|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 2978 days) Posts: 4854 From: Dark Side of the Moon Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: What type of biological life will more than likely be found on other planets? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
We had the ability to make music before we came up with the instruments. I understand that, but I am responding to your statement below [emphasis added by me]. Technology has everything to do with "going off on a guitar" like Jimi Hendrix.
onifre writes: But I don't see what technology has to do with coming up with mathematical equations, having complex languague, making art as beautiful as Michael Angelo's works, and going off on a guitar like Hendrix?Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison. Choose silence of all virtues, for by it you hear other men's imperfections, and conceal your own. George Bernard Shaw
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
As I said upthread, I'm not sure we would be capable of recognizing intelligence that is different than our own.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 93 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
But we are talking about intelligence comparable to our own.
When the rest of us use the term intelligence we are talking about that which we humans possess and which we can recognise in other beings (alien or otherwise) through the abilities they have. You for some bizarre reason are insisting that we call this technology (whether it actually involves anything that the rest of us would usually call technology or not) Putting aliens to one side for a moment - How do you recognise intelligence (as opposed to technology) in other human beings?Oni’s rather broad description seems as good a starting point as any So it is unclear why you feel the need to apply your own meanings to words in order to disagree.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I really can't much help what you define things as, or your misrepresentation of what I say.
Oni's definition works for humans but not for recognizing intelligence. And in case you missed it the thread is about alien life forms.Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2725 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Taq.
Taq writes: With land and the right amount of gravity I think we can safely assume that flight will evolve since it evolved several times in the evolution of life on this planet. I also think that flight will be a very common feature in alien life. But, just to challenge it a little bit, we could also observe that only two phyla on Earth ever evolved flight. These were also the only two phyla that evolved an articulated skeleton and jointed limbs. But, most things with an articulated skeleton cannot fly. So, logically, it could be argued that flight requires an articulated skeleton and jointed limbs. Given that these features have only evolved twice on Earth, it could be argued that most lineages will not evolve articulated skeletons or jointed limbs. It could also be argued that, even if there is an articulated skeleton and jointed limbs, most lineages will not evolve flight. From this perspective, it could plausibly be argued that flight will be uncommon. Obviously, this is from the perspective of individual lineages, and not from the perspective of an entire evolutionary tree, which may change the game entirely, but it does provide an alternative perspective.-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus) Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Since we only have a single example of life evolving it's all we have to go with.
The vast majority of life here are unintelligent microbial critters. If we look at land critters most are unintelligent plant life. If we look at flying thingies most are unintelligent insects and microbes. Is there any reason to think that pattern would not hold true universally? Edited by jar, : appalin spallinAnyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10077 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
But, just to challenge it a little bit, we could also observe that only two phyla on Earth ever evolved flight. These were also the only two phyla that evolved an articulated skeleton and jointed limbs. But, most things with an articulated skeleton cannot fly. We can also point out that an articulated skeleton evolved twice. There seems to be a general trend towards this condition for ambulatory terrestrial species.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10077 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
Since we only have a single example of life evolving it's all we have to go with. The vast majority of life here are unintelligent microbial critters. If we look at land critters most are unintelligent plant life. If we look at flying thingies most are unintelligent insects and microbes. Is there any reason to think that pattern would not hold true universally? Absolutely it should hold. I would be stunned if it didn't. Being unintelligent and simple seems to be a very successful evolutionary strategy. Once those niches are filled, however, life will start to branch out to other strategies.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
So again, looking at the one example of branching out that we have, what we see yet again is still almost all unintelligent.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dogmafood Member (Idle past 376 days) Posts: 1815 From: Ontario Canada Joined:
|
On the one side you have life springing up at every possible opportunity in every imaginable form. On the other, you have natural selection screening out the unsuited candidates. If intelligence is a beneficial characteristic (which I think is undeniable) then does it not stand to reason that organisms with more intelligence than their co-habitants will be more likely to survive? Just on average. Would this process not lead, on average, to a situation similar to what we have on earth where the most intelligent creature is dominant?
Obviously, there are many scenarios where the earth worm is more suited to survival than the human but having the ability to manipulate one's environment must count as a big plus. If this is true would it not lead to an accumulation of intelligent creatures over billions of years and billions of planets?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
If intelligence is a beneficial characteristic (which I think is undeniable) then does it not stand to reason that organisms with more intelligence than their co-habitants will be more likely to survive? But is that what we see? Humans are a real outlier but even humans don't seem more likely to survive than cockroaches. Elephants don't seem more likely to survive than snails. Dolphins don't seem more likely to survive than clams. Cephalopods don't seem to be more likely to survive than jellyfish. Is intelligence really beneficial?Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dogmafood Member (Idle past 376 days) Posts: 1815 From: Ontario Canada Joined: |
Is intelligence really beneficial? Intelligence is certainly not a prerequisite for survival. But if you take 2 cephalopods and one is more intelligent than the other, which is more likely to survive any particular environment?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
No idea.
If you take 2 humans and one is more intelligent than the other, which is more likely to survive any particular environment? I have no idea there either. A bunch of the brightest most intelligent folk I knew were dead before they were 25. Also irrelevant. Biology and evolution involve populations not individuals.Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dogmafood Member (Idle past 376 days) Posts: 1815 From: Ontario Canada Joined: |
Biology and evolution involve populations not individuals. Indeed. So in a population of cephalopods or people, are the more intelligent members not more likely to survive any particular environment?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
No.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024