Rejecting complexity: trolling intellectual the case of of Neil deGrasse Tyson on the titanic
Neil deGrasse Tyson mentioned on a recent Joe Rogan podcast he received hate comments after commenting on the scientific accuracy of movies. Recently, he made a comment about the titanic concerning the star’s alignment and people were up in arms. Trolling him endlessly with bashing insults. This part of an ideological hold that cannot be breached. Arguing against an expert out of spite is a conscious choice to be ignorant and angry instead of humble and correct.
There is an immense amount of doctrinal conformity. So hellbent on a specified version of their account any alternative is blatantly rejected, So hung up on their side of things otherness is blasphemous. This childish attitude is fair game to a friend but to an expert is dubious. It is a student rebelling against the teacher. Claiming he knows better. While in deGrasse Tyson’s case it was enjoying ignorance over knowledge. There is an aspect of trying to one up those more educated than you. To try to usurp their authority over you. A jealous youth with listening problems. Lesser knowledgeable people making unintuitive arguments to save face against the other side. Ignoring for the sake of their dignity. Blurting their belief and then storming off cowardly with tails between their legs.
Viewers may rightfully say thank you deGrasse Tyson but we do not care. The negative reaction was an attack on his mentorship. His education was being banned. It was a reboot of Galileo’s trial. Telling the biblical stories with correct science were silenced and rejected for offering an alternative to their traditional model. The level of arrogance and pettiness to maintain a status quo. deGrasse Tyson wasn’t challenging an institution but a film’s error. Facts are important. When they are muddled for convenience it creates a pattern where truth is irrelevant. Take the example of the Martian. If a scientist did not disprove it people may believe it to be true. When fables are pursued as factual, it undermines their authenticity.
Historical documentaries are a better example. The show vikings was misconstrued in its overemphasis on nordic plundering. The narrative indicated that Christians were good pure people and vikings violent raiders. If a historian does not speak out, people will take it at face value. Even with a bit of scepticism and recognition of exaggeration the embellishment cannot be properly exposed if no one speaks up. Viewers were to believe and for the sake of integrity there is reason to uphold the truth no matter what. Embellishment in any era is problematic. If experts are not trolling to ensure facts are represented that cinema will become the beacon of truth to a harsh degree.
Persistent expert rebuttal reminds viewers that cinema though photographically reflective is a director’s perspective. It does not necessarily state the truth. Films tell partial truths and must be held accountable for that. People should know the truth and should crave it. Know to be sceptical and do more research. Much of the narrative has parcels of accuracy but the details are shifted to fit an agenda. The latter must be interrogated. It is not one movie to worry about but the idea behind cinematic fact. Perceiving cinema with more truth only heightens its ability to influence the viewer. To project an agenda consuming the viewer’s identity. It is a dangerous art that if not responded correctly could steal his soul.
Titanic may not be a pivotal example but it holds accountable the mistake. The movie experience is an aspect but not the entire film. The historical account means something as well. Messing with it out of ignorance or agenda seeking is trivial. Either it’s laziness or ideological. Both are negative. There is also an educational element in pointing this out. Take the movie Ted. Though a comedy about a teddybear coming to life, deGrasse Tyson was approached how this could occur. The script followed his answer. This is a minor point to the comedic faculty of the film but accuracy and honesty are compelling themes to storytelling. A lie loses its integrity and audience commitment. It is about transparency and striving to be right.
If you cannot care about the little things why will you care about the big things. Galileo is a perfect example where deGrasse Tyson-ed to the premodern twitter—the church and they responded harshly to his comments. People refused to step away from their dogmatic beliefs. It is a perpetuated pattern of sheer ignorance and stubborn arrogance.
No comments:
Post a Comment