WEBVTT - From the Vault: Bandersnatch

0:00:05.720 --> 0:00:08.239
<v Speaker 1>Hey, welcome to Stuff to Blow your mind. My name

0:00:08.320 --> 0:00:11.559
<v Speaker 1>is Robert Lamb and I'm Joe McCormick, and it is

0:00:11.600 --> 0:00:14.400
<v Speaker 1>not Saturday, but today we're bringing you an episode from

0:00:14.440 --> 0:00:16.400
<v Speaker 1>the vault. We just had a little bit of time

0:00:16.440 --> 0:00:18.960
<v Speaker 1>off for the holidays and uh, and to get us

0:00:18.960 --> 0:00:21.479
<v Speaker 1>through that time where we're playing some older episodes. But

0:00:21.520 --> 0:00:23.239
<v Speaker 1>this was a really good one and I'm glad we're

0:00:23.239 --> 0:00:25.520
<v Speaker 1>revisiting it or I don't know if I should say myself.

0:00:25.520 --> 0:00:27.120
<v Speaker 1>It was really good. I remember it being a lot

0:00:27.160 --> 0:00:30.560
<v Speaker 1>of fun. Uh. This was from January nine, and it's

0:00:30.560 --> 0:00:33.199
<v Speaker 1>the one we did about band or Snatch. Yeah, this

0:00:33.280 --> 0:00:35.239
<v Speaker 1>was a lot of fun to do. Uh. This of

0:00:35.280 --> 0:00:39.479
<v Speaker 1>course concerns the Black Mirror Choose your Own Adventure style

0:00:40.240 --> 0:00:43.880
<v Speaker 1>episode that you can find on Netflix titled band or Snatch.

0:00:43.960 --> 0:00:47.680
<v Speaker 1>And yeah, it's a discussion of a free will and

0:00:47.720 --> 0:00:51.240
<v Speaker 1>how we make choices, and then also some some very

0:00:51.400 --> 0:00:54.600
<v Speaker 1>episode specific stuff about this, you know, about our experiences

0:00:54.640 --> 0:00:57.639
<v Speaker 1>with band or Snatch, and also I believe we got

0:00:57.640 --> 0:01:01.640
<v Speaker 1>into information collection of bit as well. Oh yeah, but

0:01:01.720 --> 0:01:05.280
<v Speaker 1>I remember one thing about I assumed one reason you

0:01:05.319 --> 0:01:07.920
<v Speaker 1>wanted to replay this one is that Bandersnatch came up

0:01:07.920 --> 0:01:11.039
<v Speaker 1>in our recent episode about how our choices later inform

0:01:11.160 --> 0:01:14.319
<v Speaker 1>what our preferences become. Yes, that was one reason. The

0:01:14.360 --> 0:01:17.520
<v Speaker 1>other reason was that I put most everything else that

0:01:17.560 --> 0:01:21.440
<v Speaker 1>we recorded uh in the last year into the schedule

0:01:21.720 --> 0:01:24.280
<v Speaker 1>for Vault episodes, and I needed something that wasn't there,

0:01:24.319 --> 0:01:28.240
<v Speaker 1>and Bandersnatch had not been assigned yet. Bam, Well we

0:01:28.319 --> 0:01:30.680
<v Speaker 1>hope you enjoy. Oh and just so you know, we

0:01:30.720 --> 0:01:33.600
<v Speaker 1>will be back with more brand new core episodes of

0:01:33.600 --> 0:01:35.720
<v Speaker 1>stuff to blow your mind on Tuesday and Thursday of

0:01:35.760 --> 0:01:38.560
<v Speaker 1>next week. So never fear more core stuff to blow

0:01:38.600 --> 0:01:47.200
<v Speaker 1>your mind on the way. And the banker, inspired with

0:01:47.240 --> 0:01:50.080
<v Speaker 1>a courage so new it was a matter for general remark,

0:01:50.600 --> 0:01:53.760
<v Speaker 1>rushed madly ahead and was lost to their view in

0:01:53.880 --> 0:01:56.880
<v Speaker 1>his zeal to discover the snark. But while he was

0:01:56.920 --> 0:02:01.280
<v Speaker 1>seeking with thymbals and care, a banders match swiftly drew

0:02:01.400 --> 0:02:04.720
<v Speaker 1>nigh and grabbed at the banker, who shrieked in despair,

0:02:04.920 --> 0:02:08.040
<v Speaker 1>for he knew it was useless to fly. He offered

0:02:08.120 --> 0:02:11.760
<v Speaker 1>large discount. He offered a check drawn to bearer for

0:02:11.880 --> 0:02:15.800
<v Speaker 1>seven pounds ten, but the Bandersnatch merely extended its neck

0:02:15.840 --> 0:02:19.640
<v Speaker 1>and grabbed at the banker again without rest or pause,

0:02:19.800 --> 0:02:25.000
<v Speaker 1>while those frumious jaws went savagely snapping around. He skipped,

0:02:25.000 --> 0:02:27.919
<v Speaker 1>and he hopped, and he floundered and flopped till fainting

0:02:27.960 --> 0:02:31.560
<v Speaker 1>he fell to the ground. The Bandersnatch fled as the

0:02:31.600 --> 0:02:35.440
<v Speaker 1>others appeared, led on by that fear stricken yell, and

0:02:35.560 --> 0:02:38.560
<v Speaker 1>the bellman remarked, it is just as I feared and

0:02:38.680 --> 0:02:48.120
<v Speaker 1>solemnly told on his bell Welcome to stuff to blow

0:02:48.160 --> 0:02:57.359
<v Speaker 1>your mind. A production of I Heart Radios has to work. Hey,

0:02:57.440 --> 0:02:59.280
<v Speaker 1>you welcome to stuff to blow your mind. My name

0:02:59.280 --> 0:03:01.880
<v Speaker 1>is Robert Lamb, and I'm Joe McCormick. And Robert, are

0:03:01.880 --> 0:03:05.360
<v Speaker 1>you feeling more frabjous or more frumious today? I guess

0:03:05.360 --> 0:03:09.280
<v Speaker 1>more frumiousis would be my answer. That was, of course

0:03:09.560 --> 0:03:13.120
<v Speaker 1>the poem The Hunting of the Snark by Lewis Carroll,

0:03:14.000 --> 0:03:15.720
<v Speaker 1>But I guess a number of people were probably more

0:03:15.720 --> 0:03:18.919
<v Speaker 1>familiar with the Bandersnatch from another poem by Lewis Carroll,

0:03:19.000 --> 0:03:22.959
<v Speaker 1>that being the jabberwah Jackwaukee. Yes, where the Bandersnatch is

0:03:23.000 --> 0:03:26.760
<v Speaker 1>just alluded to as another monstrous creature that might be

0:03:27.400 --> 0:03:30.120
<v Speaker 1>running around the woods. I love it when a poet

0:03:30.280 --> 0:03:33.680
<v Speaker 1>first name something in a kind of in a in

0:03:33.720 --> 0:03:36.360
<v Speaker 1>a listical kind of way, you know, poem poem as

0:03:36.360 --> 0:03:39.320
<v Speaker 1>a listical uh, and then later it comes through in

0:03:39.360 --> 0:03:41.960
<v Speaker 1>another poem with more force. I think that's sort of

0:03:42.000 --> 0:03:45.920
<v Speaker 1>happened with um with the demo organ, right, Yeah, yeah,

0:03:46.120 --> 0:03:49.000
<v Speaker 1>I think so. And in this case, yeah, the bandersnatch.

0:03:49.080 --> 0:03:50.800
<v Speaker 1>There's not a lot really said about it in the

0:03:51.040 --> 0:03:53.840
<v Speaker 1>writings of Lewis Carroll. Lewis Carroll, by the way, was

0:03:54.080 --> 0:03:57.680
<v Speaker 1>the pen name of Charles Lutwich Dodgson, who lived eighteen

0:03:57.720 --> 0:04:01.600
<v Speaker 1>thirty two through eight, and he first introduced the band

0:04:01.680 --> 0:04:03.840
<v Speaker 1>or snatch again just in a list of creatures that

0:04:03.920 --> 0:04:07.120
<v Speaker 1>might pop up in his eighteen seventy two novel Through

0:04:07.120 --> 0:04:10.640
<v Speaker 1>the Looking Glass in that poem the jabberwocke uh, and

0:04:10.680 --> 0:04:13.320
<v Speaker 1>then pops up again in this eighteen seventy four poem

0:04:13.360 --> 0:04:16.480
<v Speaker 1>that we just read, the Hunting of the Snark, which

0:04:16.640 --> 0:04:18.160
<v Speaker 1>we didn't read the whole of the poem, that was

0:04:18.200 --> 0:04:21.760
<v Speaker 1>just an excerpt from it. I think where the like,

0:04:21.800 --> 0:04:23.760
<v Speaker 1>who's the banker? The banker is one of these people

0:04:23.800 --> 0:04:26.480
<v Speaker 1>who goes on a voyage hunting the snark. I think

0:04:26.520 --> 0:04:29.440
<v Speaker 1>I've read that that poem was has been interpreted by

0:04:29.480 --> 0:04:32.600
<v Speaker 1>some as as metaphorical of you know that it's supposed

0:04:32.600 --> 0:04:34.920
<v Speaker 1>to be an allegory about the search for human happiness

0:04:35.000 --> 0:04:38.400
<v Speaker 1>and contentment. But then also, I think I've heard it

0:04:38.440 --> 0:04:41.479
<v Speaker 1>alleged that the poem actually has no allegorical meaning, that

0:04:41.520 --> 0:04:44.520
<v Speaker 1>it's just it's just kind of silly. Yeah, I mean,

0:04:44.600 --> 0:04:46.640
<v Speaker 1>in that sense, it's kind of enigmatic. And the creature

0:04:46.680 --> 0:04:51.200
<v Speaker 1>itself is enigmatic, scarcely described, but certainly best avoided at

0:04:51.240 --> 0:04:53.720
<v Speaker 1>all costs. There's no way to outrun it, no way

0:04:53.800 --> 0:04:57.400
<v Speaker 1>to escape its intensity. Uh. And by the way, frumious

0:04:57.839 --> 0:05:01.080
<v Speaker 1>is a combination of fuming and fear. Us Carroll just

0:05:01.160 --> 0:05:03.520
<v Speaker 1>grand these two words together to make a nice new

0:05:03.600 --> 0:05:07.800
<v Speaker 1>adjective for strange monster is a perfectly cromulent word. Very

0:05:07.839 --> 0:05:10.640
<v Speaker 1>frabjous um. And I was wondering, do you need a

0:05:10.720 --> 0:05:13.599
<v Speaker 1>vorpal sword if you go up against a bandersnatch or

0:05:13.680 --> 0:05:16.000
<v Speaker 1>is that only for the jabberwock What certainly worked on

0:05:16.040 --> 0:05:18.400
<v Speaker 1>the jabberwockie. I don't know about the band or snatch.

0:05:18.480 --> 0:05:20.640
<v Speaker 1>There's there are no tales of slaying it, are there,

0:05:20.720 --> 0:05:23.920
<v Speaker 1>at least not in Lewis Carroll's original work. Does the

0:05:24.000 --> 0:05:26.400
<v Speaker 1>vorpal sword show up as an artifact in D and D?

0:05:26.680 --> 0:05:30.440
<v Speaker 1>It does, it certainly does. Yeah. Um, pretty good sword.

0:05:30.760 --> 0:05:35.040
<v Speaker 1>Oh yeah, very good sword. Now. The name Bandersnatch has

0:05:35.040 --> 0:05:37.359
<v Speaker 1>been invoked many times over the years and works of

0:05:37.400 --> 0:05:40.800
<v Speaker 1>fantasy and science fiction. I've seen it pop up as

0:05:40.839 --> 0:05:44.480
<v Speaker 1>a space slug, another such creature. Sometimes it's just kind

0:05:44.520 --> 0:05:48.800
<v Speaker 1>of an enigmatic name for like a government project or something. Uh,

0:05:49.080 --> 0:05:51.800
<v Speaker 1>because it's a great it's a great name. In depictions

0:05:51.800 --> 0:05:53.960
<v Speaker 1>of Lewis Carroll's work, it is often take on a

0:05:54.120 --> 0:05:59.320
<v Speaker 1>mammalian character. Nineteen century children's illustrator Peter Newell depicted it

0:05:59.360 --> 0:06:02.560
<v Speaker 1>as kind of a furry, horned beast that might resemble

0:06:02.600 --> 0:06:05.400
<v Speaker 1>a cat or maybe a wolf like creature. Uh. And

0:06:05.440 --> 0:06:08.200
<v Speaker 1>this one. This is a very popular image. And then

0:06:08.200 --> 0:06:11.440
<v Speaker 1>film adaptations have depicted it as both bor like and

0:06:11.640 --> 0:06:15.520
<v Speaker 1>cat like. The two thousand ten Tim Burton adaptation has

0:06:15.680 --> 0:06:19.240
<v Speaker 1>a very memorable creature design for the Bandersnatch. Tim the

0:06:19.279 --> 0:06:22.360
<v Speaker 1>Tim Burton Alice in Wonderland. Is that what you're talking about? Yeah, yeah,

0:06:22.480 --> 0:06:24.719
<v Speaker 1>I have. I've seen the first one. Um, I never

0:06:24.800 --> 0:06:30.400
<v Speaker 1>ventured that far into late Burton. Well it it had

0:06:30.480 --> 0:06:33.200
<v Speaker 1>some things going for it. It had a really good cast,

0:06:33.279 --> 0:06:36.880
<v Speaker 1>and it had some some interesting character designs, I'll say that,

0:06:37.240 --> 0:06:41.880
<v Speaker 1>and and a very monstrous looking bandersnatch. Now, just a

0:06:41.880 --> 0:06:46.440
<v Speaker 1>couple of other interesting tidbits about Lewis Carroll. Um. He

0:06:46.520 --> 0:06:50.080
<v Speaker 1>was a mathematician. He worked in geometry and new ideas

0:06:50.080 --> 0:06:54.599
<v Speaker 1>in algebra, logic, machines, ciphers. So between this and other

0:06:54.600 --> 0:06:56.920
<v Speaker 1>details of of his life, there's a lot of black

0:06:57.000 --> 0:07:02.200
<v Speaker 1>mirror to the originator of the bander snatch. Also in Hallucinations,

0:07:02.560 --> 0:07:05.680
<v Speaker 1>the book by Oliver Sacks, the Late Oliver Sax, Sax

0:07:05.760 --> 0:07:09.200
<v Speaker 1>points out that Carol was known to suffer from classical migraines,

0:07:09.720 --> 0:07:13.280
<v Speaker 1>and that Carol W. Lippman and others have suggested that

0:07:13.360 --> 0:07:19.840
<v Speaker 1>his migraine experiences, uh may have contributed to the way

0:07:19.840 --> 0:07:23.120
<v Speaker 1>he envisioned through the Looking Glass and Alice in Wonderland,

0:07:23.160 --> 0:07:27.320
<v Speaker 1>like the skewing of time and space. Um. Also, you

0:07:27.360 --> 0:07:30.520
<v Speaker 1>have auditory hallucinations that are not uncommon in migraines, as

0:07:30.520 --> 0:07:34.480
<v Speaker 1>well as olfactory hallucinations. I've also seen descriptions of of

0:07:35.320 --> 0:07:40.520
<v Speaker 1>this lifting feeling, that this feeling of being moved through space. Uh. Yeah,

0:07:40.560 --> 0:07:43.200
<v Speaker 1>I guess the the extension of the lightheadedness that comes

0:07:43.240 --> 0:07:46.600
<v Speaker 1>on with the aura and all that. Yeah. Um, you know,

0:07:46.640 --> 0:07:49.560
<v Speaker 1>there's actually an asteroid named Bandersnatch. Oh. I didn't know

0:07:49.600 --> 0:07:52.480
<v Speaker 1>this and I looked this up. Bander Snatch. It's a

0:07:52.520 --> 0:07:55.480
<v Speaker 1>Main Belt asteroid, so it's out beyond the orbit of Mars,

0:07:55.720 --> 0:08:00.640
<v Speaker 1>discovered in nineteen by Japanese astronomers Takashi Urata and Yasuhiro

0:08:01.000 --> 0:08:04.840
<v Speaker 1>Shimizu at the Nazi Katsura Observatory and it was named,

0:08:04.840 --> 0:08:09.160
<v Speaker 1>of course after the Fermius Bandersnatch. Awesome. Now, one of

0:08:09.200 --> 0:08:11.800
<v Speaker 1>the this is just sort of the introductory material on

0:08:11.840 --> 0:08:15.240
<v Speaker 1>the Bandersnatch because for the vast majority of this episode

0:08:15.520 --> 0:08:17.920
<v Speaker 1>we're going to be talking about what, as I guess,

0:08:17.960 --> 0:08:23.600
<v Speaker 1>the most recent uh cinematic in vocation of the Bandersnatch,

0:08:23.960 --> 0:08:27.760
<v Speaker 1>and that is the Black Mirror episode. It's not even

0:08:28.120 --> 0:08:31.240
<v Speaker 1>an episode, it's a Black Mirror film that came out

0:08:31.240 --> 0:08:34.959
<v Speaker 1>on Netflix December of what was theeen so a little

0:08:34.960 --> 0:08:38.400
<v Speaker 1>over a year ago. Um and uh, and there's a

0:08:38.440 --> 0:08:41.120
<v Speaker 1>lot to unpack here. I actually didn't watch it until

0:08:41.160 --> 0:08:43.160
<v Speaker 1>this week, so I knew you wanted to do an

0:08:43.160 --> 0:08:45.200
<v Speaker 1>episode about it, and I was like, okay, I'll finally

0:08:45.200 --> 0:08:48.000
<v Speaker 1>see what all the fuss is about. I was very impressed. Yeah,

0:08:48.600 --> 0:08:51.559
<v Speaker 1>I'll get I'll certainly get more into my my very

0:08:51.600 --> 0:08:53.439
<v Speaker 1>thoughts on it later. I was impressed with it when

0:08:53.480 --> 0:08:55.360
<v Speaker 1>it came out, and then since we were going to

0:08:55.440 --> 0:08:58.000
<v Speaker 1>do the episode, I rewatched it for the first time

0:08:58.160 --> 0:09:02.040
<v Speaker 1>since its original release earlier this week, and uh, and

0:09:02.360 --> 0:09:03.959
<v Speaker 1>I have to say it, I thought it held up.

0:09:04.320 --> 0:09:07.120
<v Speaker 1>I even got a different ending and a different dead

0:09:07.200 --> 0:09:10.160
<v Speaker 1>end at one point than I had encountered previously. So

0:09:10.440 --> 0:09:12.800
<v Speaker 1>it was it was like, why every time you watch

0:09:12.840 --> 0:09:16.120
<v Speaker 1>a film that you like again you find new things,

0:09:16.480 --> 0:09:20.000
<v Speaker 1>but in this case you can actually get a different ending. Yeah,

0:09:20.040 --> 0:09:22.000
<v Speaker 1>now we're going to be exploring today some of the

0:09:22.280 --> 0:09:25.000
<v Speaker 1>some of the science and the ideas and philosophy that

0:09:25.080 --> 0:09:28.160
<v Speaker 1>are alluded to in band or snatch Um. But in

0:09:28.240 --> 0:09:31.200
<v Speaker 1>doing so, of course, this will involve some spoilers for

0:09:31.240 --> 0:09:34.439
<v Speaker 1>this strange film. So I would say there are a

0:09:34.480 --> 0:09:36.280
<v Speaker 1>couple of places we're not We're not gonna go through

0:09:36.320 --> 0:09:39.240
<v Speaker 1>and explore every possible ending or anything like that. But

0:09:39.400 --> 0:09:42.120
<v Speaker 1>if you are in the case where you haven't seen

0:09:42.160 --> 0:09:44.640
<v Speaker 1>it yet and you don't want anything at all spoiled,

0:09:44.679 --> 0:09:47.200
<v Speaker 1>you should probably stop here and go watch it first

0:09:47.200 --> 0:09:48.880
<v Speaker 1>before you listen to the rest of the episode. But

0:09:49.360 --> 0:09:51.400
<v Speaker 1>if you've already seen it, or you haven't seen it,

0:09:51.400 --> 0:09:53.480
<v Speaker 1>and you don't care about minor spoilers that don't go

0:09:53.520 --> 0:09:55.800
<v Speaker 1>all the way to all the endings, then you know,

0:09:55.880 --> 0:09:58.280
<v Speaker 1>forge ahead with us. Please. However, some of you may

0:09:58.320 --> 0:10:00.560
<v Speaker 1>be asking the question, well, what are you talking about?

0:10:00.600 --> 0:10:03.160
<v Speaker 1>What is Black Mirror? Uh? So we should probably take

0:10:03.160 --> 0:10:05.880
<v Speaker 1>a few minutes to just refresh you on what this is.

0:10:06.800 --> 0:10:09.160
<v Speaker 1>It is a is the word refresh? Would that be

0:10:09.200 --> 0:10:14.480
<v Speaker 1>the word? We should shock you to the bone? Alright?

0:10:14.520 --> 0:10:18.959
<v Speaker 1>So Black Mirror is in essence a sci fi anthology

0:10:19.000 --> 0:10:22.800
<v Speaker 1>television series. Uh, in the same vein as the Twilight Zone,

0:10:22.920 --> 0:10:25.719
<v Speaker 1>the Outer Limits, uh, these various shows we've discussed in

0:10:25.760 --> 0:10:30.120
<v Speaker 1>the past. I might call it pretty often techno horror.

0:10:30.200 --> 0:10:33.960
<v Speaker 1>Not every episode is the same, but there's essentially no

0:10:34.600 --> 0:10:38.520
<v Speaker 1>horror movie as scary as the scariest episodes of Black Mirror,

0:10:39.760 --> 0:10:44.760
<v Speaker 1>especially the ones that managed to take fairly plausible technological

0:10:44.800 --> 0:10:48.880
<v Speaker 1>scenarios and and follow them to their logical conclusions. I mean,

0:10:49.000 --> 0:10:52.280
<v Speaker 1>it's a it's a show that's very good at conjuring

0:10:52.360 --> 0:10:56.120
<v Speaker 1>up the worst possible nightmares of like the intersection of

0:10:56.920 --> 0:11:02.080
<v Speaker 1>capitalism and technology. Yeah, definitely, episodes tend to have a

0:11:02.120 --> 0:11:06.240
<v Speaker 1>technological swing to the story, and they tend to deal

0:11:06.320 --> 0:11:12.559
<v Speaker 1>on some level with with contemporary anxiety about current technology

0:11:12.559 --> 0:11:16.400
<v Speaker 1>and emerging technology. What what what are these technologies doing

0:11:16.440 --> 0:11:18.920
<v Speaker 1>to our lives? What may they do to our lives

0:11:18.920 --> 0:11:22.080
<v Speaker 1>in the future? And you know, sometimes they take varying

0:11:22.120 --> 0:11:25.520
<v Speaker 1>speculative leaps there, of course, since it is science fiction.

0:11:26.160 --> 0:11:28.880
<v Speaker 1>But you, I would say, you typically leave an episode

0:11:28.920 --> 0:11:32.120
<v Speaker 1>of Black Mirror, uh, feeling a little worse about the world.

0:11:32.200 --> 0:11:35.600
<v Speaker 1>I know that Netflix, their current masters, are very into

0:11:35.600 --> 0:11:38.319
<v Speaker 1>the whole binge model, but I personally find it very

0:11:38.320 --> 0:11:42.920
<v Speaker 1>difficult to binge Black Mirror, in part because each episode,

0:11:42.960 --> 0:11:46.280
<v Speaker 1>of course, is a self contained story with its with

0:11:46.440 --> 0:11:49.960
<v Speaker 1>with characters and applaud etcetera. But then also it's like

0:11:50.400 --> 0:11:52.200
<v Speaker 1>they're often like a punch in the gut, and I

0:11:52.320 --> 0:11:55.240
<v Speaker 1>just can't just set there and take one punch after

0:11:55.280 --> 0:11:58.360
<v Speaker 1>the other. Apart from one very sweet, very nice episode,

0:11:58.360 --> 0:12:01.319
<v Speaker 1>there's essentially nothing that makes me feel as bad as

0:12:01.360 --> 0:12:04.959
<v Speaker 1>Black Mirror. Well, you know, I was thinking, I was

0:12:05.000 --> 0:12:07.120
<v Speaker 1>thinking about this because there are definitely some very bleak

0:12:07.160 --> 0:12:10.600
<v Speaker 1>episode there episodes of Black Mirror that I admire that

0:12:10.679 --> 0:12:14.600
<v Speaker 1>I will never watch again. But but then I look

0:12:14.640 --> 0:12:16.840
<v Speaker 1>back at my some of my favorite episodes. My favorite

0:12:16.840 --> 0:12:20.600
<v Speaker 1>episodes are probably San Junipero, The U S. S. Calister,

0:12:21.080 --> 0:12:24.360
<v Speaker 1>and metal Head. Two of those. One of those is

0:12:24.360 --> 0:12:26.800
<v Speaker 1>still pretty bleak, but two of two of those are

0:12:26.800 --> 0:12:30.520
<v Speaker 1>actually pretty upbeat, probably the most upbeat episodes of the show.

0:12:31.080 --> 0:12:33.920
<v Speaker 1>Um and uh. And maybe that's the reason I would

0:12:33.920 --> 0:12:36.080
<v Speaker 1>come back to them, because if I'm gonna double dip,

0:12:36.080 --> 0:12:38.840
<v Speaker 1>I want to double dip for optimism sake. Now, in

0:12:38.920 --> 0:12:40.760
<v Speaker 1>terms that, we can't talk about Black Mirror without talking

0:12:40.760 --> 0:12:46.640
<v Speaker 1>about the creator behind it, the main creative individual behind it,

0:12:46.679 --> 0:12:50.120
<v Speaker 1>and that is Charlie Brooker, a British writer and humorist

0:12:50.520 --> 0:12:53.320
<v Speaker 1>whom the earliest thing that he worked on it I

0:12:53.320 --> 0:12:55.679
<v Speaker 1>was familiar with was that he worked on Chris Morris's

0:12:55.720 --> 0:12:59.679
<v Speaker 1>excellent news satire Brass Eye. Um. And then he also

0:12:59.760 --> 0:13:03.720
<v Speaker 1>create did a pretty great zombie movie titled Dead Set

0:13:03.760 --> 0:13:07.320
<v Speaker 1>in two thousand eight, in which the zombie apocalypse breaks

0:13:07.360 --> 0:13:11.439
<v Speaker 1>out uh in and around a Big Brother style reality

0:13:11.480 --> 0:13:14.880
<v Speaker 1>TV production. Feel like two thousand eight was sort of

0:13:14.920 --> 0:13:17.200
<v Speaker 1>like maybe two thousand seven. Two thousand eight was like

0:13:17.280 --> 0:13:21.400
<v Speaker 1>peak zombie satire movie. Yeah. And the thing about this one, though,

0:13:21.920 --> 0:13:25.120
<v Speaker 1>the premise sounds like a comedy, and so I acquired

0:13:25.160 --> 0:13:27.400
<v Speaker 1>a copy of it, thinking, oh, this is a comedy

0:13:27.440 --> 0:13:29.319
<v Speaker 1>and this is a guy that worked on brass Ie.

0:13:29.679 --> 0:13:32.719
<v Speaker 1>This is gonna be hilarious. And it is not a

0:13:32.800 --> 0:13:35.760
<v Speaker 1>straight up comedy. It is a pretty terrifying film. But

0:13:35.920 --> 0:13:38.720
<v Speaker 1>you see shades of that in Black Mirror. Sometimes there

0:13:38.800 --> 0:13:43.320
<v Speaker 1>is a premise that could sound like a joke, but

0:13:43.440 --> 0:13:47.840
<v Speaker 1>then it is taken and considered with such intensity that

0:13:47.920 --> 0:13:50.720
<v Speaker 1>it works. Yeah, what if like a major tech company

0:13:51.120 --> 0:13:54.120
<v Speaker 1>used eye tracking software to make sure you were always

0:13:54.160 --> 0:13:56.720
<v Speaker 1>watching their ads, and if you didn't watch them, they

0:13:56.760 --> 0:14:00.160
<v Speaker 1>would ring sirens in your brain and deduct money them

0:14:00.160 --> 0:14:02.800
<v Speaker 1>your bank account until you started watching the ads. Again,

0:14:03.400 --> 0:14:05.520
<v Speaker 1>sounds like a joke, but like if you just said

0:14:05.600 --> 0:14:08.000
<v Speaker 1>take that seriously for a bit, uh and explore it,

0:14:08.000 --> 0:14:12.320
<v Speaker 1>that becomes like a nightmare of of of techno sci fi.

0:14:12.520 --> 0:14:17.360
<v Speaker 1>Absolutely now. Black Mirror began in two seasons and a

0:14:17.360 --> 0:14:20.120
<v Speaker 1>holiday special came out and ran on Channel four in

0:14:20.160 --> 0:14:24.280
<v Speaker 1>the UK. Then Netflix started carrying it and Netflix became

0:14:24.640 --> 0:14:27.600
<v Speaker 1>the owner of the main publisher of the program. However,

0:14:27.600 --> 0:14:29.520
<v Speaker 1>you want to look at it starting with season three

0:14:29.600 --> 0:14:33.520
<v Speaker 1>in October. All in all, it is thus far gone

0:14:33.600 --> 0:14:37.680
<v Speaker 1>five seasons, twenty one episodes, and that's not counting the

0:14:37.720 --> 0:14:41.640
<v Speaker 1>film Bandersnatch, which again came out in December. Of these

0:14:41.680 --> 0:14:44.840
<v Speaker 1>bits of publisher information will actually become relevant later on

0:14:44.880 --> 0:14:47.880
<v Speaker 1>as we discussed the story, because the the ideas there,

0:14:48.160 --> 0:14:50.040
<v Speaker 1>because at the end we definitely get into some citiz

0:14:50.040 --> 0:14:52.840
<v Speaker 1>scenarios where we have to consider the fact that Netflix

0:14:52.960 --> 0:14:56.960
<v Speaker 1>is the the business daddy behind the Black Mirror, so

0:14:57.120 --> 0:15:01.160
<v Speaker 1>Bandersnatch the film. The Black Mirror film is actually directed

0:15:01.160 --> 0:15:03.160
<v Speaker 1>by David Slade, who I was like, where do I

0:15:03.200 --> 0:15:05.560
<v Speaker 1>know that name from. He's done several things, but one

0:15:05.640 --> 0:15:09.160
<v Speaker 1>of them was he did one of the Twilight movies. Yes,

0:15:09.200 --> 0:15:11.120
<v Speaker 1>and I've seen that, that particular one. It was the

0:15:11.200 --> 0:15:14.280
<v Speaker 1>second one, I think, and it's that's a I'm not

0:15:14.360 --> 0:15:17.320
<v Speaker 1>a huge Twilight fan, but that is a very watchable

0:15:17.320 --> 0:15:19.520
<v Speaker 1>Twilight movie and it has a great soundtrack. It's got

0:15:19.520 --> 0:15:22.880
<v Speaker 1>Tom York on it. Oh yeah. He also directed the

0:15:22.960 --> 0:15:25.760
<v Speaker 1>Black Mirror episode metal Head that I alluded to earlier,

0:15:26.000 --> 0:15:28.560
<v Speaker 1>and there are some callbacks to metal Head in the

0:15:28.600 --> 0:15:31.080
<v Speaker 1>band or Snatch episode. Now, I guess one thing we

0:15:31.120 --> 0:15:33.840
<v Speaker 1>haven't gotten fully into so far is the fact that

0:15:34.480 --> 0:15:38.480
<v Speaker 1>the Black Mirror movie Bandersnatch is it's an interactive movie,

0:15:38.560 --> 0:15:41.080
<v Speaker 1>which makes it very unique. Right, This was the big

0:15:41.120 --> 0:15:43.840
<v Speaker 1>selling point on it and and and indeed is one

0:15:43.840 --> 0:15:46.320
<v Speaker 1>of the I mean, it's it's a key part of

0:15:46.360 --> 0:15:48.240
<v Speaker 1>the way you consume it, but it is also very

0:15:48.280 --> 0:15:52.600
<v Speaker 1>important thematically, like you know, true to form. The creators

0:15:52.640 --> 0:15:56.160
<v Speaker 1>here really thought long and hard about how to utilize

0:15:56.640 --> 0:16:01.480
<v Speaker 1>um an interactive system, uh within the work and make

0:16:01.520 --> 0:16:04.720
<v Speaker 1>the work comment on that system as well. The interactive

0:16:04.720 --> 0:16:07.280
<v Speaker 1>system being Netflix, like the fact that the user can

0:16:07.280 --> 0:16:09.880
<v Speaker 1>make inputs on the movie. Yeah, basically that's what it

0:16:09.880 --> 0:16:12.880
<v Speaker 1>will amounts to. Is you you start off watching it, it

0:16:12.800 --> 0:16:17.760
<v Speaker 1>it seems like a normal Netflix presentation, but then you're

0:16:17.800 --> 0:16:22.200
<v Speaker 1>in my case, my Xbox one controller would suddenly vibrate

0:16:22.680 --> 0:16:25.440
<v Speaker 1>and then this little the screen at the bottom of

0:16:25.480 --> 0:16:28.400
<v Speaker 1>the screen. You're suddenly presented with two choices and a

0:16:28.480 --> 0:16:31.760
<v Speaker 1>timer and you have to choose, Uh, you know what

0:16:31.920 --> 0:16:33.760
<v Speaker 1>is going to happen with the character is going to do,

0:16:34.000 --> 0:16:37.520
<v Speaker 1>et cetera. Now, this is you know, when you just

0:16:37.680 --> 0:16:40.360
<v Speaker 1>watching checking out the film, you you might not realize

0:16:40.400 --> 0:16:44.200
<v Speaker 1>how much work goes into this, but it took apparently

0:16:44.320 --> 0:16:46.960
<v Speaker 1>a huge amount of work to shoot all these various

0:16:46.960 --> 0:16:51.080
<v Speaker 1>branching paths, because it becomes a you know this this,

0:16:51.080 --> 0:16:54.800
<v Speaker 1>this tree, this branching system of possibilities when you start

0:16:55.240 --> 0:17:00.320
<v Speaker 1>presenting the user with these interactive choices. For instance, the

0:17:00.320 --> 0:17:02.600
<v Speaker 1>the previously the longest episode of Black Mirror was an

0:17:02.600 --> 0:17:06.120
<v Speaker 1>episode called Hated in the Nation, which was eighty nine

0:17:06.119 --> 0:17:09.600
<v Speaker 1>minutes long. That's that's future length, right, what ninety minutes

0:17:09.680 --> 0:17:14.000
<v Speaker 1>is usually the length you shoot for with the sure film. Well,

0:17:14.359 --> 0:17:17.800
<v Speaker 1>when you're watching the Band or Snatch, depending on your choices,

0:17:18.160 --> 0:17:21.680
<v Speaker 1>the film can run anywhere between ninety minutes and two

0:17:21.680 --> 0:17:25.439
<v Speaker 1>and a half hours. And in order to make this work,

0:17:26.160 --> 0:17:30.200
<v Speaker 1>as pointed out by a Jackie Strausse in the Hollywood Reporter, uh,

0:17:30.240 --> 0:17:32.639
<v Speaker 1>this means they had to shoot like five hours of

0:17:32.680 --> 0:17:35.480
<v Speaker 1>footage so that they could actually cover all of these

0:17:35.560 --> 0:17:39.000
<v Speaker 1>various choices. And you may watch it like, for instance,

0:17:39.280 --> 0:17:41.359
<v Speaker 1>the first time I watched it, there were plenty of

0:17:41.400 --> 0:17:43.960
<v Speaker 1>scenes I did not see, And then when I watched

0:17:43.960 --> 0:17:45.960
<v Speaker 1>it again, there were films there were scenes that I

0:17:45.960 --> 0:17:47.879
<v Speaker 1>saw the first time that I did not see, and

0:17:47.960 --> 0:17:50.560
<v Speaker 1>I got an entirely different ending that I never didn't

0:17:50.560 --> 0:17:53.119
<v Speaker 1>even know about. And then there, of course various Easter

0:17:53.200 --> 0:17:56.679
<v Speaker 1>eggs and even I've read quote golden Easter eggs that

0:17:56.720 --> 0:17:59.720
<v Speaker 1>are spread throughout things that most viewers will not find.

0:17:59.880 --> 0:18:03.000
<v Speaker 1>Must they spend a great deal of time going through

0:18:03.080 --> 0:18:06.439
<v Speaker 1>and going back through and backing up, etcetera, with this

0:18:06.520 --> 0:18:11.040
<v Speaker 1>interactive piece encouraging unhealthy obsessive behavior exactly, I mean it

0:18:11.119 --> 0:18:13.199
<v Speaker 1>is it is black mirror. Now, as far as the

0:18:13.280 --> 0:18:17.120
<v Speaker 1>choices as you make in the in band or snatch um,

0:18:18.119 --> 0:18:22.080
<v Speaker 1>you start off making very small choices. It seemed very consequential.

0:18:22.280 --> 0:18:26.840
<v Speaker 1>For instance, uh, choosing the main characters breakfast cereal he's

0:18:26.840 --> 0:18:30.160
<v Speaker 1>presented his father shows two boxes and you decide which

0:18:30.200 --> 0:18:31.960
<v Speaker 1>one he's going to have for breakfast. Yeah. I think

0:18:31.960 --> 0:18:34.680
<v Speaker 1>it was what like frosted flakes or sugar puffs or something.

0:18:34.720 --> 0:18:37.119
<v Speaker 1>I remember what I realized after I made that choice

0:18:37.720 --> 0:18:39.879
<v Speaker 1>was I was like, oh, no, I think I chose

0:18:39.920 --> 0:18:43.200
<v Speaker 1>the brand that I was more familiar with. Ah, well,

0:18:43.320 --> 0:18:45.320
<v Speaker 1>we'll come back to that later. That that is an

0:18:45.320 --> 0:18:47.919
<v Speaker 1>important point that will come back to later on in

0:18:47.920 --> 0:18:50.920
<v Speaker 1>the episode. But but at first, it's it's what kind

0:18:50.920 --> 0:18:52.880
<v Speaker 1>of serial does he want all right, it doesn't doesn't

0:18:52.880 --> 0:18:54.720
<v Speaker 1>seem to matter much, and and it also gives you

0:18:54.760 --> 0:18:58.639
<v Speaker 1>a chance to try out the technology low stakes. But uh.

0:18:58.960 --> 0:19:01.560
<v Speaker 1>And then also later on you choose what music is

0:19:01.560 --> 0:19:04.399
<v Speaker 1>going to listen to in uh, when he's on the bus,

0:19:04.600 --> 0:19:05.960
<v Speaker 1>which is kind of fun. I think you get to

0:19:06.040 --> 0:19:10.640
<v Speaker 1>choose between a rhythmic song and something else. I can't

0:19:10.640 --> 0:19:14.320
<v Speaker 1>remember the other one. I think it's Thompson Twins, that's it. Yeah,

0:19:14.359 --> 0:19:16.320
<v Speaker 1>And and uh, and then later on he's in a

0:19:16.400 --> 0:19:18.440
<v Speaker 1>record store and you get to choose which record he's

0:19:18.440 --> 0:19:20.479
<v Speaker 1>gonna buy. And this is also pretty great because one

0:19:20.480 --> 0:19:25.240
<v Speaker 1>of the choices is Tangerine Dreams excellent nine four album Phaedra,

0:19:25.480 --> 0:19:28.399
<v Speaker 1>which is incredible. Absolutely. In fact, I was listening to

0:19:28.440 --> 0:19:31.680
<v Speaker 1>that again this morning while I was doing some prep

0:19:31.720 --> 0:19:34.679
<v Speaker 1>for this episode. Yeah, it's it's excellent stuff. However, this

0:19:34.760 --> 0:19:38.360
<v Speaker 1>time around, I forced myself to choose the other album instead,

0:19:38.720 --> 0:19:42.600
<v Speaker 1>the other album being a Sao Tamita's The Bermuda Triangle,

0:19:43.080 --> 0:19:46.840
<v Speaker 1>which very strange, Yeah, very strange work, but very very good.

0:19:46.880 --> 0:19:49.359
<v Speaker 1>I was really not that familiar with with with this

0:19:49.480 --> 0:19:51.600
<v Speaker 1>artist or this work, which is apparently kind of hard

0:19:51.600 --> 0:19:53.879
<v Speaker 1>to come by on streaming unless you just find like

0:19:53.880 --> 0:19:56.920
<v Speaker 1>a YouTube full album rip. But but yeah, this is

0:19:56.960 --> 0:19:59.680
<v Speaker 1>just a taste of the soundtrack. The Bandersnach is a

0:19:59.680 --> 0:20:03.800
<v Speaker 1>wonderfu soundtrack, including not only these artists but also Depeche Mode,

0:20:03.920 --> 0:20:07.760
<v Speaker 1>Laurie Anderson. Great stuff. But let's come back to the

0:20:07.840 --> 0:20:11.800
<v Speaker 1>choices you make in this interactive system. So again, they

0:20:11.840 --> 0:20:15.840
<v Speaker 1>start off seeming largely inconsequential. They start off seeming a

0:20:15.840 --> 0:20:18.520
<v Speaker 1>little bit fun, you know, it's just surface level stuff

0:20:18.520 --> 0:20:20.960
<v Speaker 1>like what what's his breakfast cereal? What's his musical choice?

0:20:21.280 --> 0:20:25.160
<v Speaker 1>But then they become increasingly high stakes and even nerve

0:20:25.280 --> 0:20:28.320
<v Speaker 1>racking to decide on, Like suddenly you're when you're controller

0:20:28.680 --> 0:20:32.560
<v Speaker 1>vibrates and you're presented with this choice, and sometimes you

0:20:32.600 --> 0:20:34.800
<v Speaker 1>feel this dread because sometimes the choice is neither one

0:20:34.840 --> 0:20:37.800
<v Speaker 1>is all that great. Sometimes the choices are kind of horrible.

0:20:38.160 --> 0:20:41.399
<v Speaker 1>And there's at least one point where you have no choice.

0:20:41.440 --> 0:20:44.680
<v Speaker 1>There's there's something to select, but there's no alternative selection,

0:20:45.119 --> 0:20:48.240
<v Speaker 1>and that feels maddening as well. And and you have

0:20:48.280 --> 0:20:49.720
<v Speaker 1>a time or you have like what I think it's

0:20:49.720 --> 0:20:52.560
<v Speaker 1>ten seconds to choose something, and if you don't choose,

0:20:52.680 --> 0:20:57.480
<v Speaker 1>Netflix chooses for you. But Netflix reports of viewers actively

0:20:57.560 --> 0:21:01.040
<v Speaker 1>made choices uh when they watch band or Snatch. Now,

0:21:01.080 --> 0:21:03.840
<v Speaker 1>in my experience, it wasn't that they chose for you

0:21:03.880 --> 0:21:06.360
<v Speaker 1>at random. It was that whichever one of the two

0:21:06.440 --> 0:21:08.760
<v Speaker 1>options was highlighted, and it was like a you know,

0:21:08.920 --> 0:21:12.040
<v Speaker 1>on off toggle, like you couldn't select neither one. You

0:21:12.080 --> 0:21:14.240
<v Speaker 1>were just selecting one or the other, and then you

0:21:14.240 --> 0:21:16.560
<v Speaker 1>could and you could go with it, or you could

0:21:16.560 --> 0:21:19.040
<v Speaker 1>not go with it, and whichever one you had highlighted

0:21:19.080 --> 0:21:23.400
<v Speaker 1>would just proceed. So there's this kind of um uh,

0:21:23.440 --> 0:21:27.040
<v Speaker 1>there's this horrible sense of like helplessness that that imposes

0:21:27.040 --> 0:21:30.399
<v Speaker 1>on you as the viewer. I have not seen it.

0:21:30.480 --> 0:21:32.560
<v Speaker 1>Sometimes I'll go into a restaurant or a bar and

0:21:32.640 --> 0:21:35.960
<v Speaker 1>they'll have Netflix on playing some show. I've never seen

0:21:36.040 --> 0:21:40.560
<v Speaker 1>them showing Bandersnatch, probably for this reason, letting all the

0:21:40.560 --> 0:21:43.119
<v Speaker 1>bar patrends vote to the side, well yeah, or just

0:21:43.200 --> 0:21:45.840
<v Speaker 1>going crazy like why is nobody clicking the button? Why

0:21:45.880 --> 0:21:48.159
<v Speaker 1>is nobody interacting with this? Don't let don't let that

0:21:48.240 --> 0:21:51.840
<v Speaker 1>choice go through. So eventually, as you as you interact

0:21:51.960 --> 0:21:54.720
<v Speaker 1>with Bandersnatch, a warping of time occurs as you find

0:21:54.760 --> 0:21:58.080
<v Speaker 1>yourself coming back around to pass choices like a wanderer

0:21:58.359 --> 0:22:01.359
<v Speaker 1>lost in a maze, and of course, befitting of a maze,

0:22:01.560 --> 0:22:03.399
<v Speaker 1>there is a sort of minotaur in all of this.

0:22:03.520 --> 0:22:07.159
<v Speaker 1>There is the Bandersnatch. Wait is it the Bandersnatch or

0:22:07.200 --> 0:22:09.919
<v Speaker 1>is it the Demon Packs? It is even packs? Yeah,

0:22:09.960 --> 0:22:13.360
<v Speaker 1>but I also it is also the Bandersnatch. Like it's design.

0:22:13.920 --> 0:22:17.199
<v Speaker 1>Its design is roughly based on that illustration of the

0:22:17.160 --> 0:22:20.120
<v Speaker 1>Bandersnatch we talked about. Okay, cool, all right, We're gonna

0:22:20.119 --> 0:22:22.040
<v Speaker 1>take a quick break, but when we come back we

0:22:22.080 --> 0:22:25.199
<v Speaker 1>will get into the themes of Bandersnatch and into the

0:22:25.359 --> 0:22:31.800
<v Speaker 1>nature of of choice and free will. Alright, we're back.

0:22:32.320 --> 0:22:35.879
<v Speaker 1>So there are a lot of interesting ideas, cool themes,

0:22:36.359 --> 0:22:40.439
<v Speaker 1>historical tidbits that are thrown together, We're not thrown together,

0:22:41.240 --> 0:22:45.560
<v Speaker 1>stitched together, reassembled in band or snatch that give it

0:22:45.560 --> 0:22:48.240
<v Speaker 1>its unique feel. Here's just a list of some of

0:22:48.240 --> 0:22:52.480
<v Speaker 1>the things. First of all, video game design circa four

0:22:52.560 --> 0:22:55.520
<v Speaker 1>because that is the setting. Yeah, it takes place in

0:22:55.560 --> 0:22:58.520
<v Speaker 1>the eighties with eighties music, eighties fashion and all that stuff.

0:22:58.560 --> 0:23:02.520
<v Speaker 1>But they're also program mng you know, old school adventure

0:23:02.640 --> 0:23:05.360
<v Speaker 1>games for like the Commodore sixty four and stuff. Yea

0:23:05.800 --> 0:23:09.399
<v Speaker 1>another huge part of it, aren't choose your own adventure books? Um,

0:23:09.480 --> 0:23:11.920
<v Speaker 1>which are you know directly referenced? And then there is

0:23:11.960 --> 0:23:15.119
<v Speaker 1>a book within Band or Snatch titled band or Snatch

0:23:15.200 --> 0:23:18.959
<v Speaker 1>that is this enormous tone that we're told is essentially

0:23:18.960 --> 0:23:23.040
<v Speaker 1>a choose your own adventure type scenario. Uh, do you

0:23:23.080 --> 0:23:26.880
<v Speaker 1>have any fond memories of cho shown adventure books? Absolutely?

0:23:26.920 --> 0:23:29.359
<v Speaker 1>I was obsessed with them. I loved them when I

0:23:29.400 --> 0:23:32.280
<v Speaker 1>was in elementary school, and I would love them despite

0:23:32.280 --> 0:23:34.560
<v Speaker 1>the fact that you know, you die in most of

0:23:34.600 --> 0:23:38.760
<v Speaker 1>the endings, Like it imposes a kind of horrible paranoid

0:23:38.800 --> 0:23:41.680
<v Speaker 1>fatalism on a child. I think, where you know, oh,

0:23:42.160 --> 0:23:44.639
<v Speaker 1>this is a book about exploring the Arctic, but almost

0:23:44.680 --> 0:23:46.639
<v Speaker 1>no matter what you do, you get eaten by a

0:23:46.680 --> 0:23:49.320
<v Speaker 1>polar bear or fall beneath the ice and you can't

0:23:49.320 --> 0:23:52.639
<v Speaker 1>get out. Um. I guess my young brain was drawn

0:23:52.640 --> 0:23:54.120
<v Speaker 1>to that kind of thing, though, you know, I had

0:23:54.119 --> 0:23:57.400
<v Speaker 1>that like morbid obsession with peril and danger and death

0:23:57.440 --> 0:24:01.040
<v Speaker 1>and all that. But also I'm curious what is so

0:24:01.119 --> 0:24:04.280
<v Speaker 1>appealing about the choose your own Adventure books? Because one

0:24:04.280 --> 0:24:05.920
<v Speaker 1>thing we should say is that this is not the

0:24:05.960 --> 0:24:11.879
<v Speaker 1>first interactive film Bandersnatch. Previous attempts at interactive films have

0:24:12.080 --> 0:24:16.639
<v Speaker 1>generally been very unpopular. I think a lot of times

0:24:16.960 --> 0:24:21.679
<v Speaker 1>people don't actually enjoy the experience of choosing the outcome

0:24:21.920 --> 0:24:24.280
<v Speaker 1>of a film, and I think there are reasons for that.

0:24:24.320 --> 0:24:25.959
<v Speaker 1>I mean, for one thing, it's just like hard to

0:24:26.000 --> 0:24:28.600
<v Speaker 1>make a story where like multiple, like so many different

0:24:28.600 --> 0:24:30.919
<v Speaker 1>options of how the story could go would all be

0:24:31.000 --> 0:24:33.600
<v Speaker 1>equally satisfying. I mean, there's a reason that an author

0:24:33.640 --> 0:24:37.040
<v Speaker 1>writes a story a certain way, right. For for instance,

0:24:37.200 --> 0:24:39.080
<v Speaker 1>one film that we've talked about on the show before,

0:24:39.440 --> 0:24:44.800
<v Speaker 1>William Castle's Mr. Sardonicus from nineteen sixty one, was presented

0:24:45.000 --> 0:24:48.280
<v Speaker 1>was marketed as having an interactive element in that at

0:24:48.320 --> 0:24:50.200
<v Speaker 1>the end of this you've got to choose the fate

0:24:50.280 --> 0:24:53.120
<v Speaker 1>for the villain, would it be, you know, justice or mercy?

0:24:54.040 --> 0:24:58.359
<v Speaker 1>And the thing is, audiences never chose mercy for this

0:24:58.480 --> 0:25:02.760
<v Speaker 1>horrible villa, of course, they always chose justice. And so

0:25:03.320 --> 0:25:06.080
<v Speaker 1>there were even accusations that they never even shot the

0:25:06.200 --> 0:25:09.240
<v Speaker 1>alternate version, like there was the the the idea that

0:25:09.280 --> 0:25:12.879
<v Speaker 1>it was interactive was just you know, the pitch was

0:25:12.920 --> 0:25:15.680
<v Speaker 1>just the marketing, but there was no actual interactive element.

0:25:15.960 --> 0:25:18.360
<v Speaker 1>William castle, I think claimed otherwise saying yes they did

0:25:18.359 --> 0:25:22.240
<v Speaker 1>shoot the sequence. I do not know personally if if

0:25:22.280 --> 0:25:25.160
<v Speaker 1>that's true or not, if if this footage has ever materialized.

0:25:25.640 --> 0:25:29.480
<v Speaker 1>But what I did did read was that generally people

0:25:29.520 --> 0:25:33.800
<v Speaker 1>point to nineteen sixty seven's uh Keno automat as the

0:25:33.920 --> 0:25:36.679
<v Speaker 1>first truly interactive film, but even that, I think there

0:25:36.720 --> 0:25:39.679
<v Speaker 1>are only like four choices that could be made, and

0:25:39.760 --> 0:25:43.800
<v Speaker 1>this film was also I think, largely comedic. Okay, well,

0:25:43.840 --> 0:25:46.200
<v Speaker 1>I mean I would say that there are many reasons

0:25:46.240 --> 0:25:48.879
<v Speaker 1>why this format doesn't always work. For some reason, it

0:25:48.920 --> 0:25:50.800
<v Speaker 1>worked for me as a kid with to choose your

0:25:50.800 --> 0:25:54.240
<v Speaker 1>own adventure books. I loved those. But I mean, one

0:25:54.280 --> 0:25:56.480
<v Speaker 1>problem I think is that it's hard to make all

0:25:56.560 --> 0:25:59.800
<v Speaker 1>the narrative branches as good as each other. But another

0:25:59.800 --> 0:26:02.359
<v Speaker 1>one is just that like, for instance, when you finish it,

0:26:02.480 --> 0:26:04.280
<v Speaker 1>there's not I don't think there was ever a sense

0:26:04.320 --> 0:26:06.840
<v Speaker 1>where I'm like, Okay, that's the ending I got. No,

0:26:07.000 --> 0:26:09.440
<v Speaker 1>I want the good ending, or I want the robust

0:26:09.560 --> 0:26:11.239
<v Speaker 1>ending you go back and do it again. It's more

0:26:11.320 --> 0:26:13.040
<v Speaker 1>like a video game, or so I don't want the

0:26:13.119 --> 0:26:16.720
<v Speaker 1>ending where I randomly die, Like the story of the

0:26:17.119 --> 0:26:20.000
<v Speaker 1>Super Mario is not that he's killed by a mutant

0:26:20.000 --> 0:26:22.960
<v Speaker 1>turtle three minutes into the game. You know, I mean,

0:26:22.960 --> 0:26:25.800
<v Speaker 1>that's that's not an epic tale. So in some ways,

0:26:25.840 --> 0:26:28.840
<v Speaker 1>I think the choose your own adventure books are sometimes

0:26:29.000 --> 0:26:32.520
<v Speaker 1>better thought of as like a puzzle to solve than

0:26:32.840 --> 0:26:35.400
<v Speaker 1>as like a narrative to be experienced. And another big

0:26:35.400 --> 0:26:37.680
<v Speaker 1>difference I will say is that one of the great

0:26:37.720 --> 0:26:41.239
<v Speaker 1>pleasures of watching a movie or reading a book, or

0:26:41.280 --> 0:26:44.200
<v Speaker 1>you know, engaging in any kind of narrative with an author,

0:26:44.280 --> 0:26:48.000
<v Speaker 1>storyteller and you as the passive audience, is a surrendering

0:26:48.320 --> 0:26:51.240
<v Speaker 1>of responsibility for what is about to happen in your

0:26:51.280 --> 0:26:56.120
<v Speaker 1>own mind. You you give up that responsibility and suddenly

0:26:56.520 --> 0:26:59.119
<v Speaker 1>you know when when bad things continue to happen in

0:26:59.160 --> 0:27:02.479
<v Speaker 1>the story, when characters make disastrous decisions that unfold and

0:27:02.800 --> 0:27:06.520
<v Speaker 1>increase the peril and heightened the drama, you're not responsible

0:27:06.560 --> 0:27:09.199
<v Speaker 1>for what's happening. You're just witnessing it. And that you

0:27:09.240 --> 0:27:11.720
<v Speaker 1>know that witnessing is very fun. Is peeking through a

0:27:11.760 --> 0:27:13.720
<v Speaker 1>hole in the wall and what's happening to somebody else

0:27:14.040 --> 0:27:18.200
<v Speaker 1>When they make you make decisions, it introduces this horrible

0:27:18.240 --> 0:27:21.919
<v Speaker 1>tension between what you want to see versus what you

0:27:21.960 --> 0:27:25.720
<v Speaker 1>think you should do, you know, like, uh that I

0:27:25.760 --> 0:27:28.919
<v Speaker 1>think there's this tension whenever a great example would be

0:27:28.920 --> 0:27:32.720
<v Speaker 1>in band or Snatch, I often felt, in a bizarre way,

0:27:32.960 --> 0:27:38.160
<v Speaker 1>morally compelled to make the tame or safer options, where

0:27:38.200 --> 0:27:41.240
<v Speaker 1>at the same time I felt more interested in seeing

0:27:41.240 --> 0:27:45.200
<v Speaker 1>the more kind of like dangerous disastrous options play out. Yeah,

0:27:45.200 --> 0:27:48.000
<v Speaker 1>this was This was definitely my experience with my first

0:27:48.080 --> 0:27:50.480
<v Speaker 1>view and a Band or Snatches that you know when

0:27:50.480 --> 0:27:53.680
<v Speaker 1>the when the decision start start hitting you, like later

0:27:53.720 --> 0:27:56.119
<v Speaker 1>on they become like this horrible choice or this horrible

0:27:56.200 --> 0:27:59.160
<v Speaker 1>choice and becomes harder to play this game. But earlier

0:27:59.200 --> 0:28:00.840
<v Speaker 1>on there are moment to where you're like, are you

0:28:00.880 --> 0:28:04.199
<v Speaker 1>going to do the sensible thing or the more rebellious

0:28:04.280 --> 0:28:06.680
<v Speaker 1>thing or even the more dangerous thing? And I found

0:28:06.680 --> 0:28:10.840
<v Speaker 1>myself choosing the safer thing, Like like minor spoiler here,

0:28:10.920 --> 0:28:14.960
<v Speaker 1>but he is he's offered the choice between producing his

0:28:15.040 --> 0:28:19.280
<v Speaker 1>dream game with this company at their offices, with their support,

0:28:19.720 --> 0:28:22.720
<v Speaker 1>or or saying no to them. And so like the

0:28:22.760 --> 0:28:24.920
<v Speaker 1>responsible part of me is like, yes, say yes to

0:28:25.080 --> 0:28:27.159
<v Speaker 1>this is employment. This is gonna be good for you.

0:28:27.400 --> 0:28:29.880
<v Speaker 1>Like clearly you're you're stuck in a weird situation at home.

0:28:29.920 --> 0:28:33.880
<v Speaker 1>You need to get out of the house, protagonists and uh,

0:28:33.960 --> 0:28:37.120
<v Speaker 1>and so that's the way I went. But it's ultimately

0:28:37.119 --> 0:28:39.280
<v Speaker 1>not the best choice, and it kind of dead ends

0:28:39.320 --> 0:28:41.880
<v Speaker 1>if you take that choice. Well, yeah, it almost kind

0:28:41.920 --> 0:28:44.160
<v Speaker 1>of gives you a little slap on the wrist for

0:28:44.240 --> 0:28:47.280
<v Speaker 1>making that choice, you know. So he So I don't

0:28:47.320 --> 0:28:50.160
<v Speaker 1>want to spoil anything, but yeah, there's a there's like

0:28:50.200 --> 0:28:53.680
<v Speaker 1>a slight shaming of the viewer for choosing the safe option.

0:28:53.880 --> 0:28:55.840
<v Speaker 1>And this is very early on, so we're not really

0:28:56.320 --> 0:28:59.080
<v Speaker 1>spoiling anything, I think nature. But but yeah, I would

0:28:59.080 --> 0:29:00.760
<v Speaker 1>do that a lot. I would Hey, I would make

0:29:00.960 --> 0:29:03.800
<v Speaker 1>safe choices. And in fact, it ultimately ended up reminding

0:29:03.840 --> 0:29:06.480
<v Speaker 1>me a little bit of the Space and Guild and Dune,

0:29:06.920 --> 0:29:08.760
<v Speaker 1>who of course used the spice to see into the

0:29:08.760 --> 0:29:11.120
<v Speaker 1>future to figure out how to navigate the dangers of space,

0:29:11.920 --> 0:29:14.120
<v Speaker 1>which is helpful if you're navigating the dangers of space,

0:29:14.160 --> 0:29:16.840
<v Speaker 1>but into in life and in politics and all these

0:29:16.880 --> 0:29:20.160
<v Speaker 1>other choices. It's this road to stagnation for the Space

0:29:20.200 --> 0:29:23.760
<v Speaker 1>and Guild because they always make the safe choice. And

0:29:24.040 --> 0:29:27.400
<v Speaker 1>when we look at the narratives that we love, generally,

0:29:27.440 --> 0:29:30.600
<v Speaker 1>they're not about people making the safe choice after safe

0:29:30.680 --> 0:29:34.560
<v Speaker 1>choice after safe choice, They're about people flying off the handles,

0:29:34.560 --> 0:29:37.120
<v Speaker 1>are making huge mistakes and having to deal with those,

0:29:37.400 --> 0:29:39.360
<v Speaker 1>and so there is I think there's a learning curve

0:29:39.360 --> 0:29:42.400
<v Speaker 1>there with band or Snatch and and so my second

0:29:42.440 --> 0:29:44.200
<v Speaker 1>viewing of it, I tried to do more of that.

0:29:44.240 --> 0:29:48.080
<v Speaker 1>I tried to make choices that I felt were interesting

0:29:48.760 --> 0:29:52.840
<v Speaker 1>or um or more dramatic, and that seemed to work

0:29:52.880 --> 0:29:57.560
<v Speaker 1>really well, and I feel like the product rewards you

0:29:57.680 --> 0:30:01.000
<v Speaker 1>for doing that. Yeah, So I think that tension is

0:30:01.040 --> 0:30:03.640
<v Speaker 1>definitely there with the movies. And I wonder if it's

0:30:03.720 --> 0:30:05.760
<v Speaker 1>more the case in a movie than in a book,

0:30:05.800 --> 0:30:09.760
<v Speaker 1>just because a movie is more sensorly visceral. The fact

0:30:09.800 --> 0:30:12.640
<v Speaker 1>that you know that it's actually visually presented to you

0:30:12.720 --> 0:30:18.040
<v Speaker 1>in video and audio makes it harder to just pursue,

0:30:18.200 --> 0:30:21.440
<v Speaker 1>you know, your sort of lust for drama and and

0:30:21.440 --> 0:30:23.560
<v Speaker 1>and weirdness and whatever it is you want to see

0:30:24.040 --> 0:30:26.800
<v Speaker 1>um as opposed to making the safer choices. I don't

0:30:26.840 --> 0:30:29.960
<v Speaker 1>recall feeling compelled to make the safer choice the same

0:30:30.000 --> 0:30:33.520
<v Speaker 1>way with Choose your Own Adventure books, and that could

0:30:33.560 --> 0:30:37.600
<v Speaker 1>just be because of like the lower sensory salience of

0:30:37.600 --> 0:30:41.040
<v Speaker 1>of books compared to movies. I don't know, yeah maybe so. Um.

0:30:41.320 --> 0:30:44.400
<v Speaker 1>I finally finally remember the Choose Your Adventure books as well,

0:30:44.760 --> 0:30:46.480
<v Speaker 1>in part because they had them at the library and

0:30:46.480 --> 0:30:49.959
<v Speaker 1>I could check them out. Um. But also another series

0:30:49.960 --> 0:30:54.240
<v Speaker 1>that I finally remember, the Lone Wolf series. Were you

0:30:54.320 --> 0:30:57.240
<v Speaker 1>familiar with these? So these there, there are a series

0:30:57.280 --> 0:30:59.800
<v Speaker 1>of these. The first one was by Joe Deaver and

0:31:00.000 --> 0:31:03.520
<v Speaker 1>Gary Chalk, And this is a there like a Choose

0:31:03.520 --> 0:31:06.840
<v Speaker 1>your Own Adventure series, very much fantasy Dungeons and Dragon

0:31:06.920 --> 0:31:09.760
<v Speaker 1>style high fantasy, but there's more of a role playing

0:31:09.760 --> 0:31:11.920
<v Speaker 1>element to it. So for instance, when you open the book,

0:31:12.600 --> 0:31:15.920
<v Speaker 1>it has not only a map of the adventuring world

0:31:16.040 --> 0:31:18.960
<v Speaker 1>you're taking a part of, but there's also an action

0:31:19.040 --> 0:31:22.120
<v Speaker 1>chart and a combat record because you're gonna end up

0:31:22.120 --> 0:31:24.480
<v Speaker 1>having to pencil in your stats as you go through

0:31:24.520 --> 0:31:28.920
<v Speaker 1>the story, picking spells and so forth. It's more like

0:31:28.960 --> 0:31:31.840
<v Speaker 1>a one player dn D module. Yeah, exactly. It's like

0:31:31.880 --> 0:31:34.440
<v Speaker 1>imagine it's like a a Choose your Own Adventure book

0:31:34.440 --> 0:31:37.000
<v Speaker 1>and a one player d n D module come together

0:31:37.040 --> 0:31:40.560
<v Speaker 1>into this one little tone. So I finally remember those,

0:31:40.680 --> 0:31:43.880
<v Speaker 1>And I might be misremembering here, but I think I

0:31:43.920 --> 0:31:47.400
<v Speaker 1>did get turned off later on when I reached an

0:31:47.520 --> 0:31:50.320
<v Speaker 1>artificial dead end in one of them, like there was

0:31:50.360 --> 0:31:54.640
<v Speaker 1>something broken and I couldn't go back. Yeah, but uh again,

0:31:54.680 --> 0:31:57.000
<v Speaker 1>I'm my memory may not be perfect on that. If

0:31:57.040 --> 0:31:59.040
<v Speaker 1>you're at all interested in this format, I do highly

0:31:59.080 --> 0:32:02.560
<v Speaker 1>recommend picking up one of these old battle issues copies

0:32:02.600 --> 0:32:05.920
<v Speaker 1>of the Lone Wolf series, and I think they've republished

0:32:05.960 --> 0:32:07.840
<v Speaker 1>them again with new artwork, but I don't know. The

0:32:08.160 --> 0:32:11.040
<v Speaker 1>classic artwork is exactly the kind of thing I love.

0:32:11.360 --> 0:32:13.880
<v Speaker 1>The Choose Your Adventure book that I brought in today

0:32:13.920 --> 0:32:15.920
<v Speaker 1>for for you to look at Robert is called You

0:32:15.960 --> 0:32:19.360
<v Speaker 1>Are a Shark by Edward Packard. It has a kid

0:32:19.440 --> 0:32:23.320
<v Speaker 1>turning into a shark. He's like mid animal sequence, but

0:32:23.360 --> 0:32:25.960
<v Speaker 1>he also looks like he's slipping sliding as he turns

0:32:26.000 --> 0:32:28.680
<v Speaker 1>into a shark. It's pretty good. That's pretty brilliant to

0:32:28.880 --> 0:32:32.880
<v Speaker 1>like channeling something that children, especially at that time, would

0:32:32.880 --> 0:32:35.840
<v Speaker 1>have been familiar, would have likely done, and giving this

0:32:35.920 --> 0:32:39.000
<v Speaker 1>fantastic spin on it. But it's the story is essentially

0:32:39.840 --> 0:32:43.440
<v Speaker 1>the fingle doppling scene from Overdrawn at the Memory Bank,

0:32:43.680 --> 0:32:47.360
<v Speaker 1>where he just gets transformed into various different animals. Do

0:32:47.440 --> 0:32:49.600
<v Speaker 1>you you know you get turned into an elephant or

0:32:49.680 --> 0:32:52.280
<v Speaker 1>a seagull or of course a shark. I think I

0:32:52.320 --> 0:32:54.720
<v Speaker 1>recall one death where you get turned into a squid

0:32:55.040 --> 0:32:57.280
<v Speaker 1>and you're being chased by something maybe it is a shark,

0:32:57.320 --> 0:32:59.960
<v Speaker 1>and you run out of ink to to disguise yourself

0:33:00.040 --> 0:33:04.560
<v Speaker 1>with and you're doomed. All right. Well, Uh, coming back

0:33:04.560 --> 0:33:08.400
<v Speaker 1>to Bandersnatch, we mentioned the video game aspect choose your

0:33:08.400 --> 0:33:11.360
<v Speaker 1>own Adventure books. There are another number of other elements

0:33:11.360 --> 0:33:14.040
<v Speaker 1>and homages in there as well. Uh. It deals with

0:33:14.160 --> 0:33:17.480
<v Speaker 1>mental illness, It deals with l s d uh, their

0:33:17.520 --> 0:33:21.520
<v Speaker 1>allusions to Philip K. Dick. Uh. There there's mention of

0:33:21.680 --> 0:33:24.600
<v Speaker 1>alternate timelines, and of course it spends a lot of

0:33:24.640 --> 0:33:27.760
<v Speaker 1>time contemplating this idea of a free will and the

0:33:27.800 --> 0:33:30.840
<v Speaker 1>potential illusion of choice. Yeah. I think that's the main

0:33:31.000 --> 0:33:34.479
<v Speaker 1>theme of it is is interrogating the idea of what

0:33:34.520 --> 0:33:38.640
<v Speaker 1>it means to be in control of one's own actions. Yeah.

0:33:38.840 --> 0:33:41.880
<v Speaker 1>And the basic plot is as follows. A young programmer

0:33:41.960 --> 0:33:44.640
<v Speaker 1>named Stephen Butler is obsessed with a choose your own

0:33:44.680 --> 0:33:48.600
<v Speaker 1>adventure style book titled bander Snatch that was written by

0:33:48.640 --> 0:33:52.080
<v Speaker 1>a the late troubled writer Jerome F. Davies, and he

0:33:52.200 --> 0:33:54.960
<v Speaker 1>really wants to turn this into a computer adventure game,

0:33:55.000 --> 0:33:57.480
<v Speaker 1>and he's begun work on it on his own. So

0:33:57.520 --> 0:33:59.960
<v Speaker 1>he ends up falling in with this video game comp

0:34:00.000 --> 0:34:04.560
<v Speaker 1>any called tucker Soft and meets its lead creative, uh,

0:34:04.600 --> 0:34:09.080
<v Speaker 1>this programmer named Colin Rittman. And from there it departs

0:34:09.120 --> 0:34:13.799
<v Speaker 1>through these varying winding paths, reality warping, through madness and

0:34:13.880 --> 0:34:16.759
<v Speaker 1>sometimes horror. Uh. And through all of it, there's also

0:34:16.920 --> 0:34:18.880
<v Speaker 1>this side of this feeling that there is a minotaur

0:34:19.040 --> 0:34:22.879
<v Speaker 1>like monster pursuing you, pursuing our our protagonist as well.

0:34:23.160 --> 0:34:26.040
<v Speaker 1>And this is the band or Snatch, but more specifically

0:34:26.200 --> 0:34:28.799
<v Speaker 1>it is titled Packs. Its name is Packs, and it

0:34:28.920 --> 0:34:32.040
<v Speaker 1>is who are told it is the Thief of Destiny. Yeah,

0:34:32.080 --> 0:34:33.759
<v Speaker 1>there's a great moment where the game appears to give

0:34:33.760 --> 0:34:37.600
<v Speaker 1>you an option to either deny worshiping Packs or submit

0:34:37.640 --> 0:34:40.319
<v Speaker 1>to worshiping Packs. Yes, this is the game within a game.

0:34:40.719 --> 0:34:42.520
<v Speaker 1>It made me want to play the game. Yeah, it

0:34:42.520 --> 0:34:45.240
<v Speaker 1>looked really cool. So something that made band or Snatch

0:34:45.360 --> 0:34:47.840
<v Speaker 1>different from most of the Choose your own adventure books

0:34:47.840 --> 0:34:51.160
<v Speaker 1>that I remember reading. I'm sure there are probably exceptions,

0:34:51.200 --> 0:34:54.480
<v Speaker 1>but in the classic books I remember reading, the story

0:34:54.600 --> 0:34:57.839
<v Speaker 1>is written in the second person. The protagonist is an

0:34:57.920 --> 0:35:01.520
<v Speaker 1>unnamed you. You know, go down the left hall, you

0:35:01.560 --> 0:35:03.920
<v Speaker 1>get eaten by a swarm of Ferrell pigs. You go

0:35:04.000 --> 0:35:06.879
<v Speaker 1>down the right hall, you get turned into a bowl

0:35:06.880 --> 0:35:09.719
<v Speaker 1>of ice cream by magic pirate. You know that you.

0:35:09.719 --> 0:35:12.759
<v Speaker 1>You explore all the different dooms On offer to you,

0:35:12.920 --> 0:35:16.120
<v Speaker 1>but it's you. Yeah. Likewise, in the Lone Wolf books,

0:35:16.560 --> 0:35:19.920
<v Speaker 1>as I recall you, you kind of make choices regarding

0:35:19.920 --> 0:35:22.920
<v Speaker 1>how this characters put together. You have a fair amount

0:35:22.920 --> 0:35:27.600
<v Speaker 1>of control. It is your character. But Bandersnatch challenges this

0:35:27.680 --> 0:35:31.040
<v Speaker 1>formula a little bit by making the protagonist a third

0:35:31.160 --> 0:35:36.280
<v Speaker 1>person character with a name and pre existing individualized circumstances.

0:35:36.280 --> 0:35:39.960
<v Speaker 1>You've got Stefan right. But then this is where it

0:35:40.000 --> 0:35:42.680
<v Speaker 1>starts getting even weirder. So not only is it this

0:35:42.760 --> 0:35:46.359
<v Speaker 1>definite third person character with their own characteristics and not

0:35:46.480 --> 0:35:50.000
<v Speaker 1>just a second person protagonist, there are moments where the

0:35:50.040 --> 0:35:54.480
<v Speaker 1>options are you choose, not what Stephen does. That's how

0:35:54.520 --> 0:35:57.000
<v Speaker 1>it mostly is. You know what does Stefon pick? You

0:35:57.040 --> 0:35:59.239
<v Speaker 1>know what? What? What does he listened to? What is

0:35:59.239 --> 0:36:02.560
<v Speaker 1>he answered somebody who poses a question to him? It

0:36:02.680 --> 0:36:05.879
<v Speaker 1>then changes and gives you the option to dictate what

0:36:06.000 --> 0:36:09.719
<v Speaker 1>happens to him from the outside. The specific example I

0:36:09.760 --> 0:36:13.759
<v Speaker 1>recall is what messages he believes he is receiving on

0:36:13.840 --> 0:36:16.960
<v Speaker 1>his computer screen. Now, of course, if you go with

0:36:17.000 --> 0:36:19.600
<v Speaker 1>the most straightforward interpretation of the story, which is that

0:36:19.640 --> 0:36:23.160
<v Speaker 1>Stephan is experiencing symptoms of psychosis, in a way, you're

0:36:23.200 --> 0:36:27.279
<v Speaker 1>still dictating the activity of his brain, but activities of

0:36:27.440 --> 0:36:30.800
<v Speaker 1>his brain that he as a character does not perceive

0:36:30.880 --> 0:36:34.640
<v Speaker 1>as coming from himself, their hallucinations that he believes to

0:36:34.680 --> 0:36:37.359
<v Speaker 1>be coming from the outside. And you know, this makes

0:36:37.400 --> 0:36:39.920
<v Speaker 1>me wonder about the framing of how we should think

0:36:39.960 --> 0:36:44.400
<v Speaker 1>about hallucinations that are generated internally by the brain but

0:36:44.560 --> 0:36:49.240
<v Speaker 1>perceived to come from an external source. Are those hallucinations

0:36:49.280 --> 0:36:53.160
<v Speaker 1>best understood as you or not? Um are are there

0:36:53.160 --> 0:36:56.719
<v Speaker 1>processes within your own brain that are, in some legitimate

0:36:56.760 --> 0:36:59.680
<v Speaker 1>sense not you, even though they are your brain, they're

0:36:59.680 --> 0:37:02.719
<v Speaker 1>not any body else. Yeah, it's it's not really the

0:37:02.800 --> 0:37:05.279
<v Speaker 1>voice of God. It is the it is it is

0:37:05.360 --> 0:37:08.480
<v Speaker 1>something coming from inside your brain that you are perhaps

0:37:08.920 --> 0:37:12.960
<v Speaker 1>imagining or or interpreting as the voice of God. But

0:37:13.200 --> 0:37:16.920
<v Speaker 1>is you more synonymous with your whole brain and everything

0:37:16.960 --> 0:37:20.359
<v Speaker 1>it does, or is you more synonymous with the part

0:37:20.400 --> 0:37:23.799
<v Speaker 1>of your brain that you identify as yourself. That's going

0:37:23.840 --> 0:37:26.560
<v Speaker 1>to be very key to some interpretations of the basic

0:37:26.719 --> 0:37:30.080
<v Speaker 1>theme explored in Bandersnatch, right, and they do explore this

0:37:30.200 --> 0:37:34.719
<v Speaker 1>theme amazingly. Well, I felt the second time I watched it,

0:37:34.920 --> 0:37:38.360
<v Speaker 1>I found all these additional layers. Um, you know again,

0:37:38.400 --> 0:37:40.640
<v Speaker 1>I'm I'm I'm tempted to make the best choices for

0:37:40.680 --> 0:37:43.480
<v Speaker 1>a protagonist, or at least there's still that inclination that

0:37:43.520 --> 0:37:45.560
<v Speaker 1>I want to do that. And at one point there's

0:37:45.560 --> 0:37:48.640
<v Speaker 1>this song playing with the lyrics doing what's best for Nigel,

0:37:48.719 --> 0:37:51.640
<v Speaker 1>and it's all in the stec or I don't know,

0:37:51.760 --> 0:37:54.200
<v Speaker 1>I think so. Yes, I was not familiar with that

0:37:54.239 --> 0:37:56.800
<v Speaker 1>group or that this song before, but yeah, it's playing,

0:37:56.800 --> 0:37:58.840
<v Speaker 1>and the whole scene is about like how his father

0:37:58.960 --> 0:38:02.000
<v Speaker 1>is making choices or him or other times it's you know,

0:38:02.040 --> 0:38:04.800
<v Speaker 1>it's the therapies therapist that is giving him advice about

0:38:04.800 --> 0:38:08.040
<v Speaker 1>how to how to make choices in his life. And

0:38:08.080 --> 0:38:10.120
<v Speaker 1>so you have all these forces that that help him

0:38:10.160 --> 0:38:13.640
<v Speaker 1>make his choices or make choices for him. And then

0:38:14.000 --> 0:38:16.839
<v Speaker 1>that's also what we are doing as we interact with

0:38:16.880 --> 0:38:19.080
<v Speaker 1>the product. Well, yes, and in a weird way, it

0:38:19.120 --> 0:38:21.880
<v Speaker 1>kind of brings you back around to to this question

0:38:21.920 --> 0:38:24.040
<v Speaker 1>of Wait a minute, is he Is he a third

0:38:24.080 --> 0:38:27.640
<v Speaker 1>person narrator or are you supposed to identify as him?

0:38:27.680 --> 0:38:31.120
<v Speaker 1>So when these choices are are in some cases things

0:38:31.200 --> 0:38:33.640
<v Speaker 1>coming to him apparently from the outside, you know, they

0:38:33.719 --> 0:38:37.319
<v Speaker 1>might be messages he's receiving from some kind of otherworldly

0:38:37.400 --> 0:38:42.240
<v Speaker 1>source or hallucinations. Um, are you still making choices for

0:38:42.360 --> 0:38:44.880
<v Speaker 1>him or not? Uh? And it leads back into this

0:38:45.040 --> 0:38:49.160
<v Speaker 1>theme of whether or not you are really in control

0:38:49.239 --> 0:38:51.080
<v Speaker 1>of your own actions and what does it mean to

0:38:51.200 --> 0:38:53.880
<v Speaker 1>be in control of your own actions? Uh? And this

0:38:54.080 --> 0:38:57.239
<v Speaker 1>we come to the subject of free will, which is

0:38:57.280 --> 0:39:00.279
<v Speaker 1>a huge topic that we return to time and time

0:39:00.280 --> 0:39:02.440
<v Speaker 1>again on stuff to blow your mind. And we're not

0:39:02.480 --> 0:39:06.440
<v Speaker 1>going to try to encapsulate everything about that here. Uh.

0:39:06.480 --> 0:39:08.640
<v Speaker 1>You know, we've talked about in the past, we're talking

0:39:08.640 --> 0:39:10.040
<v Speaker 1>about it today, We're going to talk about it in

0:39:10.040 --> 0:39:15.040
<v Speaker 1>the future. But it suffice to say philosophies, very scientific

0:39:15.080 --> 0:39:19.200
<v Speaker 1>interpretations vary, and then it drags in additional drags in

0:39:19.280 --> 0:39:21.759
<v Speaker 1>just about everything about the human condition, right, I mean,

0:39:22.040 --> 0:39:27.239
<v Speaker 1>moral responsibility, theological quandaries, etcetera. Yeah, I mean it's a

0:39:27.280 --> 0:39:31.359
<v Speaker 1>problem that it is such a huge topic and that

0:39:31.719 --> 0:39:34.719
<v Speaker 1>almost all discussions about free will that I encounter in

0:39:34.760 --> 0:39:38.359
<v Speaker 1>the wild are an absolute mess. This isn't my personal take.

0:39:38.560 --> 0:39:42.000
<v Speaker 1>I noticed. Do you ever notice how conversations about free

0:39:42.000 --> 0:39:46.719
<v Speaker 1>will almost never seemed to clarify anything. They almost never

0:39:46.719 --> 0:39:49.920
<v Speaker 1>seemed to provide any more focus or clarity than you

0:39:49.960 --> 0:39:54.040
<v Speaker 1>had to begin with. Yeah, like sometimes it's it's at

0:39:54.080 --> 0:39:58.120
<v Speaker 1>times it feels like having a conversation with somebody in

0:39:58.160 --> 0:40:00.959
<v Speaker 1>a in a swimming pool about weather water is wet,

0:40:01.840 --> 0:40:04.040
<v Speaker 1>because it does get down to like, like it seems

0:40:04.040 --> 0:40:06.360
<v Speaker 1>wet to me. I am in it. It seems like

0:40:06.440 --> 0:40:08.680
<v Speaker 1>free will to me because I am immersed in it,

0:40:08.719 --> 0:40:12.640
<v Speaker 1>and it's difficult for me to remove myself from the

0:40:12.680 --> 0:40:15.760
<v Speaker 1>experience that I'm having and and all of and everything

0:40:15.800 --> 0:40:18.520
<v Speaker 1>in my life that supports everything in the culture at large,

0:40:18.640 --> 0:40:22.640
<v Speaker 1>that supports the idea that I am making choices informed

0:40:22.719 --> 0:40:25.440
<v Speaker 1>choices about my life. I mean, I feel like some

0:40:25.480 --> 0:40:28.120
<v Speaker 1>dilemmas having to do with free will or or like

0:40:28.520 --> 0:40:31.080
<v Speaker 1>they force you to choose between two options that are

0:40:31.120 --> 0:40:35.400
<v Speaker 1>both tautologies or both absurdities. And and any time you

0:40:35.480 --> 0:40:37.919
<v Speaker 1>encounter a problem like that, I think there's a pretty

0:40:37.960 --> 0:40:40.840
<v Speaker 1>good chance that the underlying disease causing that is poorly

0:40:40.920 --> 0:40:44.680
<v Speaker 1>defined terms, right and yeah, to your point, the extreme

0:40:45.719 --> 0:40:48.200
<v Speaker 1>versions of this are are to tend to come off

0:40:48.239 --> 0:40:50.160
<v Speaker 1>as kind of looney, like if someone is just like,

0:40:50.200 --> 0:40:53.960
<v Speaker 1>I am a completely free moving soul, like, no, you're not, dummy. Uh.

0:40:54.000 --> 0:40:55.520
<v Speaker 1>You know, it's like when we discuss in the in

0:40:55.560 --> 0:40:58.200
<v Speaker 1>the Thankfulness episode that we put out, you know, like

0:40:58.360 --> 0:41:01.239
<v Speaker 1>everybody's life is shaped by these other factors, these other

0:41:01.280 --> 0:41:04.239
<v Speaker 1>individuals in their life to some extent, and I feel

0:41:04.239 --> 0:41:06.960
<v Speaker 1>like to argue against that is just lunacy. On the

0:41:06.960 --> 0:41:09.120
<v Speaker 1>other hand, if someone is saying, I am a just

0:41:09.160 --> 0:41:12.600
<v Speaker 1>a pure automaton, honey, there you can back that that

0:41:12.760 --> 0:41:16.040
<v Speaker 1>argument up with some very intriguing arguments, and we'll get

0:41:16.080 --> 0:41:18.840
<v Speaker 1>into some of those. But at the end of the day,

0:41:19.160 --> 0:41:22.120
<v Speaker 1>does that match up with your experience of reality? I

0:41:22.360 --> 0:41:24.719
<v Speaker 1>totally agree. But I think even talking about it at

0:41:24.719 --> 0:41:28.040
<v Speaker 1>that level, that's already like a level up, like having

0:41:28.120 --> 0:41:32.120
<v Speaker 1>accepted some terms as unproblematic more than I think they

0:41:32.120 --> 0:41:34.160
<v Speaker 1>should be. So like anyway, I mean, I think the

0:41:34.480 --> 0:41:37.040
<v Speaker 1>main problem with free will is people aren't being clear

0:41:37.200 --> 0:41:40.160
<v Speaker 1>what they're talking about before they start talking. And I'm

0:41:40.200 --> 0:41:42.840
<v Speaker 1>totally guilty of this as well. Uh, this is usually

0:41:42.880 --> 0:41:44.680
<v Speaker 1>the case when it comes to free will, and this

0:41:44.760 --> 0:41:47.440
<v Speaker 1>happens even when we're not aware that we're being unclear,

0:41:47.480 --> 0:41:50.120
<v Speaker 1>so we can't do it full justice. In the short segment,

0:41:50.400 --> 0:41:52.200
<v Speaker 1>I think we will try to do better than an

0:41:52.200 --> 0:41:56.360
<v Speaker 1>absolute mass. Uh. So, so to try to understand what

0:41:56.480 --> 0:42:00.880
<v Speaker 1>our terms actually mean. What is free will? Am an understanding?

0:42:01.000 --> 0:42:04.440
<v Speaker 1>Is I am in control of my own actions? And

0:42:04.480 --> 0:42:07.239
<v Speaker 1>I think most of the time for most people this

0:42:07.360 --> 0:42:10.680
<v Speaker 1>feels true. Uh. Though curiously, of course, not all of

0:42:10.680 --> 0:42:12.640
<v Speaker 1>the time and not for all people. We can come

0:42:12.640 --> 0:42:15.640
<v Speaker 1>back to that, but I would argue that it only

0:42:15.800 --> 0:42:19.719
<v Speaker 1>feels true in a general way, and it gets stickier

0:42:19.880 --> 0:42:22.239
<v Speaker 1>and THORNI or the more you try to think about it,

0:42:22.239 --> 0:42:25.480
<v Speaker 1>and the more precisely you try to deform define those terms.

0:42:25.840 --> 0:42:28.359
<v Speaker 1>So if I'm in control of my own actions, who

0:42:28.520 --> 0:42:31.319
<v Speaker 1>is I? Uh that we brought this up a minute ago?

0:42:31.440 --> 0:42:35.120
<v Speaker 1>Is I my whole brain? Uh? And Also I think

0:42:35.120 --> 0:42:37.040
<v Speaker 1>there's a good case to be made that other parts

0:42:37.040 --> 0:42:39.399
<v Speaker 1>of your body gets some kind of vote in your

0:42:39.440 --> 0:42:42.520
<v Speaker 1>decision making. So is it my whole body? Is it

0:42:42.560 --> 0:42:44.680
<v Speaker 1>everything with my genome? Even then, I would say your

0:42:44.719 --> 0:42:47.920
<v Speaker 1>microbiota sort of gets a vote. I think that there

0:42:47.920 --> 0:42:50.560
<v Speaker 1>are questions about what the eye is, But then also

0:42:50.640 --> 0:42:53.920
<v Speaker 1>what counts as control? If I am in control of

0:42:53.960 --> 0:42:56.680
<v Speaker 1>my own actions, does it mean that that I make

0:42:56.760 --> 0:43:00.960
<v Speaker 1>my decisions with no outside influences? I mean, that's obviously

0:43:01.000 --> 0:43:02.879
<v Speaker 1>not true, as you were alluding to a minute ago.

0:43:03.560 --> 0:43:07.120
<v Speaker 1>But once you accept that outside factors have some influence

0:43:07.160 --> 0:43:10.440
<v Speaker 1>over whatever it is you're talking about controlling, what's to

0:43:10.480 --> 0:43:13.480
<v Speaker 1>stop you from assuming that they have total influence? I mean,

0:43:13.520 --> 0:43:17.239
<v Speaker 1>what part of your decision making is not influenced by

0:43:17.280 --> 0:43:21.800
<v Speaker 1>pre existing factors like your memory and your physical circumstances

0:43:21.840 --> 0:43:24.319
<v Speaker 1>and so forth, Like what part of you can you

0:43:24.360 --> 0:43:28.440
<v Speaker 1>identify that stands outside of the world. And then from

0:43:28.440 --> 0:43:30.759
<v Speaker 1>the other end, paradoxically, if you were to suddenly act

0:43:30.840 --> 0:43:33.839
<v Speaker 1>in a way that made no sense given your own

0:43:33.920 --> 0:43:37.040
<v Speaker 1>history and memory and all of the inputs coming in

0:43:37.040 --> 0:43:39.960
<v Speaker 1>that you think of as influences on you, wouldn't that

0:43:40.040 --> 0:43:44.319
<v Speaker 1>action actually feel less like something that comes genuinely from you,

0:43:44.680 --> 0:43:48.560
<v Speaker 1>whatever you are. Wouldn't by this metric, the most objectively

0:43:48.719 --> 0:43:53.359
<v Speaker 1>free action seemed like something coming from the outside. You mean,

0:43:53.400 --> 0:43:56.000
<v Speaker 1>like if you go to go to a restaurant where

0:43:56.160 --> 0:43:59.040
<v Speaker 1>they're say, there's a drink menu, and you always tend

0:43:59.040 --> 0:44:01.279
<v Speaker 1>to order something that is made with a base of

0:44:01.320 --> 0:44:05.120
<v Speaker 1>say rum or bourbon or whiskey, and instead you throw

0:44:05.160 --> 0:44:06.640
<v Speaker 1>caution to the wind one day and you get a

0:44:06.640 --> 0:44:10.200
<v Speaker 1>mescal or a vodka drink. Does that actually make you

0:44:10.239 --> 0:44:14.680
<v Speaker 1>feel more free or does it seem like something you know,

0:44:14.760 --> 0:44:17.799
<v Speaker 1>something got into you? Where does that phrase come from?

0:44:17.840 --> 0:44:19.640
<v Speaker 1>I don't know. When I do things like that, I

0:44:20.280 --> 0:44:22.279
<v Speaker 1>think it does make me feel more free, because I'm like, no,

0:44:22.920 --> 0:44:25.279
<v Speaker 1>I'm not going to be the same person i've been

0:44:25.360 --> 0:44:28.440
<v Speaker 1>every time. I'm gonna try it a different direction. You know,

0:44:28.520 --> 0:44:30.680
<v Speaker 1>I'm going to I'm going to get a different type

0:44:30.719 --> 0:44:32.560
<v Speaker 1>of drink, I'm gonna try a different type of food,

0:44:32.600 --> 0:44:36.160
<v Speaker 1>I'm gonna walk a different way to the train station, etcetera. Well,

0:44:36.200 --> 0:44:38.239
<v Speaker 1>I mean, I would say that this just highlights that

0:44:39.000 --> 0:44:43.200
<v Speaker 1>neither branch either acting in character where your character has

0:44:43.239 --> 0:44:45.200
<v Speaker 1>been shaped by everything that ever happened to you, nor

0:44:45.400 --> 0:44:48.279
<v Speaker 1>by acting out of character where you know something got

0:44:48.360 --> 0:44:53.239
<v Speaker 1>into you. Neither way really cites the origin of decisions

0:44:53.320 --> 0:44:57.080
<v Speaker 1>or the origin of actions in something that's out without

0:44:57.120 --> 0:45:00.520
<v Speaker 1>outside influence. So a lot of the arguments about whether

0:45:00.560 --> 0:45:03.200
<v Speaker 1>we have free will actually seem to me to reduce

0:45:03.239 --> 0:45:06.760
<v Speaker 1>to the question of whether we feel we have free will,

0:45:07.280 --> 0:45:09.400
<v Speaker 1>But what would it actually mean to settle the question

0:45:09.440 --> 0:45:13.279
<v Speaker 1>of whether we are like physically objectively free? Uh So,

0:45:13.600 --> 0:45:15.359
<v Speaker 1>maybe we should look at like a more thought out

0:45:15.400 --> 0:45:18.799
<v Speaker 1>dictionary definition. So one that I found is quote the

0:45:18.880 --> 0:45:23.360
<v Speaker 1>power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate

0:45:24.280 --> 0:45:26.520
<v Speaker 1>or fate. Now that that brings me back to the

0:45:26.560 --> 0:45:30.120
<v Speaker 1>demon packs, the thief of destiny, I find myself. I

0:45:30.120 --> 0:45:32.200
<v Speaker 1>found myself with the second viewing of Band or Snatch,

0:45:32.560 --> 0:45:35.480
<v Speaker 1>returning to that title and trying to figure out exactly

0:45:35.520 --> 0:45:39.080
<v Speaker 1>what it means. Because destiny, on one hand, means like

0:45:39.160 --> 0:45:42.560
<v Speaker 1>the your predestined right, there is a destiny in place

0:45:42.640 --> 0:45:45.600
<v Speaker 1>for you, and you perhaps don't have any real control.

0:45:45.640 --> 0:45:47.879
<v Speaker 1>It is the thing that the gods have laid out

0:45:47.920 --> 0:45:50.000
<v Speaker 1>for you. That's like one way of looking at But

0:45:50.000 --> 0:45:53.160
<v Speaker 1>another way of looking at destiny is that destiny is

0:45:53.200 --> 0:45:56.200
<v Speaker 1>the thing you aspire to, Like, you choose your own destiny,

0:45:56.200 --> 0:46:00.120
<v Speaker 1>You choose your own adventure, right. Uh So, which each

0:46:00.160 --> 0:46:03.239
<v Speaker 1>of the two is the demon pack stealing from you?

0:46:03.440 --> 0:46:06.560
<v Speaker 1>Is he stealing from you the power to make your

0:46:06.560 --> 0:46:11.600
<v Speaker 1>own decisions? Or is he's stealing from you a predestined path.

0:46:11.800 --> 0:46:15.280
<v Speaker 1>Is he liberating you from this from the same tired

0:46:15.320 --> 0:46:18.560
<v Speaker 1>walk to the train station and the same tired choices

0:46:18.600 --> 0:46:20.399
<v Speaker 1>on the menu. Well, the funny thing about to choose

0:46:20.400 --> 0:46:23.440
<v Speaker 1>your own adventure is that even though you are making

0:46:23.480 --> 0:46:26.080
<v Speaker 1>the choices on each page about which page to turn

0:46:26.120 --> 0:46:28.719
<v Speaker 1>to next, somebody else wrote the whole thing. That's true,

0:46:29.840 --> 0:46:31.960
<v Speaker 1>and I mean, to a certain extent, like you can.

0:46:32.120 --> 0:46:35.080
<v Speaker 1>You can apply that to life. Like as rebellious as

0:46:35.120 --> 0:46:37.920
<v Speaker 1>you might seem ordering something else on the menu that

0:46:37.960 --> 0:46:40.160
<v Speaker 1>you normally don't get, it's still on the menu. And

0:46:40.200 --> 0:46:42.319
<v Speaker 1>other things in life are like that too, Like you are,

0:46:42.680 --> 0:46:47.840
<v Speaker 1>largely you are constrained by the possibilities of of your culture,

0:46:47.840 --> 0:46:51.920
<v Speaker 1>of your station in life, of you know, political realities, etcetera.

0:46:52.200 --> 0:46:56.640
<v Speaker 1>But even then, is the unpredictability of a behavior uh

0:46:56.800 --> 0:47:01.800
<v Speaker 1>at all evidence of your control or your personal volition

0:47:02.040 --> 0:47:04.919
<v Speaker 1>of that behavior. I don't know. I mean that those

0:47:04.920 --> 0:47:08.160
<v Speaker 1>things seem perhaps unrelated to me. Actually, I mean you

0:47:08.160 --> 0:47:12.160
<v Speaker 1>can also be predictably unpredictable. Yeah, um, But anyway, coming

0:47:12.160 --> 0:47:14.840
<v Speaker 1>back to this definition, the one that's you know, acting

0:47:14.880 --> 0:47:18.319
<v Speaker 1>without constraint of necessity or fate. So I think it

0:47:18.360 --> 0:47:20.480
<v Speaker 1>can be hard to pin this down to a concrete claim,

0:47:20.520 --> 0:47:23.320
<v Speaker 1>But I think what it comes closest to is saying

0:47:23.360 --> 0:47:26.880
<v Speaker 1>that for any given action or moment in my life history,

0:47:26.920 --> 0:47:30.520
<v Speaker 1>anything I do, or think or say, given the exact

0:47:30.680 --> 0:47:34.719
<v Speaker 1>same inputs, I could have produced different output than I

0:47:34.760 --> 0:47:38.359
<v Speaker 1>actually did. Um And this this would be I think,

0:47:38.400 --> 0:47:41.600
<v Speaker 1>some way of making free will a kind of like

0:47:42.160 --> 0:47:46.120
<v Speaker 1>a physical proposition. Right, if exactly the same inputs went

0:47:46.160 --> 0:47:48.480
<v Speaker 1>into you, everything was exactly the same, you could have

0:47:48.520 --> 0:47:52.120
<v Speaker 1>done something different than what you did. Unfortunately, I think

0:47:52.239 --> 0:47:55.919
<v Speaker 1>this is just a completely untestable assumption. You know, given

0:47:55.960 --> 0:47:59.080
<v Speaker 1>the complexity of brains, you can never have all of

0:47:59.160 --> 0:48:02.600
<v Speaker 1>exactly the same inputs that somebody had at a given moment,

0:48:02.680 --> 0:48:05.280
<v Speaker 1>So you can't experiment on this to find out what's true.

0:48:05.680 --> 0:48:08.600
<v Speaker 1>Though we certainly love ruminating on this in our fiction.

0:48:09.120 --> 0:48:12.080
<v Speaker 1>Like any kind of time travel film, any kind of

0:48:12.080 --> 0:48:17.320
<v Speaker 1>Groundhog Day scenario is exploring this subject. Yeah, though, even

0:48:17.360 --> 0:48:19.399
<v Speaker 1>with most of those time travel things where people want

0:48:19.400 --> 0:48:21.920
<v Speaker 1>to go back and relive it, what they actually are

0:48:22.000 --> 0:48:24.000
<v Speaker 1>imagining is they want to go back and relive a

0:48:24.000 --> 0:48:26.719
<v Speaker 1>moment with the wisdom and knowledge that they have now

0:48:26.840 --> 0:48:29.360
<v Speaker 1>that they didn't have them. Uh So it would be

0:48:29.360 --> 0:48:32.640
<v Speaker 1>funny to just like replay the same instance over and

0:48:32.719 --> 0:48:35.759
<v Speaker 1>over again with exactly the same physics involved, and see

0:48:35.800 --> 0:48:39.440
<v Speaker 1>if anything different happens without having any new knowledge or whatever.

0:48:40.280 --> 0:48:43.919
<v Speaker 1>Um But even then, I mean, imagine maybe you could

0:48:43.960 --> 0:48:45.920
<v Speaker 1>do that somehow, you know, you could just watch the

0:48:45.960 --> 0:48:48.600
<v Speaker 1>same period of time play out over and over again

0:48:48.600 --> 0:48:51.839
<v Speaker 1>and see if anything different happens. Even if it were

0:48:51.880 --> 0:48:54.480
<v Speaker 1>true that you could have produced different outputs given the

0:48:54.520 --> 0:48:58.080
<v Speaker 1>exact same inputs, would this really mean you were free?

0:48:58.200 --> 0:49:01.000
<v Speaker 1>Would this be what people mean when they see free will,

0:49:01.040 --> 0:49:03.920
<v Speaker 1>like they're in control of their own actions? You know,

0:49:04.000 --> 0:49:07.359
<v Speaker 1>imagine there's some random dice rolling machine inside your head,

0:49:07.520 --> 0:49:10.040
<v Speaker 1>or a ghost or a spirit in your brain which

0:49:10.120 --> 0:49:13.440
<v Speaker 1>pushes you in different directions, even if every single iota

0:49:13.480 --> 0:49:16.560
<v Speaker 1>of input is the same. Is that actually freedom? That

0:49:16.680 --> 0:49:19.960
<v Speaker 1>just sounds like a different kind of impetus or control.

0:49:20.520 --> 0:49:24.000
<v Speaker 1>That's interesting you bring up a randomization via some sort

0:49:24.040 --> 0:49:28.120
<v Speaker 1>of technology like dice or casting of bones, because we've

0:49:28.120 --> 0:49:29.920
<v Speaker 1>we've discussed that in the past on the show, how

0:49:29.960 --> 0:49:32.799
<v Speaker 1>that is sometimes brought up as being like that that like,

0:49:32.840 --> 0:49:37.360
<v Speaker 1>that's the purpose of these early divination um UH technologies

0:49:37.400 --> 0:49:42.000
<v Speaker 1>techniques a way to randomize choice and to sometimes force

0:49:42.120 --> 0:49:45.359
<v Speaker 1>us towards a decision that we otherwise otherwise wouldn't make,

0:49:45.480 --> 0:49:48.919
<v Speaker 1>like in a way to free us from these predestined

0:49:48.960 --> 0:49:52.160
<v Speaker 1>paths that are before us, or at least, you know,

0:49:52.560 --> 0:49:55.000
<v Speaker 1>lean us over towards a different path that we would

0:49:55.040 --> 0:49:57.839
<v Speaker 1>that is available but we normally wouldn't go for. Well,

0:49:57.840 --> 0:50:00.000
<v Speaker 1>it's funny. I mean either way you go there. So yeah,

0:50:00.160 --> 0:50:04.080
<v Speaker 1>say you're doing the teaching or throwing bones. Does either

0:50:04.280 --> 0:50:07.080
<v Speaker 1>or not doing that either way is one making you

0:50:07.280 --> 0:50:10.680
<v Speaker 1>more the author of your own destiny than another? I'm

0:50:10.719 --> 0:50:14.520
<v Speaker 1>not sure. I mean, they have differences in outcomes, But

0:50:14.760 --> 0:50:17.680
<v Speaker 1>does that actually change what people mean when they say

0:50:17.760 --> 0:50:19.719
<v Speaker 1>when they say free will? I don't know. I mean,

0:50:19.719 --> 0:50:21.879
<v Speaker 1>even if you randomize your choices, you are the one

0:50:21.920 --> 0:50:24.680
<v Speaker 1>that will then enact that choice, Like you're still the

0:50:24.719 --> 0:50:27.799
<v Speaker 1>actor in your narrative and the randomization is still an

0:50:27.800 --> 0:50:30.719
<v Speaker 1>input on you. Um So I don't know. So, uh,

0:50:31.160 --> 0:50:33.840
<v Speaker 1>anyway to to sort of sum it all up, I've

0:50:33.920 --> 0:50:37.040
<v Speaker 1>got a theory here, and it is that I think

0:50:37.120 --> 0:50:39.680
<v Speaker 1>what a lot of us are actually circling around when

0:50:39.719 --> 0:50:42.720
<v Speaker 1>we're trying to figure out how to articulate our concept

0:50:42.760 --> 0:50:45.520
<v Speaker 1>of free will is this claim. And the claim is

0:50:46.200 --> 0:50:50.920
<v Speaker 1>our consciousness dictates our choices of how we act, or

0:50:50.920 --> 0:50:54.880
<v Speaker 1>in other words, we're conscious of the process by which

0:50:54.880 --> 0:50:58.080
<v Speaker 1>our choices are made or by which our actions are generated.

0:50:58.239 --> 0:51:02.600
<v Speaker 1>Right that that when we act, we are able to

0:51:02.800 --> 0:51:06.799
<v Speaker 1>consciously be a part of the impetus to act, or

0:51:06.880 --> 0:51:10.839
<v Speaker 1>consciously cause the impetus to act. And I think this

0:51:10.880 --> 0:51:14.080
<v Speaker 1>one is actually testable, and we can come back to

0:51:14.120 --> 0:51:17.040
<v Speaker 1>that in a minute. So this is, of course, this

0:51:17.080 --> 0:51:19.080
<v Speaker 1>is one of the big riddles of the human experience.

0:51:19.120 --> 0:51:21.960
<v Speaker 1>And so people have been thinking about this and uh,

0:51:22.320 --> 0:51:25.640
<v Speaker 1>you know, essentially banging their head against the wall about this. Uh.

0:51:25.960 --> 0:51:32.200
<v Speaker 1>For thousands of years. The philosophers Democratus and Lucippus saw

0:51:32.280 --> 0:51:36.200
<v Speaker 1>the universe as wholly governed by natural laws and composed

0:51:36.280 --> 0:51:40.680
<v Speaker 1>of you know, essentially indivisible atoms. They took the determinus

0:51:40.760 --> 0:51:44.240
<v Speaker 1>view of life of one propelled down a flowing stream

0:51:44.280 --> 0:51:47.600
<v Speaker 1>of events. Aristotle, on the other hand, is a great

0:51:47.600 --> 0:51:51.040
<v Speaker 1>example of someone who stressed the individual's responsibility for their actions.

0:51:51.360 --> 0:51:54.640
<v Speaker 1>The indeterminates view of life is a boat propelling itself

0:51:55.200 --> 0:51:58.480
<v Speaker 1>through a body of water. So yeah, to what extent

0:51:58.560 --> 0:52:01.359
<v Speaker 1>are you just sailing down the river. Uh, you know

0:52:01.400 --> 0:52:03.719
<v Speaker 1>at you know, with with no power on where you're going,

0:52:04.040 --> 0:52:06.000
<v Speaker 1>or are you in a boat that have in which

0:52:06.000 --> 0:52:08.319
<v Speaker 1>you have the power to move about and even move

0:52:08.360 --> 0:52:10.560
<v Speaker 1>upstream if you need to. On that note, we're going

0:52:10.600 --> 0:52:12.439
<v Speaker 1>to take one quick break, but when we come back,

0:52:12.640 --> 0:52:15.480
<v Speaker 1>we will start rolling through some arguments for and against

0:52:15.480 --> 0:52:22.560
<v Speaker 1>free will, and then we will return to band or snatch. Alright,

0:52:22.560 --> 0:52:26.399
<v Speaker 1>we're back, So let's start with some arguments against free will,

0:52:26.520 --> 0:52:28.760
<v Speaker 1>because ultimately I think these are these are often easier

0:52:28.760 --> 0:52:32.040
<v Speaker 1>to discuss. Sure, I would say the most basic one, right,

0:52:32.239 --> 0:52:36.600
<v Speaker 1>is just the science of physics, right. Physics is very predictable.

0:52:37.360 --> 0:52:40.920
<v Speaker 1>You can, you know, given given the inputs of forces

0:52:40.960 --> 0:52:43.719
<v Speaker 1>and energy and all that, you can determine what's going

0:52:43.760 --> 0:52:46.920
<v Speaker 1>to happen as an output of that action. And if

0:52:47.040 --> 0:52:49.799
<v Speaker 1>we assume that applies to everything, then why doesn't it

0:52:49.840 --> 0:52:53.799
<v Speaker 1>apply to us? Right? And basically comes back to Democritus

0:52:53.920 --> 0:52:56.560
<v Speaker 1>and Lucippus, right, the the idea that their natural laws

0:52:56.960 --> 0:52:59.399
<v Speaker 1>and they that are in place, and we're not above

0:52:59.480 --> 0:53:03.320
<v Speaker 1>those laws. Sure yeah, So we're acting on the inputs

0:53:03.360 --> 0:53:06.680
<v Speaker 1>that come in and you know that that uh being

0:53:06.719 --> 0:53:09.120
<v Speaker 1>being pushed in one way or another, by our life

0:53:09.160 --> 0:53:12.080
<v Speaker 1>history and our brains and all, that we're going to

0:53:12.120 --> 0:53:16.239
<v Speaker 1>act a certain way as physically reactive objects. Uh. Now,

0:53:16.320 --> 0:53:18.360
<v Speaker 1>this is an argument, of course, as the most common

0:53:18.440 --> 0:53:22.040
<v Speaker 1>argument I think against free will. But one question, is

0:53:22.160 --> 0:53:26.719
<v Speaker 1>our free will and causal determinism really incompatible? Uh? Not

0:53:26.840 --> 0:53:29.480
<v Speaker 1>that it settles the issue, but I think the majority

0:53:29.480 --> 0:53:32.480
<v Speaker 1>of philosophers who look at this issue pretty closely actually

0:53:32.600 --> 0:53:35.799
<v Speaker 1>end up becoming what are called compatible lists. They they

0:53:35.840 --> 0:53:38.840
<v Speaker 1>accept causal determinism, they say, yeah, you know, we're physical

0:53:38.840 --> 0:53:42.600
<v Speaker 1>objects being pushed around by physical forces, but they define

0:53:42.719 --> 0:53:45.479
<v Speaker 1>free will in some way that it is compatible with that.

0:53:45.480 --> 0:53:48.600
<v Speaker 1>That you are a physical object being pushed around by

0:53:48.600 --> 0:53:51.400
<v Speaker 1>physical forces and the whole history of your life and everything,

0:53:51.719 --> 0:53:54.239
<v Speaker 1>and yet somehow free will still applies to you. This

0:53:54.320 --> 0:53:57.880
<v Speaker 1>often comes down to like an understanding or feeling of

0:53:57.960 --> 0:54:00.279
<v Speaker 1>free will, like I was talking about earlier, Like even

0:54:00.360 --> 0:54:04.400
<v Speaker 1>if your actions are causally determined, somehow you feel like

0:54:04.480 --> 0:54:07.920
<v Speaker 1>you have agency and that's what we mean by free will,

0:54:08.040 --> 0:54:11.760
<v Speaker 1>right right. Another take on this that I came across,

0:54:12.080 --> 0:54:13.960
<v Speaker 1>and this goes back to something we're talking about earlier.

0:54:14.160 --> 0:54:19.239
<v Speaker 1>Contemporary British analytic philosopher Galen Strawson. Uh. Their argument is

0:54:19.280 --> 0:54:22.399
<v Speaker 1>that it's that basically free will is impossible because we

0:54:22.480 --> 0:54:25.279
<v Speaker 1>act the way we are right. And this argument, this

0:54:25.360 --> 0:54:29.000
<v Speaker 1>argument always makes me think of of Yates in the

0:54:29.000 --> 0:54:32.040
<v Speaker 1>poem No Second Troy. There's that line what what could

0:54:32.080 --> 0:54:35.640
<v Speaker 1>she have done? Being what she is? Uh? And I

0:54:35.680 --> 0:54:37.640
<v Speaker 1>think about that with myself, Like what when I look

0:54:37.680 --> 0:54:40.120
<v Speaker 1>back on past choices, what else could I have done

0:54:40.280 --> 0:54:42.840
<v Speaker 1>being who I am? You know, without the you know,

0:54:42.880 --> 0:54:45.920
<v Speaker 1>some sort of sci fi foresight brought on by time

0:54:45.960 --> 0:54:51.000
<v Speaker 1>travel or groundhog day shenanigans, Like I am who I am?

0:54:51.160 --> 0:54:54.080
<v Speaker 1>I am influenced by all these these things in my life,

0:54:54.440 --> 0:54:57.600
<v Speaker 1>and my mind is this, and then what other choice

0:54:57.640 --> 0:55:00.480
<v Speaker 1>would that mind have made? Right? I mean, this is Uh.

0:55:00.600 --> 0:55:03.120
<v Speaker 1>That's a very good way of putting it. It almost

0:55:03.160 --> 0:55:07.279
<v Speaker 1>like it maybe emphasizes the fact that free will is

0:55:07.320 --> 0:55:10.800
<v Speaker 1>a difficult concept because of some of the baggage brought

0:55:10.840 --> 0:55:13.840
<v Speaker 1>by the word free. Yeah, to act in accordance with

0:55:13.880 --> 0:55:18.879
<v Speaker 1>your nature and your circumstances is not necessarily not free, right,

0:55:19.200 --> 0:55:22.000
<v Speaker 1>Like it was in my nature to responsibly come to

0:55:22.040 --> 0:55:25.400
<v Speaker 1>work this morning, and so therefore I did. Um could

0:55:25.440 --> 0:55:28.000
<v Speaker 1>I have decided not to come into work? Could I

0:55:28.000 --> 0:55:29.840
<v Speaker 1>have gone to the local I don't know, arcade or

0:55:29.880 --> 0:55:33.880
<v Speaker 1>something or whatever whatever one does when one skip squirk.

0:55:33.920 --> 0:55:37.000
<v Speaker 1>I guess I could have. In theory, there's nothing stopping you. Yeah,

0:55:37.080 --> 0:55:40.239
<v Speaker 1>nothing at all, except that is not my nature, and

0:55:40.520 --> 0:55:42.600
<v Speaker 1>that is not what I did. Because of my nature.

0:55:42.760 --> 0:55:45.239
<v Speaker 1>Given the circumstances of who you are and who you

0:55:45.280 --> 0:55:47.440
<v Speaker 1>were this morning and what was going on this morning,

0:55:47.560 --> 0:55:49.920
<v Speaker 1>you didn't do it. And that's all we know is

0:55:50.000 --> 0:55:52.319
<v Speaker 1>that you know you acted the way you were at

0:55:52.360 --> 0:55:55.560
<v Speaker 1>that time because that's who you were at that time. Yeah.

0:55:55.920 --> 0:55:58.600
<v Speaker 1>Now that being said, yes, events could have been different.

0:55:58.640 --> 0:56:01.000
<v Speaker 1>We could have had an email from our boss saying

0:56:01.080 --> 0:56:03.520
<v Speaker 1>that there is going to be like a rock concert

0:56:03.560 --> 0:56:07.720
<v Speaker 1>in the that's in the office today. That would never happen,

0:56:08.840 --> 0:56:10.839
<v Speaker 1>and it might make me think, well, maybe I don't

0:56:10.840 --> 0:56:13.160
<v Speaker 1>want to come into work today, and maybe the easiest

0:56:13.160 --> 0:56:17.080
<v Speaker 1>thing to do would be just to skip. I don't know. Again,

0:56:17.719 --> 0:56:20.960
<v Speaker 1>you can tease your brain all day thinking about what

0:56:21.120 --> 0:56:23.480
<v Speaker 1>elf and how this would have this little detail where

0:56:23.480 --> 0:56:26.719
<v Speaker 1>this other detail would affected your choices, but ultimately we

0:56:26.760 --> 0:56:28.880
<v Speaker 1>only have the version of the path behind us to

0:56:28.960 --> 0:56:31.879
<v Speaker 1>look back on when we we think about all of this. Now,

0:56:31.880 --> 0:56:35.239
<v Speaker 1>two other basic arguments against free will. This is when

0:56:35.280 --> 0:56:38.880
<v Speaker 1>I think we'll come back to Experimentation has pointed to

0:56:39.000 --> 0:56:41.800
<v Speaker 1>break downs between what feels like the moment of choice

0:56:41.840 --> 0:56:44.440
<v Speaker 1>and what physically signals a choice being made. Yeah, I

0:56:44.440 --> 0:56:47.239
<v Speaker 1>think this very much complicates the idea that Again, what

0:56:47.360 --> 0:56:49.839
<v Speaker 1>I think people are actually really getting at with their

0:56:49.880 --> 0:56:53.239
<v Speaker 1>idea of free will is that they have conscious control

0:56:53.440 --> 0:56:57.319
<v Speaker 1>over their actions and thoughts. And another one, and this

0:56:57.360 --> 0:56:59.400
<v Speaker 1>is again we've been touching on this the whole episode.

0:56:59.400 --> 0:57:04.200
<v Speaker 1>But nearly causal influences at least guide our decisions, if

0:57:04.239 --> 0:57:08.160
<v Speaker 1>not make them for us. It's hard to deny. All right,

0:57:08.239 --> 0:57:10.640
<v Speaker 1>So here are some some arguments for free will. The

0:57:10.680 --> 0:57:13.799
<v Speaker 1>big one, of course, is that subjectively, we tend to

0:57:13.840 --> 0:57:17.480
<v Speaker 1>feel like we have rational, reflective control over our choices

0:57:17.520 --> 0:57:20.240
<v Speaker 1>and actions. Sure, I mean, I can decide to do

0:57:20.320 --> 0:57:22.760
<v Speaker 1>anything that occurs to me to do right now. You know,

0:57:22.800 --> 0:57:25.840
<v Speaker 1>I could throw my computer across the room if I

0:57:25.880 --> 0:57:28.960
<v Speaker 1>really wanted to. Yeah. And then and the idea that

0:57:29.120 --> 0:57:32.040
<v Speaker 1>the way that there are brains enables to simulate these

0:57:32.080 --> 0:57:35.880
<v Speaker 1>possibilities really I think allows us to lean into that interpretation.

0:57:36.280 --> 0:57:39.400
<v Speaker 1>Because it's like the Choose your Own Adventure book, the

0:57:39.520 --> 0:57:42.120
<v Speaker 1>other choices are in there, and if we want to,

0:57:42.200 --> 0:57:44.080
<v Speaker 1>we can cheat, and we can check one out and

0:57:44.120 --> 0:57:46.040
<v Speaker 1>then back up and in a way, you know, we

0:57:46.120 --> 0:57:49.360
<v Speaker 1>can't do that in real life except through our ability

0:57:49.440 --> 0:57:53.240
<v Speaker 1>to simulate possible futures, and and of course that has

0:57:53.280 --> 0:57:55.800
<v Speaker 1>an important evolutionary role. It has a put an important

0:57:55.840 --> 0:57:59.000
<v Speaker 1>role for our survival. We can think about the different

0:57:59.000 --> 0:58:01.320
<v Speaker 1>ways we might try to, say, steal a piece of

0:58:01.360 --> 0:58:04.240
<v Speaker 1>meat from a hungry lion and escape with food and

0:58:04.360 --> 0:58:08.880
<v Speaker 1>our lives, and then choose the best course of action. Um,

0:58:09.200 --> 0:58:12.120
<v Speaker 1>this is, this is important. But it can also lean

0:58:12.200 --> 0:58:16.920
<v Speaker 1>into these interpretations that you know that certainly, uh, you know,

0:58:16.960 --> 0:58:19.840
<v Speaker 1>I have more choice than I actually have, or even

0:58:19.920 --> 0:58:22.520
<v Speaker 1>ultimately an idea that of course it's an exploring bandersnatch,

0:58:22.600 --> 0:58:25.520
<v Speaker 1>the idea that these other alternate choices are kind of

0:58:25.560 --> 0:58:28.440
<v Speaker 1>alternate timelines, that they're out there, like I saw it

0:58:28.440 --> 0:58:31.439
<v Speaker 1>in my head to a certain extent, that reality where

0:58:31.440 --> 0:58:34.040
<v Speaker 1>I tried to take more meat than was feasible and

0:58:34.120 --> 0:58:36.600
<v Speaker 1>was killed by the lion in a way that exists

0:58:36.640 --> 0:58:39.880
<v Speaker 1>because I just saw it. Unfortunately, I would say about

0:58:39.920 --> 0:58:43.400
<v Speaker 1>this argument, it does often feel that way that you know,

0:58:43.520 --> 0:58:46.560
<v Speaker 1>like I could have done anything a minute ago, but

0:58:47.200 --> 0:58:49.720
<v Speaker 1>you didn't. You did what you did. So again this

0:58:49.800 --> 0:58:53.240
<v Speaker 1>comes back to the untestability of this one, like there's

0:58:53.280 --> 0:58:56.120
<v Speaker 1>just never any way to prove that you could have

0:58:56.200 --> 0:58:59.720
<v Speaker 1>done differently than you did in the moment. Like if

0:58:59.760 --> 0:59:02.280
<v Speaker 1>you ever had a like a close call where say

0:59:02.280 --> 0:59:05.880
<v Speaker 1>you're almost in a wreck or you almost do something

0:59:05.880 --> 0:59:08.960
<v Speaker 1>that could have conceivably gotten you killed, um, and then

0:59:09.000 --> 0:59:11.040
<v Speaker 1>you have that moment of reflection. Granted, on one level,

0:59:11.080 --> 0:59:13.760
<v Speaker 1>like it it may get you're you know, just just bodily.

0:59:13.800 --> 0:59:16.120
<v Speaker 1>You're excited, right because this has happened and your body

0:59:16.160 --> 0:59:18.720
<v Speaker 1>is on high alert. But on the other hand, part

0:59:18.760 --> 0:59:22.040
<v Speaker 1>of it is sort of realizing your close proximity to

0:59:22.120 --> 0:59:26.120
<v Speaker 1>this other possibility, like I was just some minor choice,

0:59:26.200 --> 0:59:31.680
<v Speaker 1>some minor bit of input data away from something more catastrophic. Yes,

0:59:31.880 --> 0:59:34.800
<v Speaker 1>it makes you suddenly you come face to face with

0:59:34.800 --> 0:59:38.080
<v Speaker 1>how dependent you are on moment to moment circumstances and awareness.

0:59:38.560 --> 0:59:40.240
<v Speaker 1>Though I would say a lot of times when I

0:59:40.280 --> 0:59:43.040
<v Speaker 1>get that like that, like you know, catch your breath

0:59:43.040 --> 0:59:45.680
<v Speaker 1>about what could have happened. It wasn't because I narrowly

0:59:45.720 --> 0:59:49.320
<v Speaker 1>avoided something really bad happening. It's because I suddenly out

0:59:49.360 --> 0:59:53.760
<v Speaker 1>of nowhere imagined something really bad happening. Like ever, you're

0:59:53.800 --> 0:59:56.040
<v Speaker 1>going down a flight of stairs and it's going fine,

0:59:56.400 --> 0:59:58.960
<v Speaker 1>but you just imagine, oh, I could fall and hit

0:59:59.000 --> 1:00:02.080
<v Speaker 1>my teeth on that thing, and oh yeah, oh yeah,

1:00:02.080 --> 1:00:04.160
<v Speaker 1>I do that. This is of course, this is one

1:00:04.200 --> 1:00:09.680
<v Speaker 1>of my pitfalls, is to almost constantly, um essentially fantasize

1:00:09.800 --> 1:00:12.520
<v Speaker 1>about bad things that could happen. Uh. And I think

1:00:12.560 --> 1:00:13.960
<v Speaker 1>a lot of us do that, you know, And part

1:00:13.960 --> 1:00:17.640
<v Speaker 1>of that is your your mind is exploring possibilities of

1:00:17.680 --> 1:00:21.439
<v Speaker 1>what is happening or could happen or has happened. And

1:00:21.720 --> 1:00:23.720
<v Speaker 1>but in doing that we can lean into the negative

1:00:23.760 --> 1:00:28.000
<v Speaker 1>possibilities too much, and then our lives become this, you know, abysmal.

1:00:28.080 --> 1:00:31.720
<v Speaker 1>Choose your own adventure book of most of mostly terrible ends,

1:00:32.160 --> 1:00:34.520
<v Speaker 1>even though the path that you're actually on may not

1:00:35.160 --> 1:00:37.960
<v Speaker 1>be leading to any of them. Um. It's it seems

1:00:38.000 --> 1:00:40.800
<v Speaker 1>like the curse of all this confusion about whether we

1:00:40.840 --> 1:00:43.200
<v Speaker 1>have free will or not and what that actually means,

1:00:43.680 --> 1:00:45.760
<v Speaker 1>could just be rooted in the fact that we can

1:00:45.800 --> 1:00:49.800
<v Speaker 1>consider hypothetical alternative scenarios. The fact that we're able to

1:00:49.840 --> 1:00:55.080
<v Speaker 1>imagine counter factuals is what makes is what gives rise

1:00:55.120 --> 1:00:59.080
<v Speaker 1>to this whole argument. Uh So, another thing I have

1:00:59.080 --> 1:01:00.720
<v Speaker 1>in the list here, and this basically it's just an

1:01:00.720 --> 1:01:05.400
<v Speaker 1>extrapolation of everything we're talking about right now, is Philosophers

1:01:05.400 --> 1:01:09.080
<v Speaker 1>Stephen Cave and also Bruce Waller have both argued that

1:01:09.160 --> 1:01:12.880
<v Speaker 1>animals evolved with the capabilities we tend to associate with

1:01:12.960 --> 1:01:18.240
<v Speaker 1>free will in order to survive, such as opinion generation, deliberation, will,

1:01:18.280 --> 1:01:21.400
<v Speaker 1>power to stick to a choice, and the large human

1:01:21.440 --> 1:01:24.560
<v Speaker 1>brain has all of this in spades. Cave argues that

1:01:24.600 --> 1:01:27.320
<v Speaker 1>the level of free will uh that we have may

1:01:27.360 --> 1:01:30.560
<v Speaker 1>actually vary from individual to individual, and he argues that

1:01:30.600 --> 1:01:33.280
<v Speaker 1>we could potentially even put together a method of measuring

1:01:33.400 --> 1:01:36.880
<v Speaker 1>one's freedom quotient or f Q in the same way

1:01:36.920 --> 1:01:41.560
<v Speaker 1>that we well roughly measure one's intelligence, creativity, and other

1:01:41.680 --> 1:01:44.760
<v Speaker 1>psychological factors. I do think that's possible, but I also

1:01:44.800 --> 1:01:46.360
<v Speaker 1>think that that would be subject to a lot of

1:01:46.400 --> 1:01:49.960
<v Speaker 1>debate about exactly what it is you're measuring. There as

1:01:49.960 --> 1:01:52.560
<v Speaker 1>a lot of these actual uh, you know, human or

1:01:52.600 --> 1:01:55.800
<v Speaker 1>animal quotients are I mean, when when you measure human intelligence,

1:01:55.800 --> 1:01:59.080
<v Speaker 1>there's debate about what exactly are you measuring uh, And

1:01:59.120 --> 1:02:01.120
<v Speaker 1>I think the same with would be true of freedom

1:02:01.160 --> 1:02:03.960
<v Speaker 1>subject to all of these crazy caveats we've been talking

1:02:03.960 --> 1:02:06.080
<v Speaker 1>about so far. What what what do you mean when

1:02:06.080 --> 1:02:08.960
<v Speaker 1>you say freedom? Yeah. Another take on this that I

1:02:09.080 --> 1:02:11.840
<v Speaker 1>had read in the past was something that neuroscientists David

1:02:11.840 --> 1:02:16.320
<v Speaker 1>Eagleman called the principle of sufficient automatism. And the idea

1:02:16.400 --> 1:02:18.840
<v Speaker 1>here is that the more that we map the human

1:02:18.880 --> 1:02:22.720
<v Speaker 1>genome and study the brains many subconscious machinations, the more

1:02:22.720 --> 1:02:25.400
<v Speaker 1>it becomes clear that a free will exists. It's only

1:02:25.520 --> 1:02:31.320
<v Speaker 1>a factor hitching a ride on top of enormous automated machinery. Um,

1:02:32.200 --> 1:02:35.200
<v Speaker 1>so again it comes there's there's plenty of ground in

1:02:35.240 --> 1:02:39.640
<v Speaker 1>between automaton and self moving soul where you can you

1:02:39.640 --> 1:02:43.160
<v Speaker 1>can sort of move the slider towards one direction or

1:02:43.200 --> 1:02:46.240
<v Speaker 1>the other and still have something that we can at

1:02:46.320 --> 1:02:48.760
<v Speaker 1>least refer to as free will. But it might only

1:02:48.760 --> 1:02:51.280
<v Speaker 1>be a very very little bit of something. Yeah, it might.

1:02:51.400 --> 1:02:53.640
<v Speaker 1>And it's it's interesting to sort of do that, to

1:02:53.680 --> 1:02:56.080
<v Speaker 1>do a little self reflection and think about that, Like, yes,

1:02:56.160 --> 1:02:59.520
<v Speaker 1>I had choice in the Senate situation, but really, how

1:02:59.600 --> 1:03:02.920
<v Speaker 1>much voice was there? Uh? Yeah? And I think for me,

1:03:03.000 --> 1:03:06.480
<v Speaker 1>at least some of the definition problems would still remain like,

1:03:06.960 --> 1:03:10.560
<v Speaker 1>I'm not sure that even then, that that's clarifying what

1:03:10.600 --> 1:03:14.919
<v Speaker 1>the concept of freedom means there. Um So, we can't

1:03:14.960 --> 1:03:17.440
<v Speaker 1>test whether it's possible for a person to produce different

1:03:17.440 --> 1:03:20.760
<v Speaker 1>outputs given the exact same inputs. That just seems beyond

1:03:20.920 --> 1:03:24.200
<v Speaker 1>the bounds of empiricism. You could believe that if you want,

1:03:24.280 --> 1:03:26.880
<v Speaker 1>but I don't think there's any evidence for it. But

1:03:27.080 --> 1:03:30.040
<v Speaker 1>this might not be what we really mean by free will. Maybe,

1:03:30.080 --> 1:03:32.919
<v Speaker 1>as I mentioned earlier, we what we mean by free

1:03:32.920 --> 1:03:36.400
<v Speaker 1>will is that we are conscious of the process by

1:03:36.440 --> 1:03:39.760
<v Speaker 1>which we make decisions or generate actions. And I think

1:03:39.760 --> 1:03:43.800
<v Speaker 1>the empirical research is pretty clear that this is not true,

1:03:43.880 --> 1:03:47.080
<v Speaker 1>at least not in many cases. Um So, just to

1:03:47.120 --> 1:03:49.960
<v Speaker 1>look at a few studies undercutting traditional notions that our

1:03:49.960 --> 1:03:54.000
<v Speaker 1>consciousness dictates our decisions or that we're consciously aware of

1:03:54.040 --> 1:03:57.400
<v Speaker 1>how are all our decisions are reached? Um So, first

1:03:57.400 --> 1:03:59.080
<v Speaker 1>of all, I want to look at one by a

1:03:59.320 --> 1:04:04.240
<v Speaker 1>soon brass, Hines and Haines, published in Nature Neuroscience in

1:04:04.280 --> 1:04:07.560
<v Speaker 1>two thousand eight, called Unconscious Determinants of free Decisions and

1:04:07.600 --> 1:04:11.200
<v Speaker 1>the Human Brain. In this study, the authors found that

1:04:11.280 --> 1:04:14.840
<v Speaker 1>they could use brain scanning to detect a person's choice

1:04:15.280 --> 1:04:19.440
<v Speaker 1>between two options before the person believed that they had

1:04:19.600 --> 1:04:22.240
<v Speaker 1>made a choice. So you've got a very simple setup.

1:04:22.440 --> 1:04:25.760
<v Speaker 1>You're supposed to freely choose between pressing two buttons. You've

1:04:25.760 --> 1:04:28.360
<v Speaker 1>got a left button pressed with your left hand, You've

1:04:28.360 --> 1:04:31.000
<v Speaker 1>got a right button pressed with your right hand. Uh,

1:04:31.040 --> 1:04:33.120
<v Speaker 1>the two different hands were used because this made it

1:04:33.160 --> 1:04:35.480
<v Speaker 1>easier to see which hand was about to be engaged

1:04:35.520 --> 1:04:38.640
<v Speaker 1>through motor control and brain imaging. And so you take

1:04:38.640 --> 1:04:41.640
<v Speaker 1>your time, you decide which which button you want to press,

1:04:41.880 --> 1:04:45.280
<v Speaker 1>and then you note which letter in a timed sequence

1:04:45.360 --> 1:04:47.600
<v Speaker 1>is displayed on a screen in front of you. At

1:04:47.640 --> 1:04:50.440
<v Speaker 1>the moment you believe you've made your decision about which

1:04:50.440 --> 1:04:53.959
<v Speaker 1>button to push. And in some cases, the researchers could

1:04:54.000 --> 1:04:58.440
<v Speaker 1>detect brain activity of the prefrontal and parietal cortex indicating

1:04:58.520 --> 1:05:01.360
<v Speaker 1>which choice a person was going to make up to

1:05:01.520 --> 1:05:05.439
<v Speaker 1>seven to ten seconds before the person believed they had

1:05:05.520 --> 1:05:09.200
<v Speaker 1>made their choice. So this study indicates that at least

1:05:09.200 --> 1:05:12.920
<v Speaker 1>in some cases, at the moment you believe that you

1:05:13.000 --> 1:05:16.760
<v Speaker 1>have consciously made a choice to do something, machines can

1:05:16.800 --> 1:05:19.680
<v Speaker 1>look at your brain and showed that the brain has

1:05:19.760 --> 1:05:23.080
<v Speaker 1>made a choice before you believe you have made a choice,

1:05:23.120 --> 1:05:27.640
<v Speaker 1>and predict with better than chance accuracy. What that choice is?

1:05:27.680 --> 1:05:30.200
<v Speaker 1>This is this is a study that really intrigued me.

1:05:30.320 --> 1:05:33.200
<v Speaker 1>I remember when it came out, because it's basically this

1:05:33.320 --> 1:05:36.000
<v Speaker 1>idea where I think that I'm the lightning, but perhaps

1:05:36.040 --> 1:05:38.760
<v Speaker 1>I am the thunder, or at least my experience is

1:05:38.760 --> 1:05:42.120
<v Speaker 1>that of the thunder. But then the the other question is, well,

1:05:42.160 --> 1:05:44.520
<v Speaker 1>does that mean I'm not the lightning? Am I not? Both?

1:05:44.640 --> 1:05:47.000
<v Speaker 1>And maybe just I'm like, I have a thunder level

1:05:47.040 --> 1:05:50.360
<v Speaker 1>awareness of what I am, but there is this lightning

1:05:50.400 --> 1:05:53.800
<v Speaker 1>that precedes this experience of me. Well, I mean, I

1:05:53.840 --> 1:05:56.680
<v Speaker 1>don't know. I mean the decision is generated by the brain.

1:05:57.000 --> 1:05:59.400
<v Speaker 1>So again you're back to this question of what free

1:05:59.440 --> 1:06:01.800
<v Speaker 1>will mean. But if it, if it does have something

1:06:01.840 --> 1:06:05.960
<v Speaker 1>to do with consciously being a participant at the moment

1:06:06.040 --> 1:06:09.720
<v Speaker 1>that a decision is made, that there's pretty good evidence

1:06:09.760 --> 1:06:12.720
<v Speaker 1>that that's not going on. The brain is making decisions

1:06:12.760 --> 1:06:16.720
<v Speaker 1>before the person thinks I have made a decision. But okay,

1:06:16.720 --> 1:06:20.040
<v Speaker 1>that was two thousand eight. Is there anything since then? Sure?

1:06:20.080 --> 1:06:22.760
<v Speaker 1>Here's one study with findings along these lines but applied

1:06:22.760 --> 1:06:26.040
<v Speaker 1>to voluntary mental imagery, who was published just last year

1:06:26.080 --> 1:06:29.240
<v Speaker 1>in twenty nineteen, and the Open access journal Scientific Reports.

1:06:29.640 --> 1:06:33.760
<v Speaker 1>It's by Kenny Robert and Pearson in h I said

1:06:33.760 --> 1:06:37.000
<v Speaker 1>Scientific Reports called Decoding the Contents and Strength of Imagery

1:06:37.040 --> 1:06:41.120
<v Speaker 1>before Volitional Engagement. Uh and UH again. This was published

1:06:41.360 --> 1:06:44.240
<v Speaker 1>in twenty nineteen. The short version here is that the

1:06:44.280 --> 1:06:47.280
<v Speaker 1>researchers exposed people to two different images. You've got a

1:06:47.320 --> 1:06:50.800
<v Speaker 1>red circle with horizontal lines and a green circle with

1:06:50.960 --> 1:06:54.400
<v Speaker 1>vertical lines. And then the researchers were able to correlate

1:06:54.800 --> 1:06:58.640
<v Speaker 1>images of brain states with mental representation of the different pictures,

1:06:58.680 --> 1:07:00.440
<v Speaker 1>so they know what it's what it looks like in

1:07:00.480 --> 1:07:04.520
<v Speaker 1>your brain when you're thinking about these two images separately. Uh.

1:07:04.560 --> 1:07:07.840
<v Speaker 1>They could use this brain imaging to predict, again above chance,

1:07:08.080 --> 1:07:12.280
<v Speaker 1>which image subjects would choose to visualize in their head

1:07:12.800 --> 1:07:16.360
<v Speaker 1>before the subjects believed they had made a choice about

1:07:16.400 --> 1:07:18.880
<v Speaker 1>which one to imagine in their head. And they can

1:07:18.960 --> 1:07:21.360
<v Speaker 1>make these predictions at a rate above chance and average

1:07:21.360 --> 1:07:25.880
<v Speaker 1>of eleven seconds before the person's actual choice about which

1:07:25.880 --> 1:07:28.480
<v Speaker 1>one they were going to imagine. So one of the authors,

1:07:28.560 --> 1:07:31.320
<v Speaker 1>Joel Pearson UH was quoted in a statement I believed

1:07:31.320 --> 1:07:34.680
<v Speaker 1>to Medical express quote. We believe that when we are

1:07:34.720 --> 1:07:37.240
<v Speaker 1>faced with the choice between two or more options of

1:07:37.320 --> 1:07:41.240
<v Speaker 1>what to think about. Non conscious traces of the thoughts

1:07:41.280 --> 1:07:46.000
<v Speaker 1>are there already, a bit like unconscious hallucinations. That comes

1:07:46.000 --> 1:07:49.040
<v Speaker 1>back to something we talked about recently. Um As the

1:07:49.080 --> 1:07:52.480
<v Speaker 1>decision of what to think about is made, executive areas

1:07:52.520 --> 1:07:55.520
<v Speaker 1>of the brain choose the thought trace which is stronger.

1:07:55.840 --> 1:07:59.240
<v Speaker 1>In other words, if any pre existing brain activity matches

1:07:59.320 --> 1:08:01.560
<v Speaker 1>one of your choice is, then your brain will be

1:08:01.640 --> 1:08:04.520
<v Speaker 1>more likely to pick that option as it gets boosted

1:08:04.560 --> 1:08:08.400
<v Speaker 1>by the pre existing brain activity. This would explain, for example,

1:08:08.440 --> 1:08:11.439
<v Speaker 1>why thinking over and over about something leads to ever

1:08:11.520 --> 1:08:14.080
<v Speaker 1>more thoughts about it as it occurs in a positive

1:08:14.080 --> 1:08:17.480
<v Speaker 1>feedback loop. And then, to quote from the study abstract,

1:08:17.560 --> 1:08:20.439
<v Speaker 1>the authors say, our results suggest that the contents and

1:08:20.479 --> 1:08:24.599
<v Speaker 1>strength of mental imagery are influenced by sensory like neural

1:08:24.640 --> 1:08:30.160
<v Speaker 1>representations that emerge spontaneously before volition. So there are things

1:08:30.200 --> 1:08:32.320
<v Speaker 1>going on within the brain that we can detect with

1:08:32.400 --> 1:08:36.320
<v Speaker 1>machinery from the outside that suggests what you're going to

1:08:36.400 --> 1:08:39.360
<v Speaker 1>think about before you think about it now. I think

1:08:39.360 --> 1:08:42.000
<v Speaker 1>we should be fair that it's possible. This isn't always

1:08:42.040 --> 1:08:45.040
<v Speaker 1>the case, but there's plenty of evidence that at least

1:08:45.040 --> 1:08:48.040
<v Speaker 1>in some of the at least in some cases, when

1:08:48.080 --> 1:08:52.200
<v Speaker 1>people think they're consciously making a choice, the brain in

1:08:52.240 --> 1:08:55.479
<v Speaker 1>a measurable way has already made a choice that can

1:08:55.520 --> 1:08:59.000
<v Speaker 1>be detected from the outside. The brain has already set

1:08:59.080 --> 1:09:02.760
<v Speaker 1>one course of action in motion before the conscious part

1:09:02.760 --> 1:09:05.599
<v Speaker 1>of our brain is aware that we're going to choose

1:09:05.640 --> 1:09:09.320
<v Speaker 1>that course. So again, kind of a thunder enlightening scenario

1:09:09.560 --> 1:09:12.000
<v Speaker 1>right now. Of course, this stuff we've been talking about

1:09:12.080 --> 1:09:14.400
<v Speaker 1>is is true of typical human brains. Once you start

1:09:14.400 --> 1:09:17.880
<v Speaker 1>looking at a typical neurological situations, you can find all

1:09:17.960 --> 1:09:21.240
<v Speaker 1>kinds of evidence of action without the sensation of conscious

1:09:21.280 --> 1:09:23.519
<v Speaker 1>awareness or choice. A lot of these are things that

1:09:23.560 --> 1:09:26.320
<v Speaker 1>have come up on the show before, like blind site,

1:09:26.560 --> 1:09:30.600
<v Speaker 1>the fact that people can physically react to visual stimuli

1:09:30.640 --> 1:09:33.800
<v Speaker 1>while believing consciously that they are blind, or that they're

1:09:33.840 --> 1:09:36.120
<v Speaker 1>blind in some part of their visual field, like you

1:09:36.160 --> 1:09:38.840
<v Speaker 1>can react to, you know, raise your hand to catch

1:09:38.920 --> 1:09:41.479
<v Speaker 1>a ball without believing that you have seen the ball,

1:09:42.040 --> 1:09:44.840
<v Speaker 1>or you've got alien limb syndrome, where something like a

1:09:44.880 --> 1:09:47.800
<v Speaker 1>brain lesion can cause part of the body to act

1:09:47.800 --> 1:09:49.879
<v Speaker 1>in a way that you do not feel in control

1:09:50.000 --> 1:09:52.759
<v Speaker 1>of the hand moves on its own, it moves against

1:09:52.840 --> 1:09:55.280
<v Speaker 1>your will, it picks up the spoon when you meant

1:09:55.280 --> 1:09:58.720
<v Speaker 1>to pick up the fork. Um. Of course, the experiences

1:09:58.760 --> 1:10:01.400
<v Speaker 1>of split brain patients, which we we did a deep

1:10:01.439 --> 1:10:05.120
<v Speaker 1>dive on in January of twenty nineteen. The short version

1:10:05.360 --> 1:10:07.680
<v Speaker 1>is that some patients who undergo a surgery called a

1:10:07.720 --> 1:10:11.479
<v Speaker 1>corpus callisotomy, in which the main avenue of information sharing

1:10:11.479 --> 1:10:14.600
<v Speaker 1>between the two hemispheres of the brain is severed, can

1:10:14.760 --> 1:10:17.760
<v Speaker 1>seem to show signs of the right hemisphere acting and

1:10:17.800 --> 1:10:21.519
<v Speaker 1>making choices without the conscious awareness or control of the

1:10:21.640 --> 1:10:24.040
<v Speaker 1>left hemisphere, which seems to be the part of the

1:10:24.040 --> 1:10:27.200
<v Speaker 1>brain that can usually talk and the last example lead

1:10:27.240 --> 1:10:31.559
<v Speaker 1>to hypotheses like Michael Gazzaniga and Joseph Ladue's left brain

1:10:31.640 --> 1:10:34.720
<v Speaker 1>interpreter model, where they argue that part of what the

1:10:34.800 --> 1:10:38.160
<v Speaker 1>left hemisphere of the brain does is generate an ongoing

1:10:38.280 --> 1:10:43.200
<v Speaker 1>series of narrative explanations that reconcile past and present and

1:10:43.280 --> 1:10:46.439
<v Speaker 1>give us the sense of that that we understand why

1:10:46.520 --> 1:10:49.000
<v Speaker 1>we do what we do now. Of course, their model

1:10:49.040 --> 1:10:51.640
<v Speaker 1>could be incorrect, but I think it's also possible that

1:10:51.680 --> 1:10:54.640
<v Speaker 1>they're really onto something that the brain seems to have

1:10:54.680 --> 1:10:58.639
<v Speaker 1>a major function of trying to convince itself that its

1:10:58.720 --> 1:11:03.960
<v Speaker 1>behavior is coherent and has rational justifications. Uh, and if

1:11:03.960 --> 1:11:06.840
<v Speaker 1>possible to convince the conscious part of the brain that

1:11:07.040 --> 1:11:09.280
<v Speaker 1>it's in control. I think this is kind of like

1:11:09.360 --> 1:11:12.640
<v Speaker 1>at work when you give the boss three options. You know,

1:11:12.760 --> 1:11:14.800
<v Speaker 1>it's like, here are the three things we came up with,

1:11:14.840 --> 1:11:17.840
<v Speaker 1>and you've got the one you actually want to go with. Uh.

1:11:17.880 --> 1:11:20.479
<v Speaker 1>And then you've got to like terrible options that are

1:11:20.520 --> 1:11:23.680
<v Speaker 1>designed in order to be ignored and discarded by the

1:11:23.720 --> 1:11:25.960
<v Speaker 1>boss and flatter the boss and give them a sense

1:11:25.960 --> 1:11:29.560
<v Speaker 1>of control, right, which can be a dangerous exercise. Absolutely,

1:11:29.600 --> 1:11:32.360
<v Speaker 1>I'm not advising that is a good strategy. I'm just

1:11:32.400 --> 1:11:34.960
<v Speaker 1>saying people do it. To look quickly at one more

1:11:35.000 --> 1:11:38.840
<v Speaker 1>study I found. This was published in in p N A.

1:11:39.120 --> 1:11:43.439
<v Speaker 1>S By by Darby, jouts Burke, and Fox called Lesion

1:11:43.479 --> 1:11:47.960
<v Speaker 1>network Localization of free will. Very briefly, the authors here

1:11:48.600 --> 1:11:52.679
<v Speaker 1>defined the defined the neurologically relevant parts of free will

1:11:53.080 --> 1:11:55.280
<v Speaker 1>as having two parts. So first of all, there's the

1:11:55.360 --> 1:11:57.800
<v Speaker 1>desire to act. That's a volition. You know, you've got

1:11:57.880 --> 1:12:02.160
<v Speaker 1>volitional control, and then a sin of responsibility for that action,

1:12:02.280 --> 1:12:06.320
<v Speaker 1>which is the feeling of agencies. You have volition and agency.

1:12:06.400 --> 1:12:08.960
<v Speaker 1>And then they looked at two neurological conditions, one that

1:12:09.080 --> 1:12:12.120
<v Speaker 1>is believed to disrupt each of these functions. Uh, they

1:12:12.120 --> 1:12:16.040
<v Speaker 1>looked at focal brain lesions that disrupt a volition causing

1:12:16.200 --> 1:12:19.519
<v Speaker 1>a kinetic mutism, and a kinetic mutism is a condition

1:12:19.760 --> 1:12:23.080
<v Speaker 1>where patients are unable to voluntarily move or speak. This

1:12:23.360 --> 1:12:25.840
<v Speaker 1>would of course be a disruption of the volition part

1:12:25.840 --> 1:12:29.080
<v Speaker 1>of the brain. And then lesions that disrupt agency, and

1:12:29.120 --> 1:12:32.200
<v Speaker 1>this would of course cause alien limb syndrome again alien

1:12:32.320 --> 1:12:34.920
<v Speaker 1>len syndrome. That's where you've got part of your body

1:12:34.960 --> 1:12:37.760
<v Speaker 1>acting or moving in a way that does not feel voluntary.

1:12:37.840 --> 1:12:40.160
<v Speaker 1>It moves, but you don't feel like you did it.

1:12:41.040 --> 1:12:43.879
<v Speaker 1>And then they basically found that brain lesions that disrupt

1:12:43.960 --> 1:12:46.600
<v Speaker 1>volition occur all over the brain, but there within a

1:12:46.600 --> 1:12:49.320
<v Speaker 1>brain network that is connected in some way to the

1:12:49.360 --> 1:12:53.320
<v Speaker 1>anterior singulate cortex. And they found that lesions that disrupt

1:12:53.400 --> 1:12:56.680
<v Speaker 1>agency also occur in different locations around the brain, but

1:12:56.760 --> 1:12:59.400
<v Speaker 1>they tend to be defined by connectivity to a part

1:12:59.439 --> 1:13:02.080
<v Speaker 1>of the brain called the pre cunus. Now, again I

1:13:02.080 --> 1:13:05.840
<v Speaker 1>would note that this this acknowledges physical evidence that there

1:13:05.840 --> 1:13:11.080
<v Speaker 1>are distinct brain processes involved in generating action, you know, volition,

1:13:11.520 --> 1:13:16.040
<v Speaker 1>versus recognizing personal agency in that action and typical brains

1:13:16.080 --> 1:13:19.400
<v Speaker 1>executing typical actions have both of these acting in sync,

1:13:19.720 --> 1:13:22.680
<v Speaker 1>but brains can have either one without the other. Now,

1:13:22.680 --> 1:13:25.200
<v Speaker 1>obviously we could keep going here, We could keep discussing

1:13:25.280 --> 1:13:28.920
<v Speaker 1>a free will and what feels like free will and

1:13:28.960 --> 1:13:33.320
<v Speaker 1>how it matches up with with neuroscientific data, etcetera. But

1:13:33.760 --> 1:13:35.439
<v Speaker 1>at this point the podcast, we probably do need to

1:13:35.439 --> 1:13:37.840
<v Speaker 1>bring it back around to band or Snatch and the

1:13:37.960 --> 1:13:40.719
<v Speaker 1>question like, Okay, given all this stuff that we've talked about,

1:13:40.880 --> 1:13:43.000
<v Speaker 1>what does band or Snatch seem to be saying about

1:13:43.040 --> 1:13:46.879
<v Speaker 1>all of this? Well, it does seem to be largely

1:13:46.880 --> 1:13:49.479
<v Speaker 1>a rumination on the idea that we do not seem

1:13:49.560 --> 1:13:51.800
<v Speaker 1>to have as much free will as we think we do.

1:13:52.400 --> 1:13:56.200
<v Speaker 1>That that we can resist, but it takes considerable effort

1:13:56.200 --> 1:13:59.439
<v Speaker 1>to run counter to the current that we're stuck in.

1:13:59.680 --> 1:14:01.920
<v Speaker 1>I would say a thing that is a theme that

1:14:02.000 --> 1:14:04.559
<v Speaker 1>has hammered home about free will, and it is the

1:14:04.640 --> 1:14:07.320
<v Speaker 1>more we look at the concept of free will and

1:14:07.439 --> 1:14:10.120
<v Speaker 1>think about whether we have control over our actions, the

1:14:10.200 --> 1:14:12.680
<v Speaker 1>less we feel we have it. Yeah, Like I was

1:14:12.840 --> 1:14:16.000
<v Speaker 1>thinking of trying to list, like all the various factors

1:14:16.479 --> 1:14:22.000
<v Speaker 1>and agents that are influencing Stephen in the story, I mean,

1:14:22.040 --> 1:14:25.760
<v Speaker 1>we have his mental health, his past trauma, his father,

1:14:25.960 --> 1:14:29.360
<v Speaker 1>his therapist, uh, the the the work and tragic life,

1:14:29.400 --> 1:14:33.439
<v Speaker 1>the influence of Jerome F. Davies, his boss at Tucker Soft,

1:14:33.680 --> 1:14:38.960
<v Speaker 1>his mentor slash hero, slash friend Colin Rittman, conspiracy theories,

1:14:39.200 --> 1:14:42.240
<v Speaker 1>music media, etcetera. And that's not even getting into the

1:14:42.280 --> 1:14:46.200
<v Speaker 1>Specco development that there is either an actual demon entity

1:14:46.240 --> 1:14:49.640
<v Speaker 1>that is the literal thief of destiny, or that a

1:14:49.680 --> 1:14:52.920
<v Speaker 1>power beyond himself is influencing his decisions, some sort of

1:14:53.040 --> 1:14:56.120
<v Speaker 1>voice from beyond, or the machinations of a player in

1:14:56.160 --> 1:15:00.560
<v Speaker 1>another world. Yeah, the story really brings home this paradox,

1:15:00.600 --> 1:15:03.400
<v Speaker 1>which is that I think it is the case that

1:15:03.560 --> 1:15:06.519
<v Speaker 1>the closer we look at free will, and the more

1:15:06.640 --> 1:15:09.719
<v Speaker 1>we uh you know, bring bring our our sharpest scientific

1:15:09.800 --> 1:15:14.559
<v Speaker 1>tools and philosophical instruments to uh to understand it, the

1:15:14.640 --> 1:15:16.880
<v Speaker 1>less it seems to make sense and the less it

1:15:16.920 --> 1:15:19.639
<v Speaker 1>seems to be there. And yet at the same time

1:15:19.680 --> 1:15:23.240
<v Speaker 1>that we acknowledge that to feel like your actions are

1:15:23.240 --> 1:15:26.400
<v Speaker 1>not under your own control is not a heightened state

1:15:26.439 --> 1:15:30.439
<v Speaker 1>of consciousness, that is still a problem and it uh

1:15:30.439 --> 1:15:32.559
<v Speaker 1>and I don't know exactly what that signals that maybe

1:15:32.640 --> 1:15:36.080
<v Speaker 1>yet another unresolved tension in the the issue of free will,

1:15:36.120 --> 1:15:38.880
<v Speaker 1>that like, the more closely we examine it, the less

1:15:38.880 --> 1:15:42.160
<v Speaker 1>we feel like we have it, and yet genuinely feeling

1:15:42.200 --> 1:15:44.880
<v Speaker 1>like you don't have it. The more you feel that way,

1:15:44.920 --> 1:15:47.479
<v Speaker 1>the more this is a serious impediment to you living

1:15:47.479 --> 1:15:51.280
<v Speaker 1>a healthy life. Now, this seems this may seem like

1:15:51.320 --> 1:15:55.160
<v Speaker 1>a logical place to in the conversation, but one of

1:15:55.160 --> 1:15:58.880
<v Speaker 1>the things that's really interesting here is that is that

1:15:59.160 --> 1:16:01.920
<v Speaker 1>we were talking about episode of Black Mirror that deals

1:16:01.960 --> 1:16:04.760
<v Speaker 1>with free will and our choices in life. And and

1:16:04.760 --> 1:16:07.639
<v Speaker 1>certainly again Black Mirror frequently comments on our uneasy regarding

1:16:07.640 --> 1:16:11.519
<v Speaker 1>new technology. But then Band or Snatch itself, this show

1:16:11.800 --> 1:16:16.559
<v Speaker 1>on Netflix, this this movie, this movie itself factors into

1:16:16.640 --> 1:16:19.840
<v Speaker 1>some user concerns about the future of this sort of

1:16:19.920 --> 1:16:25.040
<v Speaker 1>interactive viewing technology. Yes, uh, you know, I would say

1:16:25.080 --> 1:16:27.280
<v Speaker 1>one of the things that is a legitimate concern about

1:16:27.320 --> 1:16:30.120
<v Speaker 1>free will, however you define it, is as murky as

1:16:30.120 --> 1:16:33.120
<v Speaker 1>it is. At least one thing that we want is

1:16:33.200 --> 1:16:37.120
<v Speaker 1>to we want to think that we understand the incoming

1:16:37.200 --> 1:16:40.599
<v Speaker 1>influences on our behavior, right Like you'd like to think

1:16:40.640 --> 1:16:43.400
<v Speaker 1>that if I did X. I can sort of make

1:16:43.439 --> 1:16:46.160
<v Speaker 1>sense of that. It was because I read this book,

1:16:46.240 --> 1:16:48.600
<v Speaker 1>or I read this article, or I had a conversation

1:16:48.640 --> 1:16:52.120
<v Speaker 1>with this person, and I connect the knowledge I gained

1:16:52.200 --> 1:16:56.559
<v Speaker 1>through that or the influences of those past experiences with

1:16:56.680 --> 1:17:00.000
<v Speaker 1>the decision I just made. Life starts getting more different.

1:17:00.040 --> 1:17:03.840
<v Speaker 1>Cult when you have trouble understanding what the influences on

1:17:03.960 --> 1:17:07.000
<v Speaker 1>yourself are. Does that make sense? Yeah? Yeah, And we've

1:17:07.040 --> 1:17:09.599
<v Speaker 1>we've discussed some of these in the path. We've discussed

1:17:09.600 --> 1:17:11.960
<v Speaker 1>a number of these in the past, but technologically speaking,

1:17:12.000 --> 1:17:15.120
<v Speaker 1>we have discussed advertising and we have discussed social media,

1:17:16.200 --> 1:17:19.120
<v Speaker 1>which are good things to keep in mind as as

1:17:19.160 --> 1:17:21.320
<v Speaker 1>we continue here, because there might not be a band

1:17:21.360 --> 1:17:23.880
<v Speaker 1>or snatcher, a demon awaiting you in the maze of

1:17:23.960 --> 1:17:27.439
<v Speaker 1>future interactive media technology, but there might just be some

1:17:27.600 --> 1:17:33.440
<v Speaker 1>highly targeted advertisements for example. Right. So uh. Two individuals

1:17:33.800 --> 1:17:35.840
<v Speaker 1>that I ran across the road about this topic or

1:17:36.080 --> 1:17:39.120
<v Speaker 1>or or touched on this topic. One is Matthew Galt,

1:17:39.120 --> 1:17:42.840
<v Speaker 1>who wrote about this last year for Vice's Motherboard, and

1:17:42.880 --> 1:17:45.839
<v Speaker 1>then Tiffany Sho wrote about it for The New York Times.

1:17:46.439 --> 1:17:50.520
<v Speaker 1>So Galt wrote about Michael Veal, a technology policy researcher

1:17:50.760 --> 1:17:55.439
<v Speaker 1>at University College London who utilized Europe's General Data Protection

1:17:55.520 --> 1:17:59.480
<v Speaker 1>Regulation or g d p r UM law to request

1:17:59.520 --> 1:18:03.160
<v Speaker 1>a cop be of the data Netflix collected about him

1:18:03.200 --> 1:18:06.080
<v Speaker 1>and his choices through the use of the band or

1:18:06.160 --> 1:18:10.160
<v Speaker 1>Snatch program. Now they complied, perhaps in part because of

1:18:10.520 --> 1:18:15.120
<v Speaker 1>vail status as a public person. But basically Netflix acquires

1:18:15.240 --> 1:18:18.439
<v Speaker 1>this information in order to carry out the Bandersnatch experience,

1:18:18.479 --> 1:18:21.320
<v Speaker 1>which makes sense rights it has to chart your path

1:18:21.680 --> 1:18:26.160
<v Speaker 1>through this this complex system. But then also Netflix keeps

1:18:26.200 --> 1:18:29.000
<v Speaker 1>this information, which the company claims is in order to

1:18:29.120 --> 1:18:32.559
<v Speaker 1>quote determine how to improve this model of storytelling in

1:18:32.600 --> 1:18:36.240
<v Speaker 1>the context of a show or movie. And I mean,

1:18:36.439 --> 1:18:38.920
<v Speaker 1>on one level that sounds well and good as well,

1:18:38.960 --> 1:18:42.479
<v Speaker 1>except that the veal thinks that Netflix quote should really

1:18:42.560 --> 1:18:46.000
<v Speaker 1>be using consent which you should be able to refuse,

1:18:46.360 --> 1:18:49.880
<v Speaker 1>or legitimate interests meaning that you can object to it instead.

1:18:50.880 --> 1:18:54.040
<v Speaker 1>Now in Shoes article, she points to the early choice

1:18:54.080 --> 1:18:58.839
<v Speaker 1>we make between h Kellogg's Frosties and then Quaker Sugar

1:18:58.880 --> 1:19:02.439
<v Speaker 1>Puffs out. Both of these are real serials, So I

1:19:02.439 --> 1:19:05.360
<v Speaker 1>have to admit I thought Quaker Sugar Puffs was made

1:19:05.439 --> 1:19:09.120
<v Speaker 1>up because it has this ridiculous honey Monster mascot. That's

1:19:09.160 --> 1:19:11.720
<v Speaker 1>like super fun, kind of a cheddar Goblin sort of thing.

1:19:12.479 --> 1:19:15.719
<v Speaker 1>But it turns out this was an actual UK product.

1:19:15.800 --> 1:19:19.200
<v Speaker 1>It was just a UK only products, so Americans such

1:19:19.240 --> 1:19:22.240
<v Speaker 1>as ourselves were perhaps not privy to it. But again,

1:19:22.280 --> 1:19:25.800
<v Speaker 1>both were real products and neither one was a paid inclusion,

1:19:25.840 --> 1:19:29.120
<v Speaker 1>so it was not official product placement or product integration.

1:19:29.439 --> 1:19:32.640
<v Speaker 1>And Netflix, of course it's like an ad free uh

1:19:32.680 --> 1:19:36.759
<v Speaker 1>system anyway. But Shoe points to some of the words

1:19:36.800 --> 1:19:40.640
<v Speaker 1>of Reed Hastings, co founder, chairman and CEO of Netflix,

1:19:40.840 --> 1:19:43.519
<v Speaker 1>who pointed out during a webcast tied to an earnings

1:19:43.520 --> 1:19:49.880
<v Speaker 1>report that seventy of Bandersnatch viewers selected Kellogg Frosty's over

1:19:50.360 --> 1:19:53.519
<v Speaker 1>the the the Quaker sugar Puffs. No I did too.

1:19:53.560 --> 1:19:56.680
<v Speaker 1>I feel so vulnerable right now. I don't remember what

1:19:56.760 --> 1:19:58.800
<v Speaker 1>I did the first time around. The first time I

1:19:58.880 --> 1:20:01.200
<v Speaker 1>watched it, I also watched with my wife, so we

1:20:01.200 --> 1:20:04.000
<v Speaker 1>were voting on which choices. You know, we're having a discussion,

1:20:04.360 --> 1:20:06.200
<v Speaker 1>which I guess I should have mentioned that earlier, because

1:20:06.200 --> 1:20:08.160
<v Speaker 1>that has a whole another wrinkled as a scenario of

1:20:08.200 --> 1:20:12.040
<v Speaker 1>making communal choices and voting on something, but on my

1:20:12.080 --> 1:20:15.000
<v Speaker 1>own I chose the Quaker thing just because I thought

1:20:15.040 --> 1:20:18.439
<v Speaker 1>it looked weirder. But again, I'm in the minority for

1:20:18.520 --> 1:20:21.920
<v Speaker 1>doing so. So first of all, I think this is

1:20:21.960 --> 1:20:24.240
<v Speaker 1>a shame because I think the cover and TV advertisement

1:20:24.240 --> 1:20:27.040
<v Speaker 1>for Quaker sugar Puffs is awesome and weird. Again, but

1:20:27.200 --> 1:20:30.479
<v Speaker 1>more to the point, as Shoe points out, Spencer Wang,

1:20:30.880 --> 1:20:33.960
<v Speaker 1>a Netflix vice president, chimed in and joked, and let's

1:20:33.960 --> 1:20:36.439
<v Speaker 1>be clear he was he was apparently joking that this

1:20:36.520 --> 1:20:39.720
<v Speaker 1>was the most critical data point of the quarter. Now,

1:20:39.760 --> 1:20:42.599
<v Speaker 1>she writes it. While Netflix doesn't run commercials and has

1:20:42.600 --> 1:20:46.320
<v Speaker 1>stated that it would not use bandersnatch information for anything

1:20:46.360 --> 1:20:49.880
<v Speaker 1>like this, others outside the company do see the potential, namely,

1:20:49.920 --> 1:20:53.639
<v Speaker 1>in quote, the possibility of inserting brand name products into

1:20:53.680 --> 1:20:58.360
<v Speaker 1>streaming shows based on data generated by interactive programming. Now,

1:20:58.400 --> 1:21:01.320
<v Speaker 1>Shoe stresses that the technology to roll this out isn't

1:21:01.360 --> 1:21:04.599
<v Speaker 1>here yet, but I suppose we have to to consider

1:21:04.640 --> 1:21:08.160
<v Speaker 1>two key factors in that statement. So, first of all,

1:21:09.120 --> 1:21:12.400
<v Speaker 1>we're in the early days of truly you know, interactive

1:21:12.400 --> 1:21:16.040
<v Speaker 1>features like this on major streaming platforms. Uh, you know,

1:21:16.080 --> 1:21:18.519
<v Speaker 1>assume and that's that's assuming that it really catches on

1:21:18.680 --> 1:21:22.760
<v Speaker 1>at all. As we've discussed. Interactive cinema is not new.

1:21:22.880 --> 1:21:27.080
<v Speaker 1>It's been around for decades and it has largely failed

1:21:27.120 --> 1:21:30.840
<v Speaker 1>to catch on. Um, it is not like a driving

1:21:30.960 --> 1:21:34.920
<v Speaker 1>force in our entertainment. You'll find plenty of examples of it.

1:21:34.920 --> 1:21:37.120
<v Speaker 1>You also find a lot of computer games that that

1:21:37.280 --> 1:21:40.920
<v Speaker 1>kind of fulfill this, uh, this niche right, Um, those

1:21:40.960 --> 1:21:44.880
<v Speaker 1>are also sort of failed. Yeah, Um, you know I

1:21:44.920 --> 1:21:47.439
<v Speaker 1>would have there's certainly deeper dives and say the history

1:21:47.479 --> 1:21:49.680
<v Speaker 1>of things like what Telltale Games I think was the

1:21:49.720 --> 1:21:52.720
<v Speaker 1>company maybe that did a number of these things that

1:21:52.800 --> 1:21:55.920
<v Speaker 1>were again not not really released as they weren't marketed

1:21:55.920 --> 1:22:00.000
<v Speaker 1>as interactive movies so much as they were interactive gaming experiences. Uh,

1:22:00.320 --> 1:22:03.759
<v Speaker 1>so that's one thing to consider. Interest in interactive films

1:22:03.800 --> 1:22:05.400
<v Speaker 1>has essentially gone up and down over the years, and

1:22:05.439 --> 1:22:09.240
<v Speaker 1>again it hasn't really like ignited. Still Netflix and and

1:22:09.360 --> 1:22:12.960
<v Speaker 1>also Netflix itself has only released a handful of interactive titles,

1:22:13.000 --> 1:22:17.080
<v Speaker 1>mostly kids stuff. Bandersnatches their only true adult drama release

1:22:17.439 --> 1:22:20.519
<v Speaker 1>in this of this product type, though they claim to

1:22:20.520 --> 1:22:24.400
<v Speaker 1>be doubling down on interactive content in the future, given

1:22:24.560 --> 1:22:26.200
<v Speaker 1>you know how Netflix tends to be a little bit

1:22:26.479 --> 1:22:29.479
<v Speaker 1>secretive about like what's coming out. Um, or at least

1:22:29.520 --> 1:22:31.360
<v Speaker 1>they don't tell you a lot. I guess we'll just

1:22:31.439 --> 1:22:33.840
<v Speaker 1>have to know about it when we see it pop up.

1:22:34.560 --> 1:22:37.320
<v Speaker 1>But also it's also worth reminding ourselves that a great

1:22:37.320 --> 1:22:40.080
<v Speaker 1>deal of work went into creating Bandersnatch as well. I think,

1:22:40.320 --> 1:22:42.719
<v Speaker 1>I think I've I've seen it written it like three

1:22:42.760 --> 1:22:46.400
<v Speaker 1>times as much work went into Bandersnatch versus say, um,

1:22:46.800 --> 1:22:50.280
<v Speaker 1>that long episode of the show that was approximately ninety minutes,

1:22:50.960 --> 1:22:54.840
<v Speaker 1>so is it cost effective content? Are all the limitations

1:22:54.880 --> 1:22:57.719
<v Speaker 1>worked out yet? For instance, I don't believe Bandersnatch works

1:22:57.720 --> 1:23:00.960
<v Speaker 1>on many mobile formats or older models, like you have

1:23:01.040 --> 1:23:03.320
<v Speaker 1>to have, uh, you know, something more updated like I

1:23:03.360 --> 1:23:05.479
<v Speaker 1>tried to load it down too my phone, uh and

1:23:05.520 --> 1:23:08.639
<v Speaker 1>I have an older UM iPhone. I tried to load

1:23:08.640 --> 1:23:10.680
<v Speaker 1>it on there to watch on an airplane and it

1:23:11.080 --> 1:23:13.720
<v Speaker 1>wouldn't work. I had to watch it through my Xbox one.

1:23:14.280 --> 1:23:16.479
<v Speaker 1>And another big concern is there would need to be

1:23:16.520 --> 1:23:19.760
<v Speaker 1>I guess enough interactive content out there tuned for this

1:23:19.800 --> 1:23:22.960
<v Speaker 1>sort of thing did to generate the necessary user data

1:23:23.800 --> 1:23:26.720
<v Speaker 1>to then be employed. I can really see this kind

1:23:26.720 --> 1:23:28.920
<v Speaker 1>of thing being used as a as a major data

1:23:28.960 --> 1:23:31.840
<v Speaker 1>mining that. I mean, I don't know it seems very

1:23:32.080 --> 1:23:36.000
<v Speaker 1>possible to get psychologically salient information through this now, of

1:23:36.040 --> 1:23:38.920
<v Speaker 1>course that they're already getting information through all kinds of things.

1:23:38.920 --> 1:23:42.360
<v Speaker 1>You know, the tech business can get your information through UH,

1:23:42.360 --> 1:23:45.519
<v Speaker 1>through what you buy online, through what websites you visit,

1:23:45.560 --> 1:23:48.280
<v Speaker 1>through what you do on Facebook or other social media.

1:23:48.400 --> 1:23:51.479
<v Speaker 1>Right like, a website like Netflix already knows what kind

1:23:51.520 --> 1:23:54.559
<v Speaker 1>of movies you have watched, what kind you like, what

1:23:54.680 --> 1:23:57.559
<v Speaker 1>kind of movies you want to like, and then also

1:23:58.280 --> 1:24:00.360
<v Speaker 1>you know how you have rated things as well, and

1:24:00.400 --> 1:24:03.599
<v Speaker 1>then they can serve you recommendation of what you might

1:24:03.640 --> 1:24:06.360
<v Speaker 1>want to watch in the future. Right now. This is so,

1:24:06.479 --> 1:24:09.280
<v Speaker 1>of course we're talking about this and possibly going multiple ways.

1:24:09.360 --> 1:24:14.040
<v Speaker 1>One is using interactive choices in UH in a film

1:24:14.120 --> 1:24:16.519
<v Speaker 1>to gather data about you, and the other side would

1:24:16.520 --> 1:24:22.600
<v Speaker 1>be giving like specially user tailored media experiences, which we

1:24:22.640 --> 1:24:24.800
<v Speaker 1>already get somewhat of course on websites. You know, you

1:24:24.800 --> 1:24:27.599
<v Speaker 1>get websites loading with the ads of stuff you searched

1:24:27.600 --> 1:24:30.719
<v Speaker 1>for on Amazon and Riot. But yeah, I guess we're

1:24:30.760 --> 1:24:33.280
<v Speaker 1>being forced to consider what if that starts happening within

1:24:33.439 --> 1:24:36.599
<v Speaker 1>the movies and TV shows you watch, so you start

1:24:36.640 --> 1:24:40.599
<v Speaker 1>seeing product placement for specific products that are aimed at

1:24:40.680 --> 1:24:45.080
<v Speaker 1>you individually within the show as you watch right right,

1:24:45.200 --> 1:24:49.160
<v Speaker 1>Like you know they know that well, given the serial scenario,

1:24:49.280 --> 1:24:54.040
<v Speaker 1>like potentially the the master of the content being Netflix

1:24:54.120 --> 1:24:58.439
<v Speaker 1>or some other company. Hypothetically, they might know that you

1:24:58.479 --> 1:25:01.919
<v Speaker 1>were saying more inclined towards uh, you know, healthy lifestyle choices,

1:25:02.200 --> 1:25:05.960
<v Speaker 1>and therefore some sort of granola uh you know, health

1:25:06.080 --> 1:25:09.360
<v Speaker 1>rapped content would be ideal for you in that scenario.

1:25:09.600 --> 1:25:12.920
<v Speaker 1>Or they might know that that's not your your your

1:25:12.960 --> 1:25:15.639
<v Speaker 1>ideal serial, or maybe they know that you have children

1:25:15.720 --> 1:25:17.800
<v Speaker 1>in the house and therefore a children's cereal would be

1:25:17.800 --> 1:25:21.200
<v Speaker 1>more appropriate. Like that's the kind of information that they

1:25:21.240 --> 1:25:25.160
<v Speaker 1>could conceivably have and then feed into the cereal that

1:25:25.160 --> 1:25:27.840
<v Speaker 1>appears before you on the screen. Now, that would be,

1:25:27.920 --> 1:25:32.160
<v Speaker 1>of course, something we're more familiar with, just like inserting ads.

1:25:32.160 --> 1:25:35.320
<v Speaker 1>And you might imagine a character walking past a billboard

1:25:35.439 --> 1:25:37.920
<v Speaker 1>or something in movie like happens all the time now,

1:25:38.240 --> 1:25:41.800
<v Speaker 1>except that billboard can be you know, dynamically inserted with

1:25:41.880 --> 1:25:45.840
<v Speaker 1>new imagery or something. I think things start getting even

1:25:45.880 --> 1:25:50.360
<v Speaker 1>creepier when you imagine something more like Band or Snatch Itself,

1:25:50.360 --> 1:25:53.080
<v Speaker 1>where there are alternative versions of a film that are

1:25:53.120 --> 1:25:56.639
<v Speaker 1>especially tailored do you that have different narrative content depending

1:25:56.640 --> 1:25:59.800
<v Speaker 1>on who's watching. I mean, so one thing Robert and

1:25:59.840 --> 1:26:02.200
<v Speaker 1>I talking about briefly before we came in here is

1:26:02.240 --> 1:26:05.639
<v Speaker 1>the idea that you know, we often know that movies

1:26:06.120 --> 1:26:09.639
<v Speaker 1>can embody values. Of course, you know that, like sometimes

1:26:09.640 --> 1:26:12.840
<v Speaker 1>the values of of a filmmaker creator come through and

1:26:12.880 --> 1:26:16.040
<v Speaker 1>what happens in a story. Uh, and then other times

1:26:16.080 --> 1:26:20.160
<v Speaker 1>they're they're sort of like cheap attempts to display values

1:26:20.200 --> 1:26:22.599
<v Speaker 1>what would often be called like pandering, right, you know,

1:26:22.880 --> 1:26:26.240
<v Speaker 1>like uh, you know, cheap appeals to patriotism or something

1:26:26.320 --> 1:26:29.040
<v Speaker 1>like that in a movie, or or I don't know,

1:26:29.120 --> 1:26:31.000
<v Speaker 1>I guess you can make an argument for Awards season

1:26:31.240 --> 1:26:34.479
<v Speaker 1>Academy Awards bait as well. Yeah, sure, you know, just

1:26:34.560 --> 1:26:41.000
<v Speaker 1>like sort of cheap attempts to exploit the specific desires

1:26:41.080 --> 1:26:46.200
<v Speaker 1>or value interests of a specific target audience. Um and

1:26:46.200 --> 1:26:49.040
<v Speaker 1>and so you can imagine, okay, well, now, if a

1:26:49.080 --> 1:26:52.400
<v Speaker 1>movie is made and it wants to pander, it needs

1:26:52.400 --> 1:26:55.200
<v Speaker 1>to at least make a choice, right. It's hard to

1:26:55.200 --> 1:27:00.320
<v Speaker 1>pander to everybody at the same time, but you can imagine, okay,

1:27:00.360 --> 1:27:03.640
<v Speaker 1>what if somebody just starts making more like a Bandersnatch

1:27:03.720 --> 1:27:05.799
<v Speaker 1>kind of thing where maybe you don't make the choices,

1:27:05.840 --> 1:27:07.960
<v Speaker 1>the choices are made for you based on what is

1:27:08.000 --> 1:27:11.519
<v Speaker 1>known about your user profile. And so what I was

1:27:11.560 --> 1:27:15.000
<v Speaker 1>imagining beforehand was you could have different versions of the

1:27:15.040 --> 1:27:18.519
<v Speaker 1>movie Independence Day. You remember that speech Bill Pullman gives

1:27:18.760 --> 1:27:20.920
<v Speaker 1>before they all get in the planes and go fly

1:27:21.040 --> 1:27:24.639
<v Speaker 1>off and fight. Um, So it's this rousing moment where

1:27:24.640 --> 1:27:27.719
<v Speaker 1>Bill Pullman gives this kind of innocuous speech that could

1:27:27.760 --> 1:27:30.960
<v Speaker 1>appeal to basically anybody. But you can make that speech

1:27:31.280 --> 1:27:35.280
<v Speaker 1>a much more tailored, specific interest group pandering kind of thing,

1:27:35.680 --> 1:27:37.519
<v Speaker 1>where you could have one version of the film that

1:27:37.560 --> 1:27:40.719
<v Speaker 1>plays for somebody that that's that's very inclusive. He gives

1:27:40.720 --> 1:27:43.759
<v Speaker 1>a speech, He's like, humans will join arms together around

1:27:43.800 --> 1:27:46.360
<v Speaker 1>the world. There will be no more nations and borders

1:27:46.360 --> 1:27:48.559
<v Speaker 1>and creeds, and we all, you know, we all unite

1:27:48.560 --> 1:27:51.400
<v Speaker 1>as one and standing brothers and as brothers and sisters

1:27:51.439 --> 1:27:54.120
<v Speaker 1>against this. Or you could have a version where he

1:27:54.120 --> 1:27:57.080
<v Speaker 1>gives a speech about American exceptionalism and how we're the

1:27:57.120 --> 1:27:59.200
<v Speaker 1>first and we stand up and fight when no one

1:27:59.240 --> 1:28:01.400
<v Speaker 1>else will. Or you could get you know, you can

1:28:01.439 --> 1:28:04.559
<v Speaker 1>imagine a million versions of this, depending on what kind

1:28:04.600 --> 1:28:08.160
<v Speaker 1>of user they think you are who are watching, right,

1:28:08.200 --> 1:28:12.600
<v Speaker 1>I mean, and that that kind of personality profile or

1:28:12.760 --> 1:28:16.000
<v Speaker 1>worldview profile would be pretty easy to acquire. I mean

1:28:16.040 --> 1:28:20.559
<v Speaker 1>basically websites like Facebook have that information. Like they are

1:28:20.600 --> 1:28:23.719
<v Speaker 1>They're not feeding you independence day uh with a tailored

1:28:24.479 --> 1:28:27.160
<v Speaker 1>uh speech in it, but they are feeding you giving

1:28:27.200 --> 1:28:31.679
<v Speaker 1>you a feed that that that reflects your worldviews and values.

1:28:32.040 --> 1:28:35.600
<v Speaker 1>And people are very invested in like the values of

1:28:35.640 --> 1:28:38.720
<v Speaker 1>what media they consume these days. I can imagine it

1:28:38.840 --> 1:28:43.240
<v Speaker 1>being judged a very profitable enterprise by some studios to say, well,

1:28:43.320 --> 1:28:45.840
<v Speaker 1>let's just cover all the bases. You know, we'll have

1:28:45.880 --> 1:28:48.200
<v Speaker 1>way less trouble if we make a movie, you know,

1:28:48.360 --> 1:28:50.560
<v Speaker 1>a version A of the movie for you and a

1:28:50.680 --> 1:28:53.200
<v Speaker 1>version B of the movie for you. It doesn't have

1:28:53.280 --> 1:28:56.640
<v Speaker 1>to be a coherent vision or picture of the world. Yeah,

1:28:56.640 --> 1:28:58.760
<v Speaker 1>this is you know. I can't help but think on

1:28:58.760 --> 1:29:00.760
<v Speaker 1>on past films, like first we talked about Conan the

1:29:00.800 --> 1:29:03.840
<v Speaker 1>Barbarian on the show in the past, Like that is

1:29:03.880 --> 1:29:06.639
<v Speaker 1>a film that has a has a very particular view

1:29:06.760 --> 1:29:10.479
<v Speaker 1>of what strengthen memes and what uh you know, how

1:29:10.520 --> 1:29:15.800
<v Speaker 1>power works, etcetera. And it's not everybody's political or philosophical

1:29:15.840 --> 1:29:17.880
<v Speaker 1>cup of tea. I mean you can. I think you

1:29:17.920 --> 1:29:20.360
<v Speaker 1>can enjoy that film without focusing on all of that.

1:29:20.439 --> 1:29:24.600
<v Speaker 1>But still it's definitely there um. And and that's not

1:29:24.680 --> 1:29:26.800
<v Speaker 1>a film, I mean, especially at the time it came out.

1:29:27.200 --> 1:29:29.400
<v Speaker 1>It's not a film where you would necessarily ask for

1:29:29.439 --> 1:29:32.439
<v Speaker 1>an alternate version of it. But again, it's very clear

1:29:32.439 --> 1:29:34.400
<v Speaker 1>in what it's saying. But then you have films like

1:29:34.439 --> 1:29:37.559
<v Speaker 1>say Patton. Patton is often brought up as example of

1:29:37.560 --> 1:29:40.600
<v Speaker 1>a film that meant one thing to one part of

1:29:40.600 --> 1:29:43.280
<v Speaker 1>a divided America and another to the other part of

1:29:43.280 --> 1:29:46.600
<v Speaker 1>the divided America without having to have like an a

1:29:46.760 --> 1:29:49.040
<v Speaker 1>d version. Right, Yeah, I think you can say that

1:29:49.080 --> 1:29:51.680
<v Speaker 1>about a lot of like war movies, especially. I think

1:29:51.720 --> 1:29:54.800
<v Speaker 1>that might be sort of true of Platoon, Right, is

1:29:54.840 --> 1:29:57.519
<v Speaker 1>that like an anti war movie or a patriotic movie.

1:29:57.600 --> 1:29:59.439
<v Speaker 1>You know, you sort of have some elements of each

1:29:59.600 --> 1:30:02.559
<v Speaker 1>you can match onto what you want to see there um.

1:30:02.640 --> 1:30:05.200
<v Speaker 1>But yeah, I don't know. I'm I'm somewhat disturbed by

1:30:05.240 --> 1:30:08.880
<v Speaker 1>the idea of like of of media filling up with

1:30:08.920 --> 1:30:12.280
<v Speaker 1>these like personally tailored options that are designed to make

1:30:12.280 --> 1:30:17.440
<v Speaker 1>a sort of like generic media template, uh, individually palatable

1:30:17.479 --> 1:30:20.600
<v Speaker 1>to the user. As opposed to standing for something on

1:30:20.640 --> 1:30:23.000
<v Speaker 1>its own and allowing you to judge it, yeah, or

1:30:23.040 --> 1:30:27.920
<v Speaker 1>having some level of ambiguity like does the does the

1:30:27.000 --> 1:30:30.920
<v Speaker 1>the modern audience and like the the near future audience?

1:30:30.960 --> 1:30:33.880
<v Speaker 1>Do they want ambiguity in their work or do they

1:30:33.920 --> 1:30:38.800
<v Speaker 1>want like a clear cut view that is expressed clear

1:30:38.840 --> 1:30:41.240
<v Speaker 1>cut values not only of the film but of like

1:30:41.360 --> 1:30:44.519
<v Speaker 1>the creator or creators behind it, like they you know,

1:30:44.840 --> 1:30:48.320
<v Speaker 1>is there is there an increased hunger for that? And

1:30:48.320 --> 1:30:50.919
<v Speaker 1>and if that is the case, you could easily see

1:30:51.160 --> 1:30:53.759
<v Speaker 1>a way of worming around that by taking this ABC

1:30:53.920 --> 1:30:57.840
<v Speaker 1>approach to film creation, because then nobody can say, well,

1:30:58.200 --> 1:31:00.360
<v Speaker 1>I like the character of Conan the Barbarian, I think

1:31:00.360 --> 1:31:04.679
<v Speaker 1>your view is is pro totalitarianism and uh and and

1:31:04.800 --> 1:31:08.200
<v Speaker 1>you know, I don't know, celebrates uh toxic masculinity or

1:31:08.240 --> 1:31:11.000
<v Speaker 1>whatever the critique might be. And then they could say, well,

1:31:11.080 --> 1:31:13.639
<v Speaker 1>that's all good, well and good, but you're you're only

1:31:13.680 --> 1:31:17.479
<v Speaker 1>talking about one version. If you watch Conan the Barbarian, uh,

1:31:17.520 --> 1:31:23.040
<v Speaker 1>you know, the the uh relaunch of the platform, then

1:31:23.080 --> 1:31:25.759
<v Speaker 1>you will get what is tailored to you. Its treatment

1:31:25.800 --> 1:31:29.679
<v Speaker 1>of masculinity and power will be exactly what you want

1:31:29.720 --> 1:31:33.160
<v Speaker 1>to see. And I mean that opens the door to

1:31:33.400 --> 1:31:36.160
<v Speaker 1>just a big question of like what art is and

1:31:36.240 --> 1:31:39.200
<v Speaker 1>what does that do to uh you know, to to

1:31:39.280 --> 1:31:42.160
<v Speaker 1>the role of these narratives in our in our culture.

1:31:42.400 --> 1:31:47.080
<v Speaker 1>I remember many years ago how much of like the

1:31:47.080 --> 1:31:50.320
<v Speaker 1>new Internet and the new media landscape was being sold

1:31:50.360 --> 1:31:53.719
<v Speaker 1>to us. It was so often on the selling point

1:31:53.760 --> 1:31:58.040
<v Speaker 1>of customization and individualization. You know, get what's right for you,

1:31:58.160 --> 1:32:01.720
<v Speaker 1>get an experience that's per simmily tailored for you. And

1:32:01.800 --> 1:32:03.960
<v Speaker 1>somehow I just feel like we were not able to

1:32:04.080 --> 1:32:07.800
<v Speaker 1>anticipate how scary and messed up that would feel when

1:32:07.800 --> 1:32:11.320
<v Speaker 1>it actually happened. I like to come back to Bandersnatch.

1:32:11.400 --> 1:32:14.439
<v Speaker 1>The first time I watched it, I think it probably

1:32:14.560 --> 1:32:17.880
<v Speaker 1>was over two hours that I spent questing after the

1:32:17.920 --> 1:32:20.400
<v Speaker 1>happy ending, and I got it, and I have to

1:32:20.439 --> 1:32:22.559
<v Speaker 1>admit I felt a little empty when I reached it.

1:32:23.520 --> 1:32:25.960
<v Speaker 1>The second time, I tried to just again make more

1:32:26.040 --> 1:32:29.000
<v Speaker 1>dramatic choices, uh, make a choice here and there that

1:32:29.040 --> 1:32:30.760
<v Speaker 1>were just different from what I did the first time.

1:32:31.120 --> 1:32:34.839
<v Speaker 1>I got a bleak ending, but it it felt more authentic.

1:32:35.360 --> 1:32:40.519
<v Speaker 1>Um So, uh yeah, It's interesting to think about, like

1:32:40.600 --> 1:32:45.280
<v Speaker 1>how how choice potentially impacts our appreciation of of a

1:32:45.320 --> 1:32:49.120
<v Speaker 1>work like this, especially if we're talking about increasingly interactive

1:32:49.200 --> 1:32:52.640
<v Speaker 1>work in a hypothetical future. I had to find a

1:32:52.680 --> 1:32:55.200
<v Speaker 1>good bleak note to end on. I think that's it. Yeah,

1:32:55.200 --> 1:32:58.120
<v Speaker 1>I mean, if we're talking about black mirror, that's that's

1:32:58.120 --> 1:33:01.000
<v Speaker 1>where we have to leave it. All right, Well, we

1:33:01.080 --> 1:33:03.680
<v Speaker 1>covered a lot of ground in there. Um. I imagine

1:33:03.800 --> 1:33:06.519
<v Speaker 1>listeners will want to chime in, certainly on Band or

1:33:06.520 --> 1:33:08.599
<v Speaker 1>Snatch if they have experienced it. I'd love to hear

1:33:08.640 --> 1:33:10.800
<v Speaker 1>from anyone who's like, how much time did you spend

1:33:10.800 --> 1:33:12.679
<v Speaker 1>on band or such? How many viewings have you given?

1:33:12.680 --> 1:33:14.599
<v Speaker 1>Did you do like Joe and go in and try

1:33:14.600 --> 1:33:17.880
<v Speaker 1>and find every golden Easter egg? I didn't get all

1:33:17.920 --> 1:33:19.320
<v Speaker 1>of them, but I got a lot of them. Or

1:33:19.360 --> 1:33:20.760
<v Speaker 1>did you do like me? Did you sort of go

1:33:20.800 --> 1:33:22.760
<v Speaker 1>through it once and maybe go through a second time?

1:33:22.760 --> 1:33:24.920
<v Speaker 1>And maybe you haven't seen or haven't read about the

1:33:24.960 --> 1:33:28.720
<v Speaker 1>other endings. And of course free will you all have

1:33:28.880 --> 1:33:30.320
<v Speaker 1>it or maybe you all don't have it but you

1:33:30.320 --> 1:33:32.639
<v Speaker 1>think you have it, which however you want to look

1:33:32.680 --> 1:33:34.920
<v Speaker 1>at it. You all have some thoughts about free will

1:33:35.200 --> 1:33:37.640
<v Speaker 1>you all you all have some experience to share about this,

1:33:37.680 --> 1:33:40.200
<v Speaker 1>and we would love to hear from you in the meantime,

1:33:40.240 --> 1:33:41.719
<v Speaker 1>if you want to check out more Stuff to Blow

1:33:41.760 --> 1:33:44.520
<v Speaker 1>Your Mind, you can find us anywhere you get your podcasts.

1:33:44.720 --> 1:33:46.559
<v Speaker 1>You can certainly go to stuff to Blow your Mind

1:33:46.600 --> 1:33:48.679
<v Speaker 1>dot com and that will redirect you to a place

1:33:48.680 --> 1:33:51.760
<v Speaker 1>where you can find the episodes and wherever you get

1:33:51.760 --> 1:33:53.479
<v Speaker 1>the show. We just have to ask that you support

1:33:53.560 --> 1:33:56.920
<v Speaker 1>us by rating and reviewing and subscribing. And don't forget

1:33:56.920 --> 1:34:00.480
<v Speaker 1>we have another show out there titled Invention and Invention

1:34:00.800 --> 1:34:04.719
<v Speaker 1>covers human techno history, one invention at a time. Huge

1:34:04.720 --> 1:34:08.240
<v Speaker 1>thanks as always to our excellent audio producer Seth Nicholas Johnson,

1:34:08.240 --> 1:34:11.439
<v Speaker 1>who's doing a heroic quick turnaround on today's episode, So

1:34:11.560 --> 1:34:14.920
<v Speaker 1>praise him, everyone, Praise him. Uh. If you would like

1:34:14.960 --> 1:34:17.240
<v Speaker 1>to get in touch with us with with notes on

1:34:17.280 --> 1:34:19.680
<v Speaker 1>this episode or any other, to suggest a topic for

1:34:19.720 --> 1:34:22.240
<v Speaker 1>the future, just to say hi, you can email us

1:34:22.320 --> 1:34:32.479
<v Speaker 1>at contact at stuff to Blow your Mind dot com.

1:34:32.560 --> 1:34:34.400
<v Speaker 1>Stuff to Blow Your Mind is a production of iHeart

1:34:34.479 --> 1:34:37.120
<v Speaker 1>Radio's How Stuff Works. For more podcasts from my heart Radio,

1:34:37.200 --> 1:34:39.960
<v Speaker 1>visit the iHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you

1:34:40.000 --> 1:35:00.160
<v Speaker 1>listen to your favorite shows.