Abstract
Shamir offers a comprehensive overview of the main challenges to the possibility of creating philosophy via the cinematic medium. This overview is important because, at this writing, there are many more voices arguing against the possibility that films could create any significant form of philosophical wisdom than for it. In addition, most theories that do allow for the possibility of the cinematic platform creating some sort of philosophical wisdom only admit a very limited version of it. Since Shamir’s eventual goal is to claim that cinema can create significant philosophical wisdom, he not only reviews the theories that challenge the philosophical potential of films but also offers responses to each of those challenges.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Bibliography
Books and Articles
Adorno, T., & Horkheimer, M. (1944/2006). The culture industry: Enlightenment as mass deception. In D. G. Meenakshi & K. M. Douglas (Eds.), Media and cultural studies: Key works (Rev. ed., pp. 42–72). Oxford: Blackwell.
Bernstein, M. J. (1992). The fate of art. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
Carroll, N. (2002). The wheel of virtue: Art, literature, and moral knowledge. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 60(1), 3–26.
Carroll, N. (2006, March). Philosophizing through the moving image: The case of serene velocity. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 64, 1, pp. 173-185.
Carroll, N. (2008). Philosophy in the moving image: Response to Bruce Russell. Film and Philosophy, 12, 17–26.
Céline, L.-F. (1932/2006). Journey to the end of the night (trans: Manheim, R.). New York: New Directions.
Davies, D. (2008, August). Can film be a philosophical medium?. Postgraduate Journal of Aesthetics, 5(2). McGill University. Retrieved from http://www.british-aesthetics.org/uploads/David_Davies_-_Can_Film_be_a_Philosophical_Medium.pdf
Di Paolo, E., Noble, J. & Bullock, S. (2000). Simulation models as opaque thought experiments. Seventh International Conference on Artificial Life. (pp. 497–506). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/466733/Simulation_Models_As_Opaque_Thought_Experiments
Duhem, P. (1913). La Théorie Physique Son Objet et sa Structure, (2nd ed.). Paris: Chevalier & Rivière. Used here in reprint of 1981, The aim and structure of physical theory (trans: Weiner, P.). Paris: Librairie Philosophique J. Vrin. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Elgin, C.Z. (1993, April). Understanding: Art and science. In Synthese, Vol. 95, No. 1, Probing into “Reconceptions” (pp. 13–28). Published by Springer. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/20117763
Gendler, T. (1998). Galileo and the Indispensability of Thought Experiments. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 49, 397–424.
Gilmore, R. (2005). Doing philosophy at the movies. Albany, NY: State University of New York, Albany.
Goodman, N. (1983). The new riddle of induction. In Fact, fiction, and forecast. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Granger, H. (2004). Cinematic philosophy in Le Feu Follet: The search for a meaningful life. Film and Philosophy, 8, 74–90.
Hempel, G. C. (1965). Aspects of scientific explanation. New York: Free Press.
Hume, D. (1740/1978). A treatise of human nature. In L.A. Selby-Bigge (ed.) (2nd ed. Rev. P.H. Nidditch). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Hume, D. (1748/1975). Enquiry Concerning human understanding, in Enquiries concerning human understanding and concerning the principles of morals. L.A. Selby-Bigge (ed.), (3rd ed. Rev. P.H. Nidditch). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Jackson, M. W. (1992). The gedankenexperiment method of ethics. The Journal of Value Inquiry, 26, 525–535.
Lamarque, P., & Olsen, S. H. (1994). Truth, fiction, and literature. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Little, B. (2006). Impractical pragmatics in doing philosophy in the movies. Film-Philosophy, 10(3), 122–128 Retrieved from http://www.film-philosophy.com/2006v10n3/little.pdf.
Livingston, P. (2006). Theses on cinema as philosophy. In M. Smith (ed.) & T.E. Wartenberg (ed.). Thinking through cinema: Film as philosophy. Oxford: Blackwell.
Norton, J. (1996). Are thought experiments just what you always thought? Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 26(3), 333–366.
Putnam, H. (1976). Literature, science, and reflection. InMeaning and the moral sciences (pp. 83–94). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Russell, B. (2007). Film’s limits: The sequel. Film and Philosophy, 12, 1–16.
Sinnerbrink, R. (2011). New philosophies of film: Thinking images. London: Continuum.
Smith, M. (2006). Film art, argument and ambiguity. In M. Smith (ed.) & T.E. Wartenberg (ed.), Thinking through cinema: Film as philosophy. Oxford: Blackwell.
Smuts, A. (2009, Fall). Film as philosophy: In defense of a bold thesis. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 67, 4. Blackwell Publishing.
Souder, L. (2003). What are we to think about thought experiment? InArgumentation (Vol. 17, pp. 203–217). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Stoehr, K. (2011). ‘By cinematic means alone’: The Russell-Wartenberg-Carroll debate. In Film and Philosophy, Volume, 15, 111–125.
Stolnitz, J. (1992). On the cognitive triviality of art. British Journal of Aesthetics, 32(3), 191–200.
Taylor, C., & Jefferson, D. (1994). Artificial life as a tool for biological inquiry. Artificial Life, 1(1/2), 1–13.
Thomson, J. J. (1971, Fall). A defense of abortion. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1(1), 47–66.
Wartenberg, E. T. (2007). Thinking on screen: Film as philosophy. New York: Routledge.
Williams, B. (1973). Problems of the self. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Films & Artworks
Godard, J.-L. (1967). Weekend. [Motion Picture].
Gondry, M. (2004). Eternal sunshine of the spotless mind. [Motion Picture].
Linklater, R. (2001). Waking life. [Motion Picture].
Malle, L. (1963). Le Feu Follet. [Motion Picture].
Proyas, A. (2004). I, Robot. [Motion Picture].
Reiner, C. (1984). All of me. [Motion Picture].
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Shamir, T.S. (2016). Foundation II—The Critique of Film and Philosophy. In: Cinematic Philosophy. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33473-8_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33473-8_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-33472-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-33473-8
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)