Possible Worlds is the only films I can think of that is inspired by contemporary anglo-american analytic philosophy. It involves a man who lives in several different worlds, each a possible way the actual world might be. It is clear that everyone is in this situation, except in his case, he is aware of it, and appears also to be trying to solve the crime of his own death. How these possible worlds are there, or why he is aware of them, is not explained....exactly. But it's interesting to note the situations involved in them.
I could discuss or outline the plot, but I won't. Alot of films explore possiblities and the interaction of them, and what might happen if, and why such things might occur etc. etc. This is an excellent variation. Not silly, not gratuitous. But the informed viewer will see how 'not gratuitious' it actually is. There is something entirely different going on in this film: this is basically one long, and very intriguing, discussion about contemporary metaphysics.
In one world, or in a dream, perhaps, the protagonist meets a man standing on a rocky beach, while two men shout slurry words at each other: 'slab', 'rock'. The watchers discuss what they two might be saying. In another world, the protagonist is dead and his brain is missing. Detectives investigate where it might have gone. A brain scientist reveals a store of brains wired into little bottles and kept stimulated by neutrients and electricity. (SPOILER: There is a suspicion that the main character is one of those brains). There is discussion about what the brains feel - e.g. a rat brain gives the same electrical response after being stimulated by the same signals that pass through the rat when it is running through the maze. The question, then, is the rat believing she is running through a maze..?
The film is witty, strange and would be dark ...if you took it seriously. Well, you should take it seriously, to some extent, because, unlike most films about possibility, all the ideas in this are believed by at least one group of contemporary philosophers to be true, and others to be at least possible; and the craziest are not the least true.
The strangest situations in this film are thought-experiments in current analytical use: the 'slab' men are imagined by Wittgenstein, the brain in a jar is discussed by....well, everyone after Putnam; it is also something that has very strong parallels with actual current research on rat brains (see also this article I found online, but I think radiolab would be a better source...); and the possible worlds are the domain of Lewis. These are not the many worlds of Everett, the physicist who thought many worlds could explain the measuring problem; Lewis' analysis only depends on modal logic, while Everett's depends on QM. There's no strong discussion of QM here. There's no need for quantum mechanics. Although, as a count against this, Lewis' analysis flat-out denies trans-world concrete particulars - things like you and me - i.e the protagonist and thus his ability to exist between worlds. But this might be just dramatic flavour. Can't say (does it matter?).
So, there you go. If you want a crash-course in contemporary philosophy, watch possible worlds. Then: read Wittgenstein, Putnam, Lewis, Quine, go mad...
Now, as regards time, well, there's nothing to that here...
I could discuss or outline the plot, but I won't. Alot of films explore possiblities and the interaction of them, and what might happen if, and why such things might occur etc. etc. This is an excellent variation. Not silly, not gratuitous. But the informed viewer will see how 'not gratuitious' it actually is. There is something entirely different going on in this film: this is basically one long, and very intriguing, discussion about contemporary metaphysics.
In one world, or in a dream, perhaps, the protagonist meets a man standing on a rocky beach, while two men shout slurry words at each other: 'slab', 'rock'. The watchers discuss what they two might be saying. In another world, the protagonist is dead and his brain is missing. Detectives investigate where it might have gone. A brain scientist reveals a store of brains wired into little bottles and kept stimulated by neutrients and electricity. (SPOILER: There is a suspicion that the main character is one of those brains). There is discussion about what the brains feel - e.g. a rat brain gives the same electrical response after being stimulated by the same signals that pass through the rat when it is running through the maze. The question, then, is the rat believing she is running through a maze..?
The film is witty, strange and would be dark ...if you took it seriously. Well, you should take it seriously, to some extent, because, unlike most films about possibility, all the ideas in this are believed by at least one group of contemporary philosophers to be true, and others to be at least possible; and the craziest are not the least true.
The strangest situations in this film are thought-experiments in current analytical use: the 'slab' men are imagined by Wittgenstein, the brain in a jar is discussed by....well, everyone after Putnam; it is also something that has very strong parallels with actual current research on rat brains (see also this article I found online, but I think radiolab would be a better source...); and the possible worlds are the domain of Lewis. These are not the many worlds of Everett, the physicist who thought many worlds could explain the measuring problem; Lewis' analysis only depends on modal logic, while Everett's depends on QM. There's no strong discussion of QM here. There's no need for quantum mechanics. Although, as a count against this, Lewis' analysis flat-out denies trans-world concrete particulars - things like you and me - i.e the protagonist and thus his ability to exist between worlds. But this might be just dramatic flavour. Can't say (does it matter?).
So, there you go. If you want a crash-course in contemporary philosophy, watch possible worlds. Then: read Wittgenstein, Putnam, Lewis, Quine, go mad...
Now, as regards time, well, there's nothing to that here...
