Low Level Science Fiction -A possible Sub-Genre?

[Clyde]

I have started a Listopia on "Low-level Sci-fi"
https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/6...

In brief, I'd define (describe) the difference between Hard sci-fi and low level sci-fi as:

"Hard sci-fi inspires with ideas grounded in plausible science – Lo-Lev sci-fi is like getting the blue-print to implement an idea, presented in narrative form with emphasis on context."
More on the topic here:
http://dirrogate.com/low-level-scienc...

I'd like to know:
1) Would members agree on the possibility of this sub-genre existing, culled from Hard sci-fi or Mundane Sci-fi?

For instance, Giulio Prisco - noted Futurist, Transhumanism Editor of KurzweilAI and former management of the European Space Agency has suggested
1)
2)
3)
and my book.

The aim is that Scientists, Engineers, Thinkers and DIY technologists can find a ready catalog to immerse themselves and bring the scenarios in these novels to fruition, or create derivative solutions inspired by the detailed science in these books.

(When reading, please ignore the review part of my book in the article)

Kind Regards

[Nick]

In Scifi, there are basically two levels.

Hard SF in which the science in the story is up front and the author goes into great detail. With dedicated fans of hard SF, the author had better be accurate or he/she will get called out.

Soft SF is more like the space opera's where the science is in the background and the story action is up front.

My opinion, don't try to fix what's not broken...

[Kevis]

Nick wrote: "My opinion, don't try to fix what's not broken."

+1.

[Clyde]

If I'd asked people what they wanted..they'd have said faster horses - Henry Ford

Let's do away with the cliches and provide valid arguments? ;-)

To expand further: The difference as mentioned in the article is that yes, Hard SF is (has to be) based on plausible science - Low Level Sci-fi is an attempt to catalog novels that have implementable science, detailed in the pages of the book.

Kind Regards.

[Jaime]

I've heard it tell that way back in the 1980s, people at DARPA were passing around copies of NEUROMANCER and saying "We should build this." The anecdote never specifies what "this" they were referring to but sometime I think that someone has, in fact, turned the world into (paraphrased) 'a deranged experiment in Social Darwinism (by) a bored researcher with their finger permanently on the fast-forward button'.

[Clyde]

thanks Jaime
this is worth investigating. lets see if google throws up anything on the "something"

[Nick]

Clyde wrote: Let's do away with the cliches and provide valid arguments? ;-)

What is to argue?

[Hákon]

Nick, am I wrong to say there are actually not just two, but three main levels in science fiction, the third one being social science fiction? Among them one of my favorite books, Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury for example.

[Nick]

Very little science in 451 and much more of a social commentary on where the earth is headed.

You get that in almost any genre and I am unsure how one classifies a book of social commentary over Hard or Soft SF, or Epic or High Fantasy for that matter.

Still, as a reader, I think it is our prerogative to call it as we see it...