Science or religion, who is more superstitious

Luis 2021-12-02 08:01:29

I Origins was translated into Type I Origins, and it was also classified as a sci-fi drama movie. After watching it, it was too bad. It's not that the movie is bad, but the translation of the name is too bloody, and it's not the expected science fiction movie. Looking at it now, it is a good analysis of the philosophical relationship between religion and science. The film’s description of scientific research, the character’s obsession with science, and the emphasis on the importance of experiments in particular, make me think about the historical story of my wife’s discovery of uranium in my daily life. In the movie, the female scientist Ian’s wife gave a good example. If you let go of your mobile phone, it will fall to the ground. You repeat it three million times. The negligible error of one part per million is also worthy of full study. Regarding religion, it is the question of whether God exists. The movie quoted a dialogue from Da Lai Lou. A scientist asked Da Lai Lou. What if science proves that your beliefs are wrong? Da Lai Tong said, I will try my best to explain these phenomena with my beliefs. If the facts falsify my ideas, I will give up my beliefs. So, as for the scientific beliefs you firmly believe, if there are facts falsified, will you give up? What if science just confirms the existence of God? Yin En used mutation to give the bugs without vision the ability to sense light, that is to say, there is no light in the bug's original perception world. Similarly, is it logically possible that humans have only a limited number of all perception abilities, and we cannot prove that God is just like a bug cannot perceive light. The belief that God exists and the belief that God does not exist are both hypotheses and unproven beliefs. Ian, the protagonist of the movie, originally falsified the existence of God by digging out every detail of the evolution of the eyes. As a result, through experiments with iris scanning technology, it was found that the iris characteristics of the dead person would appear in the newborn population, and the newborn person would have a memory connection with the dead person. Science has confirmed the existence of the soul. Although the conclusion of the whole movie is that the soul exists, it actually promotes the true scientific spirit, that is, rationality, not superstition. Stubbornly believe that the soul does not exist, is it not superstition, so that you are far less enlightened than the big speaker. Of course, the results of the iris scanning experiment throughout the movie are just presets that serve the theme of the movie, not a true experimental fact. Technicalism, rational theology and empiricism philosophy are all reflected in the film.

View more about I Origins reviews

Extended Reading
  • Nelda 2022-03-22 09:01:47

    Music 8 Picture 8 Director 7 Story 3 Performance 7 Impression 5 Average 5.9/10 The story is very novel, but forgive me for not understanding it, using scientific methods to prove religion is like Easter eggs (where did the iris data of old celebrities come from?). Beautiful stories are built on the basis of self-deception. Ian, who doesn't believe in reincarnation, is tired of Sofi for a moment. How will Ian face after learning that reincarnation exists? Fate makes sense: they won't be happy forever

  • Kassandra 2021-12-02 08:01:29

    The story is interesting, but it feels pretty good to deal with, I can seal the easter egg as the most inappropriate of the year

I Origins quotes

  • Ian: You ever feel like when you met someone, they fill this hole inside of you, and then when they're gone... you feel that space painfully vacant?

  • Sofi: Why are you working so hard to disprove God?

    Ian: Disprove? Who proved that God was there in the first place?