EGL309: Scifi and Cogsci on the Screen

The film Arrival and the tv episode “Darmok” in Star Trek: The Next Generation acknowledge the idea of linguistics. It exhibits how it affects our cognitive perception, or rather how it is part of our cognitive perception. Language influences how we understand who and what is around us.

Star Trek: The Next Generation

In Module 2, we briefly discussed embedded cognition, which acknowledges our interaction with the environment as a part of our cognition. The context within our physical and social environments are considered an important piece of our cognition. Embedded cognition goes hand in hand with this episode.

In one scene, Dr. Crusher, Data, Riker, and Deanna are seated together. Data and Deanna explain that the Tamarians communicate through imagery, specifically imagery of their mythological history. Deanna mentions how it’s like saying, “Juliet on her balcony”, to which Dr. Crusher adds, “An image of romance.” Riker mentions the possibility of being able to communicate with them with this information. However, it’s not the case. Dr. Crusher says, “If I didn’t know who Juliet was, or what she was doing on that balcony, the image alone wouldn’t have any meaning.” Essentially, if someone didn’t know the story of Romeo and Juliet by Shakespeare, they wouldn’t know the context of “Juliet on her balcony”, and therefore no emotions or ideas would be evoked. This is the issue the crew has with the Tamarians. They have trouble depicting the Tamarians’ imagery because they don’t know their mythological history. Embedded cognition takes on a large role here. Additionally, the discussion of meaning in the VoiceThread is active in this scene. The idea of the meanings we get from language being influenced by interactions and experiences is demonstrated. The Tamarian language would produce more meaning to the crew if they experienced the same history. That is why Picard reads a Greek mythology book at the end of the episode- to connect his personal mythology history with other species’ and produce meaning. This is like Simulation Theory in Module 3, which is when you can simulate others’ feelings in a situation based on your own experiences.

Arrival

This movie reveals how the body, language, and cognition play a role together. There is a scene when Louise writes her name on a whiteboard and points to herself saying, “Louise. I am Lousie.” She was attempting to teach the heptapods her name, but to no avail. She then risks her safety and removes her hazmat suit. She says, “They need to see me.” She touches the screen with her hand, to which a heptapod copies. She says, “Now that’s a proper introduction.” Ian ends up repeating her actions, removing the hazmat suit and saying his name while it’s written on the whiteboard. The heptapods then share their names in their written language. Louise recognizes that she must use her body to fully express herself and connect with the heptapods. According to the VoiceThread, cognitive linguistics see language as “embedded in the… interactions with the world.” Louise and the heptapod placing their hands on the screen allow them to truly connect for the first time through their physical interactions, and therefore allows the heptapod to understand her intentions and what she means. Staying in the hazmat suit creates a disconnect, as it is more of a scientific observation between the humans and heptapods rather than a true connection.

Conclusion

Star Trek: The Next Generation and Arrival both share the importance of bodily experiences and interactions with the environment in order to gain an understanding within language.

 

In the movie Arrival, I think I saw many overlaps in things we spoke about in class. With Aliens coming down to earth in a pack of twelve there are many issues at play with the main focus of Arrival being communicating with them. One thing is how “cognitive linguistics focuses on the importance of context”, this was a point of interest within the film because a word like weapon could easily be misconstrued as the word tool. When you are developing a basis of communication the specifics are yet to be finely tuned. I think this also has to do with frameshifting in one way or another. Going on the same example, weapon partnered with the word gift is not interpreted in the same manner as the other usage, use weapon. They also mention the Sapir Whorf Hypothesis which was a key point in our lesson, they define it as saying “the language you speak determines how you think, it affects how you see everything” which is accurate to what we learned in class. The point of noting this Hypothesis is brought to mind in the following scene where she references the problems of framing communication around a board game, making everything into a win-lose scenario, effectively making everything more dangerous. https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fs.studiobinder.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2010%2F03%2FArrival-Video-Essay-How-to-Balance-Fear-and-Intrigue-WP.jpg&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.studiobinder.com%2Fblog%2Farrival-movie-analysis%2F&tbnid=lYI_AyqcijQLKM&vet=12ahUKEwiqpvvFkJX5AhWon3IEHSaWDs0QMygFegUIARDoAQ..i&docid=ZRtX6nyNPLBzzM&w=1920&h=1080&q=arrival&ved=2ahUKEwiqpvvFkJX5AhWon3IEHSaWDs0QMygFegUIARDoAQ
In the episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation we watched has much more to do with conceptual metaphors. In this episode, the gang’s trip is met with a group of people who, up till now have never been able to be spoken to. They attempt interaction and the captain is transported to their planet. Though I can’t concede to knowing entirely what was happening in that episode, by the end the Leader of the federations ship, understands that the other race’s language is wholly based on metaphors and imagery. They communicate wholly through making specifics general. This is clearly brewed in the concept of conceptual metaphor, which is defined as, “Helping us make what is abstract, concrete.” though during this episode it appears to have more of the opposite effect. What assisted me to understand the idea of their language better is their comparison of Romeo and Juliet. “The Tamarian Ego Structure may not allow what we think of as self-identity. Their ability to abstract is highly unusual. They seem to communicate through narrative imagery, a reference to individuals and places that appear in their mythos. It is as if I were to say to you, Juliet on her balcony..” This helps the audience to get a handle on what our two main characters of the episode are saying… yes. But also helps you build a better idea of how the language fundamentally works. We see the understanding most clearly at play, during which the captain has figured out the idea behind some of the phrases he has been repeating the entire episode. Eventually concluding it was about two people coming together. Not simply about those two people at the end of the day. Clearly referencing their own groups within this deep sorry of extended metaphor.https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fntvb.tmsimg.com%2Fassets%2Fp7896684_b_h8_aa.jpg%3Fw%3D1280%26h%3D720&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tvinsider.com%2Fshow%2Fstar-trek-the-next-generation%2F&tbnid=ByrBEGP2vK4YYM&vet=12ahUKEwiqp8qwkJX5AhX3r3IEHbvTDCkQMygTegUIARCIAg..i&docid=2xooLp0DpzvIDM&w=1280&h=720&q=star%20trek%20the%20next%20generation&ved=2ahUKEwiqp8qwkJX5AhX3r3IEHbvTDCkQMygTegUIARCIAg

 

In this week’s module, the movie Arrival, and Star Trek episode “Darmok” demonstrated different aspects of cognitive linguistics through the characters and their interactions with other life forms. In the Star Trek episode, there is a scene where Captain Picard and the Tamarian Captain spend a night on the planet at a healthy distance from one another (11:29). We have seen previously that Picard is not able to understand the language of the Tamarian when they first meet during the day, creating a barrier between them. It seems that a common theme throughout the episode was fear, and how fear due to lack of understanding can lead to violence. Picard watches the Tamarian build a fire and place objects of some sort arround the fire before turning over to go to sleep. Picard stays awake freezing, because he does not trust this foreign being, and the absence of trust stems from the fact that he can’t put words or meaning behind the action of the Tamarian. He doesn’t know if the Tamarian is going to be peaceful, or if he will try to harm him in the night when he finally goes to sleep. The Tamarian can sense that Picard is cold and untrusting, so he offers him a torch of fire to keep warm in the night saying “Temba with arms wide”.

Picard is still unable to understand exactly what that phrase means, but with more context, in this instant the Tamarian is performing a physical act to demonstrate his actions, which allows Picard to realize that he means no harm. I think we can see how important body language is here and how it is effective in connecting the bridge between Picard and the Tamarian when the spoken language is not possible right away (this will allow actions to be connected to words, which will help when trying to understand a language). Also, Picard can use past experience to help him come to conclusions about the Tamarian’s stance towards him and whether it is good or bad. In war, if someone is offering you help instead of attacking you, that is a sign that they probably don’t want to be your enemy. Social queues within culture gain meaning, and can be used to make future decisions. 

Throughout the episode, the Tamarian holds up the two knife like weapon in the air towards Captain Picard, at one point he even throws one at the Captain. Picard sees these particular actions as “aggressive” movements and throws the weapon back at the Tamarian saying “I don’t want to fight you”. Picard fears for what may happen if they begin to engage in battle, possibly starting a war between the two species. In this scenario Picard is using a cognitive frame that is geared for foreign conflict. As I mentioned earlier, he is using past experience to make decisions, but each scenario is unique and the full story had not been revealed yet due to the language barrier. The next day they are on the planet together, they both hear a noise of an animal of some sort that is closing in on them (22:03). Picard sees how the Tamarian goes on the offensive towards where the noise is coming from and realizes the creature is upon them. Frame shifting occurs here, because new information has now been provided to Captain Picard, which changes the context of his situation. Picard deducts that the enemy is actually this creature, and that the reason the Tamarian kept trying to give him the knife was so that they could fight it together. Also, when the Tamarian kept raising the weapons in the air the day before he was trying to rally Picard to join his fight. The introduction of the creature is what Picard needed to piece together why the Tamarian wanted to meet with him in the first place. 

In the film Arrival, we see similar themes of cognitive dissonance between the humans at the Heptapods. Here, their conceptual/linguistic system is not through metaphors of spoken language, but symbol writing. The different designs within the circles that the Heptapods create represent different objects or ideas, that the human may have written words for. Louise is able to piece together their language by the mirrored action of the Heptapods.

She sees that they use symbols so she decides to adopt their method of written communication and uses a white board. Louise and Ian introduce themselves at the wall and take off their gear so the aliens can see them. Louise points to the aliens and says “you, who are you?” and they give their names with the circle symbols (47:45). Throughout the film she continues this visual type of communication, as we see later on she ha the phrase “Ian walking” on the white board, while having Ian walk in front of them. They respond with their own symbol showing how they are internalizing what they are seeing. Again we see the physical body playing an important role in communication, as Ian is being used to demonstrate an action, not to mention the Heptapods use their physical body to create the symbols on the wall. 

 

Another scene I found to be interesting was when the Heptapod write a symbol that says “offer weapon”(1:06:58), or what the human interpret it to mean. The problem here is that as discussed in the lecture, “meaning is not static, but dynamically changing…it is embedded in social interactions, physical environments, and bodily experiences”. Louise even points out that “they are using a word they don’t fully understand. We don’t know if they know the difference between a weapon and a tool, our language like our culture is messy and sometimes one can be both”. A word can be misconstrued if there isn’t a clear definition, or if there are a couple of different ways to express the same thing. Also, the humans have no previous knowledge of what life and culture is like for the Heptapods, which may leave them with gaps in understanding how the Heptapods are processing information.

This week we watched the film “Arrival” and an episode of “Star Trek: The Next Generation”. I was pleasantly surprised by both of these media. I had seen “Arrival” before but It was really enjoyable watching it again especially watching it through a lens of linguistics. The episode of “Star Trek: The Next Generation” was also so good and honestly made me feel a bit emotional. 

 

The first one I want to talk about is the episode of Star Trek titled “Darmok”. As this episode progressed I realized how heavily it focused on conceptual metaphors. In the episode Picard is taken by Dathon to a different planet. While watching the episode I did think the intentions of Dathon and the Tamarians were bad. I think this is because as a viewer I truly had no idea what Dathon was saying and what it meant. The same goes for the federation crew. Before the crew realizes that Tamarians speak in metaphors they felt threatened by them. One scene that really stuck out to me in this episode was when Deanna Troi is discussing whether or not the Tarmarians have ill intentions and she emphasizes to the crew before they take any action that one word misunderstood could be the cause of unnecessary turmoil and war. This really stuck out to me because it reminded me of the way that sometimes when you text someone they pick up on an attitude and misinterpret your message. This causes unnecessary turmoil all because of a miscommunication. This episode also made me think about how we use metaphors in our day to day life. Furthermore it made me think about how confusing it must be to some people when they don’t know the conceptual frame in which someone is using. For example, before I read Jekyll and Hyde I never understood what people meant when they would describe someone as Jekyll and Hyde. The same goes for The Federation not knowing the context of the Tamarians metaphors. 

 

“Arrival” is a fantastic film that always makes me feel a little crazy. Overall this film says a lot about how language constructs communication. One scene that definitely stuck out to me was when Louise and Ian were talking about Sapir-Work theory. It’s all about how the language you speak affects your whole life. At first I didn’t necessarily understand how this was true but after watching the movie I realized that just as the Heptapods language is written circularly they think circularly. They don’t think about endings or beginnings, they think about the big picture. As Louise works with them and learns the language she will begin to think the same which helps her in coping with what will be the eventual loss of her daughter. This film is sad when you realize she knows she will lose her daughter but when understanding that that alien language will actually help Louise to realize death isn’t the end of the journey the movie is beautiful.

This week we watched Possessor (2022) and a Futurama episode titled “I Second that Emotion,” which expressed the meaning of Theory of the Mind.

Possessor (2020)

Tasya Vos is an assassin that is able to commit murders by taking control over other people’s bodies using brain-implant technology. In order to get back to her own body, she forces the host to commit suicide. The film starts off with Vos having finished one of her jobs, but fails to force her host to commit suicide. Her inability to go through it suggests there are some issues she has to work through, and it is hinted in the beginning as to what those issues are. After returning to her body, she has to go through a debriefing session to remember and connect with her real self. She feels guilt over a pinned butterfly she killed as a child. This guilt does not bode well for her future since her handler, Girder, wants to pass her title down to her. Vos is also seen practicing her “role” as an ex-wife and mother to Michael and Ira. She practices the phrasing and tone in which she’ll talk, similar to how she practices the way the hosts she invades act as well. This demonstrates that the person she is seen as through her ex-husband and son are not truly her. Even in the end she confesses to Colin that: “I loved him too, but I’m not sure if it was me.”

Similar to Theory of the Mind, she is able to understand that other people’s thoughts and perspectives are different from her own, but she still tries to connect with them in order to get the job done. She does this when killing the lawyer when she decides to stab him repeatedly instead of shooting him, something that her host would’ve done. This could either be because it would make it easier for her to commit the act, or easier to overpower her host. When killing John Parse as Colin, she again does not shoot him, but hits him with a weapon and disfigures his face. She is connecting with her host.

 

The ending where she kills her son was interesting because there is so much rage when shooting him. As if it was that moment when she felt she was free, free of acting like she had any emotions to show to Michael and Ira. In being free of them, she was free of that guilt she felt for pinning the butterfly as a child.

Futurama

In the episode of “Futurama: I Second that Emotion,” it was less challenging to follow along. Bender flushes Nibbler (Leela’s pet) down the toilet, and feels absolutely no emotions over it afterwards, not even when witnessing Leela breakdown over Nibbler. In order to teach Bender a lesson, the Professor implants an empathy chip that will allow Bender to feel every emotion Leela is going through. Bender is unwilling to even try to understand what Leela went through, which makes it easier for him to not care. He could try to show certain acts that would be perceived as acts of kindness, but he would still not feel them. Similar to Vos practicing phrases and tones of voice in order to act as if she felt those emotions. After taking the empathy chip off, Bender is back to his old self, having no emotions.

 

What Makes Us Human?

Futurama- The Day the Earth Stood Stoopid

http://https://futurama.fandom.com/wiki/The_Day_the_Earth_Stood_Stupid

In Futurama’s episode ‘ The Day the Earth Stood Stoopid’, the episode employs the use of the image of a brain in a vat (outside the vat, in this case). The battle between the flying brains and the humans is representing the argument of cognition limited to the brain and embodied cognition. Though the brains are seen as intelligent and humans stupid, the brains’ reliance on the brain for thought processes is actually to their detriment. Why? Because they are unable to process emotions properly since they are just a brain and not a mind. This suggests that there is value in human emotions and that the collaboration between our brain and our body is what makes us human. This made me think of how we treat people in a coma. When there is a lack of brain activity, a person is called brain-dead. But, when the human form decides to cease all activity, they are just dead, which highlights the importance of viewing the brain and body as one. Also, I just wanted to highlight Leela’s comment about the brains saying: “Oh my God; they’re like flying televisions!” (because they make people dumb). I thought it was interesting that she thinks of technology as a knowledge-zapper instead of a new medium through which we can gain knowledge compared to reading, writing, etc.

 

 

 

 

 

Star Trek: Return to Tomorrow

Star Trek uses Sargon and Sargon’s planet as a symbol for brain cognition. Sargon says, “I am as dead as my planet”‘. What’s interesting is that Sargon is directing the ship through voice commands alone. It is assumed that Sargon is a person or maybe an alien until it is revealed that they are a brain in a vat (or a brain in an orb, in this case). Essentially, they act like Siri, giving commands and mimicking human-like ways of thinking. However, it’s noted that, though Sargon doesn’t consider himself dead, he doesn’t consider himself alive either. That is until he possesses a crew member’s body and states how wonderful it is, “to be again”. “To be” as in regaining the senses which allowed him to feel a pulse, breathe, and see. I would argue that vision was probably the most important sense that they regained because before they could perceive their surroundings. This circles back to the belief that human cognition is formed by our experiences. 

 

Altered Carbon: Out of the Past

Unlike both Star Trek and Futurama, Altered Carbon doesn’t have images or representations of a brain outside the body. It doesn’t question what it means to be a human. Rather, it questions what makes you, you. The writers focus on the human form, referring to bodies as ‘sleeves’, implying that bodies are vessels for the brain and that it’s solely responsible for our personality. Take the case of Kovacs, for example, he still seems to be himself even though he went from being a slender Asian man to a buff white guy. It’s suggested that the human brain acts like a computer: our thoughts are software that can be downloaded and run by anybody. In other words, the brain can’t exist outside of a body, but it can function outside of our original body.

Futurama- I Second That Emotion

The first media I watched this week was Futurama whose message was straightforward. This episode seems to be arguing that empathy isn’t an inherent trait and that it can be developed in one who does not have it. In the example of Bender who is a robot, he is able to feel empathy through the implantation of an empathy chip by the Professor. The first thing that I noticed is that he felt not only her sadness, but also her happiness and anger, which I thought was odd, but only because empathy is usually associated with kindness. Continuing, this is reminiscent of the topic of mirror neurons because Bender is able to save Leela’s pet since he seemingly feels her pain. But, it also showcases the weakness of the mirror neuron claim because, after the chip is removed, Bender doesn’t feel empathy anymore despite witnessing and displaying Leela’s love for Nibbler. This might be because he didn’t employ emotional empathy. He acted out of selfishness (how he would feel in her place) instead of thinking about how Leela herself felt. This leans more towards supporting embodied theory since he does not need to theorize Leela’s emotions. His body recognizes her body language and responds to it.

Possessor

When I glanced at the cover for Possessor, I thought it would be like a regular horror movie. You know, maybe there’s a villain, a sidekick, and some violence, However, the opening scene was different than what I expected. I don’t like needles or blood on television, so it was a little uncomfortable to watch. Also, it was a little difficult to understand the plot, so I did have to replay some scenes. Something that I focused on was the sex scenes. The act of sex is usually heightened by the feelings each person has for one another. Vos eventually empathizes with the host to where sex feels like more than an act in every relationship except her own. It paints empathy in a negative light, because, in order to empathize with someone, Vos has to lose part of herself in the process. It makes me wonder if empathy is simply understanding how someone feels or trading a portion of your consciousness for theirs. Is our consciousness just a collection of our experiences with others? In addition, the primary use of empathy in the movie is to allow her to kill people, which also isn’t exactly positive.

I also wanted to zone in on her embodied cognition and how difficult it is to separate the actions performed by the host’s body from her own consciousness. Due to the fact that she couldn’t commit suicide, it seems that the host’s body and her mind are now one. Or, if not, there’s a struggle between the mind and body for control. Vos’s experience isn’t too different from what most people experience as she uses grounding techniques such as repeating the phrase, “I’m absolutely starving”. People normally use this when they’ve lost their sense of self.

 

The mind can be manipulated by others. When watching the ending of possesor Girder the boss, grooms and  Manipulates Vos.  A person can slowly groom you into doing what they want you to do.  The human mind can be manipulated. If you are told long enough you are  A Sociopath, you begin to believe it.  You begin to believe it is the right thing to do. This begins Tasya Vos’s descent into becoming a sociopath. She lacks empathy when she begins to remember a butterfly she killed as a child. To have true empathy for others requires remorse. Scientifically Sociopaths lack empathy for others and do not see them as an individual.  They do not feel sorry for harming them.   Tasya Vos was trained to kill for the agency to take out clients as business but what is interesting in the human mind is to not want to kill and to view others as human beings as ourselves. “Tate” says, “Pull me out,” revealing Michael’s killer to actually be Vos, who once again struggles to “self-terminate” and exit her host.  Vos seems to be struggling most of all with this particular instance which makes the audience believe she has empathy deep down. Tate also uses her own mind against her to gain control back.  This is a perfect example of how the human brain can be manipulated and one can lose themselves easily. Never underestimate the powers humans can have on each other’s minds. This film gave the perfect example to Embodied Cognition.  The mind is more connected than we think.  Our cognition can be determined by our experiences with others.

In the episode of Futurama “I second that Emotion” Bender the Robot seems to be extremely selfish and lack empathy.  The scene where they take the pet named Nibbler to the vet and he is standing there angry with his arms folded.  He does not seem to care as fry and Leela are worried for his tooth.  He says to the doctor “oh put him to sleep.” Then when they go back to the house to throw nibbler a birthday party Bender cheats at pin the tail by using his target. Further proving he does things for personal gain and popularity. He seems to always be making it about himself. The scene where you can see real emotion is when Layla is crying around her friends about bender flushing nibbler down the toilet.  He is watching tears stream down her face and he has his feet up smoking a cigar.  He seems to lack any empathy about what he has done. Leela even points out to him that he has no sympathy for anyone else. She says ” I wouldn’t feel so bad if bender knew the pain he caused me.” The whole gang watches as Bender is laughing at the TV about a man dying and tragedies of a rocket crash and the death toll rising. The others just can’t wrap their head around him not having basic “humanoid
emotions.  The empathy chip would force him to feel basic human emotions.   I think this was actually a great concept if we could do this in real life.  There may be more people out there who can feel what others feel and have empathy.  Maybe we would have less cold killers in the world.