In response to Ross: maybe I have to take back what I said about "philosophical
ratings" being uninteresting. YOURS are interesting.
Here, I think, is why: what would not be as interesting is a subjective estimate
of how sophisticated a response a particular film can give to some canonical
list of philosophical questions (e.g. what is the nature of reality, how can we
know it, what is the proper basis of moral judgements, what is personal
identity, etc., or even newer questions like what is the relation between human
beings and the technologies they create?). Is the Matrix better on a scale of 1
to 10 at answering these questions than Memento or Total Recall? Who cares?
From that perspective what we have is a set of philosophical problems and
solutions that are fine on their own, and to which film can only be a
supplement. Then it is, of course, a matter of subjective preference to include
film at all. Say I happen to like films, so as a philosopher I often address
philosophical themes in relation to the examples provided by film.
But, it seems to me, to take film seriously as a medium for philosophical
reflection is to suppose that films can pose their own questions, and give
answers that are compelling and worthy of discussion independently of the extent
to which they connect up with the list of questions to which undergraduates in
philosophy are introduced. What makes Ross's list interesting to me is that it
seems to treat films in this way. Films can be considered to pose questions
about film, about comedy, about dance, etc. and to pose specific responses to
these questions. (We can of course, still make a distinction between the level
of sophistication with which they pose such questions and the subjective level
of interest I have in their questions and their way of posing them.) Of course,
textual philosophy beyond the introductory level poses these kinds of questions
too, but it strikes me that the specificity with which films can address their
own questions and their own relation to other films and other questions posed
outside of film gives it a kind of autonomy that makes it much more than a
supplement to phil
--------------------------------------------------------
This mail sent via Eckerd IMP: http://webmail.eckerd.edu
|