[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 7 KB, 309x163, imagesCATRQD5N.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3573116 No.3573116 [Reply] [Original]

Why is it that fiction tends towards a moral of "some things we were not meant to know"? Or "we shouldn't mess with things we don't understand"? This strikes me as an infuriatingly anti-science position - a lot of the problems in these works could be averted with better security.

>> No.3573142

Because it's not written by scientists. It's written by writers, and by artists to a lesser extent. I say the "science goes horribly wrong" thing is a trope nowadays and there is little honest fear of science behind it. The real fear of technology and science probably comes from a long time ago.

The original Planet of the Apes wasn't anti-science though. Even staple sci-fi stories aren't anti-science. Star Wars, Star Trek (very pro-science), 2001 (cautious but ultimately very optimistic).

>> No.3573141

Blame Mary Shelley.

>> No.3573148

You're reading into it too much, OP. People fear what they do not understand. It makes for an easy plot.

>> No.3573162

Yeah OP, if that's what you got from watching The Rise of the Planet of the Apes, then you should watch it again. If anything, the protagonists are in support of drastic transhumanism.

>> No.3573163

>>3573148
One of the protagonists outright says "there are some things we weren't meant to change" - who says what we're *meant* to do? We're homo sapiens, our THING is using the power of our minds to change things.

>> No.3573165
File: 611 KB, 960x1299, 2009-09-22-caveman_science_fiction.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3573165

obligatory

>> No.3573172

>>3573162
How does one reach the conclusion of "pro-transhumanism" from Rise of the Planet of the Apes? Not quibbling, just curious.

>> No.3573176

>>3573163
Point of order: the woman said that. Women can't be protagonists.

>> No.3573179

>>3573116


WHY DO YOU FEEL THE NEED TO PLAY GOD? YOU CAN'T PLAY GOD AND YOU'D BE STUPID TO DO SO.


But in all seriousness it's because of a combination of placing the unknown under false agency and the evolutionary advantage of being afraid of patterns that have not been done before.

Science is, by nature, evolutionarily novel, while most people try to work under what is evolutionarily familiar.

>> No.3573181

Because people love making he argument from ignorance in order to deter science.

>> No.3573183

Event Horizon - Men trying to reach the stars go to hell.

28 Days Later - "Immoral" experiments releases zombie plague upon humanity.

Any movie where anyone ever says "There are some things man was not meant to X" is an instant bonerkiller to me.

>> No.3573187

>>3573163
Science gone wrong is a very common theme in fiction. It can produce any number of antagonistic situations. The characters within such fiction don't need to make general statements about how science shouldn't do something, but the alternative statement, "we should have added another lock to the door", doesn't sound as profound.

>> No.3573189

>>3573172
It was told from the perspective of an enhanced ape and his creator, and how they overcome the constraints of society to make room in the world for the newly sentient species.

>> No.3573204

>>3573183
>Event Horizon
God I hated that movie. A universe devoted to pain? Why not a universe devoted to itching?

>28 Days Later
What? The scientists were trying to cure a natural disease. It was PETA that destroyed the world.

>> No.3573207

>>3573183

The experiments aren't what release the infection. It's the hippy PETA tards that release it.

>> No.3573216

>>3573204
>>3573207
>It's the hippy PETA tards that release it.
True. But felt like the audience was meant to side with the PETA tards.

>> No.3573226

>>3573216
Why in the hell would you think that? The scientist was begging them not to touch the cages and they just pushed him out of the way. You should watch it again.

>> No.3573228

>>3573216

What you feel is happening your own life is what you projected onto the movie. You're probably not a fan of PETA and so you felt the movie was trying to send some sort of animal-rights message. The opening scene isn't long enough to sympathize with anyone. Some goons break in a lab, the monkeys get mad, they open the cage, and boom that's it. Other than the monkey strapped down and forced to watch TV (which is a metaphor) you don't see abuse.

>> No.3573232

It's a response to the dangers of radiation and various other pollutants, they were putting radioactive materials in bottled water and to make watches glow in the dark for years, then there were cases like thalidomide and environmental disasters.

As usual the media hypes everything, the message that we need to check shit out before using it on a large scale is important.

>> No.3573236

>>3573226
Oh you know how people are. If a guy in a white coat creates something that could under any circumstance be considered dangerous it's scientist hybris god-playing that man was not meant to do.

>> No.3574595

I usually don't mind the "anti science" or "evil science" movies if they are actually good,

but what ruins it is when i visit my mums place each year and listen to her go on about science being evil, first im like wait you actually believe that shit, then I have to explain to her why homeopathy is bullshit

>> No.3574997

>>3573163

There are some things man was not meant to keep in his pants.

>> No.3575010

>>3573116
So you're happy the nazi's figured out how long they can submerge jews in cold water before they die?