The Futility of Futurism

In the world of logic, effect is always preceded by cause. An event never happens spontaneously, but rather appears as a result of surrounding circumstances. It is this fundamental assumption that allows our justice system to function: every crime has a cause, and we determine if this cause justifies the crime. Paradoxically, the entire theory of law enforcement is based upon the converse of this theory of justice. Instead of assuming the effect, and attempting to find the cause, police forces assume the cause, and attempt to prevent the effect. Yet, any mathematician would tell us that the converse of a statement is not necessarily true, which throws the entire morality of Precrime into question.

First, let us assume that effect implies cause and cause implies effect. In this scenario, Precrime is not only logically correct, but, indeed, may be more moral than its retroactive counterpart. Let me clarify: a world such as the one described resembles a world where the transition from thought to action is gravity. If a priceless porcelain figure falls from a tall shelf, do we let catch it or let it break and then assign blame where it is due? Obviously, we catch the figure, preventing such a precious object from being lost forever, for the reason that gravity is infallible. Such is the action of Precrime, an agency which prevents an otherwise immutable action from happening. However, what if we assume gravity is not infallible?

This perception lies closer to reality. In the real world, we assume abstract concepts such as “free will” can change the course of even the most linear sequence of events in an instant, not to mention the obvious time paradoxes created by the existence of the Precogs themselves. If one Precog predicts a murder happening, and thus causes Precrime to prevent it, then would not the new future be one in which the murder did not happen, thus causing the Precogs not to predict the murder at all? However, this ensures that the murder will happen; thereby causing a vicious time paradox that causes us to question whether or not a prediction of the future is possible at all, since any such reading would change the future, thus changing the prophecy. This is Heisenberg Uncertainty at its most malicious.

However, the situation is nowhere near remedied if we assume that the physics works. The existence of Precrime naturally precludes some measure of human free will, at least in the short term. This assumption may not be one which we are prepared to make, even if it were true. Could we handle the belief that our actions are even partially predetermined? Would this not undermine our ingrained concepts of human ingenuity and spirit? Indeed, even if Precrime were logically plausible, and human action were as infallible as gravity, we would never acknowledge or explore such a phenomenon. The philosophical repercussions of such a discovery would tear society apart, forcing us to admit that our lord is the cruelest of all abstract powers, destiny.