setting the record straight about robuts
It’s not the robuts in movies like “The Terminator” or “I, Robut” or “The Matrix” that are evil. Some would say that they can neither be good nor evil because they only do what they’re programmed to do. But I’m inclined to say that when they’re good (bringing us orange juice and saving children) they’re great, and even when they’re bad (destroying the human race) they still serve a purpose.
You see, the robut is the epitome of Enlightenment thinking, the idea that rationality holds the key to peace and happiness on Earth. When Kant said, in not so few and small words, don’t do anything that you wouldn’t hold up as a universal law, he was basically speaking Robut, a language of simple and rational conclusions designed to make the world a better place.
In the aforementioned films a problem usually arises when the robuts come to the impeccably rational conclusion that humans should be destroyed. At this point in the movie we’re forced to face the fact that as a species we pollute, murder, make war and a whole bunch of other stuff that sex, art and religion couldn’t possibly make up for. It’s no accident that the robuts in these movies usually appear as grotesque replications of ourselves. The robut is an extension of human consciousness, pointing out our uselessness, and threatening the quick fix solution.
Had we been able to come to this conclusion ourselves we would have most likely descended into a suicidal orgy. But as attractive as that sounds, it’s simply not an option for most people. So, in spite of this perennial aporia, these movies usually end with a triumph of the human spirit.
But what is the human spirit? Certainly more than the mere will to go on living knowing that your existence is a plague on the world. Against cold rationality, the human spirit welcomes multiplicity and mystery. It suggests that the robut jumped off Kant’s bus too soon, and proudly sports the old cliche that it’s the journey, not the destination.
The evil robut is a mirror in which we first see our vile and corrupt nature, but come to see the beauty of our spirit.
doctor Boner wrote:
When you said, “Against cold rationality, the human spirit welcomes Multiplicity,” I couldn’t agree more. Did Michael Keaton get stiffed for that performance or what? By the way, I’m a boner doctor, and the robut in the picture should, uh, you know, come and, uh, get a check up. Sooner the better. (Okay you got me, I want to steal his boner and make it my own.)
Posted on 02-Feb-07 at 3:37 am | Permalink
Lostcause wrote:
Hegel and Kant both licked toads to get high.
Interesting factoid - the word “Robot” originates from a Czech obligatory/slave/unpaid worker.
So, are you saying we slaves to our own cliche spirit?
Yeah, Yeah, Yeah - Robut not robot how c#@%^$.
Posted on 10-Feb-07 at 12:34 am | Permalink
Lostcause wrote:
There should be an “are” between “we” and “slaves” in the above post.
Posted on 10-Feb-07 at 12:36 am | Permalink
Lostcause wrote:
God damn it, I should read what I write and not write while watching kungfu!
The above post should have read:
Hegel and Kant both licked toads to get high.
Interesting factoid - the word “Robot” originates from a Czech word that meant obligatory/slave/unpaid worker.
So, are you saying we slaves to our own cliche spirit?
Yeah, Yeah, Yeah - Robut not robot how c#@%^$.
I’m going to go lick another toad!
Posted on 10-Feb-07 at 12:39 am | Permalink
Lostcause wrote:
Well actually, Kant probably stuck the toads up his ass for his daily walk.
Posted on 10-Feb-07 at 12:42 am | Permalink
G wrote:
Robuts may destroy man for his mistakes time and time again, and man may even destroy himself, but what I see as being the human spirit, is a willingness to progress. The robut in his cold rationality doesn’t work in real universals. The robut can’t forgive. The most simple and rational conclusion, is that if an error is made, debug it, don’t destroy the computer / host. This is why true reason is only applicable by the human being. Trial and error, leading to a just and universally fruitful end is purely rational. Being able to admit to the potential of mistake and then fixing the inevitable mistakes themselves, is the only reasonable solution. Great post!
“G”
Posted on 14-Feb-07 at 10:29 pm | Permalink