From: Hal Finney (hal@finney.org)
Date: Wed May 28 2003 - 11:29:58 MDT
I agree almost 100% with Mez's analysis of the movie, having also seen
it a second time. In particular, I totally agree that there is no
"nested matrix" concept here. In addition to the reasons Mez cites,
I would also point out that it's been done before (The Thirteenth Floor)
and is a tired and hackneyed cliche by modern standards. Neo's "power"
in the real world appears restricted to some control over the machines
that are part of the Matrix system, and it cost him dearly, totally
unlike his powers in the Matrix. Note that this may have been Neo's first
interaction with Sentinels since he became the One, so that transformation
may have granted him this power, or else it may be that his interaction
with the Architect was the key.
I do want to say a little more about the philosophy of the movie, and
put a slightly different emphasis on Mez's comments. IMO the key point
of the movie is mentioned in an almost offhand way by the Architect,
so that I totally missed it on the first showing: that the Matrix only
works because people have a choice to accept it. Every person in the Matrix
is aware at some level that it is a simulation. Most people, over 99%,
accept it anyway. Only a few reject it.
This is why we see Neo being so unhappy in the beginning of the first
movie. On that first meeting with Trinity, they discuss the question
which drives him: "What is the Matrix?" It was a puzzle not resolved
at that time - how did Neo know that there was a Matrix? How did he
know that it was called the Matrix? How did he know this question but
not have any understanding about the answer?
It is clear, now, that every human being is presented at a subconscious
level with the truth about the world, and probably the name, the Matrix.
They don't have conscious access to it. But those who cannot accept
the idea of living in a simulation are like Neo: driven, unhappy,
unsatisfied, convinced that there is something wrong with the world.
(Of course it doesn't hurt dramatically that most of us have experienced
similar feelings of alienation as we go through adolescence.) One way or
the other, most of those people eventually find their way out of the Matrix.
Maybe some of them just wake up, screaming, in those pods, and die when
they are flushed into the drainage system. But some are rescued and
taken to Zion. Zion is the safety valve, the pressure release, for the Matrix.
And this points out a problem which was left unsettled at the end of the
first movie: what can Neo do? Imagine six billion people awakening in
their pods as the simulation shuts down. No scenario could prevent the
deaths of virtually all of them.
This is why I agree with Mez that the resolution of the movie will
involve some form of continuance of the Matrix simulation. The clues
that he lists clearly indicate that man/machine symbiosis is the path to
the future. To this end, we have to ask: what is wrong with the Matrix?
Why does it need to be fixed? How can it be fixed in a dramatically
satisfying manner?
It's not even clear that the actions of the AIs in continuing the Matrix
are unethical, given that people are at least subconsciously agreeing
to participate. The alternative, turning everyone lose on a barren
Earth where nothing grows, would be mass murder.
However from an Extropian perspective the problem is clear: the humans
are not able to reach their potential. They are limited and restricted
in a world which is managed by machines, presumably a relatively static
world where there is no real technological progress.
So what I foresee is that the simulation will be altered, people will
be given greater freedom and flexibility, and be allowed to take greater
control over their destinies. They will still live in the Matrix, but they
will be able to grow. At least, this is what I'd like to see. However it
is also possible that the filmmakers will find it necessary to put people
back onto the newly re-greened surface of the earth.
I also think that Smith will play a part but in a different way than
Mez predicts. Smith will not be defeated, but converted. It is clear
now that the Agents are only a subset of the machine programs living
in the Matrix. They are clearly nothing more than security guards,
bouncers, thugs with little imagination, designed purely as muscle.
The other programs we see are far more colorful and imaginative.
But Smith has been transformed, and I think in the end we will see a
partnership between Neo and Smith that mirrors on a personal level the
new symbiosis between human and machine.
Back to the philosophy, I felt that the key issue in this movie was choice
versus predestination. What does it mean to choose, if there are machines
around who can predict your choices? The oracle offers an answer, and I
believe the Merovingean may have said the same thing: that the key is to
understand why you made the choice. Now, I'm not sure this makes sense,
emotionally or philosophically; if we really had machines around which
could predict our actions, would we take consolation in a philosphical
effort to gain deeper self-understanding?
Anyway, it is because of this reasoning that I do think the Architect was
referring to the Oracle as the program who was built to understand and
model human thinking, the one who came up with the idea of using human
choice as the key to the stability of the Matrix. In fact, I think this
is the main power of the Oracle: to predict human choices. And she does
this on the basis of a deep and detailed understanding of human beings.
This is why she advises the same course to others, that they try to gain
the level of understanding of themselves that she has of them.
One of the puzzles I don't fully understand is the actions and motivations
of the Architect. Why did he tell Neo about Trinity being in danger,
knowing that it would cause him to reject the deal to save the Matrix?
It seems quite clear that he anticipated Neo's decision; he could see
it coming a mile away. The Architect mentioned that Neo was different
from his predecessors in another way, besides those that Mez listed:
the earlier Ones had a love of humanity; but Neo was the first to be in
love with an individual. It was this which ultimately made him choose
differently than his predecessors.
I can see two possible reasons. The Architect has reluctantly accepted
the necessity of allowing human choice as an element in creating a stable
Matrix. It may be that this requirement extends to the One as well.
The One must make a choice in order for the Matrix to survive, and so
perhaps the Architect was compelled to give Neo the information needed
to make an informed choice.
A more interesting possibility is that the Architect was dissatisfied with
the cyclical nature of the Matrix. It seems that the events leading up
to Neo's meeting with the Architect were quite uncertain and difficult.
It's possible that if things had happened differently, the meeting might
not have happened and the simulation been destroyed. This suggests
that the Architect may be looking for a better and more stable Matrix.
Perhaps he is taking the chance that this time, things will be different,
and that out of the ashes of the current system he can construct a
new simulation that will not have the same flaws as the present one.
This would suggest that he was lying, or at least exaggerating, about
the outcome if Neo chooses to rescue Trinity, that there will be in fact
some way to save the human race and the AIs which depend on them.
I didn't find it particularly credible when he suggested that the AIs were
prepared to let the humans die and themselves remain functional only at
a very low level. This is a precise mirror of the discussion Neo had
with the Councilman in the engineering level, when they talked about
smashing the machines that kept Zion alive, just because they could.
The humans would never commit such folly, and I can't believe that the
machines would, either.
Hal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed May 28 2003 - 11:45:00 MDT