Why is most science fiction written by doddering old men

bc paraliterature gives anyone w a fetish for modernity (old (white) men)) an opportunity for alternate worlds where something impossible can apologize for them confessionally through violence

>>8241475
>Race wasn't even mentioned in OP
>Immediately go to raceb8ing

nice

File: image.jpg (39KB, 550x525px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 550x525px

>>8241475
>immediately blames old white men
>mfw

It's not an anti-progress book, which the movie sort of it. John Hammond in the book is just an extremely greedy capitalist who pushes to fast to make a buck, gambling human lives on variables he can't possibly predict, rather than taking the technology more slowly and responsibly. It's in line with why Crichton though global warming was nonsense: he didn't write about man exploiting and destroying nature for a quick buck, his running theme is more man thinking he can do this and being careless with it and thinking he can know all the variables a priori without exploring them thoroughly.

The book's perspective is most clearly elucidated in the movie by Malcolm's (who is Crichton's self-insert in the book) speech at the dinner table: "I'll tell you the problem with the scientific power you're wielding: it didn't require any discipline to attain it."

The technology is controlled and exploited by greedy people who have no knowledge or concern about implications or risk management.

>>8241465

>Why is most science fiction written by doddering old men that hate progress?

The Golden Age of Science Fiction happened long, long ago.

>(old (white) men))

Almost everything was written by them, though.

>>8241465
How is a genetically-engineered dinosaur theme park progress?

>>8241630
It increases the amount of entertainment and leisure options in the world :^)