: This is precisely what Star Trek TOS was. "Gene Roddenberry sold Star
: Trek in 1964 to NBC as a classic adventure drama, calling it a "Wagon
: Train to the Stars". But Roddenberry wanted to tell more
: sophisticated stories, using futuristic situations as analogies for
: current problems on Earth and showing how they could be rectified through
: humanism and optimism."

If I remember correctly, Quirel hates Star Trek, partly because it puts more focus on interpersonal stuff than believable science and technology, so I don't think that'll get you anywhere. I agree though that that has historically been a domain of science fiction and there's value in using it that way.

: Science fiction is more than just technology. It is fantasy. It's Man Vs
: Something wrapped up in a variety of degrees of technological and
: fantastical environments, depending on how 'advanced' or future-placed you
: want to get. Science-fiction doesn't imply any level of feasibility except
: that it is "fiction" based on "science". Some might
: argue that if there's any way to conceptualize something
: Naturalistically, then it can be quantified as science-fiction.

I would disagree there. Science fiction is a broad thing that encompasses things that lean more toward science or more toward fiction or fantasy. I think more and more that "speculative fiction" really is the best term for a lot of stuff out there, because there is so much variation in science fiction and fantasy, and so much of it isn't really important to the stories told.