When many people see this movie, they will definitely think of Michael Sandel's open class "Justice: What should I do?"? In that video, I remember the professor joking with the Taiwan Province students nearby, saying, Oh, if you push yourself, you will quit? In reality, many people are full of benevolence, righteousness and morality, and once they put them into practice, they wither. In the movie, the female pig's feet are also hopeless.
Should innocent people die for many lives? What is the bottom line for paying due price for value? This is the question raised by the film.
The kind female FBI killed 53 people first, and then killed thousands of people. Her reason is that we are just human beings and can't do that. Let the nuclear bomb explode. What can't you do? You can't hurt two innocent children temporarily, at least in front of her. So tens of thousands of people, I don't know how many innocent children died. Then the United States will wage war, and once the state machine is started, more innocent people will die, and the origin of everything will only begin with two children. Female: The FBI doesn't understand one thing. She has no right to play a tolerant role. When the female FBI talked about the constitution, the male FBI hit the nail on the head: if the nuclear bomb exploded, there would be no constitution. The values of a society are limited in human nature and evil, and infinite tolerance will breed infinite evil.
Unwilling to do what she thinks is dirty, unwilling to see dirty things happen before her eyes, and countless dirty things and more innocent deaths will lead to the failure of torture, the female FBI chose the former. Female FBI would rather choose the foreseeable fact that millions of people died than be a villain. Not feeling guilty is more important than saving others. This is very consistent with monotheistic logic: if I kill you, I can go to heaven. Then, I'm sorry. Female FBI is no different from many monotheists in the Middle Ages. Medieval Christians were not guilty of killing people under the slogan of the creator, and she was not guilty of killing people under the slogan of benevolence, righteousness and morality. A living example is that under the premise of 53 deaths, the female FBI can protect two children for their guilt (everyone knows what these two children will become when they grow up). Struggling in vain under contradictory values is a western-style burden thrown at us by the director. In fact, it can be opened with the help of the East.
Zhuang Ziyun showed no mercy. The greatest kindness seems to be merciless.
The female FBI is guilty of many crimes with small benevolence, and H ends the crime with her own inhumanity. Will H not feel guilty for what he has done? I believe he will, but he will continue to do so, so that bigger crimes will not happen. For the sake of innocent people's lives, H would rather do something that will make him live in purgatory all his life and maybe go to hell after death. This man has the shadow of an oriental saint. H understands that he has no right to decide the life and death of millions of people. He can only decide the life and death of a few people in front of him. He can't explain the values, which is even more hypocritical for the female FBI.
There is a story that I can't remember clearly. It is said that a monk crossed the river and got into a boat. He found a thief who specialized in robbing ships. Monks can tell others that others will kill thieves, so that others will kill people. Because the thief didn't commit a crime at that time, the monk didn't have to say anything, so the thief would kill people. If you choose the former and the latter, some people will fall into hell for committing murder. He stepped forward and killed the thief. Oriental thinking is not the judge of values, but the receiver. Westerners throw a burden that makes you judge right and wrong, which makes you confused, confused and breaks you down. However, our ancestors in the East told us many years ago that it is difficult to judge right and wrong in the world, and we may not have the power to judge, but only the ability to bear the consequences. What was mentioned in Professor Harvard's lecture may have been understood by our ancestors more than 2,000 years ago.
During World War I, a British soldier named Henry Tandy spared a German wounded soldier, which later led to World War II. Countless people died at the hands of this ambitious madman, whose name is known as Hitler. I don't give this example to say whether British soldiers should kill Hitler (because no one can travel through time and space and see the future), but that everyone is actually incapable of making a thorough right or wrong judgment on one thing. This is what the female FBI does.
In the late World War II, Japan refused to surrender, and American policymakers decided to drop an atomic bomb, killing 200,000 people. If American policy makers have a woman's nature and think that dropping atomic bombs is anti-human, it can be predicted that more people will die in Japan, East Asia, Southeast Asia and the United States. 200,000 people, which is100,000 times that of the two children in the movie, but the decision makers still did it. Because only war can strip away the hypocrisy of human nature and values, and hysterical reflection in peacetime is as light as dirt.
If we follow the western way of thinking, this movie will really put us in a contradictory situation. Therefore, we might as well look at it with what our ancestors once said and break away from western values.