Back in October, there were talks that legal actions were to be made against Doc Adam, a famous doctor on Youtube. The reason? Doc Adam criticizing false medical practices such as the advice that garlic is the cure for cancer and a cabbage compress helps alleviate the swelling. Another problem is the spread of fake news. For example, a certain someone saying that activists are terrorists and where an image is being manipulated to include a hammer and sickle logo. Rationality should continue to persist even at the threat that universal objective truth cannot be unearthed because of the deeply ingrained presumptions, beliefs, and relativism.
When one presents a sentiment on Twitter, for example, there will always be an instance of opposition, and these different narratives are argued for. A point to be made is that two people have different views and thus, nothing is to be concluded. Yet, this is the problem of relativism. Relativism posits that what is true is subjective and depends on the upbringing of the person. In terms of fake news and misinformation, this has its consequences since it seems to be a lazy excuse and an easy-way-out of a heated discussion: “Iba-iba naman po tayo ng opinyon.”
In discerning the information found online especially on social media platforms, one must somehow think like Descartes:The internet is a big fruit basket! Hear me out, every post seen is somehow like a fruit. Now the task is to nit-pick the rotten fruit and separate them from the fresh ones. To be irrational is to be ignorant of the existing facts that are presented therefore ignoring the sign of the decay of the fruit. For example, let’s say that there is overwhelming evidence against a certain public official who violated the quarantine guidelines, and if one ignores the evidence validating it, they are being irrational. Another example of irrationality is being a Karen, In America, some people refuse to wear a mask. (Maybe they are Empiricists since they have yet to experience the effects of Covid-19 and therefore refuse to believe that a pandemic exists.)
The importance of practicing Rationality in social media cannot be stressed enough. To be rational is to make use of the available evidence and to be able to make use of thinking critically by assessing the presented facts. This prevents a social media user from spreading misinformation. Going back to the second paragraph, a rational person would think twice if garlic is the cure for cancer, and cabbage compress helps in alleviating swells. A rational person must also think twice before accusing someone of terrorist by first assessing the circumstances.
Teddy: You don’t even know who you are.
Leonard: Yes, I do. I don’t have amnesia. I remember everything right up until the incident. I am Leonard Shelb
I am from San Francisco–
Teddy: That’s who you were. You do not know who you are, what you’ve become since… the incident.
Like the Ship of Theseus, this poses a question on the concept of sameness though on the theory of the mind: Is Leonard the same as he was from before the murder of his wife and the loss of his ability to make new memories?
Leonard seemed to answer “yes” to this, desperately creating an external memory archive in order to build the continuity of his consciousness. By the end of the film, however, we find that even Leonard plants false clues to manipulate himself into continuing this one static purpose of revenge, almost assuming a new identity, undermining his own claims of being the same person he was. Ending its narrative with this, the film posits a contention to the concept of the self as one’s consciousness, as Leonard does not cease to be Leonard despite his altered memories. He doesn’t become non-existent, but continues to be.
Philosophy often always leaves us with infinite rebuttals. Determinism supports universal causation. It says we are not really free because events and human actions are predetermined. This view often limits us to what “fate” can offer. Free will on the other hand tends to offer us false hopes in doing things that we want. Like any other philosophical dilemma, the dilemma “are we really free?” can be answered through our rational decisions and actions. Sometimes we are free, sometimes we aren’t. Or like the metaphor used in the video we are like dogs with long leashes that are tied in an “unpredictable cart”. Sometimes we don’t feel the resistance, sometimes we do; the leash gives us “leeway” but it is not long enough to make us free. We adapt either the concept of free will or determinism depending on our own personal experiences.
Just like what I have said that this drama has many scenes with moral dilemmas, I am not kidding; so here’s another scene from the Earthquake scenes. This scene was before the rescue of the survivor mentioned beforehand (he was the last one to be rescued). There are two survivors in this scene: (1) on the top is Manager Go, he is the Korean plant manager who is around 70 years old, his lower body is buried under pieces of concrete weighing around 100 pounds and necrosis or the death of body tissues has already occurred in the lower body; (2) an Uruk national plant worker in his mid 20s has a slab of steel pierced through his body, luckily missing his heart and spine, he was also pleading the rescuers to save him because it hurts too much. Now, the situation is pretty simple: lift the boulder to free Manager Go as well as cut the iron blade through the worker's body to detach it , and have it surgically removed from his body. This is when the moral and medical dilemma enters, the company commander explains to the consulting doctor (the woman in the helmet) that the mechanisms(i.e. the connection of concrete, irons in the building) to rescue these two survivors are interconnected: when they cut the iron blade, it will hold off the support and heavier concrete will fall on Mr.Go’s body; if the boulder was lift to free Mr.go, the iron blade will then slash through the body of the worker and he will eventually die. After hearing this explanation, the doctor was hit by realization that she has to save only one patient and that the rescuers need immediate medical decision. She was shocked and emotional that she asked the soldier to give her another 5 minutes to re-assess or talk to the two survivors.The Principle of Double Effect is exhibited here. The doctor first go to Manager Go which is very quick to assess what is going on, he then proceeds to tell about how beautiful the sky and the doctor is, that he already made his 3 children finish college and he has sent a lot of time with this wife, and that he is very happy and feels accomplished with this life; he referred to the man slashed with blade, stating that he has 3 children. After that, he ended his statement by a request: for the doctor to call his wife on his behalf and tell her “I love you”. Now the good result here is that one of them gets to survive while the other dies. None of them would have wanted a dead body and the doctor felt that she was not a god to just decide who gets to live. The scene ended by the rushing of doctors to put the man with an iron blade in the surgery room, and putting the ID on the chest of Manager Go then zipping up his body in a bag. Now the unintended bad effect here is the death of Mr. Go while the good result was they get to save a patient; based on the principle of double effect, it is morally right (permissible) to cause harm as a side effect (or “double effect”) of bringing about a good result. I would also have to agree with the decision, even though it hurts to see a caring character die: almost his whole body tissues are already dead and he is already old to survive treatments plus I think it was also his wish to save the other man since that man still has family to feed. This was really a tear-jerker scene and this drama is superb.