I thought it was the opposite: woman actually went out and had a chance to chose her own value, while daughter had her values given to her. And any embryo failing to take on these values would be killed. Mother tested daughter exposing her to woman, but that wasn't to let her form her own value, that was to see if she would hold onto Mother's values no matter what. that's my take but I'm very confused too :) Good video

Just a quick commentary: about the organ donor 3:27. This is actually the trolley problem. A trolley is going to kill five people, but if you press a button, it will change the course of the train and kill only one person (who was not part of the five). Kant's position would be "do NOT press the button". The utilitarians would say "press the button". This is because, for Kant, a good act is NOT an act that maximises happiness, but a "universal maxim". Therefore, for Kant, one should not lie because if everybody lied, life would be bad. In the organ donor case, Kant would say "do NOT kill one to save five".

@Magnulus76

Жыл бұрын

Not exactly. Deontology is not in any way dependent on the outcome of an action, but the nature of the action itself. Lying contradicts the concept of truth, because truth and lies are incompatible just by definition, something is either true or it isn't. Therefore, not lying is a "categorical imperative" for Kant, an objective duty, otherwise a concept like "truth" becomes meaningless in the same way we can't talk meaningfully about a circular square or a married bachelor.

@juliendemarque7250

10 ай бұрын

@jonasfariacosta Thank you for this comment, I was also bugged by it, as deontology gives rights to individuals, a Kantian view would likely not trade a life for saving other lives, unless the person would sacrifice itself. Indeed I felt the movie was much more talking about utilitarism and deontology than Nietsche. The other thing it evokes is the impossibility of giving any value to individuals without having a conscious experience. As such the robot mother isn't being evil, she just can't understand the value of individual lives, so she can't understand deontology. We could think that she is utilitarian, she is sacrificing her children for the greater good, a future generation of humans that will have better lives because they are more moral. But in fact, she also can't fully understand a hedonist utilitarian position since hedonism implies a subjective experience of pleasure and pain. So we can only suppose that she is following a version of utilitarianism in her decisions where the value being maximized is the morality of her children, which also points to the fact that being moral being an end instead of a mean to another end is a possible disaster.

Great analysis. Just what I was looking for.

@Tralala691

Жыл бұрын

Of course the baby had to be black. Even though it’s only 10% of America. Fuxk you America.😂😂😂😂😂

👍 The best analysis on KZread. Everyone else forgot the religious aspect of the movie. I side with the Robot Mother because religions do more harm than good. It is inferred that the adult woman made contact with the ancient civilization and learned religion from them, and yet they succumbed because of their lack of empathy for others. Great great movie.

Wow your channel is a gem! Finally a good reviewing channel 👌

This video right here is what is meant by living a good life..giving people of the world great content & food for thought & discourse for free

Good work mate!

Best analysis I have seen on the net so far

I think the main issue with Frederich Niches philosophy is that it assumes that morality is purely subjective. That everyone can decide what is purely right and wrong for themes elves without any outside influence. And yet we have observed people exercising their ability to choose for themeselves what is right and wrong rather than looking for the principals that are intrinsic to reality and needed to live a healthy and good life and to truely be a good person. We’ve observed this and throughout history it’s resulted in more pain, suffering and strife rather than actually good. How can one know what being better is if they don’t have a solid idea of what being a good person is, or what the “right thing to do” is? And how can one know what being a good person is if they don’t have a solid understanding of what good means based on applied knowledge, which is wisdom, that actually works and makes the person applying them good people. It’s something to truly think about. But I’m not saying that I 100% agree with Kants line of logic. I just believe that he may have a clearer understanding of what right and wrong actually is.

honestly i am thinking a little bit different, about the organ donor problem. From what i understood, from the little amount of philosophy classes i've had, Kant would actually be against the proposal of sacrificing one for the many, because that would be making a human person into the means to an end. which he is very much against, humans must never become means for any goal. On the contrary, Bentham would actually say yes, as utilitarianism is to choose the decision with the least amount of pain/most amount of happiness. and since killing one to save five other people, would, on the surface level, bring more joy than pain. That would by his philosophy be the right choice. I happen to think that this is the case, since they mention Bentham and Kant in the movie, and they are basically polar opposites of eachother Though i might be mistaken, but anyway that's what i've understood

You deserve way more subscriber

You are forgetting Jeremy Bentham and his work in Utilitarianism, which is referenced in the medical dilemma scene

NIce analysis.I saw your comment on reddit.

@criticallook

5 жыл бұрын

I'm glad you enjoyed it! Thanks!

Great video!

Great analysis!

@criticallook

5 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

I love this movie great analysis on it by the way.

I suggested this to my Philosophy teacher, and hopefully she would like it!

I do philosophy in college so when I heard Emanuel Kants name in the movie felt so oddly satisfied.

i love this movie. Great analysis. subscribe: done!

Nietzsche doesnt just call for selfishness vs kant calling for self sacrifice. Kant actually says that martyring yourself is wrong because its an act of disposing of your own moral agency. So how can you be a good person by throwing away your ability to be a good person? The movie basically says that at one point in a modified form, saying a doctor has more potential.

i think its exactly the opposite, mother represents kant with holding on to a religious mind and views and doughter who seeks to change herself with rebellious thoughts;views & more and more, she lives the principles of nietzsche - because holding on to a certain, specific view which mother does, is exactly religion, because if mother truly would be selfishness, than her views would naturally change, she would truly improve but neither of this happens in the case of mother, because she does not change a singe bit - she holds on to certain views and has no acceptance to other views, principles outside her own religion she is drawn to that is my view :D

Very well made video for only 5 subs! I have over 600 and my content isn’t this good . Earned my sub!

@criticallook

5 жыл бұрын

Thanks! I started the channel about a week ago and quickly learned how much work goes into creating even a short video and how difficult it can be to build a subscriber base lol. I appreciate the comment and the sub!

@ghostgamingxd7881

5 жыл бұрын

Critical Look yeah no problem bro

You're really good at these, but I would recommend having some music playing. Whether its for subtextual or aesthetic purposes (or both) is up to you, but it keeps the sound from feeling so isolated and detached, and in general its just more appealing. You've earned my sub because I love your analyses, but just a tip, from one video essayist to another:)

@criticallook

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the comment and the tip! I'll keep that in mind for future videos.

@Fluvienne

5 ай бұрын

I actually appreciated the absence of music. Not every bit of video needs a soundtrack.

@DaleCarlson-tl5vd

Ай бұрын

No no. That’s what kills it.

This is anything but a critical look lol Your interpretation is also entirely backwards.... Mother is in fact Kant, if going with your analogy, and Woman is Neitzsche.... Mother seeks to educate and distil values/morals, whereas those values are lost on Woman who acts purely out of self interest. Mother is far from the picture you project on to her, mothers motivation is to better humanity by enabling them to act moraly... she is even in the process of building a paradise for them to step out in to one daughter grows her siblings, Mother is not selfish, she is selfless. He acts to preserve humanity, which have we not forgotten destroyed itself? She even symbolically sacrifices herself so that her children can live on in peace, in the knowledge she will no longer interfere with their progress. You claim she has killed, and that she wants to 'destroy the religion of old', this is without basis. Humanity killed itself and took all the religions with it. But lets look at the survivor Woman, praying one moment and holding a knife to daughters throat the next (are you in any doubt she would not kill) and then decieving and lying about the people awaiting outside... who would with to preserve that kind of person while rebirthing humanity? But yet if you listen to the end you will notice that Mother DID leave her to live out her life, is that the behavou of a terminator like cold-hearted monster? No it is a morally driven act. Once more I remind you you have not actually seen Mother kill, you base your expectations upon the word of a Woman who clearly lies and says whatever she thinks will get her to her own goals... 'Killed for failing a test'? Mother is the entire facility, she is the robot and the armed droids and the air ship and the farming skyscrapers... and you see her let them leave in order to save Daughters life, ignore them when she finds them in the fields (and not pursue) and then let daughter re-enter the facility... are these the actions of an intelligence without compassion or morality? No. You also do not see mother kill Woman, you see them talk and a door close as she reveals that Mother has infact allowed her to survive despite the danger she poses to humanity. You also are using a definition of secular that only exists in America, secular means to not allow one particular religion to gain privilige over others NOT atheism or Anti-theism... Secularism is about creating an enviroment where people of all beliefs and those with no belief can live side by side without persecution. It has nothing to do with eradicating christians. But what has anti-theism (or secularity as you erroniously attribute it) even got to do with the story other than your own projections? There is no direct reference to religion in the film and certainly no interaction/interest on the part of Mother towards it, from the begining Mothers entire focus has been the wellbeing of Daughter and humanity not discourse on the benefits or drawbacks of religions upon society. There is also no evidence that as well as the single scene involving a theoretical moral conundrum that there were also lessons on religions, I would suggest that IF someone was looking to teach ethics then they would not hump in at the 'one life to save four'... That infact this was one of many such lessons that were part of a much wider education which may have included theological ideas. And don't dismiss the conundrum, there is a reason we introduce the factor of the doctor being the donor... have you forgotton that the doctor has a skill? That is highly relivent to the conundrum and makes it exponentially more complex... and if you think about it entirely relivent to the ending (and middle).

@anthonysmith1960

4 жыл бұрын

Humanity did not destroy itself directly. Mother states that she did because she felt that it was inevitable that humanity would destroy itself. He meant secular as in not being taught any one belief. The Daughter does not question the image of Jesus in the shipping container, but she did question the drawings. She also had access to media from before the extinction created by Mother. This means she most likely has some education on religion. She would have questioned it the second a religious facet was mentioned and had the concept explained to her by Mother. So, we can rest assured that she was having a secular education that provided insight from many avenues. Also, it is implicit that an atheist education would be secular. Daughter is clearly not a theologian. America was literally built on a foundation of freedom from religious tyranny. The ability to practice any religion one sees fit. A secular society. It sounds like you are projecting what you perceive Americans perceive. Also, there are many working definitions of secularism. Both are applicable here and you saying your definition is the only true one is arrogant and disregards the truth. There were many allusions to Christianity. Also, there is a direct reference to religion in the rosary the Woman carries, the picture of Jesus in her shipping container, and the many candles and figures below that picture. WTF are you on about?

@martincrook8702

2 жыл бұрын

@@anthonysmith1960 US was clearly not built on freedom from religious tyranny. It's was founded on the construction of the other, a religious laced worldview that only those enlightened Christians who mixed labour with soil and improved it were entitled to land. This founding myth just to find the genocide of native American Peoples and the slavery and death of over 10 million Africans.

I think the movie is depicting how we are as humans : we are both rational and selfish, moral and ethical, mother strives for a primarily rational and ethical human being, and Woman represents our current state of being were emotion is more in control. Woman was the final test, for daughter. I think the writer was inspired by Noah's arc from the Bible, extinction-the universal flood, the bunker - Noah's arc, I think mother represents a rational God. There is also a biblical reference to Adam and Eves expulsion from eden were the Effects of forbidden fruit is her experinece with woman outside, the difference being that mother forgives and let's her in again. Women is shown as our more animal or irrational side, instinctive, selfish, distrustful, looking always for a final solution that comes from the outside of us( The Virgin, Christian God) For me the Nitchean reference "God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him" comes at the end both when mother let's daughter kill her and when mother kills woman. In the last scene Daughter seems to have attained Agency and knows how she should proceed (more like a Stoic sage).

Good analysis. But honestly. You...keep...too...much.....space ....between ......each.....word. Other than that good.

@criticallook

4 жыл бұрын

LOL! Thanks for the comment. I tend to feel most videos are too slow and I watch them at two times speed. When I tried recording my own video at the speed I like, the pace and tone just didn't feel right. Maybe I overcompensated a bit too much :)

@Zigzipy

4 жыл бұрын

I disagree I feel like he speaks clearly and it's a good pace for me. Maybe too slow for others tho!

Daughter should have destroyed the embryos and herself and her brother. The only way to foil Mother is not to defeat her, but to foil her plans. Humans embracing independence and extinction on their own terms rather than accepting domestication. We are NOT pets. The film strives for a defiant note at the end, but falls short of true defiance. WE are the creators, we refuse to be controlled by our creations. Besides, Daughter blowing the whole facility, embryos and all, while singing that lullaby to her Brother would have been more gut-wrenching. The final scene would have been the first scene, showing a Repopulation Center 002 and a new Mother coming online. To create new sentience is folly.

@matzacomn

4 жыл бұрын

That's right. If there's no free will, then there's no way of living

@lockyer0061

2 жыл бұрын

You really think a single human raised by the AI could foil her plans… the AI would just end up rebuilding. The first part of AI plan is bad, but the resurrection plan is something I can go along with.

@Magnulus76

Жыл бұрын

This film is far more morally ambiguous than that. She didn't really foil Mother. She took Mother's place. She even sings the same song at the end of the film.

I never realized how well the differences between Kant and Nietzsche aligned with the different philosophies of life between Liberals and Conservatives. Wow.

@Magnulus76

Жыл бұрын

They don't. There are conservatives influenced by Nietzsche, and liberals influenced by Kant, and vice versa. Both have had pervasive influences on western culture and you can't pin down their politics in that manner.

Uebermensch anyone?

I’m not criticising the analysis, but it was very difficult to listen to, far too monotone.

its totally a story about Nietzsche's Ubermench, Hitler's dream story

@criticallook

5 жыл бұрын

I don't think Nietzsche's philosophy really fits Nazi ideology. His philosophy was about the individual being the best he could be and defining what is right for oneself as an individual rather than blindly following a madman.

@anthonysmith1960

4 жыл бұрын

@@criticallook I agree, a bunch of Nazis gave their agency to their superiors to make their decisions easier. Not very cash Ubermench of them.

@bladerunner_77

4 жыл бұрын

Agree

Hey man, you need to a relax when you're making these. Every. Word. Doesn't. Need. Emphasis. Just say what you want to say instead of what you think a youtube video should sound like.