Plato, Descartes, and The Matrix - Essay Example

The Matrix with the reading from Plato and Descartes The most apparent similarity between the film The Matrix, Descartes’ Meditation, and the cave analogy of Plato is that all these works doubt the reality of the world enveloping us and call into question the soundness of our sense perceptions. Nevertheless, although the three sources attempt to ask analogous questions, it is essentially their manner of answering these questions that differentiate them from each other. Plato examines the notion that the real world represents an illusion within the allegory of the cave presented in The Republic.

Similarly, Neo is pulled from a form of the cave in the Matrix film whereby when he views the real world for the initial time, everything he perceived as real is only an illusion, much equivalent to the shadows on the cave walls (Grau 3). In the myth of the cave, the darkness of the cave embodies the sensory world and the outside world represents the world of ideas. Both the cave and the Matrix represent a world that is not “real,” although, its residents think it is. In the movie, Neo represents the freed prisoner travelling into the real world and slowly learning the truth of reality (Wachowski and Lana 1999).

Descartes’’ evil demon manifests as the artificial intelligence that compels an implicit reality on humans. In the same way that Descartes appreciated that the sensations within his dreams were vibrant to persuade him the dreams were authentic, the humans plugged into the Matrix bear no idea that their consciousness are false, created superficially rather that emanating from experience (Clay 230). Until Neo is pulled from the Matrix, he too, bears no inspiration that his life is a virtual reality.

In the Matrix, Agent Smith, a program represented extended reality, and like an animal had no mind (Grau 4). Descartes theory of the mind being superior to the body is confirmed when Agent Smith is destroyed. Can we prove the world we are experiencing is real? Our knowledge of “reality” derives from sensory perceptions, thus yielding the possibility those individuals experiences of the world may be deception shielding them from seeing the truth. The understanding of the true reality is complex than the knowledge of the illusion and basing reality on sensorial perceptions minimizes individuals’ level of understanding.

Therefore, individuals have no knowledge of the true “reality” or any means of learning the truth. Individuals cannot prove the world they experience as real since none can prove it based on experimentation or empiricism as that may be what is superficial. How do we know we are not dreaming or trapped in some matrix? The dream argument reflects the postulation that the act of dreaming avails preliminary evidence that sense that individuals trust to differentiate reality from illusion cannot be entirely trusted.

Therefore, individuals cannot tell that they not dreaming, living in a platonic cave, or trapped in a matrix our own reality. The mind is not itself a totally reliable mechanism for endeavouring to differentiate reality from illusion. There is no convincing argument to demonstrate that we are not dreaming. Likewise, there is no entirely convincing argument to confirm that we are dreaming. Thus, the question of how individuals can demonstrate that they are not dreaming cannot be answered with certainty, not even when utilizing the best tools of rational logic.

The harshness of reality or the "ignorance is bliss" of illusion I consider the harshness of reality to be always much more significant than the ignorance of bliss. This derives from two premises: first, the very basis of God’s character that is truth and the notion that our lives should never be solely dictated by physical comfort and blissfully illusion. Embracing the harshness of reality is paramount to attainment of a higher goal- the truth. Being ignorant is a means of escaping the harshness of reality depicted by insecurities and weaknesses, which curtails the capability of one growing up as a person.

Can we ever be certain that our beliefs are true? Individuals can never be certain anything is true, inclusive of their beliefs. Since human knowledge is limited, all endeavours at proving things must begin with improvable assumptions, which render all assertions to be merely statements of belief. Undoubtedly, some of the beliefs that we hold are erroneous since truth is self evident. The difference in believing something to be true and confirming something to be true lies in the recognition that what materializes as manifestly true MAY be untrue.

This understanding and the humbleness that accompany it, highlights the significance of reviewing one’s belief. If what we believe to be true is true, then the incapability to prove it is true is not significant. Conclusion The Matrix manifests numerous ways that indicate the ratification of Plato’s cave by manifesting the notion of the shadows, or the half-reality of the “simulated” world. The notion that we might be living within a simulated world is impossible to disprove. Therefore, any state reliant on our senses should be vigilantly examined and rigorously tested to verify whether it is the reality.

Works Cited Clay, Diskin. Platonic Questions: Dialogues with the Silent Philosopher. University Park, Pa: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2000. Print. Grau, Christopher. Philosophers Explore the Matrix. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2005. Print. Wachowski, Andy, and Lana Wachowski. The Matrix. Los Angeles: Warner Bros Pictures, 1999. Print.