Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-17-2012, 12:01 PM   #41
jason taylor
 
jason taylor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
Default Re: Space Opera vs Hard Sci-Fi, personal vs realistic

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
Why do magic arrows make the cave man story soft, but not magic predictions of the future? Why is one a 'wonder' exempt from analysis and the other not?
Magic predictions of the future would make the cave man story soft and they would make the space story soft. The point is that in either case science is a red herring. We already know "normal people can't see the future" without science and science adds nothing to that. My point is that the effort gone to scientific accuracy and the absence of wonders are both characteristics of hard fiction. What they are not is synonymous. They go together because our minds are trained to expect them to go together and they are both appropriate elements of hard sci-fi. But the absence of wonders is not an example of the presence of reliable science in a work, or vice-versa.
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison

Last edited by jason taylor; 04-17-2012 at 12:08 PM.
jason taylor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 12:07 PM   #42
jason taylor
 
jason taylor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
Default Re: Space Opera vs Hard Sci-Fi, personal vs realistic

Quote:
Originally Posted by vierasmarius View Post
Maybe I just fail to see the difference between the wonders you're describing (which you describe as being precluded in hard sci-fi because of "flavor") and magic or superscience (which are precluded for being scientifically implausible).
I don't see how magic is precluded from hardness because of being scientific implausible; "scientific" is unnecessary as we already know it is simply implausible, and that is the point. I think magic is precluded for the same reason that prophesy is precluded. Because it just doesn't belong. As for superscience, superscience is attempting to make the hypothetical claim to be scientific, and therefore is subject to analysis on those grounds. We don't analyze Bobby Fischer on the basis of whether he can beat up George Foreman but on whether he can force resignation on Garry Kasparov.
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison
jason taylor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 12:12 PM   #43
David Johnston2
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Default Re: Space Opera vs Hard Sci-Fi, personal vs realistic

Quote:
Originally Posted by jason taylor View Post
Magic predictions of the future would make the cave man story soft and they would make the space story soft. The point is that in either case science is a red herring. We already know "normal people can't see the future" without science and science adds nothing to that.
http://www.almanac.com/weather/longrange
David Johnston2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 12:19 PM   #44
jason taylor
 
jason taylor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
Default Re: Space Opera vs Hard Sci-Fi, personal vs realistic

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Johnston2 View Post
And the cave man can predict that the mastodons will visit the watering hole and he can see it will rain by looking up and seeing clouds, just as the scientist predicts rain by watching clouds from space. But both would say "normal people don't see the future the way shamans do". The difference is in their respective opinions about the shaman not in the fact that science somehow confers an understanding about the probability of prophecy that wasn't there before.
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison
jason taylor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 12:26 PM   #45
Ulzgoroth
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Default Re: Space Opera vs Hard Sci-Fi, personal vs realistic

Quote:
Originally Posted by jason taylor View Post
Magic predictions of the future would make the cave man story soft and they would make the space story soft. The point is that in either case science is a red herring. We already know "normal people can't see the future" without science and science adds nothing to that. My point is that the effort gone to scientific accuracy and the absence of wonders are both characteristics of hard fiction. What they are not is synonymous. They go together because our minds are trained to expect them to go together and they are both appropriate elements of hard sci-fi. But the absence of wonders is not an example of the presence of reliable science in a work, or vice-versa.
I think that the presence of wonders is a breach of reliable science in a work. Obviously it doesn't necessarily dictate how reliable science will fare elsewhere in the same work, but I see no reason to count cutting an elephant in half with a hand-axe as unscientific, but prophecy as unrelated to science.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident.
Ulzgoroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 12:38 PM   #46
jason taylor
 
jason taylor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
Default Re: Space Opera vs Hard Sci-Fi, personal vs realistic

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
I think that the presence of wonders is a breach of reliable science in a work. Obviously it doesn't necessarily dictate how reliable science will fare elsewhere in the same work, but I see no reason to count cutting an elephant in half with a hand-axe as unscientific, but prophecy as unrelated to science.
Science cannot tell more about whether or not prophecy exists then is already known. For that matter it cannot tell more about whether or not it is possible to cut an elephant in half with a hand-axe then we already know.

Science can give ideas about whether or not it is possible to reliably conceal the heat signature of a large spaceship. It can tell how long a message transmitted by a media known to exist, can get from the outer system to the home planet. And we require science to know such things. We already know that ordinary hand-axes cannot cut elephants in half. If we are told that a hand ax forged by the gods can, our belief or non-belief is not about science.
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison
jason taylor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 12:43 PM   #47
Ulzgoroth
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Default Re: Space Opera vs Hard Sci-Fi, personal vs realistic

Quote:
Originally Posted by jason taylor View Post
Science cannot tell more about whether or not prophecy exists then is already known. For that matter it cannot tell more about whether or not it is possible to cut an elephant in half with a hand-axe then we already know.

Science can give ideas about whether or not it is possible to reliably conceal the heat signature of a large spaceship. It can tell how long a message transmitted by a media known to exist, can get from the outer system to the home planet. And we require science to know such things. We already know that ordinary hand-axes cannot cut elephants in half. If we are told that a hand ax forged by the gods can, our belief or non-belief is not about science.
Why does science suddenly stop being allowed to have anything to do with a piece of information once we decide that we already know it?
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident.
Ulzgoroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 12:49 PM   #48
David Johnston2
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Default Re: Space Opera vs Hard Sci-Fi, personal vs realistic

Quote:
Originally Posted by jason taylor View Post
And the cave man can predict that the mastodons will visit the watering hole and he can see it will rain by looking up and seeing clouds, just as the scientist predicts rain by watching clouds from space. But both would say "normal people don't see the future the way shamans do". .
Asimov's psychohistorians don't see the future the way shamans do. On the other hand Dune's spice users do see the future the way shamans do. I don't see how either pose a problem in space opera.
David Johnston2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 12:52 PM   #49
jason taylor
 
jason taylor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
Default Re: Space Opera vs Hard Sci-Fi, personal vs realistic

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
Why does science suddenly stop being allowed to have anything to do with a piece of information once we decide that we already know it?
Because if it is made obvious by the behavior of the characters and/or the formulation of the plot that "this plot device is strange, and wonderful", and you say "It is scientifically improbable" you have said exactly nothing. The characters already know it is improbable; that is why they are marveling over or dreading it. Saying the word "science" does not add to it. It is like those stories we hear from time to time where a newspaper says, "studies say sexy women make men dumb". When science does not and really cannot contribute more information then is already known, then saying "it is scientifically impossible" is not only superfluous but is playing word games.
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison

Last edited by jason taylor; 04-17-2012 at 01:03 PM.
jason taylor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 12:53 PM   #50
jason taylor
 
jason taylor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
Default Re: Space Opera vs Hard Sci-Fi, personal vs realistic

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Johnston2 View Post
Asimov's psychohistorians don't see the future the way shamans do. On the other hand Dune's spice users do see the future the way shamans do. I don't see how either pose a problem in space opera.
They absolutely do not pose a problem in space opera. They pose a problem in hard sci-fi.
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison

Last edited by jason taylor; 04-17-2012 at 01:00 PM.
jason taylor is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
sci fi, space opera

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.