« Reloaded Rehashed | Main | Still Reloading »
Locke
I know I said I was matrixed out, but this is good: Rick Klau suggests that Commander Locke's character refers to John Locke, the 17th century (Enlightenment) philosopher known for his beliefs in empiricism (all knowledge comes to us through experience) and the tabula rasa (idea that humans begin life as blank slates and then acquire knowledge through experience). Locke is known for many other things (social contract, natural rights and natural law, what else?), but I'm not sure if any of them have any connection to Cmdr. Locke's character in "Reloaded." However, empiricism would explain why Cmdr. Locke simply does not believe in "the prophesy" that Morpheus lives by. The fact that Locke's defense plan fails so miserably suggests the film is being critical of empiricism. Maybe. I don't know. I'm just thinking out loud with all this, you know.
(DG wonders whether "the movie was really deep or if people are making too much out of it." This is a good question, and one we should ask of any book, movie, or other cultural production. Is Ulysses really deep or have people made too much out of it? The thing is, cultural products become "great" or "classic" or influential by nothing more than consensus—a critical mass simply agrees that they're great, and so they are. I think the Matrix films are great; perhaps if enough other people agree, the films will become "canonical" (or classic or whatever you want to call it) and their smart allusions and social commentary will become common knowledge. Worse things could happen.)
Posted May 19, 2003 11:59 AM | ai movies
An interesting handle you have chosen, ambivalent imbroglio. But such a handle was unnecessary. It's evident in your post.
I can t consider smith as nihilist. Sure, he's destructive, but he has purpose and intention.
I could however have been charitable to Carr's Nihilism in Merv,
Except I instead see Serle's Chinese room in Merv, thus supporting my idea that Merv is a computer attempt to solve agency and the frame problem, ie, intentionality.
We could say Neo with the architect is him trying to merge horizons, by seeking the key question. the remainder of the equation and its opposition is what the One is refining and resolving.
Or perhaps you side with Habermas, and all the cause/effect talk is self-reflective.
In fact if I worked hard enough, I could likely demonstrate the movies are simply the Gadamer-Habermas debate. The matrix and Neo s powers could be seen as normatively regulated action. How 'bout the matrix as theory of communicative action.
Is Neo moving from existential understanding to explanation or from explanation to existential understanding? I see Apel, but both could be supported I suspect. What do you think?
If you are willing to give the Bros this much credit in Philosophy (which I am not), I don't see a post constructivist critique, but a more general hermeneutical exploration.
But I think it is more than simply an exegesis of post-modern epistemology, and competing grand narratives. I don't see the philosophy in the movies being that focused IMHO.
Posted by: Tackaberry at June 13, 2003 03:45 PM
