Escape Artists

Escape Pod => Episode Comments => Topic started by: Russell Nash on July 04, 2008, 05:22:52 PM

Title: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Russell Nash on July 04, 2008, 05:22:52 PM
EP165: Those Eyes (http://escapepod.org/2008/07/04/ep165-those-eyes/)

By David Brin (http://www.davidbrin.com/).
Read by Stephen and Anna Eley.

“…So you want to talk about flying saucers? I was afraid of that.

“This happens every damn time I’m blackmailed into babysitting you insomniacs, while Talkback Larry escapes to Bimini for a badly needed rest. I’m supposed to field call-in questions about astronomy and outer space for two weeks. You know, black holes and comets? But it seems we always have to spend the first night wrangling over puta UFOs.

“…Now, don’t get excited, sir…. Yeah, I’m just a typical ivory tower scientist, out to repress any trace of unconventional thought. Whatever you say, buddy.”


Rated PG. Contains some sexual situations and scattered profanity in both English and Spanish.


(http://escapepod.org/wp-images/podcast-mini4.gif)
Listen to this week’s Escape Pod! (http://media.rawvoice.com/escapepod/media.libsyn.com/media/escapepod/EP165_ThoseEyes.mp3)
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Randomtime on July 04, 2008, 06:21:57 PM
Great EP - Loved the reading (Although the Alien voice was a little unclear). Nice angle and very thought provoking, more of these stories plz.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Talia on July 04, 2008, 11:45:44 PM
A fun listen, I enjoyed the format. I have to wonder that the "aliens" didn't see this particular trend coming, though, particularly if they'd been watching the human race from the start..
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: deflective on July 05, 2008, 12:21:42 AM
i'm liking this philosophy, it's kinda like skepticism lite. you can keep your superstitions but must use critical thinking in daily life to keep the shadows at bay.

btw, is a clicker used to mark cut points? there's a repeated half sentence with a click-clack around minute 27.

I have to wonder that the "aliens" didn't see this particular trend coming, though, particularly if they'd been watching the human race from the start..

it sounded like they created humans, or at least believe they did. in a way, humans are kinda like artificial intelligence run amok for the fear mongers. we were granted autonomy to serve their ends but eventually we rose up, casting them aside with our greater strength and analytical thinking.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Void Munashii on July 05, 2008, 07:37:23 AM
  I was finding this story to be kind of dull at first, but it really grew on me by the end. The idea that UFO sighting are actually fairie-folk messing with people was really neat. I liked the story going back and forth between the radio host (I love talk radio, and used to listen to Art Bell every night) and the "alien".

  Without the revelation at the end about the fairies and what led to their demise, I think this story would have fallen flat for me, but the ending was unique enough to me to make what would otherwise have been a basic "meh" into a good story.

  As usual when voice effects are used, the "alien" was a little hard to understand, but not to the point that I did not know what was going on. The read itself was quite good.

  The only real question I am left with is the reference to taking the infants to a southern island; this seemed like it was meant to be a reference to something I should get. If this is the case, then  it wen completely over my head, and I would be grateful if someone would explain it to me (or link to an explanation)

btw, is a clicker used to mark cut points? there's a repeated half sentence with a click-clack around minute 27.

  That is what my guess was. My wife and I noticed it too, and wondered about it. I think I've heard this on one other occasion too, but that may have been on PP or PC... or maybe Nocturnal.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: sirana on July 05, 2008, 08:26:02 AM
It reminded me of  this comic.  (http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=1192#comic)
Other than that an average story. Not bad and certainly based on an interesting idea, but nothing that deeply engaged me.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Darwinist on July 05, 2008, 01:27:54 PM
Cool story!  Loved the back-and-forth with the alien and the talk show host.  Being skeptic minded, I loved the talk show host rants.   That's the way I feel every time I see some buffoon on TV blathering about the Phoenix lights or the latest Chinese lantern UFO sightings.   Anyway, great story IMO.

Thought the outro was interesting, also.  I can totally relate to Steve there.  I used to believe in all kinds of stuff and now have gone the opposite way.   Great show this week.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: coyote247 on July 05, 2008, 01:36:05 PM
A radio host with iron in his voice against evil fairies. Awesome.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Talia on July 06, 2008, 01:51:22 AM
A radio host with iron in his voice against evil fairies. Awesome.


Thats the thing of it. Were they really so evil? I'm not sure. Deluded, perhaps. incapable of seeing what was going on. However the onset of rationalism was  threat to their very existance, so who could blame them.

Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: bolddeceiver on July 06, 2008, 04:22:18 AM
Well, the post I was writing in my head all through this mostly got said by the scientist on the radio show, but I'll summarize:

A race of aliens so capricious as these really are no better than the gods of old.  If a civilization is so self-important and petty and intentionally inscrutable as these jerks, I want nothing to do with them.

The fact that, in this story, they exist brings up another train of thought I've had on and off.

Let's imagine that God (or gods or fairies or whatev) really does exist, and is as petty and mean-spirited and wrathful and narrow-minded as many practitioners of the world's religions seem to think.  In that case, are the people who pay obesiance to that force any better than a prison guard in Nazi Germany who "follows orders?"  I'd like to think that, in that situation, I would have the cojones to give up the chance at eternal reward to stand up for the same humanistic morals that I subscribe to in His absence.  (For an interesting story that addresses this very thought, check out "Hell is the Absence of God" by Ted Chiang, anthologised in Feeling Very Strange: The Slipstream Anthology, Kelly & Kessel, ed.)
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: coyote247 on July 06, 2008, 01:31:41 PM
A radio host with iron in his voice against evil fairies. Awesome.


Thats the thing of it. Were they really so evil? I'm not sure. Deluded, perhaps. incapable of seeing what was going on. However the onset of rationalism was  threat to their very existance, so who could blame them.




Well I'm of the Discworld school of "fairies are bad" myself, but in general I would classify anyone who views humanity as subservient and not worthy of making our own decisions about ourselves as evil, with the anti-rationalism and anti-humanism just added on poison cherries to the evil sundae.

Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: wintermute on July 06, 2008, 02:38:59 PM
In reference to the outro, I'm a sceptical agnostic atheist, because no other position seems to make sense to me.

Anyway, the story: About halfway through, when the "aliens" were saying something like "Why would we give them lenses when mystery is so much more important?", I was quite impressed. One of my big bugbears in science fiction is aliens that have entirely human thought processes and value systems. To quote Gen. Beaufort Early in Larry Niven's Known Space stories: "The thing about aliens, son, is that they're alien".

So seeing aliens that didn't think like humans was refreshing. And then they turned out to be pixies. Overall, I enjoyed it, but I agree with Void about the children on the island - is that a reference we were supposed to get? And the revelation that the pixies "created" humans as some kind of experiment was an interesting one; I only wonder if that means that all of life (as we understand it) was created by them, which I suppose leads into an ID debate.

I don't think it's fair to describe pixies as "evil" (that would be measuring their cloth with our yardstick) but, traditionally, their goals have never been very friendly to humans. When they took notice of humans, we were treated as disposable pawns in their games, at best. If wasps have a coherent moral system, they may well see humans as being evil (and if they have a coherent moral system, then we arguably are), but... well, I don't know.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: zZzacha on July 06, 2008, 04:10:11 PM
I agree with most listeners here: great story, with some nice thought provoking elements.

Also great performance by Steve and Anna, although at the start I had some trouble listening to the alien voice. Maybe we're just not used to listening to alien voices...

I think the aliens put that click in there too. And then they repeated the last sentence that was said... That sentence must really be the MOST important sentence in the whole story. Well, according to the aliens. And they love mysteries. So put your lenses away, stop focussing on the clicks and feel the mystery :)
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: zalpha on July 07, 2008, 01:25:23 PM
I have a question... it is alluded to in the story that these "aliens" created us... If this is true, then what believed in them before we did?  ???

All in all, a great story, though. Reminds me a little of American Gods.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: wintermute on July 07, 2008, 01:48:25 PM
I have a question... it is alluded to in the story that these "aliens" created us... If this is true, then what believed in them before we did?  ???
Well, maybe it was enough that nothing disbelieved in them...
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: zalpha on July 07, 2008, 01:54:04 PM
Quote
Well, maybe it was enough that nothing disbelieved in them...
Good point...
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: errant371 on July 07, 2008, 02:00:55 PM
I like Brin alot.  Good story and a great reading of it.  The central conceit of the story is fairly well used, and perhaps overused, but Brin as usual makes it fresh and interesting.  The juxtaposition between the radio host and the 'aliens' was a good way of framing the plot.  Glad to see that even a big name like Brin wants to get the Escapepod treatment!
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: bolddeceiver on July 07, 2008, 03:40:53 PM
I have a question... it is alluded to in the story that these "aliens" created us... If this is true, then what believed in them before we did?  ???

Remember, they only believe that they created us; a race so clearly uninterested in (our idea of) rationality might or might not have their own history straight.  Maybe we created them...
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: DKT on July 07, 2008, 03:58:15 PM
Let's imagine that God (or gods or fairies or whatev) really does exist, and is as petty and mean-spirited and wrathful and narrow-minded as many practitioners of the world's religions seem to think.  In that case, are the people who pay obesiance to that force any better than a prison guard in Nazi Germany who "follows orders?"  I'd like to think that, in that situation, I would have the cojones to give up the chance at eternal reward to stand up for the same humanistic morals that I subscribe to in His absence.  (For an interesting story that addresses this very thought, check out "Hell is the Absence of God" by Ted Chiang, anthologised in Feeling Very Strange: The Slipstream Anthology, Kelly & Kessel, ed.)

Honestly, I felt the story was just as much about this as it was about aliens.  But I think that's supposing quite a bit about the characteristics God (or aliens or whatever) and I think your wonderful sentiment fits pretty much in line with "Greater love has no man than this, that one lay down his life for his friend."

Or as Huckleberry Finn said: "All right then, I'll go to hell."

I wasn't really into the story until the twist, which I thought was pretty interesting.  There was stuff about it I liked and stuff about it I didn't.  Mostly that the DJ felt a lot like the skeptic from Steve's outro who told everyone else how to believe.  And I had a hard time believing that alien cared that much about what one guy playing to insomniacs said.  (Although, for some reason, I buy elves caring.)

How is that Kelly/Kessel anthology, BTW?  I checked out their "Rewired: Post-Cyberpunk" but haven't had a chance to read it yet.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: wintermute on July 07, 2008, 04:17:16 PM
There was stuff about it I liked and stuff about it I didn't.  Mostly that the DJ felt a lot like the skeptic from Steve's outro who told everyone else how to believe.
I think that, if people phone you up and ask for your opinion on certain topics, it's OK to explain why you believe as you do.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: DKT on July 07, 2008, 04:25:49 PM
There was stuff about it I liked and stuff about it I didn't.  Mostly that the DJ felt a lot like the skeptic from Steve's outro who told everyone else how to believe.
I think that, if people phone you up and ask for your opinion on certain topics, it's OK to explain why you believe as you do.

That's true, although I was talking more about his tone.  But I guess that's radio hosts for you.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Listener on July 07, 2008, 04:30:35 PM
A strong story that resonated for me -- I used to board-op an Art Bell Show syndicate affiliate, so I've heard a lot of this stuff.

The alien voice was too alien, IMO, and no offense, but Anna's twang took me out of the story a little.

I thought at first they were imagination farmers, living off our emotions, but the fact that us seeing them kills them... hmm... perhaps less than what I expected.

Overall good, though.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: stePH on July 07, 2008, 06:12:38 PM
I liked the story but wasn't able to focus on it, so I think I missed a bit and will have to give it a re-listen.

Good readings by Steve and Anna (at least I assume that was Anna, but the processing made her unrecognizable.)

I don't quite understand the title ... and it makes me want to continue "...oh, I'm cryin' ..."  ;D

In reference to the outro, I'm a sceptical agnostic atheist, because no other position seems to make sense to me.
I agree 100%.  But maybe that's because I've been oversaturated with "The Atheist Experience" podcast lately, and that's the primary host's position as well.

There was stuff about it I liked and stuff about it I didn't.  Mostly that the DJ felt a lot like the skeptic from Steve's outro who told everyone else how to believe.
I think that, if people phone you up and ask for your opinion on certain topics, it's OK to explain why you believe as you do.
Again agreed -- and the host of the aforementioned podcast makes it a point to ask callers why they believe as they do, as well as explaining his own position.

[edit]
Oh, and talking of Art Bell, he made some amusing cameo appearances in the PC game Prey.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: ajames on July 08, 2008, 01:50:05 AM
In reference to the outro, I'm a sceptical agnostic atheist, because no other position seems to make sense to me.

Not meaning to get caught up in semantics, but I'm curious - I'm familiar with 'agnostic' and 'atheist' used separately, but I'm not sure what they mean put together. Is an agnostic atheist one who believes that ultimate reality is unknowable, but that God isn't a part of it? As in, "I don't have all the answers, but I know some of what the answers aren't!" ?? Why not just drop the agnostic part and stick with atheist? Or does atheism imply something other than an ultimate reality without god?

Steve, kudos on the outro. I loved the phrase about trying so hard to keep an open mind that the brains fall out, and I have to agree as well with what you said about certain skeptics, even as I consider myself a skeptic.

Oh, and the story. I'm finding that I enjoy stories with a bit more emotional appeal, so this story wasn't my beverage of choice, but it did hold my attention.


Mod: Fixed quoting
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: stePH on July 08, 2008, 02:05:56 AM
In reference to the outro, I'm a sceptical agnostic atheist, because no other position seems to make sense to me.

Not meaning to get caught up in semantics, but I'm curious - I'm familiar with 'agnostic' and 'atheist' used separately, but I'm not sure what they mean put together. Is an agnostic atheist one who believes that ultimate reality is unknowable, but that God isn't a part of it? As in, "I don't have all the answers, but I know some of what the answers aren't!" ?? Why not just drop the agnostic part and stick with atheist? Or does atheism imply something other than an ultimate reality without god?

Steve, kudos on the outro. I loved the phrase about trying so hard to keep an open mind that the brains fall out, and I have to agree as well with what you said about certain skeptics, even as I consider myself a skeptic.

Oh, and the story. I'm finding that I enjoy stories with a bit more emotional appeal, so this story wasn't my beverage of choice, but it did hold my attention.

Atheist = one whose answer to "do you belive in god" is not "yes". 

"Atheism" is a response to "theism", which means active belief in god/s.  Does not necessarily mean that one actively disbelieves in god/s (that would be "antitheism".)  Most who claim to be "agnostic" are actually atheist.  For this reason I've recently dropped the "agnostic" part of my self-descriptor and just identify myself as an "atheist" though I will elaborate when questioned further about it.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: bolddeceiver on July 08, 2008, 03:55:41 AM

I don't quite understand the title ... and it makes me want to continue "...oh, I'm cryin' ..."  ;D

Heh, it had me thinking of Billie Holiday singing "Them There Eyes..."
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Boggled Coriander on July 08, 2008, 05:03:35 AM
I really liked this story.  Especially the sarcastic attitude of the skeptic. 

Might be an interesting companion story to "Code Brown" (DrabbleCast #29).
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: ajames on July 08, 2008, 11:28:43 AM
Not meaning to get caught up in semantics, but I'm curious - I'm familiar with 'agnostic' and 'atheist' used separately, but I'm not sure what they mean put together. Is an agnostic atheist one who believes that ultimate reality is unknowable, but that God isn't a part of it? As in, "I don't have all the answers, but I know some of what the answers aren't!" ?? Why not just drop the agnostic part and stick with atheist? Or does atheism imply something other than an ultimate reality without god?

Atheist = one whose answer to "do you belive in god" is not "yes". 

"Atheism" is a response to "theism", which means active belief in god/s.  Does not necessarily mean that one actively disbelieves in god/s (that would be "antitheism".)  Most who claim to be "agnostic" are actually atheist.  For this reason I've recently dropped the "agnostic" part of my self-descriptor and just identify myself as an "atheist" though I will elaborate when questioned further about it.

Thanks stePH.

Interestingly (to me at least), I had this conversation about the meaning of the word 'atheism' with my father last week. He argued along the lines that you have put forth, and I argued that atheism was the belief that God does not exist. He had logic (if you look at the roots of the word) on his side, and I had Webster, The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, and even the OED on my side. As I have looked a bit further, though, I see that my father, and you, have more than logic on your side. http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/sn-definitions.html (http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/sn-definitions.html)

I hope I'm not being too pedantic here - this is a topic of some interest to me.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: wintermute on July 08, 2008, 11:47:59 AM
In reference to the outro, I'm a sceptical agnostic atheist, because no other position seems to make sense to me.

Not meaning to get caught up in semantics, but I'm curious - I'm familiar with 'agnostic' and 'atheist' used separately, but I'm not sure what they mean put together. Is an agnostic atheist one who believes that ultimate reality is unknowable, but that God isn't a part of it? As in, "I don't have all the answers, but I know some of what the answers aren't!" ?? Why not just drop the agnostic part and stick with atheist? Or does atheism imply something other than an ultimate reality without god?
I am an atheist because I'm pretty sure no gods exist. When it comes to specific gods (such as Jehovah), that "pretty sure" goes up to something like five nines.

I'm an agnostic because I accept that some god or gods could exist. Show me the evidence, and I'll change my mind.

Almost all the atheists I know (and a fair number of theists, too) are agnostic, though very few of them would think to use that word.

I hope I'm not being too pedantic here - this is a topic of some interest to me.
A pedant is simply someone who demands precision in language. Words have meaning, and using them poorly leads to ambiguity and misunderstanding. Finding out exactly what someone means when they say they're an "atheist" or an "agnostic" is, frankly, central to any discussion on the topic. So, yeah. I insist you be as pedantic as possible ;)
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Dr Frankenshroom on July 08, 2008, 12:44:41 PM
Cool Story

Love the aliens reply to the talk-show scientist retorts.
The aliens should have abducted him and given him an anal probe :D
I know I would.  I would do it to remove the crap up his arse  :D :D

My retort against the idiotic talk show scientst is by a real top research scientist:

  Stanton Friedman from Moving Into Space"
How do we look to the aliens ?  From an alien point of view  wew a primitive  society  whose major   activity  is tribal warfare. Listen to the  the six o'clock  news for a week and you'll see.
Why don't they want to talk to us ?"  What in the world for?  That raises a bigger question . What are they doing here?  Whats so fascinating about this  unimportant place out in the
boondocks.  Fior the first  time, were  given an indication  the we'll  be able  to move out from
 our own planet  to bother  people  on other planets  in our neighborhood"
....

"For  a million years we may have been  a sort of pastoral  civilisation: a nice place to visit, a good place for a honeymoon. great for hunting and fishing. You don't need a license. Yet since
the Second World War, we loudly proclaimed -not by what we said but by what we did- that we Earthlings (a) are nasty creatures and (b) are going to the stars." pg 215


"The most virulently  anti-UFO  people are uniformly  those took great pride  in their  knowledge  of all that is important, especially  in the scientific relam. They seem  to use this kind of reasoning
" If flying saucers were indeed  intelligently controlled  extra-terrestrial  vehicles, that would  be very  important. If it was important., people like me and the New York Times, who keep up with the important , would know about it. We don't about it ; sop there is no basis  for these things are important, and therefore, anybody who thinks  flying saucers are real must be crazy. We don't need  to at any data, becuastr there's no data to be looked at;  becuase if there was, we'd know about it, and we don't ; so there isn't " I would  find this kind of reasoning  fascinating if I was pychologists which I'm not; but as a physicist I must  stand and proclaim it is nonsence. An ego-kick is not the way to arrive at the truth.  pg 214

Another idiotic comment by the scientist" why didn't they teach us the scientific theory of disease"

This is obvious.  We would never understood all those centuries ago
Even at the time of Madame Cure, people didn't believe her either.
As Aliester Crowley stated, you can't teach calculus to pygmies.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Listener on July 08, 2008, 12:50:13 PM

I don't quite understand the title ... and it makes me want to continue "...oh, I'm cryin' ..."  ;D

Heh, it had me thinking of Billie Holiday singing "Them There Eyes..."

I'm leaning in this direction. (http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/These-Eyes-lyrics-The-Guess-Who/5D38A566794CB5D448256CE9002EDA74) (It's not a Rickroll.)
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Cerebrilith on July 08, 2008, 01:11:43 PM
The idea of fantasy creatures that depend on our belief and are harmed by skepticism reminded me of the role-playing game Changeling: The Dreaming.

The story was okay until the radio host at the end got too heavy handed explaining the story to us.  I felt like I was being spoon fed at that point.

The back and forth of the radio host and the alien voice worked really well and I'm glad two different narrator's were used for it.  I'm not a big fan of how the effect for the alien voice turned out though.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: wintermute on July 08, 2008, 01:13:18 PM
Another idiotic comment by the scientist" why didn't they teach us the scientific theory of disease"

This is obvious.  We would never understood all those centuries ago
Even at the time of Madame Cure, people didn't believe her either.
Marie Curie really had nothing to do with the germ theory of medicine; by the time she was born, the basic idea that diseases were caused by micro-organisms was well established. And her work in radioactivity was so uncontroversial that she became the first person to win Nobel prizes in two different disciplines, Chemistry and Physics (Linus Pauling also managed this, for Chemistry and Peace).

And, yes, people laughed at Snow (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Snow_(physician)), Semmelweis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semmelweis) and Pasteur (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasteur) when they first came up with their hypotheses, but once the data was in, the medical and scientific communities accepted it with barely a murmur.

People understood. They didn't much like the idea at first (mostly because it meant that washing your hands was more effective than praying), but they understood. And they would have been capable of understanding a thousand, or ten thousand years ago - as the guy says, all you'd need would be to give a bunch of cavemen a microscope, and it wouldn't have taken long for them to work out that people with set of symptoms X always have little blobby thing Y all over them. From there, it's pretty simple.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: stePH on July 08, 2008, 01:20:33 PM
 
As Aliester Crowley states, you can't teach calculus to pygmies.


 :) I was quite interested in Crowley back in my "belief-sponge" days -- I even took "Minerval"-degree initiation in the Ordo Templi Orientis (never went to first degree because I took seriously the statement that one should be ready to forge a lifelong relationship with the Order before taking further initiation).

I still find Crowley quite interesting.  Very few (if any) others combined mysticism with scientific method.

***
"The Universe is the Practical Joke of the General at the Expense of the Particular."
E. A. "Aleister" Crowley
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Dr Frankenshroom on July 08, 2008, 01:26:39 PM
As Aliester Crowley states, you can't teach calculus to pygmies.


 :) I was quite interested in Crowley back in my "belief-sponge" days -- I even took "Minerval"-degree initiation in the Ordo Templi Orientis (never went to first degree because I took seriously the statement that one should be ready to forge a lifelong relationship with the Order before taking further initiation).

I still find Crowley quite interesting.  Very few (if any) others combined mysticism with scientific method.

***
"The Universe is the Practical Joke of the General at the Expense of the Particular."
E. A. "Aleister" Crowley

I thought it was Cure. I got the wrong scientist. Thanks for correcting me.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Dr Frankenshroom on July 08, 2008, 01:30:10 PM
As Aliester Crowley states, you can't teach calculus to pygmies.


 :) I was quite interested in Crowley back in my "belief-sponge" days -- I even took "Minerval"-degree initiation in the Ordo Templi Orientis (never went to first degree because I took seriously the statement that one should be ready to forge a lifelong relationship with the Order before taking further initiation).

I still find Crowley quite interesting.  Very few (if any) others combined mysticism with scientific method.

***
"The Universe is the Practical Joke of the General at the Expense of the Particular."
E. A. "Aleister" Crowley

I took my 3rd .  I got tired of all the ego games in the OTO.  I then went to Tibetan Buddhism
and found out it wasn't much better their either... :D



That quote is very topical to this story.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: coyote247 on July 08, 2008, 03:06:44 PM

On the subject of skepticism, I like to think of myself as an empiricist. I think that as a whole universal truth doesn't matter nearly so much as "working truths", like math and physics which are fundamentally flawed in rendering the universe but work incredibly well for the small glimpse we usually deal with. So I think it's a pretty good policy to at least try to give people the benefit of the doubt that their beliefs, be they skeptical or believing, are based on their own live experiences and have been changed with their lives to best suit the universe as it has affected them.

However, as everyone who believes in experience/evidence-based perception may cringe at, I do tend to view anything that can't be physically proven as being interpretive like literature or (in my opinion) conjecture on history, psychology, and sociology and so on. That is the aspects that deal with motive (which can not yet be proven) rather than "what actually happened" and "the statistical rates at which things happen". So when it comes to the unknowable things in life, I say be like your highschool english teacher: anything is right as long as you support with a well constructed logical argument and plenty of supporting details with cited examples.

Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Ragtime on July 08, 2008, 03:20:25 PM
  I was finding this story to be kind of dull at first, but it really grew on me by the end.

I had the exact opposite reaction.   I thought it was a cool idea at first, but the story didn't really GO anywhere with it, so by the end it was the same cool idea, moderately fleshed out, but still without any new direction that wasn't there in the first 5 minutes.

Of course, it picked up again after the story with the dedication!  ;)
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: stePH on July 08, 2008, 04:19:34 PM

I don't quite understand the title ... and it makes me want to continue "...oh, I'm cryin' ..."  ;D
I'm leaning in this direction. (http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/These-Eyes-lyrics-The-Guess-Who/5D38A566794CB5D448256CE9002EDA74) (It's not a Rickroll.)

That's the song I had in mind; apparently I've been mishearing the words all this time -- it's "...are crying", not "...oh, I'm crying".
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: stePH on July 08, 2008, 07:59:23 PM
Just finished listening to the story again (there was a story? ;)), and enjoyed it much more the second time.  Keeping the "aliens as elves" notion in mind helped the earlier alien-narrated passages make more sense.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Roney on July 08, 2008, 09:50:56 PM
I liked this story about 70%.  The voices of the phone-in host scientist and the space elf were excellent -- note-perfect I thought, with not a word out of character, and well performed by the Eley tag-team.  I loved the gag that the aliens actually go around stealing homework.  I've seen "elves were just aliens" done before, but "aliens are just elves, with nowhere left to go" is a new one to me.  I liked aliens that were no more at home in the sky than we are.  I was fascinated by the justification of their anti-rationalism -- I can see their point, if the skeptical mind is deadly to them.

And what a fascinating war they were fighting!  I liked their courage in a war that they could never hope to win, not because humans are becoming more rational but because our geographical expansion and round-the-clock activity leaves fewer places to hide.  They seemed to have some quite nifty guerilla tactics for use on modern humans, too: unlike in the old days, where elves could fill in whenever something couldn't be explained, they have to find ways to make people believe in things that actually have simple, rational explanations.  After my initial revulsion, I came to have some sympathy for them.

And I was glad that the space-elf business wasn't saved for a final twist after it had been so heavily hinted at.

So, yeah, an overwhelming display of authorial skill but some of the gears were showing.  The advocate for science is in a situation where soundbites and put-downs are favoured over serious arguments, so he inevitably comes across as glib.  The plaintive, frustrated voice of a dying race understands the scientist and is able to respond to what he has to say -- the radio host has no such advantage, and is made to say things that sound arrogant or foolish in the light of what the listener has just learned from the elf.  At times it seem terribly manipulative, straining to make the scientist into a straw man so the elves could look noble.  It smelled rather badly of propaganda for mysticism.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: qwints on July 08, 2008, 09:55:08 PM
As Aliester Crowley stated, you can't teach calculus to pygmies.

That's just plain wrong. Although hunter-gatherer lifestyles often preclude abstract pursuits, plenty of people who might be classified as pygmies are more than capable of learning calculus. Watch this speech http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/neil_turok_makes_his_ted_prize_wish.html (http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/neil_turok_makes_his_ted_prize_wish.html) about the African Institute for Mathematical Sciences http://www.aims.ac.za/english/index.php (http://www.aims.ac.za/english/index.php).

I liked the story ok. It reminded me of "Kid Stuff" by Isaac Asimov in which a child smashes an elf with his school books.

The thing that has really pissed me off is Steve's argument of tolerance for idiocy. Yes, we should always treat people with respect. But that doesn't mean that their ideas are worthy of respect. I shouldn't have to respect the governor of Louisiana with respect when he says that evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics. I don't need to tolerate scam artists who say that can cure diabetes with cane sugar. People like Carl Sagan and James Randi can be abrasive at times, but they know what they're talking about.

Now I understand that some atheists and skeptics can be assholes, but that doesn't mean that most paranormal believers aren't idiots. ;)
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: stePH on July 08, 2008, 09:59:26 PM
The thing that has really pissed me off is Steve's argument of tolerance for idiocy. Yes, we should always treat people with respect. But that doesn't mean that their ideas are worthy of respect. I shouldn't have to respect the governor of Louisiana with respect when he says that evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics. I don't need to tolerate scam artists who say that can cure diabetes with cane sugar. People like Carl Sagan and James Randi can be abrasive at times, but they know what they're talking about.

Now I understand that some atheists and skeptics can be assholes, but that doesn't mean that most paranormal believers aren't idiots. ;)

Well put.

As Aliester Crowley stated, you can't teach calculus to pygmies.


That's just plain wrong. Although hunter-gatherer lifestyles often preclude abstract pursuits,...

I think that's more what Mad Aleister was getting at, but it could have been put better.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: contra on July 08, 2008, 10:50:08 PM
I liked this story.  I don't have a lot else to add that hasn't already been said.

I liked the ending a lot.  I like d the idea of aliens gonig around and actually doing all these annoying things to people.  I'm rteally not sure why unless the people were paranoid anyway... becuase I wouldn't attribute a loss of keys to the work of aliens... but then i'm not a believer they have ever been here. 

The idea of a war being done through ideas and thoughts rather than anything else, only one side knowing it is a war though.  I suppose it would be looked at, if someone had such a mind, as how certin countries treat the world .  Some ideas are better than others, and they don't understand that the other side even exists or that alternate ideas were just as valid.  But then its been how all Empires ever have worked...

I don't know.  Its only just came to me.. and it's probably wrong.  I'm tired.  Up early.  i'm gonig to bed.

Night everyone.
Thank you Steve and co.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Ocicat on July 08, 2008, 11:00:36 PM
I liked the episode.  From the minute I finished it though, I already feared the comment thread.  Discussions on skepticism vs. belief are never real productive.

For the record, I have heard the "aliens are really elves" concept done before, in a surreal graphic novel called Seekers into the Mystery (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1934506206/escapepod-20).  That story is far more sympathetic of the supernatural critters who have become grey "aliens", and they offer spiritual enlightenment.  So "Those Eyes" is sort of the opposite side of the same coin.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: stePH on July 08, 2008, 11:13:38 PM
The idea of a war being done through ideas and thoughts rather than anything else, only one side knowing it is a war though.  I suppose it would be looked at, if someone had such a mind, as how certin countries treat the world .  Some ideas are better than others, and they don't understand that the other side even exists or that alternate ideas were just as valid.  But then its been how all Empires ever have worked...

I just remembered that the aliens/elves apparently tried to start a war that didn't quite come off.  I'm figuring that this would have been WWIII and would have driven humanity back into the stone age, presumably to reduce us to base superstition within a generation or two (thusly putting us into a mindset more conducive to their survival).
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: ajames on July 09, 2008, 04:34:58 PM
The thing that has really pissed me off is Steve's argument of tolerance for idiocy. Yes, we should always treat people with respect. But that doesn't mean that their ideas are worthy of respect. I shouldn't have to respect the governor of Louisiana with respect when he says that evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics. I don't need to tolerate scam artists who say that can cure diabetes with cane sugar. People like Carl Sagan and James Randi can be abrasive at times, but they know what they're talking about.

Now I understand that some atheists and skeptics can be assholes, but that doesn't mean that most paranormal believers aren't idiots. ;)

I don't consider James Randi or Carl Sagan to be among those who tell us what to think in an arrogant or insulting way. I've listened to interviews with James Randi, and used to listen to the podcast put out by the people who run Skeptic Magazine, and these skeptics were always very respectful of others even as they completely exposed a specific claim to be rather ordinary rather than paranormal. "I'm here at this famously haunted house, and I'm not saying there isn't a ghost here, but I'm just going to look and see if I can find a logical explanation for what's going on. Oh, well, isn't this interesting. Those weird noises seem to be coming from the adjacent stairway in the building next door where the night janitor works... and so on."
Sure, if you are heavily invested in your beliefs you might get pissed off by such skeptics, but that's only because they are raining on your parade, and as it turns out most of your floats melt in the rain.

With all the psychic charlatans around, we need people like James Randi.

Some skeptics, on the other hand, can be needlessly derisive and offensive, and believe that they have some special insight to "the truth" and it is their job in life to shove this "truth" down others throats, while telling everyone else how stupid they are. These are the people I believe Steve was talking about. To use what the Governor of Louisiana said above as an example, it is one thing to take this statement and show it to be utterly unfounded and incorrect; it is another to do this while telling the governor what an idiot he is (he'll surely listen to what you have to say then), and still another to tell him that he needs to think just like you do, or he is an idiot.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: wintermute on July 09, 2008, 05:04:51 PM
...and still another to tell him that he needs to think just like you do, or he is an idiot.
Fixed that for you.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Rain on July 09, 2008, 06:36:12 PM
I could have done without the bad sound effects but otherwise it was a good story, nothing special though
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: qwints on July 09, 2008, 10:25:23 PM
Someone said earlier that they thought the elves were noble. The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of the elves being beaten back by inquiring eyes. I'm convinced the scientist is the hero of the piece (though that may just be my personal bias.) On the other hand, I think the elves are purely evil villains who are content to prey on humanity forever.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Sandikal on July 10, 2008, 01:23:17 AM
I really, really liked this story.  Of course, I'm a big David Brin fan.  He's got such great ideas.

That said, I think I actually thought of this idea (space aliens and fae folk being the same thing) myself about 20 years ago.  Now, this story was published in 1994, so I could have read it and forgotten I read it, but I don't think so.  It's not told in any way I would remember.

BTW, is David Brin EVER going to write another book?  He hasn't had a new novel out since "Kiln People."  I think that was in 2001 or 2002.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: ajames on July 10, 2008, 02:00:13 AM
...and still another to tell him that he needs to think just like you do, or he is an idiot.
Fixed that for you.

Heh - good one. Made me laugh.  :D
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: stePH on July 10, 2008, 04:44:00 AM
Oh, and I've wondered about that movie The Postman by Kevin Costner, that Brin got paid for. 

Somebody once told me "it's like Waterworld on land ... Landworld."
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Darwinist on July 10, 2008, 01:07:33 PM
Oh, and I've wondered about that movie The Postman by Kevin Costner, that Brin got paid for. 

Somebody once told me "it's like Waterworld on land ... Landworld."

I seem to recall that Brin gave a positive review of the movie after attending the premier.  I loved the book and was excited to see the movie, I saw it on opening night.  I was pissed that the movie strayed from the book and it turned in to a Costner pukefest.   Landworld, indeed.   
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Darwinist on July 10, 2008, 01:21:35 PM
Oh, and I've wondered about that movie The Postman by Kevin Costner, that Brin got paid for. 

Somebody once told me "it's like Waterworld on land ... Landworld."

From Wikipedia:

Quote
The Postman (1985) Originally appeared, in substantially different form, as a three-part novella in Isaac Asimov's Science Fiction Magazine. (Filmed by Kevin Costner as a major motion picture with disappointing box-office numbers; Brin has spoken kindly of the film, a generosity shown by few of his fans, who found it deeply disappointing.)

and...

Quote
The Postman received generally negative reviews, faring only 10% on RottenTomatoes.com. The New York Times gave a scathing review criticizing the movie for its "bogus sentimentality" and "mawkish jingoism".[3] Roger Ebert described The Postman as "good-hearted" yet "goofy... and pretentious". However, Ebert recognized the movie as a failed parable, for which he said the viewers "shouldn't blame them for trying".


Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Talia on July 10, 2008, 02:07:07 PM
I have to confess, I liked Waterworld. me and about 2 other people in the world, I think. Heh heh.

In regards to David Brin, it looks like he released a young adult novel called Sky Horizon last year, and per a post he made on Amazon this past April, "Yes, I've been slow producing, lately.  Hoping that... and civilization... will change. Meanwhile... coming this summer... there will be a small "Brin book."  An idiosyncratic, self-indulgent little thing."

so there's your Brin update ;)
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Void Munashii on July 10, 2008, 05:14:45 PM
I have to confess, I liked Waterworld. me and about 2 other people in the world, I think. Heh heh.

  I wouldn't say I liked it, but it was fun in the way bad movies like "Drive-Thru" and "Count Yorga, Vampire" are.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Russell Nash on July 10, 2008, 05:27:52 PM
I have to confess, I liked Waterworld. me and about 2 other people in the world, I think. Heh heh.

  I wouldn't say I liked it, but it was fun in the way bad movies like "Drive-Thru" and "Count Yorga, Vampire" are.

I wasn't too annoyed until the end.  Up to that point I was OK with it.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: birdless on July 10, 2008, 06:09:59 PM
I have to confess, I liked Waterworld. me and about 2 other people in the world, I think. Heh heh.
I enjoyed it, too, Talia. I may have not cast Kevin Costner, but i enjoyed the story, but i'm kind of a sucker for postapocalyptic stuff. I didn't even hate the Postman, though i only remember seeing it once and i don't really recall anything about it.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: DKT on July 10, 2008, 06:11:12 PM
I've never quite gotten the hate for Costner.  I thought Waterworld was fun.  I didn't like the Postman, but I have seen worse movies.  And Costner's done some really good work.  The Untouchables, Dances with Wolves, Field of Dreams are all top-notch in my book.  (Although, admittedly, it's been a while. The last good thing I can think of that he was in was The Upside of Anger...)
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: birdless on July 10, 2008, 06:42:09 PM
I've never quite gotten the hate for Costner.  I thought Waterworld was fun.  I didn't like the Postman, but I have seen worse movies.  And Costner's done some really good work.  The Untouchables, Dances with Wolves, Field of Dreams are all top-notch in my book.  (Although, admittedly, it's been a while. The last good thing I can think of that he was in was The Upside of Anger...)
True, those three are all great movies. But i felt you could have switched Costner and Keanu Reeves in Waterworld and not been able to tell a difference, but maybe that was just the way the character in the movie was supposed to be. He didn't ruin it for me by any means, though.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Nobilis on July 11, 2008, 01:41:58 AM
The story didn't really jazz me, but I *really* liked Steve's commentary at the end.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: ChiliFan on July 11, 2008, 02:05:17 AM
I really liked the tag team reading, especially the alien voice. I think the story had great potential, but fizzled out at the end. I'd have liked the ending to be the aliens proving they existed, but taking some kind of revenge for the radio talkshow host who didn't believe in them. It should be obvious to everyone that aliens exist, even if they look nothing like us. They could be like hot air balloons floating in gas giant planets, feeding off the atmosphere.

Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Russell Nash on July 11, 2008, 10:31:22 AM
It should be obvious to everyone that aliens exist, even if they look nothing like us. They could be like hot air balloons floating in gas giant planets, feeding off the atmosphere.

2001 or 2010?
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: wintermute on July 11, 2008, 11:50:55 AM
I'd have liked the ending to be the aliens proving they existed, but taking some kind of revenge for the radio talkshow host who didn't believe in them. It should be obvious to everyone that aliens exist, even if they look nothing like us. They could be like hot air balloons floating in gas giant planets, feeding off the atmosphere.
But the talkshow host admitted that he believed that aliens exist! He just didn't believe that they were visiting Earth. Plus, the "aliens" weren't actually alien, so I'm not sure what your point is.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: stePH on July 11, 2008, 01:17:47 PM
I'd have liked the ending to be the aliens proving they existed, but taking some kind of revenge for the radio talkshow host who didn't believe in them. It should be obvious to everyone that aliens exist, even if they look nothing like us. They could be like hot air balloons floating in gas giant planets, feeding off the atmosphere.
But the talkshow host admitted that he believed that aliens exist!

Could exist.  He was willing to believe, if shown convincing evidence.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: wintermute on July 11, 2008, 01:22:59 PM
I'd have to re-listen to it to be sure, but I'm pretty sure he accepted life on other planets as a given. Maybe I'm misremembering.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Listener on July 12, 2008, 01:37:04 AM
I have to confess, I liked Waterworld. me and about 2 other people in the world, I think. Heh heh.

I didn't hate it.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Planish on July 12, 2008, 05:39:59 AM
I think I would have liked this story, but the effects on Anna's voice made me miss half of what she was saying, even after a second listen.
That being said, I didn't get the explanations of why they wanted to leave signs but not "land on the White House lawn"; I didn't get the business with heat; and there seemed to be a reference to iron, which I took to mean something to do with the notion that Faerie Folk cannot abide "cold iron".
btw, is a clicker used to mark cut points? there's a repeated half sentence with a click-clack around minute 27.
That is a popular practise with reader for librivox.org (http://librivox.org/). Not only does the sound stand out when you listen to it, but it also makes a pair of easily-recognised visual spikes in the waveform when you edit the sound file.

About Costner movies: I find that I usually like all the other characters in them, but not Costner's. (Graham Greene and Maury Chaykin in Dances With Wolves, Dennis Quaid as Doc Holliday in Wyatt Earp, Alan Rickman and Morgan Freeman in Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves).
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: ajames on July 12, 2008, 11:47:07 AM
I've never quite gotten the hate for Costner.  I thought Waterworld was fun.  I didn't like the Postman, but I have seen worse movies.  And Costner's done some really good work.  The Untouchables, Dances with Wolves, Field of Dreams are all top-notch in my book.  (Although, admittedly, it's been a while. The last good thing I can think of that he was in was The Upside of Anger...)
.

I think the hate comes from his off-screen image. A couple of other good movies he's been in are Bull Durham and No Way Out. I haven't seen The Postman or Waterworld, and probably never will. Same goes for Tin Cup.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: eytanz on July 12, 2008, 09:15:49 PM
So, I'm a bit late with the feedback this week - I'm on holiday and my internet connection is spotty at best - but here goes:

I liked this story, but didn't love it. I liked the dual reading, and I liked the premise - that UFO "aliens" are really not aliens at all in any real sense, but deeply familiar, just a new form of the same creatures that have always lived at the edge of our existence - and that, indeed, living at the edge of our existence is their nature. And I liked the interplay between the two views on the same topic. But on the other hand, as some others in this forum occasionally bring up, it's best to show, not tell, and in this story, not only were we being continuously told stuff, we were continuously being told the same stuff twice. From two different perspectives, but still. I know this story was designed that way, and it worked, but it just wasn't entirely engaging.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Planish on July 13, 2008, 09:31:34 AM
Oh yeah. there was something in the story about engineers working in Area 51 not blurting out "the Truth" about UFO technology.

That is what Bob Lazar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Lazar) claimed to be involved in - reverse engineering stuff found in recovered disc-shaft crafts from Zeta-Reticuli.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: errant371 on July 17, 2008, 04:03:10 PM
The thing that has really pissed me off is Steve's argument of tolerance for idiocy. Yes, we should always treat people with respect. But that doesn't mean that their ideas are worthy of respect. I shouldn't have to respect the governor of Louisiana with respect when he says that evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics. I don't need to tolerate scam artists who say that can cure diabetes with cane sugar. People like Carl Sagan and James Randi can be abrasive at times, but they know what they're talking about.

Now I understand that some atheists and skeptics can be assholes, but that doesn't mean that most paranormal believers aren't idiots. ;)

Well put.

As Aliester Crowley stated, you can't teach calculus to pygmies.


That's just plain wrong. Although hunter-gatherer lifestyles often preclude abstract pursuits,...

I think that's more what Mad Aleister was getting at, but it could have been put better.

With all the nested quotes it is hard to tell you made the comment I put into bold, and it is that comment that I would like to comment on (wow, whole lot o' comments there). 

Actually, hunter/gatherer lifestyles to not preclude abstract pursuits, infact, they encourage them.  The amount of time needed to find and prepare food, even in marginal environments, is much, much less strenuous than early argiculture, pastoral or herding was.  Studies (sadly I have no sources to cite for you, they are buried in my boxes and boxes of books) with the remaining stone age and hunter/gatherer peoples (mostly in places like equitorial Africa, New Guineia, the Amazon) show that on average the tribespeople had anywhere from 8-15 hours of free (as defined by hours that were not spent sleeping, preparing/gathering food/camp maintenance etc) time on any particular day.  And these are harsh environments.  Subsistance farming tribes on the other hand, has only 3-5 hours of free time in more friendly environments.  There are several arguments that it was the hunter/gatherer lifestyle that allowed early humans to create things like art, religion, storytelling (language), complex mythologies and rituals.  What we think of as complex society was only accomplished after the division of labour allowed different castes to form (where you would have farmers toiling for 16-18 hours a day to produce food for priestly castes etc).  In comparison to modern Westernized humans, the hunter/gatherer lifestyle allows for much greater amounts of free time.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: wintermute on July 17, 2008, 05:51:21 PM
anywhere from 8-15 hours of free(as defined by hours that were not spent sleeping, preparing/gathering food/camp maintenance etc) time on any particular day.

By that definition "15 hours of free time per day" means that you're doing absolutely nothing except sleeping and eating. Which is nice work if you can get it. On the other hand, having 8 hours free a day (assuming 8 hours of sleep) works out to a 55 hour work week. Better than subsistence farmers, but worse than most people in the developed world. So that's quite a variance.

Again, I have no cites off the top of my head, but I was under the impression that the studies showing something like a 20-hour work week for hunter-gatherers only counted time spent hunting, preparing food, and other things that were directly related to survival; ad that when they added in the time people spent creating and maintaining tools, weapons and clothing, they had closer to a 40- or 50-hour work week. So about as much free time as the middle classes have always tended to have.

Of course, if anyone can cite real numbers, rather than half-remembered guesses, that would probably help a lot.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: errant371 on July 17, 2008, 07:53:54 PM
anywhere from 8-15 hours of free(as defined by hours that were not spent sleeping, preparing/gathering food/camp maintenance etc) time on any particular day.

By that definition "15 hours of free time per day" means that you're doing absolutely nothing except sleeping and eating. Which is nice work if you can get it. On the other hand, having 8 hours free a day (assuming 8 hours of sleep) works out to a 55 hour work week. Better than subsistence farmers, but worse than most people in the developed world. So that's quite a variance.

Again, I have no cites off the top of my head, but I was under the impression that the studies showing something like a 20-hour work week for hunter-gatherers only counted time spent hunting, preparing food, and other things that were directly related to survival; ad that when they added in the time people spent creating and maintaining tools, weapons and clothing, they had closer to a 40- or 50-hour work week. So about as much free time as the middle classes have always tended to have.

Of course, if anyone can cite real numbers, rather than half-remembered guesses, that would probably help a lot.

Fair enough.  The middle class does have a fairly high porportion of free time, hence things like discussion forums, video game industries, movies etc!  Increased automation in our lives has freed up more time as well (although, strangely enough, working hours for the middle class are again shrinking due to external economic pressures).  All I had really meant to do was point out that hunter/gatherers have much more free time than most people expect, enough at least to originate art, burial practices, complex mythologies etc.  I would peg your estimate of 40-50 hour work week a bit lower, since a lot of the tasks are accomplished communally (like scraping hides, preparing thatched roofs, etc) and benefit from the "many hands, less work" principle.  Tools and weapons tend to be fairly simple, however, and take less time than we expect for that.  Perhaps I used to many "much"s. 

They certainly had more free time than agriculturalists, though.  I think we can agree on that.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: incandenza on July 22, 2008, 03:01:51 PM
Wow, Steve - you even sounded like David Brin there.

-though to be honest that could just be because the voice of the narrator is extremely didactic and self-important
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: wakela on July 23, 2008, 12:10:13 AM
Wow, Steve - you even sounded like David Brin there.

-though to be honest that could just be because the voice of the narrator is extremely didactic and self-important

I got the feeling that Brin was engaging in a little self-mockery in this story. 
I hate to be the guy who bemoans the State of Things These Days, but I think this story was written in a time when you could mock your own point of view.  These Days it seems that Things are so divisive that a writer wouldn't want people misinterpreting his opinion.  "I knew it!  David Brin does believe in aliens.  Look how he made fun of that skeptic."
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Atara on August 02, 2008, 05:38:02 PM
From the outtro: "belief sponge." Great term!

Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: ScottC on August 05, 2008, 05:48:51 PM
I thought that the story could be a comment on colonialism.  The 'fairies' are the colonizers who give the natives some nice beads and alcohol and religion in exchange for valuable resources.  The colonizers convince themselves that this is an equitable arrangement when in fact they have infantilized the native population to be docile .

But when the natives start having ideas of their own or start thinking that maybe they should have a say on what happens to their resources, the colonizers are shocked, shocked at how ungrateful the natives.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: milo on August 07, 2008, 01:30:35 AM
The distortion in Anna Eley's reading of the alien voice made it nearly impossible to listen to. I tried to listen in the car, both over the car's sound system and using headphones. Her voice was unable to compete with the road noise. I finally made it through the episode at home in a quiet room with a Bose music system. While I usually enjoy voices enhanced by sound effects, this one did not work for me.

I'm afraid I didn't much care for the story, either. Both of the points of view just seemed silly and pretentious.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Rail16 on August 11, 2008, 06:05:51 PM
i wish that i could have listened to this story, but the 'alien' voice was too annoying and difficult to understand at times.  after the 3rd time hearing it speak i moved on to another podcast, mentally noting to mark this one as not new when i get home.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: netwiz on August 30, 2008, 08:52:08 PM
This seemed to me more of a dialectic than a story I'd listen to for fun. Dialectic has its place, but it's not why I listen to Escape Pod.
Title: Re: EP165: Those Eyes
Post by: Unblinking on March 26, 2010, 05:14:28 PM
Not bad.  A bit more idea driven than my usual tastes of plot-driven, but the idea was interesting enough to keep me listening.  Steve was a good choice for the narrator since he has a polished voice for radio (unlike me, who has a face for radio).  Anna's parts I found quite hard to understand, not because of her voice itself, but the spec sound fx there were just too much--I could understand her, but I found myself thinking more about how weird she sounded than about what she was saying.

I liked the idea of creatures being beaten back by skepticism.  If this concept were explained to the announcer in some form, could he learn to believe?  If I'm a skeptic, and I KNOW that these creatures exist, but the strength of their existence depends on people believing them to exist, then can it really be proven that they exist at all?  The trouble is, the skeptic's view is based on the assumption that facts are facts regardless if they are observed.  You can't have proof if the facts change whenever you're not looking!  And that's why the story was interesting to me.  :)