3 ms·

I don't understand the author's point. One of the traits of the human species that differentiates it from many other animals is its capability to transform its

I don't understand the author's point. One of the traits of the human species that differentiates it from many other animals is its capability to transform its environment to suit itself. We long ago developed this ability to an even greater extent than any other animal on our planet, and we are still further developing this ability. So, in dropping a mindless "meat probe", he's experimenting with something that isn't really human. It isn't bringing resources with it, or building shelter, or altering its environment. He's instead artificially limiting the terms of the experiment to environments that are between 40 and 90 degrees Fahrenheit, with arable soil, no predators, and readily available food and (clean) freshwater sources. Well, hell, under those conditions, many of the places that we live today aren't supposed to be habitable.

tokenadult 17y ago
One of the traits of the human species that differentiates it from many other animals is its capability to transform its environment to suit itself. This is an outstanding characteristic of Homo sapiens, but many other living things (not just animals) improve their environments. Everyone in North America is familiar with the example of the beaver http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaver#Dams http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaver#Dams (the mascot of MIT and Caltech), the classic example, but lowly fungi improve their environment by poisoning it against bacteria with antibiotics, and many living things poison, shade, predate in, or otherwise alter their environments.
- thaumaturgy 17y ago
  My favorite example of other animals doing this is the ants. They are incredible: they explore, have organizational structures, wage wars, expand territories, transform large areas -- possibly, in one case, a couple of continents in size. Didn't know about plants/fungi though. :-)
  - Mz 17y ago
    As I understand it: Gators make swamps. In essence, they terraform.
jerf 17y ago
You seem to have a decent grasp of the author's point, since you just reiterated a huge chunk of it! The point, as the author repeatedly tried to explain in the comments, is not that this is some sort of actually good idea for a probe. The point is to use it to examine the entire concept of "habitable" by creating a fairly objective standard. It's like how psychologists name and classify disorders just so they have an objective standard to discuss the matter with, long before they understand the disorder. Exploring the meaning of "habitable" explicitly without reference to Man's ability to change the environment is the point. Yes, the standard is arbitrary. I'm surprised to see so many people freak out over that. Mathematicians do it all the time.

tokenadult 17y ago

One of the traits of the human species that differentiates it from many other animals is its capability to transform its environment to suit itself. This is an outstanding characteristic of Homo sapiens, but many other living things (not just animals) improve their environments. Everyone in North America is familiar with the example of the beaver http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaver#Dams http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaver#Dams (the mascot of MIT and Caltech), the classic example, but lowly fungi improve their environment by poisoning it against bacteria with antibiotics, and many living things poison, shade, predate in, or otherwise alter their environments.

thaumaturgy 17y ago
My favorite example of other animals doing this is the ants. They are incredible: they explore, have organizational structures, wage wars, expand territories, transform large areas -- possibly, in one case, a couple of continents in size. Didn't know about plants/fungi though. :-)
- Mz 17y ago
  As I understand it: Gators make swamps. In essence, they terraform.

jerf 17y ago

You seem to have a decent grasp of the author's point, since you just reiterated a huge chunk of it! The point, as the author repeatedly tried to explain in the comments, is not that this is some sort of actually good idea for a probe. The point is to use it to examine the entire concept of "habitable" by creating a fairly objective standard. It's like how psychologists name and classify disorders just so they have an objective standard to discuss the matter with, long before they understand the disorder. Exploring the meaning of "habitable" explicitly without reference to Man's ability to change the environment is the point. Yes, the standard is arbitrary. I'm surprised to see so many people freak out over that. Mathematicians do it all the time.