Skip to main content

Pseudoscience and Science Fiction - Andrew May ****

There are a number of books covering the links between science and science fiction, such as Ten Billion Tomorrows, but the is the first that I have come across considering the relationship between pseudoscience and science fiction - and as Andrew May points out, this is important, because the relationship between the two is strong.
Pseudoscience uses the language of science, but rather than testing a hypothesis, only accepting it if the tests hold up and seeing how the concept fits with the current understanding of science, pseudoscience simply comes up with hypotheses which are clung onto despite evidence to the contrary, and largely ignores current scientific thinking. Although science fiction is often based on the science of the day, it almost always stretches it, adding in some 'What if?' that can't be tested because it has no basis in reality. That's fine for fiction, but worrying when treated as fact. As May makes clear, pseudoscience is often, effectively, science fiction portrayed (and sometimes believed by its originator) as fact.

 Covering a wide range of fields, May shows us how pseudoscience like Charles Fort's collections of stories of odd happenings alongside his bizarre explanations have provided many plot ideas for science fiction writers, while the burgeoning science fiction market from the early pulp magazines onward started to shape new concepts in pseudoscience. Some of those magazines even carried pseudoscience 'factual' stories, including the 'Shaver' concept where the Earth is in the control of unknown external forces and the development of Dianetics by science fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard, which soon became Scientology.

 In chapters focussing on Fort, anomalous phenomena (including the infamous Philadelphia Experiment), hi-tech paranoia (they're out to get us using super-technology), flying saucers, mind power, space drives, antigravity, technology of the ancients and conspiracy theories, May takes us on a tour of the main themes of pseudoscience, always tying back to the links with science fiction. You'll find familiar science fiction films, such as Close Encounters (ripe with pseudoscience concepts), blockbuster books from fiction (the works of Dan Brown) and supposed non-fiction (Chariots of the Gods, for example) alongside obscure but fascinating early pulp works, near-forgotten authors like E. F. Russell and pseudoscience concepts that will only be familiar to the cognoscenti. As much as anything else, it's an exploration of the human imagination and psyche.

 Something that comes up a good number of times, inevitably is The X-Files. This frequently makes use of pseudoscience, and is particularly interesting as it is one of the strongest influencers for a fascinating aspect of this incestuous relationship: quite a few pseudoscience ideas have emerged from science fiction rather than the other way round. The X-Files is, for instance, one of the major influences in spreading the idea to a wider audience of large eyed grey aliens - or for that matter huge triangular spaceships, which interestingly May points out only became common in the UFO community after the huge triangular spaceships were seen in Star Wars. My only regret on The X-Files is that May does not mention my absolute favourite episode, 'José Chung's From Outer Space' from Season 3, which is both hilarious and explores beautifully the nature of unreliable narrators in pseudoscience, as well as bringing in some pseudoscience concepts like Men in Black that don't usually crop up in the show.

 Sometimes May leans over backwards to not be judgemental, and while clearly not agreeing with the pseudoscience, makes it sound like it hasn't been entirely dismissed. He's also quite kind to science fiction writer Philip K. Dick, who gets quite a few mentions as Dick's fiction often featured conspiracies and paranoia, which extended from his fiction into his life. May packs plenty in - the only slight issue I have is with the format of the book. Each chapter has an odd 'abstract' summary at the start as if it were a scientific paper, and the structure could do with a bit more connective narrative covering the overall thesis. This is particularly obvious at the end of the final chapter which simply stops without any attempt to pull the topic together.

 This book is part of the large and interesting Springer series 'Science and Fiction' - most of these titles have been overpriced for a paperback, but this is at the affordable end of the range and the good production values mean we can have a number of full colour reproductions of gorgeous old pulp covers. Overall, May does an excellent job in presenting to us this strange two-way relationship, providing a real service both in understanding some of the roots of science fiction and the nature of pseudoscience. Recommended.
Paperback:  

Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Introducing Artificial Intelligence – Henry Brighton & Howard Selina ****

It is almost impossible to rate these relentlessly hip books – they are pure marmite*. The huge  Introducing  … series (a vast range of books covering everything from Quantum Theory to Islam), previously known as …  for Beginners , puts across the message in a style that owes as much to Terry Gilliam and pop art as it does to popular science. Pretty well every page features large graphics with speech bubbles that are supposed to emphasise the point. Funnily,  Introducing Artificial Intelligence  is both a good and bad example of the series. Let’s get the bad bits out of the way first. The illustrators of these books are very variable, and I didn’t particularly like the pictures here. They did add something – the illustrations in these books always have a lot of information content, rather than being window dressing – but they seemed more detached from the text and rather lacking in the oomph the best versions have. The other real problem is that...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...
Post a Comment
Read more