The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
Please vote in the Forum Structure Poll. Polling will close at 2PM EST on January 21, 2025.
How would you handle first contact with modernized aliens?
MorninglordI'm tired of being Batman,so today I'll be Owl.Registered Userregular
edited November 2008
I will say this.
If they don't communicate, like if they don't bother with it at all, then the choice comes down to "are they going to harm us" and if they look like doing that " try to protect ourselves".
I'm all for blowing up the alien whales farting all over our planets unthinkingly if it's them or us yknow.
So we can, at least, have some limitations of communication and/or threat to our way of life.
O course yknow if the whales are immune to our weapons then its genocide by farts for us all.
I like my whales they are a funny alien to imagine.
Morninglord on
(PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.
If they don't communicate, like if they don't bother with it at all, then the choice comes down to "are they going to harm us" and if they look like doing that " try to protect ourselves".
I'm all for blowing up the alien whales farting all over our planets unthinkingly if it's them or us yknow.
So we can, at least, have some limitations of communication and/or threat to our way of life.
O course yknow if the whales are immune to our weapons then its genocide by farts for us all.
I like my whales they are a funny alien to imagine.
I think that it really comes down to communication as to whether or not we actually perceive them as intelligent life. If there's no means of communicating with it, we're just going to assume that it's non-sapient and kill/capture/harvest it.
Communication factors very heavily into a human-centric view of intelligence, which is the lense we're going to be viewing these creatures through when push comes to shove.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds.2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
0
MorninglordI'm tired of being Batman,so today I'll be Owl.Registered Userregular
edited November 2008
Baxter has them too in his Xeelee universe.
I added the farts because it is amusing.
Another interesting alien I have seen in Baxter is an intelligence that is basically a collection of interacting fluid cycles in water.
Baxter gave it rather silly humanistic qualities but the idea was interesting. Smart water? How do you do body language with water? How do you do anything with water flying a spaceship? You'd have to flash things at them and hope they can interpret it somehow.
edit: Yeah but if they are tool users but also uninterested in communicating then what do we do? Wander off in our own way?
Yet another science fiction idea: A species that committed ritual suicide because the culture shock of meeting an alien intelligence was too great.
If we meet an intelligence do we have to take into consideration this kind of moral risk?
Morninglord on
(PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.
it's interesting; i always advocate anti-war policies if possible, in human politics, and i think that if all the parties are rational and willing to work together, even if they're self interested, conflict can and should be avoided.
but if aliens are coming at us, how can we really guarantee communication or peace?
i would support exteme measures. like nuking the spacewhales.
edit: Yeah but if they are tool users but also uninterested in communicating then what do we do? Wander off in our own way?
Yet another science fiction idea: A species that committed ritual suicide because the culture shock of meeting an alien intelligence was too great.
If they're able but unwilling to communicate, it then becomes kind of a tribal standoff thing I think. We give them a wide enough berth to avoid conflict while building up resources for the inevitable clash. If they aren't even willing to talk, that's a pretty clear sign of antipathy or aggression and we should react accordingly. The real question mark is how we figure out if they are unwilling or unable. That's pretty crucial in these sorts of situations.
edit: Yeah but if they are tool users but also uninterested in communicating then what do we do? Wander off in our own way?
Yet another science fiction idea: A species that committed ritual suicide because the culture shock of meeting an alien intelligence was too great.
If they're able but unwilling to communicate, it then becomes kind of a tribal standoff thing I think. We give them a wide enough berth to avoid conflict while building up resources for the inevitable clash. If they aren't even willing to talk, that's a pretty clear sign of antipathy or aggression and we should react accordingly. The real question mark is how we figure out if they are unwilling or unable. That's pretty crucial in these sorts of situations.
Well if they were a hivemind as Evil says, so there is no concept of communication? What if they're a hivemind herbivore, feeding on space hydrogen or something? They could appear both complicated, like an ant colony, but also completely indifferent.
But yes you are right, the most important thing is to consider 1). All the possible ways physically available that we know of in the universe that could be used to send information from one physical location to another. Any of them could be a communication device.
2). Presuming we find something nonrandom, should we approach? Not approach? Should we start blasting bubbles into their talky fluid, or what?
3). What are the possible survival outcomes for our species from this. ARe they super advanced, with faster than light travel and ripping holes in the universe, using planets as playthings? Do we risk calling their attention? Water is a really useful substance for a lot of things besides keeping us squishy water bags alive and we sure do have a lot of it down here.
Morninglord on
(PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.
edit: Yeah but if they are tool users but also uninterested in communicating then what do we do? Wander off in our own way?
Yet another science fiction idea: A species that committed ritual suicide because the culture shock of meeting an alien intelligence was too great.
If they're able but unwilling to communicate, it then becomes kind of a tribal standoff thing I think. We give them a wide enough berth to avoid conflict while building up resources for the inevitable clash. If they aren't even willing to talk, that's a pretty clear sign of antipathy or aggression and we should react accordingly. The real question mark is how we figure out if they are unwilling or unable. That's pretty crucial in these sorts of situations.
Well if they were a hivemind as Evil says, so there is no concept of communication? What if they're a hivemind herbivore, feeding on space hydrogen or something? They could appear both complicated, like an ant colony, but also completely indifferent.
"Sir, we've got something on the sensors."
"What's it look like."
"Kind of like an ant colony, sir."
"Ignore it. Where are we off to next?"
Such creatures would not be sufficiently intelligent enough to interesting in a first-contact type scenario. If they are the first extra-terestrial life we've stumbled across, they might warrant a study. If they're just the next in a long line of bizarre alien fauna, they're going to get ignored for the shiny new planet off in the distance.
If it's not immediately apparent that they have intelligence, as measured on a human scale, then we're going to assume they don't until they prove that they do.
edit: Yeah but if they are tool users but also uninterested in communicating then what do we do? Wander off in our own way?
Yet another science fiction idea: A species that committed ritual suicide because the culture shock of meeting an alien intelligence was too great.
If they're able but unwilling to communicate, it then becomes kind of a tribal standoff thing I think. We give them a wide enough berth to avoid conflict while building up resources for the inevitable clash. If they aren't even willing to talk, that's a pretty clear sign of antipathy or aggression and we should react accordingly. The real question mark is how we figure out if they are unwilling or unable. That's pretty crucial in these sorts of situations.
Well if they were a hivemind as Evil says, so there is no concept of communication? What if they're a hivemind herbivore, feeding on space hydrogen or something? They could appear both complicated, like an ant colony, but also completely indifferent.
"Sir, we've got something on the sensors."
"What's it look like."
"Kind of like an ant colony, sir."
"Ignore it. Where are we off to next?"
Such creatures would not be sufficiently intelligent enough to interesting in a first-contact type scenario. If they are the first extra-terestrial life we've stumbled across, they might warrant a study. If they're just the next in a long line of bizarre alien fauna, they're going to get ignored for the shiny new planet off in the distance.
If it's not immediately apparent that they have intelligence, as measured on a human scale, then we're going to assume they don't until they prove that they do.
The situation I was trying to get across was more like:
"Ant colony. With nukes sir."
"hmmm"
Morninglord on
(PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.
Such creatures would not be sufficiently intelligent enough to interesting in a first-contact type scenario. If they are the first extra-terestrial life we've stumbled across, they might warrant a study. If they're just the next in a long line of bizarre alien fauna, they're going to get ignored for the shiny new planet off in the distance.
If it's not immediately apparent that they have intelligence, as measured on a human scale, then we're going to assume they don't until they prove that they do.
"Ant colony. With nukes sir."
"hmmm"
That would bear investigating (assuming we could detect it in the first place). Anything that resembles a known weapon system would be a beacon of the potential for intelligence, as we've leveraged so much of ours towards violence over the years and an alien race producing something similar shows the potential for a shared mindset.
That said, even if the ants in this example were down there interacting with obviously alien technology the human observers would be inclined to assume that the nukes predated the colony rather than contemplating the idea that a species that shows little semblance of human intelligence creating technology on that level.
edit: Yeah but if they are tool users but also uninterested in communicating then what do we do? Wander off in our own way?
Yet another science fiction idea: A species that committed ritual suicide because the culture shock of meeting an alien intelligence was too great.
If they're able but unwilling to communicate, it then becomes kind of a tribal standoff thing I think. We give them a wide enough berth to avoid conflict while building up resources for the inevitable clash. If they aren't even willing to talk, that's a pretty clear sign of antipathy or aggression and we should react accordingly. The real question mark is how we figure out if they are unwilling or unable. That's pretty crucial in these sorts of situations.
Well if they were a hivemind as Evil says, so there is no concept of communication? What if they're a hivemind herbivore, feeding on space hydrogen or something? They could appear both complicated, like an ant colony, but also completely indifferent.
"Sir, we've got something on the sensors."
"What's it look like."
"Kind of like an ant colony, sir."
"Ignore it. Where are we off to next?"
Such creatures would not be sufficiently intelligent enough to interesting in a first-contact type scenario. If they are the first extra-terestrial life we've stumbled across, they might warrant a study. If they're just the next in a long line of bizarre alien fauna, they're going to get ignored for the shiny new planet off in the distance.
If it's not immediately apparent that they have intelligence, as measured on a human scale, then we're going to assume they don't until they prove that they do.
What if it's a hivemind with visible technology, or at least technological levels of physical power? You're making the mistake of assuming that intelligence will follow the same route for various species.
Besides, intelligence is just one evolutionary adaptation to our environment; other specices might have found alternatives that are just as, if not more effective. We create models and predict and interpret; other species might have some kind of hyper-intuition that assembles sensory data without conscious effort, or similar. We already have some of this ourselves; in fact, that pretty much describes "inspiration."
Certainly communication would be difficult, or impossible, given such a method of interacting with reality. But we could not ignore them if their minds can process reality effectively and match or exceed our own ability to influence the material world.
Such creatures would not be sufficiently intelligent enough to interesting in a first-contact type scenario. If they are the first extra-terestrial life we've stumbled across, they might warrant a study. If they're just the next in a long line of bizarre alien fauna, they're going to get ignored for the shiny new planet off in the distance.
If it's not immediately apparent that they have intelligence, as measured on a human scale, then we're going to assume they don't until they prove that they do.
"Ant colony. With nukes sir."
"hmmm"
That would bear investigating (assuming we could detect it in the first place). Anything that resembles a known weapon system would be a beacon of the potential for intelligence, as we've leveraged so much of ours towards violence over the years and an alien race producing something similar shows the potential for a shared mindset.
That said, even if the ants in this example were down there interacting with obviously alien technology the human observers would be inclined to assume that the nukes predated the colony rather than contemplating the idea that a species that shows little semblance of human intelligence creating technology on that level.
Yeah you are focusing too hard on the ant idea mate, the idea was a thing that appears unable to communicate that is also obviously intelligent and potentially dangerous/perhaps even outmatches us in power.
So the ants have nuke ray guns and use them to dig their tunnels, and show every indication they can make them from scratch, but don't notice us as an intelligence.
That's a tricky one, if we shout real loud they might notice us after all. If we don't, they might notice us eventually.
Morninglord on
(PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.
Why would a hive-mind have any use for nukes, or developing weaponry to that level of sophistication?
killing the other species on its planet.
good point though, that they wouldn't really have war-inspired tech because they wouldn't be at war.
i don't know whether the absolute absence of conflict would be a positive or a negative for the speed of progress, since they'd just be duking it out with other species that are likely still at your basic animal levels of cognitive ability.
unless they encountered a spacefaring race and decided, hey, let us consume them.
Evil Multifarious on
0
MorninglordI'm tired of being Batman,so today I'll be Owl.Registered Userregular
edited November 2008
We use "weapon" style technologies for numerous peaceful purposes. For example, Mining = explosives. Which also = bombs. What if whatever bug it is doesn't have a biology that is affected by radiation? They'd probbaly just move a mountain by lobbing a nuke at it, it's efficient afterall.
Morninglord on
(PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.
We use "weapon" style technologies for numerous peaceful purposes. For example, Mining = explosives. Which also = bombs. What if whatever bug it is doesn't have a biology that is affected by radiation? They'd probbaly just move a mountain by lobbing a nuke at it, it's efficient afterall.
Pretty much all matter is affected by radiation. These hivemind ant things would have to be super-dense physically to be resistant to radiation, especially on the level of mountain-flattening nuclear bombs.
We use "weapon" style technologies for numerous peaceful purposes. For example, Mining = explosives. Which also = bombs. What if whatever bug it is doesn't have a biology that is affected by radiation? They'd probbaly just move a mountain by lobbing a nuke at it, it's efficient afterall.
Pretty much all matter is affected by radiation. These hivemind ant things would have to be super-dense physically to be resistant to radiation, especially on the level of mountain-flattening nuclear bombs.
Oh god FINE ok they develop fusion bombs with clean radiation levels and have no morals okay happy.
Can I just say huge destruction thing being used for industry? Will that pass the literal test? Think about the concept! I don't care about the physics I got wrong, the concept isn't reliant on a specfic example.
Morninglord on
(PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.
Yeah you are focusing too hard on the ant idea mate, the idea was a thing that appears unable to communicate that is also obviously intelligent and potentially dangerous/perhaps even outmatches us in power.
So the ants have nuke ray guns and use them to dig their tunnels, and show every indication they can make them from scratch, but don't notice us as an intelligence.
That's a tricky one, if we shout real loud they might notice us after all. If we don't, they might notice us eventually.
I'm focusing on the ant idea because it's an obvious allegory. It could be anything, up to an including things that looked freakishly human. If they don't interact with us on the level a human normally would, we're going to assume non-sentience until they prove us wrong. That's part of our inherent human-centric view of intelligence. Even if we give the (apparently) mindless drones energy weapons and personal force-fields, we're still going to see them as being of lower intelligence than we and unworthy of the first-contact treatment we reserve for potential equals.
Yeah you are focusing too hard on the ant idea mate, the idea was a thing that appears unable to communicate that is also obviously intelligent and potentially dangerous/perhaps even outmatches us in power.
So the ants have nuke ray guns and use them to dig their tunnels, and show every indication they can make them from scratch, but don't notice us as an intelligence.
That's a tricky one, if we shout real loud they might notice us after all. If we don't, they might notice us eventually.
I'm focusing on the ant idea because it's an obvious allegory. It could be anything, up to an including things that looked freakishly human. If they don't interact with us on the level a human normally would, we're going to assume non-sentience until they prove us wrong. That's part of our inherent human-centric view of intelligence. Even if we give the (apparently) mindless drones energy weapons and personal force-fields, we're still going to see them as being of lower intelligence than we and unworthy of the first-contact treatment we reserve for potential equals.
I think that's a pretty risky "universe view" you have there. I wouldn't want such ants unobserved or ignored. I'd want to know as much about a technologically advanced and potentially threatening race that didn't conform to our definition of intelligence very, very much.
And anyway, what have I told you about human centricness eh eh do I have to bring out the ruler again. Put out your knuckles boy its time for ten raps.
Morninglord on
(PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.
Yeah you are focusing too hard on the ant idea mate, the idea was a thing that appears unable to communicate that is also obviously intelligent and potentially dangerous/perhaps even outmatches us in power.
So the ants have nuke ray guns and use them to dig their tunnels, and show every indication they can make them from scratch, but don't notice us as an intelligence.
That's a tricky one, if we shout real loud they might notice us after all. If we don't, they might notice us eventually.
I'm focusing on the ant idea because it's an obvious allegory. It could be anything, up to an including things that looked freakishly human. If they don't interact with us on the level a human normally would, we're going to assume non-sentience until they prove us wrong. That's part of our inherent human-centric view of intelligence. Even if we give the (apparently) mindless drones energy weapons and personal force-fields, we're still going to see them as being of lower intelligence than we and unworthy of the first-contact treatment we reserve for potential equals.
I think that's a pretty risky "universe view" you have there. I wouldn't want such ants unobserved or ignored. I'd want to know as much about a technologically advanced and potentially threatening race that didn't conform to our definition of intelligence very, very much.
And anyway, what have I told you about human centricness eh eh do I have to bring out the ruler again. Put out your knuckles boy its time for ten raps.
Who said we were going to leave them unobserved? We're just not going to treat them like neighbors, more like wild animals or livestock. They step out of line, there wouldn't be any moral quandries taking them down because they don't seem to have sapience of their own.
As to the human-centric statement, that's the point. First contact from our side is going to be viewed through a very human-centric lense. That's going to color our interaction with whatever species we encounter, so it needs to be taken into account.
The thing is...any *perceived* encounter we ever have with ET will involve physics in a way that is perceptible to us. Otherwise, we'll never even know about it.
In this endeavour we have to maintain a human-centric approach to communication or interaction. As in, do our actions or communication attempts result in activity that has a positive or negative impact on us?
The concept of "enjoyment" or "pleasure" can be translated to a different continuum.
I think people are dramatically overestimating how alien aliens are likely to be. Barring an individually immortal alien, a technologically advanced civilization will be composed of multiple individuals. This means they will compete for resources, develop hierarchies, access rituals, methods of mediating aggression, and care for the young. Their microbiology may be radically different but their psychology and sociology are likely to fall into the same basic parameters as intelligent communal species on Earth.
Math is a function of the linearity of the human attentional process.
The current favourite theory that I personally agree with is that we task switch attentional resources, only doing one at a time, but we preprocess them with automatic habits built up as we get used to doing them.
If any "aliens" have a "thinking bit" that is truly parrallel though, there's no way in hell we would be able to either keep up or understand their thought processes.
By the same token, their math would probably not be the same as our math.
Human brains are massively parallel. It's not even the case that your conscious attention is linear, as you will notice if you pay attention to what your mind is doing at any given time. This is why math is much harder for humans than calculators, despite the fact that humans have a much, much greater processing capacity. We didn't develop math because of our linearity; we developed it in spite of our nonlinearity. And what the hell is a "thinking bit"?
Math is no more reliable than any other language. Various human cultures have very different ways of perceiving reality; there are cultures that lack the concepts of time, number, colour, or identity (or even all of the above). If the human scope of perception is that flexible, imagine how different from us an alien species could be? Their method of interacting with reality could be entirely different.
All the propositions I've seen for alien communication and existence are grounded in assumptions that I don't think are really safe. Even the idea that aliens will "evolve" in any way similar to us is making an assumption. The existence of DNA and genes and all that stuff depended on the chemical makeup of our planet, didn't it? A similar planet might end up with a similar system of evolution and complex life, but what if there are other paths by which life can come to be? What if there are other forms of abiogenesis? What if there are "advanced" species that we wouldn't even recognize as "alive," necessarily?
First, the idea that you could get aliens that are not subject to evolution is frankly crazy. Perhaps you could get aliens that have taken to manipulating their biology to the point where evolution is irrelevant, but you would still have aliens that originated in evolution and developed their basic psychology in response to evolutionary pressures. No form of abiogenesis is going to give rise to intelligent life ex nihilo.
Also the idea that there is more than one math is, I think, bunk. Principia Mathematica proved that basic arithmetic is a matter of pure analytic logic, and analytic logic is the same for any possible intelligent mind.
zakkiel on
Account not recoverable. So long.
0
MorninglordI'm tired of being Batman,so today I'll be Owl.Registered Userregular
Yeah you are focusing too hard on the ant idea mate, the idea was a thing that appears unable to communicate that is also obviously intelligent and potentially dangerous/perhaps even outmatches us in power.
So the ants have nuke ray guns and use them to dig their tunnels, and show every indication they can make them from scratch, but don't notice us as an intelligence.
That's a tricky one, if we shout real loud they might notice us after all. If we don't, they might notice us eventually.
I'm focusing on the ant idea because it's an obvious allegory. It could be anything, up to an including things that looked freakishly human. If they don't interact with us on the level a human normally would, we're going to assume non-sentience until they prove us wrong. That's part of our inherent human-centric view of intelligence. Even if we give the (apparently) mindless drones energy weapons and personal force-fields, we're still going to see them as being of lower intelligence than we and unworthy of the first-contact treatment we reserve for potential equals.
I think that's a pretty risky "universe view" you have there. I wouldn't want such ants unobserved or ignored. I'd want to know as much about a technologically advanced and potentially threatening race that didn't conform to our definition of intelligence very, very much.
And anyway, what have I told you about human centricness eh eh do I have to bring out the ruler again. Put out your knuckles boy its time for ten raps.
Who said we were going to leave them unobserved? We're just not going to treat them like neighbors, more like wild animals or livestock. They step out of line, there wouldn't be any moral quandries taking them down because they don't seem to have sapience of their own.
As to the human-centric statement, that's the point. First contact from our side is going to be viewed through a very human-centric lense. That's going to color our interaction with whatever species we encounter, so it needs to be taken into account.
I was rather hoping it would be taken into account as an example of how not to behave but whatever captain genocide.
Morninglord on
(PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.
We use "weapon" style technologies for numerous peaceful purposes. For example, Mining = explosives. Which also = bombs. What if whatever bug it is doesn't have a biology that is affected by radiation? They'd probbaly just move a mountain by lobbing a nuke at it, it's efficient afterall.
Pretty much all matter is affected by radiation. These hivemind ant things would have to be super-dense physically to be resistant to radiation, especially on the level of mountain-flattening nuclear bombs.
Oh god FINE ok they develop fusion bombs with clean radiation levels and have no morals okay happy.
Can I just say huge destruction thing being used for industry? Will that pass the literal test? Think about the concept! I don't care about the physics I got wrong, the concept isn't reliant on a specfic example.
YOU MUST DEVELOP A SPECIFICALLY FUNCTIONAL EXAMPLE OR I WILL DISMISS YOUR ENTIRE CLAIM
no i totally agree, they might have big destructive tools for the hell of it
but i wonder how far they would have the tech for industrial destruction - ours certainly isn't that great, is it?
I think people are dramatically overestimating how alien aliens are likely to be. Barring an individually immortal alien, a technologically advanced civilization will be composed of multiple individuals. This means they will compete for resources, develop hierarchies, access rituals, methods of mediating aggression, and care for the young. Their microbiology may be radically different but their psychology and sociology are likely to fall into the same basic parameters as intelligent communal species on Earth.
Math is a function of the linearity of the human attentional process.
The current favourite theory that I personally agree with is that we task switch attentional resources, only doing one at a time, but we preprocess them with automatic habits built up as we get used to doing them.
If any "aliens" have a "thinking bit" that is truly parrallel though, there's no way in hell we would be able to either keep up or understand their thought processes.
By the same token, their math would probably not be the same as our math.
Human brains are massively parallel. It's not even the case that your conscious attention is linear, as you will notice if you pay attention to what your mind is doing at any given time. This is why math is much harder for humans than calculators, despite the fact that humans have a much, much greater processing capacity. We didn't develop math because of our linearity; we developed it in spite of our nonlinearity. And what the hell is a "thinking bit"?
Math is no more reliable than any other language. Various human cultures have very different ways of perceiving reality; there are cultures that lack the concepts of time, number, colour, or identity (or even all of the above). If the human scope of perception is that flexible, imagine how different from us an alien species could be? Their method of interacting with reality could be entirely different.
All the propositions I've seen for alien communication and existence are grounded in assumptions that I don't think are really safe. Even the idea that aliens will "evolve" in any way similar to us is making an assumption. The existence of DNA and genes and all that stuff depended on the chemical makeup of our planet, didn't it? A similar planet might end up with a similar system of evolution and complex life, but what if there are other paths by which life can come to be? What if there are other forms of abiogenesis? What if there are "advanced" species that we wouldn't even recognize as "alive," necessarily?
First, the idea that you could get aliens that are not subject to evolution is frankly crazy. Perhaps you could get aliens that have taken to manipulating their biology to the point where evolution is irrelevant, but you would still have aliens that originated in evolution and developed their basic psychology in response to evolutionary pressures. No form of abiogenesis is going to give rise to intelligent life ex nihilo.
Also the idea that there is more than one math is, I think, bunk. Principia Mathematica proved that basic arithmetic is a matter of pure analytic logic, and analytic logic is the same for any possible intelligent mind.
You are basically talking about folktale psych, unless you want to quote me some references. If you are right then I'll happily be reinformed, just give me those references, I can look em up through my library site. APA quality please.
It's parallel in that lots of things are firing at once but in the end most of that parallel is to do with things we don't control. Consciously, we are pretttttty damn linear and automatic.
If you would like mine it's Paschler's PRP theory available in The Psychology of Attention. 1998, pp271-283. There are some others in there you might want to have a look at too.
Morninglord on
(PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.
0
MorninglordI'm tired of being Batman,so today I'll be Owl.Registered Userregular
I was rather hoping it would be taken into account as an example of how not to behave but whatever captain genocide.
You can't have a discussion of human reaction to first contact without taking human-centrism into account. It doesn't work that way.
The same line of logic could also be used to excuse atrocities against humans because it's human-centric to be prejudiced towards outgroups, dehumanising them.
I aint lettin ya get away with that sorry. We might run mostly on automatic, but we DO have conscious control. It's just hard. No free rides for genocide. Or ant-ocide.
Morninglord on
(PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.
First, the idea that you could get aliens that are not subject to evolution is frankly crazy. Perhaps you could get aliens that have taken to manipulating their biology to the point where evolution is irrelevant, but you would still have aliens that originated in evolution and developed their basic psychology in response to evolutionary pressures. No form of abiogenesis is going to give rise to intelligent life ex nihilo.
You misunderstand; I was not suggesting that evolution would not occur (it would have to, to produce life at any level that resembed intelligence). I was suggesting that evolution by the mechanics we are familiar with - genes, DNA, reproduction, etc - may not occur. It might be something radically different. We are completely ignorant about how other forms of life might come to exist, if such a thing is possible. We're still ignorant about how our form of carbon-based life began in the first place.
Such a radically different starting point or process might produce something so alien that we can barely perceive it as alive, let alone communicate with it.
Also the idea that there is more than one math is, I think, bunk. Principia Mathematica proved that basic arithmetic is a matter of pure analytic logic, and analytic logic is the same for any possible intelligent mind.
It is quite presumptuous to make that claim, I think. Analytic logic is generated by the human mind. It is a means by which the human mind interacts with and understands reality. To say that it is correct and functional in itself is one thing (and I agree, obviously); to say that it is the only correct and functional way is another, and I think erroneous. You are excluding the possibility of other forms of material understanding. Even arithmetic is not necessarily "natural," as there are human cultures that do not have the concept of "number."
It is entirely possible that alien minds would not comprehend analytic logic. It is entirely possible that they would have a different system that reaches the same answers, whether they understand our logic or not. Our means of thought is founded upon our means of perception, after all, and alien life might have radically different perceptual mechanisms.
I was rather hoping it would be taken into account as an example of how not to behave but whatever captain genocide.
You can't have a discussion of human reaction to first contact without taking human-centrism into account. It doesn't work that way.
The same line of logic could also be used to excuse atrocities against humans because it's human-centric to be prejudiced towards outgroups, dehumanising them.
I aint lettin ya get away with that sorry. We might run mostly on automatic, but we DO have conscious control. It's just hard. No free rides for genocide.
And I'm not letting you get away with mischaracterization like this. Morninglord is not advocating genocide, he's explaining how our primary goal, conscious or unconscious has to be our own well being.
It's not to our advantage to destroy, unless said destruction is necessary for self-preservation.
Maybe you're selfless enough that you won't fight for your survival if whoever's attacking you seems to really need to eat you, but I doubt it.
I was rather hoping it would be taken into account as an example of how not to behave but whatever captain genocide.
You can't have a discussion of human reaction to first contact without taking human-centrism into account. It doesn't work that way.
The same line of logic could also be used to excuse atrocities against humans because it's human-centric to be prejudiced towards outgroups, dehumanising them.
I aint lettin ya get away with that sorry. We might run mostly on automatic, but we DO have conscious control. It's just hard. No free rides for genocide.
When did I talk about genocide? And when was I implying that it was my first inclination to act like that?
Human interaction with alien species is going to be viewed from the human side based on how human the aliens appear and act. Anything that's completely outside the realm of human existence (such as a species that completely lacks the ability to communicate or which has no means of physical movement, etc) is going to be viewed as non-sapient by all but the scientific fringe who take the time to study them in greater depth. Once a few of those studies turn up intelligence in species previously thought to be non-sentient, the overall human view of such first-contacts may change. At first, though, it's going to be pretty simplistic in terms of what we view as equals and what we don't. I fully expect us to horribly fuck something up within the first couple decades of true space travel for precisely that reason.
I was rather hoping it would be taken into account as an example of how not to behave but whatever captain genocide.
You can't have a discussion of human reaction to first contact without taking human-centrism into account. It doesn't work that way.
The same line of logic could also be used to excuse atrocities against humans because it's human-centric to be prejudiced towards outgroups, dehumanising them.
I aint lettin ya get away with that sorry. We might run mostly on automatic, but we DO have conscious control. It's just hard. No free rides for genocide.
And I'm not letting you get away with mischaracterization like this. Morninglord is not advocating genocide, he's explaining how our primary goal, conscious or unconscious has to be our own well being.
It's not to our advantage to destroy, unless said destruction is necessary for self-preservation.
Maybe you're selfless enough that you won't fight for your survival if whoever's attacking you seems to really need to eat you, but I doubt it.
Who are you talking to.
Morninglord on
(PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.
I was rather hoping it would be taken into account as an example of how not to behave but whatever captain genocide.
You can't have a discussion of human reaction to first contact without taking human-centrism into account. It doesn't work that way.
The same line of logic could also be used to excuse atrocities against humans because it's human-centric to be prejudiced towards outgroups, dehumanising them.
I aint lettin ya get away with that sorry. We might run mostly on automatic, but we DO have conscious control. It's just hard. No free rides for genocide. Or ant-ocide.
I want a coffee mug that says "No Free Rides for Genocide." Or maybe a bumper sticker.
tsmvengy on
0
MorninglordI'm tired of being Batman,so today I'll be Owl.Registered Userregular
I was rather hoping it would be taken into account as an example of how not to behave but whatever captain genocide.
You can't have a discussion of human reaction to first contact without taking human-centrism into account. It doesn't work that way.
The same line of logic could also be used to excuse atrocities against humans because it's human-centric to be prejudiced towards outgroups, dehumanising them.
I aint lettin ya get away with that sorry. We might run mostly on automatic, but we DO have conscious control. It's just hard. No free rides for genocide.
When did I talk about genocide? And when was I implying that it was my first inclination to act like that?
Human interaction with alien species is going to be viewed from the human side based on how human the aliens appear and act. Anything that's completely outside the realm of human existence (such as a species that completely lacks the ability to communicate or which has no means of physical movement, etc) is going to be viewed as non-sapient by all but the scientific fringe who take the time to study them in greater depth. Once a few of those studies turn up intelligence in species previously thought to be non-sentient, the overall human view of such first-contacts may change. At first, though, it's going to be pretty simplistic in terms of what we view as equals and what we don't. I fully expect us to horribly fuck something up within the first couple decades of true space travel for precisely that reason.
Well yeah duh but isn't the point of this thread to think of things, yknow plans? Couldn't one of those plans be not to treat such a creature as automatically unintelligent because we recognise human-centricness is pretty smallminded?
I dunno you just seem to be jumping the shark. I mean I completely agree that people now would act like this but isn't that what a plan is for, to hopefully take into account and overcome our flaws?
And I'm joking about the genocide, just like you were, hopefully, when talking about treating technologically advanced creatures as livestock. Since we treat livestock pretty damn badly.
Morninglord on
(PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.
I think people are dramatically overestimating how alien aliens are likely to be. Barring an individually immortal alien, a technologically advanced civilization will be composed of multiple individuals. This means they will compete for resources, develop hierarchies, access rituals, methods of mediating aggression, and care for the young. Their microbiology may be radically different but their psychology and sociology are likely to fall into the same basic parameters as intelligent communal species on Earth.
Math is a function of the linearity of the human attentional process.
The current favourite theory that I personally agree with is that we task switch attentional resources, only doing one at a time, but we preprocess them with automatic habits built up as we get used to doing them.
If any "aliens" have a "thinking bit" that is truly parrallel though, there's no way in hell we would be able to either keep up or understand their thought processes.
By the same token, their math would probably not be the same as our math.
Human brains are massively parallel. It's not even the case that your conscious attention is linear, as you will notice if you pay attention to what your mind is doing at any given time. This is why math is much harder for humans than calculators, despite the fact that humans have a much, much greater processing capacity. We didn't develop math because of our linearity; we developed it in spite of our nonlinearity. And what the hell is a "thinking bit"?
Math is no more reliable than any other language. Various human cultures have very different ways of perceiving reality; there are cultures that lack the concepts of time, number, colour, or identity (or even all of the above). If the human scope of perception is that flexible, imagine how different from us an alien species could be? Their method of interacting with reality could be entirely different.
All the propositions I've seen for alien communication and existence are grounded in assumptions that I don't think are really safe. Even the idea that aliens will "evolve" in any way similar to us is making an assumption. The existence of DNA and genes and all that stuff depended on the chemical makeup of our planet, didn't it? A similar planet might end up with a similar system of evolution and complex life, but what if there are other paths by which life can come to be? What if there are other forms of abiogenesis? What if there are "advanced" species that we wouldn't even recognize as "alive," necessarily?
First, the idea that you could get aliens that are not subject to evolution is frankly crazy. Perhaps you could get aliens that have taken to manipulating their biology to the point where evolution is irrelevant, but you would still have aliens that originated in evolution and developed their basic psychology in response to evolutionary pressures. No form of abiogenesis is going to give rise to intelligent life ex nihilo.
Also the idea that there is more than one math is, I think, bunk. Principia Mathematica proved that basic arithmetic is a matter of pure analytic logic, and analytic logic is the same for any possible intelligent mind.
I think this gives rise to an interesting approach, communication by scientific proof. We could setup some experiments that demonstrate our knowledge of physics and chemistry, things like gravity, fundamental properties of matter and so on. And along with the experimental setup we could have the scientific theory written out.
It's a little more complex then calling something FOOD while pointing at it right before you eat it, but if these aliens are advanced technologically we could hope their have the same understanding of the physical universe we do and will recognize our experiments for what they are having done similar experiments themselves.
Although I appreciate your evolutionist arguement zekkiel, but I don't think you can rule out something like a hive mind where individuals communicate solely via body language and complex organic gases (like pheromones in insects). I would like to believe they would have worked out something like radio, which we could intercept and put through our computers to look for patterns, but there is no guarantee that aliens won't be exceeding non-human like.
I was rather hoping it would be taken into account as an example of how not to behave but whatever captain genocide.
You can't have a discussion of human reaction to first contact without taking human-centrism into account. It doesn't work that way.
The same line of logic could also be used to excuse atrocities against humans because it's human-centric to be prejudiced towards outgroups, dehumanising them.
I aint lettin ya get away with that sorry. We might run mostly on automatic, but we DO have conscious control. It's just hard. No free rides for genocide.
When did I talk about genocide? And when was I implying that it was my first inclination to act like that?
Human interaction with alien species is going to be viewed from the human side based on how human the aliens appear and act. Anything that's completely outside the realm of human existence (such as a species that completely lacks the ability to communicate or which has no means of physical movement, etc) is going to be viewed as non-sapient by all but the scientific fringe who take the time to study them in greater depth. Once a few of those studies turn up intelligence in species previously thought to be non-sentient, the overall human view of such first-contacts may change. At first, though, it's going to be pretty simplistic in terms of what we view as equals and what we don't. I fully expect us to horribly fuck something up within the first couple decades of true space travel for precisely that reason.
Well yeah duh but isn't the point of this thread to think of things, yknow plans? Couldn't one of those plans be not to treat such a creature as automatically unintelligent because we recognise human-centricness is pretty smallminded?
I dunno you just seem to be jumping the shark. I mean I completely agree that people now would act like this but isn't that what a plan is for, to hopefully take into account and overcome our flaws?
And I'm joking about the genocide, just like you were, hopefully, talking about treating technologically advanced creatures as livestock. Since we treat livestock pretty damn badly.
First, it's jumping the gun, not the shark.
I think he's saying that regardless of how we should handle such a situation, the reality is that we would handle it through a very human-centric view, and thus that viewpoint is worth discussing.
I was rather hoping it would be taken into account as an example of how not to behave but whatever captain genocide.
You can't have a discussion of human reaction to first contact without taking human-centrism into account. It doesn't work that way.
The same line of logic could also be used to excuse atrocities against humans because it's human-centric to be prejudiced towards outgroups, dehumanising them.
I aint lettin ya get away with that sorry. We might run mostly on automatic, but we DO have conscious control. It's just hard. No free rides for genocide.
When did I talk about genocide? And when was I implying that it was my first inclination to act like that?
Human interaction with alien species is going to be viewed from the human side based on how human the aliens appear and act. Anything that's completely outside the realm of human existence (such as a species that completely lacks the ability to communicate or which has no means of physical movement, etc) is going to be viewed as non-sapient by all but the scientific fringe who take the time to study them in greater depth. Once a few of those studies turn up intelligence in species previously thought to be non-sentient, the overall human view of such first-contacts may change. At first, though, it's going to be pretty simplistic in terms of what we view as equals and what we don't. I fully expect us to horribly fuck something up within the first couple decades of true space travel for precisely that reason.
Well yeah duh but isn't the point of this thread to think of things, yknow plans? Couldn't one of those plans be not to treat such a creature as automatically unintelligent because we recognise human-centricness is pretty smallminded?
I dunno you just seem to be jumping the shark. I mean I completely agree that people now would act like this but isn't that what a plan is for, to hopefully take into account and overcome our flaws?
And I'm joking about the genocide, just like you were, hopefully, talking about treating technologically advanced creatures as livestock. Since we treat livestock pretty damn badly.
First, it's jumping the gun, not the shark.
I think he's saying that regardless of how we should handle such a situation, the reality is that we would handle it through a very human-centric view, and thus that viewpoint is worth discussing.
Excuse me? I'm Australian. It's jumping the shark thanks.
It is worth discussing, just as discussing how prejudice works is worth discussing.
As something to not do, not encourage and not accept.
Morninglord on
(PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.
I was rather hoping it would be taken into account as an example of how not to behave but whatever captain genocide.
You can't have a discussion of human reaction to first contact without taking human-centrism into account. It doesn't work that way.
The same line of logic could also be used to excuse atrocities against humans because it's human-centric to be prejudiced towards outgroups, dehumanising them.
I aint lettin ya get away with that sorry. We might run mostly on automatic, but we DO have conscious control. It's just hard. No free rides for genocide.
When did I talk about genocide? And when was I implying that it was my first inclination to act like that?
Human interaction with alien species is going to be viewed from the human side based on how human the aliens appear and act. Anything that's completely outside the realm of human existence (such as a species that completely lacks the ability to communicate or which has no means of physical movement, etc) is going to be viewed as non-sapient by all but the scientific fringe who take the time to study them in greater depth. Once a few of those studies turn up intelligence in species previously thought to be non-sentient, the overall human view of such first-contacts may change. At first, though, it's going to be pretty simplistic in terms of what we view as equals and what we don't. I fully expect us to horribly fuck something up within the first couple decades of true space travel for precisely that reason.
Well yeah duh but isn't the point of this thread to think of things, yknow plans? Couldn't one of those plans be not to treat such a creature as automatically unintelligent because we recognise human-centricness is pretty smallminded?
I dunno you just seem to be jumping the shark. I mean I completely agree that people now would act like this but isn't that what a plan is for, to hopefully take into account and overcome our flaws?
And I'm joking about the genocide, just like you were, hopefully, when talking about treating technologically advanced creatures as livestock. Since we treat livestock pretty damn badly.
The real problem is that any first contact situation is either going to happen with some corporate mining operation way out in the boonies of space or with the Human Alliance military. That means that the people who are going to be our first face to a new alien species are going to be exemplars of some of the more negative aspects of humanity when it comes to peaceful encounters; either unmitigated greed and opportunism, or the capacity for violence. These are also going to be the people who are making plans for first-contact situations and actively seeking them out, either due to the potential for profit or for security reasons.
In reality, if we want to ensure that we as a species are approaching alien contacts in the best way possible, we need to be making some serious changes within the species itself in the meantime. We should probably avoid turning this into one of those threads, though.
I was rather hoping it would be taken into account as an example of how not to behave but whatever captain genocide.
You can't have a discussion of human reaction to first contact without taking human-centrism into account. It doesn't work that way.
The same line of logic could also be used to excuse atrocities against humans because it's human-centric to be prejudiced towards outgroups, dehumanising them.
I aint lettin ya get away with that sorry. We might run mostly on automatic, but we DO have conscious control. It's just hard. No free rides for genocide.
When did I talk about genocide? And when was I implying that it was my first inclination to act like that?
Human interaction with alien species is going to be viewed from the human side based on how human the aliens appear and act. Anything that's completely outside the realm of human existence (such as a species that completely lacks the ability to communicate or which has no means of physical movement, etc) is going to be viewed as non-sapient by all but the scientific fringe who take the time to study them in greater depth. Once a few of those studies turn up intelligence in species previously thought to be non-sentient, the overall human view of such first-contacts may change. At first, though, it's going to be pretty simplistic in terms of what we view as equals and what we don't. I fully expect us to horribly fuck something up within the first couple decades of true space travel for precisely that reason.
Well yeah duh but isn't the point of this thread to think of things, yknow plans? Couldn't one of those plans be not to treat such a creature as automatically unintelligent because we recognise human-centricness is pretty smallminded?
I dunno you just seem to be jumping the shark. I mean I completely agree that people now would act like this but isn't that what a plan is for, to hopefully take into account and overcome our flaws?
And I'm joking about the genocide, just like you were, hopefully, talking about treating technologically advanced creatures as livestock. Since we treat livestock pretty damn badly.
First, it's jumping the gun, not the shark.
I think he's saying that regardless of how we should handle such a situation, the reality is that we would handle it through a very human-centric view, and thus that viewpoint is worth discussing.
Excuse me? I'm Australian. It's jumping the shark thanks.
It is worth discussing, just as discussing how prejudice works is worth discussing.
As something to not do, not encourage and not accept.
The point is that as humans, we'd have our own self-interest prioritized pretty high. If they seemed both unintelligent and an imminent threat, we may not have time to study them for other signs of intelligence.
Edit: I guess Jumping the Shark means something different here and there, since here it's the term used when a TV show hits the point where it's going to suck and be different from that point on (and can be applied to other media).
I guess that's a perfect example of how even between two developed, english speaking human societies with constant interaction, there can be problems with communication.
Posts
If they don't communicate, like if they don't bother with it at all, then the choice comes down to "are they going to harm us" and if they look like doing that " try to protect ourselves".
I'm all for blowing up the alien whales farting all over our planets unthinkingly if it's them or us yknow.
So we can, at least, have some limitations of communication and/or threat to our way of life.
O course yknow if the whales are immune to our weapons then its genocide by farts for us all.
I like my whales they are a funny alien to imagine.
Communication factors very heavily into a human-centric view of intelligence, which is the lense we're going to be viewing these creatures through when push comes to shove.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
I added the farts because it is amusing.
Another interesting alien I have seen in Baxter is an intelligence that is basically a collection of interacting fluid cycles in water.
Baxter gave it rather silly humanistic qualities but the idea was interesting. Smart water? How do you do body language with water? How do you do anything with water flying a spaceship? You'd have to flash things at them and hope they can interpret it somehow.
edit: Yeah but if they are tool users but also uninterested in communicating then what do we do? Wander off in our own way?
Yet another science fiction idea: A species that committed ritual suicide because the culture shock of meeting an alien intelligence was too great.
If we meet an intelligence do we have to take into consideration this kind of moral risk?
but if aliens are coming at us, how can we really guarantee communication or peace?
i would support exteme measures. like nuking the spacewhales.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Well if they were a hivemind as Evil says, so there is no concept of communication? What if they're a hivemind herbivore, feeding on space hydrogen or something? They could appear both complicated, like an ant colony, but also completely indifferent.
But yes you are right, the most important thing is to consider 1). All the possible ways physically available that we know of in the universe that could be used to send information from one physical location to another. Any of them could be a communication device.
2). Presuming we find something nonrandom, should we approach? Not approach? Should we start blasting bubbles into their talky fluid, or what?
3). What are the possible survival outcomes for our species from this. ARe they super advanced, with faster than light travel and ripping holes in the universe, using planets as playthings? Do we risk calling their attention? Water is a really useful substance for a lot of things besides keeping us squishy water bags alive and we sure do have a lot of it down here.
"What's it look like."
"Kind of like an ant colony, sir."
"Ignore it. Where are we off to next?"
Such creatures would not be sufficiently intelligent enough to interesting in a first-contact type scenario. If they are the first extra-terestrial life we've stumbled across, they might warrant a study. If they're just the next in a long line of bizarre alien fauna, they're going to get ignored for the shiny new planet off in the distance.
If it's not immediately apparent that they have intelligence, as measured on a human scale, then we're going to assume they don't until they prove that they do.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
The situation I was trying to get across was more like:
"Ant colony. With nukes sir."
"hmmm"
That said, even if the ants in this example were down there interacting with obviously alien technology the human observers would be inclined to assume that the nukes predated the colony rather than contemplating the idea that a species that shows little semblance of human intelligence creating technology on that level.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
What if it's a hivemind with visible technology, or at least technological levels of physical power? You're making the mistake of assuming that intelligence will follow the same route for various species.
Besides, intelligence is just one evolutionary adaptation to our environment; other specices might have found alternatives that are just as, if not more effective. We create models and predict and interpret; other species might have some kind of hyper-intuition that assembles sensory data without conscious effort, or similar. We already have some of this ourselves; in fact, that pretty much describes "inspiration."
Certainly communication would be difficult, or impossible, given such a method of interacting with reality. But we could not ignore them if their minds can process reality effectively and match or exceed our own ability to influence the material world.
Yeah you are focusing too hard on the ant idea mate, the idea was a thing that appears unable to communicate that is also obviously intelligent and potentially dangerous/perhaps even outmatches us in power.
So the ants have nuke ray guns and use them to dig their tunnels, and show every indication they can make them from scratch, but don't notice us as an intelligence.
That's a tricky one, if we shout real loud they might notice us after all. If we don't, they might notice us eventually.
killing the other species on its planet.
good point though, that they wouldn't really have war-inspired tech because they wouldn't be at war.
i don't know whether the absolute absence of conflict would be a positive or a negative for the speed of progress, since they'd just be duking it out with other species that are likely still at your basic animal levels of cognitive ability.
unless they encountered a spacefaring race and decided, hey, let us consume them.
Pretty much all matter is affected by radiation. These hivemind ant things would have to be super-dense physically to be resistant to radiation, especially on the level of mountain-flattening nuclear bombs.
Why not?
A nuke is just a really big destructive tool, like a bulldozer or a scalpel in essence.
Oh god FINE ok they develop fusion bombs with clean radiation levels and have no morals okay happy.
Can I just say huge destruction thing being used for industry? Will that pass the literal test? Think about the concept! I don't care about the physics I got wrong, the concept isn't reliant on a specfic example.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
I think that's a pretty risky "universe view" you have there. I wouldn't want such ants unobserved or ignored. I'd want to know as much about a technologically advanced and potentially threatening race that didn't conform to our definition of intelligence very, very much.
And anyway, what have I told you about human centricness eh eh do I have to bring out the ruler again. Put out your knuckles boy its time for ten raps.
As to the human-centric statement, that's the point. First contact from our side is going to be viewed through a very human-centric lense. That's going to color our interaction with whatever species we encounter, so it needs to be taken into account.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
In this endeavour we have to maintain a human-centric approach to communication or interaction. As in, do our actions or communication attempts result in activity that has a positive or negative impact on us?
The concept of "enjoyment" or "pleasure" can be translated to a different continuum.
Human brains are massively parallel. It's not even the case that your conscious attention is linear, as you will notice if you pay attention to what your mind is doing at any given time. This is why math is much harder for humans than calculators, despite the fact that humans have a much, much greater processing capacity. We didn't develop math because of our linearity; we developed it in spite of our nonlinearity. And what the hell is a "thinking bit"?
First, the idea that you could get aliens that are not subject to evolution is frankly crazy. Perhaps you could get aliens that have taken to manipulating their biology to the point where evolution is irrelevant, but you would still have aliens that originated in evolution and developed their basic psychology in response to evolutionary pressures. No form of abiogenesis is going to give rise to intelligent life ex nihilo.
Also the idea that there is more than one math is, I think, bunk. Principia Mathematica proved that basic arithmetic is a matter of pure analytic logic, and analytic logic is the same for any possible intelligent mind.
I was rather hoping it would be taken into account as an example of how not to behave but whatever captain genocide.
YOU MUST DEVELOP A SPECIFICALLY FUNCTIONAL EXAMPLE OR I WILL DISMISS YOUR ENTIRE CLAIM
no i totally agree, they might have big destructive tools for the hell of it
but i wonder how far they would have the tech for industrial destruction - ours certainly isn't that great, is it?
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
You are basically talking about folktale psych, unless you want to quote me some references. If you are right then I'll happily be reinformed, just give me those references, I can look em up through my library site. APA quality please.
It's parallel in that lots of things are firing at once but in the end most of that parallel is to do with things we don't control. Consciously, we are pretttttty damn linear and automatic.
If you would like mine it's Paschler's PRP theory available in The Psychology of Attention. 1998, pp271-283. There are some others in there you might want to have a look at too.
The same line of logic could also be used to excuse atrocities against humans because it's human-centric to be prejudiced towards outgroups, dehumanising them.
I aint lettin ya get away with that sorry. We might run mostly on automatic, but we DO have conscious control. It's just hard. No free rides for genocide. Or ant-ocide.
You misunderstand; I was not suggesting that evolution would not occur (it would have to, to produce life at any level that resembed intelligence). I was suggesting that evolution by the mechanics we are familiar with - genes, DNA, reproduction, etc - may not occur. It might be something radically different. We are completely ignorant about how other forms of life might come to exist, if such a thing is possible. We're still ignorant about how our form of carbon-based life began in the first place.
Such a radically different starting point or process might produce something so alien that we can barely perceive it as alive, let alone communicate with it.
It is quite presumptuous to make that claim, I think. Analytic logic is generated by the human mind. It is a means by which the human mind interacts with and understands reality. To say that it is correct and functional in itself is one thing (and I agree, obviously); to say that it is the only correct and functional way is another, and I think erroneous. You are excluding the possibility of other forms of material understanding. Even arithmetic is not necessarily "natural," as there are human cultures that do not have the concept of "number."
It is entirely possible that alien minds would not comprehend analytic logic. It is entirely possible that they would have a different system that reaches the same answers, whether they understand our logic or not. Our means of thought is founded upon our means of perception, after all, and alien life might have radically different perceptual mechanisms.
And I'm not letting you get away with mischaracterization like this. Morninglord is not advocating genocide, he's explaining how our primary goal, conscious or unconscious has to be our own well being.
It's not to our advantage to destroy, unless said destruction is necessary for self-preservation.
Maybe you're selfless enough that you won't fight for your survival if whoever's attacking you seems to really need to eat you, but I doubt it.
Human interaction with alien species is going to be viewed from the human side based on how human the aliens appear and act. Anything that's completely outside the realm of human existence (such as a species that completely lacks the ability to communicate or which has no means of physical movement, etc) is going to be viewed as non-sapient by all but the scientific fringe who take the time to study them in greater depth. Once a few of those studies turn up intelligence in species previously thought to be non-sentient, the overall human view of such first-contacts may change. At first, though, it's going to be pretty simplistic in terms of what we view as equals and what we don't. I fully expect us to horribly fuck something up within the first couple decades of true space travel for precisely that reason.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Who are you talking to.
I want a coffee mug that says "No Free Rides for Genocide." Or maybe a bumper sticker.
Well yeah duh but isn't the point of this thread to think of things, yknow plans? Couldn't one of those plans be not to treat such a creature as automatically unintelligent because we recognise human-centricness is pretty smallminded?
I dunno you just seem to be jumping the shark. I mean I completely agree that people now would act like this but isn't that what a plan is for, to hopefully take into account and overcome our flaws?
And I'm joking about the genocide, just like you were, hopefully, when talking about treating technologically advanced creatures as livestock. Since we treat livestock pretty damn badly.
I think this gives rise to an interesting approach, communication by scientific proof. We could setup some experiments that demonstrate our knowledge of physics and chemistry, things like gravity, fundamental properties of matter and so on. And along with the experimental setup we could have the scientific theory written out.
It's a little more complex then calling something FOOD while pointing at it right before you eat it, but if these aliens are advanced technologically we could hope their have the same understanding of the physical universe we do and will recognize our experiments for what they are having done similar experiments themselves.
Although I appreciate your evolutionist arguement zekkiel, but I don't think you can rule out something like a hive mind where individuals communicate solely via body language and complex organic gases (like pheromones in insects). I would like to believe they would have worked out something like radio, which we could intercept and put through our computers to look for patterns, but there is no guarantee that aliens won't be exceeding non-human like.
First, it's jumping the gun, not the shark.
I think he's saying that regardless of how we should handle such a situation, the reality is that we would handle it through a very human-centric view, and thus that viewpoint is worth discussing.
Maybe the hive-mind doesn't need tools in the same way we do?
Excuse me? I'm Australian. It's jumping the shark thanks.
It is worth discussing, just as discussing how prejudice works is worth discussing.
As something to not do, not encourage and not accept.
In reality, if we want to ensure that we as a species are approaching alien contacts in the best way possible, we need to be making some serious changes within the species itself in the meantime. We should probably avoid turning this into one of those threads, though.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
The point is that as humans, we'd have our own self-interest prioritized pretty high. If they seemed both unintelligent and an imminent threat, we may not have time to study them for other signs of intelligence.
Edit: I guess Jumping the Shark means something different here and there, since here it's the term used when a TV show hits the point where it's going to suck and be different from that point on (and can be applied to other media).
I guess that's a perfect example of how even between two developed, english speaking human societies with constant interaction, there can be problems with communication.