It is difficult to believe that everything in your life is predetermined. Although Schick does raise some very alarming and well based views on the differences between the belief in fate and the concept of free will. I, myself was raised Christian. Despite the fact that I do not agree with a lot of what has become part of the package deal of organized religion it has instilled a sense of pre-ordained purpose through out my life. I do believe everything happens for a reason.
Events being seen from the present moment can always be back tracked to a series of events that led to that occurrence at that moment. Looking at it through that lens makes it a predetermined event. You can judge it in such a way knowing what caused it but how can you possibly apply that same lens in mapping the future. This is where the possibility of free will comes into play. I think that you can make personal choices that lead you to experience certain events. Although you can rationalize the cause and effect that made that event possible the opportunity to redirect the future effects of the present cause is there. Instead of seeing it as a steady stream of predetermined events I see it more like those chapter books where you decide alternative outcomes by choosing the ending for every chapter.
Free will is the choice you have in every action you take. Sometimes you can predict the outcome of these choices but sometimes it is more like a game of chance. I agree with Immanuel Kant's view that what determines whether you've led a good life is not the kind of experiences you've had, but the kind of choices you've made. A person can also rely on seeing things as fate predetermining their life. In a sense that is also a choice. They've chosen to ignore free will and just take things as they come. My best analysis of the bigger picture is that the events in your life are more of a conglomerate of events you have power over and some events that are just out of your control. I believe a good life is adapting to what you can't change and using your wisdom to judge the choices you can make.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
The Metaphysics of the Matrix
When arguing the existence of "The Matrix" or how it is separate from reality you must first understand how to make the distinction between the two. This system of analyzing and categorizing the traits which make them different is known as metaphysics. This method of organized investigation serves as a powerful tool in being able to argue either side. It is fundamental to understand that although there are many similarities it is the relation of their differences that makes their contrast so evident.
In "The Matrix and Philosophy" Jorge Gracia and Jonathan Sanford state that to even begin to distinguish the differences between the real world and "The Matrix" you must first ontologically analyze the source of each characteristic. The 2009 edition of the Random House dictionary defines ontology as the branch of metaphysics that studies the nature of existence or being as such. Essentially, to categorize each characteristic you must find the source or origin. The simplest difference between reality and "The Matrix" is that we do not know what causes reality. "The Matrix" however originates from reality. It was created and functions solely from it's creator. Someone or something had to create the concept and then map it out before producing it and eventually activating it.
Reality exists independently. "The Matrix" however is completely dependant on it's source. Everything in "The Matrix" stems from an order or program that was written for it. The whole concept of it is that it is a complex program that creates a sort of parallel reality. Gracia and Sanford best explain it as viewing each characteristic through the same lens. To know if something is real or not you must know it's source. If it was created by something you already know to be real then it is clearly a production and not real. The source of reality is unknown but you know you exist on the same plain as it and live in it. After all that's all you got
In "The Matrix and Philosophy" Jorge Gracia and Jonathan Sanford state that to even begin to distinguish the differences between the real world and "The Matrix" you must first ontologically analyze the source of each characteristic. The 2009 edition of the Random House dictionary defines ontology as the branch of metaphysics that studies the nature of existence or being as such. Essentially, to categorize each characteristic you must find the source or origin. The simplest difference between reality and "The Matrix" is that we do not know what causes reality. "The Matrix" however originates from reality. It was created and functions solely from it's creator. Someone or something had to create the concept and then map it out before producing it and eventually activating it.
Reality exists independently. "The Matrix" however is completely dependant on it's source. Everything in "The Matrix" stems from an order or program that was written for it. The whole concept of it is that it is a complex program that creates a sort of parallel reality. Gracia and Sanford best explain it as viewing each characteristic through the same lens. To know if something is real or not you must know it's source. If it was created by something you already know to be real then it is clearly a production and not real. The source of reality is unknown but you know you exist on the same plain as it and live in it. After all that's all you got
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Do We Live Or Dream Through Reality?
When asking yourself the question, "Do we live in The Matrix?" you must first analyze how real you consider reality to be. The difference between dreaming while you sleep and living your everyday life while awake can sometimes be very subtle in the sense that you still recognize objects, locations and people. That's what makes dreams interpretable, their relation to your life as you experience it awake. The concept of reality is questionable though when you consider that these things you recognize may not be real. You may just as easily be encountering these things because you are relating them in your life to something you have only encountered in your dream.
In Socrates's "Allegory of the Cave" he argues that simply liberating the prisoner may not necessarily make him come to terms with reality by being liberated from his visual captivity. He has been fixed to only see shadows on a wall his whole life. Allowing him to see what caused the shadows may not even cause him to have a better understanding of the shadows. He may not recognize or even make a connection between certain objects and the shadows they cast because it has no basis in his reality as he knows it. His lack of acknowledgement of these objects does not make them any more or less real. In the same sense with things you know to be real because you encounter them everyday does not necessarily mean that if you were to better understand how they have come to exist you would accept it. Vice versa, if you were to encounter something in a dream that seems familiar from everyday life, and then were to come to realization that it's existence relies on something new or unknown to you would it shake up your view on it in your life awake? Or in essence do these things exist at all in dream or your everyday life?
You rely on your sences to regester what you are seeing and feeling. In Descartes's "Meditations on First Philosophy", he argues that our senses can be very deceptive. Perhaps even to the extent that you may classify things as real only because it has regestered as something familiar. You recognize things in your dreams because you know them well from your everyday life. Your take on reality is what you are basing these judgements on. In dreaming you have nothing to refrence a new idea or object to. Perhaps neither should be your reference considering your reality awake is based on your senses. Considering this basis on reality may be wrong as your senses can be deceptive the difference between dreaming and your life awake may not be so different at all. Or maybe you have no knowledge on the awake reality because you drift from dream to dream. Every session of being awake ends and begins with sleep. You dream while you sleep.
In Socrates's "Allegory of the Cave" he argues that simply liberating the prisoner may not necessarily make him come to terms with reality by being liberated from his visual captivity. He has been fixed to only see shadows on a wall his whole life. Allowing him to see what caused the shadows may not even cause him to have a better understanding of the shadows. He may not recognize or even make a connection between certain objects and the shadows they cast because it has no basis in his reality as he knows it. His lack of acknowledgement of these objects does not make them any more or less real. In the same sense with things you know to be real because you encounter them everyday does not necessarily mean that if you were to better understand how they have come to exist you would accept it. Vice versa, if you were to encounter something in a dream that seems familiar from everyday life, and then were to come to realization that it's existence relies on something new or unknown to you would it shake up your view on it in your life awake? Or in essence do these things exist at all in dream or your everyday life?
You rely on your sences to regester what you are seeing and feeling. In Descartes's "Meditations on First Philosophy", he argues that our senses can be very deceptive. Perhaps even to the extent that you may classify things as real only because it has regestered as something familiar. You recognize things in your dreams because you know them well from your everyday life. Your take on reality is what you are basing these judgements on. In dreaming you have nothing to refrence a new idea or object to. Perhaps neither should be your reference considering your reality awake is based on your senses. Considering this basis on reality may be wrong as your senses can be deceptive the difference between dreaming and your life awake may not be so different at all. Or maybe you have no knowledge on the awake reality because you drift from dream to dream. Every session of being awake ends and begins with sleep. You dream while you sleep.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
The Matrix
The story of Neo's life in "The Matrix" can be compared to many similar characters through out history. A well based comparison can be that of Neo and the epic story of Jesus. Both endure similar trials and tribulations before embracing their calling. Although they both understand their mission they are full of doubt early in their development. Both eventually realize that they do serve an important purpose and that they are in fact capable of succeeding in there mission.
Another similar character is Socrates. Much like Neo he also questions his calling and is filled with doubt as to if he truly is the right person for the job. They both encounter an oracle that provides if not answers to silence their doubt, at least a point in the right direction. In a sense maybe not answers but more so the right questions. Both are weighed with the burden saving and enlightening their people.
One of Socrates best known works regarding enlightenment is "The Allegory of the Cave". Much like "The Matrix" it deals with the search for the truth. The mere idea of a bigger picture can be shocking to someone who knows and believes only what they have seen. To be able to think outside the box and consider that there is more going on then what you know and see is in a sense like walking out of the cave into the light. At this point the question of being able to accept this new knowledge is what makes the difference. You can choose to step back into ignorance and deny that there is more then what you know or you can embrace this new concept and use it to progress, in essence the choice between "the red and blue pill" as illustrated in "The Matrix".
The film itself is a direct commentary on how we accept what is presented to us through the media or how we can seek out our own answers as to what is going on around us. So much of our day to day lives relies on how we view the world we live in. If we are to only follow as told we have accepted our lives in "The Matrix" and are content with the guidelines we have been given. This however does not leave room for forming your own views and opinions. If we choose to question or look further into the information we are provided with we may be shocked at what we find. In the end isn't it better to know then to just follow blindly tho?
Another similar character is Socrates. Much like Neo he also questions his calling and is filled with doubt as to if he truly is the right person for the job. They both encounter an oracle that provides if not answers to silence their doubt, at least a point in the right direction. In a sense maybe not answers but more so the right questions. Both are weighed with the burden saving and enlightening their people.
One of Socrates best known works regarding enlightenment is "The Allegory of the Cave". Much like "The Matrix" it deals with the search for the truth. The mere idea of a bigger picture can be shocking to someone who knows and believes only what they have seen. To be able to think outside the box and consider that there is more going on then what you know and see is in a sense like walking out of the cave into the light. At this point the question of being able to accept this new knowledge is what makes the difference. You can choose to step back into ignorance and deny that there is more then what you know or you can embrace this new concept and use it to progress, in essence the choice between "the red and blue pill" as illustrated in "The Matrix".
The film itself is a direct commentary on how we accept what is presented to us through the media or how we can seek out our own answers as to what is going on around us. So much of our day to day lives relies on how we view the world we live in. If we are to only follow as told we have accepted our lives in "The Matrix" and are content with the guidelines we have been given. This however does not leave room for forming your own views and opinions. If we choose to question or look further into the information we are provided with we may be shocked at what we find. In the end isn't it better to know then to just follow blindly tho?
Monday, September 21, 2009
Allegory of the Cave
Socrates’ “Allegory of The Cave” fascinates me because it describes stages of enlightenment that anyone can be categorized under. No matter what your interests are you always have the choice to accept what you already know or question it in pursuit of a broader understanding. The age old quarrel of “Light versus Darkness” has been a reoccurring theme throughout history. For every new idea, there is always someone to criticize it. Without that critic though, there would never be a need for self-improvement.
As far as myself in the cave, I believe I am slowly but surely taking baby steps into the light. As an adolescent I always questioned why my life was the way it was, and what I can do to make what I want out of it. Looking back though, I was far from out of the cave. I hated how people were so ignorant as to social flaws and authoritative hypocrisy. This somehow led me to try to step out of this machine of thought. I eventually learned that sporting a Mohawk, a studded leather jacket, and Doc Martins combat boots was not thinking freely. I merely had gone from interpreting shadows to taking a glimpse at the fire. Although it was a far stretch from my Christian upbringing, it was not the answer I was looking for.
Over the last couple of years I have been satisfied with knowing what caused the shadows. I’ve recently come to realize that is not enough. My concept of the world I live in has expanded to not only wanting to understand, but learning more about how knowledge of all aspects of this world work in unison with my day to day life. I have returned to school in pursuit for the light outside the cave. Ignorance is bliss, but simply being satisfied with what I already know doesn’t enable me to change anything. Living in the light is the most powerful tool I can have to mold my life into what I want.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
