Doctor Who and Philosophy

Here is the link to and a description of Christopher J. Hansen’s new book. 

http://www.amazon.com/Ruminations-Peregrinations-Regenerations-Critical-Approach/dp/1443820849/ref=wl_it_dp_o?ie=UTF8&coliid=I3LBNSQA1MRR5I&colid=38JAYKZHBT5HE

Product Description (from amazon.com)

About the Author (from amazon.com)

(Note: Sorry for being gone for so long!)

I have always viewed “The Trial of a Time Lord” as being analogous to the trial and death of Socrates, and episodes 5-8 provide some of the sharpest similarities.  The similarities are seen in three main aspects.  First, the Doctor is accused of putting his companions (and all of those around him) in danger.  The accusation is similar to the accusation waged against Socrates: that he corrupted the youth.  The Doctor corrupts his companions by teaching them that life is much more than simply getting by, and that one should live his or her life to its fullest.

Second, the Time Matrix (at least it is supposed to) serves as the perfect, unchanging, eternal Forms that Plato suggests are the archetypes of the world in which we live.  Like these Forms, the Matrix serves as the measure by which the Time Lords judge what is true and false.

Third, the Valeyard, like those who brought false charges against Socrates, uses the set of laws to prosecute the Doctor for being an “incorrigible meddler.”  But the Doctor, just as Socrates, shows that the truth cannot harm him, and that it is not the laws that are corrupt; rather, it is the prosecutors that distort the laws who are corrupt.

I love all of these episodes in “The Trial of a Time Lord” series.  I think the Doctor and Peri’s relationship had matured, and the episodes had some really nice philosophical meaning nestled in the overall entertaining stories.  It is also nice to see Sabalon Glitz again.

I believe Socrates was the first to discuss the “straw-man” fallacy, where one proposes, and defeats a very weak argument in order to prove one’s own position.  We see these types of arguments all of time, especially on the 24-hour news channels.  They are so common that they seem to be a foundation of both politics and our discussion of politics.

In a very rich philosophical two-part episode “Human Nature” and “Family of Blood” the Doctor finds himself battling against real-life straw-men.  It doesn’t take much for the viewer to see how this serves as an analogy of how the Doctor fights against untruth and injustice.  These straw-men, even though they are easily destroyed, cause a lot of pain and suffering at the beckon of the Family of Blood: so much so that the Doctor condemns the Family of Blood to eternal punishment.  What I find especially interesting is that even though the Doctor defeats the straw-men and punishes the Family of Blood, the Family still pervades our existence (e.g. the image of the little girl in reflections).  So, is the Doctor telling us that “straw-men” can never be completely vanquished; or maybe something more existential, that part of ourselves is a straw-man, and therefore, part of who we are – always vulnerable to being blown away by a strong wind?    

How much does race and gender play in who we are (i.e. our personal identity)?  It is not clear that the Doctor’s personal identity is the same over time, but what if he regenerated into a female Doctor or a Doctor of a different race?  In other words, what implications does race theory and feminist theory have on the Doctor’s personal identity trans-regenerations.

Since it is the 4th of July, I’m curious what side the Doctor would have been on (or maybe was!) back in 1776.  It seems natural to say that he would help the cause of freedom, but there also seems to be something wrong with him fighting against Britain.  Of course, he probably wouldn’t have gotten involved in the actual fighting, but I bet he would have been there for the signing of the Declaration of Independence.  In fact, I think I’m going to go check the signatures to see if there is a John Smith on there!

It is no secret that the Doctor likes humans, but it is unclear how much the Doctor is human.  In the TV movie the Doctor claims to be half-human, but at other times he clearly doesn’t think that he is human.  Of course, the TV movie Doctor’s human side can now be explained by the existence of a half human Doctor created at the end of the last season of Doctor Who.  The question is: with time travel being so “Timey Wimey,” how can the Doctor be certain of his own ancestral lineage?  And, what implications does him being human have on who the Doctor is?