The Matrix Film Analysis

In this essay I shall discuss how the film, 'The Matrix', engages in a form of cinematic philosophy. Specifically, I will discuss how the film can be seen as making an objection to the position held by those such as Sidgwick (1907), who asserts that, positive states of consciousness, or, pleasure, is ultimately the only thing inherently valuable, which in turn becomes the basis for, and currency of, utilitarian ethics. The film should be considered as the cinematic adaptation of Robert Nozick's (1974) 'experience machine' thought experiment, which the film-makers bring to life, developing it into a narrative. The Matrix's narrative pulls heavily on our moral emotions, playing cleverly to our intuitions and biases. However, although the film-makers

skilfully elicit the appropriate emotional responses from the viewer to ensure successful audience uptake of the narrative (Carroll 1996), its philosophical objection to pleasure being what is ultimately valuable does not stand up to scrutiny. Like Nozick's original thought experiment, The Matrix skews the audience's response towards a rejection of Sidgwick's position by playing to our intuitions and other psychological features such as 'status quo bias' and 'loss aversion'. So, although The Matrix is successful as far as its narrative is concerned, it makes an unsuccessful argument against the position that pleasure is ultimately the only thing of inherent value.

Nozick developed his experience machine thought experiment with the aim of showing that pleasure is not what ultimately matters to people, which, in turn, poses a significant problem for utilitarians such as Sidgwick, who utilise pleasure as the currency that directs their reasoning regarding ethical judgements. For Sidgwick, pleasure is the ultimate value (Singer& *240), and pleasure is desirable and valuable regardless of from where it arises. That is, pleasure refers to desirable consciousness (Singer & *252) “when considered merely as feeling, and not in respect of its objective conditions or consequences, or of any facts that come directly within the cognisance and judgement of others besides the sentient individual” (Sidgwick 1907: 131). This means that similar quantities of pleasure are equally valuable, regardless of whether they arise from pursuits deemed to be higher or refined, such as intellectual pleasure resulting from doing philosophy, or, pursuits considered more primitive, such as sensual gratification (Singer & *241). Importantly, this also applies to pleasure whether it be obtained through living and experiencing things in reality, or whether it is delivered through an experience machine or Matrix.

Like Nozick, The Matrix aims to show us that pleasurable states are not the most important and valuable things.

Instead, it suggests that things such as living an autonomous life, engaging in the real world, and truth, are more valuable. Nozick claims that once we imagine an experience machine, we consider the idea of exiting within one – being submersed into a fluid filled tank with electrodes plugged into our nervous systems – repellent (NOZICK Singer& *259). The Matrix visually displays Nozick's position brilliantly. When the film brings us face to face with the machinery of the actual Matrix, we see hairless, pale, slimy humans, submerged in goo, with cables protruding from their bodies. This imagery evokes repugnance, and it is likely that viewers will feel disgust at the very thought of an experience machine existence. Furthermore, the likelihood of us dismissing the experience machine in favour of reality is increased through the character of the main protagonist, Neo, who we see as principled, genuine, and someone who values truth, even at the risk of loosing pleasure, which is shown in the 'red/blue pill' scene. In this scene it is made clear that if Neo opts out of the experience machine existence to confront reality, there is no promise for anything other than truth. In Neo choosing to unplug from the Matrix, we see someone virtuous and strong, traits which are generally viewed as positive. Thus, Neo serves as the embodiment of the assertion that pleasure is not what we hold to be of ultimate value, and we come to associate his positive character with the objection against

pleasure.

Although there are differences between the scenario of Nozick's experience machine and The Matrix, I suggest that these differences can be explained when we consider what a narrative needs in order to be successfully connected with by an audience. In Nozick's original thought experiment, we are asked to imagine being presented with the experience machine while we are in the midst of a life in the real world, with entrance into the experience machine being entirely voluntary, where we will not be used by others for their own purposes. Whereas, in The Matrix, individuals are born into the Matrix with the truth of the real world kept from them, and they are used as a means. In Nozick's construction, the fact that we are already living life in the real world when asked to consider 'plugging in', even if it leads to an existence filled with pleasure, works to activate aspects of our psychology which helps to skew answers in favour of Nozick's argument. Specifically, we are prone to 'status quo' bias, where it has been shown that people have a preference to stay in their current situation when faced with the prospect of change (De Brigard 2010). And, 'loss aversion', where individuals have a tendency to be unwilling to give up what they already have, even if what they can get offers greater benefits (Kahneman & Tversky 2000: 163). Researchers (****) have concluded that, although people tend to intuitively agree with Nozick, it is not because they so strongly value life in reality over pleasure, instead, their answers are heavily directed by psychological biases to stick with one's current situation.

The Matrix, on the other hand, is more than just a thought experiment. It is a narrative that is judged aesthetically, and as such its success requires its creators to produce something that will captivate and engage an audience. Noel Carroll has asserted that, narratives, far from being complete, have gaps which need to be filled by the audience. That is, creators of narratives do not spell-out every detail of the narrative, instead, they rely on the elicitation of moral emotions from an audience in order to be intelligible and aesthetically successful (Carroll 1996: 227-228). So, this would mean that, the aesthetic success of The Matrix required its creators to tactically evoke the appropriate moral emotions from viewers. I suggest that, if the film is taken to be making the philosophical objection I claim it does, then the film-makers needed to create the narrative around the premise that pleasure is not what is ultimately valuable, which explains the differences between it and the scenario described by Nozick.