Which Science Fiction Visions of the World Tomorrow Will Come Closest to the Actual Future?

BigBadBob141

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2013
Messages
537
#22
With any luck the future would be like the film "Valerian And The City Of A Thousand Planets"
Which would mean that the universe would be a very interesting place to live in.
I think the opening scene with the David Bowie song says it all!!!
 

Parson

This world is not my home
Supporter
Joined
Oct 11, 2006
Messages
7,390
Location
Iowa
#27
Those who can, might
Those who can't, teach
While those who can't teach, administrate.

Everybody criticises - themselves and everybody else.
I always heard it


Those who can, do
Those who can't, teach
And those who can't teach, teach teachers.

Having done my undergrads in teacher preparation, I can attest at least to the last line as being Gospel.
 

Joshua Jones

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
841
Location
Maryland, USA
#34
Well, the universe in my WiP, of course! It is sure to come true. Of course, you have to wait until I actually finish the WiP to discover what our future holds... :D

Ok, absurdity aside, it seems to me that many works are either too optimistic or too pessimistic to be fully taken seriously. I find persuasive the ones which begin with the assumption that there is nothing new under the sun, but different applications and advanced ways to do the same things, create the same conflicts, and bleed the same red on different battlefields. Humans don't change; only our context changes. What makes us think that we are so different from those who came before us, or those who will come after?

Either that, or we will all get Gundams. It is a coin toss...
 
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
1,001
#35
Well, the universe in my WiP, of course! It is sure to come true. Of course, you have to wait until I actually finish the WiP to discover what our future holds... :D

Ok, absurdity aside, it seems to me that many works are either too optimistic or too pessimistic to be fully taken seriously. I find persuasive the ones which begin with the assumption that there is nothing new under the sun, but different applications and advanced ways to do the same things, create the same conflicts, and bleed the same red on different battlefields. Humans don't change; only our context changes. What makes us think that we are so different from those who came before us, or those who will come after?

Either that, or we will all get Gundams. It is a coin toss...
I don't think the world is ever likely to be static, just not different in an interesting way.

Stories have drama. A future romance that only has laser toothbrushes isn't SF.
 

Joshua Jones

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
841
Location
Maryland, USA
#36
I don't think the world is ever likely to be static, just not different in an interesting way.

Stories have drama. A future romance that only has laser toothbrushes isn't SF.
I will grant that. To be SF, at least in my mind, the futuristic aspects must be more than background. They must be integral to the story. However, this does not mean the same conflicts don't arise in different ways.

As much as I hate to do this, I will use an example from my WiP, as my sleep deprived mind can only seem to pull it up at the moment. One of the major internal conflicts in one of the factions is the issue of cloning. They use a set (about 150 at least count) of custom, artificial genomes extensively, controlling their genetic dispositions and experiences tightly in order to fill the ranks of their military with capable and reliable individuals. They have free will, but the two viable candidates for how individuals make choices (nature and nurture) are tightly controlled. Also, the clones are considered property of the military, which has purchasing contracts with the "nurseries" for a steady supply. The question arises, though, of if these clones should be allowed to vote. On one hand, it seems discriminatory to ban someone from voting based on the circumstances of their birth. But, if the basis of a person's decisions are tightly controlled, does that mean that one could, hypothetically, control what decision that person is likely to make? Say, who they will vote for? So, the other side of the argument is that, with enough money, one could buy an election by buying enough clones who will vote for him or her.

This, of course, has massive throwbacks to the American civil rights battle. The tension I described above is exactly the tension which was felt over allowing slaves to vote. "Could not their masters simply order them to vote how the master wanted?" "But they are people too!" Different players, different context, same issue, because it is the same humanity which does horrific things to people, putting them into impossible situations.

That is why I say nothing changes. Plenty changes regarding context, the ones who create those contexts, and those who suffer because of them. But the issue behind the context is always constant.

Hopefully, something in there made something resembling sense. The caffeine is wearing off...
 
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
1,001
#38
I will grant that. To be SF, at least in my mind, the futuristic aspects must be more than background. They must be integral to the story. However, this does not mean the same conflicts don't arise in different ways.

As much as I hate to do this, I will use an example from my WiP, as my sleep deprived mind can only seem to pull it up at the moment. One of the major internal conflicts in one of the factions is the issue of cloning. They use a set (about 150 at least count) of custom, artificial genomes extensively, controlling their genetic dispositions and experiences tightly in order to fill the ranks of their military with capable and reliable individuals. They have free will, but the two viable candidates for how individuals make choices (nature and nurture) are tightly controlled. Also, the clones are considered property of the military, which has purchasing contracts with the "nurseries" for a steady supply. The question arises, though, of if these clones should be allowed to vote. On one hand, it seems discriminatory to ban someone from voting based on the circumstances of their birth. But, if the basis of a person's decisions are tightly controlled, does that mean that one could, hypothetically, control what decision that person is likely to make? Say, who they will vote for? So, the other side of the argument is that, with enough money, one could buy an election by buying enough clones who will vote for him or her.

This, of course, has massive throwbacks to the American civil rights battle. The tension I described above is exactly the tension which was felt over allowing slaves to vote. "Could not their masters simply order them to vote how the master wanted?" "But they are people too!" Different players, different context, same issue, because it is the same humanity which does horrific things to people, putting them into impossible situations.

That is why I say nothing changes. Plenty changes regarding context, the ones who create those contexts, and those who suffer because of them. But the issue behind the context is always constant.

Hopefully, something in there made something resembling sense. The caffeine is wearing off...
Why did the society in your WIP greenlight slavery?
 

Joshua Jones

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
841
Location
Maryland, USA
#39
Why did the society in your WIP greenlight slavery?
Desperation. They were at war with another faction, were adamantly against the draft, but had too many planets to protect with too few volunteer military. Doing it this way, they quintupled their fighting force in the span of 15 years, retook the territory they lost, and are pushing back the antagonistic faction. On the backs of a slave-warrior caste who are bred and raised for war, and are legally merchandise. All in the name of preserving "freedom", at least for the "Naturals". Because ultimately, that is the sort of thing people who are equally afraid of their destruction and the implosion of their societal values do to those they have power over, rather than shoulder the responsibility for themselves.

I have such a high view of the innate charity and goodness of humanity, don't I?
 

Joshua Jones

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
841
Location
Maryland, USA
#40
And, to be honest, this only scratches the surface of what my factions inflict on others. The faction they are fighting has a nasty habit of forcibly implanting prisoners with a device which allows them to wordlessly share thoughts, feelings, and experiences, so that they can glean military intelligence from them before they learn how to control the broadcast. Another major power is adamantly against slavery, including of clones, but has a stratified society of different classes where women are expected to be domestic, or else run charities. This faction refuses an alliance with the first one due to their oppression of clones, while the first refuses over their oppression of women. They both may well be hypocrites, more able to see the fault in the other than themselves. But, that is what people do...

Anyway, the only reason I brought up my WiP is to illustrate my point about the same issues being in the future as the past; the only difference is the particulars. I don't wish to derail this thread, so I will be happy to discuss ideas and predictions of future societies, but I won't discuss my WiP any further in this context.
 

Similar threads

Top