Is Humanity Special

TheSonOfBattles

I was pondering this the other day for some reason. Prolly all the Bill Hicks I've been listening to tbh. Anyways: Are humans special. I mean, we make ourselves out to be. Most science fiction has humanity as being a great race that shows the rest of the universe the way it should be. We make constantly slap ourselves on the back as being the pinnacle of creation, and definatly the greatest thing this planet ever did. But dinosaurs were on the planet 65 million years before they died out, and they lived those years in harmony with the planet. Humans on the other hand after 1 million years or so have managed to dig themselves in, and we're obsessed with the idea we're going to move on from Earth as it's last species, and in the process, we destroy the very ground beneath us, polluting the earth. We are the only species that makes art and relaxes and is sentient (that I know of) but does that automatically make us the best?

We may have art, sentience, emotion and opposible thumbs, but we're killing our own planet. we destroy thousands of other species, we even kill our own species. We invented the nuke, and are greedy to each other - letting fellow men die so we can make our own lives just a bit nicer. We over populate the planet with no thought to whether or not we can sustain such huge numbers.

I'm not sure where this is going, and I'm not totally anti-humanity or anything. I like living, and want to live quite a lot. It's just I wanted to get this random thought down, and discussed since it's been bugging me. Do we deserve all the back-slapping we do? Are we earths pinnacle? Do we deserve to go forth in the spaceships and enter the galaxy?

Your thoughts, please.

bizmark

Of course where earth’s best we create art and science we invent we build we try to improve ourselves etc....As you said we have been around for only 1 million years (isn’t it 250,000 for our own sub-branch ? and around 300 for technology) where young the young make mistake's but we do for the most part learn from those mistakes and have done FAR more than any species in the history of earth in a fraction of the time.

As for leaving the planet that’s just the continuation of the human urge to understand the environment around them and yes to conquer that environment.

Also your comparing us to dinos?? Who lived in harmony with the earth? Course they did they had the intelligence of a digital watch they could do notting but stomp around eating each other then get killed by a giant rock :dunno: that’s what they had to show for Millions and Millions of year's of life.Every animal kills we dont hold the monolopy on that either btw Lions kill their own cubs etc.

As for the poor animals dieing off…. Meh survival of the fittest and all that no offence to the animal lovers out there but if it’s a trow up between Humans and animals humans should win every time.

We are the best earth has to offer don’t know about the rest of the universe though.

rde

First of all, there's no such thing as a pinnacle of creation (or evolution). We're adept at flooding every corner of the planet, but there are bacteria that'll do the same. Bacteria, incidentelly, that are more likely than we at surviving a catastrophic meteor strike.

From the point of view of surviving for as long a time as possible yes, we are special; we're the first species that can do something about getting off the planet, vital in the long term. Whether you're worried meteors, supervolcanos or even the sun going nova, we're on a planet on which life will some day end. Excepting some lucky bacteria which may have hitched a ride to mars, we're the only ones who can at least attempt to ensure that life outlives the planet.

As for 'deserving' to go forth; pah. There's no such thing as deserving in this context. Some day, perhaps, we'll encounter a planet on which life exists in some form. We'll have to decide then on the best way to proceed. Until then, though, expansion is essential and (one would hope) inevitable.

DadaKopf

No.

We are still nothing against the awesome power of nature. Sure, we can do some fancy things. But can we prevent another ice age? A supernova? Our own exhaustion of the planet's natural resources?

If by the question you mean, "are we outside nature?", the answer has to be, firmly, "no".

That millions of us think and act like Gods is a social construction and to our detriment.

chewy

"As for the poor animals dieing off…. Meh survival of the fittest and all that no offence to the animal lovers out there but if it’s a trow up between Humans and animals humans should win every time."

hmm not really a case of survival of the fittest ,we should know better and i would it be the case the more diverse life that survives the better for us....

i know of no animal species that would kill its prey to extinction

are we special well the philosophy of ancient knowledge im learnign at the mo says yes and no, we are spirits on a path that if you compare us to animals are on too (just as a different stage) so we should be nice to them

we are special cos we have consciousness and potential for more... as the above person said we're young and still making mistakes




don't you love talking about stuff you have no clue about

Georgiana

Many if not most human thought systems, including most major religions, fail to recognise or acknowledge the biological fact that humans are a species of animal and fit within the mammal group within the animal world, which itself is not around all that long within the larger context. Many of the thought systems we live within have an inbuild and unchallenged assumption that human animals are fundamenatally different in nature to other animals and are in control of what goes on on this earth.

The need and desire to be in control blinds us to the role and complexity of other animals within their own right We live within our own human perspective and are mostly unable or unwilling to step outside that. It suits our needs and interests to view other animals as being subject to our control, for our use etc

The human animal has indeed evolved to a significant degree and has a level of intelligence and self awareness which is unique. Yet most of our DNA is shared with chimpanzees and a good deal even with lower order animals. We are highly adaptable and highly adept in the field of creativity and in particular the creative use of tools and the manipulation of the physical environment of the earth (covering it in concrete, glass, cars and rubbish).

Our intelligience is creative to the degree that we are capable of speculation on philosophical questions-and creating art to mirror such musings- the problem lies in the creative answers we come up with-such as God.

When push comes to shove, the human animal almost always reverts to basic instincts. When we get frightened our adrenelin kicks in and we startle or become aggressive. Because we wish to distance ourselves from animal instincts we are sufficiently "civilised" and socialised to keep a lid on our most basic instincts most of the time. But under pressure we sweat and our muscles tense and our bodies prepare to face danger in the "fight or flight" way that animals do. Desmond Morris has done fairly good work in the area of showing us as human animals.

Some people manage to attain a high level of morality which is indeed impressive within the animal world- such as those who put others before themselves in emergencies, in war and so on. Some people learn that stimulus does not have to lead to automatic animal response but exercise will or conscience to employ a chosen moral response. But I belive this is simply an intelligent animal using his or her intelligence to achieve desired ends. Other animals are also capable of compassion to those who are in need- there are many instances of this- not leaving an injured member of the herd behind for instance.

We have for the most part failed to fully recognise the complexities of the lives and abilities of other animals. Those who take the time to really study animals with compassion and an open mind can vouch for this. We can strive for greatness and goodness and it is right that we should do so- but we cannot step outside the fact the we are an animal species-for this reason I find most religions unsound in that this fact is denied-only Buddhism, as far as I know, takes an inclusive view of the animal context.

I belive we have a very inaccurate inflated perception of our own significance within the vast universe-the insects and the bacteria will probably long outlast us unfortunately! Bear in mind that humans have been on the earth only 5 minutes if you take the age of the earth to be 24 hours!

This is my personal view and I hope nobody is offended by it but retains an open mind.

Sarky

Originally posted by chewy
i know of no animal species that would kill its prey to extinction

That's because the ones that did died out along with their food.

How are we to know the dinosaurs didn't develop along lines similar to ours? 65 million years is a long time, and right now there's nothing humans could create that would last that long. There could easily have been a previous race as advanced as we are, and we'd never know it. There could have been dozens, each wiped out by a comet or massive geological upheaval, or something else entirely.

Also, I find it interesting to note that while me may indeed share 90% or so of the DNA of various apes, we also share just under half of the same DNA as cabbage. Draw from that what you will...

simu

I don't like this gung-ho "humans are the greatest species in the universe" mindset that is shown in some sci-fi, as you mentioned Son of Battles. We certainly don't live up to our own expectations of how intelligent, compassionate beings should behave.

I do find the complexity of the human brain amazing but then again, it's not our achievement as we didn't design it! The most special thing about us, to my mind is that we have this capacity to be amazed by things, to become curious about them and try to figure out how they work, that we can think about and try to imagine things far removed from our immediate survival. Unfortunately, most people chose not to bother with such things.

Moriarty

Originally posted by Sarky
How are we to know the dinosaurs didn't develop along lines similar to ours? 65 million years is a long time, and right now there's nothing humans could create that would last that long. There could easily have been a previous race as advanced as we are, and we'd never know it. There could have been dozens, each wiped out by a comet or massive geological upheaval, or something else entirely.

I thought about this a while back and came to the conclusion that we most likely would be able to tell. Oil/natural gas/coal reserves were still in plentiful supply two to three centuries ago. I think its fairly safe to assume that most civilisations will go through an 'industrial age' in which these natural resources will be used at greater and greater rates (as we're currently going through), therefore leaving a record of use in the atmosphere and a record of them not being in the ground in places that they should have been.

For scales of thousands rather than millions of years, ice core records from the poles would also show any large-scale industrialisation through air pollutants (the results of 18th century industry can be clearly seen, with impurities demonstrating large-scale coal burning etc.) in the samples.

As to whether humanity is special... I don't know really. To a certain extent I think we are. Any life forms that can leave their planet and venture out into space would seem to deserve a certain amount of recognition. Whether we will turn out to be the stereotypical good-guys or not could largely depend on the type of society that evolves over the next few hundred years. On the whole I would prefer to live in todays society than one a thousand years ago. I hope the same can be said by the majority of people that are around in a thousand years to come.

fozzle

Originally posted by Moriarty
I thought about this a while back and came to the conclusion that we most likely would be able to tell. Oil/natural gas/coal reserves were still in plentiful supply two to three centuries ago. I think its fairly safe to assume that most civilisations will go through an 'industrial age' in which these natural resources will be used at greater and greater rates (as we're currently going through), therefore leaving a record of use in the atmosphere and a record of them not being in the ground in places that they should have been.

Personally I agree with you, in that any civilisation similar to our own would have left substantial records in the fossil record, and in things like atmospheric records. However, I do think it's abit naive to assume that for a species to be considered advanced, they would have to be directly comparable to our own present society.

One of the most amazing things about human evolution is the speed at which we evolved. Our ability to adapt and to manipulate our environment has helped make humans one of the success stories of evolution. This is helped, however, by the fact that at present, we are in an extreemly quiet period as regards tectonic activity. This means that huge tracts of land aren't being covered by lava, and our global climate is relatively stable. We're due another period of upheaval soon (on a geological timescale, 1 - 10 thousand years probably), and I have grave doubts about our ability to survive that.

Anyway, as regards civilisations, I think the chances of there haing been a civilisation akin to our own in the past is nil. However, some species in the past do seem to have had levels of intelligence at least broadly comparable to our own, and the development of complex societies, possibly akin to our stone age one, are, in my mind, a much more real possibilty.

As for the idea that humans are some kind of master race on a galactic scale, well I'd be very doubtful. Even on our own planet I would query the truth of that. Sure, we seem to be the most capable of shaping our planet to our own needs, but will this pattern of being "out of sync" with the rest of nature be our downfall? Cockroaches can survive a nuclear holocaust, we wouldn't stand a chance. In fact, they can survive most things and are pretty adaptable too. In 10 million years will they be stucying our remains and trying to figure out if we were intelligent creatures? I'd imagine they'd say no, why would intelligent creatures destroy their own planet, and help destroy themselves?

SheroN

people=****.

Capt'n Midnight

We must become a spacefaring race, so we can buzz low tech cultures in our flying saucers in the far distant futures.

Humans are special - austrialian aboriginies and kalahari bushmen can chase down kangeroos and gazells (SP) on foot , we can swim rivers and climb trees and we won't starve because we can remember that granny used to talk about the lake behind the mountain over there..

We are the only organism on the planet that has the potential to prevent the next really really big global extinction event (we are of course a major extinction event especially if you are a non-aftrician animal bigger than a cow)

Buzz_Irl

This always makes me smile. Why do we have such conceited ideas about ourselves? If you think you are something more than an animal of a certain intelligence then I think you overestimate our significance.

I have no idea what we are - better than a dinosaur but less than what comes after us? Why do we rely on intelligence being such a critical differentator but do not say that we would be prepared to be the food of something more intelligent?


If we lived with the truth of where we are then perhaps we would realise more of what we are - on average you have about another 45 years of existence and then you will be as significant as you were 45 years ago.

Wandered into this post and have more interest in the Tech board but got attracted to this - Iguess the answer to the thread is very straight forward - absolutely not - just a carbon species with notions about itself - throw a steak on the barbi before we are on it.

Buzz

rde

I have no idea what we are - better than a dinosaur but less than what comes after us? Why do we rely on intelligence being such a critical differentator but do not say that we would be prepared to be the food of something more intelligent?

Intelligence is meaningless. If there is a differentiator (if such a word exists), it's sentience, not intelligence. We're intelligent and self-aware; we explore ourselves and the outer universe. Delenn said it best: "We are the universe made manifest, trying to figure itself out."

Buzz_Irl

Other peoples thoughts are no reason to chicken out on your own - even a simple cow (are there other types !) ponders his own universe - sentinence is just a perception of intelligence - if a higher level of intelligence can experience the universe on a level we cannot comprehend then we are just a level in the food chain.
We are nothing special - most likely just an evolutionary step.

My 2c.

Buzz

DadaKopf

Rather what we should do is explore anthropological reasons why our species came to view himself to be outside nature, how cultures have, or have not, developed constructions of the 'other'.

Sex probably has a lot to do with it. Think about it.

Buzz_Irl

In fairness to the original post - the question is are we special?

In the context of other forms of life I think we are special based on our advanced evolution - you can go and get upset about death and destruction (and I do when it's happening to something I care about) but basically that comes with the genepool - and how much control (until now !!) have we had over that !.

Surely what makes us special is our intelligence? Without that we would simply fail to achieve dominance - and dominance is the pre-requisite to advancement. Once dominant we can dictate how other life forms can live in OUR environment.

Plus there is the practical matter of living on a lump of rock that has a finite life - so getting of it is a pre-requisite to medium term presence (unless I start going on about some of my not so sensible ideas on evolving to thought only stages).

BUT I am pretty sure (how ?) that we will quickly bump into something that will re-assign our position to Cow status - just hope their vegetarians !

Buzz

simu

Originally posted by DadaKopf
Rather what we should do is explore anthropological reasons why our species came to view himself to be outside nature

I imagine it depends a lot on cultural context. I remeber at uni, studying medieval literature, you see that our present-day concept of individualism would have been alien at that time. People were nothing compared to God and had to accept whatever life threw at them. In fact, you can trace the thoughts and movements that led to today's ideas that humans are somehow "above" nature throughout history since then - there was the Renaissance with its emphasis on the genius of humans, the scientific age with its belief that it was a matter of time before humans would understand and control their environment completely and so on. Well, as always with history, you can't simplify that much - there are always many different currents of thought co-existing and contending and influencing one another but there a pattern does emerge.

You could go a lot further back than the Middle Ages and beyond Europe too. The discovery of how to light fires and that fire could be controlled must have been quite a shock for ppl in prehistoric times - a previously mysterious, destructive force could be used in a useful manner and this paved the way for other advances that made their surroundings seem less incomrehensible to humans.

keu

<The discovery of how to light fires and that fire could be controlled must have been quite a shock for ppl in prehistoric times - a previously mysterious, destructive force could be used in a useful manner and this paved the way for other advances that made their surroundings seem less incomrehensible to humans.>

this is a good point. The stage of development where man stopped being controlled by fire (volcanos, forest fires) and took control of the elements is equivilent to the point where man stopped behaving as animals who were at the mercy of nature. (i know that sounds very romantic) and so began the industrial revolution... or taking control of the earth.

But fire was considered life giving, and therefore a sacred gift bestowed by the Gods.
Is life special? it depends on how you wish to view it, do you consider your life as a gift or just an anomoly in the space/time differential.

we know fire is just the ignition of combustable materials, we take it for granted most of the time, because we have control of it.
I could apply the same principle to life, we know we are nothing more than a compounded mass of cells with molecular structure, no different to a tree in the sense that we are alive, we grow and breath and die... we can even combine the correct substances together in a test tube and make humans now.

This materialistic view reduces humanity to nothing more than machinary and further more involves us in insisting that the most memorable experiences of life (love, beauty creativity, ambition) are totally without meaning.
...or that within our skulls is a complex circutry, equipment which analyzes input from the world around us and then selects and executes some behavioural response, in the same way as your computer does.

But in our case (humanity) there is a seemingly superfluous miracle: we see a brilliantly coloured scene....we have the sensation of falling in love..we recall events from the past and even, some would claim from the future. This humble elcetrochemistry has given rise to a vivid personal experience.

platonian thinkers would refer these experiences as illusive perceptions, idealism tends to doubt the existance of everything and everybody-outside ourselves.

But if we are machines or biologically effeciant life forms something inside is trying very hard to decieve us about it.
Personally, I follow a dualistic approach which is derived from the greek view of reality.
The ancient philosophers of greece tended to see the "soul" as an intangiable, spiritual part of humanity, which happily co existed with the physical. From this view, I consider humanity as special, more than just machines, more than just perceptions, but unique individual living experiences
(god/energy experiencing life /physicality)

thats just how I see it though.

TheSonOfBattles

I'm quite happy to see that more than 3 weeks after I started this thread, and minus any more bumping from me (as I've been of boards for the last 3 weeks or so) this thread is still active and thought provoking.

In the time since I wrote this I've watched a BBC documentary on Space and the Universe and all that, and it was quite fascinating. One of the things it showed though was what a voilent place the universe was, how even when planets are created its with a roar rather than a whimper as they say. If the universe at large is such a violent place though, maybe this is a sign that being violent is nessecarily wrong. I've been mulling over this though since then, and still am, but I wanted to throw it into the mix to see what ya'll have to say to that as well.

frattaro

I always loved this chuck palahniuk quote:

“We are not special. We are not crap or trash, either. We just are. We just are, and what happens just happens.”

We aren't special unless we can travel between universes, because this one has an end. We're not sure whether it will implode or just keep expanding, all the suns will die, and everything will decay into a grey, formless waste of a universe. Nothing will survive that.

So we are destined, assuming we avoid anything catastrophic or apocalyptic, to be nomadic, wandering from universe to universe.

I don't think thats special. I would compare us to parasites. Devourers of worlds. Useless just like everything else. Sorry to be such a downer.

Rancidmaniac13

It definately depends on your point of view. The universe could be full of other special things that we couldn't comprehend. If we do end up destroying are planet then I think it's clear that we aren't that special.

Per Liefsonson

I think the answer to this question really depends on in what way life will evolve from us or a life form like us. There is the possibility that due to the circumstances of human society, we have reached our peak in terms of evolution. But I think that life somewhere has the potential to reach a higher form of consciousness through evolution, a kind of perfection of consciousness where perspective is not coloured by things such as instinct and where thought is completely based on reason and logic. Although, I'm not sure what kind of enviroment would give rise to this evolution.
Humans, I think, wouldn't be able to handle this, at least not at the moment. I think this kind of perfection is not compatible with humans because we lean towards emotion rather than logic. This kind of life would be Hell for a lot of people I know and for myself too. So, if this is the trend of evolution, we or whatever life form evolves past the stage we are at, we'll also have to evolve to be able to cope with it!
As far as this planet goes, I think we're definitely special, to some degree at least. We're the only beings with any serious degree of conscious thought on the planet. We're a big step for an Earth life form. But it's only the first step. I think as far as consciousness is concerned, life has a much bigger potential than humans. Whether we're a part of that journey to a higher degree of consciousness or a cul de sac of another route, I don't know.
So I think that in terms of Earth alone the answer to the question posed is yes, for the moment. If we take into account the possibile capabilities of consciousness when it is no longer in conflict with instincts and the like, I say the answer is no for the most part. We represent the first step towards truely advanced life but there is the potential for life much, much more advanced than us.

GoldieBear

The only thing 'special' about humans in my view is that we have the capacity to reflect on our own thoughts (i.e. think about our thinking).

ScumLord

The human animal is without a doubt the greatest creature that ever graced the face of this planet. We have such a broad scope we seem to take the best that nature has come up with and adapt it to better ourselfs. We are destructive but as I see it we're earths reproductive system we're the only anima that can leave the planet and when we do finally find another planet to live on we won't make do with whats there we going to populate it with earths seed. We will want meat and veg to eat, flowers and animals to look at and take care of.

We are distructive but we didn't know until recently the power we had to change the world and we are slowly changing, probably not fast enough and we'll probably need to get used to a new envioment soon but that's another bonus with the human, instant adaptablity. We're like the exact opposit of the panda and animals like it that have become set in their ways and won't survive a climate change.

Bodhidharma

Special, No . Presumptious, Yes.

tj-music.com

Our potential as human beings is endless and we´ve come a long way. Having said that, even now in the 21st century we still have not lost our very primitive hunger for warfare and violence.

It would be best to stop the wheel for a bit and just reflect and look back on history to try and learn from our mistakes.