Monday 25 March 2019

Pulp And Philosophy

Even pulp fiction conventions can generate philosophical questions. Poul Anderson identified issues even while writing action-adventure stories. In series fiction, the defeat of one villain is followed either by the return of that villain or by the advent of another similar villain. James Bond defeats SMERSH, then SPECTRE, then fights KGB...

Is there an end to an apparently endless succession of external enemies? Is the enemy only external? The Prisoner TV series and Anderson's "Un-Man" say no. The Un-Man reflects that one gang has been destroyed but another will emerge because the real enemy is man himself. What can man do about man? How can we change self when it is the as yet unchanged self that tries to make the change?

O wearisome condition of humanity!
Born under one law, to another bound;
Vainly begot and yet forbidden vanity;
Created sick, commanded to be sound.
What meaneth nature by these diverse laws?
Passion and reason, self-division cause.
-copied from here.

7 comments:

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul!

And in the context of this blog devoted to discussion of the works of Poul Anderson and similar authors, the only answer Anderson would be able to seriously give would be that there was no single, permanent answer man could give to the division and trouble within himself.

Sean

S.M. Stirling said...

G.K. Chesterton remarked, with profound truth, that all religious dogma has to be accepted on faith -- except for Original Sin, for which there is abundant empirical evidence. We are born to trouble as the sparks fly upward.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Mr. Stirling!

And I had exactly that in mind as well! The corruption and imperfectibility of human beings are glaringly obvious facts. We are FALLEN, as Chesterton reminds us.

Sean

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

All,
I think that we are rising, not fallen. Our ancestors were pre-human animals, not a divinely created couple in a garden.
Paul.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul!

I disagree. I've seen nothing in real history and in how real people actually behave to make me believe we are rising, if you mean that to mean morally improving. Our TECHNOLOGY might advance or "rise," but that does not necessarily mean people will become better. And we have no guarantee that a high tech civilization will survives. And the chances of that LESSENS the longer we persist in refusing to get OFF this rock.

I am a Catholic, I don't believe in the crudely literal interpretation of the Genesis creation stories that so many "evangelical" Protestants insist on. The Genesis stories were composed in the allegorical form we have because the inspired authors had to teach revealed truths about God, the universe, the world, and mankind that the Jews of thousands of years ago could understand. The Catholic Church has no objection, per se, to evolution playing a role in the pre-hominid life forms leading to the moment where God intervened in a special way to create the first man.

Sean

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

Sean,
We have risen from animality and civilizations have advanced from the rule of men to the rule of law although we still struggle to maintain this. Retrogression is possible.
I think that the first men resulted from evolution and natural selection, not from divine intervention. Manipulation of the environment stimulated thought about it. Cooperation generated language. Thus, our ancestors became human.
Paul.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul!

I accept most of this except I do believe there was a special moment where God intervened. Also, I am not quite so sure the rule of law is that firmly rooted among us!

Sean