The Matrix Under The Deterministic Look

0 / 5. 0

The Matrix under the deterministic look

The objective of this work is to analyze a scene of the film Matrix Reload that revolves around the theme of determinism and moral responsibility. At the beginning, the architect mentions Neo that his life is "the sum of a non -balanced equation", which means that all his actions are determined. In this part, the philosophical idea of determinism is presented, which declares that an action is determined when it is the inevitable and necessary consequence of preceding events in such a way that it only has a possible result (Fischer, Kane, Pereboom and Vargas). On the other hand, the situation in which Neo has to choose between saving the last human city or his girlfriend is shown in such a way that the architect questions him if he is willing to assume the responsibility of his decision. Here the concept of moral responsibility is exposed, which formulates that a person is morally responsible when he deserves praise, blame, rewards or punishments for an act or omission carried out in accordance with his moral obligations (Fischer et alter, 2007). However, in the end the architect postulates that Neo’s decision is already determined by causality. Therefore, if Neo’s decision is determined, will it be morally responsible for what happens? Then, the identified ethical problem is the compatibility between determinism and moral responsibility, so it is planned?

To this question have tried to answer many of the great philosophers of history, but still still with absolute and open to discussion today due to their implications. Given this situation, there are two alternatives well accept the moral responsibility of human beings and, therefore, consider that human actions are not determined, or defend determinism and deny the existence of their moral responsibility. The first of the options corresponds to Robert Kane’s libertarism while the second concerns Derk Pereboom’s hard incompatibilism. However, there is also an intermediate philosophical position with respect to this issue, known as semicompatibilism, which defends the possibility of compatible moral responsibility with determinism.

On the one hand, Robert Kane’s libertarism states that a person cannot be morally responsible for an action within a deterministic world, since he would lack control over his actions. This justifies it in his argument of the consequence in which he mentions that, if determinism is true, then the acts of a person are the consequences of the laws of nature and the events in the remote past. However, what happened before birth does not depend on the person;And neither does it depend on what are the laws of nature. Therefore, the consequences of their own acts do not depend on the person so that no one would be responsible for said action.

From this, Kane affirms that a person requires having alternative possibilities and fundamental responsibility to be morally responsible for his actions. On the one hand, the condition of alternative possibilities refers to a person could have chosen or acted in a different way. On the other hand, the condition of the fundamental responsibility refers to the fact that the current actions of an individual are essentially determined by their will and values, as long as that will is formed by past free actions called self-training actions. Although these actions seem determined, they are self-determinated by the person’s will in such a way that the main source of their actions is in the individual and not outside it due to factors external to their control.

However, Kane emphasizes that the self-training actions of an individual are undetermined, since if people must be responsible to some extent for something that is a sufficient cause for their actions as established by the condition of the fundamental responsibility, thenAn infinite decline impossible for past actions would be required unless some actions in the history of the individual’s life had not enough causes and, thus, were undetermined. For example, a young man is being judged by an assault in which his victim was hit until death. At first, the court listens to the tribunal evidence and his thoughts on the young man are full of anger and resentment. His crime was atrocious. But as the court listens to how the petty character and perverse motif. However, the parents acted so because they had also been mistreated by their parents and thus consecutively. So, to what extent is the young man morally responsible for his action? From the perspective of libertarism, the young man is morally responsible, since this action was not determined and decided by his own will assault and hit the person among various alternatives. 

Free The Matrix Under The Deterministic Look Essay Sample

Related samples

Zika virus: Transmission form Introduction The Zika virus belongs to the Flaviviradae family, was found for the first time in a monkey called Rhesus febrile and in...

Zika virus: cases and prevention Introduction The World Health Organization (WHO) has confirmed that Zika is a virus caused through the mosquito bite which is...

Zeus The King of Greek mythology Introduction Zeus is the Olympic God of heaven and thunder, the king of all other gods and men and, consequently, the main figure...

Zeus's punishment to Prometheus Introduction Prometheus, punished by Zeus Prometheus, punished by Zeus. Prometheus is a ‘cousin’ of Zeus. He is the son of the...

Comments

Leave feedback

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *