On this basis, it considers several movies on the theme of genetic engineering, throughout the history of cinema. Directed by Andrew Niccol, starring Ethan Hawke, Uma Thurman, Alan Ar (.)ĤThis article shares Wartenberg and Mulhall’s view that at least certain movies are capable of philosophical intervention (§2). Therefore – following the indications of Thomas Wartenberg and Stephen Mulhall – I shall suggest that movies only contribute to philosophical thinking when they do not simply express a particular ethical opinion but also argue for it, albeit in narrative form. Most of them express an opinion, but it is one thing to state a thesis and another to argue for it.
Obviously, not all films intend to offer a philosophical reflection on a specific theme. This does not mean, however, that at least some films are not extraordinarily capable of conveying a deeper insight, to the point of presenting philosophical arguments through their images and narration. After all, the main objective for a cultural narrative is not to fully report on the complexity of scientific research but to reflect on certain issues of wider significance. Cinema clearly addresses a mass audience and, as such, it divulges scientific content without however going into too much detail. As reported by Russell Hardin, “civilization has only continued and progressed because we do not generally demand that our knowledge meet Locke’s or even contemporary scientists’ standards” 2.ģIn this sense, cinema can tell us something about how scientific knowledge is represented in images and how wider audiences, beyond the scientific community, understand it.
But this does not mean that they cannot reflect on the questions that are raised by scientific progress. 2 Hardin, R., “If It Rained Knowledge”, Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 33 (1), 2003, pp. 3-24:22 (.)ĢIt is clear that most people cannot share the complete specialist knowledge of scientists.
0 kommentar(er)
