»Fate of Natural Redpills«

I would like to say that choice always existed for humans... which is why the first two matrices didn't work out. We chose in mass to not accept them, which they (the machines) were totally unprepared for. What you say does not make sense, how can people reject the first two matricies in mass, without that rejection being a choice that they made? The machines definatly didn't force us to reject the matrix, therefore the only other alternative is that we chose to reject it. This for me is also quite interesting because it begs the question "Why did the human race reject a perfect world". Was Smith right? To me... saying it doesn't work because their is no choice is both a cop out, and illogical.


This new version doesn't work because it gives us a choice, it works because it recognizes that choice exists. This can be accomplished in 2 ways by my thinking.

1. You create a matrix that most people will accept... which according to the films turns out to be the world we live in... or some people might say the world we are designed (by god or evolution) to live in.

2. You know that some people will still reject the programming, so you allow this anwser to exist even though it doesn't jive with the matrix programming which is designed to keep people in.

This gives you... in the words of the architect... an answer that functions, but is obviously fundamentally flawed... which would be the definition of an imperfect solution by the way.


In other news, I think the integral anomaly, or "the One" is not assigned either. It is expected, it is controlled, but it is not created by the machines. It is created by the anomaly, which does whatever it wants to do, it doesn't do what the machines tell it to... I could be wrong though. Remember, that in his moment of choice, Neo has the power to potentially bring down the whole matrix. This is the final expression of the anomaly. And to me, this is now the choice that the architect is both trying to influence, and if possible prevent. The path of the One is their to influence the choice, it is a measure of control, but it is not absolute control. "Just what is control" "If we wanted too, We could smash these machines into bits". Apparently, they have had trouble smashing Neo into bits... so instead they deal with his existance as best they can while smashing Zion into bits.

Also... if you ask me... it looks very much like the architect is trying to eliminate Neo, and trying to avoid their meeting. I personally think he try's a little to hard to prevent this from happening just to keep up the appearance of realism so Zion won't get "something is fishy" feelings. I mean, Morpheous (mr. Providence) alone would have had them following this through to the end even if the agents suddenly laid out a red carpet for them to follow to the source.

You say my way of thinking could not be further from the truth, but if you look at what you are saying, "the architect spends his time trying to prevent the One from appearing". To accomplish this at the ultimate level must also entail the elimination of the anomaly that creates Neo, which you seem to agree that he is trying to do, but I don't see how these two goals differ at all. Eliminating the One once he/she exists is really what the whole Path of the one is about anyways, instead of killing him/her, they force a choice that essentially starts everything over. Either way, problem solved (for the moment).

Quote:

I would like to say that choice always existed for humans... which is why the first two matrices didn't work out. We chose in mass to not accept them, which they (the machines) were totally unprepared for. What you say does not make sense, how can people reject the first two matricies in mass, without that rejection being a choice that they made?

I remember (and recorded) that thread "Why did the first Matrix fail?" and you're right...partially.

First of all, we're not talking about the nature of humanity. Of course humans have the ability to choose and no matrix was meant to change that. The machines were not trying to change the form of humanity just the function .

The problem comes in where Archie never expected that fact to interfere with his version of the perfect world. So no provision was made for any choice to be made that was out of harmony with the system/simulation. After all it was a world of no suffering, what's not to love, right?

So yes they had a choice (innately) but the matrix of the time did not account for it to be in harmony with the simulation.

Quote:

it begs the question "Why did the human race reject a perfect world". Was Smith right? To me... saying it doesn't work because their is no choice is both a cop out, and illogical.

Okay, Hex. To answer you and the Smith, how about if I say that it didn't work because people didn't feel that they had control over their life? They had to all act a certain way, think a certain way, and follow all the rules it takes for a "perfect" world to last.

I was always puzzled about the perfect world thing as said by Smith even before Rel. and Rev. came out. What could they possibly use as a pattern for such? Then I thought about Smith saying that "some felt we lacked the programming language to describe your perfect world." So yes I believe he was right about that. After all how can even Intell describe what a perfect world is to Hex, CaptPostMod, or Therion. Heck, look at all the controversy over which moral code(s) to adopt, what is love, concept of right and wrong, etc. Do you think someone can make a setting that all of us can accept as "perfect", just because you remove suffering?

Quote:

This new version doesn't work because it gives us a choice, it works because it recognizes that choice exists.

Or that it allows for us to pursue our respective choices without it interfering with the system itself. But we continue...

Quote:

1. You create a matrix that most people will accept... which according to the films turns out to be the world we live in... or some people might say the world we are designed (by god or evolution) to live in.

Late 20th century metropolitan America was NOT designed by God nor by any evolutionary process except for social evolution maybe. If anything, "our" world is by far the most unnatural although it allows people to pursue a wide variety of interests as manufactured as these may be.

Quote:

2. You know that some people will still reject the programming, so you allow this anwser to exist even though it doesn't jive with the matrix programming which is designed to keep people in.

Yes, you have to have a niche for these to fall into. Since you as Arc can't still understand their decision nor make a simulation that works for them, you can either view them as something to get rid of occasionally (like in the movies) or you come to accept that situation and let them be (like in MxO).

And what you say about the Architect wanting to eliminate Neo is on track. But Neo's power coming from the Source, which is the machine mainframe needs to be understood in light of what you're saying, too.

Quote:

Hey, now we're gettin' somewhere! Neo understood that the Architect's problem--the anomaly--was somehow a direct result of choice. And here we see what that choice is: to accept or reject the Matrix. That choice was missing from the first two versions, but now that it's been included, people accept the illusion as reality and go about living out their lives, as Agent Smith said.

Well, now in view of Hex's words, what you are saying kinda simplifies the situation a bit. The matrix is not just a world, it is a way of life that makes living in that simulated world comfortable or even possible. The other two worlds only included room for ONE way of life, while the third matrix allows for MANY as does this society called early 21st century America.

"The matrix is a system, Neo...when you're inside what do you see? Doctors, lawyers...carpenters.." You can choose to pursue whatever career, philosophy, pleasure, meme, you choose - - - as long as it is functional to the system. So the choice is an illusion between those in power (machines) and those without (humans inside the matrix, in this case). Just living their lives, "oblivious".

Quote:

This rejection is an anomaly, something for which the programming of the Matrix cannot support. If it is allowed to continue to exist, it will eventually threaten the stability of the entire system. Just like the first two versions crashed, this newer version will crash as well. It may take a lot longer, but because of the anomaly it is inevitable.

Thank you.

Quote:

Neo understands correctly that Zion is the result of 1% of the population rejecting the Matrix. Now that the Architect has explained why Neo is here from his standpoint, he begins to deal with Neo's prime concern--the people of Zion.

Right. They are conversing. Neo is learning from what Arc is saying, unlike many of us in the audience while this was playing, scratching our heads.

Quote:

After Neo’s lame attempt to argue with the Architect, he is faced with his biggest dilemma and the decision he’s already made but was afraid to understand.

I would be afraid of what could make me make such a desicion, too. Behold! The nightmare.

upon looking back, I just wanted to say that I love you Feral boy... and no not in a physical way, and that my post might have come off as a little more aggresive or accertive then I had intended it too... so just take it for what it is which you of all people seem to be exceptionally good at.

Quote:

Okay, Hex. To answer you and the Smith, how about if I say that it didn't work because people didn't feel that they had control over their life? They had to all act a certain way, think a certain way, and follow all the rules it takes for a "perfect" world to last.

If I didn't know what you were talking about and you didn't mention a perfect world, I would think you were describing our current world... which I find very interesting. Their is something wrong with the world...

Quote:

Late 20th century metropolitan America was NOT designed by God nor by any evolutionary process except for social evolution maybe. If anything, "our" world is by far the most unnatural although it allows people to pursue a wide variety of interests as manufactured as these may be.

I know what you are saying, but on the face of it I have to disagree. Although first I have to say that I was talking about man himself, not society...

However, we live in this world and those that do well in it prosper and those whom do not struggle. I don't believe in implementing social darwinism, but it doesn't mean it doesn't exist just because we don't overtly persue it all over the earth(and some people definatly do believe in it, which has lead to many horrible and tragic events). Everthing here now came out of what came before us, we are the evolving human, and this is the world we currently live in, and through forces of evolution in my opinion are designed to live in. (for example, we aren't desinged to live on mars, the moon, the oceans, ect.) The hard part in this is to try to figure out how the social evolution parralels or rather correlates with our own human evolution... and how the two interact with each other, since they do both effect each other, neither is independant.

I'm not sure I follow you. Explain.

n-tell wrote:

If anything, "our" world is by far the most unnatural although it allows people to pursue a wide variety of interests as manufactured as these may be.

What I mean by this is that the way we live can only lead to disaster for us and/or for the environment itself.

intell wrote:

There are a few things about the Architect to note. His appearance, vocabulary, and what he is trying to accomplish in creating both the matrix and the path of the One aid in understanding what he is talking about.

I'm curious as to your opinion about the Architect's appearance. I don't see that aspect discussed much, except that he seems to represent the grandfatherly God who keeps watch over everything and everyone.

intell wrote:

This goes back to what I said at the beginning of this post. It is interesting examining what he is referring to and how he puts it, which is how HE sees it from his perspective. Just in case you don't see it by this point in the films, you hear the Oracle briefly explain the Arc's perspective in Rev. to Neo.

I assume that you're referring to the Architect's inability to see past ANY choices. If so, that's a great point. Because the Architect functions solely on variables and sorting decisions into neat little rows so he can file them away in an orderly fashion. The Oracle's power of the Sight is in direct opposition to the Architect's method. Both the Architect and the Oracle attempt to attain a sort of foresight, but the Architect does it through control methods (knowing the future because you made it happen a certain way) and the Oracle does it through the Sight (seeing without time up until she encounters a choice she doesn't understand). And as I've tried to explain to people who want to approach the Matrix story from a purely technical standpoint, the Sight is not scientific. It is not calculating variables. But on the other hand, neither is it guessing. When Neo asks her if she knew whether or not he was going to sit down, she responds that she wouldn't be much of an oracle if she didn't. She KNOWS things about the future. She doesn't guess. The only time she doesn't know something is if she can't see past a choice she doesn't understand. She is unable to see past the cycles of the Matrix. She knows their beginning from their end. But she cannot see past them; she cannot see past the Path of the One. But she BELIEVES intuitively that the way to find peace is by some other Path. Over time she begins to BELIEVE in Neo and has FAITH that he will be able to find that way, even though she herself does not know what that way is.

intell wrote:

An anomaly? If I refered to everyone on this board who disagrees with my view of the films as an anomaly, I would really be accused of egoism, wouldn't I? Whose definition of the norm is it and why is it so necessary for everyone to conform to it? And who in society thinks this way do you know of?

I'd like to hear more of your view of the films as an anomaly. Are you referring to the movies themselves being very different from most of the fluff that Hollywood puts out, or did you mean something else?

intell wrote:

feralboy wrote: the Architect is not trying to eliminate Neo. He is trying to eliminate the anomaly that CAUSED Neo. Yess...

In hindsight, I think what I would have liked to have added is that the Architect would like to eliminate the One as well, but not until bigger priorities were met. In other words, even though the Architect's focus is on eliminating the anomaly, if he were to ever achieve that, the One would be the very next thing on the chopping block. It's just a matter of priority: first the anomaly, then the One.

intell wrote:

Neo does understand most of what the Arc tells him. After the 'no one knows' statement, he says, "precisely". And converses with him about the effects, while Neo pieces it together, noticing the screens trying to account for all possible reactions Neo could have. After Neo shows that they're on the same page with the "problem is choice" thing, then Archie continues with the history of the matrix.

When's the last time the "screen" Neo's contradict the real Neo? Do they all start to agree near the end? And I wonder if these calculations of Neo's possible responses are constantly updated, even during the course of the conversation. In other words, as Neo displays an understanding of what he's being told, do the computations begin to show that he will also probably understand the rest of the Architect's comments as well? Perhaps as Neo is learning about the Architect during the conversation, the Architect is also learning about Neo. Just a thought.

intell wrote:

Arc and Smith share a worldview here and that is important to take note of. But your questions show where Smith and Architect probably differ. Architect is learning. Smith is growing more frustrated.

That's a great comparison! I never thought of that, but it's true. Both Smith and the Architect want everyone to conform to their worldview, but Smith seems much more willing to destroy everyone and everything (including himself, eventually) to get what he wants. Scary thought.

intell wrote:

Intell's translation: It took a mind whose view of "perfection" was not as narrow as mine to understand what work for most people.

That reminds me of a quote from Dilbert, who said that hell is other people. Humans are the Architect's hell, and they just won't conform 100%. Stupid humans!

Intell, you may very well be right, but even that disaster would be part of the evolution of our species. Things either change or stay the same, and work or don't work (or work but only for so long...).

Nature has a way of fixing itself over time, we are no different, we will either adjust and live, or become extinct... like the dinosaur. Either way, I'm pretty sure the Earth will still be here along with other living things. Perhaps we are disgned to live in an unatural world, and thus we are truly a doomed species, as Smith suggests... we are a virus, a plauge upon this planet.

Extinction would be unjust for not all of us live this way or wish to.

"I don't deserve this." (Gene Hackman)
"Deserve's got nuthin' to do with it." (Clint Eastwood)
BLAM! (shotgun blast)
- from the movie The Unforgiven

Feral, I'll get back to you in a moment.

It's not about just or unjust. We live together or we die together, we all share the same planet, and generally the fate of humanity is shared equally amoung all humans(though those with power have more influence some would argue). Thus the need for change on a large scale. Nature has no sense of justice, it just "is". What of the humans who marched with the machines for their rights? Would being put in the matrix after the war be just? I don't think so, but nonetheless, we share the same fate, and share the consequences of actions even if we did/do not agree with them.

hexediter wrote:

upon looking back, I just wanted to say that I love you Feral boy... and no not in a physical way, and that my post might have come off as a little more aggresive or accertive then I had intended it too... so just take it for what it is which you of all people seem to be exceptionally good at.

I love you too, man!

Seriously though, I didn't think your words were harsh at all. I think the most abrasive stuff I've ever encountered in this forum came from Mobil, and even he wasn't all that bad. I like to listen to people's points and assume that it was written in a constructive spirit.

I did want to comment on the subject of choice, because I know you've brought it up a few times in the past as well. But I thought it deserved its own thread, so I went ahead and started one. Check it out and give me a harsh reply!

Quote:

I'm curious as to your opinion about the Architect's appearance. I don't see that aspect discussed much, except that he seems to represent the grandfatherly God who keeps watch over everything and everyone.

After a co-worker watched Reloaded, he said that he loved that Freudian reference with the Architect. He thought it was hilarious. You hear it touched on every once in a while by various posters. Anyway, whatever you hear, remember that this meeting is in a setting of like doctor and patient and this flavors Arc's tone throughout the dialogue.

Quote:

I assume that you're referring to the Architect's inability to see past ANY choices. If so, that's a great point. Because the Architect functions solely on variables and sorting decisions into neat little rows so he can file them away in an orderly fashion.

Right. You hear other posters refer to what she said about him as a rule to explain other things but you almost never hear them explain this statement. They just take for granted that he's a program and wasn't endowed with the ability to understand humanity or something like that. I disagree with all that.

Plus I'm really referring to what she said after that, which explains why he can't see past any choices, to wit:

"He doesn't understand them. To him they are VARIABLES in an equation that must be solved and countered."

Most of the audience was busy laughing while this was being said because it was a funny statement about someone who gives the impression that he knows so much that he even regarded her as a "lesser mind". But it might have been unintentional humour.

What you said is right. And even for us, it is often hard to understand choices that others make. It requires us to try to view things from their perspective. But if we, like the Arc, think of others as 'lesser' or inferior, then we would think of ourselves as the paradigm of perfection and too bound to it to comprehend things that don't fit with our definition of it.

This becomes complicated when someone like that finds themselves in a position that requires controlling or passifying these others. See why he's frustrated? He makes choices too so how is it he doesn't understand "choice"? He doesn't understand "choice" as a concept that allows for various reactions to the same stimuli. To him, he is NOT making a choice, he's simply acting in harmony with what is the right thing to do (perfection).

feralboy wrote:

intell wrote: An anomaly? If I refered to everyone on this board who disagrees with my view of the films as an anomaly, I would really be accused of egoism, wouldn't I? Whose definition of the norm is it and why is it so necessary for everyone to conform to it? And who in society thinks this way do you know of? I'd like to hear more of your view of the films as an anomaly. Are you referring to the movies themselves being very different from most of the fluff that Hollywood puts out, or did you mean something else?

Yeah. I meant something else. But I do agree with what you just said.

What I meant is that Archie defines his own view as THE view and everyone else can get in where you fit in. Now in this matrix you have the majority accepting the matrix so the minority becomes an anomaly. If my views became popular on this forum, wouldn't all theories that contradict mine become anomalies? Haha. And should I use every effort to eliminate dissent so that we have harmony like Arc or should I learn to expand my horizons like Oracle?

Quote:

In hindsight, I think what I would have liked to have added is that the Architect would like to eliminate the One as well.

Yeah Hex is right Because the ONE maybe the beginning of more like him (if left unchecked). "We freed more minds in 6 months, than in 6 years." (Hmm, I wonder why that is happening) If their was no dissent from order though, would a savior have as much importance?

Quote:

When's the last time the "screen" Neo's contradict the real Neo? Do they all start to agree near the end? And I wonder if these calculations of Neo's possible responses are constantly updated, even during the course of the conversation.

Very keen of you, FeralBoy! The screens are A.I.'s way of trying to do what we said earlier. - - > Solving the variables of the equation. iow. Demonstrating Neo's possible reactions. As the conversation continues and Neo learns more, the possibilities start to slim down a bit.

"Denial is the most predictable of human responses."

"We already know what you're going to do, don't we?"

Quote:

Perhaps as Neo is learning about the Architect during the conversation, the Architect is also learning about Neo.

Precisely.

Quote:

Smith seems much more willing to destroy everyone and everything (including himself, eventually) to get what he wants. Scary thought.

Yep. The stakes are high. You have the builder, who designs to accomodate other worldviews. And you have the destroyer who eliminates and copies over other worldviews; the smiter (origin of the word, Smith) IS5416!

Quote:

Humans are the Architect's hell, and they just won't conform 100%. Stupid humans!

"What do you think I am? Human?"
As if I'm going to deny what I've learned like the guy you sent me earlier. LOL!

Quote:

What of the humans who marched with the machines for their rights? Would being put in the matrix after the war be just? I don't think so, but nonetheless, we share the same fate, and share the consequences of actions even if we did/do not agree with them.

That's just great. Some people eat the sugar and the rest of us lose our teeth. Sheesh!

think of it more like this... some people launch missles, and the rest of us get blown up. Except it really should read we all get blown up, because the missles are always getting bigger, and are always being pointed at each other.

Black people do all the slave labor, white people become wealthy. Justice, and freedom, can be taken away, and is not garunteed. Although I'm not big on the idea that fighting foreign wars of aggression is somehow protecting my so called freedom. Freedom is fought for... although not always through violence. Of course, the big crux is... do people really want to be free? Or do they want their systems of controll? the friendly illusions or the cold truth? What we deserve and what we recieve are two different things.

Wow, Heads are churning here! Hi all.

In response to the posters original query a major point to notice is that red pills are not killed but released (albeit no care for the release is given). In the case of the dead (naturally - not red pills) they are recycled.

So red pills are not only acknowledged by the system but also unavoidably released, constituting Zion. This is the anomaly. They are following a path intuitively destined toward change that has, is and will yet further become fulfilled prophetically (note Sati). The 'thing' dared dreamed of (Oracle ~ Morpheus) is yet to be fully realised ("He did the imposable!")

It is made clear that those who become aware of the Matrix must possess a rare degree of intuition, sensitivity and questioning nature. Intuition has its origin in something spiritual, inherently derived and is not decerned from natural cognitive thinking. That’s why the Arch can’t get it and even the Oracle admits she is only playing her part, as others.

So red pills are ‘splintered’ with what Trinity described as the "Question that drives us" pointing to the Answer being ‘out there’ and is LOOKING FOR YOU. And will find you if you want it to.

Remember Neo died to release those who want out. So it becomes encumbering upon those released having discovered there IS a path, to follow it, like Neo. However, drifting and wandering due to the effects of mankinds downfall are also still inherent.

Inev! Holy crap, man--welcome back! Your presence is completely missed here and I for one am so glad you're back.

I am in complete agreement with you that the path that is followed via intuition--whether you're a human or a program like the Oracle--leads toward change. This change has as its foundation the undoing of what caused man and machine (flesh and spirit) to separate in the first place, as detailed here:

Good to be back bro. Observed the work you mentioned by tozy and vanexel711. Well thought out and produced (great use of Pic’s) nice one you two!

Thanks Inev! Great to have you back.