« On Plants / De Stirpibus | Main

June 12, 2017

Comments

Joseph

I think this treats Drake's equation (perhaps distinct from how SETI and the like discuss it) a bit poorly - Drake did distinguish between f(i) and f(c), between intelligence, and the ability to communicate that intelligence across interstellar spaces. It's true that he defines intelligence as a necessary stage in communication, which both treats intelligence as a prelimary stage in some eventual cosmic civilisation and assumes that only intelligence can create communication, but dolphins, squid, fungal colonies, etc, all can be intelligent (f(i)) without being part of that segment that communicate that intelligence (f(c)).

Chris

Really interesting post. I'm sympathetic to the general thesis. But I wonder whether you underestimate humans' "truly species-specific advantages." To push back on the following:

"First, it is not at all clear that tool-use, or a fortiori complex-tool-use, pertains to my own species essence in a significantly different way than it pertains to a chimpanzee’s species essence. If a chimpanzee and I were stranded on a desert island with only our wits to help us survive, I would not myself be able to build any tools, from available raw materials, that would be significantly more sophisticated than what the chimpanzee would come up with. I would however continue to use other truly species-specific advantages, such as bipedalism, to the best of my ability, towards my own survival."

1. You, and not the chimp, would be able to remember what your primitive tool was good for the first time around, and expand its function on repeated uses.

2. And you, better than the chimp, could make "psychological tools" (marks, notations) thus "externalizing" your memory. An arrow on a tree pointing to water can go a long way for you and mean nothing to the chimp.

These two (cognitive) advantages seem species-specific in a manner more relevant to your relative survival than bipedalism and other physiological species-specific traits.

Rick

Some of this ground was covered by Sagan and Shklovsky in their 1966 book Intelligent Life in the Universe. They speculated on the the difficulties of determining the intelligence of a dolphin. But ultimately they fell into their own trap by deciding that the "intelligence" that we will find will have been traveling toward us for much longer than will have existed our capabilities of detection.

arnold

So today, are we looking at interaction and instinct, in an infinite Universe, as appearing at the same time-now...

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Books

.