1. Zaid Shammas
September 19, 2010
Senior Seminar 8
Mr. Clover
The Perspectives of Rashomon
Ways of knowing dictate the way people obtain knowledge. Perception, one of the ways of
knowing, can be described as the awareness of the physical world through our five senses, which include
smell, sight, sound, touch and taste. The movie Rashomon, directed by Akira Kurosawa, deals with four
different perspectives concerning a murder and a rape case which come from a woodcutter, the
murdered samurai, the raped wide and the bandit. The subjective stories, based on their perceptions of
the scene, conflict with one another and create multiple truths. Are all of the stories true? Or does one
absolute truth exist? The absolutist view, coined by Eroll Morris, states that there is only one truth to
the situation, regardless of the multiple perspectives and stories. Conversely, Roger Ebert supports the
relativist view. This view states that there can exist multiple truths to one situation given incomplete
Information. Many theories of knowledge concepts may be applied to support one view or the other,
such as context, eye-witness testimony, common-sense realism and coherence. I agree more with Eroll
Morris’s absolutist view to a large extent because of many reasons, involving common-sense realism,
and context.
Roger Ebert coined the relativist view of the movie, and of truth, such that multiple truths may
exist given a situation with multiple beliefs and many potential truths. This view may be supported in a
few ways. Eye-witness testimony may be used to supply evidence to crimes in court. In Rashomon, there
are four eye witnesses. Each of these witnesses presents a different set of truths, which conflict with
one another. The danger of eye-witness testimonies extends to the real world, where research has been
conducted that shows how eye-witness testimonies must be treated with caution, since the source of
memories or reconstructions of memories may be weak or inaccurate. However, with such differing eye-
witness testimonies and the fragility of their nature, as such in Rashomon, multiple truths arise and it is
impossible to reconstruct the absolute truth from memories and testimonies, leaving many subjective
truths. Mental maps also play a role in Ebert’s relativist view of truth. A mental map is the idea a person
has in their head of reality. This includes what may be true or false, reasonable or unreasonable, and
right or wrong. Each witness of the crime in Rashomon has a different mental map of the situation and
of life. Consequently, because each of their mental maps dictates what is true or false, and right or

2. wrong, their recollections of the murder scene will differ. Due to this, the truth each and every witness
retains is different, which provides solid evidence for Ebert’s relativist view of multiple truths. Although
evidence exists to support Ebert’s view, another side of this argument contains counter evidence.
Eroll Morris has the absolutist or platonic view on truth and perception, where only one truth
may exist regardless of multiple perspectives on a situation or perception. In conjunction with the
movie, this view is the opposite of the relativist Roger Ebert. This view may be supported in many ways.
The most important term related to a single truth is common-sense realism. This concept essentially
describes perception as a straight-forward and passive process, which delivers an accurate picture of
reality. In relation to Rashomon, common-sense realism states that a single truth will likely result from
reality, since multiple realities do not exist in order for multiple truths to result. In Rashomon, there are
four different perspectives. Although these perspectives deliver conflicting truths based upon their
mental maps, only one truth exists that brings all perspectives together, whether it is known or not.
Regardless of memory recollection and storytelling, common-sense realism dictates that one truth will
result from the one reality that occurred on the scene of the crime. This is the objective truth. In
Rashomon, each perspective is based upon a different context. Context is the way we see a situation
based on its surrounding text or situation. The testimonies given were stated in different contexts,
which are incomparable. In order for multiple truths to exist, the context of the truths must remain
constant for the truths to be valid. In Rashomon, each perspective is told in a different context. Because
of this confliction, the multiple truths given cannot be valid because they do not all relate to the exact
same situation. Conversely, with Schrödinger’s cat, the context of the cat remains constant, and two
truths are derived from the cat’s state. This results in a continuum of Morris and Ebert’s views.
I agree more with to a certain extent with Eroll Morris’s absolute views of one truth rather than
Roger Ebert’s relativist view of multiple truths because of multiple reasons. Coherance is a way of
distinguishing appearance from reality. If a flying pencil flew over my head at this moment, I would not
believe it because it does not cohere to my deduction of the laws of physics. In Rashomon, coherence
plays a large role in deciding whether there is multiple or one truth. The simple fact that all four
perspectives claim a different ending to the murder does not cohere to my natural experience of the
world. Three people cannot murder one man. These examples appeal to Morris’s view of an absolute
truth, which is coherent with my experience of the world. In addition, Independent testimony provides
slight evidence to clear up the rashomon story, and appeal to Morris’s view. Out of the four perspectives
in Rashomon, two of the stories describe the bandit murdering the samurai. This testimony of others,

3. coupled with coherence, provides a solid picture of an absolute truth. I agree with Eroll Morris’s platonic
view of an absolute truth more than Roger Ebert’s relativist view.
Rashomon, one of the first crime movies to incorporate a twist in a murder plot, has been the
tree to many fruits symbolizing theories of knowledge regarding truth and perception. From the movie,
two strong opposing views of relativists and absolutists has developed a continuum of perception. On
one end reside an absolute truth, and the other a relativist truth. I agree with a large extent with Eroll
Morris’s view of an absolute truth, because of the many ways to justify the view, such as using
coherence, common-sense realism and context. However, regardless of theory and concepts, most
people will just “not understand”.