Life is Precious

[Givemeareason]

Another several good points you make here.  Ironically, our intelligence may be precisely that which makes us an evolutionary dead end -- we are the first species to develop (on this planet) which is capable of driving itself extinct through deliberate action or inaction, rather than through the blind forces of natural selection.  So in the long term (for us; short term evolutionarily), intelligence may be a self-limiting development.

This is another good argument for a vigorous SETI program -- finding another civilization would suggest that technological infancy is survivable... unless the signal suddenly and inexplicably stopped.  And it does provide one explanation as to why we haven't spotted any yet.  The real explanation, of course, is that we have only seriously been looking for about 20 years, we don't know what we're looking for, and we don't know where to look for it, so the idea that we should have found something already is statistically highly implausible.  SETI is a project for centuries, not a single professional lifetime.

I tend to think we will not go extinct but  we may drive everything else extinct.  There simply is no way to evaluate our future survivability and there is just as much if not more reason to think we will survive as not.  Our planet has never encountered aanything as survivable as us before.

[trdsf]

I tend to think we will not go extinct but  we may drive everything else extinct.  There simply is no way to evaluate our future survivability and there is just as much if not more reason to think we will survive as not.  Our planet has never encountered aanything as survivable as us before.

If we drive too many other things extinct, we go with them.  When they say all life is interwoven, that includes us, and if we unravel one thread too many, we go with them.  The weft's no good without the warp to support it.  Outside of a couple major asteroid strikes and the Siberian Traps, our planet has never encountered anything as destructive as us, either.

[SkyChief]

I would love to be convinced by you.  The only reason I say life is not precious is because I see the seeming insignificance of so many lives.  Yet I do think our species may be significant and maybe even precious.  Please explain.

Im not trying to convince you to hold any particular belief. You lean strongly toward nihilist values, which is fine. 

Its kinda ironic, but if Id want to convince you of anything, I would like to convince you that humans are only one of tens of thousands of sentient beings scattered throughout the cosmos. Alas, this would only serve to make life even more insignificant to you.   

As cosmology advances, we are finding that the likelihood of alien beings is quite high.  Theres a formula postulated which roughly calculates the number of planets which would be home to (intelligent) sentient beings capable of radio communication:



Hey, its all greek to me too. I have no idea what that stuff means.

And there are just so many unknowns that can’t be quantified.  But the consensus among most cosmologists is that there are thousands of them.

Still, life is precious.   All of it. (imo)

[doorknob]

actually life is precious because you don't have a soul that lives on. This is the only life you get so live it well.

Also I think if you presume that a fetus will have a bad life as an excuse to kill it is just that an excuse. You can't predict what type of life that fetus will have any more than you can predict your own future. I sure as shit couldn't have predicted my future! It was a crazy one. I still can't predict my future. Once you think you know every thing or 've seen every thing life will prove you wrong.

Based on that premise alone than why do we try to save the lives of people who try to kill themselves? Who are we to stop them then? their life only causes them misery right? So jump off that bridge, tie that not tight, and sharpen your blades! Or better yet have a doctor help them exit this world in a peaceful painless manor. Actually I do support assisted suicide for elders who are sick and terminal. If it is their choice to die rather than suffer or cause a burden you should respect that. Obviously I wouldn't force any one to die against their will. That would be unethical.

[Givemeareason]

Im not trying to convince you to hold any particular belief. You lean strongly toward nihilist values, which is fine. 

Its kinda ironic, but if Id want to convince you of anything, I would like to convince you that humans are only one of tens of thousands of sentient beings scattered throughout the cosmos. Alas, this would only serve to make life even more insignificant to you.   

As cosmology advances, we are finding that the likelihood of alien beings is quite high.  Theres a formula postulated which roughly calculates the number of planets which would be home to (intelligent) sentient beings capable of radio communication:



Hey, its all greek to me too. I have no idea what that stuff means.

And there are just so many unknowns that can’t be quantified.  But the consensus among most cosmologists is that there are thousands of them.

Still, life is precious.   All of it. (imo)

Nihilism is not me and is as much a leap of faith as religion is.  The problem we have is that we are always wanting something to believe in even if it's nothing at all and so we put a name on that as well.  That's why I think atheism is a first step in shedding beliefs.  Though I am not convinced of what you are saying about sentience I suspect you may be right.  The question is then when and where.  I am sure life exists elsewhere but how sentient might it be.  And if that is true why is our universe so attuned to the formation of life.  And if sentience exists in the quantities you say and if such sentience gains knowledge as we do then the question I would see is why is all this knowledge available at all.  Next thing you will have me thinking is that maybe the universe itself is sentient.  Wait!  That's starting to sound too much like religion!

[SGOS]

I tend to think we will not go extinct but  we may drive everything else extinct.  There simply is no way to evaluate our future survivability and there is just as much if not more reason to think we will survive as not.  Our planet has never encountered aanything as survivable as us before.

We don't know that we are all that survivable.  For one thing we have almost a zero track record.  The existence of our species is in a range from 50,000 to 150,000 years, and that is a pittance compared to other hominids, now extinct who lasted on the order of a million years.  The existence of all hominids combined is nothing compared to dinosaurs, which were the grand masters of survivability between the last two major extinctions, and they are all gone.  Well, it's possible that turtles have faired better, now that I think about it, but I'd have to double check.

Second survivability is owned by non specialized species during major extinctions.  Specialized species do very well for the short term as they are specialized to very specific environmental conditions, but when things change, they are the first to go.  In addition, our current environment over the last two million years, the one we evolved to survive in, even considering the ice ages, is more an anomaly than anything, and it appears to be about to change drastically.

There aren't many good reasons to bet on mankind's ability to survive, even though our egos would like to think otherwise.  Yes we own the planet right now, but it may be short term.  But for survivability?  There just isn't enough data to support that.

[Givemeareason]

If we drive too many other things extinct, we go with them.  When they say all life is interwoven, that includes us, and if we unravel one thread too many, we go with them.  The weft's no good without the warp to support it.  Outside of a couple major asteroid strikes and the Siberian Traps, our planet has never encountered anything as destructive as us, either.

I used to be an engineer so I lean toward the view that technology can solve anything.  This whole universe is just one big system.  An everything else are just subsystems within it.  All we have to do is reverse engineer it.  Short of some planet destroying event we can control it all.  There is nothing we cannot manage.  We would see anything if it started to unravel and would correct it once again.  Civilization could even be destroyed but we would only rebuild it again.

[Givemeareason]

We don't know that we are all that survivable.  For one thing we have almost a zero track record.  The existence of our species is in a range from 50,000 to 150,000 years, and that is a pittance compared to other hominids, now extinct who lasted on the order of a million years.  The existence of all hominids combined is nothing compared to dinosaurs, which were the grand masters of survivability between the last two major extinctions, and they are all gone.  Well, it's possible that turtles have faired better, now that I think about it, but I'd have to double check.

Second survivability is owned by non specialized species during major extinctions.  Specialized species do very well for the short term as they are specialized to very specific environmental conditions, but when things change, they are the first to go.  In addition, our current environment over the last two million years, the one we evolved to survive in, even considering the ice ages, is more an anomaly than anything, and it appears to be about to change drastically.

There aren't many good reasons to bet on mankind's ability to survive, even though our egos would like to think otherwise.  Yes we own the planet right now, but it may be short term.  But for survivability?  There just isn't enough data to support that.

I know what you are saying but I don't think we need a track record any longer.  They only tell us that to ingrain caution in public opinion.  The present can no longer be viewed in the light of the past.  We have surpassed the past.  We understand it we use that knowledge to form the present and the future as we choose.  Again short of some planet destroying event we are indestructible.

[Solitary]

Empty barrels make the loudest noises.

So do empty heads when the win blows. Will you quit whistling! Good habits, which bring our lower passions and appetites under automatic control, leave our natures free to explore the largest experiences of life. Too many of us divide and dissipate our energies in debating actions which should be taken for granted. I wanted to insult you, but I knew you wouldn't understand. Solitary

[SGOS]

I know what you are saying but I don't think we need a track record any longer.  They only tell us that to ingrain caution in public opinion.  The present can no longer be viewed in the light of the past.  We have surpassed the past.  We understand it we use that knowledge to form the present and the future as we choose.  Again short of some planet destroying event we are indestructible.

Can you support these claims?

[trdsf]

I used to be an engineer so I lean toward the view that technology can solve anything.  This whole universe is just one big system.  An everything else are just subsystems within it.  All we have to do is reverse engineer it.  Short of some planet destroying event we can control it all.  There is nothing we cannot manage.  We would see anything if it started to unravel and would correct it once again.  Civilization could even be destroyed but we would only rebuild it again.

I couldn't disagree more.  Look at the problems we have even convincing a significant portion of the population that anthropogenic climate change even exists, much less a concerted effort of applied research to remediate the damage.

Is it in principle possible to apply technology to solve a number of our ongoing issues on this planet?  Yes.  Is it likely under current social circumstances?  Quite frankly, no.  Given the behavior of humans as masses, I expect that once we reach the stage that only the clinically delusional could deny climate change is happening, we will miss our opportunity to repair the damage because the same sort of people who currently deny change will be wasting our time trying to affix (avoid) blame rather than trying to resolve the problem.

[Atheon]

Most people who are faced with imminent death do not want to die. If given the choice, they would rather live than die. They attach value to their lives. Life is precious.

[Mike Cl]

Most people who are faced with imminent death do not want to die. If given the choice, they would rather live than die. They attach value to their lives. Life is precious.

While your assertion is correct, it is not in my life.  My mother, father, grandfather and grandmother all chose to die when faced with imminent death.  My dad had to commit suicide because he was in the last stages of copd and felt he had no choice.  My mom died of ovarian cancer and begged to have it ended in the end.  My grandmother refused to take any medication with her advanced diabetes and my grandfather fought off the ambulance personal who were trying to transport him to a hospital.  All of them, when faced with imminent death chose death--and if we had a merciful system would have chosen it sooner.  And I assure you that all of them loved life.  Life is very precious, but at a certain point death can be preferred.   

[SkyChief]

Nihilism is not me and is as much a leap of faith as religion is.   

The question is then when and where.  I am sure life exists elsewhere but how sentient might it be.    And if sentience exists in the quantities you say and if such sentience gains knowledge as we do then the question I would see is why is all this knowledge available at all. 

Next thing you will have me thinking is that maybe the universe itself is sentient.  Wait!  That's starting to sound too much like religion!

The definition of nihilism is:   The rejection of all religious and moral principles, often in the belief that life is meaningless. This is why the reference was made.

True, nobody can quantify the amount of sentience in the universe, but we can be reasonably certain that it exists (elsewhere).

I would imagine that (intelligent) alien beings get their information the same way we do;  scientific method; i.e., systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.  This process functions on the planet Remulac (480,000 L.Y.s from Earth) as well as it does here.   I would be very surprised to learn that they believe in gods.   ha hah...  Hey that might be an interesting topic for a thread....  Could aliens believe in gods?  Nahh,,  aliens would be smarter than that.

I would never suggest the universe itself is sentient.  Agreed, that would be a spiritual and religious belief.

[SkyChief]

  All of them, when faced with imminent death chose death--and if we had a merciful system would have chosen it sooner.  And I assure you that all of them loved life.  Life is very precious, but at a certain point death can be preferred.

Someday, hopefully, we can (collectively) grow up and accept euthanasia as a humane and dignified method to end the suffering of terminally ill people (should they choose that). 

Most folks fear euthanasia because they think it would be administered for nefarious reasons.  But thats just silly.