Just wondering if there are any actual Sci Fi fans here...

There are many actual Sci-Fi fans here, Glaucon and I am sure many of them resent you pompous remarks. Sure, we know a Vs. debate is not the highest form of discussion, but it is far from stupidity. They are a guilty pleasure to tell the truth, as close as Sci-Fi comes to having a Super Bowl.

There are many actual Sci-Fi fans here, Glaucon and I am sure many of them resent you pompous remarks. Sure, we know a Vs. debate is not the highest form of discussion, but it is far from stupidity. They are a guilty pleasure to tell the truth, as close as Sci-Fi comes to having a Super Bowl.

I'm sure there are many actual fans here.
I doubt many of them resent my remarks, given that they weren't pompous in any way. My characterization of the multitudinous "versus" threads as being stupid and insipid is nothing but my opinion. If people enjoy them as a "guilty pleasure" as you say, then that's fine. Then again, as far as I'm concerned, the Super Bowl is another fine example of stupidity. While the "versus" threads may very well be enjoyable, they can hardly be said to be discussions about Sci Fi. At best they are simply a contest to see who can recall the various details and minutiae of specific Sci Fi related content. Regardless, I'm sure there are those here who visit the Sub forum for more than contrariness.

`
I agree about the "versus" business being a bit silly..
It's especially comical to behold the wrangling on what constitutes "canon" concerning the particular denizens of sci-fi settings pitted against one another. That might be a bit hypocritical of me, though, since I tossed in a few comments here & there in the Star Trek/Star Wars thread.

I would say the seemingly fanatical recall of detail speaks of some manner of fandom. Certainly it's something I never managed even with personal faves.
Frankly, I just never cared that much about the minutae.

glaucon...there are so many different sci-fi fanatics...the only thing that unites them is the same ideas/stories they had been exposed to. What else is there to talk about than? I for one thing had read many sci-fi books that noone here seems to have read. One of them was the Fiasco by Stanislaw Lem and I have so much to discuss about that story, like for example why do butterfly civilizations are uncomprehendable? ...well you havent read the book, so how would you know what the butterfly civilizations mean? you dont. But...there is Star Wars(which I havent read or seen...just glanced over one film) and Star Treck...and boy did many people heard of it.

I agree about the "versus" business being a bit silly..
...


Indeed. Especially when the debate clearly crosses 'universes'. I have no problems with getting into the detail and minutae; I myself do it. But to compare say, a TIE fighter with the Defiant, is absurd. Sure, it's harmless fun, but still absurd.



...
I would say the seemingly fanatical recall of detail speaks of some manner of fandom.
...



I wholeheartedly agree.



glaucon...there are so many different sci-fi fanatics...the only thing that unites them is the same ideas/stories they had been exposed to. What else is there to talk about than? I for one thing had read many sci-fi books that noone here seems to have read. One of them was the Fiasco by Stanislaw Lem and I have so much to discuss about that story, like for example why do butterfly civilizations are uncomprehendable? ...well you havent read the book, so how would you know what the butterfly civilizations mean? you dont. But...there is Star Wars(which I havent read or seen...just glanced over one film) and Star Treck...and boy did many people heard of it.


Of course ultimately all we can discuss is the content of those stories we've shared in experiencing; you're correct. But that wasn't my point. Each story (or set of stories) obtains to a particular universe, domain, what have you. It's the crossing and overlapping of those demarcations that is irksome. Simply because the vast majority of us have experienced some Star Wars or Stark Trek story doesn't entail that we're forced to consider whether or not Jabba the Hutt could bankrupt the Ferengis. Not only is it illicit to do so, it's also ultimately undecidable.

Alas, all I've read of Lem was "Solaris", a number of years ago. I can't say it made much of an impression upon me, for the most part due to stylistic reasons. Conceptually I found the story to be interesting, but his prose (at least, the translation..) was erratic.

More people have watched sci fi movies and tv shows than have read sci fi books. So it stands to reason that the visual media will be able to generate more discussion. Besides, as Dragon says, we haven't all read the same books because there are so many of them. It's pretty easy to keep up with the underwhelming number of good sci fi movies and the ten or twelve halfway decent sci-fi tv shows of all time.

I read "The Cyberiad" by Lem. I don't know if that is representative of his work. It was sooooooo Eastern European, like those bizarre animated films they all used to produce. All the way through, I wondered how much credit was owed to the translator. The guy made up his own words, like "Andromedary" for an interstellar beast of burden. How do you translate something like that? It's like the lady (I think) who translates García Márquez. She should share that Nobel Prize.

My favorite sci fi book of all time is "Code of the Lifemaker" by James P. Hogan. How many people have even heard of Hogan, much less this particular book? It is just collossally deep. I wrote more notes in it than in any textbook.

read Lem's Fiasco and Eden...they are his best works. Solaris is ok and the Cyberiad is interesting enough. Also the stories of astronaut Pirx are amazing...

Has anyone read any Robert J. Sawyer? His book Calculating God brought an interesting new perspective to the division between faith and science. His Hominid series was also quite good.

Lem was famous for the new words he made up; some of them are very useful, such as toposophy, that is the shape of wisdom. We have found this concept very useful at Orion's Arm (http://www.orionsarm.com) to describe the myriad known and unknown ways in which an intelligent being (human, animal, artificial, alien) could think and organise its mind.

Really:bugeye: , theologians, or those who study comparative religion, philosophers, meta-physicians. Fortune tellers, and Liars all do this too.

Lem was famous for the new words he made up; some of them are very useful, such as toposophy, that is the shape of wisdom. We have found this concept very useful at Orion's Arm (http://www.orionsarm.com) to describe the myriad known and unknown ways in which an intelligent being (human, animal, artificial, alien) could think and organise its mind.

read Lem's books...he is so much more than that. Dont read Salaris...read Edem and Fiasco

I have a copy of Eden; yes, it is very good.
Eden describes first contact between humans and an alien biotech society so complex and outside normal human experience that the astronauts are still far from understanding it at the end of the book. A quite realistic portrayal of the difficulties associated with encountering an entirely alien culture.