There are still some die-hard snobs/elitists who cling to the definition of SF as "a story where, if the science or technology is removed, the story cannot stand on its own."
This definition is dated, it has expired.
In Christopher Priest's introduction to John Wyndham's The Chrysalids (nyrb edition) he states that an SF writer's tools include "the extrapolation of trends in science or technology or society, a satirical look at a current obsession or concern, or the deployment of some kind of fantastic metaphor. Any of these, or a combination of them, may be used to examine the present day from a fresh or startling or stimulating point of view."
Ray Bradbury said, "Science fiction is really sociological studies of the future, things that the writer believes are going to happen by putting two and two together. Science fiction is a logical or mathematical projection of the future."
There can be, there is sociological SF, anthropological SF, and so much more. Let us not be constrained by notions born and reared and killed in the last century.
Let us look forward, please.