No matter how smart people are, their guesses about human nature are always just guesses. Whether the guesses are correct or not requires facts to prove them, and doubts can never prove doubts.
Being asked "like" or "dislike" and asking for a real answer is inherently problematic. Whether you answer like or dislike, you have fallen into the trap of being "persuaded". It's entirely possible to have other feelings in between, or outside, it's just this feeling, we don't know it, but the movie seems to want to deny this vague feeling, it will lead you to some kind of feeling that can get rid of doubt. As a result, how to get rid of it? Have you sit in front of a polygraph.
Not to mention the question of whether the lie detector is accurate or not, even if it is accurate, if I say that I don't like someone is a lie, does it necessarily prove that I like someone? If I can't prove it, what can I use to prove my likes or dislikes? Maybe not.
Does it really matter? Is it really so important to distinguish between indulgence and restraint?
When writing an article or making a film, it is important to know if there is a possibility, because a set of structures and explanations are needed to present the existence of a work. As long as there is existence, it is knowledge, and as long as it is knowledge, it will not touch life, and questions about who you like and whether you like it should not appear in the knowledge system, because many feelings really "can't be said", In this sense, any literary and artistic work that wants to directly express the conclusion of life is doomed to fail, because life has no answer, and any work can only show its logic.
Wittgenstein said: A meaningful question must be a question that has an answer. But does life have an answer? Is life meaningful? Yes, but not so-and-so or the so-and-so machine told you.
It's the self who really lives in it and tells you.
It's okay to show some abnormal phenomena in life, but don't try to take a stand by showing it to deny other standpoints. Otherwise, this is bound to create a new dictatorship, either in the name of liberty or in the name of despotism. Advocating freedom of thought is no more noble than strengthening intellectual tyranny.
PS: There is a question, why for the sake of children and for life, you can make up a lie to deceive the world, but you can’t make up a lie to deceive yourself? In other words, if you lie to the world, you clearly know that you are lying, but if you lie to yourself, you will never know if you are lying.
View more about Professor Marston & the Wonder Women reviews
