A sci-fi movie came out a while back entitled The Island. It has been a while since I have seen it and my recollection is a bit sketchy, but the movie brings up interesting topics that tie in very much with this class. For those that have not seen it, here is a very brief synopsis of the plot. The movie takes place on a futuristic earth where society is obsessed with achieving immortality. In order to do this, every person has a clone of himself/herself made, and this society of clones is placed on the island - hence the movie title. When something detrimental occurs to a "real" person's body or organs, the damaged parts are removed and replaced by the corresponding parts from the clone, thus killing the clone so the "real" person can have longevity. In order to control the society of clones on the island, religion is introduced. The religion makes the clones very submissive. Before a clone is killed for its organs or body parts, a prayer is said for the clone, and the clone thinks that it is going to "heaven".
So this movie addresses many important issues, the biggest being where science draws the line on morality. What is moral and what is not? Although they may be clones, are they still not human? While society's intentions for immortality may be genuinely good, (I can't think of anyone who would not want to live longer.) is it still necessary? There can be a lot of bad in this idea too. For instance, what would happen if a man like Hitler achieved immortality?
Where does morality come from? Most people base their morality on what is good for themselves or society as a whole. If an idea seems beneficial, then it seems moral as well. It only becomes immoral when excessive avarice fuels an individual to the point where said individual encroaches on the liberties of others. Morality also depends on the circumstances at hand. For instance, it is not immoral to steal food if one is suffering from starvation. Ultimately, it seems as if morality is nothing more than what is allowed "acceptable" within society. For instance, it was not moral for a woman to wear shorts in the 1600s. Now, it is the fad, and nobody thinks it is necessarily immoral, although it would have been back then. Morality is nothing more than complying with the social norm.
Posts
"I can't think of anyone who would not want to live longer."
ReplyDeleteDepends on how much longer. If we really did reach immortality, I personally would think that it would suck because I could lose emotional attachments to my family members (lack of death could decrease the emotional feeling of importance of family members). It would also be very boring to live forever.
_________
"For instance, what would happen if a man like Hitler achieved immortality?"
Well, he could still be killed or commit suicide because immortal does not necessarily mean invulnerable.
You should be more specific on what you mean by immortality.
__________
"Where does morality come from? "
I think that morality comes from how and where you were brought up. Whether people around you made you follow the rules or if they did not care and let you do whatever, etc.
Morality and ethics are things that have been debated upon by psychologists and sociologists. The development of the morals is the key idea debated. Are morals based more on our nature-- that is, the underlying uniformity of humanity, or nurture-- how we are raised.
ReplyDeleteYou asked the question of how morality related to the film "The Island". From how you described it, it seems that the film promotes the idea of nurture being the prime form of developing morals. Science appears to have replaced nature, and instead the scientists base their actions on learned morality.
There is also the idea of a person fitting their morality with what benefits them. For the scientists, they considered helping the "real people" a moral excuse for harvesting and killing clones. They feel that the "real people" are more connected with themselves, and so disassociate themselves from the clones to be able to morally justify their actions with the clones.
I think that the movie also brings into question the freedoms of people. What freedoms do clones have? And more importantly what type of freedoms should normally created humans have? This question is ancient but yet trivial. The founding of the United States was based on the concept of gross freedoms. However it is a very shady area of how can one have freedoms if other people can impose on them. Should people be allowed to kill their clones for a longer life? Who is to set the rules?
ReplyDeleteMorality is a very interesting answer to some of these questions. Before someone brought up that morals are based on the time, and this is very true. But that means that what is popular at the time can become acceptable. This idea can be quite dangerous and is very visible in our current world.