Human arrogance

SCVN 2812 · Post by **SCVN 2812** » 2002-08-24 07:29pm

In every discussion I read about space travel and contact with other intelligent life I see people who make assumptions that if we do meet lesser advanced species, that by the time we are in space they will be beneath our notice. This seems to be a little arrogant to me, if not completely, and a totally ridiculous and false generalization based on personal prejudices.

There are numerous cultures on Earth today who are less technologically advanced than Western society and yet we still study them? If less advanced than us to the extreme societies are not worth us paying any attention to, let alone studying why are there people who go to the trouble of going out there, observing or living among them in order to learn about them?

I personally see contact with another sentient race, ANY sentient race, as having the potential to inspire exponentially more curiosity and interest than our own technologically challenged societies. Considering how rare contact with another sentient species is probably going to be, if we fail to develop a means to bypass the speed of light barrier it will likely be even rarer - a once in a millenium event at least given the distances involved in space travel, even a race at cave man levels would be fascinating simply because they aren't us to an extreme, having originated on another planet under conditions ranging from only slighty different from our own to the radically different. Sure, westerners can point to middle easterners or African tribes and say they are strange and different from us to an extreme, but at least they are humans. We wouldn't even have that fundamental commonality with a whole other species. Isn't it our lack of knowledge about things and a desire to alter that state that drives us as a species, not neccessarily as individuals - there are plenty of individuals here who seem to whether conciously or not revel in ignorance and their own confidence in the superiority of their limited knowledge over other's, to seek out knowlege and make the unknown known?

Enlightenment · Post by **Enlightenment** » 2002-08-24 07:55pm

You're making the assumption that any other life we encounter will be sentient. When I made my comment that any other life we could encounter on its own turf will be beneth our consideration what I had in mind was something on the level of bactiria or, at most, insects. Certainly this kind of life will be of interest to xenobiologists but it'll hardly be something capable of any deeply meaningful exchange of knowledge.

starfury · Post by **starfury** » 2002-08-24 08:23pm

You're making the assumption that any other life we encounter will be sentient. When I made my comment that any other life we could encounter on its own turf will be beneth our consideration what I had in mind was something on the level of bactiria or, at most, insects. Certainly this kind of life will be of interest to xenobiologists but it'll hardly be something capable of any deeply meaningful exchange of knowledge.

that is very true, the possibity of encountering another sentient race as opposed to simple bactaria is very very low.

Rhadamanthus · Post by **Rhadamanthus** » 2002-08-24 08:44pm

Bah, humanity is not so bloody special, I say there is a very good chance of encountering sentient life at some point (not necessarily in our "neighborhood" as it were, but on a large scale). I for one would like to see the look on the faces of the astronauts who bump into the galactic equivalent of an ISD

Jack Lain · Post by **Jack Lain** » 2002-08-24 10:01pm

Personally, I think the chances of encountering sentient life in the next thousand years remote. FTL travel is probably impossible. Which is why every West Virginian who meets an alien is either high or seeking the limelight.

Humans are arrogant. We have to be. It's our nature to seek out new worlds and inhabit them. If there is life there already? Well, see ya sucka. There are multiple examples from Earth's history to show we will not be nice to any other life we meet. Sentient or not.

Autochton · Post by **Autochton** » 2002-08-25 04:36pm

If I have learnt anything by studying science and its development, it is that anyone who says that something is impossible is either stating the obvious, or narrowminded. 400 years ago, flight was 'imposiible' or 'improbable'. A hundred years ago, supersonic flight was 'impossible'. Today, both are commonplace. It boils down to finding the right way to do things. To find the loopholes in the laws of nature, if you will.

Already, scientists discuss various methods of 'cheating' the speed-of-light barrier. It is a question of time before they find a way. My hope is that we manage to leave this rock before we ruin it, so that that day might actually come.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-08-25 05:26pm

Autochton wrote:If I have learnt anything by studying science and its development, it is that anyone who says that something is impossible is either stating the obvious, or narrowminded.

In this case, we're stating the obvious.

400 years ago, flight was 'imposiible' or 'improbable'.

Technologically impossible, not scientifically impossible. Even 400 years ago, men looked at birds and knew that powered flight was scientifically possible.

A hundred years ago, supersonic flight was 'impossible'.

Again, technologically impossible, not scientifically impossible. You are confusing two separate concepts.

Today, both are commonplace. It boils down to finding the right way to do things. To find the loopholes in the laws of nature, if you will.

Wrong. There are no loopholes in the laws of nature. The examples you cited are of us improving our technology, not doing things which seem to be scientifically impossible.

Already, scientists discuss various methods of 'cheating' the speed-of-light barrier.

You forgot to mention that in those discussions, they usually conclude that it won't happen.

It is a question of time before they find a way. My hope is that we manage to leave this rock before we ruin it, so that that day might actually come.

Wrong. It is not merely a question of time. It may not be possible at all. There is a huge difference between scientific impossibility (ie- the laws of physics don't permit something) and technological impossibility (ie- the laws of physics permit it, but we don't know how to do it yet. Do not appeal to ignorance; not everything is simply a matter of time.

Post by **Colonel Olrik** » 2002-08-27 07:46am

Autochton wrote: Already, scientists discuss various methods of 'cheating' the speed-of-light barrier. It is a question of time before they find a way. My hope is that we manage to leave this rock before we ruin it, so that that day might actually come.

Actually, we don't have to breach the speed of light to make interstellar voyages feasible. If we take into account the dilatation of time in the ship when approaching the speed of light, large voyages (even to other galaxies) can be made easily in the lifespan of the crew.

Of course, it's difficult to have a galactic empire, for if the crew remains young at the end of the voyage, on the original departure planet thousands (or millions) of years have passed.