This is the question that hits my head hard after watching this film, aside from my sympathy for the living life of dolphins and my anger at blood-stained scarlet bays.
Human intelligence is actually amazing. Human intelligence, in addition to the deep perception of things, the ability to speak, think, and fully perceive, also includes the like to define what one has heard and seen, to express emotions, to analyze the duality of things, and to constantly answer the questions that the outside world or oneself set up. To solve the problem, constantly overthrow, and then solve it, and continue to overthrow.
They call it "progress," and that's it, no one easily admits that he loves to work in vain.
Take a look at your life to see if there are so many "useless efforts" occupying and devouring you? You have to call it a good name, no matter what kind of hard work is an accumulation. Hehe, people's instinct to seek advantage and avoid disadvantage for mental pain can reach a state called shameless.
It's a bit farther, so let's go back halfway and talk about "conspiracy theories".
The "conspiracy theory" here is what I understand, and you don't have to equate it with the standardized answer that Baidu knows. (I reflect that I shouldn't go to shameless websites, I should go to pseudo-Wikipedia.) People who like to create conspiracy theories tend to be divided into two categories: one has a clear purpose, and 120% knows the truth, but often Because of some self-preservation needs, I want other people to avoid the truth and believe the negative 120% suggestion. There is another possibility that he may not know much. He may know a lot of things, but he can't always touch the core. How to make up for this fault? Therefore, based on some so-called clues and self-considered logic, a "fact" is compiled. This kind of "conspiracy theory" is often relatively innocent. If you have to blame, you have to blame its inadequate cognition. And beyond the definitional addictions of ordinary people, and expand the undetermined thought-form semi-finished products that should exist within their own scope.
In The Cove, first we see a clearly skewed point of view, the intelligence and innocence of dolphins contrast sharply with their slaughter; in the latter part, we see a confirmed "conspiracy theory" that is Views made by Japan's spokesperson for the International Association for the Prohibition of Whaling are far from the truth, and the perjury and dirty approval ratings that have been exposed. Of course, you can say that this is the slanted point of view advocated by the filmmakers.
Therefore, based on this, conspiracy theories about the film itself also emerged: why do you stand on the side of human nature, the king of the world, and the so-called "justice" to determine which creature is inviolable of intelligence , which one can be slaughtered and eaten? Why, as an American, you go to a small town in Japan to sneakily shoot them, maybe it's wrong for them to do something wrong, but why are you accusing and trying to correct them? What is your conspiracy, you Americans? You exposed the unsafe cars of the little Japan and disturbed the sovereignty of many countries in the Middle East. Now, in the name of protecting animals, are you launching a moral trial against the little Japan?
Let us analyze this logic.
First of all, there are doubts about the traditional logic of human nature and the direction of justice. Why is it wrong to kill dolphins, and no one blames them for killing chickens and ducks or even eating them? This question is well answered. First, human beings have an instinctive closeness and kinship to intelligent creatures, and this instinct can be well explained with an idiom: sympathy for each other. Because the wisdom of human beings, in addition to the same kind, can be said to be extremely high on the earth. The higher the wisdom of animals, the more surprised and pity people feel. This is why we feel that killing cats and dogs is cruel. For those less intelligent creatures, humans tend to appear indifferent, which is the reason for animal instinct - because people have a source of food, and there are not so many reasons to protect it, and even think that it Born to be eaten by humans - although this view may make people feel a bit cruel, but this is determined by DNA; of course, when human nature and morality reach a level, human kindness will overshadow animal nature, so many people I will choose to be vegetarian. Second, we can't use a more wrong proposition to make a similar term with this seemingly less correct proposition, and finally come to the conclusion that this proposition and that more wrong proposition are of the same kind and are wrong. People always have the need to think higher. This principle is like someone who is accused of jumping in the queue. He asks back, why don't you say that someone is jumping in front of you? With this logic, can my wrongdoing be made right by comparing it with someone else's same or worse wrongdoing? Obviously not.
Second, the Americans' revelations about Little Japan are a harassment of people's lives and even sovereignty in Little Japan. We can look at it from two levels. On the first level, the emergence of this view of "what's going on in the United States, what's going on in Japan, what's going on in China, what are you going to do with you" is entirely caused by the difference in logic between China and the West. The Chinese people, and even China, belong to the typical logic of "sweeping the door", "it's none of your business", and "don't meddle in your own business." The "Americans are nosy" view. Child A punched child B, and B's parent happened to be there, so he accused A. A's parent just passed by and quit, saying, "My child, do you need your education? What do you mean?" This kind of thing should be very common, but in this case, when A makes a mistake , A parent does not educate, or even encourages, then when he grows up, he will definitely bring disaster to all living beings. A sentence B is not too much persuasion. In fact, it is beneficial to A, even the class, school, and even the whole society where AB is located. The logic of Americans, and even developed Western countries, is that your actions deviate from the logic of my correct moral view or even the logic of all mankind. You have to harm the people, harm the interests of all mankind and even the wider range of creatures. I'm going to accuse you. This kind of accusation is just accusation, which is different from moral judgment, control, and coercion. On the second level, this is a mistake that clearly misinterprets an attribute as a subject. An "American who cared and cared for dolphins" was interpreted as an "American" who cared and cared for dolphins. This matter has little to do with Americans. First of all, this is personal behavior and civil behavior; secondly, the idea of democracy and freedom and the spirit of adventure in the United States have penetrated into the hearts of Americans. If you must say why you are "American", I think this is the essential reason.
So thinking of this, why don't we put aside our self-righteous wisdom and speculation, express sympathy and compassion for the suffering of these intelligent beings, and bravely stand up for the cold aggressor?
Why do we have to figure out the tangle of the eighteen bends of the mountain road that is never clear or necessary to figure out what's behind the story, instead of focusing on the fact that the obvious human nature in the story can easily make judgments Woolen cloth?
Why do we always fight over the obvious? It’s like we think that behind the slaughter of dolphins, there is always someone with bad intentions; it’s like when we see the liberal democracy in the United States, we always sneer and say, “Che, the fake friendly face of capitalist imperialism; When the country was fighting for freedom and democracy, I was lucky that it didn't happen here; and I never take a good look at you and your compatriots, the dwindling personal rights.
View more about The Cove reviews
