Rhythmically Unique

I want to start by saying Esistenz was a bizarre film with a lot of twist and turns. Had I not known that the abstract movie had a philosophical background I would not have been able to follow the movie. There was artistic symbolism, metaphors and imagery that sets this 1999 film apart from most other films. From the stand point of virtual reality, the movie illustrates a game depicted as an abstract reality. A reality that can fit into Plato’s Hierarchical Scheme of Reality.

 Reality being “unchanging concepts or ideals transcend time and space” (Erica Cummings of study.com). In this movies instance reality seems to be the concept of trust and “friendliness”. The character Allegra Geller asks character Ted Pikul, before porting into the game eXistenZ if he is friendly. She also asks again later on in the movie. Friendliness is a sign that there will be a lack of malice or ill will. That is something that is universal in every level of reality in the movie. First the 12 “players” porting into the game must trust that one another won’t “freak out”. Secondly Allegra’s character and Pikul’s character must trust each other to escape the people who are trying to kill Allegra’s character in the game. Lastly this concept of friendless or trust comes to a reversal when Pikal turns on Allegra saying he was in fact targeting her the entire time. He was actually studying what he was sent to kill, which was Allegra and her “game”. Allegra then turns it around on him, where she says she knew he was targeting her. She then blows up the device she entered into his spine that she claimed was there to heal him. So this concept of watching the ones closest to you is universal throughout.

Furthermore there are levels of reality depicted as virtual reality to an extent where you can hardly tell when they are “in the game” or not. You never really find out until the end that in the majority of the movie they were actually in the game until the last scene. In the last scene the abstract pieces turn into pieces that are more realistic. Examples of this is first were the game pods. They turned from fleshy odd shaped items to plastic hand and head pieces similar to virtual reality games we use today. Secondly there were the weapons they used. In the game the weapons were made of flesh and bone and shot teeth instead of bullets but in that last scene in the church they were regular handguns that shot bullets.

I want to lastly point out the last thing that was said after Allegra and Ted killed the original game creator. The man at the door said “ Hey tell me the truth, are we still in the game?”. That line in itself depicted Plato’s theory of people being “sleep” or not aware of what true reality is. In short Plato says people get sucked into things like religion and what’s now media and don’t even know what reality is anymore. That’s shown here when people are so into “the game” that they no longer know the difference between it and the real world.

Source:

Study.com, Study.com, study.com/academy/lesson/the-theory-of-forms-by-plato-definition-lesson-quiz.html#:~:text=Plato’s Theory of Forms asserts that the physical realm is,in the Realm of Forms.

(Word count: 551)

The difference between beds in this world and the idea of a bed is perception. The term bed is a definition of the image that we have in our heads of what a bed is. The term is merely just a representation or a classification. As we did in class, if we sit around and ask what a bed is in actuality we will get many different answers. It could be a sofa bed, canopy bed or a crib depending on the person but in actuality its just a surface designed for a sleeping body. That is the only thing that is universal that applies to beds and only beds.

Art fits into the hierarchy according to Plato after the creator. Which he then goes to call the imitation or the imitator (referring to the artist). According to Plato artists create the image in their head and put it out for the world to see or believe is reality. From the text it says “ Then the imitator, I said, is a long way off the truth, and can do all things because he lightly touches on a small part of them, and that part an image. For example: A painter will paint a cobbler, carpenter, or any other artist, though he knows nothing of their arts; and, if he is a good artist, he may deceive children or simple persons, when he shows them his picture of a carpenter from a distance, and they will fancy that they are looking at a real carpenter.” Which means to me that art is a deception because it is a created image of what the artist chose it to be and we believe it to be true because we ,as normal beings of the 20^th century, don’t know the wiser. I agree in a sense as humans we can be ignorant to what people tell us is reality. All of our images and beliefs are from what someone told us. As an example the bible is written by a person who gave us our images of what heaven and hell is or what right and wrong from the creator to which he’s never, in the direct term, spoken to. In actuality we have all been deceived by artists to believe what they’ve created in reality when in fact its just a mere image of a made up idea or concept. An example of this is during the movie I Am Legend, Will Smith plays a character that fights killer zombie dogs in one scene. As a viewer of the movie we see just that, but in actuality Will Smith is just an actor, acting like he’s fighting a zombie and in reality the “zombie dog” is just an artificial puppet that someone is using to depict an attack on Will Smith’s character. This is an example of artist’s deception in movies. It is easy to be deceived by artists because we take a lot of things for face value without doubting artists and that is why Plato says that artists can use their talents to be deceiving and he does not hold much trust in them.

(Word count: 523)

Is it better to base your every belief purely on facts alone or is it okay to have some beliefs that are led by nonfactual evidence or no evidence at all?

In my opinion having faith based beliefs is okay and can be beneficial. As an example I didn’t always attend church. When I became an adult I took my own ideas about what it meant to have faith and one of which was that I didn’t need to go to church to go to heaven so I stopped attending. It became to the point where I didn’t think of church at all on Sundays. It wasn’t until after I went through a hardship stage where I was depressed and didn’t feel like anyone would understand that I felt I needed help. I felt like I needed to go to church in order to complete the healing process. I then went to a church here in Sacramento called New Seasons Christian Worship Center with my best friend. That day was a turning point in my life where after that I enrolled in college started back working a steady job and here I am today. That belief in going to church isn’t based on facts but it did and continues to help me in my everyday obstacles. In my honest opinion had I not returned to church and got a good message out of it I don’t think I would be in the space I’m in today physically and mentally. I can also say that after going through trials of depression I am receiving and appreciating church way more. That small belief based on no factual evidence of any kind has greatly influenced my life in a positive way. Had I only had beliefs based only on factual evidence, I would not have discovered what church can mean for me.

(Word count: 309)

1) Begging the Question “ The news is fake because so much of the news is fake” – Trump  https://youtu.be/0Cx5KH0BfE4

2) Ad Hominem “ I believe that human cloning is wrong. “ “Of course you would you’re an idiot”

3) Equivocation “Giving money to charity is the right thing to do. So charities have the right to our money.”

 4) Slippery Slope “ If teachers let students use smart phones during tutorial, eventually teachers will let students use them during regular classes.

5) Straw Man : “ The school budget must be examined to cut out waste.” “This man wants to starve our children.”

 6) Tu Quoque : “You should quit smoking.” “ Look who’s talking, I’ll quit when you quit.”

7) Non-sequitur “ If you vote against Obama because he can’t get stuff done, it’s kinda like saying ‘this guy can’t cure cancer. I’m going to vote for cancer.” -Chris Rock

 8) False Dichotomy “ Either you listen to Michael Jackson, or you don’t like pop music at all.”

9) Argument from ignorance : “Science hasn’t proven that birth control causes weight gain. Therefore, your birth control did not cause you to gain weight.”

 10) Red Herring: Energy drinks can be potentially very dangerous. However, how else are students supposed to have enough energy to study and get good grades?”

11) Appeal to emotion: I realize I’m not qualified, but if you don’t give me this job, my children will starve.

12) Genetic: “We should not trust him because he is  a Muslim and he might be a terrorist.”

(Word count: 236)

Argument: “He said to himself that she had gone safely through so many voyages and weathered so many storms that it was idle to suppose she would not come safely home from this trip also”

Standard form

1. She (the ship) went safely through many voyages
2. She (the ship) weathered many storms
3. She (the ship) will return safely from the next trip

This is not a valid argument because the premises can be false. It says that it weathered “many” storms which leaves room for error and it is not certain that the boat will return safely.

1) All beliefs influence action in some way or another.

2) Actions based on unjustified beliefs either cause harm directly, or they promote credulity which results in broad social ills.

C) Therefore it is always wrong to hold unjustified beliefs

I’m also lead to believe that this argument is not sound. The conclusion is a prediction based off of a prediction and not fact. Many times she weathered the storm but that does not guarantee she will be safe to make the trip again.

This may not be a practical claim because it doesn’t take into consideration the damage that was done to her (the ship) as it “weathered many storms”. This could be evidence that she (the ship) may not be safe to sail again. It could be because of the many voyages that the boat encountered that it is now damaged.

The fallacy that I see here is an Appeal to Past Practice. Where they are playing off of a pattern that occurred in the past and not the current condition of the ship. Although the ship has gone through many voyages, how does that make it equip to set sail again? I wasn’t taken into account the damage that has been done.

Another fallacy I see here Is Oversimplification when the ideology of safe travels on a ship are more complicated than just past predictions. Ship safety involves checking for fuel and life jackets not merely noticing trips that were made in the past.

(Word count: 343)