MovieChat Forums > Miracle on 34th Street (1994) Discussion > What's the moral of this movie?

What's the moral of this movie?

posted 2 years ago by loser (348)
14 replies | jump to latest

Regarding that quote: "What is better? A lie that draws a smile, or a truth that draws a tear?"

I mean, I'd like to unite with a loved one of mine (who's not alive) in an afterlife where we'll live happily ever after with no problems. But as an atheist, I'm fully aware that it will never happen.

Should by that quote's logic believe otherwise because "beautiful lies are better than tearful truths"? Is that what you suggest I do? Is there any point in deluding myself?

[–] strntz (12229) a year ago

Well, as an atheist, let me say that you might not be deluding yourself (OK, today I'm more agnostic).

Despite many theoretical physicist's theories that say otherwise, I still haven't read anything that comes close to explain how there is *anything* at all. The universe shouldn't be here, we shouldn't be here.

So while many atheists chide those who believe, I never do. The fact is is that there is no one on Earth now or ever who had the answers.

In a way, I envy the believers, but I also don't think anyone on Earth is 100% convinced that they will live on after their body passes despite what they say.

Are they deluding themselves? Maybe, but the best minds who ever lived who think they know that the universe can spring from nothing are also deluding themselves.

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8710) a year ago

You just touched on one of the primary reasons that I returned to Christianity after about 20 years of agnosticism. As you say, there is no good scientific explanation for why anything exists at all. It is easier for me to believe that the universe was created by an eternal creative entity who exists outside of creation than for me to believe that the universe is itself eternal or that it somehow willed itself into existence from non-existence.

[–] loser (348) a year ago

I don't see how assuming a universal creator has existed forever makes more sense than assuming that the universe itself has existed forever.

[–] strntz (12229) a year ago

Exactly.

Maybe Carl Spackler was right, maybe total consciousness will be achieved only after death, and that actually makes some sense. In other words, maybe the answer to why the universe exists at all is actually quite simple - we are simply not allowed to understand this while we are corporeal.

[–] loser (348) a year ago

If consciousness is something beyond brain, why do those with certain brain damages lose their memories forever? I don't see how further destruction, let alone total loss, of the brain will lead to the restoration of those memories.

[–] strntz (12229) a year ago

Let me qualify what I'm going to say with this - I don't have an effing clue...

But I can speculate by playing devil's advocate a bit, so here goes - maybe our "soul" isn't directly related to the brain or human intelligence which is contained in the bag of meat and water we are confined in on Earth. I mean, if we did have an immortal non-physical soul, it wouldn't necessarily follow that our soul would trend with our brain.

Maybe after death, the soul is freed from this bag of meat and we find out that because there is no physical existence, "intelligence" is a whole different thing than what we can understand while we are confined to the body.

Here's something that always amazed me - when I dream, the dream is reality for me, and as bizarre as they can be sometimes (even talking to my dad who's been gone for 20 years), I never think during the dream that something is wrong. I've explained things to people in my dreams that made perfect sense, but when I woke up and achieved a far greater consciousness (comparatively speaking), the dream seemed bizarre even though I didn't know that while dreaming.

So... what if, after death, we "awaken" further and laugh at our human understanding of intelligence and might wonder how we never realized that we were confined both physically and mentally to that bag of mean and water.

[–] loser (348) a year ago

Except that neurobiology can explain dreams too in purely physical terms.

[–] strntz (12229) a year ago

Yes, neurobiology can explain dreams in a physical brain...

To be honest, considering the breath and scope of the universe and how it popped from nothing, it makes more sense that the universe doesn't exist at all and our physicality is a "simulation" (I use that word because there is no word to describe something that doesn't exist as far as we know).

Again, playing devil's advocate, maybe after death we "wake up" released from this "physicality".

And yes, I am acutely aware that none of that comes close to explaining why we would have these souls or how they popped from nothing..

[–] liscarkat (18373) a year ago

"If consciousness is something beyond brain, why...?"

loser--that is one of the most perceptive questions regarding life-after-death I've ever read. Something on Movie Chat has actually made me think.

[–] Lord Rake (4454) a year ago

"Is there any point in deluding myself?"

By believing the beautiful lie you would never have the tearful truth because if it turns out to be a lie you would already be dead, and thus beyond the grasp of that terrible truth. I get that you are trying to trash people believing in god but it's just the wrong argument because even if they are wrong they are still avoiding the pain of thinking about death.

[–] loser (348) a year ago

That's a way of seeing it, but I prefer truth.

[–] liscarkat (18373) a year ago

The OP (loser) was not "trying to trash" anybody. Just posing a thoughtful question.

[–] Kowalski (75528) a year ago

SANTA IS REAL!

[–] liscarkat (18373) a year ago

Yeah, probably.