It’s the End of the Worldand I Feel Fine Essay -- essays papers

Its the End of the Worldand I touch sensation FineIts the End of the Worldand I Feel Fine(The usage of intellectuals in the creation and justification of atomic weapons.) In flunk natural rubber and Dr. Strangelove, Or How I Learned to Stop curse and Love the Bomb, Sidney Lumet and Stanley Kubrick question the relationship between technology and humanity by emphasizing mankinds tendency to create machines that cannot be adequately controlled. By blatantly revealing the absurdity of game theory (Mutual ensure Destruction as a reasonable deterrence for nuclear war), two(prenominal) directors call into question the plethoric pro-Cold War American ideology. One of the roughly quintessential aspects of this ideology includes the drive for constant technological advance and strategical superiority. Without the brainpower of the scientists and intellectuals who dedicated their lives to the extension of technological power and the study of worldwide conflict, the Arms Race would certainly not have been possible. These academics not still became the architects of atomic weapons but they were also faced with justifying the use of these nuclear bombs, and creating a suppositious framework within which nuclear warfare might be appropriately (and rationally) conducted. Within this context, one noteworthy parallel between Fail Safe and Dr. Strangelove is the existence (in both films) of a single intellectual champ that actively perpetuates the comprehension of nuclear advancement and strategy. Indeed, through the characterizations of Professor Groeteschele and Dr. Strangelove, both Lumet and Kubrick examine the prominent role of intellectuals (both scientists and theorists) in the creation and justification of nuclear warfare. Ultimately, both Lumet and Kubrick reveal the problems with relying solely on science and mathematics to annunciation international conflict, thus intimateing that modern warfare requires a more(prenominal) humanistic, honorable definition of right and wrong. Both Fail Safe and Dr Strangelove serve as moralizing responses to the dominant American Cold War culture, rhetoric, and political policy. In his article titled Dr. Strangelove (1964) Nightmare Comedy and the ideology of gratis(p) Consensus, Charles Maland identifies the dominant American cultural paradigm (during the Cold War) as the Ideology of the Liberal Consensus. Maland maintains that the Ideology of the ... ...ocosm of possible nuclear disasters, both directors choose to include a character that embodies the contemporary nuclear intellectual. Indeed, scientists and theoreticians (like Groeteschele and Strangelove) played a prominent role in defining and perpetuating the new Cold War culture. These academics not exclusively became the architects of nuclear bombs but they were also faced with creating a viable theoretical framework within which the use of these weapons would be both recommended and justified. However, both Kubrick an d Lumet suggest that in order to apply their brilliance towards mass destruction and death, intellectuals must give up a portion of their humanity, becoming increasingly more like the devices they create and defend. The mutual catastrophes that occur in Fail Safe and Dr. Strangelove show the inevitability of human weakness and scientific fallibility. Through the evolution of Professor Groeteschele and Dr. Strangelove, both Lumet and Kubrick illustrate the catastrophic possibilities of relying solely on science and mathematics to resolve international conflicts. Ultimately, modern, high stake warfare requires a more humanistic, ethical code of right and wrong.