Comparing and Contrasting Plato, Descartes, and “The Matrix”
Skepticism lingers, and hovers over the lives of individuals; thus, they consistently put ideas and options under evaluation, in an attempt to limelight facts from fictitious feelings. This concept of proofing for self rather than jumping into conclusions that render us subjects of society dictation forms the heart of philosophy. Being a dogma will never help in making factual based argument. It is worth exploring and quenching our doubtful feelings so as to strengthen our conscious mind of what is real from what seems. In this regard, the three excerpts of Plato, Descartes and The Matrix trends along this route of seeking to disproof to proof.
There are commonalities and disparities poking out from the three different excerpts. People are portrayed to have been living in a surrounding that is not fully understood, and whose exploration can elicit inconclusive discoveries. For instance, in The Matrix, taking the pill opens up ones capability to visualize and live in a world so hidden from the common man. It emerges that human being are interconnected just like computers, and powerful programs dictate what human beings see and how they behave. However, this is obscured from the eyes of the common man. Plato also argues on the same footing in that, the cave has so much that the conveyance are not in a position to discern. Given the rightful capability, they would e astonished of the surrounding vicinity. Similarly, Descartes describes how it is nebulous proofing that one is not in a dream land, but the events that they think are present, are for really not delusional.
Another commonality that can be derived from the three excerpts is that there would be disharmony of knowing the true of the hidden part of life. Seeking to live in The Matrix, being able to ideally identify the nature of the cave or pursuing the debate about reality and life would only torment individuals. The true being sort would be overwhelming to bear destabilizing peaceful habituation. Therefore, all the authors of the three parts respect the fact that human are better left in the comfort of their current living situations.
Furthermore, in all the three pieces of write-ups, there is eminent involvement of supernatural powers. These powers form the fulcrum concealed and “visible” part of life. Moreover, there is no true approach to validate the validity of these excerpts argument. There is no scientific procedure that can proof there exist a Matrix. It would also be difficult to evaluate the truth of argument that men are likened to powerless creature passing through a path that they cannot change. On the same footing, the degree to which the true of the matter that God exist and does not interfere in judgment on reality and delusionn in men can neither be scientifically disputed nor asserted. These arguments leave the reader with no conclusive factual based stand.
The path of entry of the argument differs in all the three arguments. The theme in The Matrix argument is introduced through a dream, Plato’s argument is based on fictitious deductions while Descartes ideas are benched on personal skepticism. While The Matrix and in Plato’s excerpt there is a lot of dialogue, Descartes argument is highly a monologue. This gives the first two pieces a sense of life. In “The Matrix” the supernatural power comes from a synthetic pill “red pill” while in Plato’s and Descartes’s excerpts, the superpowers are bestowed to a divide living. While Plato and Descartes believes that knowing the concealed face of life would result into a confusion, Neo, in “The Matrix”, is of the opinion that the truth would be alluring for the world to know. Neo argues that people will no longer be constrained or controlled like robots. Instead, they will be in a world free of rules.
In conclusion, the three excerpts evaluate the philosophy of doubt and possibility of optional living situations. It can be deduced from the three pieces that, that life or living can be approached from two different faces; the already known and the probable opposite.