Deep thought Friday

Another DtF via Mr Clarke, with a warm-up here.

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.         Arthur C. Clarke

Is "advanced" the right term? If we perceive time as linear, are we mistaking the nature of change, seeing it as progress? Seeing what was or could have been as failed? Is our thinking on science a teleology, or teleological argument, with science the deity? Would 'sufficiently unfamiliar' be more accurate? Could elsewhen than our future hold unfamiliar technology and our age be 'backward'?

_

Writers and the world

Thanks to Bibliophile Stalker I found a set of interview excerpts running from 1987 to 2001, with Douglas Adams, Isaac Asimov, Arthur C. Clarke, J. G. Ballard and Kurt Vonnegut. I recommend them to anyone wanting a look into their worlds and ours.

If that interests you, and Ballard's thinking in particular, or simply life, I'd also point you to this post at Science Not Fiction on a possible hidden meaning in Pixar's films.

On the subject, mainly for 40K fans, is Auberon's interview with Dan Abnett at Digital Waaagh!, which focuses on Abnett's contribution to the shared universe.

And following up all of that, you might well like this, a stimulating post and discussion at Astrogator's Logs, on the nature of fantasy, coincidentally quoting Douglas Adams.

_ 

Deep thought Friday

Two possibilities exist: Either we are alone in the Universe or we are not. Both are equally terrifying.

Arthur C Clarke 

This has a little of the idea 'you're either with us or against us'. What if there is a third option, or multiple extra options, and the concept 'alone' is too simplistic, too anthropic?