🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Jul31.151347.4335@bb1t.monsanto.com>, bjgaed@bb1t.monsanto.com writes:
> In article <1992Jul31.145333.21447@cs.yale.edu>, heintzelman-george@CS.YALE.EDU (George Heintzelman) writes:
>>>
>>>Why would anyone want to create a "logically consistent" fictional 
>>>world?  If the purpose of fiction (indeed, of all art) is to 
>>>illuminate truths about the world in which we live, what is the 
>>>purpose of fiction about such a world as the TAEIS project describes?
>>>To explore alien culture?  If you have a world in which everything is 
>>>logically consistent, then there is no mystery, there is nothing left 
>>>to explore.  *Everything is knowable.*  
>> 	Sheesh, talk about cynicism. Everything being consistent might
>> mean that everything is knowable (I'm not sure that it has to, but
>> I'll let it slide), but that doesn't mean that the characters
>> inhabiting that world, or those reading about it, know everything....
>> 	I hope THIS world is logically consistent. If it isn't, then
>> science may as well give up, and I'm out of a job...but humantiy, even
>> taken together, is FAR from knowing everything about it, I'm sure you
>> would agree.
> 
> On sober (?) reflection, perhaps I did over-react to that "logically 
> consistent" phrase.  However, since when is THIS world logically 
> consistent?  Perhaps on the macro scale much of the time, but there is 
> still chaos to contend with.  This does not put scientists out of a 
> job by any means.  There are still useful models which describe 
> physical systems pretty well.  But I think the idea that the universe 
> is logically consistent is an *assumption*.  If THIS world is 
> logically consistent then the *statisticians* are out of a job.  8{)
> 
Firstly, I don't get the connection to statistics.

Secondly, your interpretation of what everyone else means in their
postings when they say logical and internally self-consistent continues
to be unique and you will continue to be at odds with us over semantics
until you consider this:

Every author who is not writing a documentary is attempting to
create a logically self-consistent parallel universe. If I write
a story about a man named Robert who lives in New York in 1992 and
programs PC's, am I truly writing about the Earth as we know it? No,
unless by some miracle such a man exists and is exactly as I describe
him. Instead, I create a character that could possibly exist and a
series of events that could possibly happen in a world that is
identical to our own except that Robert exists.

You went on to ask what possible use it could have to write
about parallel worlds.  When one recognizes that all fictional
stories take place in parallel worlds with varying degrees of
similarity, the answer becomes obvious. They are food for thought
about what might yet occur in the actual world, and are moreso if
they don't contain glaring inconsistencies or impossibilities. An
example of such an inconsistent world is the one in which Superman
exists. How can there be a world which in all other respects is the
same as our own but in which a super being from another world
saves our skins in public all the time? Wouldn't that have an
effect on human politics and philosophy as well as history. Consider
for instance - would there ever again be war? -especially if Superman
is as pro-American as he is in the comics, America wouldn't have state
enemies. That's why Taeis is so interesting - it's an attempt to come
up with an alternate universe that withstands that kind of scrutiny.
-- 
=========================================================================
|Kyle A. Maschmeyer, B.Sc.		| No e-mail, please - not	|
|Programmer and student of linguistics	| configured to receive it.	|
|Sharecom Ind., Box 8, DeWinton, Alberta| Can respond to postings.	|
|Canada  Tel (403) 256-7466 days (MST)	|				|