In the article "Our Post-Mortal Future", the concept of reading someone's mind before an action is questioned. Many of the stated uses of this technology presume that an intended act is still a crime despite the absence of a victim and perpetrator (yet). The article states that this redefines the term "crime" itself. If we can punish people before they commit a crime, can we award people before they do a good deed? If these precogs can predict a crime, can they predict the Precrime unit from failing to prevent the crime, thus allowing the unit to prevent the crime they were predicted not to prevent? The idea of predicting the future is very paradoxical. The main point of this article is the idea of a criminal. The freedom for this criminal to have the intention of committing a crime is what makes him accountable for his actions. Essentially, if allowed to predict crimes before they happen, the Precrime unit is unjustly persecuting the accused. Minority Report effectively explores an individual accused of a future crime and the obstacles he or she faces to realize whether or not the action was truly intended. The film brings into question future prediction, and really any time manipulation at all. Humanity is in the now, and if allowed to predict the future and judge an individual on those future actions, we lose our humanity.
The article is called our Post Moral Future, not Post Mortal. You need to apply your discussion of the article more directly to John Anderton.
ReplyDelete