So, the Moral of the Story Is...?
Posted on: March 5, 2008 - 5:38am
Offline
So, the Moral of the Story Is...?
I've watched this repeatedly. I still don't get it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrKnhOJ-R80
...This is clearly an attempt at taking a shot at how foolish and fallible us human beeniums are compared to the Almighty - but I don't understand the argument.
Theists, help me out here. This one is clearly meant for you. Why is Mr. Roberts the antagonist?
CAUTION:
This human being has more accumulated hours playing GI Joes in the bathtub than he has sleeping, owns more polyhedral dice than he does articles of clothing and has invested more money into his personal computer than most people do on their cars.
Communicate at your own risk.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
I wouldn't call him an antagonist, but he didn't exactly put up much of a struggle.
On the other hand, were it me I would have probably pushed the button before I was told what it did.
"Illusion is the first of all pleasures." -Oscar Wilde
I think the person he killed is supposed to be Jesus. Quite often, children are taught in the theistic framework that each sin you commit drives the nail deeper into Christ's hand. Of course, I could be wrong because of the apparent lack of specific faith. For example, if the movie has a Christian agenda, then where is Mr. Roberts' faith in Christ equated into his salvation? Does accepting him as your savior on earth mean squat at your judgment? I think the film suggests that faith has little to do with anything. Rather, it is our actions and choices that determine the end result. Odd. I wonder if the director/writer of this film is Christian or some other religion?
So I guess the basic argument could be:
At your judgment you are given a choice.
Depending on that choice, you are judged.
Choosing to kill someone sends you to be judged by the devil and you are subsequently sent to hell.
Choosing to leave sends you to God and who knows what happens after that.
Beyond this basic and readily apparent argument, I'm unable to think of what else they're trying to say with this film.
The implication that we should put Darwinism on trial overlooks the fact that Darwinism has always been on trial within the scientific community. -- From Finding Darwin's God by Kenneth R. Miller
Chaos and chance don't mean the absence of law and order, but rather the presence of order so complex that it lies beyond our abilities to grasp and describe it. -- From From Certainty to Uncertainty by F. David Peat
Ahh, 'Black Button' I thought that was a great little film, it's not really all that deep, though. I'm surprised to see you guys wondering.
The moral of the story is that the 10 million is always worthless cause he's already dead, so the choice is between nothing and nothing, the "devil" never has any power at all, Roberts holds all the power. Ultimately it comes down to what Roberts is willing to do and what he is not willing to do, will he kill if it's made ridiculously easy for him to do so. That's why there is the little dialogue about accidents, people dying everyday and overpopulation, that part is not about the money, that part is about Roberts bringing out the rhetoric against his own good judgement. As people often do.
edit:
Also you asked - Why is Mr Roberts the antagonist.
I presume you mean to refer to his religious standing by that, yes? And that you're asking what about him infers (theologically) he should be in that position. The answer to that is - Nothing. Mr Roberts is nobody in particular, there's no subtle theistic clue as to his denomination in the film, in negative or positive terms, he's just anyone, he died and he faces a situation which judges his character.
If you want my opinion as someone culturally close to the filmmakers (I am theist and Australian) the message they are trying to get across is a personal concept of morality which is not a religious morality but a basic human morality.
The title object is the central theme of the film, it's just a button but it represents a crucial moral decision for Mr Roberts, so the point there is that humans can stand very distant from their moral responsibility, but does being far removed from the consequences make it OK to press the button?
I think heaven and hell are only employed in this story as colloquial extension props to emphasise the imperative of the central message. The central message, however, is the button, the distance a person can stand from the consequences, upon others, of their actions.
-- wearing a blue shirt and pouting must be a closet atheist.
Theist badge qualifier : Gnostic/Philosophical Panentheist
"Presuppositions exist in every statement we speak, in every action we perform. They may not be part of our core beliefs, but they exist to enable interpretation of the external world. A quick way to elicit conscious awareness of anyone's presuppositions is to expose the person to a context in which their presuppositions are not shared by others." Ronald David Laing
Mr. Roberts isn't the antagonist. He is the failed hero. How the hero faces his choice at the end of the journey defines whether you have witnessed a comedy or a tragedy. When the hero fails the test that is a tragedy. When the hero passes the test it's a comedy - whether you laugh or not.
I laughed. Mostly because the hero was kinda 2-D and I didn't like him anyway.
Then I wrote my own version:
http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/13846