Human Question

Information

Status

Completed

Year

2022

Author

Matthew P Camacho

• A new Day
  Jul 14, 2023
• Chapter 10
  Jul 14, 2023
• Chapter 9
  Jul 14, 2023
• Chapter 8
  Jul 14, 2023
• Chapter 7
  Jul 14, 2023
• Chapter 6
  Jul 14, 2023
• Chapter 5
  Jul 14, 2023
• Chapter 4
  Jul 14, 2023
• Chapter 3
  Jul 14, 2023
• Chapter 2
  Jul 14, 2023
• Chapter 1
  Jan 6, 2022

Reviews

Community Reviews(5)

• ArrakatRoyal Road

  ★★★★★ 5.0

  There are a few sci-fi authors that use the philospophical questions as the basis for their stories, and their world-building.
  This is a good addition to their ranks. :D
  Peter Watts's "Blindsight" looks at similar questions, but gives a different result, as does Neal Asher's "Agent Cormac" series set in his Polity Universe stories. Asher's characters explicitly discuss some of these questions, as does the underlying technology that makes up the world-building. :D
  Looking forward to exploring the rest of your work. :D
• marmotteRoyal Road

  ★★★★★ 5.0

  So a little review , for an interesting philosophical sci-fi story. So no hard science here, just a didactical story to learn.
  The story lets you follow the teaching of a human Teacher in the galactical academy. Knowledge is power. Philosophy is using this power.
  I read this story like water flowing in a river. It was a breath of fresh air. Thanks you author.
  No heavy background, keep it simple like they Say. It is the strenght of this story.
  Light in the setting, string in the thinking.
  Beware!
  Why?
  Because after Why.... There is the....w** n** ....
  It was jammed, go Reading!
• Over-inRoyal Road

  ★★★★★ 4.5

  (Overall Score 4.5/5) This book is a great philosophical read that I've thoroughly enjoyed. The writing itself is well-structured and well-paced but has frequent grammatical errors. The characters are good with some minor issues, but that is to be expected of such a short book.
  (Style Score 5/5) The style of writing is very nice. However, it is different from the traditional 1st or 3rd person, it uses a "report" style. Some people may view it as a poor way of doing things, but I think it adds a fitting style to the book. It is interesting to see the actions of the MC influence these reports over time due to his lessons.
  (Story Score 5/5) The story is short, so running relative to that, the story is good. It is simple enough not to overshoot for the size of the book, but not so contrived that it feels like Tupperware. There are also philosophical elements to the story. It delves into topics like the Socratic method, hidden meanings, and asking "Why?"
  (Character Score 4.5/5) The characters are not explored as much as some would like, but given the plot and the book's length, all that needs to be revealed, is revealed. My one critique of the characters regards the aliens. They seem so stupid and close-minded at times that it boggles my mind. However, a counterpoint for this is that they- spoilers-
  have never been exposed to modern-day thinking and freedom of speech. So given their situation it makes sense.
  But, this is up for debate.
  (Grammar Score 4/5) This is the most glaring issue that knocks me out of my reading. The book is plagued by random " signs, or lack thereof. While not groundbreaking, it's assuredly worth mentioning.
  In Conclusion, if you don't like a slightly unique way of writing, or can't stand grammatical errors, then this book likely isn't for you. If you're interested in a short philosophical read with a nice ending, I would read it. If you're on the fence about reading it, I would dive in anyway. Worst case, you don't like it that much. Best case, y
• IncognitoAnonymsRoyal Road

  ★★★★ 4.0

  It's a cute book. To be honest, this whole book reminds me of some fantasy story where a robot villain can be defeated by telling him a paradox, which causes him to fall into a stupor and break down.\
  The narrative is largely constructed as a comedy based on the exaggerated reaction of aliens to philosophy. Philosophy, the main driving element of this book, is presented, but very superficially. By superficially, I mean not badly, but superficially - you can easily gain some philosophical knowledge by surfing the Internet. Here you will not find any specialized branches of philosophy, such as mathematical philosophy, or deep varieties of philosophy that require a step-by-step examination of its working mechanisms and the introduction of new terms. We are presented with only an easy philosophy that can be safely brought to elementary school students.
  The philosophy of the aliens is so undeveloped that you may even wonder how they even reached the current level of civilization. To create spaceships, you need science. And for science, you need to separate nonsense from sense. Even if you use simple formal logic, you will easily stumble upon many paradoxes that formal logic can observe. Their civilization is not vaccinated against by-products of the use of formal logic, but at the same time actively applies formal logic in science.
  The concept of the book is good. But nevertheless, it seems to me that during the implementation, the author made the alien civilization exaggeratedly incompetent in matters of philosophy, up to an unnatural level. An example of this is given in the last paragraph.
• Conrad StokesRoyal Road

  ★★★★ 3.5

  Disclaimer: This is for a review swap with the author. I have read the entire short story to completion.
  Stylistically speaking I can see Asimov and other golden age science fiction influence on this story. To be clear that is a good thing, at least for me, since that sort of style is very thought provoking and makes the reader think about greater implications and themes as they read. Yet the story did not keep up with the style.
  The story is somewhat contrived, which may be a little excused in a short story, but often I found myself more frustrated than intrigued by the way the plot introduced ideas in a very blunt manner. The flow of the story was also not helped by the manner in which it was presented.
  Characters were a little disappointing too. Often it felt like the antagonists were straw men that were intellectually beat down by the protagonist in order to make the protagonist’s point seem stronger by comparison rather than letting the ideas stand on their own merit.
  Grammar: in the first few chapters it was not bad, but in later chapters it was so frequent that it took me out of the story.
  Overall I can see what the author is trying to convey. There are stimulating touch points about simple philosophic concepts and ideas, but the story framework said ideas are presented in does not match well with what is trying to be accomplished. There is a good style, but it lacks substance.