Human Exceptionalism

[Linna Heartbooger]

But as human knowledge has shone us--we alone are our only hope. If we don't find an answer to overcrowding the earth's will be much crueler and swifter: mass starvation.

Ohh... ouch.
If you're up for saying, does something have you really thinking about that lately?
Whenever, I try thinking about that particular problem, well... I usually end up in confusion and dancing close to despair.

Do you read Asimov?
I think I read him for the first time this last year, and I happened to read books that touch on this question.

Where is your sense of adventure, that you would suggest traveling into the past as a form of punishment rather than as a special reward...

Okay, anyone capable of making this comment, I'm not going to worry -too- much about the implications of "I'm not willing to discard any life besides my own" and the singular version of "it's entirely up to us how much we are worth."
...at least for the moment.

perhaps that is the reason such a voyage has not befallen my person?

Hey! Am I allowed to yell at you for putting down a Watcher, or am I only allowed to call that Watcher stupid (patently false), as per your sig?

[Ananda]

I voted for humans are great, but I think cats are great, too. And bacteria! and everything else on this planet and off of it. Everything is great. Why not?

[Linna Heartbooger]

I get so tired of this view we're doing something awful to the earth by creating civilization when people are complaining about it on keyboards.

OK. Why are you tired of it? What's it to you? Does it really seem so impossible to you that the world has created a class of dissatisfied slaves? That they would remain dissatisfied despite the materials given to them?

Okay, first, I take a quick laugh break:

when people are complaining about it on keyboards

Love it!

That they would remain dissatisfied despite the materials given to them?

Who writes your material, man?!


*deep breath*
Now, on a more serious note, rent of its context. (coz u can find it on the interwebzl)

At this time last year, my IJM colleagues in India had just discovered the brutal prison [stone quarry] in which "Malavika" was spending her childhood. On December 1, 2010, the reality that she and her family were indeed of very great worth became apparent to the man who had enslaved them. In a coordinated operation, IJM and the local government freed the families enslaved in the quarry. The owner who had spent the past five years tormenting these children, women and men was placed under arrest. Gloriously, Malavika’s family left forever the place where they had known so much pain.

Btw, everybody, bumped the thread "Is the world a good place" in Gen Disc:
kevinswatch.ihugny.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=859977#859977

[Holsety]

Surely I believe things exist outside our minds; but without our minds those things are just--well what? Sitting out there in non-existence as we non-exist? I just see our sentience as integral for anything having any value in the universe.

Does a dog value a bone? I think so, even though we don't normally attribute sentience to dogs. That being said, I agree that the mind plays a critical role in the creation of value for the individual - I just don't think its role can trump or be trumped by the role of what is valued. Both are necessary.

So you believe beauty exists on its own, without the mind? I do agree the brain needs external stimuli, but that stimuli has no significance without human consciousness to apply labels to it, which again; I think is an exceptional force unique in this universe.

Hmm. I worded that poorly. I should not have said "therefore it is not actually the mind that creates beauty," but "therefore it is not only the mind that creates beauty."

If it was only the mind that created beauty, surely disparate minds would be far more likely to disagree on the beauty of waterfalls, sunsets and flowers - rarely, no I think never, do I find myself in dialogue disagreeing about the beauty of these things, only on human forms and human creations do I find that such things occur.

So there may be qualities that can be called, that evoke, beauty that would exist even if they went unappreciated. A flower does not cease its physical appearance simply because there is no sensing mind to perceive it, and it is in that physical appearance that we find beauty. What that existence without appreciation can be called into question, but so too can be called into question the value of the existence of beauty with appreciation. A man might well value only his own experience with beauty as the only thing his existence can ever encompass and verify and appreciate - I do not believe myself to be that man, but I thought it was worth mentioning.

Hey! Am I allowed to yell at you for putting down a Watcher, or am I only allowed to call that Watcher stupid (patently false), as per your sig?

I don't see how I'm putting down anyone? All I was suggesting is that the reason I have not been sent back in time is that I do not deserve such a voyage to be visited upon me. I think this more approaches an absurd jape than it does an insult, even to my own unanachronized person.

But I think you're allowed to yell at me. Just do it politely. Better check the rules though and make sure in your own estimation what is appropriate.
kevinswatch.ihugny.com/phpBB2/viewtopic ... 73&start=0

[Worm of Despite]

Surely I believe things exist outside our minds; but without our minds those things are just--well what? Sitting out there in non-existence as we non-exist? I just see our sentience as integral for anything having any value in the universe.

Does a dog value a bone? I think so, even though we don't normally attribute sentience to dogs. That being said, I agree that the mind plays a critical role in the creation of value for the individual - I just don't think its role can trump or be trumped by the role of what is valued. Both are necessary.

A dog's value of a bone, interestingly, is much different from ours; and they will never appreciate a flower like we do or even care about it unless we've handled it and left our scent. A hammer isn't a hammer for them; just a chew object. And they certainly don't look up at the stars, nor does any other animal except us.

I suppose that steers me back to what I've been trying to say: that we can regard our reality, form abstract ideas about it and progress in it as well as imagine. Any other creature can't do that, and if there's one out there that computes faster than us we can break out a computer. For me we're the peak: it's not an ego thing; I just think we're beings that can achieve anything within the realm of physics given the right knowledge. If there is something that understands our reality better we can learn it from them. But if there is something that knows reality and we're somehow deficient or disabled in attaining their Chi power; well that's sci-fi/magic time there and speculative.

If it was only the mind that created beauty, surely disparate minds would be far more likely to disagree on the beauty of waterfalls, sunsets and flowers - rarely, no I think never, do I find myself in dialogue disagreeing about the beauty of these things, only on human forms and human creations do I find that such things occur.

Well I imagine that's because our brains are very alike and hardwired the same; road-tested on the same long, evolutionary course to recognize what is good for us biologically and what is bad.

My point is: there is no object you can withdraw physically from the waterfall and say, "Ah, here's its beauty." We can prove time; but beauty? Hm.

It's probably beautiful to us because it's one of many parts of a life-supporting planet that our brain sees and goes, "Oh, water. Might be a good place to stay and get a drink." All our reactions to things in a positive manner are usually based on a survival ethic that 95% of our 2 millions years here on this planet spent honing. For instance: if you saw a purple planet--some kind of gas-looking planet--would you stop your spaceship and go, "Ah, lovely. I'll go down there and find a landing spot." Probably not.

[Gadget nee Jemcheeta]

I don't know if it came up because I am in the middle of finals terror, but if 'exceptional' means 'more unique' than of course everything is of equal uniqueness. If exceptional means remarkably well suited to thrive in our environment then I would say we do ok but are totally rocked by ants and bedbugs. If we mean exceptional as in: exceptionally good at doing the stuff that humans think is exceptional <-- I would say absolutely! =D

[Worm of Despite]

I don't know if it came up because I am in the middle of finals terror, but if 'exceptional' means 'more unique' than of course everything is of equal uniqueness. If exceptional means remarkably well suited to thrive in our environment then I would say we do ok but are totally rocked by ants and bedbugs.

I'd say we do the best, simply because we are the only creatures that improve our environment. Certainly there's no ants writing symphonies in nice warm rooms, and I also believe we're the most exceptional since we're the only animals with any future chance of getting off this rock. The others won't unless we take them. Thus in a sense they've failed big time and we rock.

[Linna Heartbooger]

Thus in a sense they've failed big time and we rock.

Failed at what though? Doing their job as ants? I thought that was to take care of each-other & to haul off wasted food and help the decompostion process. ...For us. yeahh...

[Worm of Despite]

Thus in a sense they've failed big time and we rock.

Failed at what though? Doing their job as ants? I thought that was to take care of each-other & to haul off wasted food and help the decompostion process. ...For us. yeahh...

Well, they do that for themselves.

They have no job, nor even an idea that they're alive maybe. I don't know, it's very basic being an ant. You have to get inside their existence and we can only speculate. A tick for instance doesn't care about the picnic 50 feet away; it's blind and deaf, hanging on a blade of grass waiting for the correct chemical traces signaling meaty-flesh that it can latch onto.

I'm sure when we're on some giant spaceship we'll just fire our remains out in black metal caskets, like Spock in Wrath of Khan.

And I never meant they're not good at what they do: I meant in an overall picture of long-term existence; i.e. we're the only ones equipped to make it beyond this biosphere with the proper tools and technology (undiscovered as of yet but entirely possible). Which just detours back to my exceptonialism/best-ism.

[aliantha]

We're also, apparently, the only ones equipped to totally trash this biosphere, forcing us to either leave it or cease to exist.

[Cambo]

We're the most complex form of life that we know of. There's no inherent morality in that: our complexity simply gives us greater potential. we can climb higher, and sink lower, than any other Earth bound creature.

Does that make us exceptional? I don't think so. Our current stage is just a link in an evolutionary cascade; a link that other life forms may reach by the time we are far beyond it (whether more highly evolved or simply gone). And may have already, in other galaxies.

[Worm of Despite]

We're the most complex form of life that we know of. There's no inherent morality in that: our complexity simply gives us greater potential. we can climb higher, and sink lower, than any other Earth bound creature.

Does that make us exceptional? I don't think so.

So for you the ability to use explanations and improve your world is unexceptional?

To me it’s an amazing feat that these abstract entities in our brain can go beyond our brains, be improved, and cause so much progress and affect the physical world.

Interestingly there is an inherent right and wrong in our explanations of things, and we could make no progress without them.

We're also, apparently, the only ones equipped to totally trash this biosphere, forcing us to either leave it or cease to exist.

Certainly the biosphere is not in its death throes, but just as certain I feel we will solve the problem or indeed, out. Which would be a great tragedy in the universe.

Let me stress: I am enthusiastic about our exceptionalism, but beyond the adjectives I see it as factual; not philosophical as far as I see it, both in quantity (life being so, so scare; never mind matter compared to dark matter) and qualitatively.

Were it not there would be no inborn mechanisms for it to preserve itself versus non-existence. And consciousness that can use knowledge and improve upon it is the best of the best.

Our ability of knowledge is universal with any other advanced beings in the universe. I doubt there’s something more evolved that understands a piece of reality we somehow can’t or are unable to despite the use of knowledge or explanation or computers, unless they exist outside the realm of physics, which might as well be magic or fiction.

[Cambo]

So for you the ability to use explanations and improve your world is unexceptional?

It's only exceptional insofar as we are the only species on the planet who can do so. I see higher cognitive function as a logical extension of biological organisms evolving. We are special, in that we are the most evolved on this planet. "Exceptional" to me would place us outside the whole system.

If we are exceptional, what rule are we the exception to?

[Worm of Despite]

So for you the ability to use explanations and improve your world is unexceptional?

It's only exceptional insofar as we are the only species on the planet who can do so. I see higher cognitive function as a logical extension of biological organisms evolving. We are special, in that we are the most evolved on this planet. "Exceptional" to me would place us outside the whole system.

If we are exceptional, what rule are we the exception to?

Subsisting beyond our original biosphere, improving it while we live on it (though there is a reverse side to that coin, as aliantha pointed out; but I believe our improvements on the biosphere outweigh any potential long-term problems; problems I believe we'll catch up with in terms of a solution, given enough time).

And most importantly we will eventually flourish in the stars whereas other animals are only able to live on the harsh terms the earth dictates to it, and their subsistence depends on whether or not we take them with us.

Or we could just go extinct.



But either way. I see a honeycomb of exceptional possibilities when you begin using higher reasoning ala the Enlightenment/rejecting bad theories out of hand rather than the centuries of slow progress where we accepted authority unconditionally and/or parochial things.

[Cambo]

Hmm. But see, those things are all due simply to our advanced cognitive ability...which arose from the same evolutionary pressures that any other life form is subjected to. Dolphins and elephants already have an ego, language, distinct cultures between herds and pods, etc etc. Just a couple of branches across on the evolutionary tree (probably the brach that gave us opposable thumbs), and they could well evolve into sentient beings akin to us.

Another question: if we are exceptional, where does this come from?

[Zarathustra]

At this time last year, my IJM colleagues in India had just discovered the brutal prison [stone quarry] in which "Malavika" was spending her childhood. On December 1, 2010, the reality that she and her family were indeed of very great worth became apparent to the man who had enslaved them. In a coordinated operation, IJM and the local government freed the families enslaved in the quarry. The owner who had spent the past five years tormenting these children, women and men was placed under arrest. Gloriously, Malavika’s family left forever the place where they had known so much pain.

And the kittens and pond scum and bacteria did nothing to stop it?!? Those heartless bastards!

Humans are exceptional in that they can choose what they want to be. That's true whether we're talking about Mother Teresa or the people who created this prison above. That's not true for every other animal or plant on this planet.

It might be true, however, elsewhere.

[Linna Heartbooger]

At this time last year, my IJM colleagues in India had just discovered the brutal prison [stone quarry] in which "Malavika" was spending her childhood. On December 1, 2010, the reality that she and her family were indeed of very great worth became apparent to the man who had enslaved them. In a coordinated operation, IJM and the local government freed the families enslaved in the quarry. The owner who had spent the past five years tormenting these children, women and men was placed under arrest. Gloriously, Malavika’s family left forever the place where they had known so much pain.

And the kittens and pond scum and bacteria did nothing to stop it?!? Those heartless bastards!

So if I hear you correctly, you're saying that sometimes we're trying to apply some questions of "goodness" (i.e. moral good) to things that aren't in the right category for those questions to be applied to?

[Worm of Despite]

Hmm. But see, those things are all due simply to our advanced cognitive ability...which arose from the same evolutionary pressures that any other life form is subjected to. Dolphins and elephants already have an ego, language, distinct cultures between herds and pods, etc etc. Just a couple of branches across on the evolutionary tree (probably the brach that gave us opposable thumbs), and they could well evolve into sentient beings akin to us.

Another question: if we are exceptional, where does this come from?

Dolphins with thumbs underwater would still be pretty useless. Elephants with thumbs? They also would need to be bipedal and be under pressure to use their brains, but their bodies are much more adapted to their harsh environments than our hairless hides ever were, and so there's no pressure to be anything than what they are. And even if there was some kind of pressure they couldn't adapt like us, so they'd most likely go extinct before us.

I see them as intelligent, sure, but not comparable to ours. Unless they're building a more efficient energy source and I'm not aware of it.

What makes us exceptional isn't important. Though it would be interesting to find that missing link. But the exceptionalism is there. We are the long-lasting bubblegum of organisms. We got all the answers. Everyone else is Christmas treeing their scantron and failing.

[Zarathustra]

We're also, apparently, the only ones equipped to totally trash this biosphere, forcing us to either leave it or cease to exist.

No we're not. Any organism can "trash" the biosphere. Every organism consumes resources and expels waste. Just because other organisms happen to keep each other in check doesn't mean each single organism doesn't have the capability to deplete its resources or make its environment toxic. Theoretically, this is possible no matter what the species.

However, in practice it doesn't usually happen--not for other organisms, and not for us. We're not trashing the earth to the point where we have to leave it or cease to exist. We're thriving more than humans ever have. The idea that we're going to have to leave or go extinct due to our own trash is about as realistic for us as it is for squirrels. The only realistic extinction-level threat we pose is with our nukes--which, admittedly, no other organism possesses anything like this. However, we're also the only organisms which have hope of preventing something like an asteroid strike ... technology which is heavily dependent upon the very same technology which can send nukes around the globe (rockets), so that kind of balances things out a bit.

And the kittens and pond scum and bacteria did nothing to stop it?!? Those heartless bastards!

So if I hear you correctly, you're saying that sometimes we're trying to apply some questions of "goodness" (i.e. moral good) to things that aren't in the right category for those questions to be applied to?

No, I just think it's silly to compare us to pond scum or cats. As bad as we can be, the rest of the universe doesn't give a damn, so we must be better than it, even at our worst. We're amazing. And any attempt to downplay that, or to moderate it by reminding us of our dark side, or to equate it to things that aren't as amazing, is just a travesty in my opinion. I don't understand the humans who constantly want to remind us how much we suck or to rob others of their wonder for being alive and their appreciation of the fact that we're the universe waking up.

[StevieG]

I voted Yes, humans are exceptional. We are exceptionally good, and exceptionally bad, and have produced exceptionally exceptional humans who have indeed reached their full potential. We have conscience, compassion, the ability to reason. And we can choose to be evil, heartless, and pitiful. We're exceptional either way.