As I’ve gotten older, I’ve started appreciating the intersections of philosophy and film but not as a way to “understand a deeper meaning” in a film (which implies that the creators had that specific intent, and I’ve always disliked doing more than speculating on that in terms of philosophical intent). I like seeing it in the way that we try to understand the choices that a character makes and why they make those choices; it’s a skill that works out nicely for becoming more understanding of the decisions that others make in the real world and in the study of history.
In the Matrix series, there’s a strong focus on the importance of causality (“action… reaction, cause and effect,” as The Merovingian puts it). There’s a huge focus on whether or not our lives are based on free will or self-determination, which are concepts that we’re constantly applying in so many ways (economics, current events, historical events, etc); seeing these in fiction, particularly in visual media, help to explain them in a broader context (and, maybe, help us to understand our own beliefs and why we believe them).
A small warning for (censored) language on this video, though it’s really quite minor.
In social sciences, this is a huge focus for a lot of topics. We discuss the causality of different events, though this is most often done with units about wars (and less often found in units that revolve around civil rights movements or belief systems). Sometimes, it’s easier to see the links that connect events, helping us to understand them. Yet, it’s still worth asking one question: Is that event really what triggered that one?
For example, in American history, we often believe that the United States attacked Hiroshima and Nagasaki in order to force Japan to surrender earllier. This is printed in every single history textbook that I’ve ever read as a student or used as a teacher. But there are a few glitches with that story. Namely, Japan had already surrendered before the bombs were even dropped. Their military was already beaten, while there are also arguments that the Soviet invasion was potentially a bigger cause for their surrender because they would’ve assassinated the Japanese royal family. In reality, many historians disagree with the often cited belief — that dropping the bomb forced an early surrender — is far too simplistic and misleading.
So will we choose door that opens onto what appears to be the easiest to understand? Or will we choose the door that allows us to see a more complex world and to gain a better understanding of it, thus learning what is closer to the truth?