Science Fiction is not Science Fantasy

[Anonymous No.11917454]

The term "Science fiction" was tarnished by Hollywood and the stupidity of americans, using the term for science fantasy novels and movies.

2001: A Space Odyssey is a Science Fiction movie.

Blade Runner is a Science Fantasy movie.

Science fiction is creating stories based on existing technologies and scientifical breakthroughts.

Science Fantasy is creating stories based on thoughts of future technologies and future scientifical breakthroughts.

Therefore claiming that science not following science fiction is a bad sign is truthful.

Thank you, that is all.

[Anonymous No.11917457]

This. Fuck onions wars. Ryk Brown does sci-fi good.

[Anonymous No.11917489]

>>11917454
I think /lit/ would be a better board for this discussion, but you bring up a good point. You have the right distinction, but your terms are abit different than what most people use. You say Science Fiction vs. Science Fantasy, while the common names for the distinction would be Hard Science Fiction vs. Soft Science Fiction. 2001: A Space Odyssey would be Hard Science Fiction (baring the stargate sequence and what happens after it), and Blade Runner would be Soft Science Fiction.

Science Fantasy is usually reserved for Science Fiction that intentionally incorporates supernatural elements more commonly found in Fantasy.

>Therefore claiming that science not following science fiction is a bad sign is truthful.
What do you mean by this exactly?

[Anonymous No.11917493]

during the cold war, we needed to raise kids into scientists, so we had science fiction

today, during the economic war, we need to raise kids into brain dead consumers who don't know what they're purchasing operates, we have science fantasy

[Anonymous No.11917520]

>>11917489
>What do you mean by this exactly?

Means we are incompetent when it comes to science and far from the ideal.

As we I mean politicians and the people that vote for them.

Dead iconic scientists would be rolling in their graves if they knew that America prefers spending billions on aircraft carriers on numerous than to pay for space missions.

[Anonymous No.11917538]

>>11917520
>pending billions on numerous aircraft carriers**

[Anonymous No.11917601]

>>11917454
what a low IQ take. asimov's stories and 2001 both contain numerous imaginary future technologies and science.

[Anonymous No.11917614]

>>11917454
Would The Martian by Andy Weir be science fiction or science fantasy?

[Anonymous No.11917641]

>>11917601
Asimov was also a pervert who would have been #metoo out of existence if he were alive today.

[Anonymous No.11917713]

>>11917641
>#metoo
You can't be metoo'd if you don't give a fuck. The only power #metoo has is fear. If you don't let that fear control you, then #metoo has no power over you. I doubt Asimov would fear a bunch of ugly women on twitter. No idea why men today do, though. I've noticed a severe lack of conviction, of "backbone", from people in power the last few years. We need to stop worrying about how a small group of people who already hate you would think about something you do and instead act on what you think is right, without fear of a "cancel mob." If #metoo called Asimov a pervert, and if he was one and alive today, he should respond with "I love all pretty woman equally", instead of "I'm sorry please don't ruin my life even though you want to regardless but you have no power to but I'm letting you corner me into ruining my own life oh please." If Trump had some conviction, we wouldn't be in this Covid-19 mess and the economy would be fine. Turns out he was just another spineless politician. Oh well. One thing though is I will never let "cancel culture" tell me what's wrong or right. And I urge you to be the same.

[Anonymous No.11917736]

>>11917601
I think Blade Runner (especially the movie) is a bad example. Androids and their impact on society and consciousness is sci-fi.
You have three main courses for sci-fi as i see it.
Futuristic tech.
Science minded story telling. (Sort of made by and for scientists)
Impact of futuristic tech on human thought, progress and society.
Dune's a better one. Take out the planetary systems and spaceships powered by spice and you could have the same story done in a fantasy setting. Not that Dune is bad.
>>11917520
There are sci-fi stories about just this very topic. Imagination sees further than science can keep up with. The 1950's and 60's really were a peak in space travel in many ways. We haven't even sent humans further than the moon yet. So it's hard to keep writing as if we have.

[Anonymous No.11917747]

>>11917713
Embarrassing.

[Anonymous No.11917759]

>>11917747
They'll come for you soon, simping won't help.

[Anonymous No.11917771]

>>11917713
>The only power #metoo has is fear.
Yeah, or getting you blackballed and having your reputation and career ruined.

[Anonymous No.11917781]

>>11917771
>blackballed and having your reputation and career ruined.
This is only the case if you admit to a wrongdoing. Their voice is not as loud as you think.

[Anonymous No.11918198]

>>11917454
>Science Fantasy is creating stories based on thoughts of future technologies and future scientifical breakthroughts.
No, science fantasy is the combination of fantasy and sci-fi tropes. Star Wars is an example of science fantasy because it's essentially a medieval fantasy story set in space.

[Anonymous No.11918204]

>>11918198
It's space opera.

[Anonymous No.11918238]

>>11917454

lol what? so basically sci-fi can never be set the future.

[Anonymous No.11918240]

>>11917520

ye but those billions spent on useless crap are making kikes rich.

[Anonymous No.11918244]

>>11917454
>2001: A Space Odyssey is a Science Fiction movie.
>Science fiction is creating stories based on existing technologies and scientifical breakthroughts.
Interplanetary travel and general AI were not existing technologies at that time, though, they were near future breakthroughs that were popular in fiction with writers like Asimov.

[Anonymous No.11918272]

>>11917781
>This is only the case if you admit to a wrongdoing.
Tell that to Aziz Ansari.

[Anonymous No.11918276]

>NOOOO YOU ARENT USING THE RIGHT WORD!!!!
current state of this board

[Anonymous No.11918281]

>>11918276
>of this board
How is that rock? Is it comfy under there?

[Anonymous No.11918320]

Those are not how I've seen those terms defined anywhere else, and it is not how I view them. If science fiction only relied on current technology it would be pretty pointless. That is just a documentary.
The line between science fiction and science fantasy has to do with our understanding of the laws of reality. Science fiction describes things that are possible but futuristic, while science fantasy describes things not possible but with a veneer of science.
Science fiction
>2001
>Blade runner
>Alien
Science fantasy
>FTL
>Time travel

[Anonymous No.11918420]

>>11918320
>>FTL
>In layman's terms, the Alcubierre Drive achieves FTL travel by stretching the fabric of space-time in a wave

[Anonymous No.11918431]

>>11918420
Those are possibly attainable future technologies. I would say it quits being sci fi when it veers more to a different category. And then you have the stuff set in the future and the author does not even attempt to include a realistic future technology but creates some random unkown material or knowledge to achieve crazy things. Like... a fantasy novel.

[Anonymous No.11918435]

>>11917454
there's a magic formula which turns science fantasy into science fiction and this formula is "because of quantum physics, literally anything"

[Anonymous No.11918607]

>>11917713
>I doubt Asimov would fear a bunch of ugly women on twitter. No idea why men today do, though.
As opposed to attractive women that should be feared?

[Anonymous No.11920137]

>>11918420
Alcubierre drive kind of blurs the line. It is theoretically possible, but requires the existence of exotic matter (matter with negative mass)

[Anonymous No.11920277]

>>11917759
Cringe.