Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Genre Conventions: What is fantasy?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Wayside" data-source="post: 2315758" data-attributes="member: 8394"><p>I don't misunderstand your position in the least. You're saying there's a set of all works of SF, and everything that's a part of one of these works is a part of the set without being necessary to any member of the set. What I'm doing is drawing out some of the consequences of your position, which you don't seem to want to acknowledge. One assumes that all this talk about sets has <em>something</em> to do with actually <em>defining</em> SF, after all.</p><p></p><p>Your diagram demonstrates shared space between genres because it takes the shared space for granted by virtue of the kind of diagram it is, not by virtue of anything to do with the genres themselves. It's a methodology that produces, rather than deduces, its conclusions--bad theorizing, in other words. And it continues to rely on comparison of particular works of SF with other works in and outside SF, none of which can demonstrate necessarily what SF is in itself, if it is anything, since SF, if it exists, is more than a sum of these works.</p><p></p><p>Worst of all, you already need to have definitions of SF, F and H laid out for the diagram to succeed. Your argument against Celebrim and barsoomcore can thus be reduced to the mere fact that their definition disagrees with yours, and, at least for me, your definition isn't valid because you haven't given me any reason to agree with that definition in the first place. But you're going to say: no, it's the fact that a work of SF and a work of F can both contain their (barsoomcore's and Celebrim's) definitions of one or the other--to which I reiterate: you've already defined SF and F then, and your counterargument is based on the assumption that the work of SF is SF and not F, and that the work of F is F and not SF--but what if they're both <em>really</em> SF, or both <em>really</em> F, or the one we thought was SF is F, or the one we thought was F is SF?</p><p></p><p>And this all goes back to Celebrim's point about exceptions. You want to decide them in advance and forbid various definitions accordingly, when we don't even have to agree with you about what is or is not an exception in the first place. And if we don't, this simple disagreement deflates almost everything else you've said. Ideally I'd rather be charitable and not argue from that position, as I said to Celebrim earlier when he initially brought it up, but the amount of sidestepping going on here is astonishing, so maybe such a move is unavoidable.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Wayside, post: 2315758, member: 8394"] I don't misunderstand your position in the least. You're saying there's a set of all works of SF, and everything that's a part of one of these works is a part of the set without being necessary to any member of the set. What I'm doing is drawing out some of the consequences of your position, which you don't seem to want to acknowledge. One assumes that all this talk about sets has [i]something[/i] to do with actually [i]defining[/i] SF, after all. Your diagram demonstrates shared space between genres because it takes the shared space for granted by virtue of the kind of diagram it is, not by virtue of anything to do with the genres themselves. It's a methodology that produces, rather than deduces, its conclusions--bad theorizing, in other words. And it continues to rely on comparison of particular works of SF with other works in and outside SF, none of which can demonstrate necessarily what SF is in itself, if it is anything, since SF, if it exists, is more than a sum of these works. Worst of all, you already need to have definitions of SF, F and H laid out for the diagram to succeed. Your argument against Celebrim and barsoomcore can thus be reduced to the mere fact that their definition disagrees with yours, and, at least for me, your definition isn't valid because you haven't given me any reason to agree with that definition in the first place. But you're going to say: no, it's the fact that a work of SF and a work of F can both contain their (barsoomcore's and Celebrim's) definitions of one or the other--to which I reiterate: you've already defined SF and F then, and your counterargument is based on the assumption that the work of SF is SF and not F, and that the work of F is F and not SF--but what if they're both [i]really[/i] SF, or both [i]really[/i] F, or the one we thought was SF is F, or the one we thought was F is SF? And this all goes back to Celebrim's point about exceptions. You want to decide them in advance and forbid various definitions accordingly, when we don't even have to agree with you about what is or is not an exception in the first place. And if we don't, this simple disagreement deflates almost everything else you've said. Ideally I'd rather be charitable and not argue from that position, as I said to Celebrim earlier when he initially brought it up, but the amount of sidestepping going on here is astonishing, so maybe such a move is unavoidable. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Genre Conventions: What is fantasy?
Top