Jacob’s Choice – The Ultimate Weapon
Sit down before fact like a little child, and be prepared to give up every preconceived notion, follow humbly wherever and to whatever abyss Nature leads, or you shall learn nothing. —T.H. Huxley
Since the very first season of Lost there has been an ongoing debate about Freewill vs. Fate. Some of you are familiar with my theory about the answer to Lost lying in the ordinary and I believe that I have found it. It is a concept that is so simple that it is one of the first things a child learns, everyone has the power to use, and is a very devastating weapon when wielded decisively.
It is a weapon that gives a person full control over their life if the person is willing to accept the consequences of using it. A weapon that is the only real choice we can exercise. A concept that is the very foundation of not only the story of Lost, but is at the heart of every story ever told and every story yet to be told. And yet it is so ordinary (see my Ordinary Question and Ordinary Answer for more info) and overlooked.
It is a concept that the Illuminatus Trilogy tries to teach to everyone to allow them to be truly free. In the finale of the British television series ‘The Prisoner,’ Patrick McGoohan used it so effectively that he managed to befuddle the fans of the show while at the same time remaining true to the vision of the show. It is a weapon that has been used thoughout human history. It is a simple concept that ignited the American Revolution, the American Civil War, and used by the Allies against Germany in WWII. It is a concept that can be boiled down to one simple word. Martin Luther King, Ghandi, and even Jesus used it. It is a concept that any fictional and non-fictional character can use with only the understanding that one must be prepared to endure the consequences of using it. It is the choice that Jacob told Ben he could always make.
And what is this simple concept that will allow you to truly be free.
It is this:
NO
Ben did not have to follow Jacob’s orders; he always had the choice of not following another person and to do what he wanted to do. There would have been consequences but Ben did not have to follow Jacob. He always had this power and he did use it before. Ben said no to the way Charles Widmore led the Other’s and banished him from the Island. Mr. Eko said no to accepting the Smoke Monster’s judgment and died for this. And yet he died a free man.
No is what Jack, Juliet, and the others are saying to Fate by detonating Jugghead, but we have yet to see the consequences. No is what the Adversary is saying to Jacob by killing him. In the Stephan King novel ‘The Stand,’ which the producers have said has influenced them heavily, no is what Glenn Bateman says to Flagg and this is what strips away Flagg’s control over Bateman.
No
In the end Freewill will win over Fate by just saying no.
Achalli, I love how you explained the Illimunatus in such understandable terms! It is a concept that many people have great difficulty putting into practice and applying to daily living.
Such a simple word, yet it has so many emotions, reactions, consequences and implications, that apply not only to the individual saying the word, ‘no’, but on the individual hearing the word. Therefore, it becomes one of the most powerful words in our language. And, a word that to many, is so difficult to say! Yet, is one of the most empowering to the individual saying the word.
I love the analogies that you have used with Lost and The Prisoner. This also applies to the new series Flashforward.
I wholeheartedly concur. Jacob’s choice and the word ‘NO’ is the Ultimate Weapon.
Very nice theory!
Hey achalli dabs good hear you both again. I just have a minor quibble with this theory, though I do think your on the right track. No is a choice, so is yes. By making a choice wheter it’s productive or nonproductive you are exercising freewill. So is the word your looking for no, yes, choice, or is it freewill.
Thanks Dabs! Somehow I knew you would like this one. I couldn’t wait for the site to be back up so I could post it. I’ve missed seeing your avatar.
The more I thought about this the more it made sense. It makes everything easier to understand IMO.
Hi Achalli, I also missed your avatar…
This theory takes things to the next level and is where Lost is headed in Season 6, IMO.
It is precise and succinct and is a concept which is easy to understand. It also succeeds in laying the groundwork for where the story is ultimately taking us.
Hi back atcha daddyx. Nice to see you back on the site.
I can’t speak for Achalli, but the connotations of the word ‘NO’, imply resistance to obey what is being dictated. While technically a ‘choice’, the repercussions have a much more powerful impact.
Hi dabs. It’s great that site is back up and running again. Two months of cold turkey. Anyway still think it’s a roundabout way of saying that you are exercising free will.
Daddyx it’s nice to hear from you again. What I am trying to get across here is the concept that in order to have true control over you life you need to simply say no and be prepared to accept whatever is the consequence.
Ben was upset at Jacob because he had followed every thing that Jacob told him to do. When Jacob told Ben that he had a choice Jacob was trying to tell Ben that he did not have to do anything that Jacob told him to do. Ben could have lead the Others in any way that he chose.
Let me try to illustrate this another way. What keeps a person showing up at a job? The realization that saying ‘no’ to the job and employer has the consequence of no money. So the employer controls the person’s life for 8 hours a day. If the person is willing to accept the consequence of no money then there is nothing keeping that person at that job.
Achalli, you have presented a very logical illustration of the simple, yet complicated concept of gaining power through accepting the repercussions of taking full control and responsibility for having the wherewithal of saying no…
Interesting. My interpretation of this is that free will isn’t equal. Saying Yes or just complying is a much more passive action, requiring less thought for the consequences, especially when going along with the status quo – how much evil has been allowed to occur in the world because people just went along with it, effectively saying ‘Yes’. Using The Stand, Dana? was surprised that so many of the people hanging out with Flagg were nice, ORDINARY, people, allowing very not nice actions to go on.
My question is – what if any big picture evils have been committed on the island by saying Yes, and what are the consequences going to be for saying No???
Tas, I think you have a good grasp at what I’m driving at. I disagree with you with saying freewill isn’t equal. Every single person has the capability to say no and take the consequences of doing so. A lot of people don’t know how to go against their ‘programing’ to do so. For a better explaination you should refer to my ‘Ordinary Answer’ post.
As to your question, that is a good one. I would have to say big picture wise, the greatest evil to be perpetrated by saying yes to the status quo is that of one just accepting that something is their fate and not doing anything to effect the outcome. A person would then become no more special than the animals.
I didn’t mean people have unequal degrees of free will themselves, more that the choice that everyone has is not so equal. Saying Yes or No aren’t EVEN ends of a continua. It’s often easier to say yes and go with it than to say no and face isolation, prejudice and other consequences. Unless of course you are passive aggressive and saying no is your easier choice – just to not do rather than decide to participate.
A thought on Widmore / Ben – what if Widmore was exiled not because Ben said no to him, but he said no more to Ben?
What it all boils down to is whether or not a person says no to fate. If someone told you that it was your fate to be working as a waiter in the same restaurant for 20yrs and that you couldn’t avoid it; do you just give up all aspirations and accept that you have no control over your life or do you say no to fate and take measures to change the outcome? Most people would accept that they have no control.
Tas, on your Widmore question, that very well could have happened. Being banished by Ben could have very well been a consequenc that Widmore accepted. AND widmore is still saying no to Ben by trying to get back to the Island. The circumstances of the choice is different for everybody and is contantly changing. It’s a matter of recognizing that there is a choice.
If you ask me to do something I can say yes or I can say no or I can do nothing. Or I can say yes or no and do the opposite. Whatever I do though can only do by exercising freewill.
Achalli, I’d like to add to your greatest evil being to go with the status quo and accept fate and doing nothing to affect it – with then having a b***h about it. After my day at work I thought it was ironic that I saw this exact situation play out, with people being asked to MAKE a choice but then most just sat and refused to act, effectively saying yes to a situation they complain about a lot. Takes a brave soul to stand up and say No! Who of the losties are brave enough to sacrifice it all in making that stand? (don’t think Jack etc.. are there yet, I see the bomb as more of a selfish act.)
I still see Jack and company setting off the bomb as a script they were playing out. Faraday put the thought into Jacks head and we know Faraday had knowledge of past events. If they do say no to fate and exercise freewill it will have to be in the future/ present.
Roland, I’m actually thinking a bigger picture than just the bomb going off. Someone is going to have to say no to Nemesis.
Tas, the situation you’re describing shows how universal this concept is. It is the very basis of every story.
Daddyx, it is not about just saying or doing the opposite. In my post ‘An Ordinary Answer’ I discussed how a person needs to recognize and overcome the fact that most of the choices and actions of their life are merely based on the ‘programing’ in our brains. This ‘freewill’ is an illusion. Like it or not, humans react to stimuli reflexively like animals do. In order for a person to to have true freewill, they will have to say no to their programming
Achalli you used the Losties blowing up the bomb as an example of their way of saying no to fate not me. Jack embraced Fate last season or at least that’s what he thought he was doing by blowing up that bomb. He said yes to what John had been trying to tell him all along. Jack repeatedly said this was what he was meant to do or used words that meant the same thing. The rest of them Kate, Sawyer etc. tried to say no but finally did just go with the flow. I’m sorry you don’t agree with me bringing this up but it is a pretty valid point.
I dont even know where to start on this…
No, yes, yes no…fate… free will…yes, yes…
As I read through the comments quickly, and I urge all involved in this debate to reread again…you are all saying extremely similar things.
I think the same direction is being followed by all, just with possibly a misunderstanding of the context Achalli is presenting it in.
Daddy, good to see you…
I think that by saying no in this manner, it is being implied that you are simply saying no to the situation of going with the flow in general.
If one was told day after day, that it was their job to eat in front of a starving child, telling them no everytime they asked…and the employee eventually gave into their heart and said “yes” to the child when asked for food…that would be considered Achalli’s “NO” to the system.
Words only mean what you perceive them to mean.
Sorry, kind of hars example, just want it to be clear and easily understood.
Tas…Good to hear from you…
I think a good example of a big picture evil on the show is Locke killing Nadia just because Ben said they were bad.
He went along for the ride, and although they were bad, Locke was played as to this point…the question is, how far back does it span.
If he was actually used by Ben or MIB at the time (more likely Ben), he commited in my eyes a Big Evil of murder…
sorry, that just came to mind immediatly of reading your question.
On the note of a passive aggressive saying no, as opposed to yes due to personality type…
I think that what it comes down to is that its not the passive aggressive person that would have to say “no”, its the malicious compliant person that has to do it, which is kind of what they did by trying to stop fate from occuring, which is most likely why Jacob wanted them to go to the island.
The passive agressive person’s “no”…would be to say “yes”.
Oh, and Tas, love the line of thought behind the Ben and Charles idea.
Charles choose to not just say no to Ben, but to the island, the others, and even Jacob unless he knows more than we think…which I presume he does.
Achalli, dont kill me if Im screwing this up…
Roland…Good to see you…
I have to respectfully disagree with Jack embracing Fate by setting the bomb off.
I DO believe that it is very possible he caused the ultimate scenario in the future that we know so well to play out…BUT, that isnt quite the debate here…
He wasnt embracing fate, he defying it proudly, spitting a hydrogen bombs guts in its face…he thought he was saying no, he thought he was stopping fate from happening, and preventing the future, and the crash of flight 815 right along with it from occuring.
I think the rest of them said “Yes”. Kate, because she just went with Jack. Juliet, because Sawyer looked at Kate. And Sawyer, because Juliet rejected him.
I think they said yes, in Achallis line of thinking…metaphorically, by allowing fate to play out.
It is when they help set off the device, and try to prevent fate, that they say no.
Ok, now Achalli…
Something Roland said has to be taken into consideration… using the word script, as to what Jack and company were doing.
I cannot help but allow the intertwining of fate and free will…that Jack was SUPPOSED to say “NO”…
Good thoughts, and Achalli, great conversation starter for the sites return.
I screwed up a paragraph in my comments towards the end…sorry, a little rusty…
I think the rest of them said “Yes” UNTIL… Kate, because she just went along with Jack. Juliet, because Sawyer looked at Kate. And Sawyer, because Juliet rejected him
…when they went with Jack, they were saying “no” by trying to change fate as well.
I love the way you all make me think. Some thoughts on where I feel this theme may play out and how it may link with the other big theme of the show, being lost.
As AES put, yes and no don’t necessarily mean that, I think it’s about passivity and action as two ends of a continua. To stop and really think and then decide to take action with an understanding and acceptance of the consequences is where we break our automatic programming of going with the flow thoughtlessly. I think that our characters will ‘find’ themselves when they do this and with Jack having been set up as the main protagonist (flawed as he is) I think the ‘war’ in whatever form it takes next season will be decided by Jack needing to ‘find’ himself and take action. I don’t think he’s done that yet, he is still acting based on his programming ‘I can fix this’. Daniel gave him a way of fixing the ‘mistake’ of the crash and so Jack being Jack he’s off to fix it, without any real thought for the actual consequences – he hasn’t seemed to realise how many lives he will alter for better or worse just because he doesn’t like how it’s all played out and he just wants it to go away, change and not know about happened. The others (Kate etc..) are also just doing what they do – following the leader.
I’m thinking that through season 6 Jack will need to come to terms with his complusion to fix and to actively decide and accept his decision not to. Then he is ‘found’. The other characters will also need to find themselves and be active, but I think that Jack is the one who will make a difference to the outcome.
it can be argued that saying no isnt really a choice either… that you were going to say no because of your experiences and thoughts and feelings. like when jacob tells ben: i want you to know that you have a choice. and ben replies: what choice do i have? you may see a choice in front of you, but once your decision is made…was there really any other option? Your past has influenced the choices of your present, in a continual causual cycle. perhaps only an “outside force” like jacob (or desmond) can truly change anything.
Can I throw in a personal example, Eko I agree to a point, but I think what Achalli was getting to (correct me if I’m wrong) is when people choose to go against their socialisation, conditioning, programming and do something different.
Personal example, I grew up a quiet, don’t rock the boat person, I wasn’t important enough to stand up so I went with the flow, anytime I did anything it was wrong. Even as an adult I saw some stuff in my job that made me scream inside I felt it was so unjust – but my conditioning had me do nothing (and then feel bad about it). Since moving up in my career I’ve had to fight that, there are times when I need to get up and say something publicly that I know will be hugely unpopular, that will bring down a bucket load of attacks, sometimes personal in a public forum and it makes me sick to stand up and do that, often I don’t, I’ll take the easy way out. BUT I think Achalli is talking about thoses times when we make a decision to do something that our insides are saying NOOOOO, when we feel violently ill inside BUT we get up and do it because we think it’s right.
Yes maybe we were always going to do that and the times when we do very much influence our future choices (often making it easier to stand up and say NO again – the world didn’t end, although in Lost maybe it will 😉 ). I’d like to think that when I decide to go against that internal feeling of ‘just shut up’ it wasn’t predetermined, that I am being active.
A very narcissistic post sorry, but I didn’t know how to get my point across using Lost.
I want to thank everyone for their thoughts and comments.
AES it’s good to hear from you. You always provide very insightfull comments that make us think. I think you have a great handle on what I am trying to get across.
Roland, after rereading and taken into account AES comments, you do have a point. What i was trying to convey was that altough I did use specific examples, I am trying to apply this in a bigger picture sort of way.
What I am trying to get across with all of this is that the only entity that has any control over any of these indidviduals are the individuals themselves. The only person who made Ben follow Jacob’s orders was Ben himself.
Every person has the choice of saying NO to someone else’s, or something’s, control.
Ifoundmyloophole I would say that that would be a fair assesment. In order to say ‘No’ in the way that I’m talking about one would have to be prepared to sacrafice everything, including their own life. And also they would need to have the Faith that in the end everything would be set right.
I’m glad you enjoy this post. I have found that this concept is present in every story ever told no matter if the author points it out or not. It drives the plot in all stories in one way or another. And you are correct that it can be a hard concept to wrap your head around.