Dreams are always something attractive for two main reasons… first, they lack of any logic (anyway, it is not necessary whatsoever inside the world of the subconscious). Second, they are absolutely private no matter what. Or at least we want to think so. Inception deals with one of the oldest ideas in the history of mankind, reality. Is the world we see and feel actually the real thing?
Descartes thought centuries ago, that even though our senses report a vast amount of inputs, that is not enough because it is our senses (and their connection to the conscious mind) that always tend to deceive us one way or another, just remember the world-famous example of the “Wax”.It is, on one hand, dreams where we could be more “real” considering that according to psychology, they are the place where we actually free our mind, let our deepest thoughts roam our mind, be ourselves. On the other hand, dreams can keep us from that we normally call the real world, and even drive us mad.
To wonder what reality is, seems to be deeper than just asking if we are the body we see every morning in the mirror. Inception makes some of those questions in a very cinematographic (and effective) form.
Impossible objects like the ones created by Escher in his paintings or the Penrose chairs are real in our dreams. The laws of nature are all broken in a very “natural” and simple way, but Einstein and his e=mc2 had already proved that in the physic world (and not only in dreams) the most unbelievable things were actually possible (like the possibility of two objects occupying the same physical space at the same time). A true paradox!
Finally, dreams, as I said earlier, seem to be the most private thing a man can think of. But what would happen if, just like in the movie, dreams could be invaded by others, shared and controlled? The creepy thing in all this matter is that it is not just an issue of science fiction, but a (soon to be born) reality in research at universities all over the USA. The idea of creating artificial intelligence as well as devices that could change come of the settings of our minds forever are things we should worry about. In ethical terms, is it OK to think of the possibility of accessing other people’s deepest thoughts?
If you remember the movie clearly, here are some possible readings of the movie that increase the paradox immensely. Consider them and reflect on them as well:
READING 1: Saito hired Cobb and co. to plant an idea in Fischer’s mind. They succeed, and in the end Cobb really does go home to his kids.
Finally, dreams, as I said earlier, seem to be the most private thing a man can think of. But what would happen if, just like in the movie, dreams could be invaded by others, shared and controlled? The creepy thing in all this matter is that it is not just an issue of science fiction, but a (soon to be born) reality in research at universities all over the USA. The idea of creating artificial intelligence as well as devices that could change come of the settings of our minds forever are things we should worry about. In ethical terms, is it OK to think of the possibility of accessing other people’s deepest thoughts?
If you remember the movie clearly, here are some possible readings of the movie that increase the paradox immensely. Consider them and reflect on them as well:
READING 1: Saito hired Cobb and co. to plant an idea in Fischer’s mind. They succeed, and in the end Cobb really does go home to his kids.
READING 2: Saito hired Cobb and co. to plant an idea in Fischer’s mind, but the ending—everything from the moment Cobb “wakes up” on the plane until the credits roll—is just a dream.
READING 3: Cobb is actually the subject of the inception. At least some—maybe all—of the “real world” scenes are actually dreams.
READING 4: Everything we see is a product of Cobb’s subconscious.
All the levels identified in the movie, make up a series of paradoxical realities that contradict each other but, in the end there is just one thing common to all of them, that is, the token each character holds, that keeps them from being mental, or getting lost. Is there anything in our daily life that actually functions as a token? We need, I reckon something, whatever it is, in our lives that reminds us of who we are all along the way… because how can I know I am the same person I was five minutes or five years ago if I look totally (or considerably) different? What does my singularity and continuity depend on?
All the levels identified in the movie, make up a series of paradoxical realities that contradict each other but, in the end there is just one thing common to all of them, that is, the token each character holds, that keeps them from being mental, or getting lost. Is there anything in our daily life that actually functions as a token? We need, I reckon something, whatever it is, in our lives that reminds us of who we are all along the way… because how can I know I am the same person I was five minutes or five years ago if I look totally (or considerably) different? What does my singularity and continuity depend on?
According to the question: In ethical terms, is it OK to think of the possibility of accessing other people’s deepest thoughts?
ReplyDeleteAs far as im concerned, in ethical terms having access to the deepest thoughts its to violate people's mind, to the extent that the person may feel offended or ashamed due to the fact that secrets and thoughts that we don't want to share with others would be known, privacy would not be respected anymore, and some abuses of that could lead to problems such as manipulation. In the other hand, it might be useful when the access it's used by psycholgists, i mean if they have access to others mind, they would help them to solver their problems easier by knowing the certain point that affects people. Also the process could reduce corruption or crimes, because instead of doing does tests to TRY to know if someone it's lying, we will know exactly what he/she did or their intentions, the same happens when we don't know the responsible of a crime, every prisioner could be settle under this process of knowing their deepest thoughts and with this unfair charges will be avoided. I believe this would be a useful tool in the future which might be well controled, because it could cause harm as good.
how can I know I am the same person I was five minutes or five years ago if I look totally (or considerably) different? What does my singularity and continuity depend on?
I think the basic terms to answer these questions are experiences and memory which are related among each other. As we have experiences we learn about them, and that defines sometimes the way we act in the present although we are not aware of it, so this gives the sensation of chronological time, even our person still getting build, we acquire a sense of time so we can site ourselves according to the experiences that had happened. This is directly linkes with memory because as we remember all our experiences we might know that we still being us, because we had had the sense of time and because we are living in a sense- time way. So it doesn't matter what happened 10 years ago, we remember that we lived some experiences, then we learn something about them and thanks to them we are sited in the present.
After watching the film, and having little chats at class in the first weeks, it really makes you wonder if what you are thinking to be what is real, really being real or not. Now I see and totally understand why Descartes came to the conclusion "cogito ergo sum", or I think, therefore I am. It is the only way in which you can be sure you exists, however it never tells us that what er are thinking to be the correct universe, dimension, reality, etc. are trully the real ones. After reasoning this, one thinks even more and come to the conclusion that there's no reality, just the perception of what appears to be something logic, real and satisfying.
ReplyDelete