Science Fiction: Do you find it educational or just entertainement?
- Thread starter ReadyAndWilling
- Start date
Re: Science Fiction: Do you find it educational or just entertainement
You said "there's a reason it's called science fiction," implying that it was called that because the science was not trustworthy. That is a glib formulation I hear people spout all the time and it is completely, utterly wrong. It would be just as wrong if you said that about espionage fiction or detective fiction or romance fiction or any other genre of fiction. The reason any of those things are called ____ fiction is because they are invented accounts rather than documentaries. It's not because the specific subject they're about is portrayed unrealistically. It can be, but it can also be handled entirely accurately. There are works of spy fiction like James Bond that portray the intelligence business unrealistically and glamorously, but there are also works of spy fiction that portray it very authentically and are grounded solidly in realism. And yet the latter category is no less fictional, because the stories are still invented narratives. Same with historical fiction. It isn't called that because the history can't be trusted. Sometimes it takes dramatic license with the facts, but often it's extremely accurate in its presentation of history, and the fiction is in the interpolations invented by the author, the dramatized presentation of real events.
So regardless of what genre you're talking about, it doesn't make sense to say "it's called X fiction because the X is fictional." Or "There's a reason it's called X fiction," which is meant to imply the same thing. It just doesn't work that way.
You said "there's a reason it's called science fiction," implying that it was called that because the science was not trustworthy. That is a glib formulation I hear people spout all the time and it is completely, utterly wrong. It would be just as wrong if you said that about espionage fiction or detective fiction or romance fiction or any other genre of fiction. The reason any of those things are called ____ fiction is because they are invented accounts rather than documentaries. It's not because the specific subject they're about is portrayed unrealistically. It can be, but it can also be handled entirely accurately. There are works of spy fiction like James Bond that portray the intelligence business unrealistically and glamorously, but there are also works of spy fiction that portray it very authentically and are grounded solidly in realism. And yet the latter category is no less fictional, because the stories are still invented narratives. Same with historical fiction. It isn't called that because the history can't be trusted. Sometimes it takes dramatic license with the facts, but often it's extremely accurate in its presentation of history, and the fiction is in the interpolations invented by the author, the dramatized presentation of real events.
So regardless of what genre you're talking about, it doesn't make sense to say "it's called X fiction because the X is fictional." Or "There's a reason it's called X fiction," which is meant to imply the same thing. It just doesn't work that way.
Re: Science Fiction: Do you find it educational or just entertainement
No one is insulting science fiction here. We obviously wouldn't be here if we didn't like it. But, you have to admit that there is a lot of stuff labeled as sci-fi that is not accurate or likely to ever happen. That doesn't make the people who write it or read or watch it idiots.
No one is insulting science fiction here. We obviously wouldn't be here if we didn't like it. But, you have to admit that there is a lot of stuff labeled as sci-fi that is not accurate or likely to ever happen. That doesn't make the people who write it or read or watch it idiots.
Re: Science Fiction: Do you find it educational or just entertainement
I find it both entertaining and educational. The thought-provoking aspect is more commonly about politics and society (BSG, The Walking Dead) than about science, especially if we're talking TV/movies. For actual science, there are plenty of documentaries available.
When has TV and movies ever not wasted that potential? I'd be happy if there was a good space opera series on TV, even if it were wall to wall technobabble. For "real" science fiction, there's always books. I'm sure we can all figure out why mass media are unfriendly territory to actual science.
I find it both entertaining and educational. The thought-provoking aspect is more commonly about politics and society (BSG, The Walking Dead) than about science, especially if we're talking TV/movies. For actual science, there are plenty of documentaries available.
When has TV and movies ever not wasted that potential? I'd be happy if there was a good space opera series on TV, even if it were wall to wall technobabble. For "real" science fiction, there's always books. I'm sure we can all figure out why mass media are unfriendly territory to actual science.
Re: Science Fiction: Do you find it educational or just entertainement
Of course that's true, but that doesn't make it correct to generalize that to all science fiction, or to suggest that the very name of the genre is meant to denote its inaccuracy. Like all genres, science fiction can be approached in a variety of ways, some more realistic and some more fanciful. The term "fiction" is not a value judgment. Fiction can be very informative and enlightening, if that's the way the creators choose to approach it.
Of course that's true, but that doesn't make it correct to generalize that to all science fiction, or to suggest that the very name of the genre is meant to denote its inaccuracy. Like all genres, science fiction can be approached in a variety of ways, some more realistic and some more fanciful. The term "fiction" is not a value judgment. Fiction can be very informative and enlightening, if that's the way the creators choose to approach it.
Re: Science Fiction: Do you find it educational or just entertainement
You keep seeing something denigrating in the use of the classification. It's not. It's merely the observation that it's a work of fiction - not fact. It may contain facts and be very accurate with them, but at the end of the day no one is going to trust a science fiction novel as a source on a subject. It's folly to. It's a work of fucking fiction.
You keep seeing something denigrating in the use of the classification. It's not. It's merely the observation that it's a work of fiction - not fact. It may contain facts and be very accurate with them, but at the end of the day no one is going to trust a science fiction novel as a source on a subject. It's folly to. It's a work of fucking fiction.
Re: Science Fiction: Do you find it educational or just entertainement
The record of certain posters here-- and their folly-- says otherwise.
The record of certain posters here-- and their folly-- says otherwise.
Re: Science Fiction: Do you find it educational or just entertainement
Again, it depends on the novel. No, technically the novel itself is not a formal source, but a lot of hard-SF novels contain indexes or bibliographies linking to formal papers. Many hard-SF novels are written by working scientists who incorporate material from their own fields of expertise into their books, so while they may not be quite as authoritative as a formal research paper, they're probably among the best sources written for the layperson on those particular subjects. For instance, most of physicist Robert L. Forward's novels were written largely to dramatize his theories. Gregory Benford does much the same in a lot of his books, notably Timescape, which incorporated a lot of his own pioneering theoretical work on the idea of tachyons. Then there's Carl Sagan's Contact, for which physicist Kip Thorne pretty much created a whole new area of theoretical physics.
But let's not lose sight of the subject here. The question isn't whether SF is a formal source or if it always gets the science exactly right. The question is whether it can be educational. And it absolutely can be if it introduces the reader or viewer to real scientific ideas and inspires them to seek out more information about those ideas from nonfiction sources. I mean, it's not like something has to be a peer-approved research paper in order to be educational. Hell, your typical grade-school science textbook is a fairly simplified and superficial take on the subject, and your typical "educational" TV show like NOVA or Prophets of Science Fiction is also highly simplified and dramatized for the sake of entertainment. For that matter, a lot of the lectures you get from science teachers aren't particularly reliable because many of them are just reciting from the lesson plan and don't really know what they're talking about. It would be a bad idea to treat things like that as your sole sources on a subject if you really want to understand it, but they're all accepted as being legitimately educational, because they can introduce you to the basics of a subject and hopefully fire your curiosity to find out more from more detailed sources. And SF can do the same. So yes, SF can be educational, even when it isn't strictly rigorous or detailed.
Heck, I've learned a lot about science from science fiction. I got a better understanding of quantum physics from reading Greg Egan than I got from taking quantum physics in college, because the latter was just a bunch of equations with no discussion of the underlying ideas. Reading about quantum physics in Egan and other hard SF literature helped me to understand what it all meant, because actually seeing it in operation in a story gives me a better handle on it than just trying to wade through a bunch of calculus. And that's just one example. I've been learning from science fiction all my life, and science fiction is what inspired my interest in learning about science in the first place. So hell yes, it's educational.
Again, it depends on the novel. No, technically the novel itself is not a formal source, but a lot of hard-SF novels contain indexes or bibliographies linking to formal papers. Many hard-SF novels are written by working scientists who incorporate material from their own fields of expertise into their books, so while they may not be quite as authoritative as a formal research paper, they're probably among the best sources written for the layperson on those particular subjects. For instance, most of physicist Robert L. Forward's novels were written largely to dramatize his theories. Gregory Benford does much the same in a lot of his books, notably Timescape, which incorporated a lot of his own pioneering theoretical work on the idea of tachyons. Then there's Carl Sagan's Contact, for which physicist Kip Thorne pretty much created a whole new area of theoretical physics.
But let's not lose sight of the subject here. The question isn't whether SF is a formal source or if it always gets the science exactly right. The question is whether it can be educational. And it absolutely can be if it introduces the reader or viewer to real scientific ideas and inspires them to seek out more information about those ideas from nonfiction sources. I mean, it's not like something has to be a peer-approved research paper in order to be educational. Hell, your typical grade-school science textbook is a fairly simplified and superficial take on the subject, and your typical "educational" TV show like NOVA or Prophets of Science Fiction is also highly simplified and dramatized for the sake of entertainment. For that matter, a lot of the lectures you get from science teachers aren't particularly reliable because many of them are just reciting from the lesson plan and don't really know what they're talking about. It would be a bad idea to treat things like that as your sole sources on a subject if you really want to understand it, but they're all accepted as being legitimately educational, because they can introduce you to the basics of a subject and hopefully fire your curiosity to find out more from more detailed sources. And SF can do the same. So yes, SF can be educational, even when it isn't strictly rigorous or detailed.
Heck, I've learned a lot about science from science fiction. I got a better understanding of quantum physics from reading Greg Egan than I got from taking quantum physics in college, because the latter was just a bunch of equations with no discussion of the underlying ideas. Reading about quantum physics in Egan and other hard SF literature helped me to understand what it all meant, because actually seeing it in operation in a story gives me a better handle on it than just trying to wade through a bunch of calculus. And that's just one example. I've been learning from science fiction all my life, and science fiction is what inspired my interest in learning about science in the first place. So hell yes, it's educational.
Re: Science Fiction: Do you find it educational or just entertainement
The term is piques my interest, not peaks my interest.
I have learned quite a bit from Sci-Fi. As Christopher above says, there is a lot of good Science Fiction out there even through the majority of the easily accessible stuff is Science Fiction, you just have to be smart enough to tell the difference.
I'm one of those people that will look up something which peaks my interest to learn more about it, and Sci-Fi peaks my interest a lot. I also credit TNG with driving me to become an engineer.
The term is piques my interest, not peaks my interest.
Re: Science Fiction: Do you find it educational or just entertainement
Both! As noted, on the "science" side it has made me investigate things further [particularly cosmology in my case] and on the other side of course any well-written fiction can [and hopefully is] both educational and entertaining in various ways.
Both! As noted, on the "science" side it has made me investigate things further [particularly cosmology in my case] and on the other side of course any well-written fiction can [and hopefully is] both educational and entertaining in various ways.
Re: Science Fiction: Do you find it educational or just entertainement
Agreed. I also agree with Christopher's first, second and last post. And with Sojourner.
Bottom line-I wouldn't even know who Hawking is or what a ballistic arc was, little less grasp the idea of "delta vee" if it wasn't for science fiction. But in the end, I'm in it for the entertainment. Any knowledge/scientific interest acquired is a side product.
Agreed. I also agree with Christopher's first, second and last post. And with Sojourner.
Bottom line-I wouldn't even know who Hawking is or what a ballistic arc was, little less grasp the idea of "delta vee" if it wasn't for science fiction. But in the end, I'm in it for the entertainment. Any knowledge/scientific interest acquired is a side product.
Re: Science Fiction: Do you find it educational or just entertainement
Answer One: No, thats just how Americans spell it, the rest of the English speaking world spells it peaks.
Answer Two (the more truthful one): I know that, except I wasn't sure of the spelling (I was thinking peaques), Firefox was no help and I was in a hurry so I took the easy way out hoping no one would be anal enough to point it out.
I have learned quite a bit from Sci-Fi. As Christopher above says, there is a lot of good Science Fiction out there even through the majority of the easily accessible stuff is Science Fiction, you just have to be smart enough to tell the difference.
I'm one of those people that will look up something which peaks my interest to learn more about it, and Sci-Fi peaks my interest a lot. I also credit TNG with driving me to become an engineer.
The term is piques my interest, not peaks my interest.
Answer One: No, thats just how Americans spell it, the rest of the English speaking world spells it peaks.
Answer Two (the more truthful one): I know that, except I wasn't sure of the spelling (I was thinking peaques), Firefox was no help and I was in a hurry so I took the easy way out hoping no one would be anal enough to point it out.
Re: Science Fiction: Do you find it educational or just entertainement
First time on the Internets?
First time on the Internets?
Re: Science Fiction: Do you find it educational or just entertainement
Education is entertaining, as far as I'm concerned.
Yes, SF is definitely educational. Reading Clarke, Asimov et al in grade school is mainly what got me excited about science. Even comics, movies and TV would frequently send me running to the library to look stuff up; I can trace my interest in physics back to "The Production And Decay Of Strange Particles" on the original Outer Limits.
Education is entertaining, as far as I'm concerned.
Yes, SF is definitely educational. Reading Clarke, Asimov et al in grade school is mainly what got me excited about science. Even comics, movies and TV would frequently send me running to the library to look stuff up; I can trace my interest in physics back to "The Production And Decay Of Strange Particles" on the original Outer Limits.This is why I always encourage people to stick to a meaningful definition of Science Fiction.
Re: Science Fiction: Do you find it educational or just entertainement
Stuff that's just made up tends to be less entertaining. A person's imagination is rarely as novel and varied, yet still consistent and detailed as reality. Science fiction where the science isn't just fiction tends to be more entertaining. Real biology is more interesting than firebreathing dragons, for example. Science can be fictional in the sense that all extrapolation is fictional. It is thus actually be more relevant, which is to say, more interesting. In the sense that SF can draw out an interest in the real world, it is educational. To educate means to draw out, after all. But there is no opposition between education and entertainment.
On the other hand, I think there is an opposition between "education" and entertainment in fantasy, which is all about turning away from reality, in preference to the simpler worlds of the imagination. There are people who can't tell the difference between fantsy and SF, but I'm pretty sure this inability to distinguish comes from the deep conviction that only escapism is entertaining. This is a very narrow minded notion of entertainment, but there you are.
Stuff that's just made up tends to be less entertaining. A person's imagination is rarely as novel and varied, yet still consistent and detailed as reality. Science fiction where the science isn't just fiction tends to be more entertaining. Real biology is more interesting than firebreathing dragons, for example. Science can be fictional in the sense that all extrapolation is fictional. It is thus actually be more relevant, which is to say, more interesting. In the sense that SF can draw out an interest in the real world, it is educational. To educate means to draw out, after all. But there is no opposition between education and entertainment.
On the other hand, I think there is an opposition between "education" and entertainment in fantasy, which is all about turning away from reality, in preference to the simpler worlds of the imagination. There are people who can't tell the difference between fantsy and SF, but I'm pretty sure this inability to distinguish comes from the deep conviction that only escapism is entertaining. This is a very narrow minded notion of entertainment, but there you are.
Re: Science Fiction: Do you find it educational or just entertainement
In my 12 years on TrekBBS I've found that as a generalization, pointing out spelling mistakes and typos is reserved for people having pissing contests in TNZed.
In my 12 years on TrekBBS I've found that as a generalization, pointing out spelling mistakes and typos is reserved for people having pissing contests in TNZed.
Re: Science Fiction: Do you find it educational or just entertainement
Stick with the first one, it's more entertaining and fully ignores the difference in meaning between the two words.
I have learned quite a bit from Sci-Fi. As Christopher above says, there is a lot of good Science Fiction out there even through the majority of the easily accessible stuff is Science Fiction, you just have to be smart enough to tell the difference.
I'm one of those people that will look up something which peaks my interest to learn more about it, and Sci-Fi peaks my interest a lot. I also credit TNG with driving me to become an engineer.
The term is piques my interest, not peaks my interest.
Answer One: No, thats just how Americans spell it, the rest of the English speaking world spells it peaks.
Answer Two (the more truthful one): I know that, except I wasn't sure of the spelling (I was thinking peaques), Firefox was no help and I was in a hurry so I took the easy way out hoping no one would be anal enough to point it out.
Stick with the first one, it's more entertaining and fully ignores the difference in meaning between the two words.
Re: Science Fiction: Do you find it educational or just entertainement
Hear hear! I damn near stood up and cheered after reading that!
Hear hear! I damn near stood up and cheered after reading that!
Re: Science Fiction: Do you find it educational or just entertainement
Science fiction has inspired me to learn about science, but I've seldom actually _learned_ any science from reading it.
I've probably learned more about philosophical thinking from science fiction than the science part. Human condition, why are we here, alternate perspectives on the seemingly mundane, thought experiments, that sort of thing.
Science fiction has inspired me to learn about science, but I've seldom actually _learned_ any science from reading it.
I've probably learned more about philosophical thinking from science fiction than the science part. Human condition, why are we here, alternate perspectives on the seemingly mundane, thought experiments, that sort of thing.
