Please STOP using the "Aliens --> Humans / Humans --> Ants" Analogy - it's weak!

reply to post by MarrsAttax


Really?

You actually think I don't understand what an anology is?

I know precisely what an analogy is - I'm saying it this a poor one, and there are key elements missing. And, thusly, doesn't reflect accurately how an Alien Race would view us just as we view ants - Nice rant, tho.

_______________________

What the hell has happened to this place? We've got people explaining what an analogy is, because they don't understand the krux of the thread, and then a bunch more lemmings commenting/rating (2nd post by facelift) something they don't even understand the connection (or lack of) - what has this place turned into?!

(To those that think facelift is being funny in his 2nd post: pay attention - he was so caught up in trying to be humerous no one realizes that his post is completely irrelevant! Someone. ANYone, please find another thread where the ant analogy is discussed (not just referenced) - I don't believe there IS one, 'cause THAT is the subject of this thread. His link is merely to another thread about Leslie Kean, which as you can see, was only an afterthought to this thread.)



[edit on 9/2/2010 by SquirrelNutz]

Do you have a source for your first paragraph? If you've just made those words up then your argument is just a straw man like DoomsdayRex said.

You want sources, huh? (never heard this, before, I guess)

Sure. How about...

1) One from right here on ATS, where I quoted/paraphrased from 'cause it was the best, but there are more...

2) Here's Another

3) And, Another

4) And, still another
(this one came up in a discussion after Stephen Hawking warned of our possible peril if contacting aliens.

5) Or, perhaps, you could've just watched the one video embedded in this very thread (5th post / 2:55mark) where theoretical physicist, Michio Kaku, discusses it. [Pretty sure he is the originator, if not the most popular orator of the notion. I like everything he does, but disagree with him on this]


Need more? Yeah, this is far from a 'straw man' argument. It is an analogy that has been used for years.




[I think it's abundantly clear that people are paying attention less and less, these days]



[edit on 9/2/2010 by SquirrelNutz]

i'm sorry but can't be bothered to find the thread about ant=human.

i think it was said that we were like ants next to a highway being built?

that they were that far advanced, there is no need to explain to us what is going on, i guess.

that's the only thing i can remember that fits.

since ants have their shti together better than we do. they do all that stuff without cable tv.


or ats.

Originally posted by SquirrelNutz
from right here on ATS, where I quoted/paraphrased from 'cause it was the best, but there are more...

No, you used that one because it was the one example that fit your bias. The rest don't actually fit your bias but are a hodgepodge of beliefs about what aliens may be like, mischaracterized by you.

This all demonstrates that you still do not understand what the analogy confers. The idea is not to compare humans to ants as you seem to think, but compare the relative stages of development, technologically and evolutionarily, between humans and aliens. That is not to say that all alien-life in the galaxy will view us this way but much of the alien life that is capable of travelling through the galaxy may be near god-like in their power. Nor is it to say that these powerful beings are inimical to human-life. It is to say they will not care. Especially if you believe the universe is teeming with life; if so, there is nothing special about humanity. All the more reason for them to not care.

Aw, did someone's feelings get hurt, because their 'straw man' jab got thrown back in their face? Boo Hoo

No, I understand, completely.

Anyone who doesn't think I do, is missing the entire point (actually, several points) of this thread.

I understand the relative comparisons. I'm pointing out the subtle intracacies that 1) make it a bad one, and 2) (And, this is the big one) that Aliens would NOT be as dissinterested in us (on a relative scale) as we appear to be with ants.

And, ftr, no I chose THAT passage, NOT because it fit in to my views (ALL those links say the same thing, I just like his wording the best) - just watch the video, instead, and stop trying to pretend you know me.





[edit on 9/2/2010 by SquirrelNutz]

reply to post by SquirrelNutz


HaHa I didn't mean to start all that with a tiny video lol

reply to post by Tribble


Nah. Thanks for posting it. Just testament to the fact that no one reads past the titles or first few posts, anymore.

Originally posted by SquirrelNutz
reply to post by Arbitrageur

 

I'm not so sure. Are you sure ants aren't intelligent?

Nope. Not at all. I'm saying two things:

1) Ant are not nearly as intelligent as us.

makes one wonder....

does's the Aliens ---> Humans as Christopher Columbus --> Native American's analogy work better for you?

By the way that's from the voice box of Stephen Hawking

Originally posted by GummB
does's the Aliens ---> Humans as Christopher Columbus --> Native American's analogy work better for you?

By the way that's from the voice box of Stephen Hawking

Assuming the Aliens are primitive enough to even bother with us.

reply to post by Segador


I can agree with that... the native American’s were all fine and good until Christopher and his crew figured out how to saddle up and get over here.

If you have never seen the Stephen Hawking's Into the Universe I'd recommend checking it out... very interesting watch. Two episode's Aliens and Time Travel.
I'll see if I can round up a link if your interested?

GummB

we'll here they are whether your interested or not.
Aliens part 1/5
www.youtube.com...
Time Travel part 1/5
www.youtube.com...

i'm sure you can find your way from parts 2 through 5

GummB


[edit on 2-9-2010 by GummB]

reply to post by mcrom901


ha ha - excellent link - that was fascinating.

reply to post by SquirrelNutz

Thanks, SquirretNutz. Even though I oppose every point you made I want to thank you for bringing up the subject. It hits at the core of my belief system.

Even though you are totally contrary, thanks for laying it out so eloquently.

The analogy does get overused, and I've certainly heard it many times before, the OP is not incorrect in saying that it is fairly common.

The problem with trying to determine the validity of the analogy is that while humans are a known quantity, and ants are a known quantity, aliens are not.

The most likely case is that the analogy is correct for some types of aliens but not others. For example, a group of biological, technology-using ETs that are - say - only a thousand more years advanced than may very well look at our civilization with compassion, interest or sympathy, as the OP says.

On the other hand, exponentially more ancient and powerful civilizations or entities, particular of Type IV or V civilization on the Kardashev scale, may consider us little more than orangutans (or even ants) and not particularly notice or care if we are squashed, since probably the universe teems with life.

These kind of creatures might be billions of years old, harness the power of entire stars or even black holes or who knows what else, with thought processes so abstract and bizarre we could not comprehend them, nor they notice us.

A good example of that would be found in Olaf Stapledon's classic tour de force, Star Maker.

reply to post by Unknown Origin


Thank you for saying so. And, like you, I love seeing all sides of a debate. If you've put together such a diatribe () defending your position I'd love to see it.

Why do you find it hard to believe? You are assuming aliens can even -be- impressed. Our emotions are chemical related reactions to our brains. We don't have the foggiest notion about alien physiology. They may be as emotionless as a rock. It's a huge assumption they would be "impressed" or empathetic or any other emotion of us.

Life may be as common as dirt in the galactic backyard. We may be common-as-rock species # 1,209,281,591 in just our galaxy. They may not care whatsoever.

As far as thinking of us as ants: these civilizations may well be hundreds of thousands or even MILLIONS of years old. We are civilization-wise, infants.

I personally believe they only reason they have interest is only to gauge our potential threat. Warlike race + moving towards space exploration = a species to keep an eye out. Why do think so many sightings occur over nuclear plants and missile bases?

Ants is as good an analogy as anything else imo. If you want to say "rats" or perhaps "pandas," that's fine too. We are primitive. We still stone people to death for crying out loud.

reply to post by fleabit


Okay, That was the first cogent counter-argument.

Thanks for contributing. [Star, sir.]

After that video, the last post, and the anaolgy argument/analyzation, I may have to concede my point on this. Or, at least make an addendum...

I think it is a fair & relative comparison (or, analogy) after all, but would argue that there is plenty of reason for them to choose not to interfere with or destroy us.

Afterall... they haven't, already.

reply to post by SquirrelNutz


Now you've climbed down off your high horse perhaps you can forgive those of us who dared to disagree with you? I was never ranting merely putting forward my own position. Any offence caused was not intentional but I apologise if I did so