Talk:Stanisław Lem and robots

Poland Low‑importance

	Poland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Science Fiction Low‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

On 6 January 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved to Lem and robotics. The result of the discussion was Moved to Stanisław Lem and robots.

Requested move 6 January 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Stanisław Lem and robots. Consensus on the alternative. – robertsky (talk) 01:51, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Robots of Stanisław Lem → Lem and robotics – Article does not appear to have been created by someone with English as their first language, "blank and blank" makes critical discussion of the subject easier by widening the scope and would bring it in line with the precedent laid down by things like the cornucopia of "Tolkien and blank" articles maintained by Chiswick. Orchastrattor (talk) 01:18, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Poland has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:04, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Science Fiction has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:04, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support alternate move to Stanisław Lem and robots, he is not known on a last-name basis in quite the same way as, say, Tolkien. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:04, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How strongly do you feel about "robots" versus "robotics"? The former seems like it would be closer to the sources but the latter would be more useful as an actual topic. Orchastrattor (talk) 18:22, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to me that while he is well-known for his ideas about robots that "might be", it doesn't go into such detail on how they would realistically work that it would be considered "robotics", just conceptions of robots operated by as-yet-unknown principles. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:10, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support alternative per ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:21, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support alternative proposition of ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ.Marcelus (talk) 10:27, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Comment

"Summa Technologiae (1964), a book-length essay contains Chapter 4: "Intellectronics", a term coined by Lem to speculate on the field that is known today as artificial intelligence, in lieu of the term "cybernetics" banned in the Soviet Bloc."

Cybernetics was banned up to 1954, it got banned during the rule of Stalin. In 1964 Stalin was long dead and Cybernetics was not banned in the Soviet Union. 147.235.197.177 (talk) 21:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It appears you are correct. In fact, since mid-1950s the Soviet/Russian term "Kibernetika" meant what is called computer science in English. 05:07, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 11 January 2025

It has been proposed in this section that Stanisław Lem and robots be renamed and moved to Robots of Stanisław Lem.

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly.

Links: current log • target log • direct move

Stanisław Lem and robots → Robots of Stanisław Lem – restore the original title. The article is about robots in the scifi works of Stanislaw Lem and the current title is an unnecessary broadening of the scope. There is nothing else to say about "robots and Lem". And there never will be because Lem is dead and will never have a chance to meet any robot (and he never interacted with robots in the past). I have no idea how this weird title was justified. --Altenmann >talk 02:30, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Robots are a topic in culture that intersects with Lem's work, blank and blank is the only natural way to communicate that in English. Being dead, Lem would not have any chance to create some sort of robot, which is what would be implied instead by the old title. The robots that he did come up with as devices of fiction are very diverse and do not conform to any sort of single "type" unique to Lem; There isn't a "Lemian Robot" in the way that there is a "Randian Hero" or "Wellsian Utopia". Orchastrattor (talk) 03:29, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes there are robots of Lem because he invented them. No there are no "Lemian robots": it is a straw man argument because I didnt suggest such weird title: I suggested a concise descriptive title for a narrow subject Robots in works of Stanisław Lem. There is no reason to invent artificial blank and blanks because the only intersection of robots and LEM is robots invented by Lem. --Altenmann >talk 04:18, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How is that any different from saying he interacted with robots then? He didn't invent the concept, his work just adapted it for his own ends. The current title is not artificial, it is very natural to say in English speech. In fact I specifically brought up "Lemian robot" because that would actually sound more natural in English than "robots of Lem". Orchastrattor (talk) 04:37, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Again, straw man arguments. The article is not about "concept" and he did not "interact" with robots and didnt "adapt" anything. There is nothing naturai in describing Robots in works of Stanisław Lem as "robots and Lem". Juat as weird if one will try to say "Edison and lightbulb" when writing an article about Edison's lightbulb. --Altenmann >talk 04:57, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The conjunction "and" implies interaction. Lem does not interact with robots, he "owns" them, they are Lem's robots. Politics of Poland is not called Politics and Poland despite the fact, paraphrasing yours, that "politics is a topic in culture that intetrsects with the essence of Poland". --Altenmann >talk 05:18, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Poland is a country that contains things, including its own government. Lem is a person, he can express ideas through his work but they aren't a definite objective "thing" that is somehow inside of him. The concept of "robots" was invented by Karel Čapek, and Lem was just one of many writers that encountered the concept and decided to adapt it into something that would suit his work. You're just picking and choosing when to consider robots as a physical object and when to consider robots as a concept invented by a creative professional.

"Edison and lighting" would be a perfectly reasonable article title; If he had patented some specific school of lightbulb-making that was still relevant today then "Edisonian lightbulbs" or "lightbulbs invented by Edison" would be a far more natural-sounding title than "lightbulbs of Edison"

As I pointed out in the original discussion, which I'm still not sure if you have read or not, there is already a massive amount of precedent for this with JRR Tolkien under articles like Tolkien and the medieval; Tolkien and race; Tolkien and the Norse; Tolkien and the classical world; or Tolkien and antiquarianism. Tolkien didn't invent the idea of a fantastical medieval setting, he encountered it both the fiction and non-fiction texts he was familiar with and then adapted it into something that would suit Middle Earth. Orchastrattor (talk) 21:39, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Zxcvbnm: @Necrothesp: @Marcelus: as previous voters. Orchastrattor (talk) 21:27, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Piotrus: as this seems to be within their area of expertise. Orchastrattor (talk) 21:43, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]