Status
Available
Call number
Publication
Bantam Books
Pages
244
Description
One of the great masterworks of science fiction, the Foundation novels of Isaac Asimov are unsurpassed for their unique blend of nonstop action, daring ideas, and extensive world-building. The story of our future begins with the history of Foundation and its greatest psychohistorian: Hari Seldon. For twelve thousand years the Galactic Empire has ruled supreme. Now it is dying. Only Hari Seldon, creator of the revolutionary science of psychohistory, can see into the future--a dark age of ignorance, barbarism, and warfare--that will last thirty thousand years. To preserve knowledge and save mankind, Seldon gathers the best minds in the Empire--both scientists and scholars--and brings them to a bleak planet at the edge of the Galaxy to serve as a beacon of hope for future generations. He calls his sanctuary the Foundation. But soon the fledgling Foundation finds itself at the mercy of corrupt warlords rising in the wake of the receding Empire. And mankind's last best hope is faced with an agonizing choice: submit to the barbarians and live as slaves, or take a stand for freedom and risk total destruction.… (more)
Collection
Language
Original language
English
Original publication date
1951
Physical description
244 p.; 8.6 inches
ISBN
9780553803716
Similar in this library
User reviews
LibraryThing member PJWetzel
Asimov's 'Foundation' is the book that launched a thousand imitators. Frank Herbert's Dune series is a prime example. Star Trek is a direct descendent. At the time it was written, Asimov's vision of a Galaxy-wide empire was revolutionary, and therefore stunningly brilliant.
But ... beyond the basic
The story consists of one dreary formal 'boardroom-style' meeting after another. In it we are fed much more detail about Asimov's (impossibe to swallow) vision of the political workings of society than detail about the wider scope. Action is not shown but discussed in hindsight in the board room. To me that is cowardly and stand-offish. And the writing style exacerbates this impression. It is consistently pompous.
I know I'm swimming against the tide by saying this, but having read five of Asimov's books now, I'm finished. I can't stand him. I will read no more.
But ... beyond the basic
Show More
concept, and reading this book from today's perspective, when all the novelty of the concept has completely worn away, I found this book to be unpalatable. Fortunately the Foundation series gets better with each succeeding book, but this first effort isn't even mostly science fiction--it is political fantasy.The story consists of one dreary formal 'boardroom-style' meeting after another. In it we are fed much more detail about Asimov's (impossibe to swallow) vision of the political workings of society than detail about the wider scope. Action is not shown but discussed in hindsight in the board room. To me that is cowardly and stand-offish. And the writing style exacerbates this impression. It is consistently pompous.
I know I'm swimming against the tide by saying this, but having read five of Asimov's books now, I'm finished. I can't stand him. I will read no more.
Show Less
LibraryThing member helver
For over 10,000 years, the Galactic Empire has ruled the galaxy, bringing with it an era of peace and prosperity unheard of in human history. Unfortunately, mankind's drive to innovate and create and adapt come in periods of adversity. A lone scientist and mathmetician, Hari Seldon, creates a field
An exceptional book. Some say that Asimov doesn't spend time creating characters with any depth or worlds with any feel. And while I'll concede that he doesn't, I don't believe we're missing anything. The point, at least in this novel, is not about the uniqueness of worlds and individuals, but about the commonality of worlds, populations, and ideas. The ideas put forth here are huge: psychohistory; the consolidation of political power; the mechanisms for empire building through religion, trade and culture. Huge, HUGE ideas that would certainly be diminished if the author spent more time developing a character that exists for a blip on the timeline of the story...
Read 12/2007
Show More
of study he calls psychohistory - a mathmatically deterministic approach to studying and predicting the behaviors of large groups of people - and discovers that the Galactic Empire is rotting and has already begun its inevitable decline. As distressing as that prediction in, even more problematic is the 30,000 years of barbarism that will result from the fall of the Galactic Empire. In an effort to spare future generations from another Dark Ages, Seldon convinces the Emperor to fund the Encyclopedia Foundation - a group of scientists dedicated to collecting all knowledge and archiving it for future use. Fortunately, the Foundation is just a ruse...An exceptional book. Some say that Asimov doesn't spend time creating characters with any depth or worlds with any feel. And while I'll concede that he doesn't, I don't believe we're missing anything. The point, at least in this novel, is not about the uniqueness of worlds and individuals, but about the commonality of worlds, populations, and ideas. The ideas put forth here are huge: psychohistory; the consolidation of political power; the mechanisms for empire building through religion, trade and culture. Huge, HUGE ideas that would certainly be diminished if the author spent more time developing a character that exists for a blip on the timeline of the story...
Read 12/2007
Show Less
LibraryThing member thenumeraltwo
There's a noticeable absence of women. I guess equality wasn't one of the things expected to develop in the 220 centuries of empire.
Which isn't the only anachronism. Someone's phone goes off while their in the bath. Which was a thing back in the day.
With reading The Dispossessed, Dune and
Which isn't the only anachronism. Someone's phone goes off while their in the bath. Which was a thing back in the day.
With reading The Dispossessed, Dune and
Show More
Roadside Picnic I've been doing the, ahem, foundational Sci-fi works. Show Less
LibraryThing member BenDV
Asimov's Foundation trilogy is a very obvious pick for anyone wanting to get into sci-fi since it was specially given a Hugo Award for Best All-Time Series. As far as I can tell, that's pretty much the highest official praise you can get in sci-fi. But yet again the Golden Age of sci-fi has left me
So in case you don't know, Foundation is set thousands of years into the future, when Earth has been forgotten and humans have established a Galactic Empire. Everyone is thoroughly pleased with themselves for doing this and believes this Empire will last forever. But Hari Seldon, one of the great thinkers of the Empire, has developed a form of mathematics called psychohistory which predicts the future by predicting the mob-behaviour of human beings; how they will respond to various events, how things will then play out as a result of these things etc. Psychohistory predicts that the Empire is doomed; in response, Seldon helps set up a Foundation on a remote planet intended to protect the science and culture of the Empire from the coming Dark Ages, shorten the length of those times and plant the seeds for a new Galactic Empire. But along the way, there will be many crises that will have to be faced by the Foundation; the novel deals with those crises.
Foundation can be praised for its creative ideas and it's extremely well-executed stories of political intrigue, but it still pretty much fails as a novel. Asimov has no interest in emotionally involving you in his story; its cold and detached, focusing entirely on the big picture and having no concern for the micro-scale. Characters are barely given personalities, and there is little difference in voices between any of them (a comparison with the Star Wars prequels would not be inaccurate). There's no real explanation of setting in most of the novel either, no tone is really established; all Asimov wants to tell you about are the crises as predicted by psychohistory. As a result the novel is very dry, so that it doesn't even really feel like you're reading a novel at all. This may not bother sci-fi fanatics, but people who want novels to actually make them feel something aren't going to be blown away.
Foundation is worth reading because of its reputation, but if I were you I wouldn't expect the greatest sci-fi book you've ever read. Still, it's good enough for me to want to read the next two.
Show More
feeling disappointment because of the same damn flaws. So in case you don't know, Foundation is set thousands of years into the future, when Earth has been forgotten and humans have established a Galactic Empire. Everyone is thoroughly pleased with themselves for doing this and believes this Empire will last forever. But Hari Seldon, one of the great thinkers of the Empire, has developed a form of mathematics called psychohistory which predicts the future by predicting the mob-behaviour of human beings; how they will respond to various events, how things will then play out as a result of these things etc. Psychohistory predicts that the Empire is doomed; in response, Seldon helps set up a Foundation on a remote planet intended to protect the science and culture of the Empire from the coming Dark Ages, shorten the length of those times and plant the seeds for a new Galactic Empire. But along the way, there will be many crises that will have to be faced by the Foundation; the novel deals with those crises.
Foundation can be praised for its creative ideas and it's extremely well-executed stories of political intrigue, but it still pretty much fails as a novel. Asimov has no interest in emotionally involving you in his story; its cold and detached, focusing entirely on the big picture and having no concern for the micro-scale. Characters are barely given personalities, and there is little difference in voices between any of them (a comparison with the Star Wars prequels would not be inaccurate). There's no real explanation of setting in most of the novel either, no tone is really established; all Asimov wants to tell you about are the crises as predicted by psychohistory. As a result the novel is very dry, so that it doesn't even really feel like you're reading a novel at all. This may not bother sci-fi fanatics, but people who want novels to actually make them feel something aren't going to be blown away.
Foundation is worth reading because of its reputation, but if I were you I wouldn't expect the greatest sci-fi book you've ever read. Still, it's good enough for me to want to read the next two.
Show Less
LibraryThing member tabascofromgudreads
Superbly original work, about the fall of a future Galactic Empire and its gradual reconstruction over the span of some centuries. I absolutely love how, despite being set 14,000 years in the future, EVERYBODY, on EVERY planet, keeps smoking cigars and cigarettes as if their life depended on it.
I prefer the robot series, it's more engaging. The weakness of the Foundation series is the ultimate "goal" of decreasing the Middle Ages anarchic period from 30,000 years to 1,000 years. Doesn't make too much sense, and it does not help the reader to invest in the story, especially when the charachters necessarily change with each of the 5 stories.
Show More
Also, when they want to gaze at the stars, the charachters pull "heavy drapes" from the windows. Amazing. But Asimov doesn't give a crap about these details, what he's writing about is ideas and logical tricks, not people, not emotions, not a credible future reality. I prefer the robot series, it's more engaging. The weakness of the Foundation series is the ultimate "goal" of decreasing the Middle Ages anarchic period from 30,000 years to 1,000 years. Doesn't make too much sense, and it does not help the reader to invest in the story, especially when the charachters necessarily change with each of the 5 stories.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Kat_Hooper
I love Isaac Asimovƒ??s ideas, but I just couldnƒ??t suspend disbelief for the plot of this famous novel. The premise is that Hari Seldon, a psychohistorian, has calculated the course of history and made preparations for preserving humanity on a distant planet. I think itƒ??s the psychologist
Show More
in me that just canƒ??t get past this premise. Thereƒ??s no way that history can be predicted ƒ?? there are just too many factors. Another issue I have with Asimov, and itƒ??s so blatantly displayed here, is that though he could imagine all sorts of futuristic technology and possible histories, he didnƒ??t seem to be able to imagine that someday women might find their way out of their kitchens and bedrooms. Show Less
LibraryThing member ctpress
The premise of this sci-fi is The Foundation - an organization set up on a remote planet Terminus by a guy who have by a scientific method been able to predict future events. This Foundation is established in order to save civilization after the fall of the Galactic Empire. The motto which is
Very cleverly thought out. But you don't get engaged in the fate of the characters - the main thing is the imagined world they inhabit, and all the great ideas that are presented. Well, it didn't matter much, since this is a satire on political maneuvering, and as satire it works very well, I laughed a lot.
Show More
repeated again and again is: "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent". Foundation is really five short stories loosely connected, but all with the same general idea - how to prevent the threat of attack by greater regimes on other planets. This involves dangerous political tactics - one of the more clever ones is starting a religious movement in order to survive.Very cleverly thought out. But you don't get engaged in the fate of the characters - the main thing is the imagined world they inhabit, and all the great ideas that are presented. Well, it didn't matter much, since this is a satire on political maneuvering, and as satire it works very well, I laughed a lot.
Show Less
LibraryThing member CarltonC
Lacking in all character development, this is a series of five short stories telling in episodic form how Hari Seldon foresees the decline and rebirth of a galactic Empire. It starts in a galactic Empire that is starting its decline, as it settles into decadence and accepts the loss of its
The stories do not engage you emotionally, but it is great fun to see how Asimov conceived how matters might occur.
I have reread this after more than 35 years and it is interesting how much of the reworking of historic trends I missed the first time around (probably read when I was 12 or 13). It definitely bears rereading and although it no longer has the wow factor from writing about such large themes, it is an enjoyable read.
Show More
scientific curiosity. Hari Seldon, a psycho-historian, sets up the Foundation, to try to speed up the birth of a new Empire. The stories are at strategic points in the history of the Foundation and allow us to read history as it develops.The stories do not engage you emotionally, but it is great fun to see how Asimov conceived how matters might occur.
I have reread this after more than 35 years and it is interesting how much of the reworking of historic trends I missed the first time around (probably read when I was 12 or 13). It definitely bears rereading and although it no longer has the wow factor from writing about such large themes, it is an enjoyable read.
Show Less
LibraryThing member TheTwoDs
While considered a classic of the genre, Isaac Asimov's Foundation is praised more for its ideas than its writing. Originally published as 5 short stories over the course of several years, the disjointedness of the narratives prevents the entire novel from attaining any sort of cohesive character
Presented as a future history of the initial disintegration of a galactic empire and the early rise of the science and culture based organization which will attempt to preserve humanity through the dark millenia to come, Foundation offers a time-lapse overview of key events rather than an in-depth exploration of any of them. Full of political intrigue, however, Foundation does lend itself to post-millenial realpolitik readings and effectively illustrates the use of propaganda and religion to spread a secular doctrine of knowledge and science.
Rightfully acknowledged for its originality at the time of its publication, one wonders how the author managed to think of technologies far in the future, while still having characters purchase newspapers.
Criticisms notwithstanding, I am intrigued enough by the plot to continue reading in the series.
Show More
arcs. The structure leaves little time to become acquainted with any characters and this weakens the overall story.Presented as a future history of the initial disintegration of a galactic empire and the early rise of the science and culture based organization which will attempt to preserve humanity through the dark millenia to come, Foundation offers a time-lapse overview of key events rather than an in-depth exploration of any of them. Full of political intrigue, however, Foundation does lend itself to post-millenial realpolitik readings and effectively illustrates the use of propaganda and religion to spread a secular doctrine of knowledge and science.
Rightfully acknowledged for its originality at the time of its publication, one wonders how the author managed to think of technologies far in the future, while still having characters purchase newspapers.
Criticisms notwithstanding, I am intrigued enough by the plot to continue reading in the series.
Show Less
LibraryThing member dmcolon
I first read Foundation when I was around 14 years old. I didn't quite get the gist of the novel, nor did I really see the parallels with this book and Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. I'm not even sure why I picked up the book. But I enjoyed it immensely. There wasn't any real
Show More
"action" per se, and the plot sort-of chugs along, but I enjoyed it. I just picked up the book again (I'm now in my 40s) and I'm still not sure why 14 year-old me enjoyed the book. But 40 year-old me definitely did enjoy it. The book talks about the decline and fall of the immensely powerful Galactic Empire and what happens in the aftermath of its decline (though not its fall). The story centers around the Foundation - a planet of scientists dedicated to preserving the culture of the old Imperial civilization. Clearly a portrayal of the Catholic Church, the Foundation manages to survive and prosper with a minimum of violence through its intelligence and craftiness. This is a more thoughtful book than some reviewers have said. While the prose is not exactly elevated in tone, Asimov nonetheless develops a fascinating historical sci-fi novel. Show Less
LibraryThing member Neale
I think this was the first science fiction book I read. What a way to start. This is just brilliant. This is what sci-fi is all about. It creates a universe to get lost in. The other book in the trilogy are just as good. This series with Dune trilogy are the pinnacle of Sci-fi.
LibraryThing member sgerbic
Reviewed March 1998
The first book is an adventure. The first character we meet is Gaal Dornick whom you form an attachment to right away. But by the end of the second chapter you learn that he is no one, you will never know him again. The book travels like this, quickly through the characters and
9-1998
The first book is an adventure. The first character we meet is Gaal Dornick whom you form an attachment to right away. But by the end of the second chapter you learn that he is no one, you will never know him again. The book travels like this, quickly through the characters and
Show More
the time line. Traveling through the pages is traveling through time. "Foundation" sets the scene for the rest of the series, while making you feel small and insignificant. The plan is much bigger than any one person or any one world. Gone is Earth and it's memory. Asimov pushes you onward to the next book with gladness. 9-1998
Show Less
LibraryThing member TheDivineOomba
I can see why this book is a classic in the science fiction genre. The stories are well thought, interesting and keep you reading.
Unfortunately, I found the book to be too simple - with the bad guys obviously bad, the good guys cardboard cutouts of a hero, and the only woman in the story to be a
Its a story of its time and its missing a lot of the complexity that are in modern science fiction stories.
Also, every time "nucleics" (Devices run off of nuclear energy) was mentioned, I cringed a bit. Nuclear Energy was the big new-fangled energy in the 1950's, but this book seemed to do nothing but promote it.
I'm glad I read it. It is an interesting story, but a bit far fetched. Its intriguing how man hasn't changed... This book was written in an era that is the start of the whole modern day science fiction.
Unfortunately, I found the book to be too simple - with the bad guys obviously bad, the good guys cardboard cutouts of a hero, and the only woman in the story to be a
Show More
bit evil (it was a bit part). Its a story of its time and its missing a lot of the complexity that are in modern science fiction stories.
Also, every time "nucleics" (Devices run off of nuclear energy) was mentioned, I cringed a bit. Nuclear Energy was the big new-fangled energy in the 1950's, but this book seemed to do nothing but promote it.
I'm glad I read it. It is an interesting story, but a bit far fetched. Its intriguing how man hasn't changed... This book was written in an era that is the start of the whole modern day science fiction.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Karlstar
A classic examination of government and economy, and the 'science' of psychohistory. One of the best science fiction series ever. Its not obviously a series about government on a galactic scale, but Asimov slips in his opinions in the way that the government of the Foundation evolves as the Empire
Show More
devolves. Show Less
LibraryThing member robinhood26
Despite all of the potential negative comments that may apply to Isaac Asimov, there is no doubt that he was a great conceptual thinker. I found the Foundation Trilogy succeeds in not only entertaining, but also in influencing the way I think about how history and institutions affect them.
I read
I read
Show More
this book 25 years ago, and then 10 years later was introduced to the theories of Thorsten Veblen. I am sure that Asimov was aware of these Institutionalist theories, and used them to update Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire in a futuristic context. Show Less
LibraryThing member yapete
The original foundation trilogy is probably the best science fiction ever written. Very thought provoking.
LibraryThing member StormRaven
It is hard to properly review Foundation, as it is so influential a work within the science fiction genre. It is also one of the first "serious" science fiction books I read years ago when I was barely in double digits in age, and I have read it more than once since. The book details the
The alleged reason for the Foundation's existence is to compile all human knowledge into a galactic encyclopaedia which (Seldon asserts) will allow the period of anarchy following the collapse of the Empire to be reduced from thirty thousand years to a mere one thousand years. The structure of the book is a series of short stories that cover important developments in the Foundation's history. It turns out the encyclopaedia is entirely a ruse, and Seldon, via a series of prerecorded holographic lectures, appears every so often and explains what he predicted would be happening (via phsychohistory), and offers vague suggestions as to how to proceed in the future. Though mineral poor, Terminus leverages its technology to take over or dominate the surrounding areas with its superior technology.
The episodic format of the book works well - allowing for the Foundation's story to progress without long tedious periods being detailed. The books have been compared to Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, which Asimov says influenced the work. The only thing I found to be silly was the concept that is introduced in one of the stories that one of the nearby "barbarian kingdoms" remains an interstellar power despite having "lost" atomic power (i.e. they don't have the know-how to produce atomic power). At the time Asimov wrote the books, atomic energy seems to have been something of a buzz word in science fiction, and losing it was clearly supposed to show how far the Foundation's rivals had fallen, but the depiction just brought to my mind the incredibly silly image of coal fired or gas-turbine starships. As usual for the era's science fiction, no one predicted the microchip revolution, and scientists are still using slide rules and computers are the size of buildings (or cities) while atomic generators are made the size of belt buckles.
Technology wierdness aside, this is one of the foundational (note the pun) works of science fiction. It is a must read for any science fiction fan.
Show More
Foundation, established at the request of Hari Seldon, a mathemathician who discovered how to accurately predict the behaviour of humans in large numbers using mathematical formulas. Seldon predicts the collapse of the Galactic Empire, which is considered treason, and is put on trial. He makes a deal with the prosecution, and the Foundation is built on a planet named Terminus located on the edge of the galaxy.The alleged reason for the Foundation's existence is to compile all human knowledge into a galactic encyclopaedia which (Seldon asserts) will allow the period of anarchy following the collapse of the Empire to be reduced from thirty thousand years to a mere one thousand years. The structure of the book is a series of short stories that cover important developments in the Foundation's history. It turns out the encyclopaedia is entirely a ruse, and Seldon, via a series of prerecorded holographic lectures, appears every so often and explains what he predicted would be happening (via phsychohistory), and offers vague suggestions as to how to proceed in the future. Though mineral poor, Terminus leverages its technology to take over or dominate the surrounding areas with its superior technology.
The episodic format of the book works well - allowing for the Foundation's story to progress without long tedious periods being detailed. The books have been compared to Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, which Asimov says influenced the work. The only thing I found to be silly was the concept that is introduced in one of the stories that one of the nearby "barbarian kingdoms" remains an interstellar power despite having "lost" atomic power (i.e. they don't have the know-how to produce atomic power). At the time Asimov wrote the books, atomic energy seems to have been something of a buzz word in science fiction, and losing it was clearly supposed to show how far the Foundation's rivals had fallen, but the depiction just brought to my mind the incredibly silly image of coal fired or gas-turbine starships. As usual for the era's science fiction, no one predicted the microchip revolution, and scientists are still using slide rules and computers are the size of buildings (or cities) while atomic generators are made the size of belt buckles.
Technology wierdness aside, this is one of the foundational (note the pun) works of science fiction. It is a must read for any science fiction fan.
Show Less
LibraryThing member zojjz
"Old memories sting when they come suddenly"
On the one hand, the liberal use of religion as a a means of controlling the people is quite interesting for a book of its time, and almost forgives the misogynistic portrait of characters. On the other hand, however, the blind faith in and person cult
As such, I personally find the values of the book quite.. Unrelatable.
On the one hand, the liberal use of religion as a a means of controlling the people is quite interesting for a book of its time, and almost forgives the misogynistic portrait of characters. On the other hand, however, the blind faith in and person cult
Show More
around Hari Seldon diametrically opposes this view, as well as the idealisation of science. As such, I personally find the values of the book quite.. Unrelatable.
Show Less
LibraryThing member threadnsong
It is a classic which still, despite its emphasis on atomic power and almost no women in key roles, provides insights into humanity that still hold true.
The premise is that the Galactic Empire and its home planet of Trantor are going to fall after twelve thousand years of interstellar rule, and
And brilliantly, Asimov shows key points in the start of that thousand years, individual short histories that have bearing on one another only because each key person in those histories realizes that they are coming to a Seldon-anticipated moment: there seems to be no way out of their particular galactic situation except for one, and that would be what Seldon predicted.
I read this book in my early 20's, liked it well enough, but remember being jarred by the decades and centuries between the stories. Now, I read it with a lot more understanding of human interaction, and some measure of cynicism, which helps Asimov's originality shine through.
The premise is that the Galactic Empire and its home planet of Trantor are going to fall after twelve thousand years of interstellar rule, and
Show More
millennia of chaos will ensue. Thirty thousand years, per Hari Seldon's psychohistory calculations. However, Dr. Seldon has devised a plan through his Encyclopedia Galactica project that will result in only a thousand years of anarchy.And brilliantly, Asimov shows key points in the start of that thousand years, individual short histories that have bearing on one another only because each key person in those histories realizes that they are coming to a Seldon-anticipated moment: there seems to be no way out of their particular galactic situation except for one, and that would be what Seldon predicted.
I read this book in my early 20's, liked it well enough, but remember being jarred by the decades and centuries between the stories. Now, I read it with a lot more understanding of human interaction, and some measure of cynicism, which helps Asimov's originality shine through.
Show Less
LibraryThing member ericlee
I have just re-read this for the first time in 35 years. Outstanding. I can't wait to re-read the rest of the series.
LibraryThing member kencf0618
When I was an adolescent I read science fiction voraciously but shied away from this series for much the same reason I did from Atlas Shrugged or Catcher in the Rye—they were touted as being formative in a You-Must-Read-This manner. I'm 64 now, and picked it up from a Little Free Library for some
Show More
comfort reading, and I'm glad I did. It's dated, it's classic, it's wonderful, and it's a cultural fossil. And it's not a space opera: It's all about palace politics, really, and an inverse Spengler who calls the shots. Or, if you'd like, a Marx who gets the course of history right, so long as there weren't too many variables. Show Less
LibraryThing member 23eris
Using the science of psychohistory, the end of the galactic empire is foretold, followed by a long period of stagnation. The stagnation can be lessened to a millenium by the operations of the Foundation, a core group of scientists and thinkers whose first mission was to write the Galactic
I have to admit that I've tried to read this book a zillion times, and I finally got through it. The surprising thing is I really liked it this time through. Not sure why it never hit me the other times. However, it's a difficult read and may not be for everyone. I don't think the language is hard, or the concepts, just that the writing is perhaps a little dry and the huge jumps in time can be disorienting. However I do strongly reccomend this book for sci fi fans, and it is certainly a classic.
Show More
Encyclopedia. Follow the crises that lead the Foundation through this period of scientific stagnation and discover how they fight against barbarity. I have to admit that I've tried to read this book a zillion times, and I finally got through it. The surprising thing is I really liked it this time through. Not sure why it never hit me the other times. However, it's a difficult read and may not be for everyone. I don't think the language is hard, or the concepts, just that the writing is perhaps a little dry and the huge jumps in time can be disorienting. However I do strongly reccomend this book for sci fi fans, and it is certainly a classic.
Show Less
LibraryThing member antao
If I remember rightly, Asimov's robots do indeed find a cunning way around the three laws - they invent a Zero-th Law which states that "no robot can injure humanity or through inaction allow humanity to come to harm" which doesn't directly contradict the First Law, so their brains will accept it,
Part of the beauty of the novel for me was making the connections between the lines of characters in between chapters. They're not always there but the learning process regarding Asimovian lore while reading the book is great. If you really want to be sold on the brilliance of Asimov, I have to recommend one of his moderately short stories, "Nightfall." It was my first read of his and has since made me a longtime fan.
It means that everything we do is balanced on a knife edge between social and selfish impulses. The societies we create mean that people fill niches in that social structure in such a way that although individuals have flexibility of thought and predictive intelligence to work out eventual harmful consequences of collective actions, there is no flexibility in the structure to allow fundamental change in the direction we are heading together. That's why we have the rise and fall of empires through the ages and a seeming lack of ability to avoid the effects of climate change, despite knowing about it. I wonder sometimes if Asimov had it right. He seemed to suggest that human social structures are subject to the same chaos theories as weather patterns. If you could predict the consequences of small changes could it fundamentally alter the outcome of human existence at a later date and avoid catastrophic population collapse. However, I also wonder if the societal niche theory means that societies are self-healing. For example, if you went back in time and stopped Hitler's birth would that small change result in a fundamental shift in our history or would someone else simply have moved into that available space and carried out the same role. How predetermined is our fate?
I think a lot of our issues have arisen because we are a semi-social species. We are neither so altruistic as an ant nor as sociopathic as a solitary predatory species. However, perhaps it's only a semi-social species that can evolve predictive intelligence to the same capacity as ourselves. I think I may have just found my question for the "science" of Pychohistory.
Is there a possibly a mathematical model to predict the fate of the human race? It's possible that's the sort of question you should only ask a mathematician after you've taken them to the pub and fed them a couple of pints of beer.
NB: I've read these stories also as an adult and seen a subtext I missed, that the entire galaxy is a thinly-disguised Manhattan and Brooklyn. Once you've visited the city it adds a different perspective. Reading it in the sequence the stories were originally released also makes a poignant tinge as the kid gets disenchanted with Marxism and the possibilities of treating Sociology as a predictive science. It's no more literature than Dickens was.
Show More
but has the interesting effect in moral philosophical terms of turning them from Kantians to utilitarians. So rather than being guided by an absolute "thou shalt not kill" imperative they become able to kill or harm humans if and only if they have calculated it's for the greater good. Rather than becoming brutal overlords because of this (as the other laws still apply) they end up guiding the development of humanity quietly from the shadows, taking on a role not a billion kilometers from Ian M. Banks's AIs.Part of the beauty of the novel for me was making the connections between the lines of characters in between chapters. They're not always there but the learning process regarding Asimovian lore while reading the book is great. If you really want to be sold on the brilliance of Asimov, I have to recommend one of his moderately short stories, "Nightfall." It was my first read of his and has since made me a longtime fan.
It means that everything we do is balanced on a knife edge between social and selfish impulses. The societies we create mean that people fill niches in that social structure in such a way that although individuals have flexibility of thought and predictive intelligence to work out eventual harmful consequences of collective actions, there is no flexibility in the structure to allow fundamental change in the direction we are heading together. That's why we have the rise and fall of empires through the ages and a seeming lack of ability to avoid the effects of climate change, despite knowing about it. I wonder sometimes if Asimov had it right. He seemed to suggest that human social structures are subject to the same chaos theories as weather patterns. If you could predict the consequences of small changes could it fundamentally alter the outcome of human existence at a later date and avoid catastrophic population collapse. However, I also wonder if the societal niche theory means that societies are self-healing. For example, if you went back in time and stopped Hitler's birth would that small change result in a fundamental shift in our history or would someone else simply have moved into that available space and carried out the same role. How predetermined is our fate?
I think a lot of our issues have arisen because we are a semi-social species. We are neither so altruistic as an ant nor as sociopathic as a solitary predatory species. However, perhaps it's only a semi-social species that can evolve predictive intelligence to the same capacity as ourselves. I think I may have just found my question for the "science" of Pychohistory.
Is there a possibly a mathematical model to predict the fate of the human race? It's possible that's the sort of question you should only ask a mathematician after you've taken them to the pub and fed them a couple of pints of beer.
NB: I've read these stories also as an adult and seen a subtext I missed, that the entire galaxy is a thinly-disguised Manhattan and Brooklyn. Once you've visited the city it adds a different perspective. Reading it in the sequence the stories were originally released also makes a poignant tinge as the kid gets disenchanted with Marxism and the possibilities of treating Sociology as a predictive science. It's no more literature than Dickens was.
Show Less
LibraryThing member fdmts
The concept behind this book is raw genius: That science could eventually treat human behavior statistically, and perform detailed, predictive experiments on societies using rigorous mathematics. That said, the writing is choppy and half apologetic.
Still, essential reading for the literate, modern
Still, essential reading for the literate, modern
Show More
human. Show Less
LibraryThing member tandah
I was really surprised how much I enjoyed this book - it's a bookclub choice and not one I would generally pick up. What I particularly liked was that it didn't go into a lot of detail around things going wrong, and focused more on the political solution. It reminded me a little of Harry Potter for
Show More
grown ups - and perhaps its not a particularly heavy book, more an easy read. I may read the following books. Show Less
Subjects
Awards
Call number
FIC H Asi