…unless you’ve already seen, in this order: Avatar, Free Guy, The Matrix Trilogy, and (of course) Matrix Resurrections.
My probs with it… after first viewing…
At the end, they want to build unreal beauty, aka steak in the matrix. I mean… Compare “Buddy” in Free Guy to “Cypher” in The Matrix Trilogy. Notice how the movie begins… remember Animaniacs…?
They turn the Merovingian into a homeless person as if homeless people are trash.
The reflections they are rejecting are of older/unattractive people, one of whom needs to fix their marriage, and maybe change her name. Oy vey.
One thing I do love about Resurrection is its emphasis on unconditioned stimulus - that which causes a response without requiring learning—or that which can be paired with a neutral stimulus to condition a response. (Behaviorism.)
This is especially interesting when we talk about our response to beauty.
Whether we respond to beauty in nature (Kant calls that supernatural art)… or create it ourselves (Hegel says trying to imitate nature is like comparing a worm to an elephant, and Kant notes that once we realize a human is making birdsong, we stop listening…) … our response to it is unlearned. We are born knowing the beautiful like we are born knowing the Golden Rule found in every culture in history, like birds are born knowing nest building, and spiders are born knowing web building. We are born hungering for understanding, goodness, and beauty - because they don’t have to be learned. We exist because they exist—in Him we live (beauty), move (goodness), and have our BEing (truth). Amen.
_
…having never seen any of the Matrix movies nor neither knowing what red or blue pilled even is/means, I remain in total ignorance of it all.
I did attempt to watch one of the Matrix films, but kept ending up zoning out and dozing off… I’m not sure what the actual message is, that the film is attempting to convey.
The duality of nature… beautiful in its existence, yet also cruel and unforgiving at the same time… beauty in humans, especially, is eschewed as bad and so overlooked or ignored.
What if the Matrix movies themselves are just another manifestation of the Matrix reality? A Sim world in which even our discussions here are merely components of a reality that we are only deluded into thinking is the real deal?
Hell, what if the laws of matter themselves precipitating a wholly determined universe “somehow” evolved into human brain matter able to delude itself into believing that our reactions to the Matrix movies are the real deal?
Anyone here able to go beyond sheer philosophical speculation and pin this down for us – scientifically? – once and for all?
Descartes did the science thing… he took the Truth horn (unconditioned stimulus of thinking/understanding)… I AM. He grounded the ontological argument in it. Everything else flows from a God who wouldn’t deceive.
Others took the other two horns.
Kant & Hegel took the beauty horn.
Levinas took the Good horn.
But only Descartes got from the self back out to the world.
The phenomenologists accidentally argued for God’s existence by mutually producing mind and world. Who is the subject (essence) that grounds object (existence) from the beginning (eternally exists essence)? Who is the ground of being? Who moves our now from alpha to omega before we even evolved (whether or not everything outside now is actual, per Einstein)? Who is the supersubject?
Descartes says the word for that is God. He sustains us with his order, but permits our freedom with his wild.
Should say Kant & Hegel acknowledged all three horns, but… anyway. Also, Merleau-Ponty blended pre-thought seeing with the beauty horn… but same probs as other phenomenologists. Did we bootstrap all of the seen/sensed into existence just by (not even) thinking (yet)? Am I making sense?
All try to get around Descartes’ God (not Einstein, though). All fail.
Today & on I rewrite my Levinas final. In light of Resurrections & my reading of C.S. Lewis’ “Till We Have Faces” - I’ll prolly be having more fun than you
"Merleau-Ponty blended pre-thought seeing with the beauty horn… but same probs as other phenomenologists. Did we bootstrap all of the seen/sensed into existence just by (not even) thinking (yet)? Am I making sense?
All try to get around Descartes’ God (not Einstein, though). All fail.
[/quote]
The fact as i see it, is a block of invisibility abounds within and without verification, but only through a very simulated hypothetical assumption, that makes the figure-anamolous, with the figuring making- the figure blurry. Like blurry math.
The figure / figuring becomes reactive to stimuli, and thus the mirror image and the figure become a model of relative structural , transcendentally reduced to transparent proto visibility.
Crystal clear in the Descartian mind, further proto regressed to ideal forms: show more and more differential, dedifferentiated structural ‘doubt’
This maybe by way of Nietzschean inversion of formal ( dynamic) .
( note: removal of sense from non-sense becomes tedious and unworthy of re-sourceful succession>continuation.)
Do you need an editor? I need someone to help me untangle my thoughts. We could trade. Lol. I look forward to studying Nietzsche in the future…hopefully sooner than later. Obv I’m patient.
The Matrix had some good effects, and some good ideas.
I found the films to be quite entertaining, except for one major problem - that basic fundemental error in the understanding of science that laid the basis for the entire film cycle- I am talking about the totally bogas and stupid reason why humans were kept in nutrient vats in the first place.
Remember the scene where the Lawrence Fishburne’s character explains WHY humans live this way. Morpheus holds up a battery to the camera and says “energy”. Humans, we learn are being harvested for their energy. What utter complete bullshit.
I can think of a really good reason why society might develop in such a way that entrails keeping people in vats ,with a computer generated virtual reality. But “energy” gathering simply cannot be the reason.
It takes a serious misunderstanding of the most basic notions of physics to make such a moronic and stupid claim. For me, this put a dark shadow over the whole scenario.
As a lifelong reader of science fiction I appreaciate when Sci-fi stories adhere to basic rules of reality. Most science fiction requires a major deformation of natural law, the most common of these is some element requiring FTL travel. This being required to make the story work. But on any occaison where there might be a better, more elegant and scientific reason for putting people in vats why not use it, rather than resort to an meaningless and idiotic idea.
You simply cannot get any energy from a human, unless you put that energy in the ony way to get energy from a human is by burning the body!!! Energy cannot be created or destoryed. Human do not and cannot generate energy.
The fact of this stupidity acted like a damp squib throughout the entire film cycle.
Seriously if you want to have a scenario where human live like this there is a really good reason why you might want to do that - that the world’s resources are depleted and this is a more energy efficient way to give humans a life free from want. All the resources are virtual.
Second viewing… I guess the first viewing, I misunderstood the reason they were staying. They’re just going to tweak some things in order to free people’s minds from the matrix. I guess that is acceptable. I think it would be an e-vile way to do psychological warfare using satellites that make images and sounds happen that seem real. like when they broadcast ….what was it… war of the worlds?… on the radio, and people thought it was really happening.
Energy: I think it would be more feasible to put nano bots in every nonhuman animal that generates gleanable energy, and let the ranchers or just nature figure out how to feed the animals. Not sure if that’s even feasible or possible. Not sure how you would make sure nanobots didn’t get into humans.
I hear they are doing cool stuff with solar & other kinds of wave energy these days. Micro. Ocean. Who knows what else. Just hope it doesn’t involve incinerators, babies, and covid/vax victims. Js.
