Culture

Echopraxia: Not Just A Science Fiction Novel

34 Comments

echopraxia

Is is very rare that a book can truly be thought-provoking these days, especially works of fiction in an age of consumerism, materialism, and pop culture. It’s even rarer that I count down the days until the book is released. On August 26, 2014 Peter Watts released Echopraxia, the sequel to Blindsight. Not only did I purchase it as soon as possible, but also purchased the first edition hardcover instead of the Kindle version. It did not disappoint—I read all 384 pages in one day.

Echopraxia is a continuation of the story of humanity’s reaction to an ambiguous but very direct contact on Earth from something outside the solar system. This book is about the second space mission that investigates this contact. This occurs after the results of the first one in Blindsight are unknown. It is set about 80 years in the future and includes a human population that pushes the upper and lower limits of development.

In this novel, things such as genetically modified humans that have a phenotype traits similar to vampires and zombie soldiers are presented in a convincing light. The allegory for designed obsolescence is further hammered in the book when upgrades of the body are contrasted to those who are unmodified “baselines.” Don’t worry, I won’t spoil anything here.

The various interactions between these humanity “types” caused me to consider the social interactions of human beings today, and this is not the only consideration of the modern world this book has caused me to reevaluate. Concepts such as consciousness, levels of control and manipulation, and determinism are dwelt on in this book in ways not seen in general publishing since the Enlightenment. Allow me to highlight  some choice excerpts:

Long before art and science and philosophy arose consciousness had but one function: not to merely implement motor commands but to mediate between commands in opposition.

This passage really got me thinking about the nature of consciousness. The way it is framed actually had me questioning whether it really existed, and was not just a set of higher-level programming in an organic brain that is merely perceived as “conscious” due to increasing complexity.

Hell rationality itself—the exalted human ability to reason—-hadn’t evolved in the pursuit of truth but simply to win arguments, to gain control: to bend others, by means logical or sophistic, to your will.

This reminded me that your opponent in a debate might not actually care about the truth and is just peddling influence. It also give me a way to articulate my thoughts the next time someone is trying to push political influence on me when their goal is not the truth.

Truth had never been a priority. If believing a lie kept the genes proliferating, the system would believe that lie with all its heart.

This reminds me of the current artificially constructed systems that have a lie at their core necessary for the continuation of that system (e.g. feminism).

It’s all window dressing. They think they’re really sticking it to you but they’re being herded into the service of agendas they’d never support in a thousand years, if only they knew. And they’re dedicated, Daniel. They’re ferocious. They fight your wars with a passion you could never buy and never coerce, because they’re doing it out of pure ideology.

This quote is in reference to activists in the book and how they are doing the dirty deeds for the system they think they are fighting against. Applying this logic to current political and social activism, one should question who truly benefits from such activism, and consider that maybe those beneficiaries are the true hidden string-pullers.

Peter Watts covers quite a bit of philosophy and science in his book. All of it seems very well-based in actual modern ideas and concepts. He even has a bibliography at the end of his book highlighting where to look for information on these ideas. This allows the reader to look up scientific and philosophical ideas themselves and draw their own conclusions.

Overall, this book is a work beyond just science fiction. It is not the province of nerds alone. It is one of the few cases of literary open-mindedness today and is not wishy-washy propaganda. It is very sophisticated, and you might have to look up certain terms and concepts in order to understand them. I know I did. Nothing worth knowing in this world is easy, though. If you want to step it up from Tom Clancy or Twilight pulp fiction, this is the book for you.

Read More: Echopraxia, By Peter Watts

34 thoughts on “Echopraxia: Not Just A Science Fiction Novel”

  1. For something to exist, it’s opposite must exist. There would be no tall or short if everyone in the world were the same height. Height simply wouldn’t exist, and people could only argue the concept theoretically. In a physical sense, when we have the opposites of tall people and short people, we have the reality of height, and so the existence of height is truth. In a theological, philosophical or social sense, we can have the “this” and “that” in abstract form, then spend eons arguing what aspect of the abstract is truth and what’s false.
    If it can be conceived in the mind, then it’s truth. If it can move beyond conception and be experienced, then it’s real. Since any conception can be realized, it’s all real. The base question is simply, which part of reality do you wish to experience?

      1. It it’s conceived, it exists. If it exists, then it’s truth. Your rebuttal started as a thought. Your typing the thought allows others to experience it. People then assign a judgement to it and decide if it’s right or wrong for them. If a billion people agree with your thought or none do, it’s still truth for you.

        4. Hmm, getting very philosophical here. I would say though, you may conceive lies in your mind. That does not give truth to your lies simpy because they have been conceived and exist (in your mind, or elsewhere). Even universal truth is only as human men perceive it: 2 different photons may be examined to be a particle and a wave. Then they may fluctuate and change instantly to the opposite (wave and particle, respectively). The point being, mans perception is the only truth, which is still just subjecture. Conception and existence are abitrary terms if even truth is not absolute.

        5. “It it’s conceived, it exists.”
          For you in your bubble? Okay. In the real world, no.

        7. That sounds a lot like that junk deconstrunctionist philosophy that was being peddled in the late ’90s. The philosophy departments pretty much uniformly dismissed it as silly notion, but it found a warm welcoming home for a while in the much less rigorous english and literature departments.
          I can conceive of unicorns, fairies, gremlins, elves, and dragons. It would be folly to assume these mythological creatures then exist.

        8. It would be folly to assume they can’t exist outside of your own thoughts, simply because that’s the only place you’ve found them. Most people underestimate what kind of machine the universe really is, and what they themselves are.

        9. If you can think it, it does exist.
          Example: Gremlins.
          Not on earth now, but maybe 100 000 years ago or 100 000 in the future, who knows.
          If not that we could still create them as pixels in a movie or a computer game or or or or.
          If we can think it, it becomes reality one way or the other.
          Endless space and endless time.

        10. This is mindless drivel. If you want to claim that before a creation can exist, it must be thought out. Fine. However, if you want to claim that, because you “think” it, it exists, that’s pure, unadulterated, bullshit.

    2. ”Since any conception can be realized, it’s all real. The base question
      is simply, which part of reality do you wish to experience?”
      There are hard and fast limits that reality will impose on your conceptions.

        2. If they’ll lie to you about gender constructs through the use of feminism or social engineering, is it a stretch to think they’ll lie to you about other things? There are far greater lies used to control humanity than those surrounding gender relations.
          —
          “Hell rationality itself—the exalted human ability to reason—-hadn’t evolved in the pursuit of truth but simply to win arguments, to gain control: to bend others, by means logical or sophistic, to your will.”
          “It’s all window dressing. They think they’re really sticking it to you but they’re being herded into the service of agendas they’d never support in a thousand years, if only they knew. And they’re dedicated, Daniel. They’re ferocious. They fight your wars with a passion you could never buy and never coerce, because they’re doing it out of pure ideology.”
          “Truth had never been a priority.”
          —
          People can quickly identify the ideologies and propagandas that others fall victim to. But most never bother to examine the entirety of their own beliefs, nor examine whether those beliefs were self-determined or placed there by other people. How much of the software in your mind is code that you’ve written for yourself? If you could create yourself as a being without limitation, is your current self the model you’d choose to experience?
          Most people do not realize they’ll fight to keep themselves locked into the bottom 1% of their own potential. The truth is not the sum total of what you already know, it’s the sum total of what you can imagine. The lie is you believing your very thoughts cannot exist as reality. It’s a great lie, so deep and so vast that those who believe in it will die to protect it. Saving the lie absolves them of all responsibility for the creation of their own thoughts.
          Most people underestimate what kind of machine the universe really is, and what they themselves truly are.

        3. Are you saying evolutionary pressure does not necessarily select for truth? If so how can you trust your own thoughts?

  3. I enjoyed your article. Like you I enjoy reviewing the deeper notions of consciousness and our humanity.
    “Hell rationality itself—the exalted human ability to reason—- hadn’t evolved in the pursuit of truth but simply to win arguments”
    I (think I ) know what you are onto here. I would suggest that rationality was first put to use staying away from large carnivores with big claws and teeth. After that we played mind games with our friends and family.

    1. I disagree with this contention that states that logic can be used to fool, twist or convert someone into believing what you are saying. For example, I know as a matter of fact that alchohol kills testosterone, and so as a man, you shouldnt drink it. I dont care if you disagree or feel im twisting your arm or whatever bullshit. Thats rational thought and logic. Its objective.

      1. Alcohol does not kill testosterone. Alcohol (in excess) interrupts the process by which testosterone is made by the body. Alcohol also relaxes the inhibitions of both men and women. The latter of which may allow you to put that testosterone to the good use nature intended.
        Being successful at seduction is a worthy and rational goal. The process is anything but.

        1. Perhaps I was not clear. You are mistaken. Any consumption of alchohol interupts the production of testosterone and raises estrogen levels (hence bitch tits on middle aged men with beer guts). As to your comment on inhibition, alchohol removes inhibition almost completely (a basic thinking process) and is also a depressant (phycho-tropicly affects mood, causing irritability, sadness, anger etc). Purposefully doing these things to your body (yourself) is very stupid. If you happen to be a stud when your drunk or inebriated (I doubt it, haha) then thats a different story and still not logical considering the risk versus payoff concept.

  4. May I also recommend along the lines os this book, Dan Simmons’ “Hyperion” and “Fall of Hyperion”?

      1. All four are among my favourite sci-fi books, but I consider Hyperion and Fall of Hyperion the best of them.
        And it’s not correct to call the Hyperion books prequels, as they were the first ones written. It’s simply four books in chronological order, with a large time gap between the second and the third.
        And on the topic of the article, thanks to the writer for the recommendation. I bought Blindsight the other day, though I haven’t gotten far enough into it yet to determine if I’m going to love it.

  5. People ‘who do the dirty deeds for the system they think they are fighting against’ – we now call them ‘useful idiots’. It’s nice to have ample buzzwords for a quick smackdown of a useful idiot (coincidentally) when they rear their opinion (if they have their own).
    Many useful idiots to feminism or pan-gyno-phooey are unknowing dupes in service to unseen agenda-crats. An obscure level of controllers who actually walk breast to breast amongst us largely undetected. The ugly female feminist butches are merely aberrant followers and dupes. Their justification is their coping mechanism, and they are at least HUMAN. Unlike the agenda-crats of feminism, the architects and administrators of the law and craft used to confuse our sexual identity and attack our genetic core.
    It is essential to have terms like ‘agenda-crats’ to maintain brevity in our arguments and to stack them well for optimum PUNCH. It is true most people are well meaning while they know not what they do. Yet most people inherently know right from wrong and ARE NOT dumb animals and DO NOT require government suits barking at them. It’s time we start kicking shins and BREAK OUT of the idiotic farm people.
    Feminism isn’t a sickness or invading micro pathogen. It is a doctrine, a way of life and follows genetic coding that is ALIEN to our mammalian species. It is of INSECT origin. Sadly it is being used to corral and control men AND women. ALL OF US. Our entire species.
    As our civilization advances and becomes more complex it is easy to lose touch with our core genetic tribal patriarchal root. Men must therefore make genuine effort to insert and insinuate patriarchal dominance at all times. Raise the patriarchal flag and KEEP IT HIGH. I’d hate to see a future with a flag waving over us with SOME DAMNED BUG on it. REALLY !

  7. Fuck yeah Peter Watts! Love this guy. In a world where the biggest Sci_fi books a popular because they “challenge traditional gender views” (see 2312 and Ancillary Justice) he’s writing real Science Fiction. Awesome to see Echopraxia featured here.

  8. Thanks Douglas. I haven’t read a science fiction, or fiction of any sort, book for some years now. It’s been hard finishing my current readings lately without an interesting fiction to liven up my more concrete reads. I’m excited to look into this book.

Comments are closed.