Total Posts:18|Showing Posts:1-18
Jump to topic:

Memento as analogy for post-enlightenment...

Noumena
Posts: 6,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 9:30:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Memento is soooo an analogy for the courses philosophy has taken since its modern inception in the Enlightenment. The protagonist begins with clear powers of cognition (philosophy as done by the speculative rationalists and british empiricists), goes through an experience which brings with it the destruction of his cognitive processes (beginning with Kant's assault on our experiential relationship with the noumenal and continuing on through the idealists down to postmodern critiques of man as self-situated in his cognitive investigations), yet he continues to (purposely) delude himself, acting out of a futile attempt to grasp what he'd lost. The last part is where the analogy gets a bit fuzzy but I would argue that work which ignores (or brushes aside) our epistemic situatedness is doing just that.

Came to me in the shower man/
: At 5/13/2014 7:05:20 PM, Crescendo wrote:
: The difference is that the gay movement is currently pushing their will on Churches, as shown in the link to gay marriage in Denmark. Meanwhile, the Inquisition ended several centuries ago.
Noumena
Posts: 6,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/21/2013 12:35:06 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
No one cares about my showering ruminations.
: At 5/13/2014 7:05:20 PM, Crescendo wrote:
: The difference is that the gay movement is currently pushing their will on Churches, as shown in the link to gay marriage in Denmark. Meanwhile, the Inquisition ended several centuries ago.
airmax1227
Posts: 13,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/21/2013 12:58:28 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/21/2013 12:35:06 AM, Noumena wrote:
No one cares about my showering ruminations.

Well I don't have anything worthwhile to add... But I thought your analysis was very interesting... I thoroughly enjoyed the movie too.
Debate.org Moderator
Buddamoose
Posts: 19,448
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/21/2013 12:59:51 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 9:30:43 PM, Noumena wrote:

Came to me in the shower man/

Tis the place where the greatest thoughts occur
"Reality is an illusion created due to a lack of alcohol"
-Airmax1227

"You were the moon all this time, and he was always there to make you shine."

"Was he the sun?"

"No honey, he was the darkness"

-Kazekirion
Sui_Generis
Posts: 493
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2013 3:56:31 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Possibly my favorite movie. For real, it's actually listed on my profile as one of my favorite movies.

Also your theory is no.
"Mundus vult decipi--the world wants to be deceived. The truth is too complex and frightening; the taste for the truth is an acquired taste that few acquire."
-Martin Buber, I and Thou
Noumena
Posts: 6,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2013 7:03:38 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/23/2013 3:56:31 AM, Sui_Generis wrote:
Possibly my favorite movie. For real, it's actually listed on my profile as one of my favorite movies.

Also your theory is no.

It works though right? I don't think that was Nolan's goal but I still think it matches up pretty well. Where did I mess up?
: At 5/13/2014 7:05:20 PM, Crescendo wrote:
: The difference is that the gay movement is currently pushing their will on Churches, as shown in the link to gay marriage in Denmark. Meanwhile, the Inquisition ended several centuries ago.
Sui_Generis
Posts: 493
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2013 10:14:25 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/23/2013 7:03:38 AM, Noumena wrote:
At 4/23/2013 3:56:31 AM, Sui_Generis wrote:
Possibly my favorite movie. For real, it's actually listed on my profile as one of my favorite movies.

Also your theory is no.

It works though right? I don't think that was Nolan's goal but I still think it matches up pretty well. Where did I mess up?

Hmmmm...... well it works, like you say. I just meant that I don't think that anyone involved in the movie intended it that way. But besides the last scene, I don't see a discrepancy, if we're being vague.
"Mundus vult decipi--the world wants to be deceived. The truth is too complex and frightening; the taste for the truth is an acquired taste that few acquire."
-Martin Buber, I and Thou
Noumena
Posts: 6,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2013 10:48:16 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/24/2013 10:14:25 AM, Sui_Generis wrote:
At 4/23/2013 7:03:38 AM, Noumena wrote:
At 4/23/2013 3:56:31 AM, Sui_Generis wrote:
Possibly my favorite movie. For real, it's actually listed on my profile as one of my favorite movies.

Also your theory is no.

It works though right? I don't think that was Nolan's goal but I still think it matches up pretty well. Where did I mess up?

Hmmmm...... well it works, like you say. I just meant that I don't think that anyone involved in the movie intended it that way. But besides the last scene, I don't see a discrepancy, if we're being vague.

I get that of course. Nolan just seems to have a knack for putting out films open to wide philosophical interpretation. I'm still trying to find someone to debate me on whether or not his Batman trilogy possessed an implicit vindication of modern conservatism. Likewise Inception is awesome if you a springboard to get into talks of ethics, reality, even commodity production in industrial capitalism (if you can believe it) or really anything metaphysically mind-bending. Oh and then The Prestige. How about dat personal identity conunundrum?
: At 5/13/2014 7:05:20 PM, Crescendo wrote:
: The difference is that the gay movement is currently pushing their will on Churches, as shown in the link to gay marriage in Denmark. Meanwhile, the Inquisition ended several centuries ago.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2013 2:16:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/24/2013 10:48:16 AM, Noumena wrote:
At 4/24/2013 10:14:25 AM, Sui_Generis wrote:
At 4/23/2013 7:03:38 AM, Noumena wrote:
At 4/23/2013 3:56:31 AM, Sui_Generis wrote:
Possibly my favorite movie. For real, it's actually listed on my profile as one of my favorite movies.

Also your theory is no.

It works though right? I don't think that was Nolan's goal but I still think it matches up pretty well. Where did I mess up?

Hmmmm...... well it works, like you say. I just meant that I don't think that anyone involved in the movie intended it that way. But besides the last scene, I don't see a discrepancy, if we're being vague.

I get that of course. Nolan just seems to have a knack for putting out films open to wide philosophical interpretation. I'm still trying to find someone to debate me on whether or not his Batman trilogy possessed an implicit vindication of modern conservatism. Likewise Inception is awesome if you a springboard to get into talks of ethics, reality, even commodity production in industrial capitalism (if you can believe it) or really anything metaphysically mind-bending. Oh and then The Prestige. How about dat personal identity conunundrum?

Well, you could ostensibly bend and twist theory to interpret more or less anything--economists are very talented at constructing incredibly sophisticated models to fit observational data (of which there is no shortage). I think there's a definite worry involved in using theory as an interpretive matrix. There's a point at which you end up with a Higgs field problem (which explanation will probably stretch my limited understanding of quantum physics)--while all of the data-particles that are floating around acquire meaning only when connected by theory, one runs a serious risk of advocating a runaway theory when none of the hypotheses are explicitly testable, since falsifiability is what separates data-fitting theories from data-explaining ones.

All this is to say that you could use theory to glean philosophically significant conclusions from culture, but I have to wonder about where the line can be drawn between discovering something in culture and instrumentalizing theory for mental gymnastics.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2013 2:18:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
If the Higgs analogy was vague, what I mean is: the Higgs field is hypothesized as something through which particles pass to gain mass; similarly, I think there's a problem with theory in which it functions as an a priori Higgs field, attaching weight and meaning to everything which passes through it, immediately coloring its interpretation, rather than calling into question the usefulness of the theory. Incorporation vs. reevaluation, I guess.
Noumena
Posts: 6,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2013 11:24:37 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/24/2013 2:16:03 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 4/24/2013 10:48:16 AM, Noumena wrote:
At 4/24/2013 10:14:25 AM, Sui_Generis wrote:
At 4/23/2013 7:03:38 AM, Noumena wrote:
At 4/23/2013 3:56:31 AM, Sui_Generis wrote:
Possibly my favorite movie. For real, it's actually listed on my profile as one of my favorite movies.

Also your theory is no.

It works though right? I don't think that was Nolan's goal but I still think it matches up pretty well. Where did I mess up?

Hmmmm...... well it works, like you say. I just meant that I don't think that anyone involved in the movie intended it that way. But besides the last scene, I don't see a discrepancy, if we're being vague.

I get that of course. Nolan just seems to have a knack for putting out films open to wide philosophical interpretation. I'm still trying to find someone to debate me on whether or not his Batman trilogy possessed an implicit vindication of modern conservatism. Likewise Inception is awesome if you a springboard to get into talks of ethics, reality, even commodity production in industrial capitalism (if you can believe it) or really anything metaphysically mind-bending. Oh and then The Prestige. How about dat personal identity conunundrum?

Well, you could ostensibly bend and twist theory to interpret more or less anything--economists are very talented at constructing incredibly sophisticated models to fit observational data (of which there is no shortage). I think there's a definite worry involved in using theory as an interpretive matrix. There's a point at which you end up with a Higgs field problem (which explanation will probably stretch my limited understanding of quantum physics)--while all of the data-particles that are floating around acquire meaning only when connected by theory, one runs a serious risk of advocating a runaway theory when none of the hypotheses are explicitly testable, since falsifiability is what separates data-fitting theories from data-explaining ones.

All this is to say that you could use theory to glean philosophically significant conclusions from culture, but I have to wonder about where the line can be drawn between discovering something in culture and instrumentalizing theory for mental gymnastics.

I think it's not as simple as observation-explaining vs. observation-fitting theories in regards to interpreting purely entertainment-centric pieces like films. The greatness of Nolan's films is precisely that it sets up a scenario fit for "mental gymnastics". I doubt there's any conscious or overarching meaning to his works (in a the purely philosophical sense with which I've interpreted a lot of them) which is inscribed purposely. Rather he sets up a scenario of interactions, themes, and development which lends itself so easily to philosophical observation-fitting excercises. The problem of fitting observation to theory only really comes into play when it is forwarded as a realist-interpretation of an actual state of affairs. But using perceived similarities/analogies for further understanding of that which seeks to be explained (in this instance post-Enlightenment philosophy) appears to be fully consistent with an aversion for observation-fitting as realist-interpretation, if only because the scenarios are distinct.
: At 5/13/2014 7:05:20 PM, Crescendo wrote:
: The difference is that the gay movement is currently pushing their will on Churches, as shown in the link to gay marriage in Denmark. Meanwhile, the Inquisition ended several centuries ago.
Eitan_Zohar
Posts: 2,697
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2013 11:34:55 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I'm confused by the OP and this whole thread.
"It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a whole book."
Noumena
Posts: 6,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2013 4:49:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/25/2013 11:34:55 AM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
I'm confused by the OP and this whole thread.

It's because you're stupid.
: At 5/13/2014 7:05:20 PM, Crescendo wrote:
: The difference is that the gay movement is currently pushing their will on Churches, as shown in the link to gay marriage in Denmark. Meanwhile, the Inquisition ended several centuries ago.
Eitan_Zohar
Posts: 2,697
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2013 12:34:33 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/25/2013 4:49:58 PM, Noumena wrote:
At 4/25/2013 11:34:55 AM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
I'm confused by the OP and this whole thread.

It's because you're stupid.

I figured that. What exactly is Memento?
"It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a whole book."
Noumena
Posts: 6,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2013 12:54:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/26/2013 12:34:33 AM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
At 4/25/2013 4:49:58 PM, Noumena wrote:
At 4/25/2013 11:34:55 AM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
I'm confused by the OP and this whole thread.

It's because you're stupid.

I figured that. What exactly is Memento?

The greatest movie ever made.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org...(film)
: At 5/13/2014 7:05:20 PM, Crescendo wrote:
: The difference is that the gay movement is currently pushing their will on Churches, as shown in the link to gay marriage in Denmark. Meanwhile, the Inquisition ended several centuries ago.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/28/2013 3:40:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/25/2013 11:24:37 AM, Noumena wrote:
At 4/24/2013 2:16:03 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 4/24/2013 10:48:16 AM, Noumena wrote:
I get that of course. Nolan just seems to have a knack for putting out films open to wide philosophical interpretation. I'm still trying to find someone to debate me on whether or not his Batman trilogy possessed an implicit vindication of modern conservatism. Likewise Inception is awesome if you a springboard to get into talks of ethics, reality, even commodity production in industrial capitalism (if you can believe it) or really anything metaphysically mind-bending. Oh and then The Prestige. How about dat personal identity conunundrum?

Well, you could ostensibly bend and twist theory to interpret more or less anything--economists are very talented at constructing incredibly sophisticated models to fit observational data (of which there is no shortage). I think there's a definite worry involved in using theory as an interpretive matrix. There's a point at which you end up with a Higgs field problem (which explanation will probably stretch my limited understanding of quantum physics)--while all of the data-particles that are floating around acquire meaning only when connected by theory, one runs a serious risk of advocating a runaway theory when none of the hypotheses are explicitly testable, since falsifiability is what separates data-fitting theories from data-explaining ones.

All this is to say that you could use theory to glean philosophically significant conclusions from culture, but I have to wonder about where the line can be drawn between discovering something in culture and instrumentalizing theory for mental gymnastics.

I think it's not as simple as observation-explaining vs. observation-fitting theories in regards to interpreting purely entertainment-centric pieces like films. The greatness of Nolan's films is precisely that it sets up a scenario fit for "mental gymnastics". I doubt there's any conscious or overarching meaning to his works (in a the purely philosophical sense with which I've interpreted a lot of them) which is inscribed purposely. Rather he sets up a scenario of interactions, themes, and development which lends itself so easily to philosophical observation-fitting excercises. The problem of fitting observation to theory only really comes into play when it is forwarded as a realist-interpretation of an actual state of affairs. But using perceived similarities/analogies for further understanding of that which seeks to be explained (in this instance post-Enlightenment philosophy) appears to be fully consistent with an aversion for observation-fitting as realist-interpretation, if only because the scenarios are distinct.

So, what do you do with features, periods, or authors of "post-Enlightenment philosophy" which don't fit your analogy?
Noumena
Posts: 6,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/29/2013 11:27:59 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/28/2013 3:40:47 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 4/25/2013 11:24:37 AM, Noumena wrote:
At 4/24/2013 2:16:03 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 4/24/2013 10:48:16 AM, Noumena wrote:
I get that of course. Nolan just seems to have a knack for putting out films open to wide philosophical interpretation. I'm still trying to find someone to debate me on whether or not his Batman trilogy possessed an implicit vindication of modern conservatism. Likewise Inception is awesome if you a springboard to get into talks of ethics, reality, even commodity production in industrial capitalism (if you can believe it) or really anything metaphysically mind-bending. Oh and then The Prestige. How about dat personal identity conunundrum?

Well, you could ostensibly bend and twist theory to interpret more or less anything--economists are very talented at constructing incredibly sophisticated models to fit observational data (of which there is no shortage). I think there's a definite worry involved in using theory as an interpretive matrix. There's a point at which you end up with a Higgs field problem (which explanation will probably stretch my limited understanding of quantum physics)--while all of the data-particles that are floating around acquire meaning only when connected by theory, one runs a serious risk of advocating a runaway theory when none of the hypotheses are explicitly testable, since falsifiability is what separates data-fitting theories from data-explaining ones.

All this is to say that you could use theory to glean philosophically significant conclusions from culture, but I have to wonder about where the line can be drawn between discovering something in culture and instrumentalizing theory for mental gymnastics.

I think it's not as simple as observation-explaining vs. observation-fitting theories in regards to interpreting purely entertainment-centric pieces like films. The greatness of Nolan's films is precisely that it sets up a scenario fit for "mental gymnastics". I doubt there's any conscious or overarching meaning to his works (in a the purely philosophical sense with which I've interpreted a lot of them) which is inscribed purposely. Rather he sets up a scenario of interactions, themes, and development which lends itself so easily to philosophical observation-fitting excercises. The problem of fitting observation to theory only really comes into play when it is forwarded as a realist-interpretation of an actual state of affairs. But using perceived similarities/analogies for further understanding of that which seeks to be explained (in this instance post-Enlightenment philosophy) appears to be fully consistent with an aversion for observation-fitting as realist-interpretation, if only because the scenarios are distinct.

So, what do you do with features, periods, or authors of "post-Enlightenment philosophy" which don't fit your analogy?

Ignore them usually ;)
Like I said observation-fitting only becomes a problem when forwarding a realist-interpretation (read: an interpretation meant to coherently fit/explain the events observed). I'm not doing that. The methodology is more a way to mull over trends/things I happen to find important over a large amount of information. Post-enlightenment philosophy can't be explained by the Memento analogy on a realist-interpretation inasmuch as anything can't be fully/coherently explained within a set of observations fitted around a general theory. Like you said, it's a chance at mental gymnastics + intellectual masturbation.
: At 5/13/2014 7:05:20 PM, Crescendo wrote:
: The difference is that the gay movement is currently pushing their will on Churches, as shown in the link to gay marriage in Denmark. Meanwhile, the Inquisition ended several centuries ago.