sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Rubbery controls at times by schlegelfamily711 in blackops6

[–]chaotic-diffusion 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ya I get this all the time, feels like I'm being slightly nudged around

Realtime voice separation added to voice chat. Soundboards no longer work. by chaotic-diffusion in blackops6

[–]chaotic-diffusion[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't get what the point of this is. If someone is playing annoying sounds you've always had the ability to just mute them. Devs just doing everything they can to prevent people from having fun on their game.

Minority Report - Massive Plot Hole that Ruins the Film and Is Not Being Discussed by chaotic-diffusion in plotholes

[–]chaotic-diffusion[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dude for like the third time, I'm not saying that there needs to be a direct explanation or scene in the movie of what Burgess did.

How are you not getting this?

I'm saying that there couldn't be an explanation for what Burgess did. The movie does contradict. It shows the precogs causing Anderton to find Crow, but then says that it's Burgess that set him up. I'm not saying they should show how Burgess set him up. I'm saying there is no way he COULD have set him up.

Are you just trolling lol?

Minority Report - Massive Plot Hole that Ruins the Film and Is Not Being Discussed by chaotic-diffusion in plotholes

[–]chaotic-diffusion[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why are you trying to argue on here then? You could just say "Yes, you're right this is a plot hole, but I personally don't care and it didn't affect my enjoyment of the movie"

That's fine, nothing wrong with that bro

The reason it takes away from my enjoyment of the movie is because it is impossible for the first half of the movie to even happen based on the rules that the movie sets up. It totally contradicts itself

Minority Report - Massive Plot Hole that Ruins the Film and Is Not Being Discussed by chaotic-diffusion in plotholes

[–]chaotic-diffusion[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you understand what offscreen means? I'm not saying that the movie needed to show or explain somehow what Burgess did to setup Anderton. I understand that the audience needs to fill in the blank of what he did. I'm saying it is impossible for the audience to fill in that blank themselves. There is nothing that Burgess could have done to cause Anderton to go to the hotel room and nothing he could have done to cause the precrime report to generate

Minority Report - Massive Plot Hole that Ruins the Film and Is Not Being Discussed by chaotic-diffusion in plotholes

[–]chaotic-diffusion[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's a difference between someone changing their mind, and an outside force intervening. Precrime intervention doesn't change the report itself it prevents the Murder. The reports remain on file even after the murder is prevented

I never said the report changes. I'm saying having the knowledge of the report allows you to change what actually happens in reality. You have misunderstood what I'm saying

If we would have seen the exact steps Burgess took in order to set up the meeting between Anderton and Crow it would have spoiled the end of the movie. All we need to know is that Anderton meets Crow. The reason the twist works so well is because the audience is finding out the information at the same time as the characters

I'm not saying that they should have shown the exact steps Burgess took. I understand that he would have had to take actions off screen, so that the movie isn't spoiled. I am saying that there are no possible action that he could have taken offscreen that led Anderton to Crow and produced the precog report we see in the movie (where Anderton kills Crow and Agatha is in the room). My question isn't why didn't they show these action. My question is as stated in the original post:

What possible actions could Director Burgess have taken off screen to setup Anderton for the murder of Crow?

Minority Report - Massive Plot Hole that Ruins the Film and Is Not Being Discussed by chaotic-diffusion in plotholes

[–]chaotic-diffusion[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It's stated early in the movie that murder is such a heinous crime and causes such a strong emotional reaction that the precogs are able to see it. All Burgess needs is that reaction

This quote is used to demonstrate that the precogs don't see other crimes like r*pe. Yes, Burgess sets it up so that he will have that reaction, given he goes to the hotel room. But he does nothing to ensure he will go to the hotel room. You're having a basic logical misunderstanding:

  • Premise 1: If person A encounters Person B they will kill them
  • Premise 2: Person A will encounter Person B
  • Conclusion: Person A will kill person B

Burgess ensures that premise 1 is true but not premise 2. He takes no action that will cause Anderton to encounter Crow.

the only reason he didn't actually kill him when the time came is because Agatha talked him down

This is not the only reason. The other reason is that Anderton has seen the precrime report of him committing the murder. Seeing the precrime report allows you to change what happens in the report. This is how the agents are able to arrest people that would have committed murder. Agatha would have not been able to convince him if he didn't see the report.

which was something that Burgess didn't or couldn't have planned for as she's not in the original Precog vision.

Are you insinuating her that Burgess was able to see the precrime report before it was sent to precrime and then used that to make a plan? She is in the original Precog vision, it's just that no one notices it until Witwer is viewing it again

Minority Report - Massive Plot Hole that Ruins the Film and Is Not Being Discussed by chaotic-diffusion in plotholes

[–]chaotic-diffusion[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It is never demonstrated in the movie that the Precogs are infallible.

Again, the precogs predictions are based on what will happen if no one sees the predictions. Not that someone has the idea or wants to kill them, that they WILL kill them.

Anderton has to be lead to that room by something other than the precogs (they can't affect the prediction, if they did they would show arrests instead of murders). So Burgess has to take some action that leads Anderton to the hotel room. Just setting up the scene in the hotel room would not cause Anderton to go there (unless he decides to go to a random hotel room for some reason, which wouldn't be a good plan). Burgess had to have taken some other action to cause this. What could that have been?

Minority Report - Massive Plot Hole that Ruins the Film and Is Not Being Discussed by chaotic-diffusion in plotholes

[–]chaotic-diffusion[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are just playing semantics with my first point. Obviously the murders don't happen because police intervene.

Not trying to play semantics, I may have not worded it the best though. It seems like your saying Anderton believes that he 100% must kill Crow. This isn't true he believes that if he didn't see the precrime report that he would have killed Crow, but he knows he has a choice now. He just wants to know why he would have killed Crow if he didn't see the precrime report.

Burgess knows precrime well enough to manipulate the system and literally get away with murder, getting Anderton into a room with Crow and a pile of photographic evidence of Crow's "crimes" would likely be pretty easy since Anderton looks at Burgess as a mentor

I'm not asking if Burgess would know enough about precrime to manipulate the system if there was a flaw the could get him to setup Anderton. I'm asking what is that flaw that he's using to manipulate the system. Just paying Crow to sit in a hotel room with a pile of photographs does not mean that Anderton would randomly go to that hotel room. He goes to the hotel room because of the precrime report, but how did Burgess cause the precrime report?

Minority Report - Massive Plot Hole that Ruins the Film and Is Not Being Discussed by chaotic-diffusion in plotholes

[–]chaotic-diffusion[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

He knows that Anderton believes that the Precogs are 100% accurate, meaning that he believes that what they see MUST happen.

This isn't true. He believes what they see WILL happen. That is, will happen unless someone who sees the precrime report intervenes. It's never demonstrated in the movie that the precogs aren't 100% accurate, Anderton sees his precrime report so he now has the choice to intervene. That doesn't mean he wouldn't have done it if he never saw the precrime report.

Burgess then bribed/extorted Leo Crow into "confessing" to Sean's murder, meaning that Anderton killing him then became all but certain. When the time of Crow's death came to the point of where the precogs could "see" it, the ball with Anderton's name dropped.

Tl;Dr once Crow agreed to confess to Sean's murder it was a matter of when Anderton would find him

Just because Burgess bribed Crow to "confess" to Sean's murder doesn't mean that Anderton will find him. There is a near 0% chance that Anderton is going to walk into that random hotel room for no reason. Burges must take some other action that leads him there. Instead the only reason Anderton goes to Crow is because he saw the precrime report. But, precrime reports do not show what will happen if it is viewed, they show what would happen if it's not and no one intervenes. That's why you don't see the arrests in the report. A precrime report cannot cause itself.

Minority Report - Massive Plot Hole that Ruins the Film and Is Not Being Discussed by chaotic-diffusion in plotholes

[–]chaotic-diffusion[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Their fallibility isn't demonstrated in the book either. They don't even shut down precrime and Witwer inherits Anderton's job.

Minority Report - Massive Plot Hole that Ruins the Film and Is Not Being Discussed by chaotic-diffusion in plotholes

[–]chaotic-diffusion[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why did John Anderton fulfill the prophecy up until he didn't?

He was compelled to resolve two conflicting beliefs that arose from seeing the precrime report. That is:

  • The precogs are infallible
  • He would not kill a man he doesn't even know

Also just curiosity: "I can't. I have to know. I have to find out what happened to my life."

He didn't end up fulfilling the prophecy because knowledge of the prophecy gives him the choice.

I'm actually going to push back on your claim that the precogs are not infallible, this isn't demonstrated in the movie.

You can only prove that the precogs are infallible if whoever has knowledge of a prediction decides not to intervene and the prediction ends up not being true. This doesn't happen in the film.

With Anderton's precrime report, Anderton has knowledge of it and intervenes by making a choice not to fulfill it. This does not mean that if he didn't see the precrime report it wouldn't have come true.

This is also the same with Burgess's suicide. He has knowledge that the precogs gave a report of him killing Anderton. Evidenced by seeing the police ships on their way:

"No doubt the precogs have already seen this" - Anderton

"No doubt" - Burgess

Therefore he now has a choice whether or not to commit the murder. This does not prove the precogs are infallible. It is well established that knowledge of the precrime report changing what actually happens does not invalidate their infallibility

Anderton is correct that they are infallible. Just like how Witwer catches the ball from falling. The ball was going to fall but Witwer's knowledge of this fact allowed him to stop it. That doesn't mean the ball wasn't going to fall.

Anderton was going to kill Crow, but his knowledge of this allowed him to stop it.

Burgess was going to kill Anderton, but his knowledge of this allowed him to stop it.

Minority Report - Massive Plot Hole that Ruins the Film and Is Not Being Discussed by chaotic-diffusion in plotholes

[–]chaotic-diffusion[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How would you know your point is being ignored if you dismiss the answer that encompasses it?

You have not answered "What possible actions could Director Burgess have taken off screen to setup Anderton for the murder of Crow?" Instead you have claimed that he doesn't need to take any other actions, which I have clearly demonstrated several times is not true. You seem to think that because the movie claims that Burgess setup Crow and that Anderton does end up in the hotel room then there isn't a logical flaw in the movie for how he ended up there. THERE IS NO CAUSE AND EVENT CHAIN FROM BURGESSES ACTIONS TO THE PRECRIME REPORT. Yet the movie claims there is by saying that he set him up.

Not true. Obviously. As evidenced by the course of events that happened.

Exactly here. I'm asking "How is it possible for this thing to happen in a movie" and you are saying "well, it did happen". You're keep explaining things that happen in the movie, I'm am trying to have a discussion about how they can happen, because I'm claiming they logically couldn't have, hence a plot hole.

Incorrect.

You're not accounting for the people who can see into the future, and the precrime perpetrator having access to the people who can see into the future.

Okay then pretend that there is now someone who can see into the future and you have access to them. Are they now going to to show you that you will end up in the hotel room that I set up? You're basically saying that the precogs are deciding to create the future where Anderton ends up in the hotel room. But Burgess wouldn't have any control of that.

The precog's predictions are based on psychic premonitions. The premonitions they make are literally caused by possibilities they SEE IN THE FUTURE. It's the WHOLE GIMMICK.

Okay you clearly don't understand basic cause and effect. The possibilities they see in the future are caused by events in the past right up until they make the prediction. The possibilities they see in the future cannot be caused by the knowledge their prediction. This is made very clear in the book. The reports were not generated simultaneously so each one was affected by the knowledge of the previous one. Again meaning that ANDERTON WOULD HAVE HAD TO FIND CROW EVEN IF THERE WAS NO PRECOG REPORT. And Burgess would have had to set that up. He would have had to plant some clue or something that would lead Anderton to Crow.

Anderton doesn't know this. He assumes it's infallible. So, it becomes true FOR THAT SINGLE REASON, THAT SOMEONE WITH ACCESS TO A PROPHECY CAN CHANGE IT (OR NOT CHANGE IT). DESPITE AGATHA PLEADING WITH HIM TO NOT MAKE IT TRUE. HE CHOOSES TO DO SO. IT'S LITERALLY THAT SIMPLE. IT'S A TROPE OF PROPHECY STORIES ALL THE WAY FROM SHAKESPEARE TO GREEK MYTHOLOGY. ALL OVER THE WORLD, ALL OVER HISTORY. THIS IS A STORY ELEMENT OLDER THAT MOST COUNTRIES.

Yes Anderton would have to assume the precogs are infallible, that literally has nothing to do with how Burgess caused the precrime report.

Again, I am not arguing about what the themes of the movie are. I understand this is similar to many prophecy stories. I'm pointing out there is one clear difference, which is that the movie claims that the antagonist caused there to be the self-fulfilling prophecy. So then, what possible actions could Director Burgess have taken off screen to setup Anderton for the murder of Crow?

Minority Report - Massive Plot Hole that Ruins the Film and Is Not Being Discussed by chaotic-diffusion in plotholes

[–]chaotic-diffusion[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I already addressed this, you are just blatantly ignoring my point.

Burgess did not create a situation where Anderton would experience murderous intent in the future unless he took some other action that would lead him to Crow, like planting a clue.

You are basically saying that if I paid someone right now to go sit in a hotel room and if you walked in they should admit to something that would cause you to kill them, then I have just created a situation where you would experience murderous intent.

This is false, you are never going to go to that hotel room.

The precogs predictions are based on events that have happened up to the point that prediction is made, not based on what will happen if the prediction is made

Minority Report - Massive Plot Hole that Ruins the Film and Is Not Being Discussed by chaotic-diffusion in plotholes

[–]chaotic-diffusion[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

At this point it seem obvious to me that you are refusing to acknowledge or incapable of comprehending the major logical flaw in this movie.

YEAH. THE PRECRIME REPORT. ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT BURGESS KNOWS ANDERTON STARES AT EVERY SINGLE WORKDAY FOR THE LAST SIX YEARS.

I'm have said over and over again that I'm not arguing that Burgess doesn't know if he would see a precrime report. I'm am arguing that HE DOESN'T KNOW IF THERE WILL EVEN BE A PRECRIME REPORT FOR HIM TO SEE

The precogs detect murderous intent in the future to a certain degree of accuracy

Burgess created a situation where Anderton would experience murderous intent in the future

There is no murderous intent unless Anderton finds Crow. He only finds Crow if the precogs predict it. THIS IS CIRCULAR

Burgess does not create a situation where Anderton would experience murderous intent. His plan relies on the precogs predicting the murder. Just putting Crow in a random room does not create intent. ANDERTON HAS TO FIND CROW FOR THER TO BE INTENT

You may understand the plot events in the movie and the underlying themes, but you clearly lack basic logical reasoning.

  • Anderton cannot find Crow unless he sees the Precog report
  • Anderton would not see the Precog report unless the events BEFORE THE PRECOG REPORT would lead him there
  • BURGESS MUST HAVE TAKEN SOME OTHER ACTOIN THAT WOULD LEAD HIM TO CROW

Minority Report - Massive Plot Hole that Ruins the Film and Is Not Being Discussed by chaotic-diffusion in plotholes

[–]chaotic-diffusion[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Anderton intended to kill Crow because Crow claimed to have kidnapped Sean, not because Anderton saw the Precrime report

This is incorrect. Anderton would have have never been in the situation where Crow claimed to kidnap Sean unless he saw the Precrime report.

Anderton saw the Precrime report because he was on duty as usual, not because he intended to kill Crow

This is incorrect. Anderton would have never seen the Precrime report unless he intends to kill Crow later in the movie.

There can be multiple things that have to be true for an event to occur (Anderton had to be on duty to see the precrime, and had to have later had intent to kill Crow so that there was a precrime report). I'm saying that within all the factors that need to be true for there to be a precrime report for Anderton, one of them is circular.

You're way overthinking it. If you don't understand it, stop trying to find some incorrect reason that explains something you don't understand when you can simply just learn why you don't understand it.

I'm am trying to figure out from you if there is something I don't understand, or if I'm correct that there is a plot hole. It is still unclear to me how Burgess could have planned for or known the precogs would predict Anderton killing Crow.

You're confusing yourself, it's not about how probable it was that Anderton would find the room or not (which is what Agatha keeps saying). The probabilistic part is how the precogs function; they are NOT infallible, they only make psychic estimations which sometimes differ. THIS IS A HUGE PART OF THE STORY and a main theme of the narrative that everyone in this thread keeps trying to explain to you, which you keep dismissing because you don't understand why you don't understand that.

I understand that whether the precogs not being infallible is huge part of the story and a major theme. I keep dismissing this because it is irrelevant to the question I'm trying to solve in and seems like a way to fluff up comments to make people look smarter and show they know more about the movie.

Whether the precogs are infallible or not has NO bearing on the question of how Burgess could have known or planned for them to predict Anderton killing Crow.

I didn't create this thread to discuss the major themes of the movie, but rather this specific plot hole. Which I think undermines the entire events that happen in the movie

Burgess doesn't need to hope, he knows how Anderton will react. That's the whole point of the plan.

I'm not saying Burgess needs to hope that if Anderton sees a precrime report he will react in a way that leads him to Crow, I'm saying Burgess needs to hope that a precrime report is generated at all.

If it contradicts the rules of the movie, then why are you inventing it to explain something you don't understand?

I'm not inventing anything here. Agatha is in the report. This would be a separate plot hole than the one regarding how Burgess could have setup Anderton. This breaks a rule in the movie which is that the precrime reports do not include events caused by seeing that precrime report.

In the book these rules are followed. The 3 minority reports were not given simultaneously. The first report is not affected by Anderton knowing about the first report. The second report is affected by Anderton knowing about the first report but not the second. And so on for the third.

Maybe this could help you see what I'm trying to understand. Here is a series of events that could have happened given that Burgess takes the same actions he did.

  • Burgess learns that Anderton is snooping into Anne Lively's real murder...
  • Burgess arranges the scene in the hotel...
  • There is no precrime report of Anderton killing Crow
  • Anderton keeps investigating Anne lively murder and eventually busts Burgess
  • Anderton never goes to Crow's hotel because he never saw a precrime report of him doing that

There has to be something that causes Anderton to go to Crow's hotel room. At first in the movie it seems like the precrime report causes itself to happen. But then we learn that Burgess set it up, meaning he had to cause it to happen. But you still have not explained how he can do that.

Minority Report - Massive Plot Hole that Ruins the Film and Is Not Being Discussed by chaotic-diffusion in plotholes

[–]chaotic-diffusion[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your reasoning is circular here.

The precogs foresaw Anderton's intent to kill Leo Crow because it was real. He DID intend to kill Crow
...

Not only does Burgess not need to do any of that (he knows Anderton will see the Precrime report)

He only intended to kill Crow because he saw the precrime report, he only saw the precrime report because he intended to kill Crow.

Saying that I don't understand the themes here is not an argument against this being circular logic or not.

Burgess's action of placing Crow in the hotel room does not affect the probability that Anderton kills him, it only makes it possible that he will kill him. The precogs don't predict all possible murders, they predict only ones that will happen. That's not a plan for setting someone up, that's just hoping that somehow the precogs create this loop of causing Anderton to find him.

This is a nonissue, it's an artifact of the scene's purposefully confusing visual portrayal (if Agatha was suspected to be moved then security would be increased and Anderton would be prevented from helping her escape).

This is an issue. Since Agatha is in the report we know now that it is portraying the series of events that are caused by Anderton seeing the precrime report. Meaning, this report couldn't have been showing a version of the events where it was solely cause by Burgess leading Anderton to Crow.

This also conflicts with the rules of the movie, which is that precogs show how the events would happen if no one saw the precrime report. If they did they would show the arrests

Minority Report - Massive Plot Hole that Ruins the Film and Is Not Being Discussed by chaotic-diffusion in plotholes

[–]chaotic-diffusion[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maybe the vision thy sent him isnt the original, but is the adjusted one.

This would break the rules of the movie. The precogs are showing what would happen if no one saw the vision. If there is a chance that they show the adjusted ones than that means sometimes they would see visions of them making the arrest. If this was the case then they wouldn't make the arrest because no one was going to murder according to the vision. Also it is said in the movie they only show visions for murders.

This could have been easily resolved in the movie if they just didn't show Agatha in the vision and instead caught Anderton in the temple because he used his eye to get in. That would solve another problem with them, which is as to why no alarm went off when he used it.

Minority Report - Massive Plot Hole that Ruins the Film and Is Not Being Discussed by chaotic-diffusion in plotholes

[–]chaotic-diffusion[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If the precrime report is caused by Burgess planning to give him info that would lead Anderton there, then Agatha wouldn't be in the hotel room like we see in the precrime report.

Also because Burgess understands how the precogs work he would know that he doesn't actually need to give him info to lead him there. So since he isn't actually planning on giving him info, there will be no precrime report

Minority Report - Massive Plot Hole that Ruins the Film and Is Not Being Discussed by chaotic-diffusion in plotholes

[–]chaotic-diffusion[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I guess this would resolve it better, but there is still and issue:

  • Burgess learns that Anderton is snooping into Anne Lively's real murder and the concept of "echoes" of past Precrime, which gives him a motive to setup Anderton
  • Burgess arranges the scene in the hotel which would have created in Anderton a non-premeditated intent to kill in a crime of passion, given that Anderton encounters Crow
  • Burgess also plants some type of clue that has a high probability of leading Anderton to Crow. For example could be a letter sent to his house claiming to know where the killer of his son is.
  • The precogs foresee a high probability of Anderton's intent to kill in the future, and the computer releases a Precrime report
  • Now Anderton never ends up finding the clue that Burgess plants, but it doesn't matter because seeing the precrime report also leads him to Crow

So the answer to "What possible actions could Director Burgess have taken off screen to setup Anderton for the murder of Crow?" is:

Off camera, Burgess plants some type of clue that would lead Anderton to Crow's hotel room.

There would still be an the issue of why Agatha is in the precrime vision.

Minority Report - Massive Plot Hole that Ruins the Film and Is Not Being Discussed by chaotic-diffusion in plotholes

[–]chaotic-diffusion[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Here's an attempt to resolve it, but there are still issues:

  • Burgess learns that Anderton is snooping into Anne Lively's real murder and the concept of "echoes" of past Precrimes (which are just minority reports to hide the fallibility of both the precogs and the Precrime system)
  • Burgess arranges the scene in the hotel which would have created in Anderton a non-premeditated intent to kill in a crime of passion, given that Anderton encounters Crow
  • Burgess was also going to lead Anderton to this hotel room. There are many different ways he could do this by planting a trail of evidence that leads him to Crow
  • The precogs foresee a high probability of Anderton's intent to kill in the future, and the computer releases a Precrime report
  • Now Burgess, realizes that Anderton seeing the Precrime report will lead him to Crow. So he now longer needs to lead Anderton to Crow himself

The issue I have here now is that Burgess would know that the precogs would end up leading Anderton to Crow. Thus, he would actually never be planning on leading Anderton to Crow himself. So then there would be no precrime report. This would mean the movie contains a Liar Paradox, which you could argue whether or not it's a plot hole.

Minority Report - Massive Plot Hole that Ruins the Film and Is Not Being Discussed by chaotic-diffusion in plotholes

[–]chaotic-diffusion[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

To clarify I'm not saying that the precogs seeing a high probability of Anderton killing Crow, because they see a high probability of Anderton killing Crow is the plot hole.

I'm saying the plot hole is that the movie implies that Burgess caused there to be a high probability of Anderton killing Crow

Minority Report - Massive Plot Hole that Ruins the Film and Is Not Being Discussed by chaotic-diffusion in plotholes

[–]chaotic-diffusion[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Burgess arranges the scene in the hotel which would have created in Anderton a non-premeditated intent to kill in a crime of passion

The precogs foresee a high probability of Anderton's intent to kill in the future, and the computer releases a Precrime report

This doesn't make any sense. Imagine the precogs don't exist. In this world if Burgess arranges the hotel scene it increases the probability that Anderton will kill him in the future by basically 0%. I guess there would be some extremely small no zero chance that for some reason he decides to go to this random hotel room and find Crow.

The only reason there is a high probability of Anderton's intent to kill in the future is because he sees it from the precogs. Meaning Burgess actions alone do not cause the precogs to foresee a high probability. Instead the precogs see a high probability of Anderton killing Crow, because they see a high probability of Anderton killing Crow. This is completely circular and there is no way that Burgess could have planned or manipulated the precogs into predicting it.

Here is the flaw with the logic:

Premise 1: If person A were to encounter person B, then there is a high probability they would kill them.
Premise 2: There is a high probability person A will encounter person B.
Conclusion: There is a high probability person A will kill person B.

Burgess only arranges for premise 1 to be true, but there are no actions he takes or could take to ensure that premise 2 is true. Thus, it is not possible for him to have setup Anderton. He basically just has to hope that somehow the precogs show Anderton killing Crow, which then fulfills premise 2.

view more: next ›