Terminator and Philosophy by Richard Brown

Terminator and Philosophy Reviews

• 
  Julio Bonilla

  Strong reasoning makes good theory in philosophy, and even when we fail to reach the destination, there is plenty to learn along the way.

  
  This philosophy book was very intriguing, taking me on a journey through time & The Terminator movies. Even though this book is a bit repetitive towards the end, I really enjoyed it!
  
  I’ll be back.🔫
  

  
  I originally bought this to do research for a screenplay I never finished: RoboCop Vs. The 💀 Terminator.
• 
  Hayley

  I'm at the part where they talk about the metaphysics of terminator and the impossible contradictions caused by Cameron's treatment of time travel. I love this discussion.
  
  I made up an answer to the Kyle Reese/John Connor cycle issues that I'm happy with but I didn't catch the issue with Kyle going back after the terminator to save Sarah until this book pointed it out. Think about it. It couldn't work. Right?
  
  I can imagine two ways to view the nature of time.
  #1: Time is fixed. Anyone who moves around in it is already following an inevitable path. Nothing can change.
  #2: Time is fluid. Someone who goes back in time can cause rippling consequences, can double back over their own timeline, can change history and the future.
  
  Terminator seems to share view #2, since the premise of the franchise begins with Skynet's attempts to send a terminator back in time to eliminate the mother of their defeater and thus alter the course of events in their favor.
  
  The first major problem in time travel logic is this: how can John Connor send Kyle Reese back in time to save (and impregnate) his mother, if John Connor's existence depends on this event? John can't be cause and effect.
  
  However, this is only a problem if you believe the cycle always has to happen this way. If there was a first instance that did not include John Connor, but led to his existence, it would seem logical that in the version of time where John exists, he would take steps to make sure his father and mother always meet. Example: Kyle Reese leaves his post-Judgement Day, John-Connor-less world to travel back in time for whatever reason and meets Sarah, maybe by chance. This meeting leads to John Connor's birth and his existence turns the outcome of the war in humanity's favor. Skynet decides they don't like this outcome. Enter Arnold.
  
  If John listens to the tapes Sarah makes for him, he will understand what he has to do to ensure his birth, and he will do it. The cycle begins. The first time that John Connor sends Kyle Reese back, Reese will have to save Sarah from a terminator in addition to making a baby. Consider that the cycle came into existence step by step. I am okay with this explanation.
  
  The second problem involves the time lag between the T-101's journey to assassinate young Sarah, and Kyle Reese's attempts to save her. According to Delfino and Sheahan (authors of the chapter "Bad Timing: Metaphysics of The Terminator"), Reese tells John he went back in time after the Terminator had left. They go on to explain how as soon as the terminator went back in time the future would have altered immediately, realigning itself with the course dictated by Sarah's death, assuming the terminator succeeds. Post-apocalypse John Connor would blink out of existence the moment the T-101 left.
  
  I can't think of solution for this problem off the top of my head, unless a new parallel universe is created every time someone travels in time but that's not really a solution per say and going into that is going to get really complicated and I'm leaving work in ten minutes so I'm going to go back to reading (on page 118 now) and we'll see what the book has to say about it.
  
  I'll be back.
  
  ...to finish the review/discussion later.
  
• 
  Tina

  This compilation was probably the best "and philosophy" collection I've read since
  Star Wars and Philosophy: More Powerful than You Can Possibly Imagine, and not because the Terminator series is awesome, but because the essays in this collection were varied in focus, well-written, and actually argued something I hadn't considered before. By comparison, I've been trying to read
  Dexter and Philosophy: Mind over Spatter and it's just awful, because all the articles are about the same thing from different angles, which is boring, and
  X-Men and Philosophy: Astonishing Insight and Uncanny Argument in the Mutant X-Verse had absolutely no real argument for the most part - some of the essays were just explanation of the series' lore.
  
  The Terminator essays are broken into 5 parts contains 4-5 essays per topic (Life After Humanity and AI/Women and Revolutionaries/Changing What's Happened Already/The Ethics of Termination/Beyond the Neutral Net). Aren't these topics intriguing already? My favorite essays were "Un-Terminated: The Integration of the Machines" "Bad Timing: The Metaphysics of the Terminator" and "Should John Connor Save the World" (which raised an interesting point about the role of women in the Terminator series that I never thought about before and now can't ignore).
  Not only that, but the articles were more professional than the ones in X-Men and Philosophy (for example). There was humor, yes, but more subtle humor, more tongue-in-cheek than the stupid gags that the X-Men collection referenced just to get a laugh. The articles in this collection I could source somewhere and not feel immature.
  
  Anyways, if you have an interest in philosophy, and you know (and love) the Terminator series, I highly recommend this book.
• 
  Bernard

  not bad, but starts better than it ends
  
  The early essays were more engaging than the later ones. Too many of the articles are prime examples of the solipsistic navel-gazing that gives philosophy a bad reputation, and too many seem to start with their conclusions in mind - a lot of special pleading to make the Terminator movies fit their pet dogma. Despite the rich vein of material on offer, few of the writers truly engage with the possibility that Terminators are mental actors on a par with humans, and so the deeper philosophical implications of AI are simply hand-waved out of discussion. I was hoping for more heft, to be honest.
• 
  Daniel Brockhan

  Pretty good, a few of the language essays I found boring. There is literally an essay about the word "The" in "The Terminator". I read a page and skipped that one. I did enjoy the essays on humanity vs robots, evolution, time travel, and of course, the time travel fallacies I had thought about previously. Overall a good book.
• 
  Mike

  If I could only recommend one story, it'd be Should John Connor Save the World? by Peter S Fosl. The time paradox essays are fun, too, but I think I got the most entertainment and enjoyment out of this one. Some of the essays are bit redundant of one another, but overall, this was one of my favorite reads of the year.
• 
  Billie Pritchett

  Richard Brown and Kevin S. Decker's Terminator and Philosophy would make an excellent book for a student who is just learning about philosophy and who also has some interest in the Terminator series. It might also be good for someone who just likes the Terminator series and who would be interested in thinking about abstract topics or open-mindedly. Philosophy can be fun for everybody, given a thoughtful mindset.
  
  My favorite essays in the book were about the time travel aspects of the Terminator and can be found in part three of the book. There are several paradoxes in the films such as how the future leader of the resistance against the machines sends one of his own soldiers back in time to give birth to himself. Odd, right?
  
  Also, if you don't know much about ethics, you will find interesting discussions about ethics' applications to Terminator. You can learn about utilitarianism, Kantian ethics/deontology, and feminist ethics. It was especially enlightening to me to read about feminist ethics in Henry Chotiner's "I Know Now Why You Cry," which proposed an idea that I had never thought about: traditionally ethics has been concerned with people having the right principles but some form of feminist ethics proposes that we not worry about principles but worry more about making the right decisions relative to how all people involved in the moral situation could be satisfied. This is not only a beautiful idea but a good way to solve problems, not being problem-focused so much as people-focused.
  
  Anyway, maybe you'll find other parts of the book that interest you. I recommend it!
• 
  J. Gowin

  This book is not a deep philosophical treatise, which examines a question from every angle.Whether that is good or bad depends on your personal bent.
  
  I found this collection of essays to be a good primer for the philosophical concepts surrounding questions that have stymied greater minds than my own for centuries. It does not belabor specific philosophies. Rather it offers short explanations of various responses to troubling questions, using the "Terminator" series to illustrate those questions.
  
  There are problems with some of the essays. For instance, the temporal paradox created by the first film could be readily resolved by the presumption of a mobius strip. Though I concede that the later films and tv series turn the original paradox into a quagmire from which there may be no escape.
  
  I have found that the best use of this book (and it's kin) is as a gift. After reading the book myself, I passed it along to a friend, whom I knew was a fan of the "Terminator" series. The conversations did become somewhat more interesting.
• 
  Bruno Martinez

  "We're not going to make it, are we? People, I mean."
  John Connor, Terminator 2: judgement day
  
  --
  
  No better quote to start an essay about philosophy and end of human race. I certainly and very frequently feel that that child in front of me in a giant screen was right at the moment and still is to this day. Although I wouldn't want to be pessimistic day to day living in the real world makes you wonder, eh?
• 
  John Michael Strubhart

  Now, I know what you're thinking - Terminators? Of course, I do have a thing for terminators, but this book deals with the philosophical implications of things like artificial intelligence, consciousness, self-awareness, time travel and so much more. Terminator is just a vehicle for relating so many fascinating ideas that come from philosophy.
• 
  Tanya

  I love the pop culture philosophy books. It is great to feel like you are discussing your favourite entertainment with highly intelligent people who find more to it then, Arnold's cool. Some very interesting insights.
• 
  usagi ☆ミ

  Only one essay in here that includes the TV show. Kinda disappointed with that but otherwise a really good collection of essays regarding the franchise and philosophy.
• 
  Ivy

  This book is not only funny but the easiest philosophy book I have ever tried to read, if you've seen the Terminator movies that is.
• 
  Craig Bolton

  "Terminator and Philosophy: I'll Be Back, Therefore I Am (The Blackwell Philosophy and Pop Culture Series) by William Irwin (2009)"
• 
  Gergely

  Never read these books.
• 
  Hina Ansari

  Pop culture and philosophy books are often hit and miss. The last one I read, about Monk, was so poorly put together I was dreading picking another one up. Thankfully that fear was not substantiated. I’ve never thought The Terminator series would be full of philosophical situations, as I had really watched it as a survivalist sort of movie. Now that I’ve read this book, I can see how mistaken I was.
  
  I’ve only seen the first two movies and bits and pieces of the one with Christian Bale in it. I understand there was a TV show and a couple more movies. Having knowledge of only the first two movies, I still got a wonderful perspective of the topics that are more philosophical in nature. There was a prolonged discussion on whether a robot can be a human (no, though maybe sort of in the future) and whether one can really affect the past from the future. Each of the essays, save for two, were well put together and, in general, made sense. The one about time travel was both interesting and quite confusing.
  
  My biggest gripe in this book was that nearly every essay cited one of about three scenes in the movies. First, the scene where Reese tells Sarah Connor in the original movie that the Terminator would never stop. The second where Sarah grapples with killing Dyson in T2. The last, the Terminator saying to John that he understood why humans cried. Given the fact that there are at least four movies and a TV show, I would have thought there would be more to work with. With the focus of the book being on just two movies, it made the essays seem overly repetitive. If you’re a fan of the Terminator series, you should read this, but otherwise I’m doubt you’d enjoy it.