5 ms·
But changes in the environment and initial starting point can result in very different approaches. For example land mammals, reptiles and fish are quite differ
by kenjackson 5y ago
But changes in the environment and initial starting point can result in very different approaches. For example land mammals, reptiles and fish are quite different from each other. Because they've "always been here" we don't appreciate how different they are. Imagine if we had no fish and then found a planet with water that had fish in it -- that would seem absolutely shocking to see animals that could breathe underwater.
- godelski 5y agoHonestly this would be pretty hard to imagine. Even if we had no concept of fish (which I find extremely unlikely given other evolutionary pressures, physics, and mechanics of life, but let's not go there) we would think "birds, but in a denser fluid." I don't think this would be "absolutely shocking" to biologists of that planet. Similarly like how biologists here have predicted methane based lifeforms. Now if we were talking about a fluid like sulfuric acid then yeah, that would be absolutely shocking, but not for the reasons of breathing (it's about electrons).
- state_less 5y agoAnd all these animal/alien minds swim through time like a fish swims through water. Reminds me of that David Foster Wallace joke. > There are these two young fish swimming along, and they happen to meet an older fish swimming the other way, who nods at them and says, “Morning, boys. How’s the water?” And the two young fish swim on for a bit, and then eventually one of them looks over at the other and goes, “What the hell is water?” https://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/this-is-water https://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/this-is-water
- NotSwift 5y agoBoth mammals and reptiles that live in the water use very similar methods even though they are not at all closely related. It is an example of convergent evolution.