This was an excellent course with a somewhat shocking title. That being said I really enjoyed the subject and the depth in which we studied the works of philosophers such as Plato and Socrates, Sartre and Kierkegaard, and Lewis and Nussbaum, among others.
My favorite philosophical “theory”, so to speak, was Sartre’s ontology, a confusing assemblage of beings in-itself and for-itself that basically boils down to “the only way we can view ourselves is through the eyes of others”. In class it didn’t make any sense but when you lay in the grass with friends on Stubbs lawn at 2AM on a Saturday night it suddenly clicks and you’re able to describe it in perfect detail.
The course also allowed me to connect theories and subjects from my other courses. I wrote a paper on feminist theory in C.S. Lewis’ The Four Loves using studies from my sociology course. In an analysis of a Black Mirror episode I outlined communication theories as an explanation for why a relationship failed. I always enjoy being able to pull from my other courses and being able to do that at least twice in philosophy definitely made for a good time.
One thing I really appreciated from this class was that we could take walks for a grade. It’s far easier and less stressful than essays and exams so I really enjoyed taking half an hour to walk quietly without worrying about what’s due next and when the rough draft is due. It was especially nice during the several snow days we had and in the rain as well.
Below is my essay on communication theories in Black Mirror.
Interpersonal Communication Theories in “Be Right Back”
It is only natural that we should want to engage in relationships. Humans are gregarious and sociable; we seek each other out for guidance, reassurance of worth, and nurturance. Our motivations are the need for attachment, social integration, and the comfort of knowing that we are not alone. Some relationships are surface level, a collection of colleagues and followers perhaps. Others extend into deep and personal friendships which in turn may form into committed relationships. Regardless of their nature, all relationships are ultimately borne of the human desire to mingle and form bonds. Social scientists have, through the years, developed theories and models whose tenets help to explain the reasoning behind our behavior in relationships. In this paper one of these theories will be applied to an episode of the popular series Black Mirror to provide additional context and information on a relationship between a woman, her deceased partner, and an artificial intelligence.
Black Mirror is a science fiction anthology series which explores our relationship with technology, science, social media, and other modern issues through the lens of alternative reality “what-if?” scenarios. In the episode “Be Right Back” (S2E1, 2013) young couple Martha Powell and Ash Starmer move into an isolated country house together. Ash is portrayed as a social media addict, unaware that he is mindlessly scrolling through posts on his phone. Despite this he and Martha share an intimate relationship outside of social media. The day after moving in Ash is killed in a traffic collision while returning their rented van. A distraught Martha reluctantly tries communicating with Ash through a computer AI which uses his social media posts to mimic him. As she becomes more and more attached to the AI Martha goes so far as to obtain an android modelled after Ash and uploads his virtual persona into it. Though initially happy to have “Ash” back, it quickly becomes apparent that the android cannot satisfy her emotionally. It only has Ash’s surface level characteristics and is blindly compliant to all of her requests and demands. Unable to bear it any longer, Martha leads the android to a cliff and implores it to jump. In an end scene it is revealed that the android now lives in the attic where Martha and the real Ash’s daughter visit it occasionally.
While the episode mainly focuses on technology, relationships, and the question “how much of our online self is our real self?” it brings up the possibility for a unique interpretation of a communication theory. Social Penetration Theory is a model used to examine how relationships grow from surface level to intimate through interpersonal communication. The theory states that relationships “generally develop systematically and predictably” (Beauchamp and Baran 131). The four-part model places emphasis on the progress of relationships through periods of orientation (first meeting), exploratory affective exchange (initial communication, getting to know someone), affective exchange (consistent communication), and stable exchange (a relationship). Of particular interest in the case of “Be Right Back” is the relational development aspect. At the start of the episode Martha and Ash’s relationship had already progressed to a stable exchange. Ash’s death cuts the relationship short and the introduction of the AI sets the four stages in motion again, but in reverse. Because Martha was already stable with Ash the relationship with his AI cannot progress further. The android Ash complicates the matter further. Martha takes their relationship on the proverbial speedrun, trying to get to stable exchange as fast as possible. This results in “depenetration”, the deterioration of a relationship, and then an uneasy pseudo-dissolution, the relationship has ended and android Ash is stashed in the attic.
What caused the relationship to fail? Other than the obvious implications connected with forming intimate relationships with an AI-piloted lump of flesh, the lack of genuine self-disclosure explains why the android was insufficient to satisfy the emotional gap between itself and Martha. Stable exchange relies on interpersonal communication to drive relational development. To explain this scholars Paul Mongeau and Mary Lynn Henningsen use the onion model (Beauchamp and Baran 133). The layers of an onion are representative of the layers of an individual’s personality. The surface is information which is readily available on a visual scale: age, sex, race. Periphery information is in the layers underneath the surface: biographical information, employment, one’s hometown. Intermediate layers encompass the inner layers of the onion, this is rarely shared information such as personal beliefs, religion, and memories. Finally, the central layers contain the most private and personal information. Following the standard model of Social Penetration Theory a couple progresses from the surface through the periphery and intermediate layers, and sometimes to the central layer. It is much the same as peeling an onion. Martha completely destroys the onion in her relationship with the android. The AI is built upon Ash’s social media posts which reflected only surface and periphery information whereas Martha and Ash’s intimate offline relationship had progressed to the intermediate and central layers. The disparity in information serves as the breaking point. As Ash and Martha moved in Ash found a picture that brough up painful memories: on social media he described it as “funny” but in reality he was hurt by it. When picking up the same picture the android remarked “funny” proving to Martha that she would never be able to have the same relationship with the android as she did with Ash. Locked in a state of surface and periphery information, the relationship cannot progress to stable exchange and is doomed to dissolution.
“What makes us human?” Black Mirror likes to ask. We know that somewhere among the multitude of answers there lies our desire to know each other, to bond, and to form relationships. It seems strange to try and model such a natural phenomenon in scientific terms with theories and structures, and therein lies the irony: even when we reduce relationships to steps 1, 2, 3, and 4, an artificial intelligence still cannot learn to love. Ultimately it takes human trial and error within this theoretical framework to meet, communicate, and bond.
Bibliography
“Be Right Back.” Black Mirror. Created by Charlie Brooker, series 2, episode 1 Zeppotron, 2013.
Beauchamp, S.R. & Baran, S.J. (2020). Introduction to Human Communication. 2nd Edition. Oxford University Press.