At the most basic level, the science fiction writer is a sort of prophet, using the fantastic as a backdrop to explore the great what-ifs. They generally do not even pretend to write about what-wills if for no other reason than that they have no more of an idea than normal folks. One particularly interesting, if perversely circular, what-if exists: what if someone knew all the what-wills? The goal of this project is to analyze the different ways in which science fiction authors portray prophecy with regard to its usefulness to an individual as well as humanity in general.

Basically, there are two competing viewpoints. One sect, led by Isaac Asimov, claims that foreknowledge of the future can be used wisely to lead mankind toward a blessed future of prosperity and continued intellectual and spiritual growth. Conversely, the other camp, championed by Frank Herbert, specifies that the same happy ending can only be achieved when the future remains uncertain.

Each philosophy, of course, has a certain merit. The Asimovians indicate the great good that could be accomplished: prescient policemen prevent crime, politicians steer nations toward prosperity, and even the catastrophic consequences of natural disasters are mitigated with preparation. Conversely, Herbert’s followers contend that life would be dull if it were meticulously mapped-out. Consider: simply commuting to work requires the driver to pay close attention to the road because one never knows what sort of idiocy fellow motorists will commit. How easy it would be to drift down the road in a dreary haze if the road were known to be clear!

And so, creative minds vie over the ethical consequences of defocused temporal consciousness. The remainder of this project will catalogue different conceptions of precognition and how each form of prophecy can be either beneficial or detrimental to humanity.