More often than not, a writer - fiction or nonfiction - who displays a strong opinion or emotion, is talking about what they -want- to be true. In that context, how are we to take the idea of science fiction writers who posit alien species with perfected societies, who have overcome war and material avarice, and who, sagelike, come to save humanity from itself? What about a universe in which humanity, with all its flaws and all of our horrific history, gets to thr stars and is known in short order as the most ethical, rational, compassion-minded species in known space? What would this say about such an author? That they were unrealistic? Or that progress is a gradient that we have, as a species, slowly been moving to the better end of? I think one of the surest signs of an undeveloped worldview is the knee-jerk I hate people reaction to events, the cynical-chic faith in humanity meme that inevitably shows up whenever some fresh tragedy spins into the news cycle. It isnt in any way useful or productive to think of these events as markers of humanitys inadequacy. In fact, every sign suggests that the more aware we are od these outrages, the less willing we are as a global society to tolerate them. Humanity has a hell of a lot to offer. The key is not to deaden our ears, but to listen and watch, ans pay attention much more keenly now than we previously did as a species. Old oppressions are being thrown off, new ideas are being promoted that see the species as a unified ideal rather than a collection of worthy and not. Amplify those, rather than just assuming that were doomed every time something bad happens. Those SciFi writers assumed that the only thing that could save humanity was an enlightened outside force. I say we can save ourselves.
Posted on: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 23:43:15 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015