posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 01:05 AM
I have a few questions...
The science of astronomy, while deeply historically rooted, has only now in this past century taken shape as a serious discipline. Considering the
infancy of the science in this regard, and that we have immediately begun to narrow our search for extraterrestrial life by preferentially selecting
likely targets in outer space, would not these aliens do the same? Such a scheme would certainly increase their odds of finding us. If we were doing
the same, wouldn't that double our chances? But it seems there are other less apparent limitations...
Is it even plausible to assume that extraterrestrial intelligent life would even share certain qualities, such as inquisitiveness? Do you believe such
psychological structures would evolve analogously on different planets? Would they evolve at all? Could an intelligent life form evolve, capable of
sophisticated tool-use, yet be totally bereft of any sort of inquisitive nature? What about reason? If some sort of intelligence exists, which hasn't
evolved a system of rationality, but is capable of highly sophisticated tool-use, would it even bother to search for other life? Would it value a
preferential method in determining where to look for life? Probably not. Would it, like we are now, search for planets in "habitable zones" of solar
systems, for example? Do you think that intelligent life on average would develop some sort of rational interface? Or is this simply a niche that was
only relevant for evolving hominids? The emergence of advanced epistemology in humans seems to be predicated on a change in environmental conditions,
which might have favored long-term assessments of information regarding the location of food sources (Real, 1994). If similar evolutionary
trajectories never existed for our aliens in subject, would they even care if we existed, let alone question their own existence? The intelligence of
this alien could be remarkable, yet it might not even be aware of its own existence, or at least be as concerned about it in the sense that we are.
There are just so many variables it starts to get mind-numbing. However, I still don't believe we should give up. The argument that for all our work
we've seen little result is erroneous. Perhaps that's just the nature of our hunter-gather past flirting with the highly erratic nature of our
modern post-industrial world... I propose we start thinking about the long term for a change.
Real, L. A. (1994). The Evolution of Rationality. Retrieved February 4, 2008, from www.indiana.edu...
[edit on 5-2-2009 by cognoscente]