Posted on the Third Alternative message board by a "MJH":
The future's a discourse. It's made up, by definition. It isn't the world. It can't be, by definition. Who gives a toss about a discourse ? My argument with hard sf nuts has nothing to do with hard vs soft sciences and the way metaphors made from them can "handle" the world: it has to do with sf versus experience. Hard sf isn't even an act of science: it's an act of make believe. "Soft" sf just about redeems itself by (a) taking real experience into account and (b) by being a self-admitted commentary on the constructed nature of culture. That's what writing is about. I can see writing *about* the cultural phenomenon of futurology. I can see the point of *that*: although I'd rather write about the constant gallantry of individual human beings facing the problem of their own immediate future. Hard sf is just another fantasy of evasion, trying to borrow authority from genuine acts of science.
PITHY COMMENTARY: Word