Concerns about Scientific realism in "Soul Hunter"
John F. Baskette
the best one so far and well worth seeing. I am pleased in general
with Babylon 5 although some of the dialog writing in MOTFL and
the pilot needed to be improved. "Soul Hunter" dialog, however,
was satisfactory and even very good in places.
I do have some concerns about scientific realism. I would not have
these concerns if not for the fact that jms and crew have worked hard
to be scientifically accurate in so many areas. I was especially
impressed with the realism in the ship movements as seen in the
opening sequences of "Soul Hunter".
Here's a control-L to avoid giving spoilers:
What concerns me is the soul hunter's ability to perceive when a
death is about to occur. The soul hunter saw the imminent death
of the shell game operator some minutes before there was any
indication of a threat to the life of the operator and well before the
operator was hurt and dying. Also, the second soul hunter was able
to locate the imminent death and approximate location on the station
of Delaan (sp.?)and follows this up with the statement, "A soul
hunter is never wrong."
We later find that the imminent death was that of the first renegade
soul hunter and not the Minbari ambassador's. Either the second
soul hunter was perceiving the imminent death of his renegade
brother, or if he was perceiving the death of Delann (sp.?), then he
was wrong.
What mechanism does the author have in mind that can explain the
soul hunter's powers? Is death felt because a dying person emits
extra bursts of psionic energy at death? Does this energy follow an
inverse square law in it's propagation? Well, that doesn't work
because the death is perceived well in advance of any death trauma
or even any danger or threat of death.
The fact that the soul hunter used a physical mechanism to extract
the "soul" indicates that some kind of scientific explanation is being
used for the concept of "souls". Most of what we see in "Soul hunter",
however, appears to by metaphysical in nature - i.e. the future is
fixed by some kind of fated destiny apart from physical determinism
and the soul hunters have discovered some mystical method of seeing
the fated future. The categories of this seeing isolate the death of
sentient beings in a special class. It is all real metaphysical and not
science at all.
In my mind, "science fiction" authors should always have some kind
of scientific basis for whatever phenomena is introduced into a story.
Even some kind of metaphysical conception is permissible so long
as the author has a concept that is clearly defined and not simply
borrowed inconsistently from popular conceptions. Personally, I
would prefer not to see metaphysical concepts in "science fiction".
I don't care particularly for telepathy and Psi powers in this show
either, but the show could still establish somemechanism for Psi
power.
Please jms, do so if you haven't. You don't have to explain everything,
but the existence of some concept on your part will lead to the
establishment of limits and rules on how the ideas can be used in a
story. Undefined and mysterious powers tempt future authors to
invent stuff out of thin air as plot devices to solve problems. This
makes for bad story telling IMAO.
Another quibble concerns the second soul hunter's perception of
death on the station. With B5 having 100,000+ people on it at any
one time would expect that people are dying all over the place in
any given day. I am not sure of the facts, so I may be wrong.
John Baskette j...@macsch.com or j...@kaiwan.com
Henry McDaniel III
[...]
>What concerns me is the soul hunter's ability to perceive when a
>death is about to occur. . . .
>What mechanism does the author have in mind that can explain the
>soul hunter's powers?
>The fact that the soul hunter used a physical mechanism to extract
>the "soul" indicates that some kind of scientific explanation is being
>used for the concept of "souls". . .
Laugh. You ever been inside of a church? There are many physical
things that are used for expressing things to God and others. The
fact that there is a mechanism or object with flashing lights
does not mean it works on scientific laws as we think of that.
Imagine the sould hunter had a jar of holy water with a 9 volt
battery and connected flashing led inside. Now when he points
it at someone and captures their soul do we say there is a scientific
explanation known to us? Or better yet do we say that the scientific
method can be used to duplicate what is going on? In our world, no.
In B5, yes.
>Even some kind of metaphysical conception is permissible so long
^^^
>as the author has a concept that is clearly defined and not simply
>borrowed inconsistently from popular conceptions.
That is what the "fiction" in Science Fiction is for. I often
have wished that I could write a sory without symbols or icons
familiar to the reader. . . Something like "Fried green yibbits
getteh over the purple legged rising mark of the deathday brine."
But in a short story this is ill advised. I have not taken any courses
in television show making, but I suspect it is much like a good written
short-story. The "soul" is a symbol. The things in the bubbles may
not have been souls in the common connotation. All we can say is that
in JMS's reality this is how things work.
> Personally, I
>would prefer not to see metaphysical concepts in "science fiction".
>I don't care particularly for telepathy and Psi powers in this show
>either, but the show could still establish somemechanism for Psi
>power.
Guess this isn't the show for you then! Everything should not
be spelled out for viewers in blueprint fashion. That is the art
of "showing" things vs. "telling." The age old goal of writers
and story tellers everywhere. To convey and express ideas through
examples, symbols. Otherwise you soon end up at best with a documentary
on the fictional world of B5, or at worst an encyclopedia. I admit
hitchiker's guide to the universe was a pretty good show -- but it is
NOT the sort of show B5 is (or should be.)
>Please jms, do so if you haven't. You don't have to explain everything,
>but the existence of some concept on your part will lead to the
>establishment of limits and rules on how the ideas can be used in a
>story. Undefined and mysterious powers tempt future authors to
>invent stuff out of thin air as plot devices to solve problems. This
>makes for bad story telling IMAO.
You don't know how many facts JMS has already established in some
bible for future writers! I'm sure he has lots of facts and
details written down. It just so happens, that a story with depth must
be told over time. Have patience! Then the show will seem moe
realistic because it is based on the inertia of "proven" facts and
long explained concepts. Look at TNG (puke.) A trekkie watching
that show may be told: "Ok so we have this food ray that will turn
every planet within 10,000 light years into corn and butter. And
it works like this. . . " And they will not question it. How
can they? Everything is spoon fed. I like being treated like an
intelligent viewer who has the patience to let the story develop.
>Another quibble concerns the second soul hunter's perception of
>death on the station. With B5 having 100,000+ people on it at any
>one time would expect that people are dying all over the place in
>any given day. I am not sure of the facts, so I may be wrong.
It is a mystical thing (as you suggested it might be.) In this
contex the number of people (and to some extant, space and
time) have no bearing. We just have to accept or reject it.
And given the fact of what happened in the show, suppose we
had better accept it ;)
Imagine youself standing in a football field surrounded by 100,000
shouting fans. Now lets say all of them are wearing white sweaters.
But the dying ones are wearing black ones. Is it really going to
be that hard to spot the bad ones? From the perspective of the
soul hunter walls and a few miles don't mean anything. Well,
what can I say. Either you can accept it. Or you can't.
And about how many people might die in a given day, I recall
they said something about an average person living to 100 years
old?? I got the impression that people do not die easily in the
future. Atleast not unless aided ;)
Nothing personal, but I bet you are an atheist?? I am not, and
so find it easier to ALLOW JMS's spiritual stuff. Even as I
had to suffer through that lam DS9 wormhole diety trash (but
don't get me wrong, B5 rocks!!!)
-McDaniel
____________________________________________________________________
mcda...@u.washington.edu Humble Stellar MUD worker.
Henry McDaniel Communications, PO BOX 28964, Seattle WA. 98118, USA.
John F. Baskette
>Laugh. You ever been inside of a church? There are many physical
>things that are used for expressing things to God and others. The
>fact that there is a mechanism or object with flashing lights
>does not mean it works on scientific laws as we think of that.
You make a good point, but I doubt if you are correct with respect to
the Soul Hunter's Soul stealing machine. The Soul Hunter tells Delaan (sp?)
that he could rip her soul out of her body. He does not do so because he
wishes to induce a gentle death which he starts to do using some kind of
Jack Kevorkian style killing apparatus. The soul stealing machine has not
been turned on. Later, just when the machine gets turned on, Sinclair turns
the machine on the Soul Hunter whose Soul then gets ripped from the Soul
Hunter's body. We even see the image of the Soul Hunter appear in the
little glass sphere.
[Perhaps "Soul Hunter" could be renamed "Jack Kevorkian in the 23rd Century".]
>>Even some kind of metaphysical conception is permissible so long
> ^^^^
> That is what the "fiction" in Science Fiction is for.
My concern is not over the use of symbols or images. Nor do I expect
everything to be without mystery. What I expect is that the author will
have a thought out and consistent conception that they are using when
writing their story. The Soul Hunter on one hand does not believe in life
after death and uses technological devices to implement the soul saving
program. On the other hand, the Soul Hunter "feels" or "divines" when a
death is imminent somehow. We are not told how, but what we see on the
screen seems much the same as you would see if you observe psychics or
faith healers practice their craft. The Soul Hunter percieves death in
much the same way that the oracle of Delphi foretold the future, in some
kind of inner mystical vision or trance.
Also, the Soul Hunter sees this death coming even when there is no danger
or any possible cause of death evident. Our shell game player was still
playing and had not yet finished cheating his murderer to be. Perhaps the
Soul Hunter was able to pick up on the murderous thoughts and from that
could project that someone would surely die, but the Soul Hunters are
never wrong? How can that be?
[As I think about it more, the facts are more ambiguous than I first thought.
This is good!]
So what kind of universe is Babylon 5 in? A materialistic universe without
any supernatural powers? Or is it a universe in which the gods have decreed
every person's fate including the day of thier death and where special
blessed lunatics can divine the future because they have access to the mind
or will of the gods?
jms and company probably intended this episode to be somewhat ambigous on
this point in order to maintain an air of mystery. I just expect and hope
that they have an idea of what kind of universe they have created and can
give an understanding for every thing or event that occurs in that universe.
What I don't want to see is a completely inconsistent borrowing of ideas
and concepts from whatever sort such that the B5 universe ends up making no
sense at all.
I do not expect to be spoon fed or have everything explained. That was not
my point. My point concerned the consistency of the B5 universe. I also
mentioned a preference that B5 avoid metaphysics and base all their
speculations on understandings derived from science as opposed to a
religious or mystical understanding. I do not contend that using a
religious or mystical or spiritual understanding is not being realistic
in a scientific sense, but the inconsistent use of different concepts is
unrealistic. If the viewer catches on (as with that other show) that there
is no consistency then the show loses credibility and the viewer no longer
takes that aspect of the show seriously.
>Nothing personal, but I bet you are an atheist?? I am not, and
>so find it easier to ALLOW JMS's spiritual stuff.
Now it is my turn to laugh.
I am a Christian. jms is an atheist.
John Baskette j...@macsch.com