Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Dov

ET Life, and Intelligence

Recommended Posts

They do.

 

It does not "augment" your position, it flatly contradicts it.

 

You are waffling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You might, or might not, understand one day...the difference between studying mechanisms of living systems and studying the nature of life...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Patronising people is not the way forward, nor are you going to be able to both explain your position and keep it mysterious.

 

It's up to you to clarify your terms, not anyone else. If you can't make yourself understood, that is your shortcoming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Sayonara,

 

If I understand the dictionary definition of "(you are) waffling" I completely agree with you that "Patronising people is not the way forward".

 

And as to "you can't make yourself understood", I sincerely suggest that maybe this thread should be closed as there are very few other ways to say that there is a "difference between studying mechanisms of living systems and studying the nature of life".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I sincerely suggest that maybe this thread should be closed as there are very few other ways to say that there is a "difference between studying mechanisms of living systems and studying the nature of life".
If this is at the root of your argument why didn't you say so to begin with.

 

I do not have nor try to present evidence for a near zero chance to find intelligent ET life
When I place an opinion in my post I try to indicate that it is an opinion. You think there is little chance of finding inteligent life, but cannot back this up by evidence. I can back up my position 100% by evidence, for my position is that I do not know if there is any intelligent life out there. But if there is, then that is an astounding fact. And if there isn't that is also an astounding fact. I am ready, indeed enthusiastic, therefore to see a small amount of the annual science budget of the planet devoted to SETI and to speculation on possible exoecologies.

The evolutionary pathway to humans was indeed a complex one filled with chance and random happenings. I am not looking for humans. I do not know what form this ET could take. Gilded gave an analogy that despite his modest protestation I rather liked. There are likely many routes to intelligence. Humanity followed one. Only by searching do we stand a chance of finding the others.

"What is it in the humans' corporeal constitution that prompts most of them to have a different approach to the scientific study of Life than to the study of anything else?
I fail utterly to recognise the distinction you are making. It lies, I think, at the heart of your argument, yet to me it sounds simply wrong. I have never detected in the written or spoken word of any life scientist that he has a different approach to his field than any other. Perhaps you are correct, but if so then this is a very important point. Can you explain please what this difference is, and, if appropriate summarise the evidence.

If your response is it is the "difference between studying mechanisms of living systems and studying the nature of life", then you are being very dismissive of generations of behavioural zoologists, ecologists and the like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And as to "you can't make yourself understood", I sincerely suggest that maybe this thread should be closed as there are very few other ways to say that there is a "difference between studying mechanisms of living systems and studying the nature of life".

Stating that X and Y are different is one thing; explaining why in terms of the definitions of X and of Y is something entirely different, and you have not yet accomplished this.

 

If you want this thread to go anywhere you are going to have to stop obfuscating the discussion and actually expand on your terms.

 

Is that better?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dove - Why must it be one dimensional? Can't people search for life in various ways? Some can try your way. Some can try to just find it. Some can try other methods.

 

Columbus didn't understand what he had found, neither did Lief Ericson, but they did it anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dove - Why must it be one dimensional? Can't people search for life in various ways? Some can try your way. Some can try to just find it. Some can try other methods.

 

Columbus didn't understand what he had found' date=' neither did Lief Ericson, but they did it anyway.[/quote']

He's not just talking about the search for life. He's mixing in some limitless form he calls the "nature of life" and claiming we need to understand that before we bother looking elsewhere, but since he has so far avoided defining what he is refering to it is - by definition - mumbo jumbo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More on the "nature of life" and on its significance/implication to humans:

 

(1) All forms of Earth life presently known are genetically interrelated. Most scientists (maybe all of them) suggest/accept that it began with individual cell/cells, from origin and in manner not yet known.

 

Very few persons, including myself, postulate that per Pasteur's "life comes from life" cell/cells are evolutionary products preceded by and evolved from archaic RNA genes associations with their accessories-entourages. In this scenario the yet unknown is/are the origin and manner of occurrence of the early gene(s). This possible scenario is supported by inability of a cell deprived of genes-association to replicate.

 

(2)Comparing the state of affairs in a living complex with its dying/dead form uggests that life is most probably a "bubble of energy storage system" initiated and maintained by energy in a direction opposite the universal/cosmic thermodynamic drive to a state of ever dissipating order and energy. Going backwords in time to either the pre-cell life scenario or to the cell-ex-machina life scenario, both well earlier than Pasteur, there must have been a "situation" in which the combination of energy flow/balance plus combined presence of RNA- or pre-RNA type oligomer/polymer with its entourage of associated molecules happened to be in the direction of replication of this archaic gene, thus initiating Life.

 

(3) Thus many questions arise, starting with: is life a unique extremely rare random

"energy bubble" phenomenon only on Earth ( so far we have not found life unrelated to us ), or also in the universe?

 

Also as posited earlier re "intelligent life", humans are a rare random mutation even on Earth; it is staggering to reflect on the course of the tremendous number of random mutation junctions between early archaic gene(s) or archaic cell and an intelligent human.

 

(4) And ,again, as posited earlier, a most essential, and uniquely human, ingrained/inherent need is some degree of self-esteem. This self-esteem leads to "esteem" of other humans so that survival and welfare of human individuals and communities is anchored and established on a foundation of human-esteem-based cultures/civilizations which are neatly complete creations of humans. Now just imagine how this enormous functioning world human edifice might be shaken under the impact of such new insights re the nature of life, and how humans will be faced with the vital need to re-formulate the foundation of culture, to anchor and build cooperative life edifice on modified bindings/committments-justifications of vital moral/ethical/social covictions/commandments...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think his saying we should find out the old why we are here,what did we come from?.Find the answer to this before looking for life elsewhere.The only thing i could say is so far were falling short and require more data.DOV If we could find life elsewhere in the universe then that will give us a better understanding than were at now.I do hope you are not saying we should question our existence,our meaning to life,change our foundations and go all jove-witness type.Personally i like lions but wouldnt want the kids to play with one!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like re-inventing the wheel to me - complete with baseless sweeping statements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dov, has Artorius accurately summarised your thinking in the first two sentences of his post? It makes sense, but I'd like confirmation.

 

(3) Thus many questions arise, starting with: is life a unique ....random phenomenon (found) only on Earth .....? ..
Surely the best way to answer this is to find out if there is life elsewhere and to determine its characteristics? Exobiology and SETI have these as goals. What is so wrong about that? How does it detract from the larger question of 'what is life'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.