Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The philosophy of film is the discussion of philosophical problems related to film, its nature, effects, and value.1 But what of philosophy in film? We say that certain filmmakers, such as Ingmar Bergman, Sergei Eisenstein, Jean‐Luc Godard, Eric Rohmer, Wim Wenders, and Richard Linklater, are philosophical, meaning that they grapple with philosophical questions in their work.2 Likewise, we describe many films as philosophical, as in some sense doing philosophy.3 However, it is not altogether clear how a film could “do philosophy.” Of course, it all depends on exactly what we mean by “doing philosophy.” And it is plausible that doing philosophy is something along the lines of offering arguments related to a philosophical question.4 If so, then we must ask: How can a film argue? Or, how can a filmmaker argue using a film? I think film can do philosophy, and in this article I defend a position close to what Paisley Livingston calls the bold thesis of cinema as philosophy.5 My goal is not to merely play gadfly to Livingston, but to defend a well‐articulated, strong thesis about the philosophical abilities of film; the bold thesis fits the bill. As described by Livingston, the bold thesis is that some films can make innovative, independent philosophical contributions by cinematic means. In the abstract, the idea is simply that film can do philosophy in an interesting way. And it is certainly not interesting to point out that a film could be philosophical by simply presenting a philosopher reading a paper. If the film as philosophy thesis has any significance, it must hold that film can do philosophy in a way more “cinematic” than merely recording a talk. In addition, if film can do first‐rate philosophy, it must be able to make original contributions to the field. The central problem with the bold thesis is that it runs into what Livingston calls the problem of paraphrase. Before exploring this problem and my solution, it will be useful to tighten up the version of the bold thesis that I intend to defend.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aaron Smuts (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: