Postby Technomancer » Fri Mar 18, 2005 7:31 pm
Only the two movies are connected. As for the second film itself, it really depends on the kind of movies you like. Aside from it's excellent production value, it's a very weighty philsophical film- the sort you'd probably want to watch twice just to figure it all out. Basically, most of the thinking revolves around the nature of the mind and the spirit as well as concious existence. This isn't really too surprising in a world of artficial intelligence and transferable minds! I found it a fascinating film, although frequently a little annoying. Too much quoting of philosophers and too little actual exposition on what they're actually trying to say.
The scientific method," Thomas Henry Huxley once wrote, "is nothing but the normal working of the human mind." That is to say, when the mind is working; that is to say further, when it is engaged in corrrecting its mistakes. Taking this point of view, we may conclude that science is not physics, biology, or chemistry—is not even a "subject"—but a moral imperative drawn from a larger narrative whose purpose is to give perspective, balance, and humility to learning.
Neil Postman
(The End of Education)
Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge
Isaac Aasimov