3 ms·

Very disappointing. The author seems ignorant of the entire science of Psychohistory. Since it is now possible to predict human development hundreds of years in

by ronilan 12y ago

Very disappointing. The author seems ignorant of the entire science of Psychohistory. Since it is now possible to predict human development hundreds of years into the future no idea is really new anymore.

siscia 12y ago
May you elaborate ? How you claim that is possible to predict the human development ? In which way ? It to me seems a very over-simplification... Anyway, from the wikipedia the first time the term "psycho-history" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychohistory#Emergence_as_a_discipline http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychohistory#Emergence_as_a_di...) is been used is 1958, it is a good guess to say that the article is been written no later than the 1960... I guess we can forgive Asimov...
- snowwrestler 12y ago
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychohistory_%28fictional%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychohistory_%28fictional%29
  - siscia 12y ago
    Thanks
- rfrey 12y ago
  ronilan is referencing Asimov's Foundation trilogy, which has the premise that psycho-history has developed into a hard science and a reliable technology.
  - siscia 12y ago
    Still I don't get it... > Since it is now possible to predict human development hundreds of years into the future no idea is really new anymore. It is just sarcasm then ? If not can somebody elaborate ?
    - ronilan 12y ago
      Neither. It is the type of comment that takes two opposing concepts and instead of contrasting them on both edges of the idea spectrum places them one inside the other.
    - egypturnash 12y ago
      From a ways down the Wikipedia article on "psychohistory": "Science fiction author and scientist/science writer Isaac Asimov popularized the term in his famous Foundation series of novels, though in his works the term psychohistory is used fictionally for a mathematical discipline that can be used to predict the general course of future flow." So the humor lies mostly in the second line about how Asimov is not applying the discipline of psychohistory to his thinking about the future, when he wrote an entire fictional trilogy about people using said discipline. The comment you're confused by is written from the perspective of someone who lives in that fictional world. If you have read this trilogy (which is one of the early classics of science fiction), there may be an additional layer of irony, as much of the story concerns the grand plans based on psychohistorical predictions going horribly awry due to not accounting for a wild card that comes up.
- marktangotango 12y ago
  Is big data essentially psychohistory?
snowwrestler 12y ago
That's what it seems like, but it was really just robots all along. (Spoiler alert needed for a book published in 1986?)

by ronilan 12y ago

siscia 12y ago

May you elaborate ? How you claim that is possible to predict the human development ? In which way ? It to me seems a very over-simplification... Anyway, from the wikipedia the first time the term "psycho-history" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychohistory#Emergence_as_a_discipline http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychohistory#Emergence_as_a_di...) is been used is 1958, it is a good guess to say that the article is been written no later than the 1960... I guess we can forgive Asimov...

snowwrestler 12y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychohistory_%28fictional%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychohistory_%28fictional%29
- siscia 12y ago
  Thanks
rfrey 12y ago
ronilan is referencing Asimov's Foundation trilogy, which has the premise that psycho-history has developed into a hard science and a reliable technology.
- siscia 12y ago
  Still I don't get it... > Since it is now possible to predict human development hundreds of years into the future no idea is really new anymore. It is just sarcasm then ? If not can somebody elaborate ?
  - ronilan 12y ago
    Neither. It is the type of comment that takes two opposing concepts and instead of contrasting them on both edges of the idea spectrum places them one inside the other.
  - egypturnash 12y ago
    From a ways down the Wikipedia article on "psychohistory": "Science fiction author and scientist/science writer Isaac Asimov popularized the term in his famous Foundation series of novels, though in his works the term psychohistory is used fictionally for a mathematical discipline that can be used to predict the general course of future flow." So the humor lies mostly in the second line about how Asimov is not applying the discipline of psychohistory to his thinking about the future, when he wrote an entire fictional trilogy about people using said discipline. The comment you're confused by is written from the perspective of someone who lives in that fictional world. If you have read this trilogy (which is one of the early classics of science fiction), there may be an additional layer of irony, as much of the story concerns the grand plans based on psychohistorical predictions going horribly awry due to not accounting for a wild card that comes up.
marktangotango 12y ago
Is big data essentially psychohistory?

snowwrestler 12y ago

That's what it seems like, but it was really just robots all along. (Spoiler alert needed for a book published in 1986?)