Other Disciplines in the game (Part II) by Michael Barber

A Philosophical Thought Experiment

Part II

The Object of the Game
The object of the game is to tempt (or con if you prefer) fate or destiny of a lost group of survivors in order to prove your philosophy is ultimately the controlling philosophy of all mankind.

Rules of the Game
The rules are simple.

1) You cannot interfere with Free Will. Ultimate Free will is ultimately preserved and any person playing must ultimately make all "final" decisions on their own. Don't confuse Free will with Fate or with Destiny. All 3 things are different.

2) You can't short circuit game play...and this really is ultimately breaking the first rule for your opponents. For example, if my opponent has manipulated players that are about to prove a philosopher, you could just kill them and just avoid the games decisive outcome. However, this is not permitted in the game....and it cheating. It is cheating Free Will...and robbing the person of their Free Will choice by terminating them. This is why Nemesis cannot kill Jacob. Its why Smokie can't kill the others.

Anyone can kill a Lostie. However, if that player is critical to the other side, they are liable to tempt fate or tempt destiny or tempt their control aspects and prevent that player from being taken.

Movement of players-The con

Lost is a con game. We have to con the chess pieces- the Lost survivors into making decisions for our side; even though, ultimately the final decision must be free will. Its a con game because the ultimate "real" players of the game, Jacob and Nemesis are attempting to prove their philosophy. The chess pieces to play out the game on behalf of Jacob and Nemesis are chosen are experts at the con, on lying, on intimidation to enforce their will.

Since manipulation is the primary method of movement of pieces (Lost survivors) within the game, these expertises are highly prized. This is why most of the survivors have these basic traits. Some use brute force to enforce what they want out of individuals. Others use their physical attractiveness to get what they want. Still others use their intellect to get what they want. In each case, its the same --- manipulation. Stubbornness as a conviction is also important. This is because stubbornness means a willing to maintain your philosophy and thus not yield to the pressures of the competing philosophy. Weaker survivors are killed off lest they obviously become pawns of the competition.

Other disciplines

Each of the basic philosophies ultimately break down into common central themes within many disciplines. Philosophy was discussed in part I. Within other disciplines there are these same two central core questions, they just manifest themselves differently depending on different disciplines. These differences have led viewers to think that these are different from the same two core disciplines. Or, that the story is indeed about something else.

I'll go over each basic discipline and the thinking process and position of each of our philosophers and see its relation to the original fundamental philosophical premises:

(Philosophy)
empiricism vs. Rationalism

Jacob- Empiricism
Juan- Rationalism
(More information: http://www.dummies.com/how-to/conten...ationalis.html)

Discussed at length in Part I.

Empiricists believe "sensory" perception and experience is the foundation of all knowledge. We arrive as blank slates. We touch objects, we feel warmth, etc. and from these experiences we learn, experience, understand, learn, and know everything.

Rationalists believe that rather we born with innate concepts (sometimes referred as apriori) and principals and from those we reason deductively to arrive at more complex concepts. Such apriori concepts of causation, morality, and logic allow us to formulate all knowledge.

(Cosmology)
Fate vs. Destiny

Jacob - Destiny, Determinism
Juan - Fate, Fatalism
(More information: http://www.orderofthewhitelion.com/K...e.destiny.html
http://www.naturalism.org/fatalism.htm
)

Destiny as it is typically defined as "shaped". A destiny can change just as a destination can change. Destiny thus is determinant. Things and events are interconnected. The experiences of an interconnected universe and the process and interactions we go through shape our final destiny.

Fate on the other hand is fixed. There is still free will. However free will decisions are always the same, they are anticipated, expected and preordained within the universe. No matter what you do the same thing will happen to you. Your life will be the same.

(Psychology & Sociology)
Nature vs. Nurture

Jacob - Nurture (empiricism, behaviorism)
Juan - Nature (innatism, nativism)
[Note of confusion: the use of the word "Nature" here is not the same use of the word Nature as to objects or what we see when we open the window. This is in contrast to its previous use. Nature here refers to "biological"...how nature has created us...it refers to genetics]

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_versus_nurture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behaviorism
)

Innatism argue that who we are, what we will be, how we will die, what we will think, how we will act, is all pretty much ordained by genetics and our biology. Biology is pretty much preordained --so this is a fatalistic concept. Fundamentally our genetics and biology will cause us to make certain decisions a certain way and respond to our environment in a certain way based on our genetics and our biology. These elements are preordained and they are the foundations of genetic, evolution and survival of the fittest. Even the concept of survival of the fittest means that it can be calculated and ultimately determined statistically by genetics. It is predictive.

Behaviorists believe our environment and the nurturing of our interactions largely effect our behavior. And those elements largely dictate who we are, what we will be, how we will die, what we will think, how we will act. Since our environment and interactions are random, our ultimate behavoir is unpredictive.

(Physics)
TCC vs. WHH (Physics)

Jacob - TCC
Juan - WHH

Time can change (TCC) is the Science and Physic's interpretation of Jacobs Philosophy. Because people ultimately are affected by their environment, sensory experience and are constantly "evolving". Their free will choices can change or evolve as well.

What ever happened happened (WHH) is the Science and Physic's interpretation of MiB's Philosophy. Because people ultimately are born with innate concepts and those manipulations are fixed and independent of experiences, or better said, the experiences always create the same contrast, the free will choices we make are the same over and over again and predictive. It is free will but determinate.

So when someone says that Lost is about WHH...they are right. And when someone says Lost is about TCC...they are right. The show is about BOTH. The fact that both are intrinsic in the show is why we both disagree.

(Religion/Theology)
Original (Innate) Sin vs. Actual Sin

Jacob-Actual Sin
Juan-Innate Sin

Jacob believes in Tabla Rasa....that’s a blank slate. There is no original or innate sin. Each time and each individual is the sum total of his sensory experiences

Juan believes in innate sin or the good or bad of man is inherent. We arrive pre-cast of sin. It is predictive when and how we will sin.

(Ethics, Sociology)
Science vs. Faith

Jacob-Man of Science
Juan-Man of Faith

Jacob is the man of science just like Jack is. This is because science is an offshoot of empiricism and empiricist thought.

Juan is the man of faith just like John was a man of faith (faith in destiny and a meaning of life as opposed to religious faith). This is because Rationalism provides for a duality of man with one aspect being the soul. The soul is where faith resides. Faith cannot be measured and it cannot be empirically determined or quantified. It just is.