Into the future!
This is a question I guess for any actual historians or sociologists out there. It came up when I was go through all my tumblr stuff and fascinated me.
It's about science fiction. Would there be any equivalent of sci-fi in FR, for example. But in particular, stories set in the future. Other than prophecies, are they a recent phenomenon that only started happening in the last couple hundred years? And if so, why didn't they happen before? Have cultures always had a pessimistic view of the future, like the greeks saw man's history as being one of decline, and in the middle ages was everyone just sitting around waiting for the world to end? Is it just because technology has been advancing at a faster pace than ever before and people have been able to witness huge changes taking place in their own lifetime?
It's about science fiction. Would there be any equivalent of sci-fi in FR, for example. But in particular, stories set in the future. Other than prophecies, are they a recent phenomenon that only started happening in the last couple hundred years? And if so, why didn't they happen before? Have cultures always had a pessimistic view of the future, like the greeks saw man's history as being one of decline, and in the middle ages was everyone just sitting around waiting for the world to end? Is it just because technology has been advancing at a faster pace than ever before and people have been able to witness huge changes taking place in their own lifetime?
Post edited by Coutelier on
0
Comments
That's my opinion anyway
As I recall from the course I took in college on Science Fiction (yes, my community college ROCKED), there was a story called "Tale of the Bamboo Cutter" in the 10th Century and a guy named ibn Al-Nafiss (?) who wrote a book in the 13th century. Voltaire and Kepler also wrote speculative fiction. MicroMegas being the Voltaire book and Somnium being the Kepler book. They are considered science fantasy, though, and not really science fiction- Although some peg "Somnium" as Science Fiction since it involves a journey to the moon and the motion of the earth as seen from the moon is described.
"The Blazing World" by Margaret Cavendish and "Nicolai Klimii's Underground Travels" (a translated title, can't remember the original) are two other forerunners of modern Sci-Fi. More people agree that Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein" and "The Last Man" are the first REAL (for whatever values of 'real' you accept) first Science Fiction stories. Then there was Edgar Allen Poe's Hans Pfaal story where the titular character takes a flight to the moon, and from there on, Jules Verne dominated the Sci-Fi scene.
The difference between Sci-Fi and simple speculative fiction is that in Sci-Fi, Man himself is the instrument and instigator of his future, not merely a participant or minion. It took a God or other mythological supernatural power in order to arrange for the brighter future in pre-enlightenment speculative fiction, while in Sci-Fi, Man makes himself greater than he is (Also, note 'greater', not necessarily 'better' or 'happier').
There have been a handful of instances in the more distant past of individuals who were able to overcome this handicap of perspective, but they were definitely outliers.
I think I'd mention as well though, Sir Francis Bacon's novel New Atlantis. Not really a story set in the future, but obviously his idea of a utopian society. It's also where much of the modern myth of Atlantis being a much more advanced society comes from (the Atlantians Plato originally wrote about were very wealthy, but not really any more advanced, scientifically or otherwise, than the Athenians of his time). But I guess that's another example of how people do often look to the past as some golden age, when people were wiser and possessed some kind of knowledge that we've somehow lost.
This is what people did not understand , and may be understood but used it against those to gain influence , generally and obviously involving money-making efforts , like the con-artists do.
There is no beginning and there will be no end that we need an information of. The only information that counts as valuable and necessary is what concerns us , and the other is barred away by limits the nature imposes on us, or cannot be computed , and , or cannot be proven in sound health.
Who would care if Hitler actually was a person , not just a figure created by multiple men to drive a nation ? Why would I care ?
I know this that there are things people don't look , because they are somehow certain about them. What I say to the OP will be :
" Fasten your seatbelt ! "