Author Topic: Take me down to paradox city  (Read 9079 times)

Offline lili517

  • Onlooker
  • *
  • Posts: 17
    • View Profile
Re: Take me down to paradox city
« Reply #15 on: April 19, 2007, 06:24:32 PM »
Maybe the parachutist was not supposed to be rescued....

No matter what they did, stuck to what Des saw in the vision or not, unless they waited an extra day or something, the parachutist would be rescued

What I am wondering is how diffrent would the outcome have been if Des didn't save Charlie?  They still got to the parachutist.  And if Des would have let Charlie die AND not help him b/c he is in a hurry, wouldnt people on the island get very upset since they know he knew what would happen and wouldnt that be an even worse outcome? 

Offline The Professor

  • Onlooker
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Re: Take me down to paradox city
« Reply #16 on: April 19, 2007, 07:59:27 PM »
So is the catch-22 let Charlie die and ensure that Desmond finds what he is looking for or save Charlie and risk losing what he thought at the time was Penny?  I think that is what the Catch-22 of the episode is, at least on the surface...

Offline LouE68

  • Island Native
  • *
  • Posts: 34203
    • View Profile
Re: Take me down to paradox city
« Reply #17 on: April 19, 2007, 09:49:18 PM »
Sorry, I'm not always crazy about the little bugga. 

But, Desmond's attempts to make the sequence of events fit his vision had already changed the reality thread.  For one thing, Desmond did not forsee the backpack and sat phone.  This stop caused a delay in their trek and the dialogue between Hurley and Charlie is altered.

Finally, when Charlie steps on the trip wire, he completes his sentence....Might as well fit Superman with kryptonite ballerina slippers.

The Hawthorne effect....Observation is Intervention.  Desmond, by simply having some knowledge of the future, alters the future.  Furthermore, since some of the losties have recognized this talent....they change their behaviors and the future is again divergent. 

(It's kinda like when Warren Buffet invests in a company.  Just that vote of confidence changes the nature of the business.  Buy railroad stock in about 3 months).

The question I have is whether Desmond's gift can EVER be useful in making long term predictions?  Also, is Desmond's knowledge of his powers, his altered behavior due to what he has seen, and his intervention factored into the vision in the first place? 


Why do you say it's a gift? Seems more of a curse.

Offline jillybean4u

  • Background Extra
  • *
  • Posts: 41
    • View Profile
Re: Take me down to paradox city
« Reply #18 on: April 20, 2007, 04:23:48 PM »
I have nothing to add, but wow, may I applaud all of you.  This is the most intelligent, thought out & interesting thread I have read in some time!!

Offline puff6962

  • In the Loop
  • ****
  • Posts: 1074
    • View Profile
Re: Take me down to paradox city
« Reply #19 on: April 20, 2007, 04:32:30 PM »
Some gifts are, in fact, curses.  In Viet Nam, there is a curse that translates....may you live in interesting times.  So, maybe we are cursed as well.  

Again, the Hawthorne Effect.  Observation is Intervention.  We see the same thing in quantum mechanics.  But, my question is whether, if Desmond had never enlisted Hurley and the crew to come with him, then would they have got the idea on their own to take the outing?  Would there have been some other inspiration for the four to go out on a trek?

The paradox of having visions of the future, when such visions are depedent upon you actions based upon these visions, is apparent.  Did I say that right?

It is the classic fortune teller, O. Henry, twist....you get your future told, you do everything you can to escape the bad and capture the good, but those actions lead only to the bad that was foretold.  (I hate to say this, but watch the movie, 'Premonition').

Observation is intervention, so if one gets a glimpse of the future, is one's reactions to that glimpse already factored into the content of the glimpse?

Ha. I managed to say that twice in different ways.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2007, 04:35:40 PM by puff6962 »

Offline LouE68

  • Island Native
  • *
  • Posts: 34203
    • View Profile
Re: Take me down to paradox city
« Reply #20 on: April 20, 2007, 04:42:12 PM »
Some gifts are, in fact, curses.  In Viet Nam, there is a curse that translates....may you live in interesting times.  So, maybe we are cursed as well.  

Again, the Hawthorne Effect.  Observation is Intervention.  We see the same thing in quantum mechanics.  But, my question is whether, if Desmond had never enlisted Hurley and the crew to come with him, then would they have got the idea on their own to take the outing?  Would there have been some other inspiration for the four to go out on a trek?

The paradox of having visions of the future, when such visions are depedent upon you actions based upon these visions, is apparent.  Did I say that right?

It is the classic fortune teller, O. Henry, twist....you get your future told, you do everything you can to escape the bad and capture the good, but those actions lead only to the bad that was foretold.  (I hate to say this, but watch the movie, 'Premonition').

Observation is intervention, so if one gets a glimpse of the future, is one's reactions to that glimpse already factored into the content of the glimpse?

Ha. I managed to say that twice in different ways.
those are two different definitions of gift....

Offline puff6962

  • In the Loop
  • ****
  • Posts: 1074
    • View Profile
Re: Take me down to paradox city
« Reply #21 on: April 20, 2007, 04:45:35 PM »
sorry, I should have consulted wikipedia.

Offline LouE68

  • Island Native
  • *
  • Posts: 34203
    • View Profile
Re: Take me down to paradox city
« Reply #22 on: April 20, 2007, 04:53:50 PM »
sorry, I should have consulted wikipedia.
try Webster ;)

Offline Creflo

  • Survivor
  • ***
  • Posts: 606
    • View Profile
Re: Take me down to paradox city
« Reply #23 on: April 20, 2007, 04:57:07 PM »
I think I have an analogy that will help some folks understand what is happening here, because there is a clear distinction between the events that we have control over and those we do not. 

If someone has Desmond's gift/curse, it is like getting travel directions from some nitwit, not like knowing the way or even having a map.

Directions are something like this:

Quote
Go along the beach until you see a wire.  Turn left at the beacon.  Pass the arrow through the throat and stop when you get to the hanging Naomi

While this is more useful than having no knowledge at all, it is no substitute for a map or a thorough understanding of the terrain.  And, I'm not just talking about physical landmarks here.  Desmond's landmarks are visions of events in time, not just locations.

As we all know from following flawed or incomplete directions i.r.l., once you make a wrong turn, your whole journey could be thrown off.  If you have a map you can get back on course, but in this discussion about time journeys, all roads are one-way and sometimes "you can't get there from here".


What I think folks are missing is that some things are out of Desmond's control.  If a pilot falls in the woods and no one is around to hear it...it DOES still happen.  It is one of the landmarks.  If Desmond "drives" the wrong way because he missed a "turn" and got on the wrong path, Naomi would just hang there.

Certain things are destined to happen, and Desmond happens to have glimpses of some of the ways in which they could happen.  "Difficult to see is the future...always in motion", says Yoda.  Some things can be interfered with and some things you can rely on to happen regardless of your meddling.  For example, let's say that I take my precog to the casino.  I foresee the shooter on the craps table will throw a seven, so I bet accordingly.  However, the action of me placing a bet causes a slight delay in the shooter's roll so now he throws something different.  On the other hand, if I head to the Roulette table and the ball is already in motion, I can reliably bet according to my vision because it will not affect the outcome in any way.

This distinction I point out in my above post:

Quote
What would've happened regardless of Desmond's "flash-forwards" (for lack of a better term) are:

- the beacon
- the crash
- the hanging pilot

What could've been changed by his actions:

- who goes camping (needed enough people to catch her with the chute, carry her back)
- what time of day they come upon certain areas
- Charlie gets a laryngectomy
- other pointless details such as the Flash vs Superman convo
- the pilot could've hung around undiscovered and died


Sorry, I just quoted myself.


In conclusion, Desmond has some scatter-brained directions...not a map.  If he follows them carefully, he can arrive at his destination.

btw, here's the map I'm referring to:


Offline Chefpyro

  • Red Shirt
  • **
  • Posts: 237
    • View Profile
Re: Take me down to paradox city
« Reply #24 on: April 20, 2007, 11:58:13 PM »
Desmond asked Jack for the first aid kit, so that he could pull out the arrow, i guess, anyway that first action started the whole chain of events off in a way that wasn't consistent with the vision, therefore starting a whole new sequence of events.<------Pyro[move]
« Last Edit: April 21, 2007, 07:25:16 AM by Chefpyro »

Offline puff6962

  • In the Loop
  • ****
  • Posts: 1074
    • View Profile
Re: Take me down to paradox city
« Reply #25 on: April 21, 2007, 12:40:14 PM »
I have to restate a question.....

If the crux of the episode is "Catch-22," and we are led to believe that the catch-22 involved Charlie, then how did Charlie's fate effect any outcome?

Charlie lived, and they still found the parachutist, but she was a black female and not Penny.  How would this have changed if Charlie had died?  In other words, what's different now? 

How could Charlie's death effected an event that had already occurred (the parachutist had already landed)?

Additionally, they had already found the backpack, the Sat phone, and the book/picture prior to Charlie's event....so that is unchanged.

Only one thing is different.  The group was not meant to find this lady alive!  They would have been delayed by Charlie's dying and all, had to take him back to camp, and give a eulogy for the little garden hopper.  Eventually, they would set out, find Naomi's body, hypothesize who she was and put her in the sand.

So, the next conclusion to be drawn is that this Naomi babe will lead the Losties in a direction away from Desmond being reunited with Penny.  Perhaps, if she had died, another attempt to cross onto the island would have been made.  Likely, nobody else in Penny's team would have attempted it (no matter how much money she paid them) and Penny would have had to do it herself.

Further, Penny's team may now assume that Naomi made it onto the island and are awaiting information.  During this time, something bad may happen to the endeavor.

Finally, the wierd possibilites....Desmond is really with Penny now, Naomi is Bizarro Penny, Penny is dead, Penny is an Other (and Naomi is a plant), blah blah blah.

So, watch out for this Naomi girl because the island/fate was telling Desmond that she is a little dangerous.


Offline Austruck

  • Red Shirt
  • **
  • Posts: 232
    • View Profile
Re: Take me down to paradox city
« Reply #26 on: April 21, 2007, 08:22:01 PM »
It seems to me that Desmond desperately tried to avoid Charlie's larygectomy (LOL, love that word) by suggesting they go at night. Charlie, who sometimes doesn't trust Desmond now that he knows what's going on, insists they wait till it's light out, which is safer. (And Charlie's all about safety these days!)

Desmond challenges him at first but then realizes he's not going to change Charlie's mind and so he relents.

But now Desmond has to instead pull off another of his heroic "interventions" to save Charlie's life.

I don't think it has anything to do with Desmond WANTING Charlie to die. He's never wanted Charlie to die before. And he's had good end results despite having intervened before, so he knows that's possible.

I think it's as simple as Plan A (go into the jungle at night to change the flash timeline), or Plan B (relent to Charlie's request and then just save him at the very last minute in order to preserve as much of the flash timeline as possible).

Did I mention lately that I love this show?   ;D

Offline Chefpyro

  • Red Shirt
  • **
  • Posts: 237
    • View Profile
Re: Take me down to paradox city
« Reply #27 on: April 23, 2007, 09:26:45 PM »
or C, let everything happen the way it's supposed to.<------Pyro[move]

Offline puff6962

  • In the Loop
  • ****
  • Posts: 1074
    • View Profile
Re: Take me down to paradox city
« Reply #28 on: April 23, 2007, 10:58:17 PM »
Realize that Abraham was very old, and Isaac an adult, at the time of the sacrifice.  Isaac, it would seem to me, was tested even more than Abraham as he was required to not only have faith in God but also in his father's judgement. 

In this scenario, Charlie will be required to sacrifice himself and then all will be made clear.  The little bugga's goin to do something heroic all in the name of the greater good.

Offline T Mack

  • Red Shirt
  • **
  • Posts: 447
    • View Profile
Re: Take me down to paradox city
« Reply #29 on: April 24, 2007, 01:52:56 PM »

I
Quote
have to restate a question.....

If the crux of the episode is "Catch-22," and we are led to believe that the catch-22 involved Charlie, then how did Charlie's fate effect any outcome?

Charlie lived, and they still found the parachutist, but she was a black female and not Penny.  How would this have changed if Charlie had died?  In other words, what's different now? 


Because it wasn't a real "Catch-22", it was an imagined one.  Desmond thought that the parachutist was to be Penny, but she was never Penny.  The Catch -22 in his mind (wrongly) was whether or not to save Charlie, or see Penny.  In the end, Desmond tried to compensate by saving Charlie and then still going to find the parachutist- in effect getting both Charlie saved and seeing Penny, but since he was wrong on the Penny part of the vision, he found Naomi instead.

Letting Charlie die would have actually potentially 'not saved' the parachutist because then they would have had to stop to deal with Charlie's death, and the parachutist may not have lived.  But Desmond's misinterpretation of that vision was that if he changed any events in the timeline (i.e., saving Charlie) it would change the outcome (i.e., no Penny).  But since he did change events and there was no Penny anyway (there never was intended to be), it is revealed that he can change certain events and still get the same outcome.