{poll} Why do you like science Fiction?

[elderbear]

BorisP's post asking for a poll about SF

 

Thank-you BorisP for demonstrating your lack of trollishness! This is a great poll!

[Soulreaper]

Agreed, and again my answer is "most of the above"

[Fenriswolf]

I'd have to agree and also state my answer would be most of the above, with a special interest to the formation of new ideas - this is what I find challenges me in the sci-fi genre far more than any other genre out there.

[daffydk]

Yes, most of the above should have an answer.

 

But i am surprised no one else picked the fact that its SCIENCE and they enjoy LEARNING.

 

SCIENCE is such a central part of scifi.. in trek, its mostly astronomy and physics/engineering. If you want something with captains or fighting, it can be found in other shows.

If you like girls with big breasts, baywatch and some other shows..

 

 

[Fenriswolf]

Yes, most of the above should have an answer.

 

But i am surprised no one else picked the fact that its SCIENCE and they enjoy LEARNING.

 

SCIENCE is such a central part of scifi.. in trek, its mostly astronomy and physics/engineering. If you want something with captains or fighting, it can be found in other shows.

If you like girls with big breasts, baywatch and some other shows..

 

 

As long as the science doesn't mar the enjoyment, I am all for it. It's when the science becomes the be-all and end-all of a program that I somehow worry the message of the show (if it has one) has been lost.

[TetsuoShima]

Agreed' date=' and again my answer is "most of the above"[/quote']

 

yes, me too, where is that reply?

[silverj]

Seven of Nine's breasts are certainly a draw... as is the voice of Kes; but isn't it just entertainment, like a sitcom perhaps? Fun to watch, can be exciting or funny, and when it's well done, pulls the heart strings a little too.

[Soulreaper]

Agreed' date=' and again my answer is "most of the above"[/quote']

 

yes, me too, where is that reply?

 

It would seem it currently goes under the tag:

"Something else I did not mention?" (which currently has 2 votes)

[werecow]

i enjoy it because it provides you with an escape from reality and does expose you to the human element in different environments....i also believe that we are inside a matrix like environment...what we are living in is not true reality....proove me wrong

[S0V13T]

Voted for entertainment, becuase thats bacically what sci fi is. I don;t think that I could build a warp reactor just becuase they show you how on Star Trek, or becuase theres diagrams in Star Trek books. So, I dont find it educational. If I want to watch something educational, I watch the Discovery Channel, or read a book.

[elderbear]

But i am surprised no one else picked the fact that its SCIENCE and they enjoy LEARNING.

 

I tend to like my science straight up. I like the speculation that grows out of it in SF. Authors like Arthur C. Clarke and Robert Heinlein embedded hard science in their stories. I read once that Heinlein spent three days calculating (slide-rule and pencil) a transfer orbit that impacted one sentence of a novel. But the readers never learned anything about orbital mechanics!!!

 

Even Arthur C. Clarke, who first proposed geosynchronous comm satellites didn't teach much hard science. What good "hard" SF does is to fire up the imagination. Couple that with some solid science education and THEN you've got something!!!

 

I think the only science you're likely to learn out of SF is speculative sociology, sociology, and anthropology.

[Fenriswolf]

You raise a very interesting point there elderbear. While I can admire Heinlein's dedication to the science of his fiction, I agree with you completely that imagination and a knowledge of science, it doesn't even have to be really extensive as long as it's solid enough and you can create some really good (and hopefully thoughtful) material.

 

I like to be entertained myself, without worry too much about the whole science thing, as long as there is a semi-plausible explanation (or someone invents a reason why there shouldn't be one) I am pretty much willing to let anything slide.

 

But I have friends that are so deep into the science of sci-fi they miss the pure enjoyment out of it, they will sit painstakingly correcting a sci-fi RPG rulebook to the nearest decimal point in the calculations and stats section for vehicles that don't even exist.

 

Is there such a thing as too much science in science fiction?

 

 

[coolcat13]

I think Sci Fi is just entertaining .the rest of the answers are really just a subset as to why it is entertaining .also I would put Rose Tylers(Dr Who companion) chest up against any one elses :P

[luukie41]

the special effects cause sci fi is all special effects :D

[Fenriswolf]

I think Sci Fi is just entertaining .the rest of the answers are really just a subset as to why it is entertaining .also I would put Rose Tylers(Dr Who companion) chest up against any one elses :P

 

*high 5's Coolcat!*

 

 

[RagenWrongly]

Very good Poll

[elderbear]

Yes, most of the above should have an answer.

 

But i am surprised no one else picked the fact that its SCIENCE and they enjoy LEARNING.

 

SCIENCE is such a central part of scifi.. in trek, its mostly astronomy and physics/engineering.

 

But it's BAD science. I'm watching the Terra Prime episodes right now. When the energy canon on Mars fires at the moon, Earth is in the background. Earth and Moon are illuminated at different angles by the Sun. Bad science - but good visuals. The beam hits the moon where it cannot be seen from Earth ... a bad demonstration ...

 

When Enterprise hitches a ride with the comet, the comet tail, which should point away from the Sun, is at a different angle than the illumination of Mars. Bad science.

 

Fun. Enjoyable. But not the place to learn about astronomy at all!

 

B)

[elderbear]

But I have friends that are so deep into the science of sci-fi they miss the pure enjoyment out of it, they will sit painstakingly correcting a sci-fi RPG rulebook to the nearest decimal point in the calculations and stats section for vehicles that don't even exist.

 

Is there such a thing as too much science in science fiction?

 

If it damages the story! Science Fiction is LITERATURE! What if Shakespear had filled Henry V with a tactical and strategic analysis of Agincourt? Or Romeo and Juliet with a treatise on ethics and child-rearing?

 

There are many, many excellent, interesting, and accessible books on pretty much any aspect of science available. Read them. Read Scientific American - if that's too technical, read Omni or Discover.

 

Heinlein spent time calculating a transfer orbit - but he didn't bore the reader with those calculations, he simply used the calculations to have a realistic transit time.

 

In literature, it's the human element that's interesting, where the heros and villains tug at our guts, where we find ourselves saying "No! No! Don't do that!" and the characters do it anyhow. Science fiction gives the writer an advantage over other forms of fiction - the ability to create a universe custom built to explore how beings can relate to situations that we've never been able to encounter before.

 

And that's where the learning takes place, IMHO, when we see other ways of being, of reacting - when we see potential consequences of societal behavior, when we envision how other ways of organizing society might turn out.

 

Rant mode off - gotta go finish up Enterprise!

[jbrownos01]

I think what really draws me to science fiction is that you can look at events that are similar to things in real life, but get a totally new perspective on them. It lets you take an idea about morality, politics, science, or lots of other things and view them in a different light that might not be possible in a "real life" based medium.

[Engineer101]

oh that is soo true. and most of the technology we see in sci fi is like coming reality in life