Essay 3 Pass :)

 As Garcia and Sanfordon pages 61-62 discuss "source" and "ontological status" they are trying to prove their tclaim and differintiate between real and unreal. The matirx is an "unreal" world but it is all the people have ever known so to the mit is real. How can it be proven to be "unreal"? How can we be totally sure?
  As this argument is being discussed the term "source" comes into play. The source here means how it all began, where it originated. In the Matrix we know the source of the matrix are the machines. We also know it was a result of the war between humans and machines. What we don't know are the exact terms of the event. We don't know how it all came  to that event or what were the specifics. So we aren't exactly sure of the source of the "real world". But we do know the matrix does not cause what occurs in the realw olrd. The source helps us to break down each world so we cans ay if one is real or not.
 After discussing source another term comes into play ontological status. Which basically means the reference to the physical world, "the way things exist" (pg 61). A way of determining the ontological status of both worlds is seeing it int erms of  dependence. The real worlsd shouldnt have to depnd on anything to exist. But the matrix("unreal" world depends ont he machines (in the real world) to keep everything running.
 In using ontological status and the source Garcia and Sanford are trying to categorize what is real and unreal and how can we be sure, "The real world is metaphysically distinct from the unreal world because the former contains things that have a different source and ontological status from things contained in the latter" (62). In other words they have developed a way to tell the difference of each world.
 I personally have t o agree with Garcia and Sanfords assessment. In terms of ontological status the real world should be able to to stand alone with no dependency. Only something created, something unreal would have to be dependent on the original or creator. In terms of source we know the history of the matrix already and know it is a world created by the machines so it cannot be real. Although we don't have complete knowledge of all the sources int he real world, we have a general idea.
 I can see the logic categorizing with the two terms and I can understand it. IN knowing the source of something you know its a creation if it is created majority of the time it is not real. I something requires dependency of the creator or original it again, probably is not real. If it can stand alone it is most likely real.