3 ms·

> A perfect summary. "Foundation" trilogy is essentially a novelization of the generalized anthropic principle[0]: protagonists aren't special, the only reason

> A perfect summary. "Foundation" trilogy is essentially a novelization of the generalized anthropic principle[0]: protagonists aren't special, the only reason we're reading about particular characters and not some others is because those people happened to be at the right place and time during pivotal moments in history. That "anthropic principle" goes out the window pretty quick in book 2 when a super-powered mutant becomes the antagonist.

spacedcowboy 5y ago
... which is the point. It's all about the spinning top (The Foundation) staying spinning and not falling over... Premise: You can't expect predictions to stay true over centuries, you need a guiding hand to keep that top spinning and not tumbling over, so you need the Second Foundation to be The Management. Bonus: due to the circumstantial requirements, you get to make them secret and hidden. Requirement: There has to be tension within a book. There has to be conflict, resolved in a way conducive to literary imperative. Resolution: Something has to be able to challenge this otherwise-perfectly-set-up system. Something that is not predictable, and which would not be easily adjustable by the Second Foundation; something out of the ordinary. A single man, who really can influence history. The Second Foundation would be prepared for a Napoleon of their time, but they wouldn't expect anyone like the Mule. Corollary: The Second Foundation is exposed, introducing tension and conflict for the next book in the series. Who wants to be a puppet on a string, after all ? It could have gone very differently if the Mule hadn't been sterile, or could have taught his skill, but again, literary imperative dictates that "The Good Guys win", so the Second Foundation overcomes the Mule, and the plan is put back on track. Suspiciously well, in fact. The anthropic principle is validated, and a single man did not in fact change history. This time. "The Good Guys" changes in later books, of course, and the Second Foundation end up losing, but that's quite literally another story :)
- addingnumbers 5y ago
  > you need a guiding hand to keep that top spinning and not tumbling over, so you need the Second Foundation to be The Management That's where your anthropic principle ends, though, halfway through the trilogy. From there on out the original protagonists can't win without a new "special" set of characters blessed with superhuman abilities.
- sifar 5y ago
  I feel the Mule was like the Mongols, bring distant realms under one rule, disperse the knowledge and then burn out.
- TeMPOraL 5y ago
  I mostly agree, except for "The Good Guys" part. What I found endearing about the books[0] is that it didn't try to cast any of the factions as The Good Guys. The Foundation definitely isn't. The trilogy, especially the first book, shows the Foundation applying plenty of hard realpolitik to survive and expand; they do not carry any moral banner, except that of Seldon's Plan. They're not the United Federation of Planets by any measure. They just are. The Second Foundation isn't presented in a better light either. > The anthropic principle is validated, and a single man did not in fact change history. This time. I most likely haven't read far enough into the book sequence, but at least by "Foundation's Edge", the anthropic principle remains valid; the protagonist of that book, despite being seen as special by their contemporaries, still turns out to be involved in the story only because they happened to be best person available along the criteria of the ... entity ... driving the events. -- [0] - That I've read so far, i.e. the trilogy, and "Foundation's Edge".
  - spacedcowboy 5y ago
    > I mostly agree, except for "The Good Guys" part. That's why I had "The Good Guys" in quotes :) We're supposed to root for the Foundation/Second Foundation, but it's clearly presented as the best of two evils. People, being people but better than 30,000 years of anarchy.

spacedcowboy 5y ago

... which is the point. It's all about the spinning top (The Foundation) staying spinning and not falling over... Premise: You can't expect predictions to stay true over centuries, you need a guiding hand to keep that top spinning and not tumbling over, so you need the Second Foundation to be The Management. Bonus: due to the circumstantial requirements, you get to make them secret and hidden. Requirement: There has to be tension within a book. There has to be conflict, resolved in a way conducive to literary imperative. Resolution: Something has to be able to challenge this otherwise-perfectly-set-up system. Something that is not predictable, and which would not be easily adjustable by the Second Foundation; something out of the ordinary. A single man, who really can influence history. The Second Foundation would be prepared for a Napoleon of their time, but they wouldn't expect anyone like the Mule. Corollary: The Second Foundation is exposed, introducing tension and conflict for the next book in the series. Who wants to be a puppet on a string, after all ? It could have gone very differently if the Mule hadn't been sterile, or could have taught his skill, but again, literary imperative dictates that "The Good Guys win", so the Second Foundation overcomes the Mule, and the plan is put back on track. Suspiciously well, in fact. The anthropic principle is validated, and a single man did not in fact change history. This time. "The Good Guys" changes in later books, of course, and the Second Foundation end up losing, but that's quite literally another story :)

addingnumbers 5y ago
> you need a guiding hand to keep that top spinning and not tumbling over, so you need the Second Foundation to be The Management That's where your anthropic principle ends, though, halfway through the trilogy. From there on out the original protagonists can't win without a new "special" set of characters blessed with superhuman abilities.
sifar 5y ago
I feel the Mule was like the Mongols, bring distant realms under one rule, disperse the knowledge and then burn out.
TeMPOraL 5y ago
I mostly agree, except for "The Good Guys" part. What I found endearing about the books[0] is that it didn't try to cast any of the factions as The Good Guys. The Foundation definitely isn't. The trilogy, especially the first book, shows the Foundation applying plenty of hard realpolitik to survive and expand; they do not carry any moral banner, except that of Seldon's Plan. They're not the United Federation of Planets by any measure. They just are. The Second Foundation isn't presented in a better light either. > The anthropic principle is validated, and a single man did not in fact change history. This time. I most likely haven't read far enough into the book sequence, but at least by "Foundation's Edge", the anthropic principle remains valid; the protagonist of that book, despite being seen as special by their contemporaries, still turns out to be involved in the story only because they happened to be best person available along the criteria of the ... entity ... driving the events. -- [0] - That I've read so far, i.e. the trilogy, and "Foundation's Edge".
- spacedcowboy 5y ago
  > I mostly agree, except for "The Good Guys" part. That's why I had "The Good Guys" in quotes :) We're supposed to root for the Foundation/Second Foundation, but it's clearly presented as the best of two evils. People, being people but better than 30,000 years of anarchy.