When we think of science fiction, we always think of an extraordinary future scenario. Sometimes we discover plausible or predictable developments, and sometimes we find them inconceivable, surprising or unbelievable. But how do we really see things? Let’s look at them from different angles.
In this century, technology continues to amaze. I remember looking forward to drawing lessons at primary school. I liked trying to create something, because technological developments are like that, they stimulate the imagination and make assumptions.
In one of these classes, our teacher asked us to draw the technological devices that we predicted might exist in the future. Strangely enough, all my dreams that did not exist then are now either here or very likely to be achieved. Was it because I didn’t push my imagination hard enough, or was it really the effect of the exponential development of technology?
Photo by Guillaume Bourdages on Unsplash
Sometimes I think back to ancient times. Although mankind has always had the imagination and curiosity to fuel it, there could be a limit. When the needs of the time are generally focused on survival, people tend, or are forced, to put such feelings and thoughts on the back burner. This means that the task of imagination is left to the wildest of the wild, or those minds that are open to developments. These are the ones whose names we remember.
But what is striking here is that while the difficulty of human survival seems to have periodically remained the same, imagination has gradually increased. So much so that we can normalise thoughts that may sound strange. The reason for this is that the concept called science has spread to the general public. Because science is a concept based on imagination, questioning, experimentation, error and repetition, the idea of crossing boundaries is both possible and pleasurable.
Inevitably, the imagination required to achieve the unbelievable or to unravel the unknown increases. As technology sheds light on this, the enlightened minds of centuries past multiply and development accelerates.
And so science fiction was born. It is not a new genre, of course, but it is a constantly evolving one. The best thing about it is that it will never die. Even though different genres come and go, science fiction will continue to exist because it illuminates the structure at the core of humanity. Because whenever we assume it is over, we will see technological and scientific developments. We will continue to be surprised and amazed. Of course, it would be naive to think that this will not continue.
Photo by Kevin Oetiker on Unsplash
Having recently been exposed to news of technological developments in many fields, I felt the need to write an article of this genre. Our constant journeys into space are becoming more and more commonplace. Recently, a brand new set of VR glasses was introduced, and in fact this technology has been around for decades. However, it cannot be put into the desired structure and cannot be fully adopted. Technological developments are a bit like that, sometimes you can’t embrace them. It doesn’t matter how scientifically sound or cool it is.
In addition to our inconsistent relationship with virtual reality, I really liked a video I saw yesterday. You may have seen the film “Her”. It is about a virtual friend that accompanies a man and his different relationship with the virtual friend and leads us to do this kind of questioning from then to the future. In the video I watched, someone is doing just that, creating a virtual friend for himself with the help of similar programmes, in particular ChatGpt, where he can get help. I was both excited and frightened as I watched.
On the other hand, when I read the news about the first chip implanted in a human being by Neuralink company, I felt that everything was overlapping. The confluence of so many technological issues makes me feel like I am in a dilemma.
Photo by Vishnu Mohanan on Unsplash
It actually went something like this: I asked ChatGpt a question about humanity’s adoption of future technologies. I am concerned that the positives will outweigh the negatives. After all, with every technological advance comes vulnerability. So I argued with it over whether the emphasis would be on the positives or the negatives.
When I asked further questions, it stated that the answers it generated were generally positive because of its own design. When I repeated my question with this in mind, I saw that this time the answer emphasised both sides. It could no longer say that one could prevail over the other.
As human beings, we are more attracted to negative thoughts than to positive ones. Everybody wants to think positively when they embark on something new, but negativity is just as possible as positivity. Of course, I am speaking very superficially, but I am saying this to mention that a balance can take place here and that it will be very natural.
The thing is that negativity is also necessary and contributes to our development, just as it does for science. However, because we are not mechanical or digital individuals and have an emotional flow, the issues that affect us can be more negative. While the positives provide periodic relief, the negatives can recur from time to time. This can make people (understandably) more prone to negativity in general.
Coming back to the subject, I think the comfort that technology brings is also periodic. The goosebumps I used to get when I thought about these things as a child are no longer there. The Jetsons are outdated for a while now. But it always seemed like the kind of fiction that we could access a hundred years later. Or, to put it best, we used to say, “We’ll get there one day, but I don’t know when,” didn’t we? We don’t even feel the need to say that anymore, because deep down we know. Was I wrong to think that the limits of our imagination were getting wider and wider? Now I have the urge to think back to ancient times yet again: I wonder if they too felt a sense of technological finality or fulfilment?
Photo by Su San Lee on Unsplash
As science advances and technology develops, we have seen what human beings can achieve. This is a wonderful situation, but if we take it in the way I mentioned above (the habit we formed over time against those), it can also numb us. Even if I still take note of the mental ideas that come to my mind with pleasure, the thought that we will be able to access them tomorrow, because I have seen this happen over time, leaves me in a state of indifference. In short, I’m talking about not being able to fully imagine, isn’t that strange?
I am afraid that as long as we continue to be familiar with what the period brings, our imagination may begin to atrophy. Not being able to think of something new and getting the answer, “Oh, that’s been told in a couple of films ten years ago,” doesn’t sound very pleasant. It is good to be able to imagine, of course, but it is really frightening not to be able to add anything new to the imagination.
In this respect, my respect for science fiction novelists increases many times over every time I think about it. To be able to think of something for the first time, to put it into an “accurate” fiction, to give direction to the future, to see dreams come true in line with science and technology, or to develop by being inspired by these fictions even after years have passed, isn’t that wonderful?
To interfere with the genetic code of living creatures, to reach the bottom of the oceans or the vast darkness of space, to think about the time machine and the fictional lives in the lands travelled — how simple it seems now, doesn’t it? Just ask those who wrote it centuries ago. Of course, you have to find a time machine first.
Photo by Mohamed Osama on Unsplash
Science and technology will continue to advance unceasingly, almost acting as one. But how can we overcome humanity’s intellectual limitations? Are we capable of thinking as freely as the times demand? How did the visionary writers of the past achieve this? Do we really need the kind of digitalisation that science fiction novels talk about and that has been transferred to the screen? Or, as my favourite topic, are we just part of a simulation?
Although these two concepts (science and technology) are serious, their combination with fiction can sound equally frivolous. But this is wrong, quite wrong. Fiction, the product of our imagination, driven by our curiosity, illuminates the truth. It always has been and always will be, to whatever extent we make it so.
Let us conclude this article with the three laws of Sir Arthur Charles Clarke, one of the most respected figures in the science fiction genre (one of the three acknowledged fathers of science fiction):
1. When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
2. The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.
3. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
In addition, I leave an amazing link here for those who are interested, where you can get information about the future and beyond.
Articles that might interest you:
Comments