There are two sides to science fiction in just about every form it takes. One side is the thrill of adventure, bringing exotic beings and locations, fantastic technologies, and conflicts that put planets, galaxies, or the whole universe at risk.
But on the other side are the questions that sci-fi asks: who are we? Where did we come from? Where are we going? What is the mind and what forms can it take? What does it mean to be human?
Stepping outside of specific stories for a moment, I’m reviewing–for the sake of such questions–a nonfiction book called Science Fiction and Philosophy, which should raise questions for any good reader or writer of sci-fi material, if not for anyone who thinks deeply about Life, The Universe, and Everything.
Part I: Could I Be In A “Matrix” Or Computer Simulation?
This section of essays looks at the nature of reality and the “Matrix Hypothesis” put forward most recently by the film of the same name: that the world as we perceive it is not entirely real, but a computer simulation run by outside forces.
Excerpts are taken from Socrates and Descartes, and we get a few looks at the “brain in a jar” thought experiment. But the centerpiece of this section is the essay “The Matrix As Metaphysics” by David J. Chalmers. In it, Chalmers states that the Matrix Hypothesis is a skeptical one (i.e., one we can’t ever be certain about) and that even if we were to learn about the simulated nature of our world, nothing about our lives would really change except or one or two beliefs.
I found this section to be a little slow to start with, but as I read on, I felt more interested about the hypothesis being discussed. With no disrespect to the first Matrix film, I suppose that I wouldn’t be so quick to attack the machines when I consider that the entire human race is dependent on this simulation and that the alternative is to live in a barren wasteland that might never be reclaimed. The real question would be how to interact with the machines and reach some kind of compromise, so that we depend on one another instead of trying to dominate.
Part II: What Am I? Free Will And The Nature Of Persons
The essays in this portion deal with consciousness as existence and the question of whether free will exists or whether everything that exists is predetermined.
Many of the essays look at the “brain in a vat” thought experiment as a frame for their discussions of consciousness and attachments to our bodies. Ray Kurzweil contributes the first of his two papers in this book, discussing human identity as something that can expand beyond its current physical boundaries. Michael Huemer also examines determinism and free will through the lens of the story Minority Report.
For me, the highlight of this section was the essay on “Personal Identity” by Eric Olson. It raises some good questions about how we define our consciousness in a “Psychological Approach” and how that approach doesn’t handle certain issues very well. It also helps that these questions later come up in the next section.
Part III: Mind: Natural, Artificial, Hybrid, And “Super”
These essays look at issues regarding artificial intelligence, cyborgs, and the Singularity hypothesis about technological development.
To start off, there’s a reprint of the short story “Robot Dreams” by Isaac Asimov, examining the evolution of consciousness in robots. We then get a few papers that put forward a computational view of the human brain and how that applies to artificial intelligence. We also get Andy Clark and his view of modern human beings as “Cyborgs Unplugged” and Ray Kurzweil explaining the hypothesis behind the Singularity that should occur once we develop a “superintelligence” through exponentially rising computing power.
My favorite paper in this section was Andy Clark’s, since talking about cyborgs is always a good way to get my attention and I like the idea that we’re already “evolving” through our relationship with technology. I was also interested in Kurweil’s paper since the Singularity is a concept that’s often confused me. But now that I have a better understanding of it, I can honestly say that I don’t buy the hypothesis. It’s a wonderful idea, but it assumes that the growth of human technology and computation will go unhindered when there could be any number of unpredictable crises or flaws that could prevent the “inevitable” rise of a superintelligence.
Part IV: Ethical And Political Issues
These papers examine the pace of scientific research and technological development and how moral and ethical thinking applies to those areas.
Susan Schneider, the editor for this book, contributes her own perspective in looking at the transhumanist perspective and its implication for those people who do not accept “enhancement.” There’s also perspective on the dangers of genetic engineering and the ethical treatment of AI and androids, regardless of whether or not they’re classified or accepted as equal to human beings.
Besides Schneider’s analysis, I also liked the essay written by Susan Leigh Anderson, where she examines the Three Laws of Robotics in the context of the Asimov story “The Bicentennial Man.” Anderson ultimately concludes that the Three Laws, while useful for Asimov’s stories, would not work so well for real-world androids, being open to abuse and degrading behavior. It’s a great way to think about androids beyond a rigid code and to take a broader altruistic attitude than to enforce the simplistic laws.
Part V: Space And Time
The last essays discuss the possibilities and paradoxes of time travel, starting it all with a reprint of Ray Bradbury’s story “A Sound of Thunder.”
Other writings look into the movement of time itself, classic cases like the Grandfather paradox, the possibility of time travel working in coordination with parallel universes, and Richard Hanley’s perspective on “Science Fiction As Epistemology.”
For the most part, the time travel papers were dense but interesting. Hanley’s essay was also interesting, although I have some issue with his view of God as being on par with the idea of the Mysterious Entity running the Simulation we take to be the world. It’s not that I think he’s wrong, but that he rests too much certainty onto the idea, even if he might be a little tongue-in-cheek about it.
Final Verdict: It’s Not An Easy Read, But The Issues Are Worth It
Science fiction covers a lot of ground, from time travel to robots and aliens to questions of identity and social progress. I would only recommend this book for the issues and questions it raises rather than answers. I don’t suggest that it be used as a guide for what stories ought to be written, but how we ought to think about the implications we present in the stories we write. Science fiction must be seen as a fountain of possibilities rather than a stack of tired clichés.
—
Bibliography: Science Fiction and Philosophy: From Time Travel To Superintelligence. Ed. Susan Schneider. Blackwell Publishing, 2009.
Mr. Rhapsodist 