Some relevant Chiang quotes

From the 2011 Locus interview:

"I consider most of my work science fiction, even the stories that look like fantasy. To me, what makes a story science fiction is not whether the universe has the same laws as our universe or not, but whether it is a universe in which the scientific method works. That is a more interesting distinction for me. By that criterion, ‘Exhalation’ is a science fiction story, even though its universe bears no resemblance to ours. The same is true for '72 Letters,' and for 'Tower of Babylon.'"

The next two are from the 2010 Boing Boing interview:

"When some friends of mine read 'Understand,' they were certain that I must have taken hallucinogens at some point, but I have not. I wasn't attempting to describe someone hallucinating, but I was attempting to describe the experience of having a revelation, an incredibly deep and profound revelation about the nature of the universe. I guess it so happens that most people's experience of that occurs when they're taking hallucinogens, but the hallucinogen aspect was not my intent."

On "Seventy-Two Letters":

"Computer programming is a rational practice while Kabbalah is a mystical practice, and DNA is different from computer code, and I wouldn't want anyone confusing one with another. At a metaphorical level, they all provide ways of thinking about the relationship between language and reality, which is a topic I find interesting. There's this old idea in magic that there's a language where the symbols have a tight relationship with what's being signified, so by manipulating those symbols, you could manipulate reality itself. ... And that certainly bears a resemblance to computer programming, where code is translated into actions by a computer. And in turn that bears a resemblance to DNA, where code is translated into the bodies of living organisms. So I think it's fun to imagine a connection between all three of these, so long as we're talking about fiction. I wouldn't want anyone to take this too literally."

The next two are from the 2008 IndieBound interview:

"I wouldn't say I've explored alternate histories, per se, but rather alternate sciences. For example, in 'Seventy-Two Letters,' what's different isn't the outcome of a pivotal historical event, but rather the underlying mechanism of reproductive biology: in the world of that story, there's a fully formed, tiny fetus inside each sperm cell, which ultimately grows to become an infant. The theory is known as preformation, there's a famous sketch, drawn around 1700, that illustrates it. Initially I didn't know much more than that, but I did some reading and found that there's quite a history behind it. For decades scientists debated whether the preformed fetus originated in the sperm or the ovum, and they tried to design experiments to prove either the 'spermist' or 'ovist' hypothesis. I'm fascinated by episodes like this in the history of science."

"To me, 'Tower of Babylon' and 'Seventy-Two Letters' are more about science than faith, although I certainly understand why many people focus on the religious elements. In the past science and faith were much more closely aligned than they are now; investigating the natural world was seen as a way of celebrating God's creation, and that attitude is visible in both of those stories. But I wouldn't say that the characters' religious beliefs are literally true; the universe in those stories appears consistent with the inhabitants' religious beliefs, but the same could be said of our universe."

From the 2003 Fantastic Metropolis interview:

"I wasn’t raised in any religion, so I don’t have such strong feelings toward religion that many people do. When I was younger I had a vague belief in God, but as I grew older, it seemed to me that the idea of God didn’t explain anything that couldn’t be explained otherwise, so I’m currently an atheist. I think religion is interesting, but my interest in it is strictly abstract. I recently had a conversation with someone who said she had occasionally experienced epiphanies, moments when she felt the presence of the divine. I have never experienced anything like that, which probably keeps my interest in religion from becoming more than abstract."

From the 2002 Infinity Plus interview, on the similarity between the Heptapods in "Story of Your Life" and the Trafalmadorians in Vonnegut's <i>Slaughterhouse-Five</i>:

"I actually hadn't read Vonnegut's novel at the time I wrote my story. To me there's a big difference in the two works. I think of Slaughterhouse-Five as being really bleak in its outlook, while I don't think of my story that way at all. My story ends on a note that, to me, is ultimately life affirming. The story is about choosing to go ahead with life, even though there will be pain in the future as well as joy. You can say that the narrator doesn't actually have a choice, and that's true, but that's not the most important aspect of it. She's not being forced into it against her will. She's accepting the bad with the good."

From the 2002 SF Site interview:

"I'd say that, as far as divine intervention goes, the world in 'Tower of Babylon' operates the way I see our universe operating, while the world in 'Hell is the Absence of God' operates the way certain other people see our universe operating. Good and bad things happen in both universes. In the former, it's unclear whether any of them are the result of divine intervention; in the latter, it's clear that many of them are. That accounts for some, if not all, of the difference between those stories' depictions of religion."

On "Understand": 

"While the story is about the search for knowledge, its message is not that some forms of knowledge are intrinsically corrupting or destructive. It's true that the story's protagonist feels little kinship with ordinary humanity, but many people feel the same way right now, without having enhanced intelligence. 

"There have been a lot of different ideas about how high intelligence would affect one's moral behavior. One is that it would make you cold, unfeeling, even amoral, e.g. the cliché of the mad scientist. Another is that it would make you kind and altruistic, e.g. the cliché of the benevolent, super-intelligent alien race. I don't believe there's a correlation in either direction. I think superintelligent people would, if anything, vary more than ordinary people in their behavior; after all, humans probably have a broader range of behavior than, say, dogs.

"One could claim that enhanced intelligence implies an increased moral obligation ('with great power comes great responsibility,' ála Spiderman). This certainly sounds plausible, but I'd need to hear more argument to be convinced of its truth. Where is the line between the obligatory (what we must do) and the supererogatory (what is above and beyond the call of duty)? I don't know."