Skip to main content

What is the nature of human existence?

Equilibrium is an excellent movie set in a futuristic world where a totalitarian government has solved the problem of violence by suppressing emotions. Books, art and music are strictly forbidden and feeling is a crime punishable by death. Christian Bale starts as Cleric John Preston, a top ranking government agent responsible for destroying those who resist the rules. When he misses a dose of Prozium, the mind-altering drug that hinders emotion, Preston suddenly begins to question the regime. 



In one of the most fascinating scenes, John interviews Mary, a sense offender under custody :
Mary: Let me ask you something. [Grabs John's hand]
Mary: Why are you alive?
John Preston: [Breaks free] I'm alive... I live... to safeguard the continuity of this great society. To serve Libria.
Mary: It's circular. You exist to continue your existence. What's the point?
John Preston: What's the point of your existence?
Mary: To feel. 'Cause you've never done it, you can never know it. But it's as vital as breath. And without it, without love, without anger, without sorrow, breath is just a clock... ticking
Mary is correct that John Preston’s answer is inadequate. John’s answer to the simple question is that man exists to continue existence. He exists to perpetuate civilisation. But he can’t say why – or in Mary’s blunt question “what’s the point”? It turns out John’s answer is actually very common. Many people believe there’s no purpose in existence per se. We just exist to exist! 

Therefore the only purpose of existing is to exist. All naturalism, nihilism and many other worldviews hold this position. They believe there’s nothing out there outside the material world – so the purpose of our existence is simply existing to perpetuate our existence. Which of course is folly – a point John concedes by switching the burden back to Mary with the question – “What's the point of your existence?”

But in what is clearly one of the most underwhelming moment in all of cinema, Mary’s response does not impress either! [Though the producers must have felt it was the right answer – given the way it is given rhetoric force in the narrative]. Her response seems to anchor man's existence in a broad range of activity. Man can feel and through it experience other things.  In other words, the essence of our existence is wrapped up into who we are as “feeling beings” with many diverse experiences. We exist to feel – and if we don’t feel we don’t exist because without feeling there's no experiences. 

But that still only explains partly our nature, it does not explain our purpose. I say "partly" because Mary's explanation does not even fully explain our nature. A snake probably has many emotions – not least that of feeling pain, but that does not make it human. Similarly, the chimpanzee exhibits many traits of emotions but it is not human. To anchor the nature of being on being able to feel and relate to others is inadequate as a definition of human nature. I think the reason people do that is because they recognise that there must be something deeper about human beings. But unfortunately they relate this thing back only to the physical.

Both Mary and Preston are operating in a naturalistic framework which is closed system. Naturalism is not able to to explain "purpose". It can only explain "what".  And of course the "what" without sufficient explanation of the "why" makes for circular reasoning.

The Christian worldview gives us both the what and the why. In Psalm 8, the Psalmist thunders, "What is mankind that you are mindful of them, human beings that you care for them? You have made them a little lower than the angels and crowned them with glory and honor. You made them rulers over the works of your hands; you put everything under their feet". Man is a special creation of God, bestowed with honour and glory from God. He carries God's divine imprint. Man's purpose is to serve God and exercise dominion over what God has created. He is God's vice regent. That is the point of his existence. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I am what I am by Gloria Gaynor

Beverly Knight closed the opening ceremony of the Paralympics with what has been dubbed the signature tune of the Paralympics. I had no idea Ms Knight is still in the singing business. And clearly going by the raving reviews she will continue to be around. One media source says her performance was so electric that "there wasn’t a dry eye to be seen as she sang the lyrics to the song and people even watching at home felt the passion in her words" . The song was Gloria Gaynor's I am what I am . Clearly not written by Gloria Gaynor but certainly musically owned and popularized by her. It opens triumphantly: I am what I am / I am my own special creation / So come take a look / Give me the hook or the ovation / It's my world that I want to have a little pride in / My world and it's not a place I have to hide in / Life's not worth a damn till you can say I am what I am The words “I am what I am” echo over ten times in the song. A bold declaration that she

Workers for Your Joy (A Review)

Workers for your Joy (WFYJ) is about what Christ calls leaders in his church to be and do, particularly the teaching office in the church (i.e. pastor or elder).  It presents a biblical vision of leadership by going through the fifteen qualifications of elders listed 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1. The central question Mathis is basically asking is – how should we pastor or lead the church in light of these qualifications? The target audience of the book seems to be those who are in the early stages of pastoral ministry. The book was part of the seminary syllabus at Bethlehem. However, the author does explicitly state that the book is also meant to be of use to church members in considering what Christ expects of leadership in the local church.   Mathis has written this book because he believes leadership has fallen on hard times. The church in the west and the society around us has become increasingly discontent with being led due to the high-profile cases that have sprung about leadership.

I Am Mother

I think it is true to say that the Netflix film I Am Mother is one the most disturbing movies I have watched for a long time. The film is set in a near future. Human life has been wiped out. An artificial intelligence (AI) called Mother is living inside a bunker where thousands of embroyos are stored. It selects an embryo and initiates a program to grow a baby within 24 hours. The AI then goes on to raise the child as its mother over the next few years.  After 16 years, the girl, who now goes by the name of Daughter (Clara Rugaard) is a teenager. She has never been outside because Mother has told her that the air is toxic. Her time is spend being home schooled in science and ethics so that she can become a perfect human being. The bond between Daughter and Mother is unusually strong. To our surprise there does not appear to be any mental or pyschological trauma of having a machine as her mother.  The strength of the bond between man and machine is tested when a nameless Woman (Hilary