Was Cypher Really the ‘Bad Guy’ in The Matrix?

He sold out his ‘friends’ and tried to return to the normie life, but was Cypher really a villain?

Can the so-called ‘truth movement’ be seen as something akin to a mind-virus?

Who was there in 2015 when the Flat Earth ‘movement’ first took over the internet, and where. are. they. now?

Early on Saturday morning, 9-Nov-2019, I decided to do an impromptu livestream on my YouTube channel.

During the presentation I tried to answer all of these questions and so much more.


Video

Audio-only

This mp3 file is a slightly-edited rip of the video, with some dead air at the beginning removed, and audio balance / noise removal functions applied, for the benefit of the listener.


Relevant

Post #65 | Let’s Discuss The Matrix (8-Nov-2019)

Impromptu Chat #13 | Flat Earth Reflections (17-May-2017)

Liveshow | Tim Osman and JLB Discuss the ‘Truth Movement’ (22-May-2019)


Production notes. Livestreamed 9-Nov-2019, mp3 released later same day. Manual audio balancing, auto compression @ 5:1, some dead air removed.


 

9 thoughts on “Was Cypher Really the ‘Bad Guy’ in The Matrix?

  • 12-November-2019 at 5:03 am
    Permalink

    I’ve always loved Cypher, a suffering human like me, sick of eating cream of wheat, craving steak, and giving in. “I understand, brother,” I tell the TV screen every time I watch that scene #cypherandtheportlandthinkerareoneandthesame <3 ps: Put me back into the Matrix. I wanna remember nothing. And make me somebody important like a poet! #lol

  • 12-November-2019 at 5:38 am
    Permalink

    “Halt, agent Smith!” the poet commanded, lol. Like Neo I hold out my hand to stop the bullets, but the bullets shred the fuck out of my hand ūüôĀ #itried

  • 12-November-2019 at 9:28 am
    Permalink

    What is Going on Here: A Personal Voyage

    Some Possibilities as I see it.

    1) Dumb materialism produced our current experience of consciousness. Sync alone makes this possibility laughable to me. And the crazy premise that some original explosion, utterly chaotic and lifeless, eventually gave rise to order, complexity, life reproducing and evolving into a form possible of contemplating all.

    2) The Cosmos is some kind of contrived Matrix/Simulation/Video Game/Dream. This resonates with my intuition/inner knowing, but as my grandma used to say, “you can’t always trust your inner knowing.” Of course this framework seems neither provable nor improvable. It remains my default position until something more appealing comes along.

    3) It’s a recycling, reincarnation soul trap in which our memories are wiped clean as a baby every infinitely recurring time so that some eternal A.I. demiurge can feed from our energy. I certainly hope this is not the truth, John. That some God designed us to suffer physically and psychologically is not a belief I’d wish any intercourse with.

    4) It’s a test. If we see or behave in a certain way we pass, win the game, live to play a different one, ascend as an adept into a higher realm, etc. I like this idea because it allows for free will and individual merit. Or rather, it seems to. But who is doing the testing and for what purpose? Beats me.

    5) We’re Gods who’ve induced upon ourselves an intentional amnesia so that we can experience physical randomness. This idea strikes me as comically stupid, but I guess it’s possible. If I’m God cue the clown noises, please!

    I like to think that those of us blessed/cursed with 1st rate intelligence can keep all possible frameworks in mind, believing none of them, skeptical of all of them, without going mad (whatever that is). For me, comedy is sanity’s friend, and if I ever lose the ability to laugh, especially at myself, then I’m a goner no matter what I believe. Let’s continue to explore the greatest questions together, brother, with good thoughts for whatever futures will be.

    • 12-November-2019 at 10:25 am
      Permalink

      6 – You are The Dreamer, and all others are characters in your dream.

      “dream is destiny”

      • 12-November-2019 at 12:14 pm
        Permalink

        i’ll take this opportunity to commit a lazy/vile act of copypasta, specifically some ‘untouched’ background notes i prepared ahead of our call which i find apropos to your brewing discourse:

        * very different movie (‚Äėwhatif‚Äô re-casting/casting remix game) if Cypher were in Morpheus role
        * [Morpheus][1]: late 14c., name for the god of dreams in Ovid, son of Sleep, literally "the maker of shapes," from Greek¬†morphńst"form, shape, figure," especially "a fine figure, a beautiful form; beauty, fashion, outward appearance," a word of uncertain etymology. Related:¬†Morphean.¬†MorphŇ欆was an epithet of Aphrodite at Sparta, literally "shapely."
        * are we all sharing a dream, or are we each dreaming our own version, or…?
        * Oracle’s premise that Neo must choose between Morpheus’s life and his own
        * begs question of: who/what is Morpheus?
        * captain of ship Nebuchadnezzar - what is exact nature of his relationship to the Matrix?
        * especially in light of events of later movies
        * agents in humansuits - MIB in the Real
        * are both Morpheus and Smith ‚Äúagents‚ÄĚ of same ‚Äėforce‚Äô
        * just agents of sync or honX or something?
        * what are our dreams the agents of?
        * [I have dreamed a dream, but now that dream is gone from me.][2]
        * https://paranormalpeopleonline.com/dream-a-little-dream-of-me-lucid-dreaming-and-its-techniques/
        * in Tank’s ('child of zion') words: more than a leader, a father
        * i’ll ask [bmseattle][3] - and anyone else wishing to chime up now - what he believes Philip K. Dick might have made of the ACT realm

        1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dream_(character)
        2: https://www.metmuseum.org/exhibitions/listings/2014/assyria-to-iberia/blog/posts/matrix
        3: https://www.johnlebon.com/site-news-and-updates/lets-discuss-the-matrix/#comment-7723

  • 13-November-2019 at 11:34 am
    Permalink

    i’ll ask [bmseattle][3] Рand anyone else wishing to chime up now Рwhat he believes Philip K. Dick might have made of the ACT realm

    Interesting question, Fuhng.
    I’m not even sure what I make of the ACT realm, so guessing the mind of a man I didn’t know, who is said to have died nearly 40 years ago is a bit beyond my ken.

    Taking Dick’s public persona at face value, and trying to interepret his mind based on his writings, this is what I would say if pushed to hazard a guess.

    He admitted to being paranoid and distrustful of the government. He openly stated that there were times in his life that he suspected that he was being spied on and intimidated by some mysterious agents of the government.
    So I would guess that he would sympathize with the aspect of the ACT realm that fears/distrusts authority, and feels there is some force/power that has control over us.

    It seems he had somewhat of a “conspiritard-like” perspective on that. Thinking, for example, that Richard Nixon was evil personified, and that removing him from office would be beneficial to the world.
    That, combined with his religious ideas (specifically gnosticism), leads me to believe he had somewhat of a victim mentality.
    To his credit, he wasn’t idle, and was trying to “figure things out” and his perspective on things was constantly shifting, so I doubt he would be tied to any particular viewpoint for very long.

    Whether or not he would actively involve himself in any sort of conspiracy oriented community is doubtful to me. I presume that he wouldn’t trust it, and he wouldn’t want to engage with people he didn’t know personally. Though he probably wouldn’t have any problem in accepting most of the typical hoaxes that spur conversations at the typical ACT realm site.

    Also, he was into themes like “what is reality”, “what does it mean to be human”, and “what is God”. Not the kinds of things that most ACT realm members are really interested in exploring.

    Perhaps if he were still alive, and stumbled upon JLB.com, he might find some kindred spirits he could relate to? ūüėČ

    • 13-November-2019 at 12:04 pm
      Permalink

      thank you for your answer! i always look forward to any of your comments, which i have always appreciated for the (imo) great care you give to the written expression of your own ‘thinking about thinking.’

      funny how PKD’s essential worldview seems to have been distilled and injected into the present technological landscape as something akin to ‘the ghost in the machine’ that haunts our collective unconscious. even when a work such as The Matrix gives PKD nothing in the way of explicit credit, his anxieties and preoccupations – not only with technology, but as you write above, with themes like ‚Äúwhat is reality‚ÄĚ, ‚Äúwhat does it mean to be human‚ÄĚ, and ‚Äúwhat is God‚ÄĚ – seem to my mind core to a truly critical evaluation of our lot here.

      so whether or not such treatment is intended to ‘throw out PKD’s baby while re-circulating his bathwater…?’

      • 14-November-2019 at 9:49 am
        Permalink

        Thanks, Fuhng.

        I like the terms you use…”distilled” (extracting the essence of), “injected” (implying direct access to the lifeblood).
        I suppose one could argue that any piece of literature that is condensed into film, will be a distilled product.
        And, certainly, many movies borrow ideas from Dick, without giving him “credit” (Truman show being on obvious example).
        There are, of course, the many movies/tv shows that are explicit representations of his books, though almost all fail to capture the deeper meaning/implications of his stories. (Scanner Darkly does the best job of this, IMO)

        Take Blade Runner… widely considered the quintessential dystopian/sci-fi film.
        Anyone who reads the book (for the first time) after watching the movie, will likely be somewhat confused and underwhelmed.

        While empathy as a determining factor in “being human” is a theme in the film, missing is the “empathy box” that everyone (well, every human) connects to daily to “set” their mood at any given moment.
        It is also used to connect empathically with an apparent “jesus” type figure (Mercer), who is engaged in a never ending, painful test of endurance and sacrifice.
        Also a huge theme in the book is empathy/caring for animals… both real and “robotic”.
        As almost all animals have gone extinct, it is the ultimate goal of every human to buy or find and own/take care of, a living animal.

        Since that is virtually impossible, an elaborate, yet universelly understood ruse takes place, where people buy robotic animals and tend to them as if they are real. On the surface, this is done for “show” and for status in society.
        However, it also represents another theme in the book (and one that is addressed in the film), of whether one can/should feel empathy for a non living thing.

        It’s truly amazing to me how many things that Dick wrote about back in the 50’s, 60’s, and 70’s are pushed on us so incessently now. Even Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch addresses Global warming, for goodness sake, and that book was written in the mid 60’s.
        (Perhaps Dick took over where Huxley left off?)

        Anyway, I hope you enjoy your upcoming injection of Three Stigmata. ūüôā

        • 15-November-2019 at 8:54 am
          Permalink

          having yet to read the source material of Blade Runner, the extra dimensions you’ve shared are quite excellent to encounter here, thanx! and i am giving A Scanner Darkly another go soon based on your reco, as well!

          i did notice the apparition of the ‘global warming’ b√™te noire that’s presently possessing the global zeitgeist in Three Stigmata – and i’m not even through the first chapter yet! XD

          WATTBA – will you please help me find PKD’s baby?

          XP KD

Leave a Reply