driven

Members
  • Posts

    2
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About driven

  • Birthday 02/17/1981

Contact Methods

  • Yahoo
    driven4agoodlife

Profile Information

  • Interests
    travel, Chicago, oceans & lakes, beaches, mountains, hottubs, casinos, dining out, cooking, cuddling, movies, thunderstorms, dogs, taking walks, reading books, cars, grilling out, country music, Frank Sinatra, road trips, golfing, camping, and many more...
  • Location
    outside Chicago
  • Gender
    Male

Previous Fields

  • Full Name
    Douglas Turner
  • Looking or Not Looking
    not looking
  • Relationship status
    In a relationship.

driven's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

0

Reputation

  1. This weekend, I went and saw the recently released movie "The Box" , directed by Richard Kelly and based upon the short story "Button, Button" by Richard Matheson. I can certainly say this movie was nothing like expected from the trailer, in fact I was expecting a fast paced action thriller, instead I wind up with a slower paced, weird, makes-you-think disappointment. The basic plot of the movie is that a man shows up and offers up a box to Norma and Arthur, our main characters. Should they press the button that is within the box wuthun 24 hours, two things will happen: 1) Someone in the world, whom they don't know, will die. 2) They will receive $1,000,000. The bulk of the movie is then spent dealing with their ramifications of (obviously) pressing the button. Walking away from the movie, several thoughts occured to me as I pondered what message about morality the movie was intended to present to the viewers, and about what types of philosophical ponderings could be had about points raised in the movie. 1) I wondered if it was drawing a parallel to organized religions, with the end statement that people need to be altruistic, rather than selfish, otherwise this world will be taken from us? a) There was some sort of "higher being" or "employer" ultimately in control of some sort of end-of-state decision based upon how they interpreted "the data" being collected from this "experiment". B) They had chosen a messenger to relay their message and to test people. c) There were "Employees" who seemed more like zombied sheep than free thinking humans, used as pawns in this overall scheme being unfolded. The library scene with rows of these "employees" even reminded me of churchgoers sitting in pews, soaking up every word being told to them. d) It was mentioned something along the lines of the only way to save humanity was through living altruistically. Perhaps, due to recent discussion on religion, I had it on the brain, but I couldn' help but draw some parallels here. 2) So after some discussion, Norma presses the button, and the movie cuts to a woman who was shot, a 911 call, and officers arriving to a scene where a woman was shot without a struggle, and a child is padlocked into the bathroom. They recieve a description of a man fleeing the scene with a briefcase. It's at least obvious to me, that this was probably the couple who had the box before Norma and Arthur, the wife is dead, and the husband nowhere to be found, but the briefcase probably was the $1,000,000 that couple had received. At the point Norma and Arthur receieve their $1,000,000 they are assured the box would be reprogrammed and the same offer made to someone they do not know. This was obvious foreshadowing that one of them would now be the stranger referred to in the scenario. At one point late into the movie, Norma and Arthur are given a choice to essentially have Arthur kill Norma, to return their son back to normal (his sight and hearing was somehow damaged while he was in the care of the "Employees" during some strange, unseen ritual), or to all live a life together, but with their son having no sight or hearing. The movie cuts to another couple now pondering the decision to press the button or not. Obviously, our Norma is now "the stranger" that is going to die should the new couple press the button. I submit that's quite a scenario now, both of these couples cannot possibly have free will in choosing their decision as one event is directly linked to the other at this point. Seems like quite the unexplained paradox. Man cannot possible be given a moral choice to make that has already been predetermined for him by a similar moral decision to be made by someone else. At that point it's no longer a choice, but a literally forced action, and thus, could have no moral consequences. I find it against reason that these "choices" are the core premise of this expirement being done by moving this box from couple to couple, when they can't possible be choices in all situations to begin with, as it seems only those pressing the box at that moment have a choice at all. Now, it could be argued that Norma and Arthur made their choice when they pressed the box in the first place, but it is obious that our messenger intends that they have a choice to make now regarding their son, and who shall live and who shall die. 3) Obviously, there is a message that our choices have consequences we must live with, but the abstract way those consequences were delived was just a bit odd and choppy to me, but then again I've never seen any of the Twilight Zone episodes (which this was once on), and I hear this kind of scenario was commonplace for that show. I suppose I don't really know where I'm going with this, other than to say the movie was strange, and provokes some philosophical thought about morality, free will, choices and consequences, and at least in my mind, why organized religion seems just as silly as the plotline of this movie. I will admit, I'm not the best writer, and at least with being new to philosophy, I have yet to perfect framing a written philosophical argument as clearly as I would like, but I think there could be some interesting discussion nonetheless from some of the messages within the movie. Just my .02. If you've seen the movie, feel free to chime in! -Driven
  2. Well, since I think I did a good job of writing in my about me, I'm going to summarize some of that here, but needless to say, I'm happy to be here, and looking forward to learning from each of you, and hopefully contributing to the discussions where I can As a consultant, I'm essentially paid to think, to produce ideas and/or to act upon those ideas to produce something. I decided I was not applying the same level of thought to my personal life, beliefs, goals, etc... and have recently taken up some of those internal critical thinking activities that led me to delve into philosophy, which led me to the beliefs of different philosophies, which led me here, to Objectivism which happens to already coorellate with how I've often thought throughout my life, even if I wasn't aware that's what it was. So, I'm new to Ayn Rand, new to Objectivism, new to a whole slew of ideas and concepts I've never really taken the time to study, think about, discuss, or really care about before other than my own thoughts about the world around me, and the interactions with the people in it, and eager for more!