Alien, I mean really Alien.

Slick · #1 March 25th, 2004, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dogscoff:

quote:

I don't really follow your example of alien dolphin-like animals, either. Of course scientists would study the heck out of any alien life form. Scientists study dolphins, too.

My point is that we assume dolphins aren't sentient because we have thousands of years of history defining them as 'dumb animals'. SUppose dolphins didn't exist on Earth, but on planet Blarg. Now suppose we sent a spaceship to Blarg and discovered the dolphins, frolicking and singing to each other. WOuold we say "they're just a bunch of clever but sub-sentient animls" or would we start with the assumption that they might be sentient and work our way up? And if we did the latter, what would we find?

I guess what I'm saying is, we take the various life forms we already have for granted. If we were to look at them with fresh eyes we might be surprised.

But I can't remember what this has to do with xenodiversity. someone remember to ask me when I sober up.

Sounds like what happened in "So Long and Thanks for all the Fish"

Slick.

[ March 25, 2004, 20:39: Message edited by: Slick ]

narf poit chez BOOM · #2 March 25th, 2004, 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dogscoff:

quote:

Dogscoff, what your saying is that they may develop a fear reaction, but they won't be feeling fear?

Well, if it serves the same purpose as fear, and it provokes the same response as fear... why don't we just call it fear? There will undoubtedly be biological differences but the end result is the same. After all, how do i know that when *you* feel fear you feel the same thing as me? How do I know you don't see red as what I would call call blue?

It's like the Turing test for AI: You can't know for sure whether a machine is actually intelligent or just doing a really good impression of one that is, but when it gets to that stage there's very little point trying to tell the difference anyway.

What you seem to be saying is that 'you can't know how other beings think, so they might be thinking differently'. I'm saying, if stimuli and responce can be made to match up, then why should they be different?

I'm also saying that any different stimuli and responce can be simulated with the human brain.

PvK · #3 March 25th, 2004, 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dogscoff:

quote:

I don't really follow your example of alien dolphin-like animals, either. Of course scientists would study the heck out of any alien life form. Scientists study dolphins, too.

My point is that we assume dolphins aren't sentient because we have thousands of years of history defining them as 'dumb animals'. SUppose dolphins didn't exist on Earth, but on planet Blarg. Now suppose we sent a spaceship to Blarg and discovered the dolphins, frolicking and singing to each other. WOuold we say "they're just a bunch of clever but sub-sentient animls" or would we start with the assumption that they might be sentient and work our way up? And if we did the latter, what would we find?

I guess what I'm saying is, we take the various life forms we already have for granted. If we were to look at them with fresh eyes we might be surprised.

But I can't remember what this has to do with xenodiversity. someone remember to ask me when I sober up.

Ok.

I'll also ask what the disagreement with what I was trying to say was, because I entirely agree with you on this. In fact, the humans that assert that animals (from dolphins to rats) are "not intelligent" or "sub-sentient" are either just plain wrong, or are framing their questions in ways that I think are rather off.

PvK

dogscoff · #4 March 26th, 2004, 01:03 AM

hmm, I seemdd to have generated some replies. If only I could rememebr what the hell I was talking about. But, to reply to everyone at once: Yes/no/thanks/of course/sorry/curses!/oops (delete as appropriate)

Atrocities · #5 March 26th, 2004, 01:18 AM

There are no aliens living on other worlds. It is mathamatically improbable that sentient space faring life could have evolved on another world given the absolute uniqueness that spawned life here. The chances for another life giving planet are so astronomically rare that if you could explore space in its entirety in one day it would take you a trillion years to find one planet like Earth. We are it and until one lands on this planet and proves me wrong, I am going to stick by this narrow minded concept.

Captain Kwok · #6 March 26th, 2004, 01:38 AM

Atrocities:

I'll give you the chance that Aliens visiting us here is next to nothing, but I sincerely doubt your assertion that there is no alien life elsewhere in our galaxy. Once we have better tools in place, we'll start identifying planets much more like our own than the ones they've found so far.

Atrocities · #7 March 26th, 2004, 01:45 AM

CK I have to tell you that our being here is an accident of epic proportions. The simple fact that life evolved on Earth is such a rare event that chances of it occuring twice or more in the universe is so great that if you took the number 1 and put 0 behind it to the point that it could circle the universe a centrillion times to the billionth power you might be within 1% of the chance.

This planet is so rare that it equals 1 10th of a grain of sand compared to the entire galaxy. And we are wasting it away.

No CK, life does not exsist "out there" it only exsists here.