S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
As much as I disliked The Minority Report, I think I can provide an answer
to at least one of your questions. The precogs could predict the details of
the Leo Crow murder because although John Anderton didn't plan on killing
him, someone else planned on John Anderton killing him. The whole situation
of the drowning lady demonstrates that the precogs' abilities were
restricted to a visual image of the crime itself. One of the flaws of the
PreCrime program was that the precogs had no way of knowing who the
premeditator actually was.
<<-----Original Message-----
<<From: Film-Philosophy Salon <<Behalf Of Nathan Andersen
<<(There are interesting "epistemological" problems in Minority Report that
<<probably can't be resolved, because insufficient thought went into their
<<presentation: how come Tom Cruise's crime was designated as a
<<premeditated one,
<<when he didn't know the victim? perhaps worse: how is that the
<<knowledge of the
<<precogs can be linked to intention -- hence the important
<<distinction between
<<planned and unpremeditated murder -- and yet they predict the
<<precise details for
<<a "murder" that is in fact unintentional? in fact what the
<<precogs "know" is
<<something like a counterfactual: not the actual event of a crime
<<-- because it
<<can be stopped -- but only that if nobody does something it will
<<take place, but
<<it is a peculiar counterfactual because it is not yet contrary to
<<any fact --
<<what kind of knowledge is that?)
|