From: "Strong, Lee" <StrongL at MTMC.ARMY.MIL> To: "'WSFA members'" <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net> Subject: [WSFA] Reality and the Alternatives Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 13:41:05 -0400 Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net> As Spock didn't say, "I admire your mind." I'd like to borrow _Alternate Realities_ sometime. Based on your description, it discusses perceptions of reality rather than reality itself, but it sounds interesting and useful. What Heinlein book(s) included "fictons"? _The Number of the Beast_? Might have to reread it. Strictly for research purposes you understand. B-) Both of the Robinsons are on my "D" list, meaning that I will probably never read anything by either of them, but don't rule the possibility completely out. Yuppies in space and yuppies in cyberpunk: what a lack of concept! Lee -----Original Message----- From: Erica VD Ginter [mailto:eginter at klgai.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 12:47 PM To: 'WSFA members' Subject: [WSFA] Re: Texas, more than you thought This discussiond reminds me of "fictons," created by Heinlein, in which all possible imagined universes exist; each such universe is a ficton. Spider Robinson has adopted the idea and used it with distinction in some of his Callahan's stories. I am also reminded of one of my favorite nonfiction books, "Alternate Realities: The Search for the Full Human Being," by Lawrence LeShan (Ballantine 1976, NY, ISBN 0-345-3494-5). LeShan talks about the different approaches to viewing the universe we all share, i.e., the religious/mystical vs. the scientific, and argues the validity of each approach. I should reread it and review it for the journal, but I just bought Stan Robinson's new book, soooooo... (It's received so many excellent mainstream reviews that I had to go to 4 bookstores to find it! We're proud of you, Stan!) Erica -----Original Message----- From: Strong, Lee [mailto:StrongL at MTMC.ARMY.MIL] Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 7:57 AM To: 'WSFA members' Subject: [WSFA] Re: Texas, more than you thought Sam, I understand your point of view and agree with it in part. However, I think we should reserve the term "alternate history" for universes where objective history differs one from another. Otherwise, a useful term acquires a totally different meaning and becomes almost useless. Perhaps we should use "ideoverse" to describe an individual worldview within a single universe by analogy with the established term "ideolect" used by speech scientists to describe individuals' unique speech sub-languages within a standard language. -----Original Message----- From: Samuel Lubell [mailto:lubell at cais.com] Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 11:26 PM To: WSFA members Subject: [WSFA] Re: Texas, more than you thought At 09:01 AM 4/8/02 -0400, you wrote: >Sam, > If you're really interested, I think I can find my hard copy >reference. Most of the proposals I read in a bound master's thesis at the >University of Mississippi. > >Lee > Not that interested, sorry. But I will comment that every work of history is an alternate history as two historians, looking at the same events will come up with different interpretations.