0

Cyberspace, as it exists now on the online networks, is only a harbinger of the screenless, image-based, computer-generalized worlds of future long-distance communication. More than downloadable photographs and instantaneous chat, future electronic worlds will be entered, reconnoitered, touched, monitored and replayed, in part supplementing their carbon-based predecessors. Surreptitiously, almost insidiously, machines integrate themselves in our lives.

Intuitively, I would think it means the previous electronic worlds. But if I adopt this explanation, the carbon-based seems to be somewhat weird since it is usually related to creatures. Hence I think maybe its meaning is human beings and predecessors indicates inventors. Am I correct?

A picture of the original passage is available at https://s22.postimg.io/fosdxav8x/e8c6d2798c5fc82_Copy.jpg

Improve this question
3
  • Please include a link to the source where this passage may be found.
    – Alan Carmack
    Commented Sep 16, 2016 at 11:09
  • What do you mean "somewhat wired"?
    – Alan Carmack
    Commented Sep 16, 2016 at 11:10
  • @AlanCarmack I only have a picture of the passage, It's available at s22.postimg.io/fosdxav8x/e8c6d2798c5fc82_Copy.jpg . Sorry for "wired", that's a typo, it should be "weird".
    – James
    Commented Sep 16, 2016 at 11:43

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
2

The term Carbon-based predecessors refers to people. You are right, it does not refer to the electronic worlds or to the future.

The paragraph simply suggests that electronics (Silicon-based) will replace people. The reference to communications being carbon-based is simply referring to face-to-face speech.

The intention is not to refer specifically to the inventors of the electronic systems.

The whole thing is metaphorically stating that the machines are taking over. You will find other works of literature that use similar phraseology,.

Improve this answer
-1

The term carbon-based describes only predecessors; it does not apply to future electronic worlds.

The noun phrase their carbon-based predecessors is compared to future electronic worlds, which, in turn, goes back to screenless, image-based, computer-generalized worlds of future long-distance communication.

It does not matter if future electronic worlds are not carbon-based. This passage describes only their predecessors as carbon-based. The quality of carbon-based is not being ascribed to future electronic worlds.

You can rewrite the passage as

...future electronic worlds will be entered, reconnoitered, touched, monitored and replayed, in part supplementing their predecessors, which were carbon-based.

Here again, carbon-based describes only their predecessors, not any future world.

Improve this answer
3
  • Sorry, I'm still confused by the usage of "carbon-based". Does it refer to those entities?
    – James
    Commented Sep 16, 2016 at 12:09
  • In this passage, carbon-based only refers to the predecessors of future electronic worlds.
    – Alan Carmack
    Commented Sep 16, 2016 at 12:17
  • Maybe I failed to express my confusion properly. Why does the author use "carbon-based" on predecessors? It is unusual to me because it's hard for me to understand why the predecessors, not creatures are "carbon-based" .
    – James
    Commented Sep 16, 2016 at 12:55

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .