3 ms·

I'd note a couple of points here: - Yes, the Culture is way more technologically advanced than the Azadians. But the point is that a basic Culture human of sta

by n4r9 2y ago

I'd note a couple of points here: - Yes, the Culture is way more technologically advanced than the Azadians. But the point is that a basic Culture human of standard intelligence (albeit extensive knowledge of strategy games) can - after a relatively small amount of training - defeat an Azadian who has devoted their entire life to Azad. And the reason is that the Culture humans's strategies reflect the values and philosophy of the Culture. The subtext is that the non-heirarchical nature of the Culture leads to a more effective use of resources. - The Culture-Idiran war is an example of them confronting an enemy that is of comparable technological development. Again, it's implied that the Culture wins because their decentralised and non-hierarchical existence let them move rapidly throughout the galaxy while switching quickly to a full war-footing. - It sounds like you have the impression that the Culture dominates all other civilisations. This is not true. For example, in Excession they discover that they're being observed by a vastly superior civilization that has some ability to hop between dimensions in a way that they cannot. There are civilisations like the Gzilt or Homomdans who are on a level with the Culture, and ancient Elder species like the Involucra who also give Culture ships a run for their money on combat.

ethbr1 2y ago
I was speaking less about specific capabilities and more about total economic size. How big is the Azadian civilization in terms of worlds/stations/industry? > It sounds like you have the impression that the Culture dominates all other civilisations. There's three places I'm getting this from, more as a pervasive slant than an absolute truth. (1) Ian Banks' writings on the Culture (outside of the books themselves) demonstrate a very strong belief that the Culture approach to things is superior (to those used on current Earth, and to many alternatives) (2) The Culture as zeitgeist moment is very focused on how superior it is to alternatives (civilization evolution wise, if not explicitly). Rarely do people post blog entries about how interesting and aspiration other civilizations from the Culture series are (3) If Banks had wanted to set up a peer-powered civilization that made alternative choices, he would have. He didn't. At least aside from oddities or deus ex machina The most convincing point I've heard in this thread is that essentially the Culture is OP not because of inherent superiority of their beliefs, but specifically because their belief system keeps most of them hanging around past the technological stage other civilizations would have transcended.
- n4r9 2y ago
  Points 1-3 show that Banks thought the Culture was morally superior. It's not obvious that they dominated the galaxy/universe on a technological or economic level. I concede that there's an suggestion that the Culture are doing very well and continuing to evolve at a greater rate than their peer civilizations due to several factors including their reluctance to Sublime and their idealistic nature. However on Wikipedia there's a well-sourced paragraph stating (emphasis mine): > Although the Culture has more advanced technology and a more powerful economy than the vast majority of known civilizations, it is only one of the "Involved" civilizations that take an active part in galactic affairs. The much older Homomda are slightly more advanced at the time of Consider Phlebas (this is, however, set several centuries before the other books, and Culture technology and martial power continue to advance in the interim);[b] the Morthanveld have a much larger population and economy, but are hampered by a more restrictive attitude to the role of AI in their society.[4] The capabilities of all such societies are vastly exceeded by those of the Elder civilisations (semi-retired from Galactic politics but who remain supremely potent) and even more so by those of the Sublimed, entities which have abandoned their material form for existence in the form of non-corporeal, multi-dimensional energy being. The Sublimed generally refrain from intervention in the material world.[5]
tivert 2y ago
> But the point is that a basic Culture human of standard intelligence (albeit extensive knowledge of strategy games) can - after a relatively small amount of training - defeat an Azadian who has devoted their entire life to Azad. > Again, it's implied that the Culture wins because their decentralised and non-hierarchical existence let them move rapidly throughout the galaxy while switching quickly to a full war-footing. The Culture didn't win because of their "decentralised and non-hierarchical existence," they won for exactly the same reason stormstroopers couldn't shoot Luke Skywalker: they're the main character in the story and they have Bank's sympathies.
- n4r9 2y ago
  The Culture wiki [0] talks in more detail about how the Culture's decentralised existence worked in their favour, compared to the Idirans' territorial and religious philosophy: > The initial stages of the war were defined by a hasty withdrawal of the Culture from vast galactic spaces invaded by the Idirans, who tried to inflict as many civilian casualties as possible in the hope of making the Culture sue for peace. However, the Culture was able—often by bodily moving its artificial worlds out of harm's way—to escape into the vastness of space, while it in turn geared up its productive capabilities for war, eventually starting to turn out untold numbers of extremely advanced warships. > The later stages of the war began with Culture strikes deep within the new Idiran zones of influence. As the Idirans were religiously committed to holding on to all of their conquests, these strikes forced them to divide their attentions. It also cites the Culture's more liberal attitude to AI as a deciding factor. [0] https://theculture.fandom.com/wiki/Idiran%E2%80%93Culture_War https://theculture.fandom.com/wiki/Idiran%E2%80%93Culture_Wa...
  - tivert 2y ago
    My point was to note that Banks's works are fiction, so the usefulness of citing outcomes in his fictional universe is very limited, because they're almost certainly more of an expression of his biases than anything else (and IIRC, his biases could be cartoonish). The Culture basically had god (Banks) on its side, to ensure its victory, just like Skywalker had god (Lucas) on his side, who made it so the stormtroopers could never shoot straight when he was around. I bet Banks, consciously or unconsciously, played up the Culture's strengths, and played down the strengths of its adversaries (or engineered them with exploitable weaknesses).

by n4r9 2y ago

ethbr1 2y ago

I was speaking less about specific capabilities and more about total economic size. How big is the Azadian civilization in terms of worlds/stations/industry? > It sounds like you have the impression that the Culture dominates all other civilisations. There's three places I'm getting this from, more as a pervasive slant than an absolute truth. (1) Ian Banks' writings on the Culture (outside of the books themselves) demonstrate a very strong belief that the Culture approach to things is superior (to those used on current Earth, and to many alternatives) (2) The Culture as zeitgeist moment is very focused on how superior it is to alternatives (civilization evolution wise, if not explicitly). Rarely do people post blog entries about how interesting and aspiration other civilizations from the Culture series are (3) If Banks had wanted to set up a peer-powered civilization that made alternative choices, he would have. He didn't. At least aside from oddities or deus ex machina The most convincing point I've heard in this thread is that essentially the Culture is OP not because of inherent superiority of their beliefs, but specifically because their belief system keeps most of them hanging around past the technological stage other civilizations would have transcended.

n4r9 2y ago
Points 1-3 show that Banks thought the Culture was morally superior. It's not obvious that they dominated the galaxy/universe on a technological or economic level. I concede that there's an suggestion that the Culture are doing very well and continuing to evolve at a greater rate than their peer civilizations due to several factors including their reluctance to Sublime and their idealistic nature. However on Wikipedia there's a well-sourced paragraph stating (emphasis mine): > Although the Culture has more advanced technology and a more powerful economy than the vast majority of known civilizations, it is only one of the "Involved" civilizations that take an active part in galactic affairs. The much older Homomda are slightly more advanced at the time of Consider Phlebas (this is, however, set several centuries before the other books, and Culture technology and martial power continue to advance in the interim);[b] the Morthanveld have a much larger population and economy, but are hampered by a more restrictive attitude to the role of AI in their society.[4] The capabilities of all such societies are vastly exceeded by those of the Elder civilisations (semi-retired from Galactic politics but who remain supremely potent) and even more so by those of the Sublimed, entities which have abandoned their material form for existence in the form of non-corporeal, multi-dimensional energy being. The Sublimed generally refrain from intervention in the material world.[5]

tivert 2y ago

> But the point is that a basic Culture human of standard intelligence (albeit extensive knowledge of strategy games) can - after a relatively small amount of training - defeat an Azadian who has devoted their entire life to Azad. > Again, it's implied that the Culture wins because their decentralised and non-hierarchical existence let them move rapidly throughout the galaxy while switching quickly to a full war-footing. The Culture didn't win because of their "decentralised and non-hierarchical existence," they won for exactly the same reason stormstroopers couldn't shoot Luke Skywalker: they're the main character in the story and they have Bank's sympathies.

n4r9 2y ago
The Culture wiki [0] talks in more detail about how the Culture's decentralised existence worked in their favour, compared to the Idirans' territorial and religious philosophy: > The initial stages of the war were defined by a hasty withdrawal of the Culture from vast galactic spaces invaded by the Idirans, who tried to inflict as many civilian casualties as possible in the hope of making the Culture sue for peace. However, the Culture was able—often by bodily moving its artificial worlds out of harm's way—to escape into the vastness of space, while it in turn geared up its productive capabilities for war, eventually starting to turn out untold numbers of extremely advanced warships. > The later stages of the war began with Culture strikes deep within the new Idiran zones of influence. As the Idirans were religiously committed to holding on to all of their conquests, these strikes forced them to divide their attentions. It also cites the Culture's more liberal attitude to AI as a deciding factor. [0] https://theculture.fandom.com/wiki/Idiran%E2%80%93Culture_War https://theculture.fandom.com/wiki/Idiran%E2%80%93Culture_Wa...
- tivert 2y ago
  My point was to note that Banks's works are fiction, so the usefulness of citing outcomes in his fictional universe is very limited, because they're almost certainly more of an expression of his biases than anything else (and IIRC, his biases could be cartoonish). The Culture basically had god (Banks) on its side, to ensure its victory, just like Skywalker had god (Lucas) on his side, who made it so the stormtroopers could never shoot straight when he was around. I bet Banks, consciously or unconsciously, played up the Culture's strengths, and played down the strengths of its adversaries (or engineered them with exploitable weaknesses).