My interpretation of psychohistory is simple: it's science fiction about what science fiction itself would look like if it turned into a real science.
It has all the things science fiction does (attempts to predict the future, large scale social dynamics scenarios, etc), plus a hint of what science used to look like in the public perception at that time.
It's kind of provocative. That line of thinking implies science fiction authors need to be more science and less fantasy (exactly what Asimov himself did by starting to more textbooks and less characters).
Psychohistory results partly from Isaac Asimov's brief flirtation with Marxism... Because Marxists have long had the notion that they can predict future tendencies in scientific terms, even though they keep having to retcon the results when things go differently than expected.
Now instead of the Foundation series' Hari Seldon, we have the WEF's Yuval Noah Harari, who is set up as some kind of scientific oracle for our past and future.
This post is sort of ignorant. Bro needs to learn NetMF style ultrarapid eigendecomposition)matrix factorization algorithms, read The Nature of Order, and touch grass.
3 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 15.6 ms ] threadIt has all the things science fiction does (attempts to predict the future, large scale social dynamics scenarios, etc), plus a hint of what science used to look like in the public perception at that time.
It's kind of provocative. That line of thinking implies science fiction authors need to be more science and less fantasy (exactly what Asimov himself did by starting to more textbooks and less characters).
Of course it will never exist.
Now instead of the Foundation series' Hari Seldon, we have the WEF's Yuval Noah Harari, who is set up as some kind of scientific oracle for our past and future.