Wittgenstein is mentioned at the beginning of the movie, and it is rare that I am not unfamiliar with the name. Although my concept of philosophy is very superficial, but recently I accidentally got a little understanding of this "big boss" because of the theory about social therapy. Don't get me wrong, in fact, this innocent philosopher is not the real murderer behind the scenes. He died as early as 1951, but the author of the play referred to his thoughts and affected the development of the plot.
"The law doesn't exist" is my interpretation of some of Wittgenstein's thoughts embodied in the play. I don't know if it is a misreading. There are always countless possibilities under a sequence. Rigorous numerical and logical reasoning cannot lead to the truth of the event. This is the point of view of the show, and it is also the core idea that drives the main line of reasoning in the show (this makes Conan of "there is only one truth". How can a small pot of friendship be worth it...). So the logical mathematicians in "Oxford Murder" perfectly deduced a perfect logical reasoning composed of complete contingency (this is what strikes me as cute, the rare "anti-logical logic" The speculative novel idea~~).
The following is completely philosophical thinking. Regarding the thinking followed by this film, I think it is: people cannot follow strict logic to obtain the truth, the world we see is not real, the truth is from the moment we are observers Existence (Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, also reminds me of Schrödinger's cat~~). Personally, I believe that Wittgenstein's thought belongs to the scope of postmodernism, and at least in this film, we can see some shadows of phenomenology. Phenomenology only pays attention to the description of the complete present, the here and now, and does not pay attention to "explaining, predicting, controlling", so we can only determine what we see, but cannot predict all possibilities. It is true that phenomenological ideas bring us closer to real life than positivism (mostly some laboratory experiments~), but it is really sad for psychology to admit that events are unpredictable and controllable.. ....
Going back to this movie, it seems that an interesting fact has been raised at the end: although reasoning from pure logic and objective laws may lead to wrong results, one of them is decisive. Human behaviors are all motivated, while Motivation points to real outcomes. I want to give psychology a little cheer here because sometimes logic may be powerless under the many possibilities of criminal tactics that people cannot predict, but as long as the inner drive of the behavior exists, the behavior points to a basically certain outcome.
But human motives aren't so predictable, otherwise Martin wouldn't have been that innocent butterfly, and a flap of his wings would have changed Beth's mind. So, what is certain, who knows? Maybe people should really be scared because we have to admit that we really have no control over anything, the only truth is - there is no single truth.
View more about The Oxford Murders reviews
