Thursday, February 11, 2010

The Non-Utilitarian Dr. Shephard


The Jack vs. Sawyer bit is getting more solidified in my head. I used to really hate Jack but I seem to be coming around to his camp, slowly.

"He walks among them but He is not one of them."

Jack always came off as a crappy leader because his choices seemed to always be crappy. Obviously he's not a stupid man, but so much of the time I wondered why he always seemed to be betting on the wrong horse or putting his eggs in the wrong basket. I think he got the shaft all the time because of something his father told him in one of the earlier seasons during the flashback when Jack tried to save his friend from getting beat up. . . "YOU DON'T HAVE WHAT IT TAKES." and later, "YOU HAVE TO LET IT GO, JACK."

He doesn't, and he can't.

Back in a intro to ethics class, there were two major opponents in our text, Immanuel Kant (treat people as ends and not as means to an end) and the Utilitarians. The Utilitarians wanted their leaders to do what was best for the greatest number of people. This would involve something like sacrificing a child in order to save a village (you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs). The followers of Kant didn't go for it and wanted each person to be treated equally and equally valued. Many of the parents in the class were with Kant and not the Utilitarians. Jack seems unable or unwilling to act as a Utilitarian, even though he was technically a leader of people, as a doctor off island, and on the island with the survivors. Locke seemed a little more comfortable using a Utilitarian approach ("Boone was a sacrifice the island demanded," "This is not a democracy, Claire." etc.)

I find it interesting that Jack puts his own safety on the line (for Sayid) by almost swallowing that ash-pill, and the guy takes great care to get it out of him. Also, that those guards in front of the Apothocary office just willingly let him in when he demanded they stand aside. Why do they listen to him, and why do they need him to get Sayid to do anything? And where is Old Man Shephard during all of this?

When Hurley asks Sayid if he's a zombie, Sayid's eyes FLUTTER rapidly; it's weird. Sayid, a professional INTERROGATOR, has a little fidgety tic all of a sudden? My guess is then, YES, HE'S A ZOMBIE.

Claire = Rousseau (nouveau?) No more baby-stealing. Is Kate pregnant? There was too much pregnancy-sticking and allusions to Kate as a non-mother/mother/potential mother for me to let this drop.

If I could ask JJ one question right now, I'd ask him if the Twilight Zone has any bearing on how this will all end, and if yes, I would immediately put my money on SHADOW PLAY.

7 comments:

Elyssa said...

It's funny that in the real world, Jack is obligated to follow the rules of Kant (one patient at a time, even choosing to save people (Sarah/Mr Rutherford) over others, but on the island he is expected to follow the rules of a Utilitarian. Who even appointed him leader anyway? He is constantly trying to do what is best for everyone, but I think being a doctor and Christian's son (you don't have what it takes), he is finding it hard to break his mold. Locke is obvious choice for a leader role (always thinking of the whole), but everyone thinks he's bat shit, so no one listens to him.

I think we have every role in philosophy being played on the island:

Jack follows Kant.
Locke follows Bentham (not weird he took his name as Bentham is one of the most notarized Utilitarians)
Sayid is a consequentialist. (Iraqi torturer?)
Sawyer is a egocentric. (all though not complete, he is always looking after himself)

stupescommaruth said...

wow! right on! if this pans out then it would absolutely validate the theory (mine) that Jack= Jacob and Sawyer = Smokey Man.

Elyssa said...

Undoubtedly, Jacob and Smokey are enemies, but I am unsure if Jack and Sawyer are those two entities. I think, if anything, they just mirror the feud.

Do you know anything of Jacob and Esau from the Bible? They were brothers who were constantly at odds with each other. Twins, I think.

Having being a Bible reference, it was understood that the Smoke Monster couldn't go in the Temple, right? But isn't that where the Smoke Monster pulled one of Rosseau's men? Underneath the Temple wall?

I still stick with the Jacob/Esau theory that the Smoke Monster is probably a relative of Jacob.

I can see where you'd say Jack and Sawyer are respectively Jacob and Smoke Monster, and would have agreed with you until Jacob was shown as a person.

Also, I don't think we are done with Aaron yet, as in the Bible as well, Aaron is a descendant of Jacob. There is something huge in store for that kid, I just don't know what it is yet.

stupescommaruth said...

Elyssa, I think you are onto something. Aaron FOR SURE. I also think they are NOT letting us know the Smokey Man's real name on purpose.

I thought really, really long and hard (geeked out big time) this morning about all this. I sense a major twist coming on. I have to rewatch anything with the temple in it. This is tricky.
almost like it's tricky to rock a rhyme to rock a rhyme that's right on time.

madamsvito said...

It's bad enough that LOST has all the duality going on:
Good / Evil
God / Satan
Life / Death
Rosseau/Claire
Others / Oceanic Victims
Blah blah blah.

But now we have to deal with all this shit with alternate realities and the spirit becoming one with other entities, finding loop holes to escape the island, it's too much to wrap your mind around unless you just sit down, start from the beginning and take notes. What kills me is EYE LINER has lived there this whole time and we've never had an entire episode dedicated to him! I want to know more about the EYE LINER. What brand is he using, does he make it himself and has he ever gone a day without? After those questions are answered, I want to know his life.

stupescommaruth said...

i heart richard alpert and i heart the eyeliner. i hope he's a good guy.

Elyssa said...

YES! MATT!!!

Why don't we know anything about Richard?! Maybe he's not even real...

HOME