Science fiction and philosophy
Because of my schedule and because we don’t pay for cable, I rarely watch television. Aside from Thursday nights (comedy done right on NBC), I tend to get my programming through iTunes or Blockbuster. Recently, since I completed season one of Damages, I decided to branch out, back into a genre that I used to love: science fiction. I had recently picked up, on a whim, Ursula K. LeGuin’s collection of short stories called Changing Planes. Then a few days later, on NPR, I heard some critics discuss Battlestar Galactica, in the context of the Writer’s Guild strike. So, with my taste whetted by LeGuin, I got onto Blockbuster.com and ordered Season One.
I had forgotten how much I loved science fiction–I used to tear through Star Trek novels as a middle schooler, before moving on to Asimov and others. And I had forgotten how much it fueled my philosophical imagination. LeGuin’s short stories in Changing Planes are predicated on the conceit that it’s possible to switch between dimensions while sitting, stressfully, in airport waiting rooms. They function as a set of possible worlds, where LeGuin can explore the roles of language, consciousness, evolution, etc. On one world, humans have been genetically modified to not require sleep. They lose the sort of self-consciousness that we have, however, and drift more and more into a zombie-like half-waking, half-dreaming state.
In the new Battlestar Galactica, unlike the original 1970’s version, Cylons are advanced artificial intelligence robots created by humans which then turn on their makers. They have adapted to the point of being humanoid and indistinguishable from humans, down to the cellular level. Moreover, there are political and religious implications to the fight between the two groups–the Cylons are monotheistic religious fanatics and the humans worship a polytheistic set of “Lords of Cobal.” Yes, zombies would believe in god, it seems…
Anyway, this is hardly a new observation: professors use sci-fi in their introductory classes and there are books written on the philosophy of [insert favorite sci-fi show here]. I suppose what I wonder is what sort of congruence there might be between traditions of philosophy and their interest in science fiction.
Maybe the appeal (and I’m speaking about individual philosophers here) of science fiction depends on how you view thought experiments. If you think they’re generally useless, then sci-fi is probably not going to fascinate you. If, on the other hand, you think we can learn about the actual world from the possible, then sci-fi (and fantasy, for that matter) gives you a rich place to explore these questions.
Arbitrary Chatter:
Aaron Boyden: Well, back when I was an... Aaron Boyden: The evaluation of historical... Loden Jinpa: thanks Richard: Thanks Colleen — let me just add... Loden Jinpa: >Finally, I just read the draft...