Kopchak 1 Corey Kopchak English 101: Rhetoric Mr.

Newman 19 November 2013

Fictitious Predictor Science is an ever changing field. One day an idea can drive discovery; the next day it can be proven untrue. Science fiction often brings up ideas that toy with the imagination of the reader with the goal of entertaining an audience. These ideas often have not been discovered in the scientific field so far. These ideas have even been credited for starting scientists on to their paths of discovery, but this is not the authors initial goal. Over the years science fiction has foreshadowed many discoveries relating to science, which deals with facts; but science fiction is not an accurate predictor for science because the goals of the stories are to entertain and spur imagination. Science fiction is a genre of entertainment that has no bounds to reality. Writers can do what they want with the characters, setting, and, especially, the technology. All this control gives the writer power over the audiences imagination. All the ideas of the story seep into the readers mind, and the reader will often begin to wonder if some of the presented ideas are possible. Join this curiosity with the mind of a scientist, and one can begin to see a hypothesis form. James Gunn, the founding director of the Center for the Study of Science Fiction; a professor emeritus of English at the University of Kansas; and the author or editor of 42 books, says, One rule of invention: before you can invent it, you have to imagine it. So science fiction does not predict or foreshadow discoveries, as much as it imagines them. As Gunn continues, he lists examples of science fiction being credited with inspiring inventions: Lake, the inventor of the ocean-going

Kopchak 2 submarine, attributed his inspiration to Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea (Gunn). This is an example of a monumental invention that was obviously influenced by stories, but the author never intended to predict this invention; he was just exploring his own imagination. Science fiction exploded in popularity when the United States made a goal to reach the moon in the 1960s. Space became the playground for science fiction writers; but as soon as NASA landed on the moon, the moon did not have the same mystical quality as when it was just a figure in the night sky. Therefore, science fiction writers began focusing on destinations such as Mars. This diverted attention further discredits the prediction hypothesis; writers are not predicting a Mars landing; they are just building off the excitement of the space race and directing it towards the next closest astronomical mass. In reality, science fiction is not scientific fact. Many of the articles in this room for debate focus on the correct predictions, but Gunn explains that the predictions are only correct about once out of every nine ideas. For an example of an idea that never came into existence, Daniel H. Wilson, the author of Robopocalypse and Wheres My Jetpack?: A Guide to the Amazing Science Fiction Future that Never Arrived, wonders where the atomic train is that should be shuttling him through the underwater city in which he lives. Today, no such device nor place exists. Back to Gunn, he continues his argument, stating that these are good odds in the prediction industry; but one in nine is not good enough for the science industry. Only absolute facts are accepted in science, and one in nine is nothing more than luck. David G. Hartwell, a senior editor at Tor Books, is the author of Age of Wonders: Exploring The World of Science Fiction and The Hard SF Renaissance and a co-editor of the Years Best SF series, summarizes this best when he says, To a great extent, science fiction is not prophetic or predictive literature, but over the decades sometimes authors get it right. Hartwell, a man who is

Kopchak 3 involved with choosing the best science fiction publications of the year, explains that the genres goal is to entertain an audience, which is why science fiction is still, in fact, fiction. Fiction tells stories that are still in the control of the authors imagination. Other science fiction authors have cited contemporary science as their inspiration. Heather Masri, teacher of interdisciplinary courses in Liberal Studies at New York University; the editor of Science Fiction: Stories and Contexts and the author of a forthcoming book about the science fiction writer Connie Willis, explains that Mary Shelley, author of Frankenstein, the first science fiction novel: was inspired in part by the recent experiments of Luigi Galvani, who produced muscle twitches in dead frogs by applying electric shocks. Sheree Rene Thomas, author of Shotgun Lullabies: Stories & Poems, edited the anthology Dark Matter: A Century of Speculative Fiction From the African Diaspora, explains, Even Mary Shelleys Frankenstein is said to have foreshadowed test tube babies. As stated earlier, Shelley based her story off scientific research that was being conducted while she was writing the book. So the book that started this predictive science fiction did not predict anything itself. Shelly was just building off the science that was already there. What do others think? Some people believe that science fiction produces new technology; an example would be from the television show Star Trek. Going back to the original series, when you look at 45 years ago, look at the communicator they used, Denise Okuda said. Then fast forward and look at what we are using today: flip phones (Foresman). Other inventions first seen on Star Trek might be memory cards, or USB flash drives first seen on the data chips used on the original Enterprise.

Kopchak 4 This belief is incorrect. Star Trek started in 1966; the same time the space race was raging. It is fair to assume that Star Trek was influenced greatly by the space race. Much of this technology can also be found in early NASA equipment and star trek simply built off of it. It is difficult to argue that science fiction is an accurate predictor of science when it is based off science. Science fiction authors are rarely correct in their predictions. This inaccuracy is not a dilemma for the authors whose purpose is to entertain an audience. I concede that there is a connection between science and science fiction and that science fiction has inspired some of the land mark, scientific discoveries, but one is incorrect to use science fiction and the ideas of an author that, often, knows little about the science of their stories as a predictor for scientific discovery. When an author writes a science fiction story, they do not care what the scientific community will hypothesize from their work; they are looking to entertain an audience.

Kopchak 5 Works Cited Foresman, Chris. "How Star Trek artists imagined the iPad 23 years ago." arstechnica. arstechnica, 9 Aug. 2010. Web. 18 Nov. 2013. Gunn, James. "Before Inventing, Imagining." Room for Debate. New York, 29 Sept. 2011. Web. 18 Nov. 2013. Hartwell, David G. "Future History." Room for Debate. New York Times, 29 Sept. 2011. Web. 19 Nov. 2013. Masri, Heather. "The Prediction of the Possible." Room for Debate. New York Times, 29 Sept. 2011. Web. 19 Nov. 2013. Thomas, Sheree Renee. "The Ominous and the Hilarious." Room for Debate. New York Times, 29 Sept. 2011. Web. 19 Nov. 2013. Wilson, Daniel H. "The Atomic Oen That Never Was." Room for Debate. New York Time, 29 Sept. 2011. Web. 19 Nov. 2013.