In this blog post, we’ll examine how free will and attitudes toward death are connected to humanity through the film ‘The Bicentennial Man’.
The film ‘The Bicentennial Man’ is steeped in humanism. What’s interesting is that the source of this humanism is the protagonist—a robot. So how was the film able to convey the theme of humanity through a robot? The protagonist, Andrew, is a mutant robot who feels and acts like a human, and he makes two major decisions. The first decision comes as Andrew consistently reads history books and realizes that what humans have always strived to achieve is “freedom.” He proposes that he no longer wishes to be a servant who merely obeys orders, but rather a free being who voluntarily cares for the family members who have treated him like one of their own. Seeing that Andrew is not asking to leave but merely requesting a change in status, his owner, Martin, becomes deeply pensive. Ultimately, he sends Andrew away from home so that Andrew can experience not only a change in status but also freedom in a broader sense. The second decision is closely related to the meaning of the film’s title. Andrew experiences deep sorrow as he watches the family members he has lived with die one by one. Later, after falling in love with someone, he begins to question his own identity, wondering what he would be if even this person were to die. He comes to desire recognition for who he truly is—a being capable of thought and feeling. Consequently, he modifies himself to have the same biological structure as a person capable of aging and decides to die just like his beloved, Portia. On the day he dies at the age of 200, he is recognized through a trial as a human being rather than a robot, thus becoming the “Bicentennial Man.” The answer to the question “What is humanity?” lies precisely within these two decisions.
Free will generally refers to the ability to choose one’s actions voluntarily, without being subject to external coercion, control, or constraint. In other words, it refers to the ability to make decisions based on one’s own will, unaffected by external factors. However, when examining specific cases, it is not easy to explain the true nature of this free will. For example, consider a student who participates in volunteer work. We might assume that this student participated in the volunteer work out of a desire to help those in need. However, suppose there is also the aspect that this volunteer experience could later serve as proof of their resume. In that case, the question arises as to whether the student would have volunteered even if the experience were not recognized as part of their resume. As such, there are almost no instances in which external factors are completely eliminated when making a decision. Therefore, we must think about it the other way around. That is, we must examine the tendency to act uniquely by exercising one’s will, even in the face of external coercion, control, or constraints. And this tendency is clear: it is the desire to choose freely—the longing for freedom itself.
Even if one has the desire to choose freely, putting that desire into action is a different matter. For example, among those who lived during the Japanese colonial period, even though there was clearly a desire to resist Japanese oppression, some acted on it while others did not. This is not intended as a criticism of those who did not act. People inherently desire freedom, but for various reasons, they are often unable to act upon it. Richard Dawkins went so far as to claim that human choice is, by its very nature, inevitably selfish. However, this is not the case. The choices made by Admiral Yi Sun-sin—who forged a myth of invincibility and died in battle despite the Joseon government’s refusal to officially recognize him as a general and despite having a small number of troops and warships—or by Doctor Ahn Jung-geun, who risked his life to single-handedly assassinate key Japanese officials at Harbin Station and severely wound others, cannot be interpreted as selfish choices.
Furthermore, we must consider that countless people respect the choices made by these two great figures, are moved by their lives, and honor their spirit. Of course, there is a difference compared to Andrew’s attempt to escape his status as a servant. Since it was a proposal made for his own freedom, there is no altruistic aspect to Andrew’s actions. However, the fact that he offered up his entire fortune in exchange for his freedom, and made it clear that—apart from the change in status—he would not leave the household and would continue to take full responsibility for the household chores as before, evokes a sense of humanistic inspiration. This seems to evoke a similar emotion to that seen in Hong Gil-dong, the protagonist of Korea’s ‘The Story of Hong Gil-dong’, who, unable to bear his father’s failure to treat him as an equal, left home to pursue his own freedom, only to later return to rescue his father from detention.
So what drives one to take that leap toward the freedom they yearn for? This is a standard that cannot be judged. We cannot judge someone as wrong simply because they did not actively resist during the Japanese colonial period. This is because they faced an unfavorable situation and, furthermore, the fear that they might die. The crux of the matter lies precisely in one’s attitude toward death. Admiral Yi Sun-sin, mentioned in the example above, left behind the pre-battle maxim, “If you are determined to die, you will live; if you are determined to live, you will die,” precisely to emphasize the attitude of being prepared to die. Those who have resolved to die are driven to take decisive action. And within that action, excellence inevitably shines through, moving others who witness it. Admiral Yi Sun-sin was a formidable victor in battle right up until his death in the midst of actual warfare. In the movie, there is a scene where the judge asks Andrew—who is identical to a human in every way except for not being recognized as one, and who could live forever—why he would go so far as to choose death just to be recognized as a human. Andrew answers this question as follows: “To be recognized. Not praise or judgment about who I am as I am, but simply to have the truth acknowledged. That is my goal. For that, I have chosen to die with dignity.” When people ask whether free will exists, they usually naturally invoke situations where there are no entirely free decisions, particularly in moral contexts. This is because, as Jonathan Edwards argued in ‘Free Will’, decisions such as which color one prefers are already inherent and therefore not suitable for selection through the will. This, in fact, serves as evidence that humans have an inclination to desire virtues such as freedom. However, this aspiration always encounters obstacles. The possibility of dying in war, as mentioned in the example above, or the inability to live forever—as depicted in movies—are precisely those obstacles. Yet, it is when one overcomes these obstacles that a person’s strong will is revealed—through that spirit of acting as if one were going to die, or rather, of achieving one’s goal even while dying.
