I have to admit, I often find myself identifying with Mulder when watching this show. I'm not a believer in conspiracy theories or aliens, but people who know me know that I do hold strong beliefs and I defend them adamantly.
But I also like the idea of grey areas (god dammit, the phrase 'shades of grey' will never be usable again, will it?) Not everything - perhaps nothing, even - has a clear answer or a definite right or wrong.
One of Mulder's defining characteristics is his skepticism.
"Wait, don't you mean Scully?" I hear you ask.
Well, they're both skeptics, but in different ways.
Mulder doesn't trust authority, especially when it tends to be vague and not exactly forthcoming with information. He's wary of people who claim things are impossible - even when X does, he resists, which has got him into trouble more than a couple of times.
It's his skepticism of absolutes where I find he and I have a lot in common. I don't accept the idea that we live in a world where everything has a clear right or wrong answer (except things like math and physics, which actually do have many known right and wrong answers). Since this entire show deals with things that aren't known, I'm talking more about acceptance of possibilities than beliefs in truths or philosophical opinions. After all, there are things I believe are the 'truth', as does Mulder, but lacking any hard evidence to the contrary, we have to remain open to the possibility that we're wrong, or that everyone else is, too. (Or that everyone is right!)
And that's an important distinction - Mulder doesn't just accept things that aren't proven, but he believes in the possibility of things that aren't disproven. Just because there's no hard evidence for something doesn't need to imply that there's hard evidence against it. Proof by lack of counterexample is a logical fallacy.
Sure, Mulder can be tactless about his assumptions at times - well, OK, a lot of the time - and especially to people who aren't Scully, but I enjoy that forthrightness. He's confident about his beliefs, and tries over and over to get Scully not to accept them outright, but be willing to accept that even paranormal phenomena actually can be demonstrated using the scientific method. He's only pushy about the idea that he could be right. Because he doesn't believe in absolutes, he's not going to be so presumptuous as to push his beliefs as fact.
Plus, he's a psychologist, so he understands a lot about human behaviour, at least from an academic standpoint. He recognises both why Scully is reluctant to believe him and how best to argue his case so as not to completely alienate (hah!) her. He's not oppressive with his beliefs, even when he is very sure of them.
I don't have any training like his (really, less than none, I know nothing about behavioural psychology), but knowing that I wouldn't be very receptive to someone's beliefs if they beat me over the head with them (are you listening, fundies? no, probably not, you probably don't read this blog), I'm not going to pound out my beliefs, either. It's pointless. Plus, in this case, we are talking about just theories, and without specific evidence to back them up, the best I can do is to keep an open mind and expect others to, as well.
It took me a while to learn and probably took Mulder a while, too (it's probably one of the reasons no one else at the FBI likes him very much) that you don't need to convince anyone of anything other than possibility. Every argument can be had in the realm of the meta. I don't need someone to agree with my conclusions, but simply to accept that they are my conclusions and can potentially be valid conclusions. I ask that people accept that my beliefs may be reasonable, even if they don't believe the same thing, and I especially ask that they not state incorrect facts and claim them as opinions. (This is also extremely important. You can't claim two plus two is five and say it's just your opinion. It's not. It's simply wrong.)
And if they're going to challenge my conclusions, they had better have a good argument to back it up. I (and Mulder) won't accept black and white absolutes or answers of "That's the way it is." If someone is willing to accept that my conclusions could be valid, they might choose to take the same position at some point. I'm not going to claim I don't care at all if people agree with me, but in the context of a discussion or debate, I care more that my beliefs aren't dismissed - it makes it easier to discuss differences of opinion when people are discussing the conclusions instead of arguing about the validity of the opinions themselves.
I mean, I'll admit, it's really hard to convince those believers in black and white that any differing opinions or theories even could be valid, or that their 'opinions' often aren't (Again, two plus two equals five is not an opinion). So I'm glad, for Mulder's sake (and for the show's) that Scully is also not so absolute in her beliefs, even in her acceptance of science (even if her sister claims she is). Even she knows there are things that the available techniques cannot yet explain.
I do think Mulder's past experiences with the FBI and probably earlier in life help to inform his interactions with Scully. He knows she'll never just accept his beliefs unquestioningly, and he knows that simply demanding that she believe him will not only make her less likely to believe at all, but less likely even to accept that he could be right (also less inclined to want to work with him). His approach is simply to insist that she, and others, not be dismissive about it. And in those moments when Scully is receptive to the possibilities, he's the most open about it, too.
And this is why they get along so well. Neither one is closed-minded, they're just viewing the world from different perspectives and recognise that in each other.
Also, completely randomly, and rather off the subject of our respective beliefs, I've observed that Mulder can often be silly and sarcastic, especially when something comes up that really isn't worth investigating in depth. The frogs fell from the sky in 'Die Hand Die Verletzt'? Their parachutes didn't open. I think if I ever encounter airborne amphibians, I might have to appropriate that line. Because what else can you possibly say in that situation?
This is one of those things that makes The X-Files great. Characters the viewers can identify with. I think it's a problem, at least for me, on several other shows where all the characters are caricatures and often act in such extreme ways that I cannot connect to them.
But I can connect to Mulder. He is neither perfect nor entirely flawed (you want caricature, try the Lone Gunmen - they're a little over the top, and as a result, harder for me to like). He's written and played as very human, and I think that makes him a lot easier to identify with.
No comments:
Post a Comment