SciFi Visions of the Future - What do you hope for?

[Tabitha]

I have been reading Philip K Dick's collection of short stories (incl. Minority Report) recently, the central defining point of these separate stories seems to be a catastrophic nuclear war at some point in the 20th Century. The stories either deal with the direct aftermath for the survivors, or mentions the catastrophy as a particular turning point in humanity's past.

I think, in general, Dick described the distant future in quite a positive way, but much science fiction does not. For every perfect Star Trek future there is a counterbalancing Matrix, Bladerunner or Farenheit 451 style hell.

Is there any particular vision of our future that you would most like to see? Does the saccharine perfection of Roddenberry's idea turn your stomach?
Would the world have to live through a global catastrophy for a truly egalitarian society to emerge?

I am not too sure which I would like to see - I think the Star Trek future is much too ambitious for us - I think people in general are much too selfish and petty. At the moment I really do foresee Corporations taking over... Bladerunner and Rollerball here we come.

Interested to hear other opinions though

 

[Dave]

Interesting. I'll have to think and get back to you, but as an initial reply I'd agree that the Star Trek future seems a little too soon. Man of the 21st Century isn't genetically any different from a caveman, so in another 300 years time we will also still be just as violent, cruel and impetuous as today.

PKD was writing at the height of the Cold War, around the time of the Bay of Pigs, and most people believed a Nuclear World War was inevitable at the time. Many authors of the time wrote around this theme. So I don't think he is unusual. Now there is still a threat, but it is not Russia-USA, but any small country with a nuclear arsenal and a grudge. What is worse, is that now we know it would not be as simple to survive such an attack, because of the after-effects of a 'nuclear winter'.

Corporations already have a huge amount of power, and their influence in governments in enormous. I don't seem them getting to control the world though. There is already a backlash both from so called 'anti-capitalist' groups, and from ordinary shareholders after the Enron and Worldpay scandals. I would see this growing.

 

[Dave]

World Government -- I don't believe that we will ever get a company managerial elite assuming the ruling functions. In the world today we are still seeing Balkanization, where rival governments compete for control, and the UN is powerless to act. Differences of race, religion and culture will continue to divide us and the only thing that might result in a World Government would be some outside threat -- alien invasion, or asteroid impact.

I hope we can get a better world government without wars, but I don't see it soon.

Global Warming -- This is going to affect society. The evidence is now clear that the Earth is warming considerably and sea levels will rise, the arguments are now only if it is due to the man-made release of CO2, or a natural warming due to increased solar activity. I don't however see a 'Waterworld' in the future, more of the 'AI: Artificial Intelligence' version.

I hope we can learn to control our climate, I think we've lost the CO2 battle, unless people like Bush wake up and stop listening to their paymasters.

Androids/ Simulacrums/ Replicants -- speaking of 'AI' -- these are going to come, because we want them, we want someone to do our boring and repetitive tasks, so that we can get on with enjoying ourselves. The problem of Android rights goes way right back to the very first robot story by Karel Capek (he created the word robot in 1920 for his play called "R.U.R. or Rossum’s Universal Robots", in which artificial workers eventually overthrow their creators.)
Should we treat something intelligent as a slave?
In the end, we will morally have to give them equal rights, and eventually they probably will be better than humans at everything.

We need to show respect for each other first, before we can ever respect machines the same way.

Population Control and Density -- We still have done nothing but pay lip service to this problem. Medical Advances are letting people live longer, and the birth rate overall is unchanged. The world described by books such as 'Make Room, Make Room' by Harry Harrison are still distinct possibilities. The prologue to that book is as true today as in 1966.

Only the totalitarian Chinese government has managed to impose birth rights on parents, the world's democracies have not, and will never allow a political doctrine that has anything to do with it. However, it could be this problem that finally results in world governmental changes, when the worlds energy resources are consumed, its mineral resources are depleted and the starving populations of the world have had enough.

Unless we stop wasting resources and address the problem of population control seriously, the future is very bleak.

To answer your original question: one of these global catastrophies might have to happen before any real change occurs.

 

[Tabitha]

My first post in this thread came out a little garbled - as I was thinking about lots of things I wanted to post and didn't really order them very well. Your voluminous posts haven't helped me clear my head any either

Originally posted by Dave
but as an initial reply I'd agree that the Star Trek future seems a little too soon. Man of the 21st Century isn't genetically any different from a caveman, so in another 300 years time we will also still be just as violent, cruel and impetuous as today.

I suppose the traditional counter argument here would go, "But in the Star Trek of the 23rd century man wants for nothing. Money is no longer a requirement or even a status symbol - you get what you need and much, much more. Racism and sexism no longer exist, you can educate yourself as much as you like, and the stars are there for your exploration. Why would there be any need for the violence that comes with territorial aggression, or the crime and jealousy that accompanies wan?."
I am not sure if this would be the kind of response Roddenberry would give - but surely, as Dave suggests above, human nature would never let us act this way. Remove all the problems humanity faces now and we still will have politics - on whatever scale. I would imagine that it would be hard to leave our vindictive, gossipy selves behind to become the model citizens of ST.

Originally posted by Dave
PKD was writing at the height of the Cold War, around the time of the Bay of Pigs, and most people believed a Nuclear World War was inevitable at the time. Many authors of the time wrote around this theme. So I don't think he is unusual. Now there is still a threat, but it is not Russia-USA, but any small country with a nuclear arsenal and a grudge. What is worse, is that now we know it would not be as simple to survive such an attack, because of the after-effects of a 'nuclear winter'.

That is something that really stood out for me in the PKD stories that desribed the immediate aftermath of nuclear war - characters visited bomb craters within months of explosions and while he did talk about radiation sickness and mutations, it almost seemed as if there wasn't the same general knowledge about the actual effects of Nuclear War as there is today. Obviously 'post-apocalyptic' is a fairly common SF theme, but I would rather envision my future without it, thank you very much

Your frightening synopsis of the future we face is pretty grim, and no mistake. Population is the one issue that really frightens me - I think it was in "The Selfish Gene" that I read Dawkin's projection that if population continues to grow at its present rate, and barring any catastrophies or plagues, by 2050 the population of South America will have grown to the point where one could 'carpet' the entire continent with the inhabitants. Evidently this is not a sustainable population growth
I have no intention of having any children myself, and embarassingly enough I do quote this kind of stuff when reasoning it out in conversations with skeptical friends, I am sure they just think I am afraid of childbirth (a healthy fear, I imagine!) I don't think this one decision will make a great difference in the grand scheme of things, but I plan on adopting if the desire for motherhood ever makes itself felt in me.

 

[Tabitha]

Originally posted by Dave
To answer your original question: one of these global catastrophies might have to happen before any real change occurs.

What about my other original question? Seen any fictional civilisation you would like to be defrosted into in two or three hundred years?

 

[Dave]

Originally posted by Tabitha

What about my other original question? Seen any fictional civilisation you would like to be defrosted into in two or three hundred years?

I would doubt any scifi prediction will get it exactly right, real life is always stranger than fiction. New discoveries and inventions will happen that we had no idea of.

What would I like? I think that I have to say that I would rather live in the 'Star Trek' utopian universe, or the 'Culture' of Iain M Banks, than the 'Bladerunner', 'Total Recall', 'Terminator', 'Mad Max', 'Star Wars' dystophian ones. But they are more exciting!

 

[Pandæmonium]

I personally agree with the corporations taking over. I also agre that humans are way to selfish and ingnorent, so the Star Trek option in my view is also ont an option, but everyone can change can't they?

So, obviously computers will play a very indefinate role in the future, and i think everyone will be affected by them. Is this bad or good though?


Good:
Makes things quicker
Can store MUCh more inofrmation
Quicker to get information across
Makes life easier in general

BAD:
Have we all become luddities?
What if everything crashes? (Wall St in 1929, WWII here we come)
Hackers - Information that could be very private is easily accessible
"BIG BROTHER" effect


In a way, I sort of wish computers wouldn't take over our lives, but I can't do anything about that. Maybe I think the kind of Rollerball attitude to the future etc would be a more pheasible attitude. I don't konw, No one can predict the furture un less they've been there.

In 300 Years, maybe the future will be exactly as it is now, only more sophisticated, or maybe we'll be living on other worlds, conolising else where. It'd be nice to think good things that happen, but we must never forget that bad things also come about. What they are, no body can tell.

 

[ZachWZ]

Their is a lot to be pessmistic about. I'm a Roman Catholic in the USA. Still i believe that relingion is the key to solving most of these problems. Here's a few predictions.

The line between real relingion and lip service mass marker relgion will merge in laity controlled parshishes. while clergy controlled will widen the gap.

Despite hundreds of thousands of contraceptive availible for nothing the population rae will sky rocket.

More people will become tech dund. That is the worlds electric grid fails. the amish will become near Gods. since they are the only ones that know what work.

More and more information will become availible to the public throu various media. 99.9% of it will be useless, and/or lies.

The works of Mark Twain will be outlawed. While 3rd rate hacks will be required reading.

As i said earier faith is the key.

ZachWZ

 

[Tabitha]

Originally posted by D4rk 3vil L()rd
I personally agree with the corporations taking over.

What? Why? What possible good could this bring about? Corporations ramble on about their great community relations and their apparent concern for their employees, but I for one am not convinced. I think the basic controlling force in most corporations is profit. Whose interests do these corporations serve? Well, those of the shareholder and upper level management. The problem most corporations are facing at the moment is how to spin their activities in ways that make them sound very concerned with the wellbeing of their employees, the environment, and society in general. How can these concerns exist side by side with the motive of making a profit for the shareholders. I would say they can't, no matter how it is spun.
How do you think motives like these could be applied to running a country? I can't see it going well, but I think it may be coming. Dave mentioned above the process of Balkanization. I can easily imagine this leading to small countries or localities working very closely with, and then evolving into being part governed by, a corporation. Imagine if the locality in question was plentiful in some valuable resource, like oil, for example. I can see it happening, and spiralling from there, and I don't like it one bit.


ZachWZ ---> You aren't kidding about being pessimistic. I don't think I can ever see the Amish becoming "near Gods" though. I find it hard to believe that we would be unable to function without all our little electronic gadgets.

While 3rd rate hacks will be required reading.

I think some people would argue that we have already got to this point

 

[EmilyH]

Personally, I've liked always Star Trek. But I'm not sure how much longer the Federation in the Trek universe can last. All good things must come to an end, or so they say.

 

[DCBastien]

Personally I do not want all that apocolypse stuff to come to pass, be it weather/asteroid/plagues/overcrowding but things will get better before they get worse.

I wouldn't want any Machine Stops or 1984 control; creativity and freedom are much better, even if they are dangerous.

Its not likely we'll ever see (or at least not me and you) the complete multi-species demographics of the Star Wars universe, but I would like to see at least one other culture-- it would be more interesting that way.

Time travel might be interesting but all the rigid rules etc would make it impossible for the hoi polloi to jaunt about being Victorians for the weekend: unless they were very rich indeed.

Space travel would be fun. Communications'd be slower, but hey, not to big a drag. It would be interesting to experience it, definately, and to visit other places.

Lots of gadgets to make life easier would be fun: but mayhap not AI as, hey, we should all know what people worry could be wrong with that.

Cloning I'm not to big on, nor cryogenics. Longer life-spans might be nice Virtual Reality games taken to a new level-- and hopefully NOT addictive (like in BTL-- could be fun too

So basically just give me some mod-cons (future-cons?) and I'll be happy

 

[Dave]

http://yesterdaystomorrows.org/

This site is about a touring exhibition in the USA that compares yesterdays scifi visions to the real thing...

Nuclear powered cars, ray guns, personal robots, time machines, rocket ships, cities in the sky.

Has anyone seen it? It looks very interesting.

 

[timdgreat]

one of the things that i would like for the future that is kinda a combiniation of several fictional works, is to see human kind colinizing habital planets around the galaxy, only problem with this, i dont think we have found any other habitable planets yet:rolly2:

 

[L. Arkwright]

I have to say that my vision for the future is a kind of bleak one. I feel that society as a whole is in regression. Anyone who has read Harry Harrisons "To the stars" would get my meaning. Politics and class as a whole hold no intrest for me at all but my vision travels along these lines. Take the film "Oliver" In this film the gap between the haves and the have nots is huge. Education costs, your status in life is everything and if your poor you will stay poor. I feel that history is slowly coming full circle. In a series of books by Tad Williams (Otherland) several of his characters live in the U.S. in small walled suburbs, patrolled by private security forces. He doesnt make out that the rest of the city is in chaos but merely that the crime rate is huge and people who can afford it live in relative safety. The lifestyle im talking about is a class trap. If your poor you cant afford to pay the costs of education so you will never be able to get a job that would pay you enough to rise above your neighbour. If your rich, well you just have to look at how the lower classes live to give you an incentive to study hard so you to can afford to live in the way you have grown accustomed to.
Empires and civilizations, the way of life that ancient people knew in most cases began to crumble and decay, to become decadent and lazy. I feel that is whats happening now. When I was a child I could walk down the street in the evening passed rows of glass fronted shops that had closed for the day. You dont see many of those any more. most shops these days have the roller shutter type door. They have these because in the span of my life things such as vandalism and crime have got steadily worse. Buses, in certain areas, refuse to travel after 6 pm, whilst the drivers sit behind attack proof screens. Old people and children seem to be on the news costantly after being attacked or the like. It sounds so cliched to say this but things just werent like that when I was younger. To be honest the future I can see runs along the lines of Robocop or the first Madmax.
I dont think Ill ever get to see a man on mars in my lifetime. Space travel is a huge expense, in the 60's and 70's it could be justified as a propaganda tool but now with the cold war over it just seems to those in power to be a waste of resources. Why put a man in space anyway when we can send robotic probes to do the job for us. The romance has gone from it all. Its all seen in cold hard cash and the possible profit it could make. If at all, we do get into space I can imagine it running along the lines of the Alien universe. No gleaming panels or carpeted floors, just a purely functional craft.
Ok, now ive put a downer on the subject, I have to say that if I could choose what future vision I would like live in it would have to be The Nights Dawn universe (Preferably before the events in the novels )

 

[Dave]

Here's a couple of combined future history/alternative timeline websites to mull over:

http://www.othertimelines.com
http://www.novanotes.com/futhistory.htm

 

[KernalK]

Asimov, anyone?*

Quite frankly dystopias** have always been easier to imagine AND implement than utopias**. In fact, in a particulary apposite development of the series, Roddenbury's utopia was revealed as the veneer that it was, scarcely existing inside the Federation and Starfleet, let alone outside. DS9's Section 31 was in my opinion endemic of the kind of way-of-life that the Federation imposes on both its members and its proselytes.

Babylon 5 for me is rather realistic, in that it acknowledges the darker elements of human society, whilst representing some kind of hope. Earth: Final Conflict appears to be a decaying utopia, but I'm not sure how that resolves itself - sci-fi in the UK can be cruel to its viewers! (DS9 is only on after 01:00)

I suppose to make a watchable sci-fi you have to appeal to either the hope of the viewer or the realism. Or both?

K.


* this title has nothing to do with my post really
** I'm sure there is a proper plural for these, but I can't find it as I post this.

 

[CatBar]

I'd love to live on the planet Aurora in Asimov's robot novels.

There'd be peace, space, beautiful countriside, one's own detached house in lovely grounds, lots of nice quiet robots to protect me, do all the boring chores etc, no neighbours too near, no cars except little airfoil things with automatic doors, and the food sounds really good and there'd be the dishy Daneel Olivaw for eye-candy and who would never upset me or get on my nerves like people do!

 

[Moonbat]

I like the idea of a Star Trek type utopia and especialy the Ian M Bank's culture. Human beings just enjoying life and computers/minds looking after everything.

I think the question here is what makes writing or planning a sci-fi universe really interesting but hard also. It's easier to plan a universe if you wipe the slate clean with a nuclear war. You can ignore history and don't have to research so much of modern technology predictions. The star wars and Culture aren't actually humans, they have no direct link with Earth, so apart from the obvious hominid-ness of the characters they don't have the history to deal with.

I like universes with a healthy mix of both, utopia is something only the rich can afford, but the simplest lives are the most rewarding.

 

[manephelien]

I'm wondering why this thread is in the Asimov forum?

I like reading dystopias, but our current world is near enough one to give one pause. So when I want to escape reality, I'd much rather grab a more optimistic book to read.

What am I hoping for? A future with a true galactic federation of intelligences, although probably some kind of energy beings rather than flesh-and-blood. These would be rather rationalistic in outlook, and would prevent any person or race with superstitious beliefs from joining. That would either cure humanity of its greatest sickness -religion- rather quickly, or else we'd be left to perish. Of course, with the chosen few without religion joining. Then the rest of the Earth could blow itself up.

 

[sarakoth]

I think there will be a world war in the future but hopefully, missile defense technology will prevail over nukes.After the world war, humans will concentrate on rebuilding and expanding. I envision a future where Earth is overcrowded so human build huge floating cities and start mining the resources on the ocean floor.As for the energy problem, fossil fuels will last for several more decades. I envision a future where every city has fusion reactors powering them.