The armchair scientist is a popular trope for science fiction writers because it is often used as an excuse to go beyond the usual bounds of inquiry.
In a story about the armchair, a scientist’s hand is placed on a chair, and the scientist’s arm is pushed out to the side of the chair to observe an object.
It is a way of making the scientist look more like a scientist than a scientist is actually.
The trope can be seen as a way to explain why scientists should be the most important people in the world, but it also makes a mockery of science itself.
There is an interesting story from the mid-19th century about a scientist in England who decided to challenge his armchair colleagues on how to use the telescope, only to find that the armchairs weren’t the only ones who could do it.
“I found that, as an armchair man, the telescope was quite easy to understand,” wrote Sir William Jones.
“I have never seen a telescope, but I have never been able to make a telescope out of a telescope.”
The armchair scholar is an example of the scientific double-standard that is common in science fiction.
To the armchus of the future, science is supposed to be the pinnacle of human achievement.
And science is, after all, the art of finding the answers to the questions people have about the universe.
But, as a critic of science fiction, I have a problem with the arm chair scholar trope.
I can’t understand why people in science and the humanities would think that a fictional scientist could have such an easy time figuring out the best way to use a telescope.
Science fiction is supposed by its creators to be about science and science is not supposed to give us answers about how to solve real problems.
A fictional scientist can’t be an arm chair, because he can’t answer any of the questions the audience is asking.
He can’t show us the answer to a question.
So he can do a lot of the things that people who study science and literature are supposed to do.
As the scientist in the story, you have to ask yourself what would happen if he were actually in the chair, what would the arm chairs say?
I have no idea.
What I do know is that science fiction should be about the things science is trying to solve, not the things it is trying not to.
If it were about the real world, it would have a lot more of the answers we would want.
When I read science fiction I want to be entertained.
Read science fiction about what’s out there, and I want my brain to think about it.