I agree, I've also questioned whether the label fit him, but it speaks to the time when the intellectuals thought about ideology a different way. I think back then you could still have an ideological stance but still question it and you'd be more respected for that. This ideological/intellectual/informational purity standard we find ourselves locked in has been a long time brewin'. The irony is that if you care about promoting your own ideology it actually makes you stronger to question it, probe it, find out the weaknesses before opponents can exploit it. It's a form of empathy that makes you have stronger arguments. I've failed to explain this to many wannabe activists in today's world. It's Sun Tzu "know your enemy" shit that they deliberately stay ignorant of that would actually open the door for gaining of ground. That being said, I think he has really smart ideas that were influential but I never enjoyed reading any of his books aside from the introduction of scientific concepts to storytelling (like in Troopers how a planet without sufficient radiation exposure would become "retarded"). I think we both know that the only reason PKD needed a typewriter was because They snuck into his house and sabotaged his old one 😉 That's very funny Asimov politely suggesting H. was pussywhipped. I guess it makes sense since he was in the Free Love scene which probably had a more Matriarchically structure given the difference of power balance (His Moon society was Matriarchically, IIRC). This reminds of a Chuck Klosterman passage that I think of time to time, “Whenever I meet dynamic, nonretarded Americans, I notice that they all seem to share a single unifying characteristic: the inability to experience the kind of mind-blowing, transcendent romantic relationship they perceive to be a normal part of living.” The Inverse of this is that relationships take dynamic, thinking men and destroy those qualities. I could make a list...