hardsciencefiction

posts about #hardsciencefiction more →
Science Fiction Is Making You More Clueless About Science
10 Books that Prove Science Fiction Just Got Harder
Hard Science Fiction Isn't About Science After All
Science of Astrobiology Reading List

Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.

Dsmvwl Admin Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×

TheFaithfulStone
11/19/08

In reply to Science Fiction Is Making You More Clueless About Science
Specialists hate it when people are wrong about their speciality. They consider it a personal affront when people say "incorrect" things that they know the answer to.

Try going on Slashdot sometime and talk about that movie "Hackers" or even "Sneakers" (which is more realistic, but still...)

Thus - "real" scientists hate science fiction. "Real" advertising people hate "Mad Men." "Real" archeologist hate "The Bone Detectives" on Discovery. "Real" CSI's hate CSI. I suspect janitors and pig-shit cleaners hate "Dirty Jobs" and fishermen hate "The Deadliest Catch."

Most people take themselves FAR to seriously.
Reply

TheFaithfulStone was starred TheFaithfulStone was unstarred

RAHfanboy
11/18/08

In reply to Science Fiction Is Making You More Clueless About Science
Science Fiction's purpose is to entertain, not educate. It can do both and HAS done both, but that is serendipitous, a collateral benefit, so to speak.

I would think that a lot of actual scientists became interested in science, at least partially, by reading Sci-Fi as a kid.
Reply

RAHfanboy was starred RAHfanboy was unstarred

Itsatrap
11/18/08

In reply to Science Fiction Is Making You More Clueless About Science
This doesn't surprise me at all.

What surprises me are the negative comments.

I can't count the number of times some form of media (including novels, short stories, films, television programs, news media) have gotten something wrong about biology.

e got are Gattaca (film) and Brave New World (novel), and that's only because these dystopias were vague about the science.
Reply

Itsatrap was starred Itsatrap was unstarred

Alexis
11/18/08

@NenyaVilyaNenya:

Well there's a difference between the news getting something wrong and fiction getting something wrong. One has an obligation for information and truth. The other does not.

It's great when fiction does take itself seriously and implements actual science into its story, but it is not required. I can't understand what point these people are really trying to make. Is it every bit of sci-fi that neglects to get specific about its science, or a particular type?
Reply

Alexis was starred Alexis was unstarred

Dr Emilio Lizardo
11/18/08

In reply to Science Fiction Is Making You More Clueless About Science
Yeah, Science Fiction is definitely ant-science. Clark, Asimov, Hienlien - those guys didn't know crap about real science. Benford, Brin, Robinson - they're just continuing the same tradition. Go survey the engineers at NASA, I'm sure none of them ever read anything SF.

This is such bullshit the page is turning brown. I get confronted with people who get their medical knowledge from ER and House all the time. It's all made up, but it's not SF. The people quoted here are basically saying that anything that is fiction is science fiction. CSI is not SF, it's just crap. Just because they make stuff up doesn't make it SF. The events in "Apocalypse Now" never actually happened and many of them are so outlandish they never would, that doesn't make it SF.
Reply

Dr Emilio Lizardo was starred

Alexis
11/18/08

@DrEmilioLizardo:

*applause*
Reply

Alexis was starred Alexis was unstarred

Alexis
11/18/08

In reply to Science Fiction Is Making You More Clueless About Science
What a crock of shit. I'm sorry but when did fictional media become responsible for people's understanding of science. Oftentimes "hard science fiction" is weak on story and character development. Now I'm not saying that literature/tv/film should be allowed to expect us to believe anything (see Heroes) but where is this newfound sense of scientific obligation?

Am I reading that if it aint something out of a scientific journal than it should have dragons flying around? I just don't get it. It's fiction. Is it CSI's fault that people don't know how our judicial system works? No. Is it sci-fi's fault that people don't care about the space program? Of course not. Once again people choose the "blame the media" card.
Reply

Alexis was starred Alexis was unstarred

Cambias
11/18/08

In reply to Science Fiction Is Making You More Clueless About Science
I think we need to draw a HUGE distinction between media SF and written SF. Most SF writers try very hard to get the science right -- or at least the parts they aren't handwaving for the sake of the story.

Film, television, and comicbook SF is a different story -- a story without much science in it.

I think it stems from the need to make it visual. The sad fact is this: scientific accuracy is hard to make visually interesting.
Reply

Cambias was starred Cambias was unstarred

Alexis
11/18/08

@Cambias:

Also let's not forget a very basic fact. People watch tv for character development and story, not a science lesson.
Reply

Alexis was starred Alexis was unstarred

tetracycloide
11/18/08

@Evlsushi: 'character development and story?' wow, that's charitable i was going to say tits and ass. how else can you explain absurdly attrative people in completely banal settings sustaining faithful weekly followings?
Reply

tetracycloide was starred tetracycloide was unstarred

crashedpc - Haifisch
11/18/08

In reply to Science Fiction Is Making You More Clueless About Science
But... but... reading is easier than studying! *stares at HP Lovecraft and Neal Stephenson collection*

Actually, Anathem got me thinking about ... thinking differently, Cryptonomicon had a poopload of math and was awesome, and Cthulhu f'thagn *burble*
Reply

braak: You are, as usual, completely correct.
11/18/08

In reply to Science Fiction Is Making You More Clueless About Science
Well, that CSI thing is probably true.

But if, as Kim Hannula suggests, Science is not a cause, but an organized curiosity about the natural world, then shouldn't the merits of science fiction be evaluated with regards to how successful it pique's curiosity?

It's purely anecdotal for me, but reading about strange new sciences in books often gets me interested in understanding them.

That I never fail to be disappointed is a separate, though probably related, issue.
Reply

NefariousNewt
11/18/08

@braak: Science fiction of now is not the science fiction of the Golden Age, when most of the great discoveries of science (quantum mechanics, etc.) were still new and unfamiliar. We live in the Internet Age now, where information about new advances in science are available almost immediately. I think it's safe to say that s.f. has to move beyond the role of teacher into the role of thought-provoker. What we have to be careful of is the glamorization of flash-in-the-pan science (remember cold fusion?) at the expense of solid science (Newton and Einstein). There's no reason current s.f. can't or shouldn't provoke people to take a fresh look at science.
Reply

NefariousNewt was starred NefariousNewt was unstarred

tetracycloide
11/18/08

@braak: the CSI thing being true is evidence of a problem in our legal system, not necessarily our entertainment.

i'd echo the sentament on science fiction. reading sci-fi has repeaditly encouraged me to research topics i never would have considered before reading.
Reply

tetracycloide was starred tetracycloide was unstarred

Harrison_Bergeron
11/18/08

In reply to Science Fiction Is Making You More Clueless About Science
Lets all not jump on the Niel Armstrong bandwagon.
Reply

Harrison_Bergeron was starred

Garrison Dean: R.O.A.C.H.
11/18/08

@Harrison_Bergeron: Yeah you don't fuck with Buzz Aldrin...

Reply

Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion