Why do people believe that having an imagination makes you a moron?

[Marshalscienceguy]

I really do not understand this logic. Someone says because you saw it in a movie its impossible. People cant invent anything if they don't have an imagination so why does having an imagination make you a moron? People said "What if people could fly" and made airplanes. Does that make them idiots? Why do people believe that because it does not exist now it will never exist and anyone with an imagination is stupid? I really don't understand this logic at all. In Star trek they transported peoples particles to another location. They are currently working on this. So why is believing stuff in star trek could be possible one day a sign that you're a complete idiot and everyone needs to laugh at you?

[ajb]

This coming from some bitter experience?

[Greg H.]

bitter whinging

Remember this:

 

1. The average intelligence of any group of people is inversely proportional to the size of the group.

2. In general, people are assholes.

[swansont]

I really do not understand this logic. Someone says because you saw it in a movie its impossible. People cant invent anything if they don't have an imagination so why does having an imagination make you a moron?

I think you're vastly over-generalizing.

 

However, I do think that there is an issue at play here, in general. Credulity/incredulity. Some people are too credulous at things they see and hear, not understanding or having experience at what's involved. That sounds like what you're talking about. The other side of the coin is the issue of not believing something unless that person can experience or understand it.

 

Either extreme is worrisome.

 

In Star trek they transported peoples particles to another location. They are currently working on this. So why is believing stuff in star trek could be possible one day a sign that you're a complete idiot and everyone needs to laugh at you?

The actual technology in Star Trek is somewhat nebulous, but no, they aren't. Quantum teleportation is not the same thing and Star Trek should not be mentioned in any other context when discussing it.

 

Since it's topical,

http://blogs.scienceforums.net/swansont/archives/14945

[Marshalscienceguy]

 

I think you're vastly over-generalizing.

 

However, I do think that there is an issue at play here, in general. Credulity/incredulity. Some people are too credulous at things they see and hear, not understanding or having experience at what's involved. That sounds like what you're talking about. The other side of the coin is the issue of not believing something unless that person can experience or understand it.

 

Either extreme is worrisome.

 

 

The actual technology in Star Trek is somewhat nebulous, but no, they aren't. Quantum teleportation is not the same thing and Star Trek should not be mentioned in any other context when discussing it.

 

Since it's topical,

http://blogs.scienceforums.net/swansont/archives/14945

This is debate I keep seeing. "Its in a movie so it can never happen". I just don't understand how any one can follow this thinking much less use it to discredit another persons argument and I see this argument a lot. I am not saying all movies are 100 percent fact but if there is a possibility presented in a film I don't think it should be ruled as a flat out lie automatically. The only reason people created inventions and advancements was the fact someone had enough of an imagination to see the possibilities and not settle for whats in front of us. Someone had to have the idea for any of this to happen.

Edited May 14, 2014 by Marshalscienceguy

[Arete]

To use an old saying - it's good to have an open mind, but don't open it so far that your brain falls out.

 

While imagination and creativity are essential components of science, those new ideas should build on existing knowledge rather than rejecting or ignoring it. If something in a movie blatantly contradicts everything we know about a subject, maintaining the idea that it is somehow plausible just because imagination, is somewhat fruitless.

[swansont]

This is debate I keep seeing. "Its in a movie so it can never happen". I just don't understand how any one can follow this thinking much less use it to discredit another persons argument and I see this argument a lot. I am not saying all movies are 100 percent fact but if there is a possibility presented in a film I don't think it should be ruled as a flat out lie automatically. The only reason people created inventions and advancements was the fact someone had enough of an imagination to see the possibilities and not settle for whats in front of us. Someone had to have the idea for any of this to happen.

I remember some students who were dumbfounded that antimatter was a real thing, because they had seen it on Star Trek. Too much assumption about the "fiction" part of science fiction.

 

As I said, when the pendulum swings too far in either direction, it's not good. On the one side is "Its in a movie so it can never happen" but on the other side is "anything is possible". But not everyone falls into these categories.

[Marshalscienceguy]

To use an old saying - it's good to have an open mind, but don't open it so far that your brain falls out.

 

While imagination and creativity are essential components of science, those new ideas should build on existing knowledge rather than rejecting or ignoring it. If something in a movie blatantly contradicts everything we know about a subject, maintaining the idea that it is somehow plausible just because imagination, is somewhat fruitless.

I agree completely. Reality has rules that we must follow in order to produce things. Now some ideas just might not work. It doesn't mean we can write off everything though. A cyborg seems a little more plausible than a fairy born when babies laughs.

Edited May 14, 2014 by Marshalscienceguy

[swansont]

Cyborgs probably seem more plausible because if one applies the most basic definition of the term, they already exist. Cochlear and other types of implants, etc. One might even consider artificial joints as counting.

[Iamwhat?]

What are you doing with your imagination? Are you using your imagination imagining some made for TV future reality, or some new invention to get rich? Or are you using your imagination for the betterment of mankind?

Imagination is never bad it all depends on the context. I feel we should all strive for productive imagination.

[Ophiolite]

Imagination is never bad it all depends on the context.

Hitler had an active imagination. Are you arguing that was good? Or just neutral?

[Marshalscienceguy]

Hitler had an active imagination. Are you arguing that was good? Or just neutral?

You just invoked godwins law.