Chapters (68)
- Title Page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Map
- Part 1: Areoformation
- Prologue
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Part 2: The Ambassador
- Prologue
- 1
- 2
- Part 3: Long Runout
- Prologue
- 2
- 3
- Part 4: The Scientist as Hero
- Prologue
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Part 5: Homeless
- Prologue
- 1
- 2
- Part 6: Tariqat
- Prologue
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Part 7: What Is to Be Done?
- Prologue
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Part 8: Social Engineering
- Prologue
- 1
- Part 9: The Spur of the Moment
- Prologue
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Part 10: Phase Change
- Prologue
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Epilogue
- Temperature Comparisons
- Bantam Books by Kim Stanley Robinson
- Copyright
That’s one of the reasons I don’t think it’s a science.
It is certainly a science. One of its tenets is, if you want to know more, care more. Every astronomer loves the stars. Otherwise why study them so?
Because they are mysteries.
What do you care about?
I care about truth.
The truth is not a very good lover.
It isn’t love I’m looking for.
Are you sure?
No surer than anyone else who thinks about— motivations.
You agree we have motivations?
Yes. But science cannot explain them.
So they are part of your great unexplainable.
Yes.
And so you focus your attention on other things.
Yes.
But the motivations are still there.
Oh yes.
What did you read when you were young?
All kinds of things.
What were some of your favorite books?
Sherlock Holmes. Other detective stories. The Thinking Machine. Dr. Thorndyke.
Did your parents punish you if you got upset?
I don’t think so. They didn’t like me making a fuss. But I think they were just ordinary in that respect.
Did you ever see them get upset?
I don’t remember.
Did you ever see them shout, or cry?
I never heard them shout. Sometimes my mom cried, I think.
Did you know why?
No.
Did you wonder why?
I don’t remember. Would it matter if I had?
What do you mean?
I mean, if I had had one kind of past. I could still have turned into any kind of person. Depending on my reaction to the— events. And if I had had another kind of past. The same variations would have followed. So that your line of questioning is useless. In that it has no explanatory rigor. It’s an imitation of the scientific method.
I consider your conception of science to be as parsimonious and reductive as your scientific activities. Essentially you are saying we should not study the human mind in a scientific manner because it is too complex to make the study easy. That’s not very bold of you. The universe outside us is complex too, but you don’t advise avoiding that. Why so with the universe inside?
You can’t isolate factors, you can’t repeat conditions, you can’t set up experiments with controls, you can’t make falsifiable hypotheses. The whole apparatus of science is unavailable to you.
Think about the first scientists for a while.
The Greeks?