The Purpose of the Science Fiction Novel [sciencetechnology-center.blogspot.com]
Question by : How much ignorance could be eliminated by a thorough understanding of science and history? There seems to be widespread ignorance of basic science and history. People don't understand recessive genes causing blonde hair or melanin in the role of skin color. They don’t understand that organisms evolve to survive in different environments. I liken it to people clinging to the idea of spontaneous generation; in the face of all evidence to the contrary. Fundamentalist antagonism toward science and history is a primary culprit. I am a Christian that loves science and history. They strengthen my awe of the universe. What can be done to educate the public? Best answer for How much ignorance could be eliminated by a thorough understanding of science and history?:
Answer by lordua
Unfortunately we live in the U.S. which doesn't seem to invest much in education.
Answer by Christopher
Look at how much ignorance was eliminated due to the Enlightenment. Science is our candle in the dark as Carl Sagan put it.
Answer by PROBLEM JPAS A.R.T.
I am a Christian, I also love science and history. It isn't antagonism toward these subjects that is the primary culprit, it is the nature of man. Humans will find some thing to kill each other over. Until greed, lust for power, and hate can be done away with history will keep repeating it's self.
Answer by Your inner Jedi. ☮
Science and history have always been my favorite topics in high school (and art), but unfortunately they do not teach us these things thoroughly. I have received an A in Earth science, but then moved to another location and the school demanded I take it again, thus setting me back. I was looking forward to learning mo re in science, but they seemed to regress in that subject, and I didn't learn much. I'm glad I am privileged enough to have internet access...because without it I would be at a standstill concerning science. :) though I'm not afraid to admit one of my favorite sites is Cracked.com
Answer by Michael
I couldn't agree more. it would seem that most people have a gross misunderstanding of what exactly science is and how it works, not so much what we know through science, just how the process is done and why we use the word "theory" instead of "fact" and things like burden of proof. And the biggest one which is so obvious but sooo many people can't seem to comprehend this; that the universe is the way it is whether we like it or not. The fundies might indignantly declare "I’m not a monkey" which doesn't change the fact that we are primates by definition. I think a philosophy of science class should be required on the school curriculum, the same way we require English and maths. i really do think it would go a long way to clearing up the confusion
Answer by FineMaterial
I would suggest having them read the buybull. Only about 10% of Christians have actually read it. The more people read it the more will know it's all myth. There is nothing profound in the buybull.
Since the arrival of Islam in India within a hundred years of its inception, Hindus and Muslims coexisted for centuries. But both suffered devastating hardships during the partition of the country, that took decades to heal. With this historical background, the film paints a wide canvas of the invaluable contribution Muslims have made in nation building post independence. Leaders like Maulana Azad, Rafi Ahmed Kidwai and Zakir Hussain strived to give a secular, democratic dimension to the polity. Aligarh Muslim University and Jamia Millia Islamia are providing world class education in society. Traditional Islamic institutions like Darul Uloom are integrating modern educational techniques while maintaining the classical methodology. India has seen invaluable contribution of eminent Muslim personalities in science, armed forces, administrative services, business, film industry, literature, fine and performing arts.
Where fantasy goes into uncharted territory, the kind of story that couldn't exist, science fiction, a term made famous by the likes of Philip K. Dick, Isaac Asimov, and Robert Heinlein, goes into charted territory. Let's make sense of that last statement: Science fiction is based on truths, questions of reality, and questions of survival. Its purpose is to go where other fiction cannot. Unlike horror, it tells something far more dangerous because it could happen. Unlike mystery, there isn't always someone at the other end of the gun, maybe "something" instead. Like mainstream work, it proposes fascinating philosophies on mankind in the past, present, and future.
When writers talked of space stations maybe they were onto something. When Star Trek characters could talk to each other on small, hand-held phones, most thought it was too good to be true. Now we have cell phones, computers that can talk, computers that can think in some ways, and a variety of other ide as that were often proposed in science fiction.
But the science fiction novel has its own place outside of the realm of Star Trek and Star Wars. For one, the legend must be created in words, not film or TV images. Second, the writers behind it are often as much philosophers as authors. Lastly, science fiction is its own frontier, a place for free thinking.
The thesis for all this would be that the science fiction novel engages a reader in a "This is how it could happen." The purpose is, as in all writing, to say something different. Long before "War of the Worlds" and even longer before Star Trek and Star Wars, people looked to the skies with hope, emboldening their legends with all kinds of flying creatures-angels, demons, sometimes aliens-who could do things they could not. That is exactly the purpose of the modern science fiction novel-it says we, the human race, can do something that right now we cannot.
The final purpose of the science fiction novel is always to make a mark on society. Star Trek could only go so far. When one looks at a science fiction novel, however, sometimes it seemingly is a race to the finish instead of a treatise on life in the future. Something is always happening; it happens fast. Take Philip K. Dick, for example, who once wrote 11 novels in 2 years (he used various drugs, much like Hunter Thompson, to improve writing speed). However, there is nothing superficial about the science fiction novel. This is because even films have a hard time capturing the legion of ideas presented in the classics, like "The Man In the High Castle," Philip K. Dick's best novel. If any film does capture the purpose of science fiction, it's "Blade Runner," considered to be one of the best films of all time, based on the Philip K. Dick story "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?"
Where it can be hard to pin down the modern science fiction novel, it can easily be seen that writing one can be a lucid ride into the un explored. One of the best in recent memory is "Hyperion," a science fiction novel that won the famous Hugo award. Here, Simmons explored what is real, much like Philip K. Dick, and did it as though he were poet, forming a tale of seven pilgrims to a far away world, much like "The Canterbury Tales."
Some of the finest novels of the 20th century were labeled "junk" because they explored taboo subjects or had sexually revealing covers. Without the likes of Philip K. Dick, Isaac Asimov, Robert Heinlein, and the hundreds of other talents, maybe there would have been no Star Trek, Star Wars, or Battlestar Galactica. Without the junk science fiction novel bought for a nickel in the 1940s and 50s perhaps mankind would never have dreamed of stepping on the moon in the 1960s.
Recommend The Purpose of the Science Fiction Novel Issues
0 comments:
Post a Comment