Reality does not stand still as an object to be known,
but unfolds through relation, participation, and change...
Contemporary science fiction has increasingly become a site of philosophical reflection, not merely through speculative imagery but through its engagement with enduring questions concerning knowledge, reality, and the human place within the cosmos. Among recent works, three narratives stand out for their distinct yet converging explorations of these themes: The Martian, Project Hail Mary, and Arrival. Each film presents a scenario of contact with the unknown - whether planetary environmental, astrological biological, or alien linguistics - with stages of response that explore deeper assumptions about the nature of reality itself.
At first glance, these works appear to belong to a shared genre concerned with survival under extraordinary conditions. Yet upon closer examination, they articulate three progressively complex orientations toward the real. In The Martian, reality is approached as a system to be understood and mastered through scientific reasoning. In Project Hail Mary, this orientation shifts toward cooperation, where survival depends upon relational engagement with an intelligence that cannot be reduced to prior categories. In Arrival, the encounter becomes transformative at the level of perception itself, as the very usage and expression of language reshapes not only communication but the structure of time and experience.
Taken together, these narratives trace a movement from isolation to participation, from a model of the knowing subject as external observer to one in which knowledge arises through relational involvement. This progression reflects broader philosophical developments - from naturalistic and scientific realism toward more relational and process-oriented accounts of reality. In this sense, these films do not merely depict encounters with the unknown; they dramatize evolving frameworks through which reality is apprehended and lived.
The present essay proceeds by examining these works comparatively, moving motif by motif across each of their narratives. Beginning with the concrete problem of survival, it advances through questions of intelligence, communication, and temporality, before arriving at a more comprehensive reflection on realism itself. In doing so, it seeks to show that these films collectively gesture toward a view of reality that is not static nor merely objective, but dynamic, relational, and participatory - an orientation that resonates with emerging process-based interpretations of the world.
Survival is bound to how the world is encountered and understood.
At the most immediate level, The Martian, Project Hail Mary, and Arrival each present a fundamental problem: how to endure within an unfamiliar and potentially hostile environment. Yet the manner in which survival is conceived - and the relationship between the human subject and their surroundings - differs significantly across the three narratives. These differences, though initially practical, reveal deeper assumptions about the nature of reality and humanity’s place within it.
In The Martian, survival is framed as a technical challenge. The environment of Mars is completely inhospitable but ultimately intelligible. Its dangers are very real, yet they are neither arbitrary nor unknowable. The protagonist’s task (Matt Damon) is to analyze, calculate, and adapt. Through the disciplined application of scientific reasoning, the external world becomes a system that can be navigated, managed, and, to a limited extent, controlled. Survival, in this context, depends upon the subject’s ability to correctly model external conditions and to act upon them with timely precision. Accordingly, the environment remains distinct from the human self, and is a domain to be hopefully mastered through ingenuity and perseverance.
Project Hail Mary begins within a similar framework but gradually departs from it. The initial problem of an astrobiological threat to Earth appears to invite the same kind of analytical response found in The Martian. However, the narrative introduces a complication that cannot be resolved through technical expertise alone: the presence of another intelligence that is undergoing similar duress to its species' existence. Survival now depends not only on understanding an alien environment but on engaging with an alien being whose mode of existence differs radically from human reality. The environment is no longer merely physical; it must become relational as well. The challenge is not simply to solve a problem, but to establish a form of alien-to-alien cooperation that allows both parties to persist. In this shift, the boundary between subjects (Ryan Gosling and "Rocky") and their joined reality becomes less rigid. Survival emerges through productive interaction rather than fear, distance, and control.
In Arrival, the problem of survival is reframed once again, this time at the level of interpretation itself. The present environment is not overtly hostile in a conventional sense (though it is one that is moving towards hostility in the future); rather, it is incomprehensible. The arrival of extraterrestrial beings introduces a situation in which the primary obstacle is neither physical hardship nor immediate threat, but the inability to understand what is being communicated and why it is being communicated. Here, survival is bound to linguistic interpretation. The protagonist’s task (Amy Adams) is not to dominate or even to cooperate in a straightforward manner, but to enter into a form of understanding that alters her own perceptual and temporal framework. The environment, in this case, is not simply external - it is mediated through language, cognition, and personal experience. To survive is to undergo a transformation in how reality itself is (temporally) apprehended.
Considered together, these three films outline a progression. In the first, survival is achieved through mastery of an external system. In the second, it depends upon collaboration across difference. In the third, it requires a reconfiguration of perception and meaning. What begins as a problem of endurance within a hostile setting evolves into a more complex engagement with alterity (sic, difference; otherness), culminating in a transformation of the conditions under which reality is known.
This progression suggests that survival is not merely a biological nor technical matter. It is also epistemological and relational. The question is not only whether one can endure, but how one understands and participates in a challenging world of deadly consequences that must be endured. As the films move from isolation to cooperation to transformation, they implicitly challenge the assumption that reality stands apart as a fixed object awaiting analysis. Instead, they gesture toward a view in which the conditions of survival are intertwined with the ways in which the world is encountered, interpreted, and engaged.
Intelligence is both means and medium: an evolving engagement that is shaped by, and reshapes, how alien worlds are encountered.
If survival provides the initial frame through which these films engage the unknown, the question of intelligence deepens that engagement by asking how such survival is made possible. Intelligence, in each narrative, is not merely a background capacity but the primary means through which the subject encounters, interprets, and responds to its environment. Yet as with survival, the nature of intelligence is not uniform across these works. Rather, it undergoes a significant transformation, moving from calculation to relation to reconfiguration.
In The Martian, intelligence is presented in its most recognizable modern form: the capacity to solve problems through rational analysis. Faced with a hostile environment, the protagonist relies on scientific knowledge, engineering skill, and logical reasoning to generate solutions. Each obstacle is approached as a discrete challenge, capable of being broken down, understood, and addressed through methodical effort. Intelligence here is procedural and instrumental. It operates by establishing a clear distinction between subject and object, allowing the human survivor to act effectively upon the latter. The success of this approach reinforces a view of intelligence as mastery - the ability to impose order upon an otherwise indifferent world.
Project Hail Mary complicates this picture by introducing a form of intelligence that cannot be reduced to familiar categories. While the protagonist initially relies on the same analytical framework found in The Martian, this proves insufficient when confronted with an alien being whose sensory apparatus, communicative methods, and conceptual structures differ markedly from human norms. Intelligence must then expand beyond problem-solving into the domain of relation. It becomes necessary not only to understand, but to co-construct understanding. Communication is not given but built, and meaning arises through iterative interaction rather than unilateral interpretation. In this context, intelligence is no longer merely the capacity to solve problems; it is the capacity to establish shared frameworks within which problems can be addressed together.
In Arrival, the transformation of intelligence reaches a further stage. Here, intelligence is not simply relational but transformative. The act of understanding another form of communication alters the structure of cognition itself. Language does not merely convey information; it reshapes perception, reorders temporal experience, and redefines the boundaries of selfhood. Intelligence becomes inseparable from the conditions under which reality is experienced. To understand is not to represent an external world more accurately, but to participate in a reconfiguration of one’s own interpretive framework. The subject does not stand apart from what is known; it is changed by the act of participatory understanding.
Across these three narratives, intelligence moves through a series of expansions. It begins as calculation, oriented toward control and survival within a given environment. It then becomes relational, oriented toward cooperation and shared understanding. Finally, it becomes transformative, altering the very structures through which reality is apprehended. This progression suggests that intelligence cannot be adequately defined as a fixed capacity or a set of cognitive tools. Rather, it is better understood as an evolving mode of engagement - one that is shaped by, and in turn reshapes, the conditions under which the world is encountered.
In this way, the films collectively challenge a narrow conception of intelligence as purely instrumental. They suggest instead that intelligence involves responsiveness, adaptability, and openness to change. It is not only the means by which problems are solved, but also the medium through which new forms of relation and understanding become possible. As such, intelligence serves as a bridge between survival and a more expansive engagement with reality - one that moves beyond mastery toward participation.
III. Communication
Reality emerges not as something merely observed, but through relation, interpretation, and response.
If intelligence provides the means by which these narratives engage the unknown, communication reveals the limits and possibilities of that engagement. Across The Martian, Project Hail Mary, and Arrival, communication moves from transmission to construction to transformation. What begins as the exchange of information becomes, by the final work, the reconfiguration of meaning itself.
In The Martian, communication functions primarily as a technical extension of intelligence. Messages are transmitted between Earth and Mars through established systems, and the primary challenge lies in overcoming physical barriers such as distance and delay. Once contact is reestablished, communication is largely unproblematic: shared language, shared assumptions, and shared scientific frameworks ensure that meaning is preserved across transmission. The difficulty is logistical rather than interpretive. Communication serves as a conduit for coordination, enabling collaborative problem-solving across vast spatial separation. In this context, language is transparent; it carries meaning without fundamentally altering it.
Project Hail Mary introduces a more complex communicative landscape. The encounter with an alien intelligence disrupts the assumption of shared linguistic and conceptual frameworks. Communication must be constructed from the ground up, requiring patience, experimentation, and mutual adjustment. Meaning does not preexist before the interaction; it emerges through it. Each attempt at communication is provisional, subject to revision as both parties refine their understanding of one another. In this setting, language is no longer a neutral conduit but an evolving structure, shaped by the interaction between distinct forms of intelligence. Communication becomes an achievement rather than a given, and its success depends upon the willingness of both participants to adapt.
In Arrival, communication undergoes a further transformation. The task is not simply to establish a shared system of signs, but to enter into a form of language that alters cognitive reality itself. The extraterrestrial language encountered in the film does not map onto human linguistic structures; instead, it embodies a radically different orientation toward time and meaning. As the protagonist learns this language, her perception of temporal sequence changes, collapsing the distinction between past, present, and future. Communication here is not merely the exchange or construction of meaning - it is the medium through which reality is re-experienced. To learn the language is to inhabit a different structure of temporal reality.
Across these films, communication evolves from a stable mechanism of transmission to a dynamic process of co-creation, and finally to a transformative force that reshapes perception. This progression parallels the movement identified in earlier sections. Where The Martian assumes a shared world that can be described and coordinated through language, Project Hail Mary reveals that such a world must often be built through interaction. Arrival, in turn, suggests that even this shared world is not fixed, but can be reconfigured through the very act of communication.
What emerges from this comparison is a shift in how language is understood. Rather than serving merely as a tool for representing reality, communication becomes a site in which reality is negotiated and, in certain cases, altered. Meaning is no longer transmitted intact from one subject to another; it arises within the relational space between them. In its most developed form, communication does not simply bridge differences - it transforms the conditions under which those differences are perceived.
In this way, the films collectively move beyond a model of language as representation toward one in which communication participates in the formation of experience itself. The act of speaking, listening, and interpreting becomes inseparable from the act of inhabiting a world. As such, communication stands as a crucial turning point in this essay’s projected trajectory - marking the transition from intelligence as engagement to a more expansive understanding of how reality is constituted through relation, interpretation, and response.
Reality comes into view through the ways it is encountered.
Having examined survival, intelligence, and communication across these three narratives, we are now in a position to consider the underlying question that each film raises in its own way: What is the nature of reality itself? More specifically, how is reality understood within each narrative, and what assumptions govern the relationship between the knower and the known?
At a foundational level, The Martian operates within a broadly naturalistic and scientific realist framework. The world it presents is external, structured, and independent of human perception. Mars exists as a physical environment governed by consistent laws, which can be investigated, modeled, and navigated. The protagonist’s success depends upon the reliability of these laws and the accuracy of his understanding. Reality, in this context, is stable and objective, even if it is difficult to endure. Knowledge functions as a form of alignment between thought and world, and survival is achieved through the refinement of that alignment.
Project Hail Mary begins within a similar orientation but gradually introduces a complication that unsettles it. While the physical universe remains structured and intelligible, the presence of another intelligence reveals that reality cannot be fully accounted for by observation alone. The encounter requires not only analysis but interaction, and the success of that interaction depends upon the capacity to establish shared meaning across difference so that each mission is successful. Reality, here, is not abandoned as an external order, but it becomes increasingly clear to each entity (the human and the non-human) that successful accomplishment of a difficult task to save life requires successful engagement each with the other. The world is not simply there to be described; it must be approached in ways that allow for mutual intelligibility. In this sense, the film moves toward a more relational understanding, in which reality is encountered through cooperative relational processes rather than strict unilateral observation.
In Arrival, the shift becomes more pronounced. The assumption that reality exists as a fixed structure independent of interpretation is no longer sufficient to account for what occurs. The extraterrestrial language encountered in the film does not merely describe the world; it reorganizes the temporal and experiential framework through which the world is perceived. Past and future are no longer sequential but co-present, and knowledge becomes inseparable from the conditions of its articulation. Reality, in this context, cannot be understood apart from the interpretive structures that make it accessible. What is known is shaped by how it is known, and changes in interpretation lead to changes in experience.
Taken together, these films trace a movement across different forms of realism. In the first, reality is approached as an independent, knowable domain that can be accurately described through scientific means. In the second, this domain remains, but its productive accessibility is shown to depend upon relational engagement. In the third, the distinction between reality and its interpretation becomes more fluid, as the act of understanding reshapes the conditions under which reality is experienced. That is, reality itself is the alien object to encounter and not only the Arrival aliens themselves.
This progression does not require the abandonment of realism, but it does call for its expansion of perception. Rather than viewing reality as either wholly objective or wholly constructed, the films suggest a more nuanced position: that reality is encountered through a dynamic interplay between structure and interpretation, stability and change, independence and engagement. The world is not reducible to human perception, yet neither is it entirely separable from the ways in which it is apprehended.
In this sense, realism is not discarded but reconfigured. It shifts from a model centered on detached observation toward one that recognizes the role of participation in the emergence of meaning. What is real is not simply what exists independently of us, but also what becomes accessible through our ways of encountering, interpreting, and responding to it. The films thus point toward a form of realism that remains committed to the existence of a world beyond the subject, while acknowledging that access to that world is always mediated by the conditions of engagement.
V. Time and Experience
Lived time is experienced differently in its encounter.
If the preceding sections have traced a movement in how survival, intelligence, communication, and reality are understood, the question of time introduces a further dimension through which these differences become fully apparent. Time, in each of these narratives, is not merely a background condition but an integral feature of how experience is structured and lived. The manner in which time is conceived - whether as linear, extended, or reconfigured - reveals deeper assumptions about the relationship between knowledge and reality.
In The Martian, time is treated as sequential and procedural. Events unfold in a linear progression, and the protagonist’s task is to navigate this progression through careful planning and execution. Each moment builds upon the last, and success depends upon the ability to anticipate future conditions based on present knowledge. Time functions as a measurable resource: it can be managed, allocated, and endured. The narrative reinforces a sense of continuity in which cause and effect remain stable, and the future is approached as an extension of the present. Experience, in this framework, is oriented toward control within a predictable temporal order.
Project Hail Mary retains this general orientation but introduces a more complex relationship to time. The extended duration of interstellar travel, combined with the protagonist’s fragmented memory, disrupts the straightforward continuity found in The Martian. Past and present are interwoven through recollection, and the narrative unfolds through a gradual reconstruction of events rather than a strictly forward progression. Time remains directional, yet it is no longer experienced as a seamless flow. Instead, it is mediated through memory, interruption, and recovery. This introduces a degree of reflexivity: the protagonist must not only act within time but also reconstruct his understanding of it as he lives across it. Experience becomes layered, and the present is informed by a past that is only partially accessible.
In Arrival, the structure of time is fundamentally altered. The acquisition of the extraterrestrial language transforms the protagonist’s perception such that temporal sequence is no longer linear. Past, present, and future are experienced as coexisting together in a jumbled arrangement rather than successively. Events are not simply anticipated or remembered; they are known in a different sense altogether, one that collapses the distinction between what has occurred and what will occur. This reconfiguration challenges deeply held assumptions about causality, choice, and experience. Time is no longer a container within which events unfold, but a dimension of experience that can be differently organized through the structures of understanding.
When considered together, these three films suggest a progression in how time is experienced. In The Martian, time is linear and manageable, a framework within which rational action unfolds. In Project Hail Mary, time becomes layered and partially discontinuous, shaped by memory and reconstruction. In Arrival, time is reconfigured entirely non-linearly; it is no longer bound by forward sequence but integrated into a broader field of irregular, misunderstood temporal experience.
This progression has important implications. As the conception of time shifts, so too does the nature of experience itself. In a strictly linear framework, experience is oriented toward prediction and control. In a layered framework, it involves recollection and reinterpretation. In a reconfigured framework, it entails a transformation in how events are perceived and understood. The subject is no longer positioned simply within time but is affected by the ways in which time is apprehended.
Thus, the treatment of time across these narratives reinforces the broader movement identified throughout the essay. What begins as a stable and measurable dimension gradually becomes more complex, culminating in a view in which time is inseparable from the conditions of perception and meaning. The films suggest that time, like reality itself, is not merely given but is experienced through the structures by which it is encountered. In doing so, they further unsettle the assumption that the world is encountered from a fixed standpoint, instead pointing toward a more fluid and participatory understanding of experience.
Interactions with new realities affect meaning, identity, and purpose...
If the preceding sections have traced shifts in survival, intelligence, communication, reality, and time, these developments ultimately converge upon a more fundamental question: What becomes of the subject within such a reality? Each of the three films presents not only a different environment or challenge, but a different configuration of the human subject in relation to what is encountered. As the nature of engagement changes, so too does the subject who engages.
In The Martian, the subject remains largely intact and continuous. The protagonist’s identity is stable, defined by his expertise, resourcefulness, and capacity for rational action. Though isolated, he does not undergo a fundamental transformation in how he understands himself or the world. Instead, he extends his existing capabilities into an extreme environment. His success reinforces a model in which the subject stands over against the world, interpreting and acting upon it without being substantially altered in return. Relation, in this case, is asymmetrical: the world presents challenges, but the subject retains coherence through mastery.
In Project Hail Mary, this stability begins to shift. The encounter with another intelligence introduces a form of relation that cannot be reduced to problem-solving alone. The subject must adapt not only behavior but orientation, learning to inhabit a shared space of meaning that emerges through interaction. Identity becomes less fixed, shaped by the demands of cooperation and the necessity of mutual understanding. The subject is no longer simply acting upon the world but is engaged within a field of interaction that influences both participants. Relation becomes reciprocal, and the subject’s coherence is maintained not through independence, but through responsiveness.
In Arrival, the transformation of the subject becomes more profound. The act of learning the extraterrestrial language alters not only how the protagonist communicates, but how she experiences time, memory, and selfhood. The subject is no longer stable in the conventional sense; it is reconfigured through the encounter itself. What it means to know, to choose, and even to remember is reshaped by the structures of temporal-giftedness that the subject comes to inhabit. Relation here is not merely reciprocal but constitutive: the subject is formed through the very process of engagement.
Across these narratives, a clear movement emerges. In the first, the subject remains distinct from what is encountered, maintaining coherence through control and problem-solving. In the second, the subject enters into reciprocal relation, adapting in response to another intelligence. In the third, the subject is transformed at a deep personal (structural) level, as the conditions of reality and experience themselves are altered.
This progression suggests that the subject cannot be understood as a fixed point from which the world is observed. Rather, the subject is shaped through its engagements, formed in and through the relations it enters. The more complex and unfamiliar the encounter, the more the subject is required to adjust, reinterpret, and, in some cases, undergo transformation.
Such a view does not eliminate the subject, but it reframes it. The subject is no longer defined solely by autonomy or independence, but by its capacity to respond, to adapt, and to participate in the unfolding of experience. Identity is not abandoned, but it is no longer self-contained. It is, instead, relationally reconstituted - affected by interaction - and emerging from that interaction with new meaning, identity, and purpose.
In this way, the films collectively move toward a conception of the subject that aligns with the broader trajectory of the essay. As survival becomes engagement, and engagement becomes transformation, the subject itself is drawn into this movement. What begins as an isolated agent confronting an external world becomes, by the final narrative, a participant whose very structure is shaped by the encounter. The transformation of the subject thus marks a decisive moment in the progression from isolation to participation, bringing into focus the deeper implications of how reality is experienced and lived.
The preceding sections have traced a progression across multiple dimensions - survival, intelligence, communication, reality, time, and subjectivity - revealing a consistent movement in how these films engage the unknown. What begins as a confrontation between a human subject and an external environment gradually unfolds into a more complex interplay in which understanding, interaction, and transformation become central. This progression invites a final question: What kind of world is implied by these shifts?
In The Martian, the world is presented as structured and reliable, governed by principles that can be discovered and applied. The subject engages this world through analysis and action, and success depends upon the ability to align thought with external conditions. The relationship between subject and world is one of distance bridged by knowledge. Participation, in this context, is limited; the subject acts within the world but remains largely unchanged by it.
Project Hail Mary expands this relationship by introducing a form of engagement that cannot be reduced to analysis alone. The presence of another intelligence requires the subject to enter into a shared space of meaning, where understanding is achieved through cooperation rather than unilateral interpretation. The world is no longer encountered as a neutral field of objects, but as a domain in which interaction shapes outcome. Participation becomes more central, as survival and success depend upon the capacity to respond to what is encountered in ways that allow for mutual adaptation.
In Arrival, the implications of this shift are carried further. The act of understanding alters the conditions under which the world is experienced, suggesting that the distinction between subject and world is less fixed than previously assumed. Participation here is not simply a matter of engagement but of transformation. The subject does not merely act within a given reality; it comes to inhabit a different configuration of that reality through the process of interpretation. The world is not only engaged—it is experienced differently as a result of that engagement.
Taken together, these films suggest that the relationship between subject and world cannot be fully captured by models that emphasize detachment or control. While such models remain effective within certain domains, they prove insufficient when confronted with forms of difference that resist immediate categorization. In their place, a more expansive understanding begins to emerge - one in which knowledge is inseparable from engagement, and engagement carries the potential for transformation.
This does not entail a rejection of objectivity or the abandonment of realism. Rather, it calls for a refinement of how realism is understood. The world retains its structure and independence, yet access to that world is shaped by the ways in which it is approached. Observation, interaction, and interpretation are not external to reality but are part of how it comes into view. Participation, in this sense, is not opposed to knowledge; it is one of its conditions.
The movement traced across these narratives - from isolation to cooperation to transformation - thus culminates in a view of reality that is neither wholly detached nor wholly constructed. Instead, it is encountered through a dynamic interplay between what is given and how it is engaged. The subject does not stand outside the world, nor is it dissolved into it. Rather, it participates in a field of relations in which meaning, understanding, and experience arise.
- Such a perspective offers a way of holding together insights that might otherwise appear in tension. It affirms the existence of a world that exceeds any single perspective, while recognizing that access to that world is always mediated by the conditions of encounter.
- It preserves the importance of scientific inquiry, while acknowledging that not all dimensions of experience can be reduced to measurement or control (scientific realism)
- It allows for cooperation across difference, while also accounting for the transformative effects such cooperation may entail.
In this way, the films collectively point toward an orientation in which participation becomes central - not as a replacement for knowledge, but as a deepening of it. To know the world is not only to observe it, but to engage with it in ways that allow for response, adaptation, and, at times, transformation. The shift from isolation to participation thus marks not merely a narrative development across these works, but a broader reconsideration of how reality itself is encountered and lived.
Essay I → Essay II
- Naturalistic Realism → we are a byproduct
- Scientific Realism → we are observers
- Metamodern Realism → we are interpreters
- Processual Realism → we are intrinsic participants
We next will move from this first essay which has provided a cultural and narrative horizon of discussion on the subject of reality, to a second, more philosophical, essay that will explore reality's philosophical depth through the following figures:
- Gottlob Frege - meaning, sense, reference
- Jacques Lacan - trauma, rupture, lack/longing, misrecognition
- internal fragmentation
- experiential tension
- Alain Badiou - being, event, rupture, revelation, transformation, fidelity
- a sudden awakening
- transformational break
- rupture as truth-event
- Alfred North Whitehead - relational becoming
- ongoing awareness
- ontological flow
- generative becoming
March 21, 2026
@copyright R.E. Slater Publications
all rights reserved
Films
- Arrival. Directed by Denis Villeneuve. 2016.
- The Martian. Directed by Ridley Scott. 2015.
- Project Hail Mary. Directed by Phil Lord and Christopher Miller. 2026. (or note as “forthcoming/film adaptation” depending on your preference)
Philosophical and Theoretical Works
- Alfred North Whitehead. Process and Reality. New York: Free Press, 1978.
- ———. Science and the Modern World. New York: Free Press, 1997.
- Alain Badiou. Being and Event. London: Continuum, 2005.
- Jacques Lacan. Écrits. New York: Norton, 2006.
- Kuhn, Thomas S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962.
- Gadamer, Hans-Georg. Truth and Method. New York: Continuum, 2004.
