4 ms·
As WE are the only civilisation we know of is it not sensible to presume that we are the average. In which case there could be lots of civilisations out there.
by ErrantX 17y ago
As WE are the only civilisation we know of is it not sensible to presume that we are the average. In which case there could be lots of civilisations out there.
When we actually come into contact with one then perhaps it is time to refactor the theory.
otherwise it just sounds like meaningless projections that will probably be wrong.
- jodrellblank 17y agoDo we have any reason to think we are either above or below average? Assuming other life forms exist so we can't claim 'existance' as an exceptional characteristic, isn't it more likely that we are somewhere in the middle of any given range than that we are an outlier?
- nazgulnarsil 17y agoit depends entirely on the distribution. One of my pet peeves about statistics is that everyone thinks every statistical distribution is either uniform or a bell curve. a statistical distribution ca take on many shapes.
- dmfdmf 17y agoOutlier, if you accept the Rare Earth argument. http://www.wikinfo.org/index.php/Rare_Earth_hypothesis_according_to_Wikipedia http://www.wikinfo.org/index.php/Rare_Earth_hypothesis_accor... Interesting book...
- rsheridan6 17y agoOur technology changing so rapidly that we couldn't be average. On a geological or cosmic timescale, civilized humanity as we know it has been around and probably will be around for a blink of an eye. So, no, we're not average, because even if something like us might exist, might have existed, or might someday exist elsewhere, at any given time chances are it's either stuck in a primordial stage, or it's moved on to something else. Taking the long view, we're not even average for Earth-based life.