bomb first went off, but when Captain Stevens caught the bomber and chose to die he created an alternate reality where everybody was technically real. I believe that the real Sean Fentress got to live in this reality but Captain Stevens and Goodwin are stuck in a constant time loop where the same thing happens every day, they catch the bomber. Each day creating a new alternate reality, like it showed in the Bean.
ReplyDeleteAccording to my time loop theory I believe that the government did cross the line with using Captain Stevens essence/ body for the source code. Although at the same time he is unaware of the time loop so he is unaware of his constant pain and torture he goes through everyday to catch the bomber. Also, keeping in mind the fact that Captain Stevens did save hundreds or even thousands of people in Chicago that day by catching the bomber through the source code I can see how some people would state that one life out rules hundreds or thousands. There is also the argument that Captain Stevens would be dead but instead his mind lives on continuing to serve his country, he should be happy to live on even after death but in the end he chooses to die. Stevens wanted Goodwin to cut his life support because he’d rather die than continue in the source code. I believe the single fact that Captain Stevens would prefer to die than to have his essence live on in the source code should prove that the government crossed the line, but I believe that one mission is enough and then the government should allow them to make their own decision to stay in the source code or to end their life support.
The end of the movie is not a new movie reality, like I said before I believe that Captain Stevens created a time loop. I believe this time loop was created when Stevens sent the text to Goodwin when he was in the source code. The text about the playing cards which basically says when a man named Captain Stevens arrives she should eventually turn off his life support, which she does. Little did Stevens know, Goodwin would receive this text every single Monday morning and this will happen for infinity, unbeknownst to Goodwin or Stevens or anybody for that matter. Steven creates a new alternate reality everytime Goodwin turns off his life support day after day after day. Eventually resulting in the creation of infinite alternate realities till the end of time.
Ben Glick
ReplyDelete3. I think that the military crossed the line with the use of Captain Stevens body and mind. He has absolutely no control over his life. He was still living but he has basically no choices in his life. He was forced into the program; he had no say over what would happen to him after he “died”. He was forced to continuously go into the source code even though he had no understanding of what was going on around him and clearly didn’t want to. Dr. Rutledge tried to wipe his memory, even after they made a deal that they would let him die. Even the having the capacity to wipe his memory and have him do everything all over again is taking it to far. If they actually went through with the memory wipe it means that Captain Stevens would be in an unescapable and constant state of torture and captivity. They went too far because they usurped any control he had on his life, and forced him to do things, some of which were borderline torture, against his will.
4. Sean Fentress’s essence was gone before the source code starts. When Sean died his essence went wherever you believe essence goes. When he died he was no more. I think source code is no more than a video game. They use Sean’s memories and Brain to make that game, but Sean is dead. The source code is just making a recreation of his memories and environment. When the captain goes into Sean’s body, he isn’t stealing life away from Sean because Sean never existed as a person in the Source Code. It seems that the Source Code is just a simulation. It’s not like it’s transferring the captain into a pre-existing alternate reality.
5. I don’t know if the source code really creates a new reality. I think probably creates a temporary reality. I have no reason to believe that the final use of the Source Code is any different than the previous ones. Captain Stevens was told that he only had eight minutes because that was all that was stored in the memory, but we have no reason to believe that once those 8 minutes were up he would be pulled out. Throughout the whole movie he never ran out of time and was pulled out of the Source Code. Every time he was pulled out it was because he died in the source code. So, I think it probably creates a temporary reality that he stays in until he dies. I think that if the movie took a route in which Goodwin never killed Captain Stevens, the ending could be very different. This is because I think Captain Stevens would live out his whole life in the Source code, but once he died, he would wake up back in the original reality. The only reason this is impossible in the current ending is that he is dead, so when he wakes up he will be waking up into a dead body.
There are multiple ways that the filmmakers could've made the movie more similar to Plato's allegory. I felt that the filmmakers showed the "real world" much to early. But since they were limited by a part of the plot that states that the simulation an only last eight minutes. If they would have been able to wait linger before pulling Stevens out of the simulation, the audience might have been much more convinced that the simulation was actually where the story took place, putting the audience in the place of the prisoner, truly believing that what they see is reality. They also could've had more than one person on the simulation (maybe his army crew), but Stevens would be the only one to realize they were dead this whole time. He would come back to his crewmates to tell them the truth, but they would be furious from what Stevens would tell him and turn hostile to him, just like how the other prisoners treated the freed man in Plato's allegory.
ReplyDeleteThe third question is extremely nuanced, as it brings in other questions. Was the Captain Stevens that was in the simulation the same Captain Stevens who died in the helicopter crash? The new Captain Stevens had the same memories, and his brain still resided in his body. I still think the military crossed the line, because they basically did a Frankenstein, but exclusively on his brain. He did not give any consent, and they were planning on wiping his memory and making him think he had just started the simulation. For all we know, Captain Stevens could have participated in many simulations before the movie started, as they could've just wiped his memory, basically making him a mind slave. We also saw that what he was seeing was making him mentally weak (constantly having to go through seeing people die), almost like mental torture.
To answer the last question, from what I understood, Goodwin pulled the plug on Stevens after the eight minutes ended. So not only did he prevent the bombing from happening, which ensured that Stevens and Christine continued to live in the simulation world, and he survives after eight minutes, so the simulation isn't controlled by the Goodwin or the doctor, thus the simulation exists on its own, and Stevens fully lives in it.
After watching Ducan Jones’ (who is David Bowie’s son by the way) Source Code, I’ve realised a few things.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I think it’s a bit of a stretch to compare this movie to that of Plato’s Cave. Plato’s cave is about a person being freed from false group think; seeing the light of critical, independent thought; and coming back to free others, just to be killed because they reject his freedom. I think little to none of that is in Source Code. You might think that Jake Gyllenhaal being in the guy’s body could represent either the shadows or the light, but neither make much sense because he knows what's going on. It would be as if the people knew that the shadows were fake all along, but did it to find some shadow demon. The meaning of the story doesn’t make sense either. The movie seems to be about our treatment of soilders, and the fears of terrorism, while the Cave is about truth and our complantency with lies.
Fate would be a much better philosophical connection to this movie than Plato’s Cave. The whole plot of the movie revolves around Jake Gyllenhall changing fate to try to catch the bomber, and then at the end we find out he made alternate realities, so he directly changed fate in those worlds. In the number of realities he created Jake Gyllenhall tries to change the fate of the people in that train who are supposed to die. He fails in most of them, saves the girl in one of them, gets her in another, and finally saves all of them from the bomb. At first it doesn’t seem to have any real life effect (like a simulation), but at the end it turns out that all of those created different realities and changed the fate of all of the people on that train.
I think the military's treatment of the soldier's crossed a line. They should have asked if Captain Steve wanted to be part of Source Code or not. It was as if they used him as a tool and not a person. This flaw is also applicable to the draft or any compulsory service. It’s the government seeing their citizens as tools for war. If you want to volunteer because your country needs you, that's great, but I don’t think a person should have to give their life for a cause they don’t believe in.
1. How could the filmmakers have changed the film to make it more like Plato's cave? Explain your reasoning.
ReplyDeleteI want to start by saying that I really enjoyed the movie, and I really appreciate how much it made me think. Not only did I have to sit and understand the world that the movie takes place in, but it also made me work to understand the world around me as well. I think some things that the filmmakers could’ve done to make it more like the cave would be to expand on the idea that the person would be killed by trying to bring attention to reality. I’m no movie expert, but I think Captain Stevens being the only person in the capsule made it so that he wasn’t trying to share “the good” or “the truth” with others. He didn’t even try to explain the truth to people on the train. I personally feel that a big part of plato’s allegory was that after one person realizes the truth, they share it with others and the world isn’t always as enlightened as they are. That reaction and willingness to stay in the dark is pretty important and it wasn’t shown in the movie. I liked the ending though and I’m sure a lot would have to change to implement that ending so for that reason I prefer it stay the same, but it would be more like “the cave” if they showed that aspect.
2. What role did fate play in this movie? Why? Or, did fate play no role at all and why not?
My favorite part of the movie was the ending because I’m not yet sure if I think fate played a role at all. Part of me says yes, because I think it is obvious that there was no escaping Captain Stevens being used for Source Code. It’s quite possible that he’s been used multiple times and he could’ve successfully ended projects for YEARS but he ends up in the same place because as the man said in the end, a horrible event will take place and source code will have it’s moment in the sun. It could easily become a cycle of waiting for an event, the event takes place, source code is successful, captain stevens goes back one more time to save the original group that died, and the source code goes back to waiting. The only thing to end the cycle would be when Goodwin lets him die, but in the email sent to goodwin, he tells her to let him know that it’ll be okay which i interpreted to mean that it will always be his fate to go through source code, but he’s destined to be okay in the end. The same way he was destined to see that sculpture.
3. Did the military cross the line with the use of Capt. Stevens' body and mind for the Source Code? Why or why not?
Ultimately I think it was worth it because Capt. Stevens saved millions of people. It’s hard to think that his suffering is worth it because we see them personally, but overall if he has to suffer for the world to be safer it would be worth it and he even has a happy ending so he isn’t even miserable the entire time. Yes, he deserved the right to die in the end but the lives of 2 million people outweighs him.
Olivia Laser- I think in this movie the military definitely crossed the line with the use of Captain Stevens body and mind. I do not think that they should have kept his body in a lab after he died. His father was only given a little ash, when the military really still had a large part of his body. They were also using Captain Stevens' body and mind without him approving that. He had no clue as to what happened. They just took his body and used it. He did not know why they were doing this to him or how he even got to be there. He was repeatedly being put in the source code just to be killed again and again. There was not an end in sight for him. Even after he did what they asked him to do Doctor Rutledge still wanted to use him. All he wanted was to be able to die and Doctor Rutledge wouldn’t let him.
ReplyDeleteThere are many things that could have happened to Sean Fentress’s soul. It depends on what you believe or even what he believed. If he was religious and believed in Christianity, he would probably believe that his soul would go to Heaven or Hell. If you do not believe in Heaven or Hell you might think his soul just left his body, similar to what Plato believed happened to the soul. Plato thought that the soul was immortal, if that is what you or Sean thought that is probably what happened. I think where his soul or essence went all depends on your beliefs and what he believed in.
I think that fate played a role in this movie. It played a large part in Captain Stevens' story. At one point in the movie Captain Stevens asked Goodwin if she believed in fate, if she was destined to be where she was. For me it made me think that Captain Stevens probably believed in fate or destiny. He probably thought that for some reason he was supposed to be in the source code. Even if at the time he did not fully understand why. He thought that he was meant to end up where he was at the end, saving the people on the train and evening up with Christina. Once he figured out what was going on he probably thought that he was meant to be in that fight that cost him his life, so he could end up on the train and save the people.Overall I think there was a lot about fate in this movie.
In Source Code, fate played an indestructible role at the start, then as time progressed, it seemed like an aspect of the film that one could overcome with enough strategy and opportunity. In the beginning of the movie, it seemed as if it was fate that kept constantly allowing the bomb to blow up the train. No matter what Stevens did to prevent it from happening, there was still an explosion because he couldn’t find the bomber. This movie showed the immortality of fate in the start. However, toward the end we see that Stevens did in fact find the bomber and save the train. So, it sort of debunks fate in a sense because if fate were truly inevitable, then he would’ve failed the mission endless times instead of finally catching the bomber after the 8th trip into the memory travel. So, I think fate did play a big role, but it did not seem as inevitable as it came off in the beginning of the film. Personally, I think the movie shows that fate can be changed if people had multiple chances at life like Captain Stevens.
ReplyDeleteThe military definitely crossed the line by using Captain Stevens’ mind for the Source Code, however the end result reflects how it takes extreme measures to complete certain tasks for the sake of the country and its citizens. Their decision to remove Stevens’ brain from his body is absolutely immoral and shows how humans look at each other as subjects more than human beings. The film really brings to life a lot of real world issues that the government has, such as objectifying citizens like Stevens for their own experimentation. That’s not the say that the mission didn’t work (after multiple attempts), but it questions whether it should be okay to sacrifice one living body for a group of people that could have been saved had there been different outcomes.
I think Sean’s soul/essence is with his memories, such as the short term memory that Captain Stevens uses to complete the mission. Stevens adopts Sean’s soul to complete the mission because without it, he wouldn’t have the knowledge that he had to go about the mission on the train. Then again, I didn’t have the chance to watch the whole film so it’s still a bit fuzzy as to how those memories are transferred to Stevens.
I think that the military for sure crossed the line with their experiments with captain Stevens’ mind and body and its usage for source code. I think that doing it once with consent and then letting him die after would be better but still pushing it. But the fact that they were planning on resetting him again again and making him go through such a traumatic thing even if he is dead already. He was in a state of confusion the whole time with no help from the man who decided to play god and was using the captain as a lab rat. He got lucky enough to have someone who felt pity enough to give him a few answers but even then they were bare and obscure. And when he did finally figure out what was happening he couldn't seem to be doing anything good enough. He seemed exhausted but he would keep getting sent back time and time again. The creator seemed to encompass this as an honour and he should be proud to be a part of it but it seemed a lot more like torture than a gift. He was even ready to dismiss captains’ final wish of being able to rest in peace for his own personal gain.
ReplyDeleteI think I would consider the ending to be a “movie reality” with my very minimal understanding of the idea of alternate realities, mixing them seems very complicated and wouldn’t really be possible if they were to be real. And if they were able to mix realities I feel like that could cause many problems. And going off of the scientific facts that the movie was going around of alternate realities it is very not possible. I think it just helped give the movie a more memorable and fitting ending. It also is the type of ending that would leave the viewer a lot more satisfied and content when the ending credits roll in.
I’m not sure i would say that fate had anything to do with what was happening. I understand why people would argue against that though. I’m not 100% adamant to this opinion. But I think instead of fate it was more about trial and error. If he didn’t talk to the right person the train would blow up. BUt then he would try again, he can keep going in so in the simulation there is no fate because you can go in and change it again and again. And there is nothing you can do in his reality because the train has already blown up so you can’t change those people’s fate because they have already died from the bomb. So i don’t think fate has anything to do with this.
- andersen cabble
Source code blog
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, I think fate was the whole reason that Captain Stevens was in the situation that he was in. I think that it was his fate to always end up with Christina, and when he went away to war his fate did not change just the journey he took. I think this is a great example of both soft determinism and hard determinism because you can make the argument he chose to go to war but you could also argue that he was always meant to die and go into the source code and meet Christina. If Stevens never went to war then there is a possibility nobody would’ve been fit for the source code, therefore chicago could be in ruins. There are so many angles of this movie you can argue about fate but in the end he ended up with Christina who he had an immediate connection with, and some may call them soul mates and he was just on his path to find her. In my opinion, I do NOT think they crossed the line, I think the way they informed captain stevens was the faulty part. Every soldier that would’ve died in the line of battle i think would’ve been honored to be selected to save chicago because they went to war to protect their country and this is another way for them to do that. I think they should’ve debriefed Stevens from the start, and then I think the missions would’ve been much faster and Stevens would have compiled. However, they made it seem deceiving instead they could make it seem like an honor. But if the soldier or person in the source code doesn’t wish to help then he should be allowed to die because it will just be counter productive. It may seem terrible to say but I think they could’ve reset Stevens' memory and waited for the next time they needed to use him. I only say this because if you reset the memory of Stevens then he will never know how many times he has been used and he will think that everything is a first for him. It seems not right but it is very practical and would save many lives. I think the ending is a parallel universe because in the end they killed him in the main world but he was still living as Sean’s in the second world. However, they contradicted themselves in saying that Stevens couldn’t live past Sean’s life span on the train. The only way that he would have continued living was if he became Sean in the parallel universe because if this didn’t happen then there would be a large plot hole in the fact he just happened to live past the life cycle of Sean in the source code (which is supposedly impossible).
I think that fate was a factor in this movie at first as fate plays apart in everybody's life. When everybody died on the train that was their fate but when they went back in with Captain Stevens and altered the situation to find out who the bomber was “fate” became somewhat irrelevant for the duration of the experiment. Obviously he still eventually died or at least his body did but I think that they changed Captain Stevens Fate by keeping him alive to find the bomber.
ReplyDeleteYes, personally I think it was a little excessive and over the top. My initial reaction was shocked and a little disgusted that they would do that to somebody. However, at the same time i think that's a part of being a soldier. Their duty as the military is to find threats and eradicate them. As a soldier you're required to think more logically and realistically than a normal citizen and with less emotional attachment in order to problem solve in my opinion. Also, they have to do what's best for the greater good, not just one individual who's already half dead. I also would have seen it as more harsh if the experiment did not work but seeing as though it did it just goes to show the extremities you sometimes have to go through in order to find a solution for the greater good.
Honestly I'm not really sure but if i was to guess I think Sean Fentress’s soul was gone. The soul, body and mind are all connected, we are more than just our thoughts, we are our bodies, our emotions and experiences. I think you need all of those to function as a normal human being which Sean couldn't do because only a certain part of his brain worked and he only had half a body. I think Sean's body was pretty much dormant.
emily,
ReplyDeleteThe filmmakers could have made Source Code more like Plato's cave if they had added different things. If they would have deepened his sense of darkness and 'shadows' like in Plato's allegory. If they wouldn't have made his character skeptical from the beginning then it would've been more like it already. They did a good job portraying the cave in his little shuttle almost but in Plato's allegory there was three men and one was let out but in Source code there is only one man so it already strays the allegory. If they would have had another man in the capsule with him who wasn't going in and out of the source code then it would have seemed more like the allegory.
I think that the military defiantly crossed the line with using his body like that. They took his body without even letting his family know at all and that's the part that really gets me because they could have told the family that they had the body but they need him for something. I know it would change a lot about the movie but they also like didn't tell him at all why he was doing the source code and where he was which made it all worse for them. I feel like they kept him in the dark for so long and if they would have just told him what was going on it would have taken him way less time to find the bomber.
I think the ending is a movie reality because viewers would have been dissatisfied with the ending if he didn't stay in that reality and keep living. The only thing that makes me confused about it is like he just has to live as this other guy he doesn't know anything about, He doesn't know his friends, He doesn't know his family, He doesn't know how to be a teacher, He knows very little about this man. If they would have let him die and not live on in the source code then everyone watching would have been annoyed with how he saved so many people and didn't get to live on. I think he only really stayed in that reality because of the timing if everything in general because if he was out of the source code then he would have died but because they killed him while he was still in the source code he got to live on in that reality.