OK Here I go.
I am looking for all your ideas about the difference you see in the two terms in the heading.
Here are my thoughts.
What If, can encompass anything. I think that is pretty obvious.
But what about Counterfactual?
To me this suggests that there is already something in fact that has to be countered.
So where would that put Sci Fi stuff, or in fact any other stuff that has no basis in fact but fits into the What If genre?
Your answers please.
Jim
Not sure where the term counter factual comes from. Whiff works well enough for me. Things I build are pretty much "out there".
I'm a fan of words and nuances of meaning, but I have to say that there is really no difference here. "Counterfactual" means, of course, counter to the actual fact. So, flying saucers, for example, do NOT exist, but when we build one, we "pretend" (counter to the actual facts) that they do. So, any WHIF is, by definition, counterfactual, regardless of how FAR from the actual facts (or near to them) that it might be.
Just my opinion, though...
Chuck
Quote from: Acree on April 09, 2016, 06:57:53 PM
I'm a fan of words and nuances of meaning, but I have to say that there is really no difference here. "Counterfactual" means, of course, counter to the actual fact. So, flying saucers, for example, do NOT exist, but when we build one, we "pretend" (counter to the actual facts) that they do. So, any WHIF is, by definition, counterfactual, regardless of how FAR from the actual facts (or near to them) that it might be.
Just my opinion, though...
Chuck
I agree with Chuck here , as I think they both basically mean the same , but I much prefer the term " what-if " myself. I think that counterfactual sounds much too pretentious for my liking.
Andrew
Quote from: Acree on April 09, 2016, 06:57:53 PM
...So, flying saucers, for example, do NOT exist...
Hmmmmm, so you're one of them are you...
;)
Just to muddy the waters, is counter factual the same thing as alternate history?
Since there's also no true definition to "what if...", a discussion appears futile to me. In a wide scope, SF things are whiffy - not only hypothetical versions of "official" SF designs, e .g. modified TIE Fighters. "Counterfactual" suggests that there's a real world/proven/documented reference, and that there's something fictional "against" these facts. But that's a borderless frame, too. The same goes for alternate history, which might tweak facts to a certain degree and end, but since this also can end in borderless mutation of facts and respective ordnance, there's to me actually no difference, and the discussion rather hairsplitting for the sake of pointless differentiation?
Quote from: zenrat on April 10, 2016, 02:36:54 AM
.
Just to muddy the waters, is counter factual the same thing as alternate history?
It does seem to have become the "trendy" word to used to describe alternate history books over the last few years that's for sure.
To be honest it's a valid question and I know where Jim is coming from, but in all honesty I've never been able to get to grips with the word "counterfactual". To me it's a rather clumsy word and in all honesty I don't like it. "What If" works very well and is far simpler in describing the genre.
As for Sci Fi ? Always been a completely different field to me and I see that and What If as two completely separate genres, but then that's simply because my brain has always liked to compartmentalise things.
Counterfactual is where we take real concepts and proposals and build them as if they were built/converted and went into service, counter to what actually happened thus Counterfactual
What-if is free thinking ideas what happened if so and so used this instead of that, or continued to use and develop this, or what if we mix and match hardware or kits, these being based on ideas rather than facts.
As I understand it, the term 'counterfactual' was coined by historians who wanted to use their imaginations to make restrained what-ifs seem respectable and legitimate in historical journals and publications. Although a literal interpretation of it as 'counter to the facts' would seem to allow the same unrestrained freedom as 'what if?', in the historical context, it's used to mean restrained and credible extrapolations based on known facts and solid research.
For example, an essay about Hitler's invasion of Britain, based closely on detailed research into the Operation Sealion plans and British defence plans and sticking to known facts about German and British planning, tactics and behaviour, would be a Counterfactual, and might well get published by a respectable historical journal. An essay about Hitler's invasion of Britain using flying saucers and the Hollow Earth to outflank the British by landing/surfacing in Scotland would be a What-If, and would only get published in a sci-fi magazine or on here. :wacko:
If you want to apply the distinction to model making, then I think Thorvic's definition is as good as any. Counterfactuals are what the Project Cancelled SIG do: taking real-world designs, plans and proposals that didn't get selected and building them as if they had been. Not every What If is a Counterfactual, but all Counterfactuals are What Ifs.
Quote from: Weaver on April 10, 2016, 08:53:57 AM
As I understand it, the term 'counterfactual' was coined by historians who wanted to use their imaginations to make restrained what-ifs seem respectable and legitimate in historical journals and publications. Although a literal interpretation of it as 'counter to the facts' would seem to allow the same unrestrained freedom as 'what if?', in the historical context, it's used to mean restrained and credible extrapolations based on known facts and solid research.
For example, an essay about Hitler's invasion of Britain, based closely on detailed research into the Operation Sealion plans and British defence plans and sticking to known facts about German and British planning, tactics and behaviour, would be a Counterfactual, and might well get published by a respectable historical journal. An essay about Hitler's invasion of Britain using flying saucers and the Hollow Earth to outflank the British by landing/surfacing in Scotland would be a What-If, and would only get published in a sci-fi magazine or on here. :wacko:
If you want to apply the distinction to model making, then I think Thorvic's definition is as good as any. Counterfactuals are what the Project Cancelled SIG do: taking real-world designs, plans and proposals that didn't get selected and building them as if they had been. Not every What If is a Counterfactual, but all Counterfactuals are What Ifs.
Best definition I've read, yet.
My interpretation is that there is a similar link between Science Fiction & What If; Not all SF is What If, but all What Ifs are SF.
I could go into a lengthy dissertation about who created the first "official" "counterfactual" (it was a short piece in a US economic history journal about the uneconomical nature of slavery in the 1960s, if you're interested) BUT the concept existed long before that in fiction writing, with stories being written particularly about military history ("The Legend of Duffer's Drift" was a stage play at the turn of the 20th century). However, I won't bore you. "What-if" is just a slang term for the same concept. I like the idea of "counterfactual" (ie "against the facts") but will use it interchangeably with the concept of "What-if", depending on the context.
Isn't Counter-Factual Non-Fiction approached from the opposite direction?
Like the terms Pro-Choice and Pro-Life.
Isn't alternate history " what if " ?
What if WW2 ended in 1956 ..........
:rolleyes:
Counterfactual, What If, Science Fiction:- They're all sub-genres of Speculative Fiction, a genre 1st made popular by writers such as Jules Verne & H. G. Wells but probably best represented by Arthur C. Clarke.