Why I love Science Fiction

I admit it, I'm a geek. This is not news to my friends. When I asked friends and family to be part of my wedding several of them asked if they would have to dress up as stormtroopers. (They didn't - we were much more subtle. We only played the Star Wars theme as we walked down the aisle after the ceremony. But anyway- there are much more interesting things to have people dress up as besides stormtroopers - not that I thought about it that much.)

And my original interest in Star Wars wasn't particularly sophisticated. It came from watching Episodes IV-VI in my formative years. But as an adult I have grown to appreciate lots of different kinds of science fiction movies, TV shows, and books.

The reputation of those of us who show up to the midnight openings of Star Wars movies, have read all of the Babylon Five Books and have been going through the early DVD's of Stargate SG-1 episode by episode can be less than complimentary. But I want to explain rational reasons that science ficition are worth being interested in.

I think of myself as a student of social sciences. What makes me so interested in science fiction is the way that it allows us to study human nature in fascinating ways.

What would happen if we started traveling long distances in space and discovered other kinds of beings? What makes us unique as human beings compared with the other races? What would we do if confronted with new ways of being? New technology? Would our interaction with other planets and societies bring out the best in us? Or the worst? What is the best of us?

What if instead of our solar system there were a completely different one? If humans live on other places would they act the same or differently?

The parallels between political situations on earth and those in science fiction are great ways of understanding our own conflicts. The battle between the Klingon and Earth in Star Trek is obvious as a parallel to the Cold War, but more recent ones have become even more sophisticated.

Personal and social battles are also fascinating to examine. If a small being like a worm can live for a long time and inhabit different bodies and different genders - what does that mean for our definition of gender or souls? Could two souls and beings inhabit the same body? What defines love, sex, couples for us - and is it different than we think?

We of course know that we would have to have a new way of traveling in order to get far enough to find other cultures. So hyperspace, stargates with worm holes, jumpgates and warp speed are some of the ways that different universes have dealt with this problem. Each one of these create different permutations of problems that have to be dealt with in ways that are often unexpected.

How do other places and beings deal with the idea of higher beings? How does exploring the cosmos change our perception of God?

As I read or watch science fiction, I am impressed with the unexpected turns of the stories. I think what makes it great is the way that all of the rules that usually have to apply to reality can get thrown out.

So that is why I love science fiction. Coming soon - my pet peeves about the genre.

Department of Offense?

When President Bush created a new Cabinet post and Department in 2003 called “Homeland Security,” I wondered about the overlap with the Department of Defense. Not that Homeland Security and Defense do the same thing so much, but rather the name implication. Defense exists to defend our country. But Homeland Security is supposed to secure our homeland? What is the difference? By creating a department of Homeland Security, are we not saying that the department of Defense is actually a department of Offense?

But let’s take a look at a history of the presidential cabinet. How did these jobs evolve?

Washington’s cabinet was pretty small; but then so was the federal government, and especially the executive branch. He had 4 cabinet members: State (diplomacy), Treasury (money), Attorney General (top prosecutor) and War. The first three departments of the executive branch have existed ever since.

The next department was added quickly; under John Adams the second president, the Secretary of the Navy was added. (So was the Navy not involved in war?)

During the 1800’s not very many cabinet posts were created. Postmaster General, Secretary of the Interior and Secretary of Agriculture were the only ones. And in the first half of the 20th century I was surprised to see that despite the growing Presidential power, there were not that many more.

But in 1947 the Departments of War and Navy were incorporated under a new organization; the Department of Defense. Now there are so many reasons that these departments needed to be reorganized. We now had an Air Force and the Marines. The business of keeping the country safe was very different from the job of Henry Knox, Washington’s first Secretary of War.

But why not call it all the Department of War? Well we now regularly had an army, not just during times of war. The jobs of officers and enlisted men in all the branches of the service were not just about making war. But the Secretary of War under Lincoln was in charge of the soldiers that were stationed in the South after the Civil War. They weren’t making war, they were making sure the states of the former Confederacy were following the laws sent down by Congress. So perhaps the department of War has never been completely accurate.

And the new name of “Defense” had to be very political as well. We had just finished the Second World War, which the American public (in general) did not want to get involved in. Calling our soldiers “defenders” instead of “warriors” lends itself to our reactionary isolationism that we get into in this country.

But it is also not true, as the creation of the Department of Homeland Security points out. If the Pentagon were only in the job of defending the United States, their behavior would be very different.

So what should we call these two departments to accurately reflect the jobs that the executive branch is carrying out?

My suggestion about the true nature of the Pentagon in the title is actual facetious (at least I hope so). But I do think that we need to reexamine the mandate given to them.

And maybe a name isn’t very important. We all know what these departments do, right?

Well I hope so.