I've always preferred the idea of evil gods. It's a lot easier to explain why bad things happen if some gods are actively messing with humanity. Though my favorite god from fiction is Crom, from Conan the Barbarian. He imbues you at birth with all the strength you'll need to face the world. Then he doesn't think about you again until you die and meet him. Because why would he need to do more, you already have everything you need to thrive.
Crom is a reference to Our human DNA, so long as you are not severely malnourished, your Human DNA makes you very capable, sadly men often do not see what they have or whatever
Yes, evil gods! I’m an incurable theist, but I’m also humanistic. I’m able to reconcile my theism with humanism by accepting the possibility that god or gods/goddesses do not have humanity’s best interests in mind.
@@EliaSarsenLoor maybe the creator wants us to become the creators and the only way we can is by going through hell first As saying goes before the tree can reach heaven its roots must reach hell. Our creator loves us
I definitely prefer gods like Crom--they're not exactly good or evil, they attempt to set up great things for the world but they make mistakes and are sometimes irreverent or stupid or not looking when they should be. I think that's the best possible theist explanation for why our world is the way it is. If a god made us in his image, then it passed on its own capability for empathy and love as well as its idiocy and short-sightedness.
@@MilitantAntiAtheism Morality can be applied to humans without the need of a God. I am an agnostic. I do not know if there is a God or isn't. I'm just a smart monkey, a piece of meat that thinks. I don't have the capacity to fathom, understand or confirm such existence. But I will act according to my moral and ethic beliefs. Do I enjoy seeing people sufrer? No, I don't enjoy that. It makes me feel bad. Then I will act towards an outcome that doesn't hurt people. It's actually beautiful to think that there's no need for an all powerful being watching over us to act in a good, moral way. Yadda yadda yadda.
@@MilitantAntiAtheism -Genetics and parental relationships -basic decency and sanitary problems -health issues and murder But please don't start a discussion under a funny joke, you can do it literally anywhere else
The Epicurus quote, "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" Is perfect for this video
Free will is a basis of this world. God has the ability to know what will you do but won't interfere unless you want him to. The salvation of your soul is your struggle and god will help you just enough so you can save yourself.
"[The San-Ti] confuse Humanity with seemingly miraculous events that undermine our civilizations focus on advancement through reason. In short, they play the role of God, but one jealous of the potential power of its subjects who uses cruel trickery for the sake of its own power." This made me think of The Tower of Babel.
There are a few parts of the OT where God gets nervous about human's abilities. When we eat from the apple it worries about also gaining immortality as well as knowledge. When the "children of God" start taking humans for wives (just before the flood). And the Tower of Babbel as you mentioned.... Its a theme of Genesis.
@@sidneyshaw9814 But God seems more worried about the interaction with the divine rather than it being humanity themselves doing it. If divine beings(angels, children of god etc) are taking human wives, that's not really humanities hubris, but God is worried all the same.
@@work3753 If you want to see humanity rise and stay on a high degree of development, you do it under God's blessing. All else is human initiative driven by a hubristic Luciferian doctrine that will destroy humanity wholesale in its ascent to proverbial godhood.
Speaking of fantasy, most contemporary fantasy authors are Mormons, because Mormon theology is so darn complex that you need a flow chart to understand it. The whole thing looks like something Brandon Sanderson could come up with, oh wait...
I keep thinking about the theological history in the Mistborn trilogy. It's such a passable answer to the question "how could the gospel of a real god be corrupted?" and it could only work for someone who believes in little-g god
I find it fascinating that his books read very agnostic-at least to me-even though he’s Mormon. I recently read an interview with him where he seemed to imply that he doesn’t think it matters what religion a person adheres to.
Never mind the spoilers, I'm so glad I watched this! I'm a sci-fi writer. The novel into which I've poured seven years of work is strongly premised on Clarke's Law (as you call it), and your new law of science fiction pithily explains why parts of my book read so much like religious literature. So I'm going to be quoting the McGrath-McCoy Law from here on out! And I'm going to start reading Cixin Liu's books at last!
Unfortunately this definition is just a sub-genre within sci-fi, not the entirety of the genre. I can’t remember the source, but someone described sci-fi as “change an aspect of reality and see how it changes society”. E.g. if one or more of faster-than-light travel, teleportation, telepathy, bionic implants etc. are possible what would change? No religion required, just human psychology and society (but religion can be, I repeat, an aspect that can be examined so is a sub-genre and *not* the whole genre).
I would decribe the books as being closer to Asimov in writing. Which is to say, more concerned with making sure the science checks out, even at the cost of character development. Also like Asimov, Liu Cixin excels when it comes to ideas and symbolism. In the books, the San-ti, also called the Trisolarians, are a metaphor for the China's modern day authoritarianism: demanding a the sacrifice of progress and scientific advancement while telling people that it's for their own good, that they're "protecting us from ourselves", while keeping them constantly under watch and demanding complete acquiescence. He uses the metaphor so well, that even people who don't understand China's current political structure can connect and understand. It's also why it can connect so easily to religious structures.
Its not that gods are evil. They were created by people who wanted to be evil like the gods they created. They are worshipped by people who want to be evil, free of responsibility and accountability, getting what they want like toddlers and hating on everyone outside the cult. It brings out the worst in people.
I think that’s similar to why people are drawn to fascist politicians. People see an authoritarian and have the feeling of “I want to be that guy” and it somehow turns into “I want that guy in charge of me”
Nice comment loser but will never disprove ma almighty loving tfp megatron. Never be true Dat he's not real when you should know to repeat to him ✝️🟣🟣🟣
This touches upon the reason why I'm an agnostic atheist in the first place. What is a god, exactly? It's just a question of power scale. The rest is mythology and moralism.
@@Motive4890how is pointing out a lack of consistency in usage of a word arrogance? Methinks demanding reverence for concepts YOU consider sacred for personal reasons is closer to the definition of the word.
Look, we know what is a man (a miserable little pile of secrets). If we assume we were created in god's image, AND that god is perfect, I propose that god is a "magnificent massive pile of secrets".
@@路易不懒惰 On this planet we are the most violent species period. We have killed each other more than other animals, and have a horrifying amount of determination and ambition. We want something, we will do anything to get it, no matter what. Humans are disturbing creatures.
@@ObsTho-100 Do you understand what that means? If we were to encounter another species out there with a similar level of awareness but had a completely different directive of life, we wouldn't care, at least in our current state of mind. Our ambitions and determination would lead to drastic implications, unless we learn to shift our own directive to something less aggressive and chaotic. We don't need more bloodshed....
I've been thinking a lot lately about how big shared universe like Star Trek and the MCU serve as post-modern mythology for a secular age. They're fiction, and we know they're fiction, but they still impart values and bring a sense of meaning and community. Consider Star Wars Day and First Contact Day.
Jedi dance clubs look harmless. Until they start swing steel pipes cover in glow in the dark spray paint. Usa has a gun problem, any time they bring up gun reform, more people buy guns. England has a matchet problem, .. Any time someone wants to crack down on natives playing Burhart wearing mail and slapping each other with blunt swords, more people start joining local Jedi glow stick dance clubs. Now once again, we have those Dune movies. May the 4th be with you.
This is fascinating. I wonder if this could make sense of the origins of Scientology. Hubbard's pivot from sci-fi novelist to religious leader always fascinated me.
Maybe I'm oversimplifying a bit, but didn't he just consistently go where the money is for his whole life? It's not like he was a particularily talented writer (or war hero, or spiritual leader for that matter)... He was just good at self-marketing, like that other guy what'shisname... Drumpf?!
3 Body presents valid criticism of religiosity, but I still prefer Lovecraft’s cosmicism when considering Clarke’s Law. It justifies the Trisolarans acting like children when inconvenienced by the human insect. It’s driven in even more when you get to the Dark Forest analogy and how one must act on the interstellar political stage.
You might also be interested in another book: The Killing Star by Pelligrino and Zebrowski. A quote from page 33 gives a flavor of this science fiction story: “The solar system had been "bug bombed," as if humankind had been nothing more to the Intruders than an insect infesting an apartment dwelling.”
That's what I thought with this one. If they are so advanced, and worried, why would they spend so many resources with such a complicated way to do away with us. Just poison the water. If they are so advanced, they could probably isolate it to only harm us. Or at least only the Great Apes. It seems very inept to me.
Many years ago I read a short story (IIRC) about an alien invasion of Earth. Humans find out that their "Christian" God (Jehovah) is finished with them & adopted the invaders as His "Chosen People". IOW, He is now the God of the Philistines and not the Jews.
That sentence is mad redundant, unless you don't know what a bug bomb is. Like saying "He cut me open with the butchers knife, as if I was just another piece of meat on his table" like yeah i got you at butcher knife bro
Snuff films are banned... I don't see you complaining about that. Banning something doesn't automatically make you bad. And even if it did, then you'd have to allow everything just to be a good person or have a good belief system. Either way, your comment is internally inconsistent and it makes you look hypocritical. The only exception to that is if you assume that "religions of all types" ban, all books except their own. But I have to assume you knew that no such religion exists...
...which also explains why all those "atheist" dictators back in the day weren't atheist at all. They just hated the competition from the more mainstream cults!
Short story by Harlan Ellison called "The Deathbird" (as best as I can remember it): The last man on Earth is walking across a shattered wasteland. After a time he's joined by someone he's never met before, but our original person is still the last man on Earth, because the new companion is rather different, probably not a man. Every hour or two a voice booms out of the sky saying something like, "Bow down before me!", or "I am the Alpha and the Omega!"... things of that nature. The companion is friendly, sensible and helps the man, who begins climbing to the top of a nearby mountain. After climbing for a while the loud voice booms out again, saying something like, "Worship me!" The man finally turns to his unusual companion and asks, "Was he always insane?" and the companion sadly nods his head and mournfully replies, "Yes, he's always been insane." We realize the booming voice comes from God and the kind companion is Satan. Love that story.
This is a really fun series. Get this as an audiobook... it is absurdly dense. I enjoy the series a lot but often put it down just because it is kind of a commitment.
The first book I read with a Wikipedia page on astrophysics concepts on the side. I don't regret it, coz I love reading astro on wiki, but next books I had audio books instead. I still wiki searched a few times.
@@Frodo1000000 Yeah it’s fun like that, I would say if what you did sounds like a bad time you might not like the book. This is kind of the point and to me the point of most sci-fi. In some ways it is why if we take it as religious text, it is a good one. We did better than a multitude of things that used to be science fiction. You can actually progress through the religious texts of science fiction. We don’t have telephones now we wrongly call pocket computers smart phones.
I was lucky enough to get to read the first book at work, and having no idea what it was going to be about. I didn't even know there would be aliens in it, someone just assured me that I should read it, and I loved it.
I'm reminded of the opening lines for Nier:Automata Everything that lives is designed to end. We are perpetually trapped in a never ending spiral of life and death. Is this a curse? Or some kind of punishment? I often think about the god who blessed us with this cryptic puzzle… and wonder if we’ll ever get the chance to kill him. The game story has various, on the nose themes about existentialism, nihilism, hope. Stuff that really stays with you.
love the amount of william blake in this video, super underrated as a religious figure, im deconstructing and slowly becoming an anarchist and blake is one of few paths i see to any possible future spirituality
@@casualthurs3243 Not sure what you're asking, But there are at least three definitions for anarchy. And most anarchists are referring more to the first, not the second or third. 1-- Absence of any form of political authority. 2-- Political disorder and confusion. 3+--Absence of any cohesive principle, such as a common standard or purpose.
You Tube has gone off the deep end and makes no sense when it comes to that. My only guess is that they are using AI and bad AI at that. It also makes no sense that someone can write a horrible comment, and if you rebut it YOU get deleted and the OG comment does not.
@@LittleBitofHopeToo2518yup they can't handle freedom. So they must make sure Dat unstoppable knowledge iz DISabled and 😶🔇. Y u think disgusting disabilities are really a actual thing
As a sci-fi author who has wholeheartedy used high-concept cultures and beings as explorations and expressions of theology, I wholeheartedly agree with the new law you've set up. I've had a lot of fun taking the different reasons why people engage with a religion or belief system and turning them into a series of sci-fi cultures in my book Arcforge: What Lies Beyond.
I very much appreciate the theological angle here as it's hard for me to view things through that lens after growing up without any religion or mysticism in my life. That being said, I feel like Wenjie is painted as villainous or destructive here and I disagree with that fundamentally. I don't even think the San Ti can be considered villainous honestly, not in comparison to humanity at least. They sort of beat us over the head with that, watching how we're willing to kill innocents in the name of our continued safety. Thats all the San Ti are doing. That's all Wenjie was willing to risk. Before we can call them evil we have to recognize that they're human, and if they're evil then so are we.
@markwazny6361 It may be the way Drew intended his analysis to read, but evil to most people isn't just a disagreement it's a moral stance that goes against the greater good. Wenjie and the San Ti aren't any more evil than a cat is when it hunts a bird, they're just doing the best to survive with the information they've got.
Another thing I love about the show is how it (inadvertently) shows the perspective of the vilified ancient Roman persecutors of Christianity; they were protecting their civilization from an evil cult.
I suppose the only difference between a cult and organised religion is acceptance. That said I wouldn’t ascribe such… concerned motives to the Roman emperors. Having a cult that proclaims that you aren’t the highest authority is a threat to your rule, especially if they claim to know it better.
@@rustkarl Not merely a cult that denies the divinity of the emperor, but a cult that invented the divinity of Jesus to make him a mock-Emperor, a false Caesar.
You’re projecting your own biases onto the authority of Rome. The Romans didn’t see Christians as an evil cult and Jesus was not meant to be a fake Caesar more like an anti-Caesar something wholly opposite of an earthly king.
@@trillestchrisxo Have you read any Roman sources on the persecutions of Christians? Of course not. Have you read the book of Revelation? It' blatantly the work of an anti-Roman evil cult. Apocalypticism is a cult of revenge, where an evil god is believed to be coming to destroy the world. There is no difference between fake Caesar and anti-Caesar, just like Christians do NOT distinguish between false Christ and anti-Christ. If Jesus was not meant to be a fake Caesar, when WHY did Christians invent the divinity of Jesus in the first place?
Very nice content. Ursula K. LeGuin is quoted as Sci-Fi NOT being prophecy, but instead, an examination of what is current, examined through the lens of what could be different, rather than what is. Both Sci-Fi and Fantasy allows us to look at human constructs and norms without our existing attachments, and as such free us to look at things differently.
I love how the series Stargate treats the topic of religion and the interesting parody on medieval Christianity that is shown with the Ori. Hallowed are the Ori!
Humanity’s super power is the ability to adapt quickly….. kind of an amazing power to have, but is also our weakness. We can get comfortable and complacent in bad situations we should be working our way out of instead of surviving in those conditions/situations.
Because were related to chimpanzees and share many of their behaviours. They throw poop at each other and then realiate by unaliving the other for doing the same thing back at them. Humans are just less hairy poop throwing chimpanzees
The creation of mythologies and religions are very complex, most of the times its not just making it up in an instant for no reason at all, but believing through your reasoning that there muct be a greater being that exists, mainly to explain the unexplainable. The belief in these beings and tales is sure to cause zealotry in some and to the ambitious and opportunistic people, to manipulate these beliefs for their interests, thus causing conflicts over who is right.
I’ve always found science fiction to be a tad strange as a genre, and this video helps clear it up. I always thought that science fiction always felt like… fantasy but with a different coat of paint. Fantasy and science fantasy just seems like different aesthetics and yet I was always told that science fiction was different in some immutable way. This video got me to realise that. Thanks for solving a bugbear I’ve had for years.
I disagree with the idea that science fiction is a form of religious literature. Because religious literature does not usually reflect on its themes with an open mind. For instance, it does not usually consider the possibility that their god is evil. It is true that SF and fantasy can create new myths, which people might approach with a religious mindset, in RL or within the fictional world, but that doesn't make the stories religious rather than about possible permutations of religion as a social phenomenon which is independent of the actual truth of their mythology. SF has a different perspective than religious literature.
Christianity defines evil in the first place, in the form of sin. Without a solid foundation for what is evil, then you don't have any evil; you just have decisions that are bad or good based on the culture. Which is as brittle and meaningless as it sounds.
@@learningagain4094 and that's not even solid because there are disagreements among christians over modern moral issues, each side believing they have it right and what's even more telling is that they will use secular arguments when trying to get their moral beliefs passed into law since it's obvious "god says so" or "it's a sin" can justify any moral position depending on the religious bubble you grew up in
You have given me a lot to think about with regards to theology. I was always taken to hindu mythology and scifi, alwaysconsidered them apart now that i think about it gives me a different perspective. Also thank you for reminding me to watch the 3-body problem, i had read all the books but forgot the series existed
A little different, especially in the characters. Liu Xicin is more Arthur C. Clarke/Isaac Asimov; concerned with the Big Idea. To adapt it they had to focus more on the characters- as well as making them more Western, but as someone who lives in Taiwan and is fairly immersed in Chinese culture, it's not too awfully bad.
I never expected you to discuss the demiurge and Gnosticism (The Apocryphon of John). I’m happily surprised. There is another text I believe is called “The Apocryphon of Adam” (I think that’s the title, it’s been a while, but it’s in the Nag Hammadi library. Adam is explaining to Seth why he serves a god he knows isn’t the true god. Out of fear and in slavery. *shivers*
Japan, its language, culture, and history are my academic forte, and spent several years of my childhood and adulthood here. I don't think there's anything particular about Japan or its religions that tie this theme to culture, though. That said, kami (the shinto gods) are many, and while seen as a force of awe, they aren't unambiguously seen as morally good, so the concept of an evil god is not as controversial here as it would be in some other places around the world.
Short answer: because it’s cool and god names are pretty badass Actual Answer: This is just like the natural endpoint of most fantasy games. Kill or become a god. It’s not a problem solely endemic to JRPGs. 4 out of the 5 elder scrolls games involve fighting, controlling, or defeating a god, just as a for instance. The God of War series has killing gods as its main premise, as another one. JRPGs simply have the most direct references. usually because the Abrahamic religions aren’t that popular over there comparatively and in Japanese culture there’s nothing taboo about putting deities into video games as enemies, playable characters, etc.
I have found the concept of a misotheist and/or dystheism faith to be rather interesting. One being the belief that God is evil and actively antagonistic, but it is our place to serve as lesser creatures, and the other being the same idea, but that it is our moral obligation to apose, or even destroy, God at every opportunity. The closest thing to this idea was the Word Barors from Warhammer 40K. A dystheist religion that says, yes, the Gods are evil, but they are the truth, and so despite our digust of them and the deeds they have us commit, we must do it, because it is the will of the true Gods. I have been working on a world building project made around the idea of miso/dys Deity and or panthion. And this video has given me an interesting insight on how to go about that better.
The fact that you don't see any dystheist religions in real life says a lot about nature of religion. Even "dark" religions like Sethianism are more about personal freedom and liberation from social conventions and less about doing evil things for evil god.
I think the difference between theology and science fiction is that scifi authors don’t ask you to believe their stories are literal truth upon which your salvation is hung (unless they are total egomaniacs, I’m looking at LRon there). This is a noncommittal engagement with “theology” in the sense that it deals with intelligent forces larger than mankind. But there is also scifi that doesn’t ask us to accept alien civilizations, that doesn’t ask us to confront cosmic forces. I’m speaking of the hardest of hard scifi. I don’t think anyone could read Andy Weir’s the Martian and come away with any sense that the book bears any resemblance to theology. I’m also not particularly fond of this type of scifi as I don’t think it really grapples with big ideas other than basic survival. I love when scifi explores the inexplicable in a realistic way in the same manner that I as an agnostic study religious theology as a kind of fantasy fiction. I have no commitment to any of it from a viewpoint on ultimate reality. I just love rolling around the ideas that humans have used to express their reaction to a reality beyond their comprehension. And if you think the alien as “evil god” metaphor ends with the first book, finish the third in the series. The smiting gets delightfully incomprehensible.
"I’m also not particularly fond of this type of scifi as I don’t think it really grapples with big ideas other than basic survival." The Martian in particular doesn't, but Artemis does and is (almost) as hard a sci-fi. And better written imo. The thing I really liked about both of them is, both the problems the characters face and the solutions make sense in a way you rarely find in more speculative sci-fi/fantasy.
I'm thinking of one of the classic speculative fictions, The Cold Equations. What if someone stowed away on a spaceship that had the survival of the crew precisely calculated into its weight/mass? No hard science, its the philosophical trolley problem in space. All will die, if all remain on the ship. If one dies, the rest will live. Does this hypothetical characterize religion? Religion might play a part in your values, but it seems more basic to humanity than far flung gods. If you're interested, there are a number of formal responses to the story. My favorite one to hate suggests a solution where all live, but requires body parts to be sacrificed. What is the minimum amount of flesh you need to live? Everything else is luxury.
@@Badficwriter Would this be a short story from the 1950’s? Sounds intriguing. The religious allegory probably depends on how it's written, but i could imagine it.
@@gnosismonkey Yes, by Tom Godwin in 1954. Reading an essay on it, the religious allegory might have to do with sacrifice. The stowaway willingly sacrifices themselves, not just to save the original crew, but because its an emergency medical supply ship that needs to save their loved one. One of the counter essays has the crew sacrificing major portions of their own bodies to make weight (I recall an allegory of Heaven characterizing something like that--as long as all helped each other as much as possible). I was struck by a comment of a man who empathized with the harshness. He could not make payroll because of embezzlers, so he had to fire dozens of people just before Christmas. If he tried to emulate the counter essay, everyone else in the company would have to lose a major part of their pay in order to avoid sacrificing jobs. Engineers rail against the story btw, because it shows bad space travel design. They are the atheists pointing out the original idea didn't make sense! 😄
I`m loving the ``Mcgrath - Mccoy Law`` and I`ll remember it every time I come across it in any Science fiction scenario. Thank you Genetically Modified Skeptic!
In mistborn two gods are responsible for creation: One that is order, he can hear your thoughts but because he is order he is also stillness. He represents trust, faith, stability, honesty, love, static… He wants to preserve, to save, to survive people as he wants unchangingness. The other one is chaos and Entropy. He has a murderous intent and wants destruction. He represents lies, instability (also instabile psych people are more receptive to him). Under circumstances he can talk to you, which is alike Sizophrenia, the symptoms are to hear negative voices and see hallucinations. He likes to appear as deceased loved ones or religious figures to manipulate and deceit people. The interesting thing is he can save you, change you, he will save one figure to topple ten others. So it’s like a short survive term. He represents also manipulation, change, he wants to control people and possess them, which he can under conditions. Both of them balance each other, so it’s the people who are the reason which essence they follow… and their responsibility…
I made an idea for something. See, there's a deity of light, creation, and justice akin to God, and a force that opposes it that represents evil, decay, and destruction. The light god wants to maintain their creation(s)- sentient life, a universe of possibility, etc. The darkness, on the other hand, wants to snuff out all light. The light god is chaos through order- keeping the universe full of life and possibility, while darkness is order through chaos- manipulation, destruction, death- all so it can keep the universe in a dead state of perfect entropy where nothing will ever be allowed to exist again.
@@Eclipsecomet-k7cBecause God is clearly shown to be terrified of humanity's progress. That's why he split the languages of the tower of Babel, he specifically said: "if they could do this with one language, there is nothing they cannot do." If we keep letting him do as he wants, he'll destroy us over and over to keep us from becoming like him.
@@thunderspark1536 Satanic conclusion and revealing of ones self-deception. "And the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do." Men were sinful, what they imagined to do would be sinful. And Babel represents and extreme pride of humanity, a hubris that ought to have been struck down and scattered. The greatest nations, the most prideful ones have often been the most evil ones in all of humanity. The Spanish Empire and its slavery, the British and its consistent conquest and division, the Mongols and their pure wrathful murder, America and its greed, the USSR and its oppression; the Nazis and their genocide. Islamic empires and their conquests. "f we keep letting him do as he wants" The sheer hubris in that statement is laughable. You could die of a heart attack tomorrow, get hit by a car; or find some strange pain and get diagnosed with cancer. Life is as fleeting as a gust of wind and that gust of wind is heading for hellfire. Jesus is undisputedly the only way to avoid that.
Hi. I have a slightly different definition of what defines science fiction, and I say that as someone who is at the final stages of completing their first science fiction novel. I think it is useful to first consider what happens when you combine the words science and fiction together, because it's quite ambiguous and open to interpretation. We could interpret it to mean harnessing scientific fact to tell a fictional story. I think some people may call this hard science fiction, but under this definition exceptionally few so called hard science fiction novels live up to this ideal. Three body problem is a good example. The concepts in this book are extremely speculative and although presented in a very scientifically disciplined way they go far beyond our ability to verify that the concepts are even remotely plausible. Another possible definition is that the science itself is to be regarded as fictional, and this is absolutely where most science fiction stories land. What differentiates them from fantasy is not the plausibility of the scientific artifacts, but the fact that they are to be regarded as scientific fact within the fictional framework of the story being told. These scientifically fictional artifacts must be self consistent within the entirety of the story. Whatever rules the writer conjures up to govern them these rules cannot be broken and thus provide a solid framework upon which to develop the story around. Some ideas may seem more plausible than others but when examined more closely they all break down as rather obviously being Unproven , unprovable, or even complete nonsense. For example the ubiquitous warp drive used as a way to defeat the mind numbing distances that describe the topological structure of the Cosmos. While the Warp drive is mathematically defensible it's physics require the existence of negative matter , something we have absolutely no reason to believe is real or even possible. The engineering requirements to build a warp drive is equally implausible. This is why I feel only the mildest guilt at conjuring up something like a mass generator in my own writing. It's complete bullocks, but is to be regarded as scientific fact within the universe I have created and provides a useful mcguffen to structure some of my story around. Fantasy, on the other hand treats its mcguffens As a form of magic that requires no framework to justify its existence or capabilities. This magic does not need to be self consistent and can conveniently be changed to suit the story's narrative if and when necessary. The boundary line between fantasy and science fiction is a lot less obvious than it might first appear. Consider Peter F Hamilton's universe within a black hole that can go back in time so that someone can repeatedly live out a specific event choosing different options until they finally achieve the outcome they are pursuing. This is science fiction rather than fantasy because the story provides a basic justification for how this is achieved. A fantasy novel on the other hand would attempt no such justification Other than say a magic wand and a student trained in the ability to wield it.
It amuses me no end to see the caring religious folk freely give God a free pass for faulty manufacture but are outraged when GM or Toyota drop the ball. 😂🤣😂😇
As a sci fi enthusiast from my youth, your presentation was very interesting. I'll have to think about it some more. What I did find fascinating was the art work you included! Where did you find all of that?!
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." This is true even between humans and humans. Imagine time travelling ten thousand years to the past and showing ancient humans technologies we find unimpressive like a walkie talkie. To those anceint humans it would be like magic, and it would take a long time to teach them concepts like the existence of radiowaves, electronics and electricity for them to fully understand how it works. They would just think that you're using magic.
I'd argue that at first they'd say it's magic but unless you can keep producing it or use it to protect yourself, those ancient folks would wise up quickly. Or destroy it. I'm thinking of an early episode of Stargate SG-1 where in order to rescue Carter they gave a Mongol-like warchief a pistol. And he was rather impressed by it but as they're leaving camp they remark that they'll be impressed until the ammo runs out... so they move very quickly away. Then you got the anime Doctor Stone where in the far future when society and civilisation has collapsed and grown over, etc. the protagonist Senku demonstrates how to make the magic stuff work using Stone Age technology, quickly trying to advance the tech tree. And one such tech was the phone.
@@stylesrj It's kind of like how apparently the only tools you should give uncontacted tribes in the amazon is stuff that's rock solid and will last generations, if not forever, like cast-iron cookware. Otherwise you'll probably hurt them in the long run if they grow to rely on that technology and it breaks down.
I really disagree that science fiction is theology. Speculative scifi is about what might happen. Theology is about what WILL and what HAS happened. Scfi is MYTHOLOGY, but I wouldnt go as far as to call it religious. Religion and storytelling and mythology are different things. Not mutually exclusive things, but not necessarily the same either.
Hmm, i have a hard time with that bit, cuz i do agree. But a LOT of sci-fi is directly created as anology of a god or religion. Despite having some pretty anti-thiest stances thoughout the history of the medium, its leaned very agnostic as well. i think sci-fi can be "theology" because a lot of early and modern sci-fi subplants powers with people for questions of responsibility. And that ideas like the matrix can overlap ontop religious belief with no issue of the text.. and genres like star trek combat unquestionable things (like the Q) as both relatively unattainable and theologically powerful. Genders like cyberpunk too, also use "zealousness" as a theme very often, but the entire focus on anti-capitalism forces a secular view.. so thats hard to argue. I don't quite understand the comment of "sci-fi is theology" maybe its explained more in the book he wrote. Sci-fi uses "magic" and i get his point of techonobabble. But sci-fi so often dismantles "divinity" as a concept. And magic sci-fi words being used to explain that doesnt contradict the point, at the very least, dismantling superpowers with the use of "super science powers" is a pretty solid line to explain human rationality.
I don’t believe God is evil but many teaching trying to help us be with God became mandated rather than “go the extra mile,” thus unintentionally making God seem harsh with very high expectations, in reality all we need is good virtue; I also agree that religion is limited and is meant to be a stepping stone I’m here to see religion in a mind of an atheist And so far, I agree with your points and I am proud of that
Using logic, people worship god because at their core they are AFRAID of him. God in the Bible is nothing but a petulant child who throws hissy fits, because a few thousands people worshipped the wrong statue. If we are made in his image, wtf would you expect him to be like. Humans are capable of unimaginable cruelty, a human mind with unlimited power? Well you see where im going with this.
Yes, the greeks looked at the imperfect world and said the gods that govern it must also be imperfect... Simply the gods are refelections of what we thought drove the world... One by one they died when we came to understand more of how the world truely works...
Kind of relevant, but I got an ad for some Isreal-based organization that started off talking about helping out the people suffering from the war, but then suddenly changed to it being that God was doing his work and everyone needs to trust his process. Just want to say how disgusting of a view it is that people being slaughtered is “God’s plan”. shouldn’t be a surprise that people say it, but RUclips literally running an ad that says it? Says a lot
I ask myself this question every day... That question is what started my journey into questioning my faith. Looking back at it now, that question is what changed my life and way of thinking only for the better.
I had the opposite journey. I grew-up in an atheistic/agnostic household, and we all slowly became Christian. No societal influence, no family influence; just pure Holy Spirit and God showing me how the world really works. We're all important pieces in this world, we aren't stardust and we all have souls.
@@ryonalionthunder No societal influence. Lol, obviously; I live in Britain. For all the churches we have, I sure didn't have a clue about what Christianity actually was when growing-up.
Three Body Problem is largely about game theory. The way it relates to god is that a player who is praying has no time to think, and will fail. magical thinking defeats logical, like a deer dazzled by headlights in it's last seconds, perhaps thinking "how beautiful." Hard science fiction is intended to communicate concepts, usually quite specific ones. Three Body Problem is trying to communicate some fundamental game theory concepts like forced vs unforced error, time and space in relation to strategy (using macro scales and the three body problem itself to illustrate strategic uncertainty), the concept of zero sum, information control and manipulation. stuff like that. and some "bigger" theoretical concepts like The Dark Forrest. (I think the second novel in the trilogy effectively named that concept) you're calling it speculative because it does make a bunch of stuff up, but it's trying to communicate some things that can be proven on paper, the "message" of the books at least has nothing to do with people, but with game concepts and "player" behavior. Christianity does call Satan "the adversary" I suppose, perhaps we are not doing theology here, but detangling logical concepts from theology.
The message of the books has everything to do with people and theology - it's about whether it's really all that wrong to choose not to give up our humanity in the face of evidence that sheer survival requires us to abandon it.
I think we've got a few books or movies about something like that. Its basically the entire lore of the lovecraftian mythos. The existance of biological life is a reaction of the "gods" existing, they have no intent, no judgement, many of the old gods are more like sentient forces of nature, and they casually destroy life because they are doing something else.. "You don't intend to kill hundreds of bugs and flies and worms when you drive your car down the road, nor do you stop when you consider the action will result in their deaths. You simply have a focus and they're too small to consider"
@@TheKiroshi And the story of Prometheus in the Alien Series. They weren't pleased, either but didn't get around to erasing their mistake thanks to a spiteful android. An analysis of the theological motives in Alien is also really fascinating.
I think it'd be interesting to put Liu Cixin, and your fascinating ideas about his sci-fi as exploring evil gods, in dialogue with His Dark Materials. I'm not sure what conclusions you'd come to or even what questions you would be led to ask - and admittedly Pullman is rather more blatant about his message in some ways - but it'd still probably go in interesting directions!
If you look at the character, whether real or not, he is clearly evil and deceitful, using fear and other means to make humanity not dare say the truth about him.
Ive been watching this channel for a few years. Very interesting. I just realized that discussing religion is exactly the same as discussing lore of any other story. Spirituality is so important to life, but religion corrupts our language for talking about it. Religion is weird. It makes me uncomfortable.
I think you hit upon this point but it still applies today. Rising interest in the idea of a demiurge is a result of that idea reflecting a person’s own personal truth and experience.
There were a lot of theological themes in the Netflix series, no surprise, as Netflix's owner also has a controlling share of Pureflix. The book series was more about "The Dark Forrest Hypothesis" as a possible solution to Fermi's paradox. Though all stories, whether theological or secular share characteristics, as all narratives, share similar characteristics. Campbell's hero of a thousand faces testified to this end, and narrative construction follows Dunbar's number very closely. So I have to disagree with the "Three Body Problem" being classified as an angry god allegory.
If it exists it must operate on rules and principles which are wholly divorced from our own. It cannot be human, it certainly wouldn't have a mind comprehensible to 3 dimensional life.
I am planning on watching 3 Body Problem, but given your spoiler video on Midnight Mass not only introduced me to that amazing show and to Mike Flanagan's work at large (thank you for that, by the way), I don't mind being spoiled on this show. Edit: Also, Eiza Gonzalez is in it. So it's a s must watch for me.
There is also the aspect of the Dark Forest theory, that casts a rather grim light on the explanation why there has not been any contact or sign of any other civilisation (apart from the obvious caveat of the unimaginable distances and time differences). I always liked the books for so clearly posting that as a thought experiment how humanity would position itself to a conclusion that has, within the story of the book, been independently reached by countless advanced civilisations but is essentially perpetuated exclusively by the belief in its veracity - which in itself is a foundation of many human assumptions most of which cause similar destruction and suffering.
God is the highest reality and the highest reality has an intrinsic goodness. Every sane person prefers reality to nothingness. God is a unity between reality and goodness: he is a good reality or a real goodness (as Plato believes). This also means that God is also a uniter of evil and nothingness: evil is nothing or nothing is evil.
Great video, this idea of sci-fi as a new theology beautifully put's into words how I've long felt about great sci-fi stories, including these books. There's a feeling akin to a spiritual experience when you read something like "tha soap bubble theory" in the Remembrance of Earth's Past books.
A little bit of a roundabout way of saying this, but I hope you'll read it. The best analogy to use when describing science fiction is storytelling to a fish in a fishbowl. The idea is to make the fish consider itself and the environment it lives in (yes this is strange, but go with it). In order to do this, science (or sciency stuff) is used to draw the reader's imagination outside of the fishbowl, but only in ways that do not impact the theme the storyteller wants to get across. In this differing environment of the narrative, it is possible for the reader to examine something that is commonplace to them from the point of view of someone for whom this is not commonplace at all. Consider Star Trek narratives, in which scarcity and the fight over resources are removed to examine the struggles that are inherent to us as human beings, rather than a product of unmet physical needs (except in certain instances where they are instead highlighted in particular). I agree that myths and theology were an early form of telling the fish a story about itself from outside the fishbowl. There is a serious difference to think of, though. Where some theology tells stories that are meant to be believed on some level (especially by fundamentalists) and are in many cases the basis for some authoritative statement about The Way Things Should Be Done, science fiction instead relies on both the reader's suspension of disbelief and the reader's intellect to explore the possible meanings within the text to a far greater degree than theology does. Theology by its very nature within most societies is very difficult to openly question, whereas non-escapist science fiction (no matter what some fandoms believe) must be ruthlessly interrogated in order to gain the most from it. This is to set aside individual examples of authors believing their own hype and forming a cult-like relationship with their readers, which fortunately is not terribly common, especially represented in one specific example I'm sure you can think of. Thank you for your work!
I've always preferred the idea of evil gods. It's a lot easier to explain why bad things happen if some gods are actively messing with humanity. Though my favorite god from fiction is Crom, from Conan the Barbarian. He imbues you at birth with all the strength you'll need to face the world. Then he doesn't think about you again until you die and meet him. Because why would he need to do more, you already have everything you need to thrive.
Crom is a reference to Our human DNA, so long as you are not severely malnourished, your Human DNA makes you very capable, sadly men often do not see what they have or whatever
Yes, evil gods! I’m an incurable theist, but I’m also humanistic. I’m able to reconcile my theism with humanism by accepting the possibility that god or gods/goddesses do not have humanity’s best interests in mind.
@@EliaSarsenLoor maybe the creator wants us to become the creators and the only way we can is by going through hell first
As saying goes before the tree can reach heaven its roots must reach hell.
Our creator loves us
I definitely prefer gods like Crom--they're not exactly good or evil, they attempt to set up great things for the world but they make mistakes and are sometimes irreverent or stupid or not looking when they should be. I think that's the best possible theist explanation for why our world is the way it is. If a god made us in his image, then it passed on its own capability for empathy and love as well as its idiocy and short-sightedness.
@@Eclipsecomet-k7cyou should read Returning to Eden by Heather Hamilton. She talks about this exact thing.
"Any sufficiently speculative science fiction is indistinguishable from theology"
I actually like that.
Scientology is proof #1.
I love Stanislav Lem for that reason
I would rather "Magic and myth is the sci-fi of the past."
Communism?
@@ibelieveingaming3562 that's kind of how I've seen it, but they don't contradict each other, do they?
I would also like to add Cole's law to the conversation:
Cole's law:
Thinly sliced cabbage
Underrated comment
According to atheist religion,
- What is wrong about incest?
- What is wrong about necrophilia?
- What is wrong about cannibalism?
@@MilitantAntiAtheismthere is no such religion, atheist is not believing in a religion therefore it can’t be a religion
@@MilitantAntiAtheism Morality can be applied to humans without the need of a God.
I am an agnostic. I do not know if there is a God or isn't. I'm just a smart monkey, a piece of meat that thinks. I don't have the capacity to fathom, understand or confirm such existence. But I will act according to my moral and ethic beliefs.
Do I enjoy seeing people sufrer? No, I don't enjoy that. It makes me feel bad. Then I will act towards an outcome that doesn't hurt people.
It's actually beautiful to think that there's no need for an all powerful being watching over us to act in a good, moral way.
Yadda yadda yadda.
@@MilitantAntiAtheism
-Genetics and parental relationships
-basic decency and sanitary problems
-health issues and murder
But please don't start a discussion under a funny joke, you can do it literally anywhere else
The Epicurus quote, "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"
Is perfect for this video
God and his decisions are something we cannot conprehend. Just focus on Doing what he says, and you will be successful
Free will is a basis of this world. God has the ability to know what will you do but won't interfere unless you want him to. The salvation of your soul is your struggle and god will help you just enough so you can save yourself.
@@divoulos5758 freewill doesn't really exist
@TyTy-cx7rp first you need to prove he exists. Something no theist EVER has done
@@divoulos5758 if god has the knowledge of what i will do it's not free will, it's an illusion of free will
*"Do you think God stays in heaven because he, too, lives in fear of what he's created here on earth?"* -Robert Rodriguez
Ah, my fellow Spy Kids fans, we unite once again :)
Never heard that one before 🥴
Earth is God's footstool. Would he be scared of his footstool?
@@learningagain4094 You ever stub your toe before?
@@learningagain4094Facts. The question is idiotic
"[The San-Ti] confuse Humanity with seemingly miraculous events that undermine our civilizations focus on advancement through reason. In short, they play the role of God, but one jealous of the potential power of its subjects who uses cruel trickery for the sake of its own power."
This made me think of The Tower of Babel.
Exactly!
There are a few parts of the OT where God gets nervous about human's abilities. When we eat from the apple it worries about also gaining immortality as well as knowledge. When the "children of God" start taking humans for wives (just before the flood). And the Tower of Babbel as you mentioned.... Its a theme of Genesis.
Or, rather, that humanity would create its own downfall in hubris.
@@sidneyshaw9814 But God seems more worried about the interaction with the divine rather than it being humanity themselves doing it. If divine beings(angels, children of god etc) are taking human wives, that's not really humanities hubris, but God is worried all the same.
@@work3753 If you want to see humanity rise and stay on a high degree of development, you do it under God's blessing. All else is human initiative driven by a hubristic Luciferian doctrine that will destroy humanity wholesale in its ascent to proverbial godhood.
Speaking of fantasy, most contemporary fantasy authors are Mormons, because Mormon theology is so darn complex that you need a flow chart to understand it. The whole thing looks like something Brandon Sanderson could come up with, oh wait...
Brandon Sanderson's books make more sense than mormon mythology.
@@mrptr9013 He is definitely a better writer than Joseph Smith.
I keep thinking about the theological history in the Mistborn trilogy. It's such a passable answer to the question "how could the gospel of a real god be corrupted?" and it could only work for someone who believes in little-g god
Its not that complicated. The book seems complicated because its written like king James translation of the bible.
I find it fascinating that his books read very agnostic-at least to me-even though he’s Mormon. I recently read an interview with him where he seemed to imply that he doesn’t think it matters what religion a person adheres to.
Never mind the spoilers, I'm so glad I watched this! I'm a sci-fi writer. The novel into which I've poured seven years of work is strongly premised on Clarke's Law (as you call it), and your new law of science fiction pithily explains why parts of my book read so much like religious literature. So I'm going to be quoting the McGrath-McCoy Law from here on out! And I'm going to start reading Cixin Liu's books at last!
Unfortunately this definition is just a sub-genre within sci-fi, not the entirety of the genre. I can’t remember the source, but someone described sci-fi as “change an aspect of reality and see how it changes society”. E.g. if one or more of faster-than-light travel, teleportation, telepathy, bionic implants etc. are possible what would change? No religion required, just human psychology and society (but religion can be, I repeat, an aspect that can be examined so is a sub-genre and *not* the whole genre).
I'm writing a book about the UAP Phenomenon and it has a lot of that too in spite of my trying not to.
I would decribe the books as being closer to Asimov in writing. Which is to say, more concerned with making sure the science checks out, even at the cost of character development.
Also like Asimov, Liu Cixin excels when it comes to ideas and symbolism. In the books, the San-ti, also called the Trisolarians, are a metaphor for the China's modern day authoritarianism: demanding a the sacrifice of progress and scientific advancement while telling people that it's for their own good, that they're "protecting us from ourselves", while keeping them constantly under watch and demanding complete acquiescence.
He uses the metaphor so well, that even people who don't understand China's current political structure can connect and understand. It's also why it can connect so easily to religious structures.
i enjoy eating pencil lead
Mee too bro mee too
Well, it's graphite, so I hope you're hungry.
It’s just carbon.
add oxygen and hydrogen and you get sugar (im totally a chemist)
We gotta make this the top comment
Its not that gods are evil. They were created by people who wanted to be evil like the gods they created. They are worshipped by people who want to be evil, free of responsibility and accountability, getting what they want like toddlers and hating on everyone outside the cult. It brings out the worst in people.
I think that’s similar to why people are drawn to fascist politicians. People see an authoritarian and have the feeling of “I want to be that guy” and it somehow turns into “I want that guy in charge of me”
Nice comment loser but will never disprove ma almighty loving tfp megatron. Never be true Dat he's not real when you should know to repeat to him ✝️🟣🟣🟣
@@mistylover7398 okeeey so if it’s true that I should know to repeat him, why don’t I know to repeat him? Cause I don’t know what that means.
@@soyevquirsefron990 you know he's real. That's why you want to sin
@@mistylover7398ew
This touches upon the reason why I'm an agnostic atheist in the first place. What is a god, exactly? It's just a question of power scale. The rest is mythology and moralism.
hes could beat up superman easily in the rapture
God power level over 9000 for sure
If you are smart enough to write this comment you should be smart enough to be careful about engaging the arrogance of the intellect.
@@Motive4890how is pointing out a lack of consistency in usage of a word arrogance?
Methinks demanding reverence for concepts YOU consider sacred for personal reasons is closer to the definition of the word.
Look, we know what is a man (a miserable little pile of secrets). If we assume we were created in god's image, AND that god is perfect, I propose that god is a "magnificent massive pile of secrets".
I remember writing a short story about when aliens came to earth they saw how violent we were and used us as bodies to fight in their wars.
I holp only us are violent, otherwise......
I would totally read your story, actually. Concepts like that are positively fascinating to me.
@@路易不懒惰 On this planet we are the most violent species period. We have killed each other more than other animals, and have a horrifying amount of determination and ambition. We want something, we will do anything to get it, no matter what. Humans are disturbing creatures.
@@creeperkinght1144 so?
@@ObsTho-100 Do you understand what that means? If we were to encounter another species out there with a similar level of awareness but had a completely different directive of life, we wouldn't care, at least in our current state of mind. Our ambitions and determination would lead to drastic implications, unless we learn to shift our own directive to something less aggressive and chaotic. We don't need more bloodshed....
Drew channeling his inner NileRed narration
Me wait for the light to turn (nile) green:
@@zyansheepNileGreen:
"Something I've always wanted to do... is turn drywall... into THC."
Niledrew
Omg!! I was thinking this too. 😂
"Today, I'll be turning the essence of God into hot sauce"
I've been thinking a lot lately about how big shared universe like Star Trek and the MCU serve as post-modern mythology for a secular age. They're fiction, and we know they're fiction, but they still impart values and bring a sense of meaning and community. Consider Star Wars Day and First Contact Day.
Jedi dance clubs look harmless.
Until they start swing steel pipes cover in glow in the dark spray paint.
Usa has a gun problem, any time they bring up gun reform, more people buy guns.
England has a matchet problem, ..
Any time someone wants to crack down on natives playing Burhart wearing mail and slapping each other with blunt swords,
more people start joining local Jedi glow stick dance clubs.
Now once again, we have those Dune movies.
May the 4th be with you.
I like your comment! I've exactly been thinking, at some point, about how Star Wars is modern mythology.
This is fascinating. I wonder if this could make sense of the origins of Scientology. Hubbard's pivot from sci-fi novelist to religious leader always fascinated me.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar_bet probably not true and the wrong author won
Think The Process Church of the Final Judgement was a defector of Scientology
@@ennuiblue4295One of the founders of the Process church and his followers eventually started the Best Friends Animal Sanctuary in Utah.
No, that was about money and banging chicks, just like most cults.
Maybe I'm oversimplifying a bit, but didn't he just consistently go where the money is for his whole life? It's not like he was a particularily talented writer (or war hero, or spiritual leader for that matter)... He was just good at self-marketing, like that other guy what'shisname... Drumpf?!
was expecting this to be from quinn’s ideas, this is a pleasant surprise :3
I freaking love Quinn’s Ideas. I watch every video he makes
@@GeneticallyModifiedSkeptic Ah, I see you're a person of culture as well!
@@GeneticallyModifiedSkepticThat’s awesome!!! Was really cool to see you cover TBP
3 Body presents valid criticism of religiosity, but I still prefer Lovecraft’s cosmicism when considering Clarke’s Law. It justifies the Trisolarans acting like children when inconvenienced by the human insect. It’s driven in even more when you get to the Dark Forest analogy and how one must act on the interstellar political stage.
Quinn's ideas?
You might also be interested in another book: The Killing Star by Pelligrino and Zebrowski. A quote from page 33 gives a flavor of this science fiction story: “The solar system had been "bug bombed," as if humankind had been nothing more to the Intruders than an insect infesting an apartment dwelling.”
That's what I thought with this one. If they are so advanced, and worried, why would they spend so many resources with such a complicated way to do away with us. Just poison the water. If they are so advanced, they could probably isolate it to only harm us. Or at least only the Great Apes. It seems very inept to me.
Many years ago I read a short story (IIRC) about an alien invasion of Earth. Humans find out that their "Christian" God (Jehovah) is finished with them & adopted the invaders as His "Chosen People".
IOW, He is now the God of the Philistines and not the Jews.
That sentence is mad redundant, unless you don't know what a bug bomb is. Like saying "He cut me open with the butchers knife, as if I was just another piece of meat on his table" like yeah i got you at butcher knife bro
@@frozengoat5834🙃🙃
Im looking for it now
Science Fiction as Theology certainly explains why religions of all types try to ban books and movies. They hate competition!
Beliefs in general do that. That is why there is limitations on everything.
Do religions do this or do certain denominations do this? In either case, it is not a phenomenon exclusive to religion.
Snuff films are banned... I don't see you complaining about that. Banning something doesn't automatically make you bad.
And even if it did, then you'd have to allow everything just to be a good person or have a good belief system.
Either way, your comment is internally inconsistent and it makes you look hypocritical.
The only exception to that is if you assume that "religions of all types" ban, all books except their own. But I have to assume you knew that no such religion exists...
@@Icemario87are you pretending to be braindead
...which also explains why all those "atheist" dictators back in the day weren't atheist at all. They just hated the competition from the more mainstream cults!
Short story by Harlan Ellison called "The Deathbird" (as best as I can remember it): The last man on Earth is walking across a shattered wasteland. After a time he's joined by someone he's never met before, but our original person is still the last man on Earth, because the new companion is rather different, probably not a man.
Every hour or two a voice booms out of the sky saying something like, "Bow down before me!", or "I am the Alpha and the Omega!"... things of that nature. The companion is friendly, sensible and helps the man, who begins climbing to the top of a nearby mountain. After climbing for a while the loud voice booms out again, saying something like, "Worship me!" The man finally turns to his unusual companion and asks, "Was he always insane?" and the companion sadly nods his head and mournfully replies, "Yes, he's always been insane."
We realize the booming voice comes from God and the kind companion is Satan.
Love that story.
Lolll Gods just a narcissist with Asperger's
This is a really fun series. Get this as an audiobook... it is absurdly dense. I enjoy the series a lot but often put it down just because it is kind of a commitment.
The first book I read with a Wikipedia page on astrophysics concepts on the side. I don't regret it, coz I love reading astro on wiki, but next books I had audio books instead. I still wiki searched a few times.
@@Frodo1000000 Yeah it’s fun like that, I would say if what you did sounds like a bad time you might not like the book. This is kind of the point and to me the point of most sci-fi.
In some ways it is why if we take it as religious text, it is a good one. We did better than a multitude of things that used to be science fiction. You can actually progress through the religious texts of science fiction. We don’t have telephones now we wrongly call pocket computers smart phones.
I was lucky enough to get to read the first book at work, and having no idea what it was going to be about. I didn't even know there would be aliens in it, someone just assured me that I should read it, and I loved it.
@@noeditbookreviews okay if you have not heard of House of leaves go buy it.
Its not that dense.
I'm reminded of the opening lines for Nier:Automata
Everything that lives is designed to end. We are perpetually trapped in a never ending spiral of life and death. Is this a curse? Or some kind of punishment? I often think about the god who blessed us with this cryptic puzzle… and wonder if we’ll ever get the chance to kill him.
The game story has various, on the nose themes about existentialism, nihilism, hope. Stuff that really stays with you.
The creature in the thumbnail looks so much like a warframe haha
Looks just like my Revenant lmfao
I thought so too!
Our history is smoke, Blurred by dreams, guided by ghosts.
Yes!
before I saw the channel name and title, I actually thought it WAS a Warframe video
Bravo to you and Dr. McGrath for moving the conversation forward!
love the amount of william blake in this video, super underrated as a religious figure, im deconstructing and slowly becoming an anarchist and blake is one of few paths i see to any possible future spirituality
I’m so glad someone recognizes the art I chose here! I love William Blake’s art and it felt like a great match for the subject matter
Why an anarchist ?
@@FrankSwancey
"Why anarchist?"
Can't answer for him
but
~No Gods No Kings No Masters~
@@FoursWithinso next step is anarchy? Seems like a bit of a leap
@@casualthurs3243
Not sure what you're asking,
But there are at least three definitions for anarchy. And most anarchists are referring more
to the first, not the second or third.
1-- Absence of any form of political authority.
2-- Political disorder and confusion.
3+--Absence of any cohesive principle, such as a common standard or purpose.
Really? RUclips punishes me for talking about the hypothetical forced unalivement of gods? That's just ridiculous.
You Tube has gone off the deep end and makes no sense when it comes to that. My only guess is that they are using AI and bad AI at that. It also makes no sense that someone can write a horrible comment, and if you rebut it YOU get deleted and the OG comment does not.
@LittleBitofHopeToo2518 all AI is bad AI when it's brainlessly thrown at any problem without human oversight.
@@Jman0163 Yep.
Somewhere Juniper Downs is smiling.
@@LittleBitofHopeToo2518yup they can't handle freedom. So they must make sure Dat unstoppable knowledge iz DISabled and 😶🔇. Y u think disgusting disabilities are really a actual thing
As a sci-fi author who has wholeheartedy used high-concept cultures and beings as explorations and expressions of theology, I wholeheartedly agree with the new law you've set up. I've had a lot of fun taking the different reasons why people engage with a religion or belief system and turning them into a series of sci-fi cultures in my book Arcforge: What Lies Beyond.
I very much appreciate the theological angle here as it's hard for me to view things through that lens after growing up without any religion or mysticism in my life.
That being said, I feel like Wenjie is painted as villainous or destructive here and I disagree with that fundamentally. I don't even think the San Ti can be considered villainous honestly, not in comparison to humanity at least. They sort of beat us over the head with that, watching how we're willing to kill innocents in the name of our continued safety.
Thats all the San Ti are doing. That's all Wenjie was willing to risk. Before we can call them evil we have to recognize that they're human, and if they're evil then so are we.
Really, “evil” here just means their interests don’t align with our own.
@markwazny6361 It may be the way Drew intended his analysis to read, but evil to most people isn't just a disagreement it's a moral stance that goes against the greater good. Wenjie and the San Ti aren't any more evil than a cat is when it hunts a bird, they're just doing the best to survive with the information they've got.
Great video! Enjoyed this very much!
Was only a matter of time till you showed up. Are you looking forward to the next seasons of the show?
Thanks, Quinn! You’re the one that got me interested in this series in the first place 👊
Another thing I love about the show is how it (inadvertently) shows the perspective of the vilified ancient Roman persecutors of Christianity; they were protecting their civilization from an evil cult.
Evil cult that opposed human and animal sacrifice and preached loving even the ones who were persecuting your evil cult.
I suppose the only difference between a cult and organised religion is acceptance.
That said I wouldn’t ascribe such… concerned motives to the Roman emperors. Having a cult that proclaims that you aren’t the highest authority is a threat to your rule, especially if they claim to know it better.
@@rustkarl Not merely a cult that denies the divinity of the emperor, but a cult that invented the divinity of Jesus to make him a mock-Emperor, a false Caesar.
You’re projecting your own biases onto the authority of Rome. The Romans didn’t see Christians as an evil cult and Jesus was not meant to be a fake Caesar more like an anti-Caesar something wholly opposite of an earthly king.
@@trillestchrisxo Have you read any Roman sources on the persecutions of Christians? Of course not.
Have you read the book of Revelation? It' blatantly the work of an anti-Roman evil cult. Apocalypticism is a cult of revenge, where an evil god is believed to be coming to destroy the world.
There is no difference between fake Caesar and anti-Caesar, just like Christians do NOT distinguish between false Christ and anti-Christ.
If Jesus was not meant to be a fake Caesar, when WHY did Christians invent the divinity of Jesus in the first place?
The fact there's even aliens is a spoiler for the book... There's no reason to suspect them at first lol
The thumbnail looks so badass
Very nice content. Ursula K. LeGuin is quoted as Sci-Fi NOT being prophecy, but instead, an examination of what is current, examined through the lens of what could be different, rather than what is. Both Sci-Fi and Fantasy allows us to look at human constructs and norms without our existing attachments, and as such free us to look at things differently.
I love how the series Stargate treats the topic of religion and the interesting parody on medieval Christianity that is shown with the Ori.
Hallowed are the Ori!
Oi leave my little glowing Ori alone!
Humanity’s super power is the ability to adapt quickly….. kind of an amazing power to have, but is also our weakness. We can get comfortable and complacent in bad situations we should be working our way out of instead of surviving in those conditions/situations.
Your content always help me think further and deeper, thank you for everything
Why did humans invent imaginary gods and then fight or argue over which god is true?
Because were related to chimpanzees and share many of their behaviours.
They throw poop at each other and then realiate by unaliving the other for doing the same thing back at them.
Humans are just less hairy poop throwing chimpanzees
What human doesn't want power?
I mean, we also created Star Trek and argue over which one of the shows is the best (though we all know deep down it's DS9)
Control
The creation of mythologies and religions are very complex, most of the times its not just making it up in an instant for no reason at all, but believing through your reasoning that there muct be a greater being that exists, mainly to explain the unexplainable. The belief in these beings and tales is sure to cause zealotry in some and to the ambitious and opportunistic people, to manipulate these beliefs for their interests, thus causing conflicts over who is right.
The "never play with God" joke was actually the hint on how to defeat the TriSolarens.
Being 1 minute after upload is evil
I’ve always found science fiction to be a tad strange as a genre, and this video helps clear it up.
I always thought that science fiction always felt like… fantasy but with a different coat of paint. Fantasy and science fantasy just seems like different aesthetics and yet I was always told that science fiction was different in some immutable way.
This video got me to realise that. Thanks for solving a bugbear I’ve had for years.
I disagree with the idea that science fiction is a form of religious literature. Because religious literature does not usually reflect on its themes with an open mind. For instance, it does not usually consider the possibility that their god is evil. It is true that SF and fantasy can create new myths, which people might approach with a religious mindset, in RL or within the fictional world, but that doesn't make the stories religious rather than about possible permutations of religion as a social phenomenon which is independent of the actual truth of their mythology. SF has a different perspective than religious literature.
Nothing is truely evil
@@lolasdm6959 I agree. Nothing is evil. It is the epitome of evil.
Christianity defines evil in the first place, in the form of sin.
Without a solid foundation for what is evil, then you don't have any evil; you just have decisions that are bad or good based on the culture. Which is as brittle and meaningless as it sounds.
@@learningagain4094 and that's not even solid because there are disagreements among christians over modern moral issues, each side believing they have it right
and what's even more telling is that they will use secular arguments when trying to get their moral beliefs passed into law since it's obvious "god says so" or "it's a sin" can justify any moral position depending on the religious bubble you grew up in
@@learningagain4094 are you stupid on purpose
You have given me a lot to think about with regards to theology. I was always taken to hindu mythology and scifi, alwaysconsidered them apart now that i think about it gives me a different perspective. Also thank you for reminding me to watch the 3-body problem, i had read all the books but forgot the series existed
A little different, especially in the characters. Liu Xicin is more Arthur C. Clarke/Isaac Asimov; concerned with the Big Idea. To adapt it they had to focus more on the characters- as well as making them more Western, but as someone who lives in Taiwan and is fairly immersed in Chinese culture, it's not too awfully bad.
I never expected you to discuss the demiurge and Gnosticism (The Apocryphon of John). I’m happily surprised. There is another text I believe is called “The Apocryphon of Adam” (I think that’s the title, it’s been a while, but it’s in the Nag Hammadi library. Adam is explaining to Seth why he serves a god he knows isn’t the true god. Out of fear and in slavery. *shivers*
Could you touch on why Japanese RPGs seem to always have you kill god? In person 5 the main villain is quite literally yaldaboath
*yaldabaoth
@@shinjiikari1021 If you're interested in a more sociological/cultural analysis moon channels video on the topic is quite good
Japan, its language, culture, and history are my academic forte, and spent several years of my childhood and adulthood here. I don't think there's anything particular about Japan or its religions that tie this theme to culture, though. That said, kami (the shinto gods) are many, and while seen as a force of awe, they aren't unambiguously seen as morally good, so the concept of an evil god is not as controversial here as it would be in some other places around the world.
...and in Xenogears you fight and destroy "Deus" after a lengthy analogous story that acts as a scathing indictment of the Abrahamic religions
Short answer: because it’s cool and god names are pretty badass
Actual Answer: This is just like the natural endpoint of most fantasy games. Kill or become a god. It’s not a problem solely endemic to JRPGs. 4 out of the 5 elder scrolls games involve fighting, controlling, or defeating a god, just as a for instance. The God of War series has killing gods as its main premise, as another one. JRPGs simply have the most direct references. usually because the Abrahamic religions aren’t that popular over there comparatively and in Japanese culture there’s nothing taboo about putting deities into video games as enemies, playable characters, etc.
I have found the concept of a misotheist and/or dystheism faith to be rather interesting. One being the belief that God is evil and actively antagonistic, but it is our place to serve as lesser creatures, and the other being the same idea, but that it is our moral obligation to apose, or even destroy, God at every opportunity.
The closest thing to this idea was the Word Barors from Warhammer 40K. A dystheist religion that says, yes, the Gods are evil, but they are the truth, and so despite our digust of them and the deeds they have us commit, we must do it, because it is the will of the true Gods.
I have been working on a world building project made around the idea of miso/dys Deity and or panthion. And this video has given me an interesting insight on how to go about that better.
The fact that you don't see any dystheist religions in real life says a lot about nature of religion. Even "dark" religions like Sethianism are more about personal freedom and liberation from social conventions and less about doing evil things for evil god.
I like the "science fiction is theology" thing because you can flip it into "theology is fiction".
Yeah indeed the truth.
*tips fedora*
I think the difference between theology and science fiction is that scifi authors don’t ask you to believe their stories are literal truth upon which your salvation is hung (unless they are total egomaniacs, I’m looking at LRon there). This is a noncommittal engagement with “theology” in the sense that it deals with intelligent forces larger than mankind.
But there is also scifi that doesn’t ask us to accept alien civilizations, that doesn’t ask us to confront cosmic forces. I’m speaking of the hardest of hard scifi. I don’t think anyone could read Andy Weir’s the Martian and come away with any sense that the book bears any resemblance to theology. I’m also not particularly fond of this type of scifi as I don’t think it really grapples with big ideas other than basic survival. I love when scifi explores the inexplicable in a realistic way in the same manner that I as an agnostic study religious theology as a kind of fantasy fiction. I have no commitment to any of it from a viewpoint on ultimate reality. I just love rolling around the ideas that humans have used to express their reaction to a reality beyond their comprehension.
And if you think the alien as “evil god” metaphor ends with the first book, finish the third in the series. The smiting gets delightfully incomprehensible.
"I’m also not particularly fond of this type of scifi as I don’t think it really grapples with big ideas other than basic survival."
The Martian in particular doesn't, but Artemis does and is (almost) as hard a sci-fi. And better written imo.
The thing I really liked about both of them is, both the problems the characters face and the solutions make sense in a way you rarely find in more speculative sci-fi/fantasy.
I'm thinking of one of the classic speculative fictions, The Cold Equations. What if someone stowed away on a spaceship that had the survival of the crew precisely calculated into its weight/mass? No hard science, its the philosophical trolley problem in space. All will die, if all remain on the ship. If one dies, the rest will live. Does this hypothetical characterize religion? Religion might play a part in your values, but it seems more basic to humanity than far flung gods.
If you're interested, there are a number of formal responses to the story. My favorite one to hate suggests a solution where all live, but requires body parts to be sacrificed. What is the minimum amount of flesh you need to live? Everything else is luxury.
@@gernottiefenbrunner172
I’ll give Artemis a shot then, I appreciate it.
@@Badficwriter
Would this be a short story from the 1950’s? Sounds intriguing. The religious allegory probably depends on how it's written, but i could imagine it.
@@gnosismonkey Yes, by Tom Godwin in 1954. Reading an essay on it, the religious allegory might have to do with sacrifice. The stowaway willingly sacrifices themselves, not just to save the original crew, but because its an emergency medical supply ship that needs to save their loved one. One of the counter essays has the crew sacrificing major portions of their own bodies to make weight (I recall an allegory of Heaven characterizing something like that--as long as all helped each other as much as possible).
I was struck by a comment of a man who empathized with the harshness. He could not make payroll because of embezzlers, so he had to fire dozens of people just before Christmas. If he tried to emulate the counter essay, everyone else in the company would have to lose a major part of their pay in order to avoid sacrificing jobs.
Engineers rail against the story btw, because it shows bad space travel design. They are the atheists pointing out the original idea didn't make sense! 😄
I love this recent foray into nerdy video essays.
I`m loving the ``Mcgrath - Mccoy Law`` and I`ll remember it every time I come across it in any Science fiction scenario. Thank you Genetically Modified Skeptic!
In mistborn two gods are responsible for creation:
One that is order, he can hear your thoughts but because he is order he is also stillness. He represents trust, faith, stability, honesty, love, static… He wants to preserve, to save, to survive people as he wants unchangingness.
The other one is chaos and Entropy. He has a murderous intent and wants destruction. He represents lies, instability (also instabile psych people are more receptive to him). Under circumstances he can talk to you, which is alike Sizophrenia, the symptoms are to hear negative voices and see hallucinations. He likes to appear as deceased loved ones or religious figures to manipulate and deceit people. The interesting thing is he can save you, change you, he will save one figure to topple ten others. So it’s like a short survive term. He represents also manipulation, change, he wants to control people and possess them, which he can under conditions.
Both of them balance each other, so it’s the people who are the reason which essence they follow… and their responsibility…
I made an idea for something. See, there's a deity of light, creation, and justice akin to God, and a force that opposes it that represents evil, decay, and destruction. The light god wants to maintain their creation(s)- sentient life, a universe of possibility, etc. The darkness, on the other hand, wants to snuff out all light. The light god is chaos through order- keeping the universe full of life and possibility, while darkness is order through chaos- manipulation, destruction, death- all so it can keep the universe in a dead state of perfect entropy where nothing will ever be allowed to exist again.
If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him. If God really did exist, it would be necessary to overthrow him.
Why would it be necessary to over throw God?
@@Eclipsecomet-k7c"Becuase we can!"
God: Presses delete button.
@@Eclipsecomet-k7cso you decide your own fate
@@Eclipsecomet-k7cBecause God is clearly shown to be terrified of humanity's progress. That's why he split the languages of the tower of Babel, he specifically said: "if they could do this with one language, there is nothing they cannot do."
If we keep letting him do as he wants, he'll destroy us over and over to keep us from becoming like him.
@@thunderspark1536 Satanic conclusion and revealing of ones self-deception.
"And the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do."
Men were sinful, what they imagined to do would be sinful. And Babel represents and extreme pride of humanity, a hubris that ought to have been struck down and scattered.
The greatest nations, the most prideful ones have often been the most evil ones in all of humanity. The Spanish Empire and its slavery, the British and its consistent conquest and division, the Mongols and their pure wrathful murder, America and its greed, the USSR and its oppression; the Nazis and their genocide. Islamic empires and their conquests.
"f we keep letting him do as he wants" The sheer hubris in that statement is laughable. You could die of a heart attack tomorrow, get hit by a car; or find some strange pain and get diagnosed with cancer. Life is as fleeting as a gust of wind and that gust of wind is heading for hellfire. Jesus is undisputedly the only way to avoid that.
Hi. I have a slightly different definition of what defines science fiction, and I say that as someone who is at the final stages of completing their first science fiction novel. I think it is useful to first consider what happens when you combine the words science and fiction together, because it's quite ambiguous and open to interpretation.
We could interpret it to mean harnessing scientific fact to tell a fictional story. I think some people may call this hard science fiction, but under this definition exceptionally few so called hard science fiction novels live up to this ideal. Three body problem is a good example. The concepts in this book are extremely speculative and although presented in a very scientifically disciplined way they go far beyond our ability to verify that the concepts are even remotely plausible.
Another possible definition is that the science itself is to be regarded as fictional, and this is absolutely where most science fiction stories land. What differentiates them from fantasy is not the plausibility of the scientific artifacts, but the fact that they are to be regarded as scientific fact within the fictional framework of the story being told. These scientifically fictional artifacts must be self consistent within the entirety of the story. Whatever rules the writer conjures up to govern them these rules cannot be broken and thus provide a solid framework upon which to develop the story around.
Some ideas may seem more plausible than others but when examined more closely they all break down as rather obviously being Unproven , unprovable, or even complete nonsense. For example the ubiquitous warp drive used as a way to defeat the mind numbing distances that describe the topological structure of the Cosmos. While the Warp drive is mathematically defensible it's physics require the existence of negative matter , something we have absolutely no reason to believe is real or even possible. The engineering requirements to build a warp drive is equally implausible. This is why I feel only the mildest guilt at conjuring up something like a mass generator in my own writing. It's complete bullocks, but is to be regarded as scientific fact within the universe I have created and provides a useful mcguffen to structure some of my story around.
Fantasy, on the other hand treats its mcguffens As a form of magic that requires no framework to justify its existence or capabilities. This magic does not need to be self consistent and can conveniently be changed to suit the story's narrative if and when necessary. The boundary line between fantasy and science fiction is a lot less obvious than it might first appear. Consider Peter F Hamilton's universe within a black hole that can go back in time so that someone can repeatedly live out a specific event choosing different options until they finally achieve the outcome they are pursuing. This is science fiction rather than fantasy because the story provides a basic justification for how this is achieved. A fantasy novel on the other hand would attempt no such justification Other than say a magic wand and a student trained in the ability to wield it.
It amuses me no end to see the caring religious folk freely give God a free pass for faulty manufacture but are outraged when GM or Toyota drop the ball. 😂🤣😂😇
Or Boeing.
Or do we suck it up and go "Well, they made most of our planes so we gotta have faith they work..."
As a sci fi enthusiast from my youth, your presentation was very interesting. I'll have to think about it some more.
What I did find fascinating was the art work you included!
Where did you find all of that?!
I always love your content it helps me to think more rational than getting emotional with everything ❤
Oooo! I’m excited to watch this. New type of content from GMS with sci-fi themes. Woooo!
I thought this was a Warframe video from the thumbnail
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
This is true even between humans and humans. Imagine time travelling ten thousand years to the past and showing ancient humans technologies we find unimpressive like a walkie talkie. To those anceint humans it would be like magic, and it would take a long time to teach them concepts like the existence of radiowaves, electronics and electricity for them to fully understand how it works. They would just think that you're using magic.
I'd argue that at first they'd say it's magic but unless you can keep producing it or use it to protect yourself, those ancient folks would wise up quickly. Or destroy it.
I'm thinking of an early episode of Stargate SG-1 where in order to rescue Carter they gave a Mongol-like warchief a pistol. And he was rather impressed by it but as they're leaving camp they remark that they'll be impressed until the ammo runs out... so they move very quickly away.
Then you got the anime Doctor Stone where in the far future when society and civilisation has collapsed and grown over, etc. the protagonist Senku demonstrates how to make the magic stuff work using Stone Age technology, quickly trying to advance the tech tree. And one such tech was the phone.
@@stylesrj It's kind of like how apparently the only tools you should give uncontacted tribes in the amazon is stuff that's rock solid and will last generations, if not forever, like cast-iron cookware. Otherwise you'll probably hurt them in the long run if they grow to rely on that technology and it breaks down.
@@Colddirector
And certainly not a plastic or glass bottle either... that might cause problems as everyone will want one...
This is a damn good video.
I really disagree that science fiction is theology. Speculative scifi is about what might happen. Theology is about what WILL and what HAS happened. Scfi is MYTHOLOGY, but I wouldnt go as far as to call it religious. Religion and storytelling and mythology are different things. Not mutually exclusive things, but not necessarily the same either.
Hmm, i have a hard time with that bit, cuz i do agree. But a LOT of sci-fi is directly created as anology of a god or religion. Despite having some pretty anti-thiest stances thoughout the history of the medium, its leaned very agnostic as well.
i think sci-fi can be "theology" because a lot of early and modern sci-fi subplants powers with people for questions of responsibility. And that ideas like the matrix can overlap ontop religious belief with no issue of the text.. and genres like star trek combat unquestionable things (like the Q) as both relatively unattainable and theologically powerful. Genders like cyberpunk too, also use "zealousness" as a theme very often, but the entire focus on anti-capitalism forces a secular view.. so thats hard to argue.
I don't quite understand the comment of "sci-fi is theology" maybe its explained more in the book he wrote. Sci-fi uses "magic" and i get his point of techonobabble. But sci-fi so often dismantles "divinity" as a concept. And magic sci-fi words being used to explain that doesnt contradict the point, at the very least, dismantling superpowers with the use of "super science powers" is a pretty solid line to explain human rationality.
I don’t believe God is evil but many teaching trying to help us be with God became mandated rather than “go the extra mile,” thus unintentionally making God seem harsh with very high expectations, in reality all we need is good virtue; I also agree that religion is limited and is meant to be a stepping stone
I’m here to see religion in a mind of an atheist
And so far, I agree with your points and I am proud of that
The fact you are named McCoy should give you some kind of joy when discussing sci-fi ; )
BONES😅
On a not-quite-related note, I'm now tempted to refer to him as the real McCoy when discussing atheism.
Using logic, people worship god because at their core they are AFRAID of him. God in the Bible is nothing but a petulant child who throws hissy fits, because a few thousands people worshipped the wrong statue.
If we are made in his image, wtf would you expect him to be like. Humans are capable of unimaginable cruelty, a human mind with unlimited power? Well you see where im going with this.
There are other forms of god/religion besides the angry god in the sky
Because what they describe is the a true God.
Hilarious, during the section about Santi traveling and arriving to a more advanced earth and ad for travel insurance pops up. 😂
Drew: Science fiction is theology.
Me: I am a member of the Church of Trek, forever and ever, amen.
Mankind has made many gods in its image. Most of them reflect the benevolance we wish we had.
Some of them are more... honest...
Yes, the greeks looked at the imperfect world and said the gods that govern it must also be imperfect... Simply the gods are refelections of what we thought drove the world... One by one they died when we came to understand more of how the world truely works...
Kind of relevant, but I got an ad for some Isreal-based organization that started off talking about helping out the people suffering from the war, but then suddenly changed to it being that God was doing his work and everyone needs to trust his process. Just want to say how disgusting of a view it is that people being slaughtered is “God’s plan”. shouldn’t be a surprise that people say it, but RUclips literally running an ad that says it? Says a lot
Im 50 pages away from finishing the first book 😅 welp time to speedread and return to the video
Thanks dude.
I ask myself this question every day... That question is what started my journey into questioning my faith.
Looking back at it now, that question is what changed my life and way of thinking only for the better.
I had the opposite journey. I grew-up in an atheistic/agnostic household, and we all slowly became Christian. No societal influence, no family influence; just pure Holy Spirit and God showing me how the world really works.
We're all important pieces in this world, we aren't stardust and we all have souls.
@@learningagain4094no societal influence? lol, right.
@@learningagain4094 you're lying
@@Gambit0590 Why would I lie about that "Fang"?
@@ryonalionthunder No societal influence. Lol, obviously; I live in Britain. For all the churches we have, I sure didn't have a clue about what Christianity actually was when growing-up.
Three Body Problem is largely about game theory. The way it relates to god is that a player who is praying has no time to think, and will fail. magical thinking defeats logical, like a deer dazzled by headlights in it's last seconds, perhaps thinking "how beautiful."
Hard science fiction is intended to communicate concepts, usually quite specific ones. Three Body Problem is trying to communicate some fundamental game theory concepts like forced vs unforced error, time and space in relation to strategy (using macro scales and the three body problem itself to illustrate strategic uncertainty), the concept of zero sum, information control and manipulation. stuff like that. and some "bigger" theoretical concepts like The Dark Forrest. (I think the second novel in the trilogy effectively named that concept)
you're calling it speculative because it does make a bunch of stuff up, but it's trying to communicate some things that can be proven on paper, the "message" of the books at least has nothing to do with people, but with game concepts and "player" behavior.
Christianity does call Satan "the adversary" I suppose, perhaps we are not doing theology here, but detangling logical concepts from theology.
The message of the books has everything to do with people and theology - it's about whether it's really all that wrong to choose not to give up our humanity in the face of evidence that sheer survival requires us to abandon it.
@@maxsilva11 That is certainly a part of the book? But I'm not sure it's the message.
The ideas of the book have been tested with game theory and absolutely were *not* proven -- they've in fact been repeatedly debunked.
Is that a warframe?
Praying for you man. I love you and pray that your intelect does not go to waste.
What if we contact god and it turns out he never intended to create us in the first place, and does to us what we do to weeds in our gardens.
If that was the case God could just let the early stop spinning for a minute.
I think we've got a few books or movies about something like that. Its basically the entire lore of the lovecraftian mythos.
The existance of biological life is a reaction of the "gods" existing, they have no intent, no judgement, many of the old gods are more like sentient forces of nature, and they casually destroy life because they are doing something else..
"You don't intend to kill hundreds of bugs and flies and worms when you drive your car down the road, nor do you stop when you consider the action will result in their deaths. You simply have a focus and they're too small to consider"
@@TheKiroshi And the story of Prometheus in the Alien Series. They weren't pleased, either but didn't get around to erasing their mistake thanks to a spiteful android. An analysis of the theological motives in Alien is also really fascinating.
Evil is real,
GOD Is not....
I think it'd be interesting to put Liu Cixin, and your fascinating ideas about his sci-fi as exploring evil gods, in dialogue with His Dark Materials. I'm not sure what conclusions you'd come to or even what questions you would be led to ask - and admittedly Pullman is rather more blatant about his message in some ways - but it'd still probably go in interesting directions!
Or perhaps, God is neither good or evil.
And that probably because he may not exist.
If you look at the character, whether real or not, he is clearly evil and deceitful, using fear and other means to make humanity not dare say the truth about him.
Ive been watching this channel for a few years. Very interesting. I just realized that discussing religion is exactly the same as discussing lore of any other story. Spirituality is so important to life, but religion corrupts our language for talking about it.
Religion is weird. It makes me uncomfortable.
I think you hit upon this point but it still applies today. Rising interest in the idea of a demiurge is a result of that idea reflecting a person’s own personal truth and experience.
God is what you make it.
There were a lot of theological themes in the Netflix series, no surprise, as Netflix's owner also has a controlling share of Pureflix.
The book series was more about "The Dark Forrest Hypothesis" as a possible solution to Fermi's paradox. Though all stories, whether theological or secular share characteristics, as all narratives, share similar characteristics. Campbell's hero of a thousand faces testified to this end, and narrative construction follows Dunbar's number very closely.
So I have to disagree with the "Three Body Problem" being classified as an angry god allegory.
Oh man this is super interesting! I’ve been absolutely devouring your videos
DS9 reference = instant like
Agreed but ds9 < voyager
If the universe has a creator, then it's neither good nor evil. It simply defies understanding.
What do you mean by " defies understanding"?
If it exists it must operate on rules and principles which are wholly divorced from our own.
It cannot be human, it certainly wouldn't have a mind comprehensible to 3 dimensional life.
@@spideycomic_15describe to me a seventh spacial dimension.
@@tristanmiltenburg1084 It’s a spacial dimension.
@@xavierhouston4650 literally not a description.
I am planning on watching 3 Body Problem, but given your spoiler video on Midnight Mass not only introduced me to that amazing show and to Mike Flanagan's work at large (thank you for that, by the way), I don't mind being spoiled on this show.
Edit: Also, Eiza Gonzalez is in it. So it's a s must watch for me.
4:47 Gnosticism of the demiurge
7:01 James McGrath, religion as science fiction
Same with the Apocalypse of Adam
I can only think of Warhammer 40k when listening to this. I feel like it's the ultimate science fiction/religious series.
There is also the aspect of the Dark Forest theory, that casts a rather grim light on the explanation why there has not been any contact or sign of any other civilisation (apart from the obvious caveat of the unimaginable distances and time differences). I always liked the books for so clearly posting that as a thought experiment how humanity would position itself to a conclusion that has, within the story of the book, been independently reached by countless advanced civilisations but is essentially perpetuated exclusively by the belief in its veracity - which in itself is a foundation of many human assumptions most of which cause similar destruction and suffering.
Wait you're not Quinn's ideas 😂
God is the highest reality and the highest reality has an intrinsic goodness. Every sane person prefers reality to nothingness. God is a unity between reality and goodness: he is a good reality or a real goodness (as Plato believes). This also means that God is also a uniter of evil and nothingness: evil is nothing or nothing is evil.
Oooo! Very good! One of your best videos yet!
Any fans of overlord here?
Yes great anime.
Make America Read Again
Nice Blake art showcase!
it's all fiction
Evil according to whose ethical beliefs?
Clearly not yours'
Watch through the video.
mine
Decent people.
Ding ding! Suddenly an objective and authoritative standard exists?
Great video, this idea of sci-fi as a new theology beautifully put's into words how I've long felt about great sci-fi stories, including these books. There's a feeling akin to a spiritual experience when you read something like "tha soap bubble theory" in the Remembrance of Earth's Past books.
Any sufficiently accurate speculation is indistinguishable from prophecy
Loved this video to the coreee ❤❤❤ curious about that film and book now.
Great video. Really felt I got to see your channel from a different viewpoint. Hope you can do more videos on these kinds of series.
A little bit of a roundabout way of saying this, but I hope you'll read it. The best analogy to use when describing science fiction is storytelling to a fish in a fishbowl. The idea is to make the fish consider itself and the environment it lives in (yes this is strange, but go with it). In order to do this, science (or sciency stuff) is used to draw the reader's imagination outside of the fishbowl, but only in ways that do not impact the theme the storyteller wants to get across. In this differing environment of the narrative, it is possible for the reader to examine something that is commonplace to them from the point of view of someone for whom this is not commonplace at all. Consider Star Trek narratives, in which scarcity and the fight over resources are removed to examine the struggles that are inherent to us as human beings, rather than a product of unmet physical needs (except in certain instances where they are instead highlighted in particular). I agree that myths and theology were an early form of telling the fish a story about itself from outside the fishbowl.
There is a serious difference to think of, though. Where some theology tells stories that are meant to be believed on some level (especially by fundamentalists) and are in many cases the basis for some authoritative statement about The Way Things Should Be Done, science fiction instead relies on both the reader's suspension of disbelief and the reader's intellect to explore the possible meanings within the text to a far greater degree than theology does. Theology by its very nature within most societies is very difficult to openly question, whereas non-escapist science fiction (no matter what some fandoms believe) must be ruthlessly interrogated in order to gain the most from it.
This is to set aside individual examples of authors believing their own hype and forming a cult-like relationship with their readers, which fortunately is not terribly common, especially represented in one specific example I'm sure you can think of.
Thank you for your work!