4 ms·

I would not rule out that they have a way to build tools, assuming for a moment they exist. So earth technology is closely related to fire as a energy source. (

by yk 13y ago

I would not rule out that they have a way to build tools, assuming for a moment they exist. So earth technology is closely related to fire as a energy source. ( During the early development for smelting.) But this role could be filled by black smokers, or volcanic activity. But further development would of course be completely different, so I think it is entirely conceivable that we did not detect anything.

Udo 13y ago
True, it's a matter of definitions. Octopuses also use tools, but do they qualify as an intelligent civilization? Probably not (yet). We assume, because we have little reference of what an intelligent human-equivalent entity might be like, that they'd probably build very complex tools over time as we have. This judgement of what constitutes an advanced life form sadly carries a cultural component. If we encountered our own species at the very beginning of its intellectual journey, would we have labeled them a civilization? Would we have described them as having human-equivalent intelligence? It's tricky. But then we move hundreds of thousands of years ahead and suddenly there are monumental buildings and clever machines, suddenly you can meet individuals with astonishing capabilities, and now it's very easy to categorize them. So if our hypothetical space Euroctopus species is in its early intellectual development, we might not be able to correctly attribute their intelligence. There's always the possibility of that development being stagnant too, and again we'd have a difficult time recognizing that. Therefore, the only real chances at discerning an intelligent civilization would be by either directly observing its behavior or by looking at the capabilities of their tools.
- bennyg 13y ago
  The funny thing is, we can only categorize intelligence to the peak and adjacent possibilities of where we're at now. Go back over 100,000 years or more and it would be very hard to categorize us as extremely intelligent beings.
  - yk 13y ago
    Not sure if this is what you meant, but assume you are showing a picture of a programmer to someone from the past. One hundred years ago, the person would probably recognize a computer as some kind of type writer, and from his background then assume that the person is a typist. 200 years ago, there were no jobs which could be described as 'sitting in front of a box,' so the person would have no frame of reference to understand the picture. ( And it seems likely to conclude the same into the future.)
    - pavlov 13y ago
      Medieval monks copying manuscripts had jobs that were essentially "sitting in front of a box all day": http://www.studenthandouts.com/photo_gallery/Pics1/MiddleAges-4.jpg http://www.studenthandouts.com/photo_gallery/Pics1/MiddleAge...
billforsternz 13y ago
My criteria for whether a tool building species is really intelligent; Have they successfully avoided creating and extensively using a close relative to C++. (This reflects an afternoon battling boost, smart pointers, dynamic casts etc. etc. etc.)
- charlieflowers 13y ago
  The Dolphins come out ahead on that one...

by yk 13y ago

Udo 13y ago

True, it's a matter of definitions. Octopuses also use tools, but do they qualify as an intelligent civilization? Probably not (yet). We assume, because we have little reference of what an intelligent human-equivalent entity might be like, that they'd probably build very complex tools over time as we have. This judgement of what constitutes an advanced life form sadly carries a cultural component. If we encountered our own species at the very beginning of its intellectual journey, would we have labeled them a civilization? Would we have described them as having human-equivalent intelligence? It's tricky. But then we move hundreds of thousands of years ahead and suddenly there are monumental buildings and clever machines, suddenly you can meet individuals with astonishing capabilities, and now it's very easy to categorize them. So if our hypothetical space Euroctopus species is in its early intellectual development, we might not be able to correctly attribute their intelligence. There's always the possibility of that development being stagnant too, and again we'd have a difficult time recognizing that. Therefore, the only real chances at discerning an intelligent civilization would be by either directly observing its behavior or by looking at the capabilities of their tools.

bennyg 13y ago
The funny thing is, we can only categorize intelligence to the peak and adjacent possibilities of where we're at now. Go back over 100,000 years or more and it would be very hard to categorize us as extremely intelligent beings.
- yk 13y ago
  Not sure if this is what you meant, but assume you are showing a picture of a programmer to someone from the past. One hundred years ago, the person would probably recognize a computer as some kind of type writer, and from his background then assume that the person is a typist. 200 years ago, there were no jobs which could be described as 'sitting in front of a box,' so the person would have no frame of reference to understand the picture. ( And it seems likely to conclude the same into the future.)
  - pavlov 13y ago
    Medieval monks copying manuscripts had jobs that were essentially "sitting in front of a box all day": http://www.studenthandouts.com/photo_gallery/Pics1/MiddleAges-4.jpg http://www.studenthandouts.com/photo_gallery/Pics1/MiddleAge...

billforsternz 13y ago

My criteria for whether a tool building species is really intelligent; Have they successfully avoided creating and extensively using a close relative to C++. (This reflects an afternoon battling boost, smart pointers, dynamic casts etc. etc. etc.)

charlieflowers 13y ago
The Dolphins come out ahead on that one...