3 ms·

> Why are you so sure that this is impossible, still? Aside from FTL travel, in what way are humans fundamentally different from Kingons? You don't understand

by maratd 15y ago

> Why are you so sure that this is impossible, still? Aside from FTL travel, in what way are humans fundamentally different from Kingons? You don't understand my argument. We (and our intelligence) are the unique product of our evolutionary environment. There is no tendency in evolution towards intelligence. There are far many more organisms on this planet in far greater numbers than us that don't even have a brain, nevermind a complex one like ours. We define intelligence based on traits that we (humans) possess. Some animals possess some of those traits (like dolphins, chimps, etc.), but no animal posses them all, save for us humans, by definition. For us to find a species that is identical or even just compatible with us psychologically, that species had to evolve in an identical evolutionary environment spanning millions of years. That is so astronomically unlikely that it might as well be impossible. You may find life that posses some of our traits (like dolphins), but you won't find life that has them all (like Klingons).

moe 15y ago
astronomically unlikely Interesting choice of words. So while we're talking in astronomical terms: How big is the universe? How many earth-like planets does it contain? Are there other universes? Until we can answer at least one of these questions I would refrain from calling anything in this context "astronomically unlikely".
- daemin 15y ago
  I think that in the whole universe there is intelligent life out there like ours (not in body but in mind/thought). However due to the time/distance scales that are required to interact with them, it might as well not exist, since we'd require a huge amount of luck to ever interact with them.
ericd 15y ago
>There is no tendency in evolution towards intelligence. What? An obvious ability to learn is found in lots of animals, and in the cases where the benefit outweighs the additional caloric requirements, the evolutionary tendency is towards intelligence. Of course it's not the only one, but it's a pretty big trump card natural selection-wise when it reaches a sufficient level, as humans have clearly demonstrated. Millions of years are a dime a dozen in the time scales of the universe, and parallelize that across more than trillions of planets. I think your intuition is way off here.

by maratd 15y ago

moe 15y ago

astronomically unlikely Interesting choice of words. So while we're talking in astronomical terms: How big is the universe? How many earth-like planets does it contain? Are there other universes? Until we can answer at least one of these questions I would refrain from calling anything in this context "astronomically unlikely".

daemin 15y ago
I think that in the whole universe there is intelligent life out there like ours (not in body but in mind/thought). However due to the time/distance scales that are required to interact with them, it might as well not exist, since we'd require a huge amount of luck to ever interact with them.

ericd 15y ago

>There is no tendency in evolution towards intelligence. What? An obvious ability to learn is found in lots of animals, and in the cases where the benefit outweighs the additional caloric requirements, the evolutionary tendency is towards intelligence. Of course it's not the only one, but it's a pretty big trump card natural selection-wise when it reaches a sufficient level, as humans have clearly demonstrated. Millions of years are a dime a dozen in the time scales of the universe, and parallelize that across more than trillions of planets. I think your intuition is way off here.