Films and Philosophy

My Dinner With Andre

Manufacturing Consent is entry level but fun to watch.

Donald is right.
Though that doesn't mean you inherently and shouldn't value something, someone, anyone, anything and have to be a nihilistic fag.

>>462355
Inherently can't*

>>462355

Why not? (srs question)

>>462413
You can choose (or I guess focus those chemical reactions for these intents and purposes) to be nihilistic or not. People that refuse to accept the pattern of neurochemicals driving all areas of the brain, and logically that's how cognition and consciousness are controlled are probably just scared of losing sense of self. But you don't have to. You could just accept it. Or you could not, or even refute it altogether, which is kind of beautiful.

Just because you're driven by chemicals doesn't mean you HAVE to lose all sense of self. You can simply be okay with it and move on with ordinary life. You're human because you are that unique combination of chemicals. However, you can focus those chemicals as you please "choose" to an order of magnitude that exceeds other combinations of chemicals. You can choose to give value to whatever.

But that makes for shit books and people want to be edgy black-or-white faggots and circlejerk to their ebin brofoundness.

>>462520
Sorry for the autism spergout, I'm just tired of the "oh but muh uniqueness, ALL LOSES VALUE" argument when you can still choose to do whatever you'd like, simply because you can.

Just because my dog is also a pile of organic material, theses no reason I can't choose to value him because I can ultimately describe him so impersonally.

>>462242
> Donald
> Reductionist
> Current year

Top kek, scientism always finds ways to amuse.

File: matrix_chenbeard_by_wordofchen-d4xwtes.jpg (294KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

294KB, 800x600px

The matrix

Love and War
La Jetée
Marat/Sade
I Heart Huckabees
Most (good) sci. fi.

File: Whereof-One-Cannot-Speak,-One-Must-Douse-With-Supersoakers.gif (3MB, 300x220px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 300x220px

>>462242

I really loved Derek Jarman's Wittgenstein. It's probably impenetrable if you're not already somewhat familiar with his life and work, though.

all film is philosophy, but I assume you're asking for something "clearly" philosophical. You want meme films.

>>462520
I agree with most of your post. The one thing is how would you go about refuting a reductionist world view like that?