The Matrix Movie Now in a College Course 287
koolade writes "It looks like The Matrix meant a lot to some people at the University of Washington in Seattle, since an introductory philosophy class is now being offered based on the movie. You can read about it here."
Philosophy of the Matrix (Score:1)
But at further inspection, I find remarkable similarities between the dualities of the two realities and that of Eastern legends of ~Maya and the Astral Plane (especially with the chord attached to the back of the head . . a.k.a. the Astral Umbilical chord; death in one plane resulting to the other, the predestined masters . .
And most interesting, in my opinion, was the emphasis on Free Will versus Predestination. Neo, of course wanting to decide his own fate, but not understanding that he will decide but in effect has, as things will happen as they should. Thus, thier solution to the debate is that both are true. If you don't understand what I am having a hard time saying, just refer to the scene where Neo breaks the vase.
Well, that was my philosophic take. I hope you enjoyed my amateur opinion.
Plato and AJ Ayer did it better. (Score:1)
I guess enrollment is down in the department.
PS: Dark City was better.
Re:The basic problem: (Score:1)
What is that? (metaphysics)
Is that really true? (epistemology)
Why should I? (ethics)
Re:Hmm... (Score:1)
Humm... I went to a school where ethics WAS required for a CS degree (perhaps that says something entirely in and of itself).
Want to know what I discovered?
I learned that unless you wrote your papers to agree with the professor's opinions you got bad marks.
That taught me way more than I ever could have ever learned about ethics from that, or any other, professor.
(...and, yes, I had actual quantitative evidence that this was the case. You see, we had go out and interview three people in non-computer related jobs who had recently been exposed to some sort of computer automation. I actually inverview people who had fairly nice things to say about how computers had enhanced their job.
A friend of mine waited until about 8 hours before the term paper was due and made the entire thing up out of his imagination with the opposite conclusion to his "interviews".
He got an A; I got a C.
...and it wasn't a question of mechanics either. My paper was spell checked and peer reviewed a full week ahead of time and I believe he even went as far as to TYPE his paper, resulting in all sorts of gramatical, puncutation and spelling problems (much like this post) that writing a term paper in less than 8 hours on a typewriter causes.)
...I'm not bitter, really...
...but if I could find a way to code embedded elevator controllers to recognize philosophers, they would be the first to get managled by an evil computer and it's non-ethical (just applying what I was taught with maximum efficency) programmer.
Re:Why not others? (Score:1)
If anyone here hasn't seen Lain yet, then shame on you. The entire series is out on VHS and DVD. Get it. Now [pioneeranimation.com].
Anyone ordering VHS should get the subbed version. There's so much that can be lost with a dub. But remember, the DVD has both languages and some neat extras. (:
Re:What Bugged Me About Matrix [OT] (Score:1)
Flamebait (Score:1)
I *CAN* see why it was moderated down though.
It may be true that America is turning out plenty of illiterate people. However, the tone of the post was sneering, and cast America as the sole province of illiteracy. That's flame.
Plenty of other countries have illiteracy problems similar to those in America. This is offtopic, though.
While I admit that there is a unique philosophical perspective to The Matrix (e.g., how can we tell what is real?), I don't necessarily see that it is a good idea to start basing non-entertainment-related courses on entertainment. (Of course, I also fail to see how anything with Madonna in it can be useful, unless as an example of what *NOT* to do).
Who am I?
Why am here?
Where is the chocolate?
I thought it was apropos (Score:1)
Now, if I wanted to change a scene to improve the movie, I'd keep the superman ending and have Neo stay dead in the real-world and be a living, free-agent in the Matrix.
Here's the only REAL question in The Matrix (Score:1)
"Unfortunately, no one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself."
All I had to say to sum up the film for someone who hadn't seen it was this:
"Basically, the plot revolved around the world as we see it being a simulation. The main character somehow gets out of the simulation and starts kicking ass. Good flick, you gotta see it."
Anyone who's screwed with computers enough could easily grasp the scenario without visual aids. Neo obviously has screwed with computers for a long time, and could have been given a better choice than "red pill or blue pill?"
Other than that, great film. For more of the same, see The Thirteenth Floor (sorry, no "bullet-time" sequences).
ObTopic: An even better philosophical question is raised during the scenes when Neo's brain is being filled with knowledge. If complex skills become downloadable, our society will collapse. I'll leave "why?" as an excersise for the reader, but here's a clue: A meritocracy's currency is knowledge.
Not's Keanu's film (Score:1)
Minor detail, not worth quibbling about really.
T.
liberal arts (Score:1)
This article is inaccurate (Score:1)
That one is closer, but still a bit skewed.
I know the head of the University's Curriculum Office, and so I asked him about it. He had
this to say:
PHIL 200 is 'topics in philosophy', which is (obviously) an undergraduate course that meets tone of the 'general education' requirements. The University has *not* approved a course on the Matrix. All they've done is approved a course in 'topics', which is then left up to the dept to decide how best to use that course.
Topics courses, however, tend not to be able to be used for specific degree requirements -- always general ed electives or degree program electives.
Re:Hello people... anyone remember Lewis Carroll?? (Score:1)
That's pretty close to Morpheus's: `Do you believe that's air you are breathing now?' during Neo's training session.
(BTW, while "researching" this post I found The Matrix script here [geocities.com]).
Regards, Ralph.
royalties (Score:1)
Re:Sounds like a neat piece of marketing (Score:1)
PI was rather similar to The Matrix... except that the puppeteer is never revealed. In the end, the "illusion" is preserved and the main character takes the other pill.
Technologically, the movie is absurd, but they didn't bow down to the special effects like many other movies do. I think they really captured what it is to be obsessed with solving a really tough mathematical problem with deep philosophical ramifications.
It's kind of depressing and headachy at the same time. Interesting movie.
Seems totally reasonable. (Score:1)
Jordan
Re:Seems totally reasonable. (Score:1)
As much as I hate to do this, because I really hate to admit what I remember of ST, I feel some sick compelling need to correct you.
The crew saved the day by making Moriarty think he could leave the holodeck (or as I like to call it the "we've run out of plot ideas, lets steal some from classic literature machine.") Then they just left him in a self contained computer running an infinate loop of "if (out_of_holodeck) then explore_galaxy()"
Stanislaw Lem! (Score:1)
My perception of what science fiction should really be like are the books of Stanislaw Lem. In his 1969 book 'Summa Technologiae', for example, he explains the concept of virtual reality. The Futurological Congress [fatbrain.com] also touches upon this topic, but even goes a little further in that it describes a world where there is not one but many levels of nested virtual realities. Also very interesting is the book 'Dialogues', in which he, among other questions, discusses whether machines can be concious. The book was written in the 1960's. By far his best book, imho, is Fiasco [fatbrain.com]. That's a book I'd like to see a film based on!
Leather Clad Ass Kicking Chicz (Score:1)
You do the math...
Media as homework, three "R"s as hobbies... (Score:1)
Re:He really did!!!! (Score:1)
The animated TV show "The Critic" did what may have been a spoof of Reeves in Much Ado About Nothing.
In one scene, Jay is walking down the street, bemoaning the vulgarity of Hollywood films. He stops in front of a movie theater and looks up, overjoyed to see The Merchant of Venice on the marquee.
After Jay enters the theater, the camera pans over, showing the rest of the marquee--"Starring Keanu Reeves". We cut to inside the theater:
Reeves [As Shylock]: "If you cut me, do I not, like, get bummed?"
Umm yeah (Score:1)
I was initially confused by the Oracle. I expected an old woman, wise and vague... I was treated to a very HUMAN, nurturing, compassionate PERSON. Someone who baked cookies and was the anti-thesis of the machine. Life experience.
Maybe the skin color was intentional, but not to fill a quota. It may be my prejudicial white view, but I've always found black people more expressive emotionally than whites. Maybe this is a cultural archetype that was being utilized. The Oracle for humans beaten down by machines was one which (to me at least) sybolized feeling, expressiveness, and, dare I say it, SOUL.
For the record, I mean no disrespect, and I can't dance to a beat to save my life.
Purpose of the UI? (Score:1)
"Any means of interaction beyond the UI interface metaphor is indistinguishable from magic" - w/apologies to A. C. Clarke.
What a joke . (Score:1)
If one wanted to go deeper on this subject "13 floor" is much much better ( and also more interesting movie on it's own )
Re:Seems totally reasonable. (Score:1)
Get real. It was SF movie with effects- - not much more
I had a Star Trek course (Score:1)
Anyways, just sharing. Classes that show movies are cool.
Brain in a vat, Godel's theorem, et. al. (Score:1)
The Matrix doesn't contain any of those labels, and really doesn't cover many ideas. Let's face it, it doesn't even make sense. What, was he supposed to have had some sort of psychic power over the computer? He wasn't hacking into the system in any way we'd recognize; the fact that the world was computer simulated in no way explained Neo's ability to break the rules at will.
Actually, The Matrix contained several important ideas, most of them epistemological (for those of you without much exposure to philosophy, epistemology means the theory of knowledge).
1. Descarte's problem. Descarte (a.k.a the "I think therefore I am" guy) went through this entire reductive thought experiment where he reasoned that even if he was in a permanent dream state and an "evil demon" was just feeding him sensory data, he would still have to exist. This problem has been rephrased by more contemporary philosophers as the "brain in a vat" theory.
2. Godel's theorem. Godel was an early 20th century mathematician who theorized that (paraphrasing and simplifying here) within every logical system there exists a problem that cannot be proven by the rules of that system. To prove this problem, you have to (in effect) transcend the system and create more rules. This theory was proved, btw (although you could get into a recursive arguement here, but I'll skip that). Neo was a living embodiment of Godel's theorem. He transcended the rules of the logical set (his universe) and created new rules.
3. The problem of other minds. I know I have a mind, but how do I know that you have a mind?
These are the major topics, IMO. It also touched nicely on some assumptions about causation and answers the age old question, why are we here (To feed the computer, naturally)?
Re:the oracle scene is my favorite (Score:1)
This is as good a point as any to urge everyone to read "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind", by Julian Jaynes. This book talks explains what oracles really were (along with nearly everything else about human nature you've ever wondered about). Slow motion fight scenes you can get from The Six Million Dollar Man. Movies with great chase scenes and computer graphics are a dime a dozen. Reading this book is a mind-altering experience. (See the reviews at Amazon.)
Re:The basic problem: (Score:1)
Re:Proving reality is not "just in your head" (Score:1)
I agree that the meditations seem to prove the existance of things outside yourself. At the very least, for a demon to be deceiving you, the demon must exist, along with the vat in which he is storing your brain.
What if, however, it were not that some massive deceit is being committed to fool you into seeing a reality which does not exist, but that all that exists in reality is you, filling reality completely, so that there are no gaps in which actual nothing could exist, and in some sort of psychosis brought about by being the only existing entity, you deceive yourself by hallucinating an entire universe of perception? This leaves you with an existing you, and an abstract concept of nothing, which by definition does not exist. In order for this to be valid, you would have to admit to the possibility that you could be an entity entirely different from how you imagine yourself to be. It's not very relevant to The Matrix and it's take on the whole idea.
In any case, I'd ordinarily find it annoying that someone somewhere has deemed it useful to base a philosophy course on a film that spends ten minutes explaining painstakingly what the audience figured out in less than two, but it seems that since www.philosophy.com now sells cosmetics, philosophy has less value in the 3rd millenium than than a blemish free face. Drag.
Well, it's not like the ideas in The Matrix are (Score:1)
Re:I'd agree with you, except you're wrong. (Score:1)
Trust me, they make more sense than the _average_ comic...a few points to comment on your post, if I may please. Trinity runs fast at the beginning of the movie. And she's running from...an Agent. He keeps up with her, up until she jumps into the window (her second "big jump", by the by) and rolls down the flight of stairs. She uses every trick she has to excape and barely does. And it's laid out well. The reason the Agent doesn't follow her any further? They knew where she was going by that point, and the other Agents simply waited for her. No need for him to waste any more time.
As far as the kung-fu -- yes, it's not up to a full-bore Hong Kong action flick. But, it's still very impressive, to me, esp. from people who trained for only 6 months. I had no problems with the look and feel of that area, esp. if you think that these people likely have never _seen_ Jackie Chan, or any other Martial Art. They are just empty vessles for skills, in that regard.
Re:What we've come to (Score:1)
that the AI's keep the humans alive
is so Hollywood can make a movie about it
But like most religions the matrix also postulate.
Reality is a illusion.
and that highly developed beings
is able to create there own reality.
Physics from Fisher Information : A Unification
by B. Roy Frieden
seams to give a hint in this direction
Knud
Re:Seems totally reasonable. (Score:1)
That only proves the matrix may be running a Win2K beta! ;)
Re:Sounds like a neat piece of marketing (Score:1)
Existenz comes to mind, but I guess that movie isn't commercial enough :)
No problem! (Score:1)
The movie's basic premise is that we are trapped in an artificial construct called the Matrix, and that there is a level of reality that is more real than the Matrix. No problem: my basic premise is that we are trapped in an artificial construct called the Mind.
What is the mind for? Apart from its useful analysis functions, the mind is really good at believing things. We believe these things even when they are obviously injurious to us. All of the events of our lives are filtered through these beliefs, and these beliefs then determine our reactions.
The Matrix was great in that it showed people escaping from the Matrix, and the dilemma of someone who wanted to return back to this invented reality.
How similar is life?
Can one escape from the boundaries of personal belief? Is the world from this perspective better, or would one long to return to the certainties of belief in particular "truths"?
It all depends on what you believe (which is wonderfully self-referential!). I believe that we choose our beliefs. What other source is there for them? One can argue with someone over their beliefs, but in the end that person will always choose what they believe.
Can we do away with belief entirely, and experience the here and now without the distraction of belief in a certain past and possible futures? Look inside and check it out. Is there any part of you unaffected by the beliefs that you have held over the course of your lifetime? Maybe that bit of you is worthy of further examination...
Hey! Put me back in! I am without an anchor in the sea of consciousness, and nothing is self-evident anymore.
Re:The basic problem: (Score:1)
There's more to philosophy than just applying labels. Learning more about logic, for example.
Learning how to break an argument down, verifying the logic by which the conclusion is proved by the assumptions, and evaluating the assumptions.
I do agree that the Matrix, much as I enjoyed it, doesn't seem to have much stuff that an academic would consider "philosophical"...
neo is a dead greek guy (Score:1)
Seems totally stupid... (Score:2)
The Matrix is probably one of the worst movie I ever seen. While special effects were very impressive, the underlying ideas of the film were nasty, at least.
I'm a sci-fi fan, majorly interested in conscience/reality (Who have the movie rights on Ubik or The Three Stigmata Of Plamer Eldricht ?). Dark City, Total Recall, PI, Cube, or Existenz are IMHO *much* better than the Matrix.
Why? In the Matrix, the so-called 'good guys' kill a few dozen of innocent people. It is not 'virtual', as people killed in the matrix dies in real life too. It is not by accident, and is glorified by special effects. By comparison, the so-called bad guys don't kill any one (It is not clear if people die when they 'transfer' into their body). I don't mind nasty films (ie: Tesis is one of the best movie I ever seen), but people admiring The Matrix don't seems to have the distanciation to see that Neo probably took the wrong pill. The same thing hold for Starship Troopers (Why didn't Verhoeven choosed to adapt The Forever War instead ?)
Taking this movie as a base for *philosophical* course about preception escapes me.
--fred
PS: And the scenario is quite stupid too. If Neo had more than room temperature IQ, he would questionate the reality of Morpheus too. Total Recall is better in this point of view (ie: At least, the onirism of the ending scenes make me beleive that Douglas Quaid should have took the pill Dr. Edgemar proposed).
The Universe Is Open Source (ObMSBash) (Score:2)
Re:Seems totally reasonable. (Score:2)
T.
Thinking for Dummies - new from QUE! (Score:2)
Such certainty, such certainty. One of the things you learn from Philosophy (Western analytical Philosphy, anyway) is that all the cool sci-fi paradoxes and ideas that got you interested in the subject when you were 17 are MUCH MORE COMPLEX THAN THEY LOOK.
Do a google search for 'putnam brains in vats' or somesuch and check out some of the papers people have written. One is below:
http://www.d.umn.edu/~dcole/evil90.htm [umn.edu]
Christian Parallels in The Matrix (Score:2)
The Matrix was based on one of my PHIL 101 finals! (Score:2)
Each TA wrote one question. This one came from mine. I
spent half the final exam period working on the final, and
the other half memorizing this very question. I'm firmly
convinced that at least one of the Wachowski brothers was
in my class, and said, "We should make a movie about that."
I've included footnotes for references that are now dated.
Question 2
----------
part a: Explain ____'s definition of reality as "true knowledge"
part b: Explain whether either of the individuals in the
following situation have true knowledge as directed.
Bill and Ted hop on their interplanetary space Harleys and
head off to the planet Pluto. When they arrive, they see
some lights in the distance, and investigate. Upon closer
inspection, they see what appears to be an exact replica of
the Campus Village shopping center (1). Bill and Ted decide
to pick up a local copy of the National Inquirer, but when
they get into People's (2), they are abducted by a bunch of
Telly Savalas (3) look alikes, who take them to what appears
to be the game show set for Let's Make A Deal (4). Ted has
all of his sensory organs disconnect from his body and put
in a box. Bill is told that they will reconnect them if he
can guess which curtain Ted's sensory organs are hiding
behind. While Bill is thinking about his choice, someone
brushes past curtain #2, revealing what appear to be Ted's
sensory organs in a box. In truth, it's a hologram. The
organs are actually in a smaller box, behind the hologram.
Does Bill have True Knowledge as to the whereabouts of Ted's
sensory organs?
Ted's brain is electrically stimulated to make him believe
that he's on the game show, Let's Make A Deal, and that
his sensory organs will be reconnected if Bill guesses what
curtain they are hiding behind. Does Ted have True Knowledge
as to his whereabouts?
(1) a shopping center just off the UMCP campus.
(2) a drug store chain, now CVS Pharmacy.
(3) Kojak, a bald police detective(?) from a popular '70s show.
(4) Another popular '70s show, "would you like to trade all
that you have now for what's behind curtain #2."
Re:cool! (Score:2)
Re:Socratic philosophy in The Matrix (Score:2)
Which is why, in the modern age of accelerating change, they're dinosaurs. I'm not sure if Philosophy is as important as studying Philosophy, because the act of considering alternate viewpoints as legitimate competitors to your own provides the flexibility needed to cope with change. Knowing the people and language of the Philosophy discipline is important if you wish to spread yours or have people understand it, but honestly life is getting so individually-tailored that soon (if not now) it will be futile to try and categorize philosophies.
Of course, discrimination is also important: reflexive flexibility is extremely dangerous, you should definitely develop good filters..
Your Working Boy,
Re:Stanislaw Lem! (Score:2)
I dunno, my favorite has to be The Cyberiad.. I particularly like the story of the 2 warring nations whose princes had Trurl and Klaupaucius build conduits into their armies' heads, to connect them together and allow for exact maneuvers. IIRC it was Sally 7, but it's been awhile..
Your Working Boy,
Re:cool! (Score:2)
Re:Seems totally reasonable. (Score:2)
Re:Seems totally reasonable. (Score:2)
Re:And boy did he suck (Score:2)
It's just a pity he's such a rabid gun nut.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
Re:Philosophy Lecturer (Score:2)
However, watching The Matrix *does* provide a concrete example of some epistemiological questions. It would provide a means of grasping the basic concepts and a basis for discussion in future lectures, if nothing else.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
Keanu Reeves does Shakespeare! (Score:2)
JULIET:
O Romeo, Romeo! wherefore art thou Romeo?
Deny thy father and refuse thy name;
Or, if thou wilt not, be but sworn my love,
And I'll no longer be a Capulet
NEO:
Woah!
JULIET:
Tis but thy name that is my enemy;
Thou art thyself, though not a Montague.
What's Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;
So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call'd,
Retain that dear perfection which he owes
Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name,
And for that name which is no part of thee
Take all myself.
Neo:
Dude!
etc...
Oracle revelations (Score:2)
Sort of parallels with Heisenberg as applied to psychology. Once you are made aware of something, you can't help but pay attention to it. It's like someone saying "Don't look at that guys nose"...
There's a whole fate/predeterminism vs free-will discussion in there as well... And it feeds well into the whole issue of Neo becoming The One by choosing to 'walk the path' in addition to being 'destined' to be The One through 'knowing the path'.
Interesting that once Neo decided to give up on his destiny, and sacrifice himself to save Morpheus (reasoning that Morpheus could do more good for mankind than Neo himself), he actually fulfilled his destiny. He chose to go against it and thereby brought it to fruition.
The Oracle scene holds enough meat for a couple of philosophy courses, and probably a psych class while at it.
divinity as it relates to order/chaos (Score:2)
my adaptation of process theodicy is that "god" is simply an innate force in the universe to perpetuate self-organizing systems that oppose entropy, thereby extending the life of "god"/the universe... you see (s)he's just doing what (s)he can to stay alive!
therefore if you accept this theodicy god is in all things, as well as transcending them... very simmilar to the popular christian theodicy of the "holy spirit"...
it's more of a rational moderate approach that I think most people could accept...
there's a lot further that you can go with this sort of a theory... heck if I was going for an MA in phillosophy rather than an MS in CS it would probably be my thesis...
(p.s. follow my URL for other theological ideas surrounding this one)
Re:Is what I read on /. what is actually written? (Score:2)
Re:... (Score:2)
Re:Seems totally reasonable. (Score:2)
2) Who says the universe is infinite? We could be living on a hyper-sphere.
Re:The basic problem: (Score:2)
Good. I'm not the only one who feels this way. =) Reeves was good as Neo, I wouldn't argue that. Calling it his movie is off the mark, IMO. Sure, Neo is the central figure as "the one". I can imagine several different actors who could have played this role, and yes - it would still have been the same movie.
Not the same for Fishburne... I agree completely - wouldn't have been the same movie with anyone else.
P.S. Remember when Fishburne was on Pee Wee Herman's playhouse as one of the characters? What was his name? I want to say "Coyboy Carl" but I'm not sure. God its funny to go back and see other stuff our favorite actors have done when they were small-time.
That's funny... (Score:2)
However, aside from logic, philosophy (as it is studied in courses bearing that name) is about nothing but unanswerable questions (unfortunately ones to which people often have to choose arbitrary answers to go on with their lives).
A better ending: (Score:2)
(or is that too "Outer Limits"?)
Re:the oracle scene is my favorite (Score:2)
Jazilla.org - the Java Mozilla [sourceforge.net]
Is what I read on /. what is actually written? (Score:2)
The Matrix brings out that confusing aspect of reality, among other things. Oh ya.. as the article mentioned, the secod half was mundane comapred to the amount of brain work was needed to 'understand' the first half. A small indicator would be the number of times I had to watch the first half and not the second half to make some sense out of the movie!
Re:Seems totally reasonable. (Score:2)
I do not know how to do it, but I suspect it will happen, but it more fun to think about self aware memes or thoughs within a computer/human..
Can a computer program, if it is aware, believe something that's not true?
I do not see why not since most humans bvelieve in a god (or reinterpret this as most humans do not believe in your god if you are religious), but it is much more fun to think about designing computers (or humans through genetic and psycological engenring) to figure out specific problems (like open math problems). If you think technologies moves fast now, you should see how fast it moves when you can build people to solve specific problems.
Actually, I am of the opinion that building people to answer specific problems in the "ultimate in open source" (sorry for the wording, but this is the most efficent wast to communicate ythe idea to a slashdot audience) because when Joe creates Bob to solve a problem no one should own the solution, i.e. Joe's ownership == slavery and Bob's ownership == Joe had no reason to make Bob.
Is there such a thing as Free Will?
I can not answer your question because it involves inherently vague terms (free will), but I can say we are very complex mechines (this can be interpreted to mean yes or no depending on what youwant to call free will). Regardless, the connction of us with machines is the importent philosophical point.
What if our entire universe is actually a subatomic particle in another universe?
It dose not matter if it can not effect you in any way (note: things like the big bang and the end of the universe do effect you). There are much cooler questions which are more down to earth.. like stuff from quantum mechanics.
Jeff
Re:Here's a thought (Score:2)
"Today, class, we're going to discuss the Austrian influence on the start of the First World War."
"G'Day, Mate! Let's throw another shrimp on the 'barby!"
Lame and Ironic, Desperate and Sad (Score:2)
Bollocks. Bad philosopy isn't needed (Score:2)
Firstly in my experience most people don't think those thoughts, just the smarter reflective ones.
Secondly the questions aren't the issue. It's the answers, and espesially the methods to find the answers that are important.
Philosophy is not about catergorizing difficult questions, it's about solving them. If you think philosopy is just a mechanism for efficiently expressing supposedly profound thoughts then you have missed the core of philosophy.
Unfortunately meny philosophers have also missed the core of philosophy.
The questions are uncertain. Philosophy is about solving those problems by providing arguments to suggest answers.
Philosophy is reasoning. It should be taught at an early age because people need to reason.
Many people believe that if A then B means disproving A also disproves B. I've come across it many times.
Look at an abortion clinic protest. You get pro choice and pro life people chanting slogans at each other. Most of them seem to have only a slight understanding of the real moral issues. Philosophy would give them the chance to analyze their own and their adversaries' arguments.
If the reasoning tools of philosiphy were taught at an early age (most aren't difficult, how to spot and avoid fallacies would be a good start) then they can use them in their day to day lives.
Just imagine how the average persons live would be different if they could spot fallacies reasonably well. Reading the newspaper would be an entirely different experience for them.
Now, just imagine how _OUR_ lives would be better if the average journalist knew how to spot a fallacy an also knew that their readership could as well.
the idea behind the class has merit... (Score:2)
As anyone who has used their own brain to any degree and developed a thirst for knowledge could attest, the ideas enumerated in the film are not original and not elaborated upon to do them justice. However, there is a generation of tv-babies that have been spoonfed a manipulated sense of reality to whom this movie might initiate a desire to learn more. Opening their eyes to other possibilities. Books don't neccesarily appeal to those who like their thinking to be done for them. Target these potential students in the course description or a flyer campaign, but don't discredit the name of Philosophy & the great thinkers throughout existence by linking (limiting) it to a hollywood creation (no matter how un-conventional it might have been in that it presupposed a certain amount of intellect to enjoy on a higher level).
There are better ways to manipulate enrollment that don't have such recursive effects on mentality and credibility to actual open-mindedness. What next? A Jerry Springer Social Behavior course? Big Daddy Single Parenting? ER Medical School?
them's my thoughts....
What we've come to (Score:2)
At any rate, Matrix is a very nice movie, but as far as stimulating the intellect? Come on. Humans as biological batteries? Please. "Grow large amounts of algae. Burn it.". I mean, how silly can you get?
They could have come up with dozens of more plausible and more interesting scenarios: for example, the AIs are not strong on creativity, and are maintaining all the charade just for the few human geniuses who contribute new science, new art, etc. - that would make an interesting twist in things, and could serve as a basis for wonderful plot lines.
Or, why just one level of reality? The whole humans-as-batteries is so absurd you just have to believe it is also simulated and that there's a level below. "It is turtles all the way down".
OK, expecting an intelligent script from Hollywood is like expecting generosity from a bank. But a University? If it had some sense, they'd pick on the writings of Phillip K. Dick instead. "Ubik" comes to mind as an excellent example.
Re:The Universe Is Open Source (ObMSBash) (Score:2)
Right. That'd be Dark City, then.
How many related films can we namecheck in one /. thread, then? The Matrix, good though it was, was mainly a collection of rehashed ideas from other sf films and literature, after all.
--
This comment was brought to you by And Clover.
'Armchair philosphers' (Score:2)
when I see someone explaining exceedingly simple and obvious aspects of philosphy as if their thoughts were profound?
I really enjoyed The Matrix, but I was really annoyed when I overheard everyone talking about how deep it was outside of the theatre.
This is the same feeling I get when I see people using the word 'one'.
When one is using the word one to describe oneself then one perhaps has seen one too many movies?
It's elitism I know, I just can't seem to shake it.
blah.
What Bugged Me About Matrix [OT] (Score:2)
Hmm... (Score:2)
(It sure helped explain "MAGE: THE ASCENSION" to
a couple of newbie players)
However when I talk to a friend of mine (who
has an university degree in Philosophy) he says
the most the most important aspect of philosophy
is imagination and carefull pondering.
If you need a movie to understand some concepts,
it might be a good idea NOT to study philosophy...
(of course the article says the film is used
as introduction material which is definetlt
a good idea. I wished more teachers would be
so open-minded)
J.
I think everyone is missing what the oracle is (Score:2)
Re:Hello people...anyone remember Phillip K. Dick? (Score:2)
earning credits "online" (Score:2)
I just wanted to say that I found the Matrix totally realistic technologically, and I like to think of myself as highly realism-oriented I walked out of Raiders of the Lost Ark and didn't think putting a deLorean in Back to the Future was funny in any way. Here's how I rationalize The Matrix: IMHO, martial arts are mystical hocus pocus, martial arts in movies are insipid and martial arts video games really really really pointless. However, I also realize that many people disagree with me. So, if all the programmers that like Mortal Kombat were to work on coding the matrix, it would be exactly like that matrix in The Matrix, wouldn't it?
As to the philosophy, cool in the movie because it was presented as someone else's idea of what if, like acting out a scenario "what if I was John Malkovich?", but not much there to take away... how do I know I'm not dreaming that I'm in the movies?
oops, the light bulbs analogy was stupid (Score:2)
ok, shoot me :) (Score:2)
Re:(sic) [sic] (Score:2)
Re:Hmm... (Score:2)
Oh puhleeeze. Leave that kind of thinking up to people who want to philosophize all their lives. Right now I'm taking an ethics course - not because I want to be an ethicist (I'm a CS major) and it's not even required for my degree, I'm taking it because Ethics is a little interesting to me. Now, my professor often gives us examples from his own life and the lives of famous people to give us somewhere to start from in understanding ethical theories. (Figuring out all the differences and similarities between Kantian ethics and Moral Relativism is a little harder than just digesting a textbook.) Examples from art are also given - i.e. what ethical rationalizations are used by Huckleberry Finn at the climax of the novel? What modern-day issues are brought up and reconciled in Frankenstein? Using stories from popular culture is a great way to educate. All good stories have conflict, and all good conflicts bring moral decisions into play. We identify with a story when it presents us with a ethical choice similar to a choice we may have to make in our own lives. So, to conclude this rant, using pop culture folklore to teach concepts is an excellent idea, and an important one. Of course, only time will tell if this professor does it well or responsibly.
Re:The basic problem: (Score:2)
Here's my interpretation. The big-ass computer controlls what everyone perceives via the direct wire into the brain. Neo, along with some other people in The Oracle's house, has such a strong mind that he is able to override what the computer is inputting into him, thus changing the reality for himself. When Morpheus is explaining The Matrix to Neo, he mentions that "A body cannot exist without a mind. If your mind is killed in the Matrix, your body dies, too" (paraphrasing). The idea being that if you have the power to manipulate the perceptions being fed to you, you can, say, dodge two dozen bullets at supersonic speed. :)
Re:Hmm... (Score:2)
You sound pretty bitter to me. This is not the result of philosophy or philosophers, you had a crappy professor. Unfortunately, the world is full of crappy everything. My professor does not grade on wether or not he agrees with you (I, too, have quantitative evidence of this) but how well you present your argument. I think a great deal of how much you enjoy and learn from a course has to do with the professor, but the rest has to do with the student.
Interesting Course if done well (Score:2)
You could start with some of Philip K. Dicks essays on the nature of reality (particularly around his VALIS idea) and talk about the ideas in philosophy and religion to which they connect.
Dick could lead you into science fiction, cyberpunk, and national anxiety about control.
Bring in other films like Existenz and talk about self-reference in video games like Nomad Soul.
Heck, Id take the class.
Calculus class (Score:2)
Coming Soon.. (Score:3)
Re:Hello people... anyone remember Lewis Carroll?? (Score:3)
Not psychic power (Score:3)
Every person was a ksh shell. Instead of a text interface, the API was sensory. (make a leap of faith, it's sci-fi) All running in standard user mode. The machine was in charge and could renice everyone as the automated routines and daemons (agents) saw fit. Neo had the potential to su -root on the system. Well, actually more than that, he had the ability to adjust the hidden/local variables of the OS.
A person can always out think a video game AI. Always. The advantage that video games have is speed, not intelligence. Eventually the human is simply out-gunned, and can't react fast enough.
Well, Neo could, not because he was faster than the machine, but because he could tweak the delay parameters at runtime.
What we saw on the screen was for entertainment purposes, but also (to me at least) presented an interesting concept. The ultimate user interface is one which you are not even aware of. It's totally natural, and totally transparent. It's 'real world', where your actions are ideal metaphors for what you want to do.
You may recall a few weeks ago
I perticularly liked the idea of 'looking at the actual code' rather than it's rendering. It's the best way to debug.
I'd agree with you, except you're wrong. (Score:3)
"The Matrix" is a re-working of Descartes (Score:3)
The "evil genius" idea, or as I learned about it in a philosophy class as the "brain in a vat" idea, is that it's hard to tell whether what you experience is reality, or whether it is the result of impulses being fed into your brain somehow.
Both Descartes writings and "The Matrix" make you consider philosophical questions like:
-- Can I trust my senses about what reality is?
-- If I can't be sure what reality is, what things can I be sure of? Do I exist? Am I the way I think I am? Are people the way I think they are?
-- How much does it matter? If I knew for sure that I was a brain in a vat dreaming these things, would I live my life differently?
Re:Seems totally reasonable. (Score:3)
1) I only know that I am a real human bean, if I know for certain that I am not being decieved into thinking that I am.
2) I cannot know for certain that I am not being decieved.
3) Therefore I cannot know whether or not I am real human bean.
Check out philosophy texts for "externalism", "Descartes' Demon" and "closure of knowledge under entailment" and you'll probably find a more rigorous discussion of this.
Re:The basic problem: (Score:3)
The basic problem: (Score:4)
Philosophy classes are about labels. They're about communicating meaningfully about these questions which every mind produces. How efficient to just say "solipsism" and express the great uncertainty of whether anything exists outside of your own mind!
The Matrix doesn't contain any of those labels, and really doesn't cover many ideas. Let's face it, it doesn't even make sense. What, was he supposed to have had some sort of psychic power over the computer? He wasn't hacking into the system in any way we'd recognize; the fact that the world was computer simulated in no way explained Neo's ability to break the rules at will. It has about as much philosophical value as Star Wars' mystical babble about the force: the purpose is not to inspire deep thought, but to produce a momentary awe to enhance the entertainment through deeper emotional involvement, and promote the suspension of disbelief in a representation of the eternal struggle of good against evil as primitive hand-to-hand combat (no really, this isn't pro-wrestling! they have strange psychic powers that will determine the fate of the universe!).
Of course, every once in while, exceptional pop culture can provide us with deep philosophical insights [onastick.net]. ^_^
In all seriousness, you could cover all this stuff with dozens of different popular movies and such, but just singling one out for the focus of an entire course is silly.
Socratic philosophy in The Matrix (Score:4)
Evidently The Matrix is strongly influenced by the philosophy of Socrates (at least as far as Plato tells us about it). The bit about the Oracle just makes it a tad too obvious: the wise saying ``know yourself'' (``GNOTHI SEAUTON'' in Greek — now I wonder why the makers of the movie decided to translate it in Latin: ``NOSCA TEMET'') was carved in front of the real Oracle, in Delphi, and Socrates adopted it as his motto. (Socrates, it seems, went to see the Oracle in Delphi and thus discovered about his own wisdom: ``the only thing I know is that I know nothing'' (``en oida ho ti ouden oida'').)
The whole film reeks of the parable of the cavern, told by Socrates in Plato's Republic. Recall that it goes something like this: some men are prisoners in a cavern, and are bound so that all they can see is a wall in front of them, and the shadows on that wall made by objects moving behind them. The prisoners think that the shadows are the real objects and give names to them. But one day a prisonner is unchained and goes out of the cavern. At first he is blinded by the sun, but after some time he gets accustomed to Reality. He goes back to the cavern and tries to convince his fellow prisoners that what they see are only shadows of the real objects. And so on. (If you want the full story, read The Republic.)
Now Plato has a very elitist vision of mankind. He was strongly opposed to democracy (two of his uncles were part of the Thirty Tyrants, the antidemocratic regime imposed upon Athens when it lost the Peloponnesian war against Sparta). The whole idea of The Republic, if I dare summarize it in just a few words, is that philosophers (those who can see further than the shadows of the parable's cavern) should be in charge of ruling the (city-)state. I think (I hope) that The Matrix has a more democratic vision of things, that the idea is to free mankind — all of mankind, not just a select happy few.
Another intersting point which is made, albeit briefly, in The Matrix, is when whatshisname discusses about the taste of things, how they might taste in reality, and how they taste in the Matrix: of course, the cavern's shadow-world is a projection of reality, but it is only a projection, and there is nothing to say that the reality is not vastly different from the projection (or vice versa).
I don't think this comparison is all that important, but it certainly fun to think how a science-fiction film of the end of the XXth century could have been greatly influenced by the writings of a philosopher nearly 25 centuries earlier.
(PS: Here in France we have philosophy courses in high school. I think that is a good idea.)
Re:The basic problem: (Score:4)
Who is the head of department sleeping with?
Where is the coffee?
Re:Seems totally reasonable. (Score:4)
After seeing The Matrix I went and saw another somewhat cool movie, The Thirteenth Floor. For those of you who don't know - it's about scientists who invent a directly neural-linked VR system. What one of the scientists doesn't realize is that he is merely a character in someone else's giant VR world. To me, this raises some other interesting philosophical questions.
And, tying in with some of the stuff from The Matrix
Well, the last one doesn't have much to do with either film, but I've always wondered about that since I was very, very little.
Philosophy is the science of asking everything and answering nothing. - Me
Hello people....anyone remember William Gibson??? (Score:4)
I am glad the Wachowski's created the film and in it's own "kickass" manner did a fair job of it too. Yet it peeves me that nowhere, and nohow did noone mention Gibson, even as a passing reference!
Sounds like a neat piece of marketing (Score:5)
While The Matrix has some interesting philosophical ideas, there are a whole bunch of other novels and movies that examine the same ideas, and more effectively IMHO. I would suspect that a large number of them are on the reading list for the course.
However, I've got to give the lecturer A for initiative - I hope he gets a good student or two out of it.
Wish I may, wish I might (Score:5)
Imagine the same noir scenery. A lone function f(x) is just a mundane polynomial, but if you look in the table of contents, you know it's destined to perform derivatives, integrations (by parts when necessary), and even Fournier analysis.
f(x): When I am ready, will I be able to perform Reimann summation?
g(x): When you are ready, you won't have to...
Wow...
Philosophy Lecturer (Score:5)
He then proceeded to leave the entire lecture theatre of students, mouths wide open, a minute and a half after coming in.
Half of us went striaght over to the cinemas and saw The Matrix!
the oracle scene is my favorite (Score:5)
Disclaimer 2: this stuff may seem obvious to people who have watched The Matrix more than once or twice. Sorry if I'm boring you :)
The scene where Neo is taken to the Oracle is quite interesting. I think it could cover a large portion of philosophy course. After seeing the movie a couple times, this scene really interested me.
Why? Well, as the movie progresses past that scene, it seems at first glance that the Oracle lied to Neo. Yeah everyone says "duh" he's the hero - of course he's The One. Morpheus later tells Neo "she told you exactly what you needed to hear", implying that the Oracle would lie if it lead Neo down the correct path.
But, at least in my interpretation, everything the Oracle told Neo was the truth. Morpheus himself did not completely understand the Oracle - he was in disbelief when he saw Neo die.
The Oracle however, knew this was one path that could happen. She told Neo that he would have to make a choice and that he or Morpheus WOULD die. She also told him that he's not The One. I think that he wasn't The One at that time. Notice how she also says "seems like you're waiting for something - maybe the next life - who knows?". Neo did die (flatlined), and then regained his life. At that point he had become The One. He didn't need to dodge bullets (as Morpheus had mentioned at the end of the agent training simulation).
And of course there are some religious parallels but I won't go there on this forum.
All in all, the Oracle scene was very well done, and linked in beautifully with the rest of the movie IMO.
Best regards,
SEAL