Same "sho" root with either an "nen" or "jo" suffix. So, if we assume the same pattern for "seinin".... The root would be "sei" with the suffix being "nin". So, the other suffix would be "jo"...making sei*ohno!shonen/shojo/seinen/the one that means adult girls
What I am saying is that the technology, (be it science or magic), in a story will do what the writer needs it to do. It will work as well, or fail as badly, as the writer needs it to, depending on what the writer needs the character to do or fail at doing.A character is going to do something (or not) regardless of if the story even uses magic or technology. I don't see what you're point here is as that can really apply to anything.
Plenty. And, I have seen it because I watch/read plety of sci-fi. Replicators in "Star Trek" can pretty much do anything, providing more or less indefinite sources of food and other goods. (At most, a replicator needs raw mass to restructure, meaning that you could "recycle" the same cheese omelette over and over and over again.)....You're not really big on science fiction are you Dom? What brand of sci-fi have you seen that has ever used some sort of "all purpose McGuffin"?
I have nothing against soft sci-fi. (Hell, look how much I like TF.) But, I am not going to pretend it is meaningfully different from sword and sorcery. ("Fantasy" sounds kind of fae to my ear.) Magic and sci-fi tech work pretty much interchangably.
Hard sci-fi, (which I doubt anyone here reads much of if any), has "reasoned possibilities". But, most sci-fi, (including what we tend to talk about on this forum), is definitely in the "soft' category. The "technology" in soft sci-fi works the way it needs to for the story, rather than having having the story work around the limits of non-existent tech that just seems to work.And again, that's a point about science fiction that you keep ignoring, reasoned possibilities.
Socrates was a fucking idiot. That is all I need to know.No... I'll admit I'm not very familiar with this sort of stuff from ancient Greek
That is a pretty clear distinction. But, distinctions within fiction are less rigid, often having as much to do with branding (at both the macro and micro levels) as with anything else.Would you argue that fiction and non-fiction are fluid? Something real against something false?
Yes! To bring up Dom's Excalibur With A Lightsaber plotline again, Sparky's argument was "BUT LIGHTSABERS DON'T WORK THAT WAY!" Well, if Star Wars' plot had relied on them working that way, you're damn sure George Lucas would have made them that way.
Agreed. But, the Excalibur analogue was Shockwave's.
Dom
-from Synjo to Socrates in one post. My god, this is an amazing thread.
