>>95654562
>Tech and time period don't affect whether or not something is impossible or improbable
Given the overtly counterfactual hard science fiction engaging in the exact same speculations of things known to be false include a number of the best-regarded works and the fundamental nature of speculative fiction frequently engaging with premises that turn out incorrect, this is a terribly inadequate definition.

For example, "psychic powers" are a science fiction trope because they're retro-futurism. In the roots of the genre convention were a great many writers who earnestly believed in the matter, because a very large portion of the population did, and so advancements in them were simply expected as just another part of speculating on probable features of the future. Active attempts at bringing this about are what coined the term "psionics".

>and you definitely don't have to call it something different just because generations of retards believed a lie spread by fantasy writers who wanted to set themselves and their works of fantasy apart in a saturated market.
But that IS how etymology works. A billion retards are in fact more authoritative than a thousand experts, no matter how well educated, because definitions describe common use.

>>95655335
>The narrative functions of knighthood and piloting giant robots don't overlap.
Rather, the function of Mecha in its native genre conventions don't overlap WELL, though on the Super Robot side you'll find plenty of worthwhile comparisons between its notions of heroism and the romance view of chivalry.

Back | Go to board

Board:

/tg/

Thread:

Ultimately aren’t mechs just the sci-fi equivalent of chivalrous knights?>You have your good knights and your evil black knights…

Ultimately aren’t mechs just the sci-fi equivalent of chivalrous knights?
>You have your good knights and your evil black knights…