The film A Beautiful Mind tells the story of John Nash, a brilliant mathematician who suffers from schizophrenia. Although the movie takes some creative liberties to enhance its dramatic effect, it remains based on true events. It showcases Nash’s journey from his belief that he is working on top-secret code-breaking for the U.S government against Russia, to his romantic involvement and starting a family with one of his students. However, the film also accurately depicts his eventual institutionalization due to mental health concerns. Surprisingly, Nash later goes on to win the Nobel Prize in Economics for his groundbreaking equilibrium theory. Despite offering a glimpse into reality, it is important to acknowledge that A Beautiful Mind has certain limitations.
Even though Nash has a mental illness, the movie “A Beautiful Mind” effectively depicts his journey and showcases how people with mental illness can triumph over obstacles to achieve success. Nevertheless, it is crucial to recognize that the car chases and shootings in the Hollywood scenes were made up and did not happen in real life. The purpose of the film is to demonstrate that individuals with mental disabilities can still have remarkable intelligence. Regrettably, society frequently links mental illness with incompetence or shortcomings, reflecting a mindset focused on deficits.
The central message of A Beautiful Mind is the significance of embracing a mindset that focuses on an individual’s strengths rather than solely on their mental illness. Personally, I found the film to be outstanding and it serves as a source of motivation. It effectively illustrates how individuals who are considered “unconventional” by society can still achieve success. The movie accurately depicts schizophrenia, showing both hallucinations and aggressive outbursts. However, there are instances where the portrayal in the film does not perfectly align with Nash’s actual experiences.
In her work on “Bioethics at the movies,” Sandra Shapshay discusses the potential of films to enhance our understanding of philosophy. Shapshay argues that films provide us with evidence for supporting moral claims, connecting this idea to the concept of functionalism. Functionalism posits that every element in our society serves a purpose. For instance, crime and immoral behavior exist to serve as a reference point for distinguishing right from wrong.
Functionalism proponents may argue that the existence of people with mental illnesses helps us distinguish between normal individuals and those with mental health issues. According to Shapshay, films offer captivating examples of philosophical concepts explored independently. This implies that visual aids, such as films, can enhance the study and comprehension of philosophical ideas, which may be challenging for certain individuals without such visual support. I personally perceive film analysis as a unique branch of philosophy in its own regard.
Film serves as a means of visually presenting philosophy, expanding its influence to a wider audience. Nevertheless, there are potential drawbacks in employing film as a platform for philosophical contemplation. Shapshay identifies three hazards associated with using film for philosophical reflection. Firstly, films might employ rhetoric and emotional manipulation rather than presenting logical arguments to convince viewers. For instance, a film could depict a mentally ill individual committing crimes to support their family due to an inability to work. Although the film may elicit sympathy for the struggles of the mentally ill person, it does not legitimize their criminal behavior. Secondly, films are crafted by humans who make subjective choices when selecting shots, combining images, and framing problematic situations.
As a filmmaker, I fully concur with Shapshay’s assertion about the manipulation and control of films. Films can easily be manipulated to convey a persuasive message supporting any side of an argument or to evoke intense emotions of sympathy. A personal experience that exemplifies this is my recent involvement in the Widener film project. Although it had been over 3 years since I last visited the Widener Memorial School, I joined the project in Early March without knowing what to expect. The students at this school all face various disabilities, whether physical or mental. Nevertheless, despite encountering everyday obstacles, challenges, and adversity, these students consistently arrive at school with smiles on their faces, just like any other student in the world.
With the aim of showcasing the school in a positive light, I endeavored to challenge the belief that individuals with disabilities are fundamentally distinct from others. It is equally essential not to approach the film with a close-minded perspective that solely focuses on its objective elements while disregarding its artistic and cultural worth. By doing so, we neglect to recognize its capacity for advancing philosophical ideas. Merely regarding a film as mere amusement without making an effort to grasp its profound significance diminishes its importance. Consequently, it is vital to dedicate time and energy towards genuinely comprehending a film rather than superficially watching it.
Film serves as a valuable medium for presenting philosophy to individuals who struggle with comprehending it solely through textual format. It offers an alternative viewpoint on the very same philosophical subjects. Personally, I believe that while film is a powerful tool for conveying philosophy, it should not be the exclusive means of doing so. Relying on a single method is risky, as everything possesses inherent biases. Increasing the number of mediums utilized decreases the likelihood of complete bias towards any particular direction. Ultimately, film proves to be an excellent avenue for advancing philosophy, but it should not be employed as the sole approach.
