Well, alls I can says is, I ain’t no Phillistine. Believe it or not, I do have the ability to appreciate and analyze intellectual art, but when I read “Moby Dick”, I don’t waste a lot of time wondering if the whale is a Republican.
P.S. I don’t need entitlement to speak with mockery.
Good points, but I see the issue in a different way. Ok, grant that both human and replicant can both have souls, the distinction between the two is still profound. While I could feel for and sympathize with a replicant’s plight, I would never be able to really identify with it. It would still be very important for me that the story retain a human as one of its major characters because the central dilemma is a human one, “what is a human?” not, “what is a simulated human?”
I can think of one way that replicants fail in comparison as biological that is by no means minute: they cannot procreate. (Speaking hypothetically) Replicants are not a race. The film is not just examing the experiences of one man, but of the human race. So, in order for the story to retain the integrity of its central question, a human must play a central role.