Goldberg Blade Runner

Blade Runner is centralized to the conceptual conception of free will. Directed Ridley Scott, based off of Philip K Dick, who claims, “I am not a director, I am a philosopher. He poses two questions: A) What is reality, and B) what makes someone Human? Both extremely obscure philosophical questions, yet very futuristic as well asvery important. Is humanity a social conduction? Who does the power of dub another human being more or less human belong to? They may sound like crazy questions, but if you look back throughout history, as well as today, you will find they are not fanatical at all. What did we do to the slaves? Were they not considered 3/4^ths human? Or the Indians? Where did all of their land go; what about the Texas Mexican Boarder War of northern aggression – although it is another great example – I was not referring to the civil wars northern aggression either. The Japanese during WWII were they or were they not put into concentration camps, and were their lands not taken? What about the Holocaust? As for today what about the way immigrants are treated?

We don’t know what is “human.” We keep trying to find an answer. People come and people go, who claim to know. Who deem social groups lesser or greater? What is the driving force? Could it be fear? Is the only thing to fear, fear itself?Or is it each other? Dick portrays this idea of what is human In the film, Blade Runner, the protagonist’s name is Rick whose job is to seek out “replicants.” What are replicants? Replicants are humans whohave been created by man. They are programmed to be exactly what their maker wanted them to be. They are perfect hum beings for their intent. They all have memories. Granted they are not their memories, they are other peoples, but did those people not formulate themselves around such memories? Replicants have emotional and physical feeling; they are capable of love. To no surprise I am sure, you can guess they are not treated as humans. They are given a “shelf life” of 4 years, and then they “expire.” The antagonist’s in the film are the “replicants” who are not really antagonists at all they are morethe innocent bystanders of an experiment to which in terms of exponential growth was not fully understood. They just want to find their creator, and be freed, given their “civil rights.” The creators did not fully conceive what they were creating. “Some of the worst things to have ever happened werestarted with the best intentions. “

The film goes on presentingthis futuristically plausible question – what is human -- which is very futuristic, but at the rate at which we are creating technology “replicants” -- or something like them –- will not be so futuristic for as long as some of us may think. Robots are being made all around the world, and Asian is soon to be the “mother” of A.I.. We have not even determined our global rights; we are just beginningto globalize. Yet, we are creating something that will have the ability not only to succeed us all and be our sole demise; but far more confusion another group to deal with, another “other.” If we cannot even determine what it is that makes us human, then howcan we even begin to conceive a world with robots, where we tell them what they are?

K Dick presents the idea of eyes. The thought that eyes are the windows to the soul. So the only way to determine who is or is not a replicant is to perform a test. The test is a compilation of a series of quesitons that are meant to trigger certain emotional activity similar to a polygraph test except a camera is fixated on ones cornea as apposed to pulse. “Real people” can answer all the questions and their pupils will dilate accordingly. Replicants pupils will not. This is a very cleaver idea he presents. Most of the “replicants” are branded not human because they don’t have the emotional ties to things that we do. Yet the film then introduces replicants who can pass these tests because they were produced with the ability to do so. They were upgraded.

This film does a great job of combining, and presenting futuristic concepts and present issues. It, like its ideas are way beyond its time. We are our own worst enemy. We keep producing, and advancing. Yet what are we advancing towards? Is it a world where we will have to have tests to determine if we are human? Are we going to have nature? Are we going to even be here? Does history always repeat itself except to a more advanced level? And if so what is the level that ends it all?