Are we going to write Fan-Fiction about this game?

[username_3699487]

Are you talking about the book Straw Dogs by John N. Gray? Here's something from Wikipedia:

"Gray sees volition, and hence morality, as an illusion, and portrays humanity as a ravenous species engaged in wiping out other forms of life."
"In Straw Dogs, he argues that the idea that humans are self-determining agents does not pass the acid test of experience. Those Darwinist thinkers who believe humans can take charge of their own destiny to prevent environmental degradation are, in this view, not naturalists, but apostles of humanism"

Yeah, first of all, this all is not Cyberpunk, and more importantly, it is not Cyberpunk 2020. The latter, of course, is a much more specific and unique world and setting. Secondly, he has some very gloomy, albeit most likely accurate views concerning the human species as a whole, but those views fall apart when you're talking about individuals. I know his type, though, and I understand where he's coming from. Despite all his rave reviews and awards though, he doesn't see the forest for the trees, and it would take seeing the entire forest to be able to see all the minute details of those trees.

In any case, he has a lot of ideas which all rest on the assumption that individuals are a part of the whole, which of course isn't always the case.

Hi there.

Yes, that's the book I was talking about.

Well John Gray doesn't believe in progress and I still think that book is pretty cyberpunk. That's because he doesn't see technology as our salvation. Technology just make us pithecanthropus erectus with lasers according to him.
So for him more technology doesn't mean moral improvement, only new ways for men to subjugate other men. In this sense I think he's pretty cyberpunk.

Or did I got this one wrong?

Anyway, I believe he's not exactly original, is he? But as I don't read philosophy books very much, I really liked him.

And when I watched that Mike Pondsmith's vídeo it became pretty clear to me what Gray was talking about in some parts of the book.

 

[Sydanyo]

Well, the whole concept that "the idea that humans are self-determining agents does not pass the acid test of experience" clashes completely with what Mike said about Cyberpunk 2020, which is that it's not about saving humanity, it's about saving yourself. According to Gray, you don't have self-determination, and you can't save yourself.

Also, nowhere in Cyberpunk 2020 is there the idea that the cyberware we use isn't our salvation. Quite the contrary, cyberware is the main attraction. It's what you do with it that determines whether it saves or destroys you. It's a tool, just like nuclear fission. You can use it for good in power plants, or you can use it for evil and slaughter hundreds of thousands with a bomb. Nobody would be that evil, though. Would they?

 

[thewarsend]

It would be interesting to a see story where a woman from the 90s wakes up in the 2070s, and is given the ultimatium of either adapting to the harsh lifestyle of this future or certain death.

My only gripe is that the dialogue should be more natural. Something like this:

"What the fuck are you gonna do with a human popsicle, man?"

"Reasons."

"Youre not gonna sell her off as a bitch to a pack of boosters are you?"

"Fuck no. Just reasons."

"Alright Mr.Vague, your call."

Nice input and good point.. I shouldn't give away much, but she might have a terrible secret.. She was working on technology well above her time after all.. And our main guy might have noticed something he is not telling..

 

[kanonite]

As someone who contemplates philosophy and morality on a frequent basis I must say. This guy is full of shit.

I personally view technology as inherently neutral. Take for example, a hammer. Its a useful tool, allowing one to hammer in nails that support other things along with removing them. It can also be used to stow a mans face in.

Or a car. It allows one to travel across land faster than a horse ever could, and it required far less care than a horse aswell. However it can also be used for getaway after a bank robbery or delibaretly running people over.

Like Mike said, "The Street finds its use for things". Technology in itself isnt inherently evil. Its how the people use it.

Gray's philosophy doesnt just fall apart when individuals come into question, it falls apart when you look at our current accomplishments. The internet, which allows more openess, more satire and meeting more people from other countries than was previously possible. Not to mention giving hundreds of independent music and video game creators an ability to exercise their creativity without executives screwing them over by wanting to appeal to a mythic mass market. If that is not progress, I dont know what is. Claiming to not believe in progress is like claiming to not believe in eyes.

 

[username_3699487]

As someone who contemplates philosophy and morality on a frequent basis I must say. This guy is full of shit.

I personally view technology as inherently neutral. Take for example, a hammer. Its a useful tool, allowing one to hammer in nails that support other things along with removing them. It can also be used to stow a mans face in.

Or a car. It allows one to travel across land faster than a horse ever could, and it required far less care than a horse aswell. However it can also be used for getaway after a bank robbery or delibaretly running people over.

Like Mike said, "The Street finds its use for things". Technology in itself isnt inherently evil. Its how the people use it.

Gray's philosophy doesnt just fall apart when individuals come into question, it falls apart when you look at our current accomplishments. The internet, which allows more openess, more satire and meeting more people from other countries than was previously possible. Not to mention giving hundreds of independent music and video game creators an ability to exercise their creativity without executives screwing them over by wanting to appeal to a mythic mass market. If that is not progress, I dont know what is. Claiming to not believe in progress is like claiming to not believe in eyes.

Yes, I understand what you're saying. When he says that all we have acomplished in terms of technology and knowledge means nothing I think he exaggerates a lot.

And yes he doesn't believe very much in the "human spirit" or in individuals.

Still, I think he has a good insight when he says more knowlegde/technology is not equal better, happier society or moral improvement.

He doesn't say it explicitly but I think for him that's the tragedy: more knowledge is not = moral improvement or more happiness or whatever. Sometimes much to the contrary.

People who used to believe in progress of the mankind, mainly in the XVIII, XIX and XX centuries, used to believe more knowledge = "more happiness", "more freedom", etc.

But there were exceptions. Voltaire was sometimes skeptic about all this. I remember reading a little text he wrote saying he preferred to be unhappy then happy and ignorant.

So I think cyberpunk, as a genre, generally critics this sort of utopia of the XVIII, XIX and beginning of the XX century and so does John Gray.

 

[username_3699487]

Well, the whole concept that "the idea that humans are self-determining agents does not pass the acid test of experience" clashes completely with what Mike said about Cyberpunk 2020, which is that it's not about saving humanity, it's about saving yourself. According to Gray, you don't have self-determination, and you can't save yourself.

Also, nowhere in Cyberpunk 2020 is there the idea that the cyberware we use isn't our salvation. Quite the contrary, cyberware is the main attraction. It's what you do with it that determines whether it saves or destroys you. It's a tool, just like nuclear fission. You can use it for good in power plants, or you can use it for evil and slaughter hundreds of thousands with a bomb. Nobody would be that evil, though. Would they?

Yes... good points there.

And I'm not saying I totally agree with Gray.
Just saying he criticizes some of the XVIII/XIX centuries utopias and so does cyberpunk in a way.

 

[kanonite]

Yes, cyberpunk was indeed a middle finger to the utopian sci-fi that came before it. Spurred by the 1980s historically massive crime-rate and excess along with asias intense industrialization at the time.

And I agree that higher tech doesnt mean happniess. Unless its some kind of high-tech lobotomy that leaves only what makes a person good in their brains.

 

[chriswebb2020.736]

Ok, i'm up to writing a short fan fiction for CP77...

A little bit of Borderlands.
A little bit of Battle Angel Alita.
A little bit of Warsend.


I like it.

 

[thewarsend]

A little bit of Borderlands.
A little bit of Battle Angel Alita.
A little bit of Warsend.

I like it.

Thanks! Glad you liked it.. I'm always trying to keep it "Warsend".. You know..