While enjoying the film science fiction meal, many questions have caused me to think, and these questions are also worth thinking about. How should we view the relationship between science and government? What kind of experimental spirit should a scientist have? Can any experiment be done without hesitation? Wait... Here I will talk about my personal views on some of the issues involved in the movie.
In the scientist
film, scientist Dr. Larry specializes in researching the impact of "virtual reality" on the development of the human brain. He believes that "virtual reality" coupled with drug stimulation can accelerate brain development, thereby rapidly increasing the level of human intelligence. He hopes that using his research can raise human intelligence to a new level.
Scientists should have their own conscience or moral restraint. Scientific experiments have certain risks. If you blindly pursue results and pursue benefits, the consequences will be unimaginable. Larry could increase the amount of drugs and increase the stimulation of "virtual reality" for his first experiment, but he did not, because he understood that while increasing intelligence, the violent tendency of orangutans was also increasing, so he tried his best to make The experiment is gradual. Later, in human experiments (not discussing the problems here), Job (experimental product) was prone to violence due to the investor's deception. Larry immediately stopped the experiment and tried his best to prevent Job, who was experimenting on his own due to intellectual growth. To a worse state. In fact, we can also see the spirit of the doctor from the side. He has the conditions and the ability to conduct experiments on himself so that he can become smarter, but he did not do so, lest the tendency of violence increases to harm mankind. From this perspective, scientists cannot be too risky to conduct scientific experiments, because experiments are risky.
Scientists should also persist in researching scientific projects that can benefit mankind. Although for some reason, scientists will face a lot of pressure on a certain research, (many times from the experimental sponsor), but if the experiment can really benefit humans and the risk is not high, they should persist, at least not destroy it. Larry finally took the research materials and results and left, but he said that he would conduct further research to achieve greater results. The connection between
politicians,
scientists and politicians is inevitable. Even if an individual has a laboratory, the scale is limited, but in the end large-scale experiments require large-scale laboratories, which require government support. So scientists and politicians are connected.
There is nothing wrong with the government's investment in scientific experiments, but if it is to turn the world into hands, what a terrible thing it would be. In the film, the government secretly invests in the "Project Five". It wants to use the orangutan as a war machine and Job as a more ultimate weapon. Its disrespect for human society is disgusting and condemned. Their ambition for the world is even more disgusting. Perhaps some countries, such as the United States, are conducting this kind of research! I don’t know, I hope I’m overwhelmed.
I still have a certain basis for saying this. To a certain extent, movies have a certain degree of reality (a point can be seen in many movies), and the government's secret investment in research will not be groundless. In addition, I have accidentally obtained secret documents (the kind of top secret) similar to the CIA's "Human Mind Control" research on the Internet. It is hard to say that there will be more unimaginable projects.
On the other hand, these politicians are pathetic. They think that they are playing power and turning the world into their hands, but they don't know the risks involved. When it is really difficult to cause it, they are unable to do anything about the situation due to lack of their own professional knowledge, not to mention some situations that even scientists cannot solve. Job's situation is completely beyond these people's control, and those politicians can only accept the end of being slaughtered by Job.
Experiment/victim
The fate of experimental products is often a victim. Job finally disappeared in the explosion. Taking a step back, because the film was going to be a sequel, it can be concluded from the last hundreds of millions of phone calls that the digital Job did not perish. However, Job, as the weeder, still ruined his life, gave up his physical body, and said he was in a virtual world. From this point of view, he was considered a victim of this experiment, even though he had changed from a foolish weeder to a very high young man.
In reality, the fate of the experiment is also tragic. Those cute little guinea pigs, those poor little frogs, those seemingly happy orangutans, monkeys...the animals as experimental animals play their own value in human experiments, many of which have failed due to experiments. The experiment was improperly operated and paid a huge price. Some died, some got sick, some gradually became thinner, and some were abandoned...because most of the experimental results are irreversible. Of course, human beings are regarded as unethical as experimental objects, and there are not many examples of human beings as experimental objects in risky experiments in the scientific community. But what about experiments that are considered to be risk-free, but are actually risky? What about those who have been forced to do human experiments in human history? (Death doctor in Germany)...I
long for the beautiful science fictions in science fiction movies to become reality in reality: human intelligence is improved with the help of "virtual reality"; the original ability of consciousness to control matter is reproduced (It is considered that the wizard can master but is lost); the virtual world can bring development to the real world...
View more about The Lawnmower Man reviews
