My biggest issue with Arrival is Sapir-Whorf, the theory used as the primary drive in the film, has been highly disproven.
Otherwise, it's a great flick. ^_^
It certainly has, but for human languages and brains. It's entirely possible that alien language works differently and Amy Adams's character somehow tapped into it.
Handwave-y scifi theories like that quiet the (amateur) knowledge of linguistics I have from interfering with the film. Still loved the movie, and even if Sapir-Whorf is bunk, I like it as a analogy for empathy. Amy Adams puts the effort into communicating with and learning about the aliens and is therefore able to see the universe and time as they do.
Very astute observations from both of you. I hadn't considered it on terms outside of human language, which is funny since that's what the entire movie dealt with. I definitely like the empathy idea. I will dial down my "linguistic indignation" in light of a really fun narrative. ^_^Well, among human languages. I'm sure the process to perceive a non-human, or non-terrestrial language more specifically, would have more weight behind the possibility. If anything, any sort of alien film is already an issue because of the fact that we are perceiving them with little effort. I would think it's not as simple as seeing a being.
I doubt an interstellar species would actually be all that interested in Earth, or humanity, beyond information gathering. It's unlikely they would be facing any scarcity issues that would require taking over Earth. Any material they need is just as easily found elsewhere in the galaxy on the hundreds of billions of other planets.
Isn't it only the extreme version of the Sapir-Whorf Theory that's considered bunk? I thought the basic idea behind it was generally considered true considering the words and concepts that can't be expressed in some languages but can in others?My biggest issue with Arrival is Sapir-Whorf, the theory used as the primary drive in the film, has been highly disproven.
Otherwise, it's a great flick. ^_^
Isn't it only the extreme version of the Sapir-Whorf Theory that's considered bunk? I thought the basic idea behind it was generally considered true considering the words and concepts that can't be expressed in some languages but can in others?
This flatters the human species considerably. You wouldn't need to outsmart humans; we're literally defenseless from outer space by choice. Just alter the trajectory of a KBO or comet to intersect with Earth and wait a few decades. Or use an asteroid, if you're impatient. Odds are higher we'd detect it, but there wouldn't be enough time to do anything about it. We are aware of these threats -- it happens naturally FFS -- but no country on Earth is funding any sort of defense against what we know killed off the dinosaurs. Nor is there any collective effort to do so. The scientists are trying but no one's funding their efforts. We are spending billions on sports arenas, so there's that.I'm not sure any movie depicts the complete and utter annihilation of humanity with no hope for retaliation. It's likely we'd be wiped out before we even knew we were being attacked. Any being capable of interstellar travel would have access to weapons of unimaginable power, and they would likely be able to outsmart us at every turn if they decided on a ground invasion.
I don't think it's even remotely possible to predict. Violence and social order may not even be concepts that apply to the aliens.
uh. Too bad I can't think of an appropiate movie scene right now
Let's get one thing out of the way. . . aliens DO NOT need "our" resources. This is not a matter of opinion; it's an energy equation. The Earth is zipping around in a deep gravity well. In the simplest terms, it's kind of like saying, "I'm running low on gas and I live in Chicago; well, there ought to be a gas station in Utah." Why would anyone do that? I mean, it might pay off, depends on what they need, but there are better options along the way, including farther out in the solar system. If you want hydrogen, there's Neptune. If you still use hydrocarbons, Titan's got lakes of them just sitting on the surface. Water? Mine Pluto, or Enceladus. And the best part? All these places are uninhabited. In fact, they could strip mine Titan and not only would we be powerless to stop them, would anyone with money or power even care? Also, bear in mind that any alien ship would enter the system from the outside, so it'd have to pass by all this stuff just to get to Earth anyway. Aliens visiting Earth to gas up is one of those neat-sounding ideas that shrivels up and dies if you study science for five minutes.
So the only real appeal is the reason we want to go out and discover aliens ourselves -- curiosity. But even in this regard they could observe us for quite some time a safe distance out, and although they could curb-stomp us with superior tech, figure we're too primitive and violent to interact with directly. It'd be like scientists studying the Sydney funnel-web spider but going full Jane Goodall and living with them. You'd learn a lot, but there are much safer ways of getting the same information.
This flatters the human species considerably. You wouldn't need to outsmart humans; we're literally defenseless from outer space by choice. Just alter the trajectory of a KBO or comet to intersect with Earth and wait a few decades. Or use an asteroid, if you're impatient. Odds are higher we'd detect it, but there wouldn't be enough time to do anything about it. We are aware of these threats -- it happens naturally FFS -- but no country on Earth is funding any sort of defense against what we know killed off the dinosaurs. Nor is there any collective effort to do so. The scientists are trying but no one's funding their efforts. We are spending billions on sports arenas, so there's that.
You have interstellar travel but aren't able to make robots ? You've got problems.You are forgetting one resource that isn't as common or easy to grab in the rest of the universe.
Slaves.
You have interstellar travel but aren't able to make robots ? You've got problems.