The core of the savior logic is the savior, but who is the savior, and who is the founder of the savior logic? This question has been bothering people for a long time, because there is no answer, so this question is finally closed. No one can give an answer, and it doesn't even matter if the answer exists. People are still tirelessly pursuing the logical proposition created by the Savior, but no one is thinking about who was the first to propose the Savior.
The film I recommend to you today is about such a concept. "Creation" is a fantasy movie, this film is mainly about an isolated island, there is a person who can control the behavior and thoughts of the people on the island by controlling the chessboard, the person who controls the chessboard hides in a dark corner and is happy, and those who are manipulated unknowingly make unbelievable actions. When one of them realizes that his actions are being manipulated, he meets the person who controls the board, but after that, he still has no way to solve the puzzle, whether he is being manipulated by others or by others.
"Creation" fabricates a savior for the people on this island in behavior and logic, and the logic of the existence of this savior lies in the fact that the people on this island have desires. If we can seriously analyze the basic behavioral logic of the people on this small island (especially the behavior after being manipulated), it is not difficult to find that their every action is basically a reflection of their own desires in their hearts. The man who angrily treats his neighbor's servant, the woman who is amorous in the face of a strange man, the child who wants to destroy the grocery store when he sees it, etc., these behaviors of these people are all a display of their inner desires, but except for the moment of manipulation, these desires are basically hidden.
People don't realize how dirty their hearts are, or even if they realize that their hearts are dirty, but they are still kidnapped by the shackles of morality, at this time, no one can break through their inner desire to use an act that shows their desires to do something that is contrary to their daily life. However, this "creation" easily shattered these desires with a chessboard.
What does "creation" mean at this time? In the film, we can easily conclude that this "creation" belongs to another kind of savior, but when this savior does not make any actions beyond the individual to make the individual show another side, can we still say that the savior is a "savior"?
Normally, what we think of as a savior is to endow humans with a superhuman ability, but is the "creation" in this film a superhuman ability for the group of people on the island? Obviously not, it just liberates the nature implicit in these people, and these natures are not given to them by anyone, but they should have been repressed and have been suppressed. At this time, the "creation" is only a gatekeeper, not a giver, so is it still a savior?
The reason why it is known as a creation, the answer given by this film is that it manipulates the fate of some people, but if it is said to be manipulating fate, then has the fate of these manipulated people taken a turn? It seems that no, they are just liberating nature, if the result is the liberation of nature, then the act of creation is still manipulating fate? If not, then is it still a savior?
If, on the other hand, the creature is not the savior, then all his actions are nothing more than a natural release, then this release should not be considered supernatural. And the person who discovers this secret does not need to be surprised, in fact, the person who has insight into this secret in this film is himself shocked, so is his shock due to the manipulation of fate by the creation, or is it due to the result of the people on the island facing their true selves?
Obviously, this is another unsolvable problem, therefore, back to the topic at the beginning, it is no longer important whether the savior exists or not, what people need is not a simple savior who exists or not, but a logical closed loop that can explain their own behavior, it is not important whether the savior exists or not, it is important for people to explain the logic of their behavior. The same thing is nothing but the thing that exposes one's true nature, and if it is a kind of inner naturalness of individuality, then people will naturally look at the person who exposes his true nature in amazement, as if he were looking at a monster, but if all this can be projected onto the savior, then the problem will be much easier, and people can use theological logic to explain their own actions, then the irrationality of these actions will obviously become more reasonable. At this time, what does it mean to be a savior?
Therefore, it does not matter whether the savior exists or not, the important thing is that people need to set a reason for their niche behavior, and this reason is the fig leaf, and the existence of the fig leaf can be a savior, a creation, or any ethereal and unfalsifiable existence, so that people can do something unscrupulously, and throw their negative results to an ethereal "person", excusing themselves from this, and the initiator of the right to explain this problem is indeed a smart person.
……
Hello and goodbye