6 ms·

Say humans went extinct and some alien species revived us from collected germ cells. Even if they could work out all the genetic quirks to make new population s

by aj3 5y ago

Say humans went extinct and some alien species revived us from collected germ cells. Even if they could work out all the genetic quirks to make new population sustainable, 40000 years of social progress would be lost. Resurrected population wouldn't have benefit of any scientific advances, nor would they have any sense of rational thinking, philosophy, religion, social structures, not even language and writing. Humanity wiped out multiple species' social history and that change is irrevocable.

truth4urts 5y ago
Religion in that list makes what you're describing as progress.
- paxcoder 5y ago
  Personally, I tend to stick to one account, and leave it up to the Lord of all (spiritual and physical)
- dividedbyzero 5y ago
  Does it, though? I'm not religious myself (agnostic comes close-ish), but I would think, based on the evidence I'm aware of, that there must be an important function that spirituality and religion fulfill, especially to people not living in a 21st century first world society. After all, up until very, very, very recently, every group, society, people we today have any knowledge of, in every remote corner of the planet, had some sort of spiritual or religious framework. Atheism and a-spiritualism as a mass phenomenon is (to the best of my knowledge) a very recent phenomenon, and even most of the atheists I know have something that feels to me personally like a bit of a "replacement spirituality". If everyone's doing it, shouldn't there be a good reason for that? Traces of such activity go back a long way in time, too. Use of ochre goes back almost 300 000 years, and while we don't know what they used it for then, later finds make a pretty solid case for it to be used in some spiritual context [1]. Neanderthals built structures that may very well have been connected to spirituality 176 000 years ago [2]. We have lots and lots of Venus figurines from the ice age Homo sapiens [3], we have lots of amazing cave paintings that may have been just naturalistic studies, but really don't look like it (like this 13 000 years-old chimeric guy: [4]). And then there are statuettes of lion-headed humans and lots of other art that doesn't appear to be naturalistic at all [5], probably right up to today, unless the very few uncontacted tribes are areligious exceptions or don't create spiritual art. That sort of thing is costly. Effigies are costly, art is costly, rituals are costly, all the more so if you're living in an ice age environment that makes today's northern Siberia look kinda decent, or on a resource-starved island. Sacrifices are very costly, and they have been a part of lots and lots of cults and religions since time immemorial. There must be a reason why we kept doing this, and why people seem have such an enormous innate need for such things that they pick up such practices on their own again and again. Actually, I'd say there must be some pretty huge upside to this, given that cataclysmic events and very hard times invariably deepen people's religiosity, despite all the selection pressure acting under a volcanic plume or in an icy summer or during devastating epidemics. They may shatter organized religions, but there are no atheists on a foundering ship in a storm, and all that. That's not to say that our huge organized religions are a great thing, and should be kept as-is forever. Religiosity certainly has been and is being used as a means to deplorable ends. But there is, and probably always has been, another arguably much larger dimension to this, and people without churches probably wouldn't be steadfast atheists who never believe anything they haven't seen a peer-reviewed double-blind study on. I'd speculate that if someone actually did that experiment and set some machine-reared Homo sapiens children loose on a pristine second Earth, and if by chance they'd actually make it through the first couple of generations, a complete lack of spirituality would probably be a disadvantage to them, and they'd probably fill that void before long. They'd have to hit the big existential questions at some point, after all, and if there is another way to answer them, I don't know it. 1: https://www.livescience.com/64138-ochre.html https://www.livescience.com/64138-ochre.html 2: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/neanderthals-caves-rings-building-france-archaeology https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/neanderth... 3: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_figurine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_figurine 4: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sorcerer_(cave_art) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sorcerer_(cave_art) 5: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Stone_Age_art https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Stone_Age_art
  - yain49 5y ago
    What you're describing can be replaced with philosophy. Believing, being indifferent, and or not believing in God isn't destructive. Religion is what's destructive if you examine what has happened to the natives, LGBTQ+ persons, disabled persons and anyone else throughout history that didn't fit the cult model of religion.
    - nobodyandproud 5y ago
      Humans are perfectly capable of performing horrific acts at a massive scale without religion.
      - irel90 5y ago
        That's just a rhetoric that attempts to dismiss religion from being bad throughout history towards minorities. Yes, we should all just sit back and not acknowledge truth because humans can be bad by other ways.
        nobodyandproud 5y ago
        It’s not rhetoric, and stating all religions are bad isn’t even the truth. Some of the most committed against slavery were its religious opponents, for instance: http://web.tricolib.brynmawr.edu/speccoll/quakersandslavery/commentary/organizations/underground_railroad.php http://web.tricolib.brynmawr.edu/speccoll/quakersandslavery/... If you want to discuss the evils of politicized religion, or state mandated religion then I’m all ears. But religion is a convenient scapegoat for more simple truth: Without fail every movement, party, or group that gains influence sooner or later overreaches and becomes the oppressor. Religion is a red herring.
        irel90 5y ago
        I'm all ears as well but all you wrote is nonsense.
usrnm 5y ago
In that hypothetical scenario, would you prefer humanity was left extinct? Culture can be recreated, or at least something new can be created in its place. If you're dead, that's it, you're gone
paxcoder 5y ago
Animals aren't rational but rather instinct-driven. What would they lack other than say some elephant bone sites? I'd guess if you say put them where they used to be, they'd manage fine
amelius 5y ago
Not if they copied YouTube too.
- est31 5y ago
  ... at the price of the human colony muttering the words "don't forget to comment and subscribe" as a farewell ritual.
  - m_mueller 5y ago
    “today I’m reacting to you making me dinner...”
est31 5y ago
Animal culture, aka knowledge and behaviors passed from generation to generation, exists but is way simpler than human culture and societal progress. It feels to me it can be recreated much more easily.
- TravHatesMe 5y ago
  Way simpler from our perspective. I bet there are many intricacies that we haven't identified / cannot be identified through the human experience. Or maybe I am wrong, but I remain skeptical because we often don't give enough credit to other species.
- arcturus17 5y ago
  What if the aliens had access to culture? They could then maybe raise the clones as cultural humans that could be somewhat close to us.

by aj3 5y ago

truth4urts 5y ago

Religion in that list makes what you're describing as progress.

paxcoder 5y ago
Personally, I tend to stick to one account, and leave it up to the Lord of all (spiritual and physical)
dividedbyzero 5y ago
Does it, though? I'm not religious myself (agnostic comes close-ish), but I would think, based on the evidence I'm aware of, that there must be an important function that spirituality and religion fulfill, especially to people not living in a 21st century first world society. After all, up until very, very, very recently, every group, society, people we today have any knowledge of, in every remote corner of the planet, had some sort of spiritual or religious framework. Atheism and a-spiritualism as a mass phenomenon is (to the best of my knowledge) a very recent phenomenon, and even most of the atheists I know have something that feels to me personally like a bit of a "replacement spirituality". If everyone's doing it, shouldn't there be a good reason for that? Traces of such activity go back a long way in time, too. Use of ochre goes back almost 300 000 years, and while we don't know what they used it for then, later finds make a pretty solid case for it to be used in some spiritual context [1]. Neanderthals built structures that may very well have been connected to spirituality 176 000 years ago [2]. We have lots and lots of Venus figurines from the ice age Homo sapiens [3], we have lots of amazing cave paintings that may have been just naturalistic studies, but really don't look like it (like this 13 000 years-old chimeric guy: [4]). And then there are statuettes of lion-headed humans and lots of other art that doesn't appear to be naturalistic at all [5], probably right up to today, unless the very few uncontacted tribes are areligious exceptions or don't create spiritual art. That sort of thing is costly. Effigies are costly, art is costly, rituals are costly, all the more so if you're living in an ice age environment that makes today's northern Siberia look kinda decent, or on a resource-starved island. Sacrifices are very costly, and they have been a part of lots and lots of cults and religions since time immemorial. There must be a reason why we kept doing this, and why people seem have such an enormous innate need for such things that they pick up such practices on their own again and again. Actually, I'd say there must be some pretty huge upside to this, given that cataclysmic events and very hard times invariably deepen people's religiosity, despite all the selection pressure acting under a volcanic plume or in an icy summer or during devastating epidemics. They may shatter organized religions, but there are no atheists on a foundering ship in a storm, and all that. That's not to say that our huge organized religions are a great thing, and should be kept as-is forever. Religiosity certainly has been and is being used as a means to deplorable ends. But there is, and probably always has been, another arguably much larger dimension to this, and people without churches probably wouldn't be steadfast atheists who never believe anything they haven't seen a peer-reviewed double-blind study on. I'd speculate that if someone actually did that experiment and set some machine-reared Homo sapiens children loose on a pristine second Earth, and if by chance they'd actually make it through the first couple of generations, a complete lack of spirituality would probably be a disadvantage to them, and they'd probably fill that void before long. They'd have to hit the big existential questions at some point, after all, and if there is another way to answer them, I don't know it. 1: https://www.livescience.com/64138-ochre.html https://www.livescience.com/64138-ochre.html 2: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/neanderthals-caves-rings-building-france-archaeology https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/neanderth... 3: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_figurine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_figurine 4: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sorcerer_(cave_art) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sorcerer_(cave_art) 5: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Stone_Age_art https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Stone_Age_art
- yain49 5y ago
  What you're describing can be replaced with philosophy. Believing, being indifferent, and or not believing in God isn't destructive. Religion is what's destructive if you examine what has happened to the natives, LGBTQ+ persons, disabled persons and anyone else throughout history that didn't fit the cult model of religion.
  - nobodyandproud 5y ago
    Humans are perfectly capable of performing horrific acts at a massive scale without religion.
    - irel90 5y ago
      That's just a rhetoric that attempts to dismiss religion from being bad throughout history towards minorities. Yes, we should all just sit back and not acknowledge truth because humans can be bad by other ways.
      - nobodyandproud 5y ago
        It’s not rhetoric, and stating all religions are bad isn’t even the truth. Some of the most committed against slavery were its religious opponents, for instance: http://web.tricolib.brynmawr.edu/speccoll/quakersandslavery/commentary/organizations/underground_railroad.php http://web.tricolib.brynmawr.edu/speccoll/quakersandslavery/... If you want to discuss the evils of politicized religion, or state mandated religion then I’m all ears. But religion is a convenient scapegoat for more simple truth: Without fail every movement, party, or group that gains influence sooner or later overreaches and becomes the oppressor. Religion is a red herring.
        irel90 5y ago
        I'm all ears as well but all you wrote is nonsense.

usrnm 5y ago

In that hypothetical scenario, would you prefer humanity was left extinct? Culture can be recreated, or at least something new can be created in its place. If you're dead, that's it, you're gone

paxcoder 5y ago

Animals aren't rational but rather instinct-driven. What would they lack other than say some elephant bone sites? I'd guess if you say put them where they used to be, they'd manage fine

amelius 5y ago

Not if they copied YouTube too.

est31 5y ago
... at the price of the human colony muttering the words "don't forget to comment and subscribe" as a farewell ritual.
- m_mueller 5y ago
  “today I’m reacting to you making me dinner...”

est31 5y ago

Animal culture, aka knowledge and behaviors passed from generation to generation, exists but is way simpler than human culture and societal progress. It feels to me it can be recreated much more easily.

TravHatesMe 5y ago
Way simpler from our perspective. I bet there are many intricacies that we haven't identified / cannot be identified through the human experience. Or maybe I am wrong, but I remain skeptical because we often don't give enough credit to other species.
arcturus17 5y ago
What if the aliens had access to culture? They could then maybe raise the clones as cultural humans that could be somewhat close to us.