Yay... I guess.

1. Alisha Cunzio
Question: To what extent do the views of either Ebert or Morris (with regards to truth and
reality) fit an analysis to the film Roshomon?
„Truth‟, while it may seem concrete to most, is actually a concept that is as hard to pin
down as „reality‟. There are two major beliefs when it comes to truth. The first is that truth is
subjective and many different things can be true in respect to individual perception. The second
belief is that truth is an overarching reality that exists independent of individual perception.
While both concepts may be right in different situations, even at the same time, Roger Ebert and
Errol Moriss have polar opposite views on truth when speaking about the film Rashomon. Ebert
believes that each testimony was true in that it was real for the individuals, while Moriss believes
that there is only one truth despite what all of the „murderers‟ had to say. To a large extent,
Moriss‟ views on truth and reality are the most accurate when analyzing the film Rasomon.
According to Moriss, the events of Rashomon can be traced back to a single truth despite
all of the different stories that take place. While Moriss does state in a discussion about the film
that there is the concept of „subjective truth‟, he later clarifies himself in saying that, “…the
claim that everybody sees the world differently is not a claim that there‟s no reality. It‟s a
different kind of claim.” The different claim that Moriss talks about is the claim that humans all
have different ways of perceiving the world, but truth, whether it is found or not, will always be
a constant. In fact, he later states that it is clear which version of events actually happened (at
least in his own opinion), and thus comes to the conclusion that there is a concrete truth to what
happened in Rashomon. Even if Moriss is not entirely correct in saying that the path of events is
„obvious‟, there is truth in that one set of events must have been the real „truth‟.
Another way to relate the absolute truth model to Rashomon is to look at how Knowledge
equals Justified True Beliefs. The equation (JTB=K) leaves no „wiggle room‟ for personal
perceptions of truth. While JTB does allow room for human error, especially in the belief portion
of the equation, the truth portion quickly shuts down any truth that is not absolute. The „truth‟
part of the equation clearly states that the truth must not only be independent of human
perception, but must also be universally and eternally true. Thus truth is not subjective, only
belief is. In his article, Moriss states, “There is such a thing as truth, but we have a vested interest
in not seeing it, in avoiding it.” Therefore, when studying Rashomon an individual would do best
to view the movie with the belief that there is a single truth in who killed the samurai. Even if
one sided with Ebert and believed that all versions were true to the individuals, that would not
change the fact that only one set of events actually happened. By changing the belief, the viewer
is simply accepting that there is one truth to the events. What is „true‟ must be universally and
eternally true, and thus Moriss‟ thesis that there is only a singular truth is supported by Plato
himself, and is accurate in analyzing Rashomon.
Moriss‟ views can further support Rashomon when looking at eye witness testimonies.
Belief again plays a tricky role in this situation. Despite the fact that an individual may truly and
wholly believe in what they saw as the truth, it doesn‟t mean that it‟s actually true. Many cases
are repealed when eye witness testimonies are overturned by factual evidence, showing that even
though one might have a strong belief and a perception of truth, that doesn‟t not make that belief

2. or perception actually true. This is especially evident in Rashomon, where every witness gives
claim to being the murderer and gives a different account of the murder. There must be a single
truth as to what really happened, but due to the fact that these are eye witness testimonies the
truth is more obscure. However, this does not mean that one truth does not exist, as only one of
the witnesses can be correct. Thus truth is independent of the individual and is a constant in
reality, proving Moriss‟ belief to be most accurate when analyzing Rashomon.
In conclusion, the statement that truth must be both universal and eternal proves that
Moriss‟ absolutist view of analyzing Rashomon is the most accurate. Justified True Beliefs
support Moriss‟ thesis in that the truth, independent of the belief, must be concrete and singular.
Eye witness testimonies also support the Moriss analysis, since even in the presence of
conflicting stories a conviction (or an appeal) is based off of the true events surrounding a
situation. While Ebert‟s view does hold ground in that the stories of the Samurai, the Bandit, the
Wife, and even the Woodcutter are all true to those individuals, that does not mean that their
stories are, in the end, actually true. Thus truth is universal, eternal, and overall absolute, and that
is true even in Rashomon.