XPost: alt.fan.tolkien, rec.arts.books.tolkien, alt.books.cs-lewis
From: bredband.net@ojevind.lang
"Dirk Thierbach" skrev i meddelandet
news:20090812074005.1272.1.NOFFLE@dthierbach.news.arcor.de...
> Öjevind Lång wrote:
[snip]
>> Yes, but a lot of particles moving at random are only one category of
>> phenomena; in psyhohistory, you'd have to process population statistics,
>> economical facts and forecasts [etc.]
>
> Yes, of course. I didn't say that psychohistory is easy, or actually
> possible. (IMHO the system is probably too close to chaotic behaviour
> to make any realiable forecast). The point was that in principle, the
> idea is sound, and it's not a question of the inability to measure
> single facts, which become quickly outdated.
I agree that the system is too close to chaotic behaviour for any reliable
forecasts. Furthermore, all observers view things through ideological
spectacles. I rather dislike having to trot out the hackneyed term
"paradigm", but paradigms do exist and tend to distort what one perceives.
How does one identify all relevant data? Of course, Asimov, with his almost
religious belief in the absolute objectivity of science (a belief which is
in itself a paradigm) would probably have disagreed, and not just for the
purpose of defending a work of fiction.
The original Foundation trilogy depicts the Galactic Empire (and later on
the Foundation) as some sort of mid-20th century USA minus religion. Almost
everybody has very cursorily disguised Anglo-American names (Hober Mallow,
Salvor Hardin, Homir Munn, Hari Seldon, Jord Fara, Arcadia Darell, even Jan
Smite); female emancipation has not happened and almost all women are
housewives (the exception being a handful of novelists, academics and
teachers and, I imagine, the occasional sour middle-aged spinster scientist
of the Susan Calvin type, and, at the other end of the social spectrum,
housekeepers and waitresses); the sexual emancipation has not taken place;
the schools are American 1940's schools; the economical system is outdated
even by early 20th century standards; everybody speaks and thinks like
Americans of the time (except some stereotyped, even parodical, British
aristocrats, Roman generals, barbarian chiefs, olde worlde kings and country
yokels), and so on.
About the thinly disguised names: when Asimov reaches for diversity, it
often (rather bizarrely) takes the form of Latin or Greek names: Pelleas
Anthor, Publis Manlio, Olynthus Dam. One does find a Professor Klein and a
Miss Erlking (a school teacher who is of course unmarried), thus providing a
little German flavour to the WASP mix - as in the USA of the 1940's. There
is one single little hint that perhaps not everybody who settled space was
of white, predominantly Anglo-American stock: the name Linge Chen, which
looks more or less Chinese. (I believe there is also a brief mention of a
black man somewhere.) That is to say, Asimov did not foresee the increasing
racial and ethnic diversity in the US either. How could he? To my knowledge,
nobody did. The fact that one can't foresee the future is exactly the point.
(On which we agree; I just enjoy picking at the details.)
>>> BTW, Asimov actually showed in the Foundation series that in the long
>>> run, the laws don't hold -- a single individual can have enough
>>> influence to let the course of events take a different turn.
>>> Today we'd call that "chaotic behaviour", I guess.
>
>> True, but the idea of introducing a rogue factor which upset the flow of
>> the
>> planned future, in the shape of the Mule, was actually suggested by John
>> W.
>> Campbell, the editor of "Astounding Science Fiction".
>
> Ah, I didn't know that.
Asimov himself generously mentions it somewhere. He seems to have been an
arrogant person in some ways, but he did like to give credit where credit
was due.
>> And if I have been
>> correctly informed, Asimov later on became nervous about this irrational
>> anomaly and made up a story showing that the Mule was actually aslo part
>> of
>> the Plan.
>
> Didn't know that either. Do you remember the name of the story? Though
> I prefer early Asimov to late Asimov :-)
I most emphatically agree. :-) As a matter of fact, I haven't read the
story in question myself; someone posted the information in aft or rabt.
[snip]
>>> In the same way, most of his robots stories are actually about
>>> situations where the three laws *fail* to make a robot behave properly.
>
>> I know. That's what makes them fun to read. At the same time, it is hard
>> not
>> to feel that manufacturing robots with too much authority would be a
>> crappy
>> and dangerous idea.
>
> I think it gets more interesting if one doesn't concentrate so much on the
> actual feasibility of such robots ("Positronic brains" are of course just
> handwaving. "Magic", if you want).
They are almost as bizarre as the laminated mouse brain used in Cordwainer
Smith's wonderful short story "Think Blue, Count Two", about a
psycho-mehanical safety device installed on board a starship carrying
passengers (most of them in cryonic sleep) in order to ensure that the few
crew members who will be awakened by the machines in an emergency won't be
able to go on a murderous spree or the like if they turn out to be unhinged.
I'm not saying anything more; there were other bizarre ingrendients in the
safety device, including all the episodes of a popular TV series called
"Marcia and the Moon Men"... I'm not saying anything more.
> But it's a very interesting idea philosophically. The three laws
> really describe a perfectly altruistic human being. And that's still
> not enough to make everything work as it should.
>
> Who said again that SF/F is mere escapism? :-)
No, it's fun! :-)
Öjevind
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
