Month: September 2021

The Matrix Resurrections: Trailer, Part 2.5

crimson

I was planning on discussing the “vat in a vat” theory in this post, the theory that outside the Matrix is still inside a simulation (also sometimes called the inception theory), but after some thinking about my last post, I came up with another viable theory about what is going on. I cannot help but explore this new idea: what if Neo is actually dead?

I really need to add another spoiler warning here. I am definitely going to go into great detail regarding plot points and specifics of the previous films here. This idea just cannot be discussed otherwise. So, again, do not continue to read if you don’t want spoilers.

Most people who are familiar with this story may think I am suggesting Neo is dead, as in at the conclusion of the third film. Unfortunately, this is not what I mean. I am suggesting Neo is dead, as in at the climax of the first film. I am suggesting that Agent Smith was successful in killing Thomas Anderson, and the Neo that we have all been witnessing since that moment is in fact someone, or rather something, else entirely.

Consider all the important exposition and evidence we are given throughout the first film regarding the “rules” of consciousness and mind/body dualism. As Morpheus reminds us, the mind and the body cannot continue without each other, and we see a lot of evidence to suggest this is the case. When Cypher kills his shipmates in the first film, those individuals die in the Matrix, confirming for us that the mind cannot exist without the body. We are also shown the reverse, in the form of Mouse being killed by the police shortly after the glitch in the Matrix; the body cannot live without the mind. The audience is given very, very clear guidance in this regard. Mind/body dualism does NOT exist in the universe of the Matrix storyline.

However, there is a seeming exception, as I noted in my last post: Neo. For some reason Neo can exhibit mind/body dualism. We witness this character’s mind and body each continuing exclusively in many situations. In the first film, Neo’s mind is killed by Agent Smith in the climax, and yet, somehow his body does not perish. Some may want to argue that the body can exist for up to four minutes, giving the opportunity for resuscitation. While this may be true, the situation Neo is in is grim as we still have no explanation for the continuance of his mind.

Based on the evidence we are provided throughout the first film, injuries sustained by individuals in the Matrix translate into real world damage. Get punched in the face in the Matrix, and your nose really gets broken. Your body manifests that damage in the real world. Again, this is demonstrated time and time again throughout the first film. The mind and the body are always linked. When Agent Smith is pummeling Neo inside the Matrix, Neo’s body is jerking about and his mouth is spiting blood in the real world. If this is all truly how it works, then Neo’s body would have manifested bullet wounds in the real world as Agent Smith shot him. Agent Smith unloaded a clip into Neo’s body at his death.

Neo’s mind and body should both have been finished at the climax of the first film. And yet, somehow, miraculously, Neo survives. Trinity commands Neo to stand up and fight back. And in this moment, Neo is transformed. Neo’s sight is revealed. Neo stops bullets. Neo leaps into Agent Smith’s virtual body and seemingly destroys Agent Smith from the inside. But let us take a moment and think about all this. What really happened? And what makes this one individual so special as to be able to break the established rules about mind/body dualism?

What if Neo really did die? If he really did die, then the established rules given to the audience are upheld. There is no conflict. No mind without body or body without mind. What awakens is not Neo. What awakens is not human at all. If we consider the scene from the second film where Bane’s body is taken over by Agent Smith’s mind (what I always considered to be the most important scene in all the films), then perhaps what awoke is a program of Neo.

Here is what I think could have taken place: Thomas Anderson died. Agent Smith killed him successfully. The human mind is extinguished and the human body lay in ruin (with that four minute opportunity for resuscitation). Agent Smith, confident he has accomplished his mission walks away as Trinity utters that it cannot be true that her love is dead. This is where the magic happens. Thomas Anderson was important to the Oracle and to the Architect. They’ve known about him for some time. They’ve been watching him. Thomas Anderson’s interactions with the Matrix, his ability to press against the rules and laws within the main program, have allowed for his “human code” to interact with the machines’ code. Bits of Neo exist within the system, and have been manifesting slowly, perhaps collected by important machines. In some sense, there is a doppelganger of Neo in the Matrix. Or perhaps something like a backup.

After Thomas Anderson dies at the hands of Agent Smith, this doppelganger has now the opportunity to manifest itself within the dead body of Thomas Anderson. The doppelganger is not human remember. It never had a body. It is simply a program within the machine world. Perhaps not even a complete program either. Just some free floating code, sort of like a computer virus. What awoke may simply be this doppelganger, who only knows of itself as Neo.

At this point, our new Neo would certainly have all the abilities we see from this point to the end of the third film. When he sees the Matrix, he doesn’t see what the Matrix program feeds him, he sees the code itself. As a sentient program, he can manipulate the Matrix entirely, stopping bullets and leaping into Agent Smith’s body, destroying it from the inside. As a sentient program, there is nothing that permanently ties him to the body of our former Thomas Anderson. Mind/body dualism CAN now exist within this new entity.

I am not suggesting that this new entity is in any way malicious. As far as it is concerned, it is Neo. It may even consider itself to be Thomas Anderson as well. It gains all the memories and experiences of its blueprint or template, sliding easily into the life of the dead human. It would explain how distant Neo becomes throughout the following films. How disconnected from humanity he is. The talk with Councillor Hamann becomes far more significant now. Far more telling.

For all intents and purposes, this doppelganger is Neo, and the audience doesn’t necessarily need to know any different. Certainly none of the other human characters need to know any different. Perhaps the machine characters don’t need to understand either, though I suspect they actually do. At least a few of them. This would also very much explain the character of the Merovingian.

Consider the Merovingian for a moment. Clearly a sentient program. But also possibly a previous iteration of the One, as is hinted at through the story and is suggested by many fans. Let us, for a moment, assume that is correct: that the Merovingian is a previous iteration of the One, perhaps even the first iteration. How could he still exist after so much time? If he were a human, his body would have decayed long ago. If we assume the information we are provided is in some way correct, and Thomas Anderson was in fact the sixth iteration of the One, then we can estimate that this cycle has been going on for at least 120 years. That is, each new iteration has to be born inside the Matrix, live a bit of a life, and grow up to be old enough to manifest the One. Being conservative here, I will suggest that each iteration takes at least 20 years to manifest (and probably longer than that). Therefore, the difference in age between our Neo and the original, first iteration would have to be in excess of 100 actual years.

However, if the Merovingian is “just” a sentient program, he could exist in perpetuity. There is no suggestion made in the story that the machines “grow old and die.” It is suggested (by the Oracle) that programs are frequently deleted, and can either choose to hide in the Matrix “or return to The Source” (“The machine mainframe”). She suggests that programs are not deleted due to age, but instead for other reasons: “Maybe it breaks down. Maybe a better program is created to replace it.”

This all suggests that the Merovingian is such a program, hiding in the Matrix. If the Merovingian was also another iteration of the One, and if the One is “the sum of a remainder of an unbalanced equation inherent to the programming of the Matrix,” as the Architect suggests, then it suggests that the One is in fact a sentient program, and not actually human.

I hear many of you screaming now: what about the fact that the Architect suggested Neo is “irrevocably human?” There are two possibilities as I see it. One possibility is that the Architect chose his words carefully, as to say “irrevocably” is not to say one is human, but to instead suggest one cannot escape one’s human heritage. If I am correct, and Neo is simply a sentient program, then it cannot escape it’s doppelganger quality of playing a human, even believing that it is, and therefore behaving as or being limited by its human qualities. The other possibility is that the Architect doesn’t know. I’m more inclined to believe the former in this case, as the Architect is both incredibly pompous and intelligent; I think his choice of words is incredibly important, especially in cases where the words he chooses have multiple meanings. For example, the Architect explicitly suggests that Neo’s “5 predecessors were, by design, based on a similar predication.”

“By design.”

I believe that the Architect knew what he was doing. I believe that the Architect clearly understood how “the anomaly is systemic – creating fluctuations in even the most simplistic equations.” The Architect understood that the existence of Thomas Anderson (and those like him) would automatically generate rogue code patterns within the system of the Matrix. What was needed was to create a vessel to manifest the rogue code. An opportunity to purge the code using a human vessel. Thomas Anderson NEEDED to die to make room for the rogue code to occupy his deceased body. Upon doing so, the rogue code allowed for the path of the One to play out: “The function of the One is now to return to the Source, allowing a temporary dissemination of the code you carry, reinserting the prime program.” A line that has been debated at length, and yet seems clear as day if my theory is correct.

I could not help but write this post. Even though it only manifested in my own mind over the past couple days, it seems to make a tremendous amount of sense to me. The Neo we all know from the second and third films is not the Thomas Anderson from the first film at all, but a doppelganger that thinks it is human. A possession of a human body by a segment of anomalous code, just like Bane was. Bane was the hint to all of this. As Agent Smith is Neo’s equal and opposite, does it not stand to reason that both had to possess a human body at some point in the story?

The Matrix Resurrections: Trailer, Part 2

crimson

Continuing the topic of the upcoming film, I will now discuss what I consider to be the second most important aspect of the trailer (and the most important aspect of the story as a whole): colour. While I expect most people will focus on the red versus blue conflict, a conflict that is made abundantly apparent in the trailer, there is a less obvious significance of colour that seems to be missing from the trailer. I am speaking of the camera filters.

It is again at this point that I need to provide the spoiler warnings for what I am about to discuss. To make my points, again I will be making deeper dives into the story and especially things that reveal surprises regarding what is going on for people who have not experienced this story yet. So, if you have not yet watched any of these films, you have been spoiler warned!

I think it should have been obvious to most that the cameras in the first three films all had extensive use of camera filters throughout. However, just because something is obvious to me does not mean it will be obvious to others, so I will explain what I mean in detail. This will help frame the issue I find exists in the trailer for the upcoming film.

There are numerous colour theories that exist. Each purports slightly (and sometimes significantly) different relationships between particular colours and their meanings. For example, many people believe red relates to passion and anger, while blue relates to sadness and tranquility. In business environments, there is sometimes a workshop conducted where employees’ “true colours” are determined; I was identified as being strongly blue and gold in such workshops, meaning I was highly emotional and very organized, and very weakly orange, meaning I was an introvert.

The Matrix films, at least the first three films, use colours extensively in order to situate the audience. In particular, there are three important colours audiences should be intimately aware of: green, blue, and gold. Green is the colour of the mind, blue of the body, and gold of the spirit or soul. I will discuss each in detail.

The first colour, green, is fairly obvious to most audiences. Whenever the story is taking place inside the Matrix, there is ALWAYS a green filter on the cameras. It comes out strongly in the first three films, overshadowing everything in a bit of a nauseating undertone. I do not believe it is an accident that the famous falling gliphs are also green, now used as many people’s screen savers on their computers. Green is the colour of the mind.

The green filter is a que to the audience that whatever is happening is taking place IN the mind. The Matrix, a “neural-interactive simulation” as Morpheus refers to it, does not exist in the “real world” as such. Everything that happens inside the Matrix is like a dream. Fights, discussions, driving a car, all exist within the mind of those who participate in the simulation. In this way, there really is no gravity, nor any real air to breath in the Matrix. Due to these illusory limitations, those who are truly aware of the Matrix can break the rules of the Matrix, and perform amazing feats. This the the crux of the first film, where Neo escapes his limitations, and grows beyond the rules of the Matrix. This is made intimately clear at the conclusion of the first film as Neo literally flies into the air.

None of these things actually happen, at least not in the real world. Neo cannot actually fly in the real world. In fact, Neo cannot do exciting martial arts or other exotic things in the real world, at least not until later in the third film, but I will get to that in a bit. Everything that happens in the Matrix happens in the mind, and thus has a green filter on it. The main question people ought to consider is whether the green filter is coming from the Matrix itself, or whether the green filter is being imposed by the occupants of the Matrix by themselves. That is, is the green filter simply what happens when we peek into someone’s mind?

The second colour, blue, is much less obvious. Once I point this out, if you didn’t realize it was there, you might consider rewatching some of those previous films for it. Anytime the scene does not take place in the Matrix (with a couple exceptions in the third film), there is a blue filter placed on the camera. The crumbling remains of the great metropolises, the dank caverns of Zion, even the hovercraft engines are all blue. Blue is the colour of the body.

The blue filter is the que to the audience that whatever is happening is taking place IN the body. The body exists in the “real world.” The real world is the world we all inhabit, at least as far as we can tell. There is a very real theory that what we think is the real world is in fact simply another level in a possibly multilevel simulation: the simulation hypothesis. Interest and belief in this theory has certainly grown in the past 20 years since the Matrix movie was first released. However, if we assume that this world we inhabit is, in fact, the top level of such an idea, we can continue to discuss the idea of the real.

In the real world, in the films, all rules are rigidly enforced and all consequences are permanent. Gravity exists and we require air to breath. We require food to sustain ourselves, and our limited squishy bodies succumb to injury. As far as we know, leaving our body is a permanent and terminal activity. With the exception of what takes place at the end of the second film, all these rules seem to be enforced. Or so it seems. It is a fan theory that the supposed “real world” is simply another layer in the many layer simulation. I will discuss this idea in a future post, as it relates to the new trailer. For now, let us simply suggest the real world really is the real world (even saying it like that seems incredibly confusing and problematic, but let’s just run with it).

This leaves us with gold. As far as I can tell, there is no gold filter used in the first three films. This is not to say there are not cases where one might have been appropriate; instead those scenes where one might have been used, the scene is entirely computer generated and so it might not have made much sense. I am, of course, referring to Neo’s Sight in the third film. However, I will argue that this sight was present much earlier, and has been slowly developing/evolving throughout the second and third films.

Gold is the colour of the spirit or the soul. Gold is not used in the first film (as far as I can tell). At the first possibly appropriate point that it might have been used is when Neo first “sees” the agents at the end of the film, after he had died. The agents, to Neo, look like globs of green code, similar to the famous screen saver. Simply silhouettes of green code. This could mean one of two things: either the agents do not have souls, or Neo’s ability to see souls has not yet developed. I believe it is the latter; evidence to suggest Neo’s Sight is developing is seen through the second film.

After the defeat of Agent Smith, Neo flies away, and the second film begins. Early into the second film, Neo meets Seraph, and he sees something he has not seen before. The silhouette of Seraph is gold, not green. He does not know what this means. Shortly after their interlude, he begins a discussion with the Oracle, and establishes that both the Oracle and Seraph are “not human,” that they are both “program[s] from the machine world.” He made no reference to this after seeing the Oracle in the first film, because he did not yet have his sight. It took his death to begin that process and evolution in his character.

From this point onward, whenever the audience is allowed to see what Neo sees, all the sentient programs he encounters are silhouettes of gold. To my knowledge, they do not show him looking at humans, so it is unclear whether the same sort of event would occur with them. However, Neo clearly indicates the sentient programs are “not human,” and so we can conclude that the souls of machines look different to him. This raises other possible questions regarding his sight, such as a possible limitation on only seeing machine souls and not human souls. On some level this makes sense, as we definitely do not have the technology to see human souls at present. It is suggested that human souls are unmeasurable, which would seem to suggest an inability to see them (even with the use of technological aids).

Even if we conclude that Neo’s Sight only privileges him to see the souls of sentient programs, it is still a rather significant upgrade. His sight works for him within the Matrix, but not in the real world until the end of the second film, when he says, “Something’s different. I can feel them.” His ability has developed sufficiently that he can now use the ability outside the Matrix, and can sense the machines.

Into the third film, Neo and Trinity separate from the others in order to journey to the machine city. Bane stows away in order to confront Neo. But Bane, as is seen in the second film, is no longer really Bane; he is Agent Smith, now manifest in the real world. During his fight with Neo, he burns Neo’s eyes, effectively making him blind. But Neo’s blindness is only of the real world; Neo’s ability to see machines’ souls still operates, and he literally reveals to Agent Smith and the audience that he can see Agent Smith. Take note, however, that Agent Smith’s silhouette is quite different than all the other machine souls; Agent Smith’s soul is red and flaming, as if it were corrupted somehow. Perhaps Agent Smith’s soul is in conflict with Bane’s soul, fighting for control of the flesh and blood body that Agent Smith detests so much. No other machine’s soul looks like this, only Bane/Agent Smith.

From this point onward, Neo literally sees all the sentient machine’s they encounter. The audience is in a privileged position to share in Neo’s Sight, as they make their way to the machine city. He tries to share this with Trinity upon her death by describing the machine city as having “Lights everywhere. Like the whole thing was built with light.” Neo’s Sight suggests to the audience that the manner in which the machines manifest themselves is quite different than humans. That is, as is presented by the machine Deus Ex Machina, the machines are not as individualistic as human’s believe they are. Smaller sentient machines collectively make up larger sentient machines, as if the smaller ones could be considered the cells of the larger organism. In some sense, the machine city is a single conscious entity, much as it might be argued Zion could be as well. This leads into discussions of sociology, mob mentality, and group think, which I will not discuss here. I will simply argue that the machines’ societal structures are a bit different than the ones we are likely familiar with in our human world.

This leads me, “inexorably,” to the trailer for the upcoming film. The previous three films utilize these three colours, green, blue, and gold, extensively to situate the audience during the telling of the story. At all times, the audience should have a clear idea where the action is taking place, in the Matrix, in the real world, and in Neo’s Sight respectively. But the trailer seems to break all this. The opening, with Thomas Anderson having a discussion with what appears to be a psychiatrist, does NOT appear to have any filter. It is possible that the filter was removed specifically for the trailer, as a way to mislead the audience regarding what is happening, and especially where. Or, there is another possibility that I will suggest: there is an orange or gold filter in place.

I’ve been watching the trailer over and over, trying to see if it exists. The truth is, I am unable to tell with certainty. But it is interesting that the backgrounds and sun’s lens flares are so dominantly orange/gold in colour. Even the flesh on the actors does feel a bit more orangy than it should otherwise be. I think it is entirely possible that a gold or orange filter may be in use.

So, let us say for the moment that I am correct; what does this all suggest? I believe it might suggest that Neo is in none of the places I have described above. Not in the Matrix, not in the real world, and not using his special sight. He is somewhere else. It is even possible he IS someone else also. As for where he might be, I have one suggestion: he could be in “heaven.”

By “heaven,” I do not mean the Christian heaven from the Bible. I mean something like a special simulation created by the machines exclusively for Neo. After the events of the third film, Neo is dead. His mind is lost, but his body is still possibly recoverable. Perhaps, due to another as yet unknown to the audience conflict, the machines needed to resurrect Neo. Or perhaps the machines simply don’t think as humans think, and thought it was a good idea to resurrect him anyway. In any case, the machines might have created a special simulation to either contain or develop a new mind for Neo. A place to bring Neo back from.

It would be consistent with many of the things seen in the trailer. Younger versions of familiar characters, pushing Neo through something like the path he took previously in the first film. Redeveloping his cognitive abilities. Perhaps resurrecting the powers he had before. Of course Trinity would appear, even as a ghost created by Neo’s subconscious. In fact, as Neo’s abilities grew and manifested, Trinity’s appearance should be inevitable. Not that she really existed, because she should be dead in the real world. A ghost in the machine, created by Neo’s obsession with his lost love. It might explain those green gliphs falling down her cheeks at about half way through the trailer. She may not be real.

One last thing to think about, before I leave this discussion on the colour filters. During the trailer, at each moment that there is the text on the screen, look to the background. There you will find the usual green gliphs falling down, the trademark of the Matrix films. But also look below. What is that rising from the bottom of the screen? Golden gliphs rising from the bottom, as if fighting with the green one’s that are falling. Perhaps this is the real hint as to what is to come in the new film.

The Matrix Resurrections: Trailer, Part 1

crimson

I’m always so serious in my posts. Today, I will try to be a little less serious. I will talk about the upcoming film The Matrix Resurrections.

As many of my friends know, I am a bit of a Matrix fanatic. Not that I think the story is real or even entirely realistic. However, I do think it is an amazingly rich story that can be enjoyed on countless levels, and poses numerous deep and philosophical questions. Put simply, the story makes one think. For me, this frequently makes a story (whether it is a film or a book) very enjoyable.

I will not rehash what has taken place in the story up to the point in time of this latest film, in part because it would take too long. Also, because I would not want to spoil it for those of you who may not be familiar with the story. Seriously, if you are reading this and you either have not seen the previous films, or if you simply have no idea about this story, I urge you to stop reading right now and go watch them. The first film for sure, but I encourage you to make your way through all three films, and The Animatrix as well. The entire story is quite interesting, and there is much to talk about throughout.

This is your spoiler warning. Do not continue reading if you do not want me to spoil the story for you. I will try to be somewhat vague regarding some things, but ultimately I suspect I will have to go rather deep simply to make my points. So, once again, this is your spoiler warning.

This past week, the trailer for the upcoming film was released. For many of us fans, we have been eagerly awaiting this trailer, as well as the film. Speaking for myself, I was not disappointed.

The first thing to establish is that this is a trailer. As a trailer, its purpose is to get audiences excited and eager to watch the upcoming film. It is an advertising vehicle intended to get “butts into seats” at the theaters. As such, I immediately expect the trailer to be misleading and deceptive. In fact, knowing the trouble Marvel studies has gone to with their own film trailers, misrepresenting information and outright manipulating scenes in order to mislead audiences, I expect this trailer may have done similar things. On the other hand, considering the complexity of the story, the producers may not have had to do very much anyway.

I’m not going through the trailer frame by frame or anything like that. Just proposing some things regarding what may be going on and what sorts of things I noticed and looked for in the trailer. Significant things that I believe will be important in the upcoming film. At the front of this line of important things is the fact that Neo appears to be our star and protagonist.

For anyone who knows the story, this one detail should already raise questions. After all, at the conclusion of the third film, Neo died. It is true that it may be possible to suggest Neo wasn’t entirely dead. In his mutual annihilation with Agent Smith, like all the other residents of the Matrix, Thomas Anderson may simply have been purged of the virus and re-awoken with the rest. This is certainly not made clear in the third film, but it remains a possibility.

I suspect there are a number of possible interpretations for what happened at the end of the third film. Firstly, it has been established numerous times that the “body cannot live without the mind,” as Morpheus makes explicitly clear in the first film. At the conclusion of the fight between Neo and Agent Smith, Neo’s mind should be gone, leaving his body without a mind. His body, now a lifeless husk, being gracefully taken away by the machines, possibly in reverence. But we also know that the machines are particularly adept with the simple flesh and blood bodies of humans as well, as is establish in the The Second Renaissance Part II. It would not be very difficult for the machines to take Neo’s body and repair or maintain it for future uses, if they were so motivated.

With his body’s survival established, this leaves us with his mind once again. Neo’s mind should have been destroyed, along with Agent Smith’s mind. For me, this is a critically important plot point, and the reason I believe the story works so well. Neo cannot survive the elimination of Agent Smith. They are “equal and opposite,” as the Oracle suggests, and as such neither can exist without the other. Or, to put this another way, one cannot be destroyed without destroying the other. Neo must die at the end of the story. So his existence in the fourth film becomes a very interesting puzzle.

One simple way they might explain Neo’s mind would be to copy it from backup. This, of course, suggests that the Matrix is being regularly backed up. This could also explain how the Matrix is restored as well, suggesting perhaps the Matrix was restored from a previous backup. However, as I say all this, it seems less and less reasonable. If backups were being done, then human minds would be regularly backed up, and at times, restored, suggesting human minds were being restored from time to time. This would be highly problematic, especially considering the sorts of information that would regularly be overwritten.

Very generally, backups are typically performed at instantaneous intervals, however, Agent Smith’s infection of the people inside the Matrix takes place slowly over time. To restore a backup of the Matrix, one would need to be done from before Agent Smith becomes virulent, which takes place at the end of the first film.

As case example of overwriting minds, let us briefly discuss the character Bane. In the second film, Bane’s mind is overwritten with Agent Smith’s mind. Upon leaving the Matrix, Agent Smith is effectively possessing Bane’s body. This is a significant plot point in the second and third films. Is Bane’s mind literally and completely overwritten with Agent Smith’s mind? This is not made entirely clear, and involves suppositions regarding mind/body dualism. In fact, this entire discussion assumes that minds and bodies can exist independent of one another, something that Morpheus will remind us cannot happen.

It is here that we enter some very murky waters. There are many, many examples of science fiction that exist today where the assumption of mind/body dualism is assumed. That minds can exist independently from bodies. In the Matrix story itself, at the end of the second film and the beginning of the third, it is suggested that Neo’s mind and body do, in fact, separate completely. It requires the character Link and others to utilize “some pretty ancient hacks” in order to successfully reintegrate Neo’s mind with his body. In fact, Link doesn’t even recognize Neo inside the Matrix, telling Morpheus that he “couldn’t tell what it was” that was with Morpheus. Of note here is the use of the pronoun “it” as opposed to “who,” suggesting Neo’s mind didn’t even look like a human mind at all.

There are a lot of ways one might interpret this entire situation. Morpheus suggests that minds and bodies cannot exist independent of each other, and yet Neo’s mind clearly was separated from his body for a significant amount of time. Furthermore, Neo’s mind (while separated from its body) clearly is unlike a typical human mind as well. All of this suggests that minds and bodies can actually be separated, however, there may be consequences of such a separation. This likely relates to the special nature of Neo, and why he is able to do the things he does, as noted by Councillor Hamann.

It is unlikely I will be able to resolve this puzzle, but it does strongly suggest the possibility that the machines could do something similar in this latest film. The machines could continue maintaining Neo’s body after the fight with Agent Smith (similar to how the human’s maintained Neo’s body at the end of the second film). The machines could, conceivably find a source for Neo’s mind and then join the two back together. All that remains to explain is where Neo’s mind might be found.

It is also here that we might conceivably have our tension or conflict within the fourth film. Neo and Agent Smith are inextricably tied to one another, at least after the events of the first film. There cannot be one without the other. If the machines found and/or preserved Neo’s mind in some fashion, then Agent Smith’s mind should not be far behind. To be fair, if Neo’s mind is in a condition from before he and Agent Smith merged, then perhaps Neo can exist without Agent Smith. However, in such a circumstance, Neo’s mind would not contain the extra code from Agent Smith: the code from the source. Would Neo continue to have the extraordinary abilities he had without the source code?

It will be interesting to see how the producers of this latest installment explain the mere existence of Neo. It seems very strange to me that he exists at all. And I haven’t even discussed the existence of Trinity…

Weaknesses in the Freedom Argument

crimson

Recently, I witnessed an Anti-Vaccine Protest. I have often observed at these protests recurring themes and recurring arguments that are meant to support their cause. It is often claimed that they are “Critical Thinkers” and that their logic and reason lead them to conclude that taking a vaccine is a bad idea. Further to this, they will often argue that it restricts their right to freedom if they are coerced or forced to get vaccinated. With the pandemic still going strong, there seem to be many such protests going on.

In this post, I will discuss what I will refer to as the “Freedom Argument,” the argument that suggests getting vaccinated (or being coerced or forced to get vaccinated) goes against their right to freedom. To begin, I will need to clarify what those presenting this argument mean by freedom.

On this website, I have spoken about freedom and free will at length. My understanding of freedom typically relates to an idea of unpredictability; something that is not a part of causal chains of events, like and uncaused cause perhaps. The Freedom Argument’s version of freedom is very different than my understanding.

Having listened to many discussions from protesters, it is my belief that what they mean by freedom is more akin to their perceived right to be able to act as they desire without being restricted in those acts. That is, if one wishes to eat ice cream, they ought to be able to eat ice cream, and that if anyone interferes with that desire, they are restricting the person’s freedom to eat ice cream. With this understanding, freedom would seem to be intimately related to egoism and hedonism, as it seems intimately tied with one’s desires.

In the first case of egoism, I am suggesting that an individual is acting in a self-interested manner. In the case of the Freedom Argument, one is intended to be free to act in self-interested ways. To prevent an individual from pursuing self-interested actions, one is restricting that individual’s freedom. The Freedom Argument will suggest that this is a bad thing.

In the second case of hedonism, I am suggesting that an individual is pursuing fulfillment of their desires, especially pleasure. In the case of the Freedom Argument, one is intended to be free to pursue their own desires and pleasures. To prevent an individual from pursuing their pleasures, one is restricting that individual’s freedom. Again, the Freedom Argument will suggest this is a bad thing.

There is often one additional caveat that is added to the Freedom Argument, though it may be unspoken in many cases. The idea that to pursue one’s desires and self-interest is considered acceptable (and even desirable) in all circumstances, so long as it does not infringe upon the freedom of others. That is, if my action affects only me and no one else (in any significant way), then I ought to be free to pursue that action without restriction. To put this another way, if my action will not cause any negative effects on those around me, there is no reason for others to restrict my action.

It is this last point that muddles up most of the argument, I think. To be self-interested and to pursue one’s desires within and of themselves seems unproblematic. It may even be argued that all people are already self-interested and pursuing their desires presently. There are complicated arguments that suggest helping others is simply a pathway to self-interestedness and that such actions may, in fact, lead to individual pleasure. However, in the pursuit of desire and pleasure, especially in our modern world, it is frequently incumbent to make others suffer.

I imagine the last statement I made will be met with a great deal of resistance. One might suggest that the act of eating ice cream, for example, causes no suffering to any one. However, I would raise the question of how one might gain the opportunity to eat ice cream. The ice cream must be generated by some means. Someone will have to milk a cow, or similar mammal, accumulate the dairy product, process it, reduce its temperature, mix in other ingredients, (these other ingredients will have their own story to tell regarding how they come about as well), stored, presented, sold, prepared, and numerous other activities. My point is that the process behind the generation of ice cream is quite long and complicated. There are many things one might consider along the path of that process, including the well-being of the cow (or other mammal), the people who partake of each step of the process, and the eventual process of acquisition. Are we so certain that no one in that entire process suffered so that one might enjoy ice cream?

In our modern consumerist world (at least the part of the world where I reside), it may be suggested that working toward the production of a product does not count as suffering. After all, the people partaking of the process of manufacture are provided compensation for their labours. While I might agree that some people may truly enjoy their work and receive arguably appropriate compensation for that work, I have often observed that this is not the case. That many people are not very happy with their employment situations, and that the conditions in which they work under are less than ideal. Furthermore, compensation is frequently much less than what those people deserve. This last point, I admit, is my opinion; there is no objective measure of valuation that one can rely upon to ensure that compensation for labour is fair.

My ice cream example does, I admit, seem a little taxed. If the cow is sustainably and ethically farmed, if the farmer and his family are happy, if everyone in every step of the process is not unduly taxed during the process, it seems unproblematic for one to eat ice cream in a manner that does not cause suffering. Can the same be said regarding all other aspects of our lives? Are our clothes all so easily manufactured? Or our homes? Or our smartphones?

It might seem I have gone off on a tangent here, but I assure you I have not. Those individuals who participate in the process that eventually results in the shoes you place on your feet are frequently unable to exercise their freedom in the manner I have outlined above. Their suffering is a result of poor working conditions as well and a severe lack of appropriate compensation. In some cases, they may even be forced to work, not having any other live options. Similar situations occur in most aspects of Western Society. There is a great disconnect between those who utilize products and services, and the sources of those same products and services. The greater the disconnect, the less likely one may feel the associations that exist between their actions and the consequences of their actions.

This all may seem quite preachy and contrived, so I will provide a much, much simpler example that I observed during the protest that I referred to at the outset of this article. During the protest, one of the protesters had a megaphone and decided to exercise his freedom by walking down the middle of a busy street. Through the megaphone, he indicated that he was exercising his freedom to walk upon the street, and that if anyone were to prevent him from doing so, they would be restricting his freedom. It was his way of presenting his evidence of his Freedom Argument.

Unfortunately, there resulted a long line up of cars behind him as he walked. Numerous vehicles, occupied by numerous individuals, who were simply trying to exercise their freedom to drive on the street. The protester’s actions, while possibly a manifestation of his own freedom, incurred the suffering of others. Was his freedom somehow more valuable or important than the freedom of the drivers on the street?

In our world, we often live within societies with laws and rules. Those laws and rules are, I think, intended to provide a vehicle for cooperation between people, as well as an opportunity to allow each participant in the rules to manifest a limited freedom. That is to say, it required quite a cooperative effort by many, many individuals to produce the street that the protester and drivers all were trying to use. No one person owns that street; it belongs to all those who helped build it, which included all the tax payers. With the street being essentially a shared resource, coming up with a set of rules to govern its use seems a fair way to ensure that all those who partook of its creation can all enjoy its use. (I will admit that the precise nature of the laws and rules may require some adjustment to ensure fairness across all individuals, but the idea of having laws and rules I do not think is in dispute).

The protester walking down the middle of the street infringes on the rules of the street’s use, namely the protester is “jaywalking.” By choosing to break the agreed upon rule governing the use of the street, the protester is suggesting that his freedom to walk down the street, in spite of the rules, is more important or more valuable than the freedom of those driving their vehicles on the street.

Ultimately the point I am trying to make is that the exercising of a freedom by one, often restricts the freedom of others, unless the freedom being exercised somehow does not affect others. In the case of a pandemic and vaccination, the purpose of vaccination is to collectively provide defensive measures to mitigate the spread of the virus. When individuals decide not to get vaccinated, they are not only affecting themselves, they are affecting everyone around them with their choice. Their decision to exercise their freedom and not get vaccinated actually restricts the freedom of others, including those who chose to get vaccinated.

The largest weakness of the Freedom Argument, in my opinion, is the lack of consideration of others. For me to be free, others must have their freedom restricted. A better argument might suggest that we are all not entirely free, but free in a limited capacity. I allow my freedom to be restricted in a small way, and you do as well, such that we both can share a similar level of freedom. A compromise of a sort. It seems to me to be better that we all share a limited freedom, than for some to hold onto an unrestricted freedom while many receive no freedom at all.