What Would Life on Alien Worlds Strive For?

  • Thread starter Thread starter datatec
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Alien Life
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion explores the philosophical implications of intelligent life on alien worlds, questioning what their motivations and goals might be. Participants argue that advanced alien life forms could possess entirely different psychological frameworks, shaped by their unique evolutionary histories. The conversation touches on the nature of belief systems, including the distinction between theistic and non-theistic religions, and critiques the assumptions surrounding the motivations of believers. The works of Robert Forward, particularly "Dragon's Egg" and "Starquake," are cited as examples of radically different forms of life and their evolution.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of convergent evolution and its implications for intelligent life.
  • Familiarity with philosophical concepts such as metaphysics and epistemology.
  • Knowledge of different belief systems, including Buddhism and Taoism.
  • Awareness of science fiction literature, particularly works by Robert Forward.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the principles of convergent evolution in the context of extraterrestrial life.
  • Explore the philosophical implications of metaphysics and epistemology in understanding alien intelligence.
  • Read "Dragon's Egg" and "Starquake" by Robert Forward for insights into alien evolution.
  • Investigate the distinctions between theistic and non-theistic religions and their societal impacts.
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for philosophers, astrobiologists, science fiction enthusiasts, and anyone interested in the implications of extraterrestrial intelligence and belief systems.

datatec
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
Check this out:

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/TECH/space/09/02/et.send/index.html

This article got me thinking. On an alien planet, on which life forms have developed in a completely different way to us; how would they think (presuming they were more intelligent than us) what would their purpose be, in other words what would they strive to do? Would they be interested in finding other lifeforms? On the planet which we currently live (most of us) strive to work hard to make money----basis of capitalism. Others devote themselves to religion (religion is, in effect, an illusion of the human mind--with no proof god exists people who are depressed or poor turn to god and the belief they will die and go to a better place). However on a highly advanced alien planet, on which the lifeforms are both equal and willing to work hard (a mixture of capitalism, marxism, and democracy) like a utopia. What would these lifeforms strive for, if there is nothing to strive for?(Exploration,...)?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's a complete shot in the dark to speculate about such matters. It's not clear what would really constitute truly intelligent life elsewhere, let alone if they would strive for anything in roughly the same sense that we humans understand ourselves to strive for things.

It's not unreasonable to think that there might be an advanced lifeform somewhere that would feel 'lonely' in the universe and seek out other life. Such sentiment is presumably the result of a need to seek companionship, which itself is presumably the result of a very general evolutionary survival strategy of organisms forming social groups that work together towards achieving common goals. If life elsewhere is anything like it is here, we might expect such a strategy to be a common one due to principles of convergent evolution, and thus we might expect that sufficiently advanced societies would commonly feel the urge to seek out advanced life elsewhere in the universe.

But when we begin to talk about intelligent alien life, it boggles the mind to think of all the ways in which the mental lives of such aliens could vary from that of a human. It's hard enough to try to make sense of all the complexities of the human, on both the individual and social scale. To what extent could we understand an intelligent life form with no biological ties to us whatsoever, which evolved on a completely different planet in a completely different context? It seems to me that in all likelyhood the psychological lives of such creatures would be almost completely beyond our understanding (and vice versa). Therefore, it might not even make sense, metaphysically or epistemically, to speak of such life as having anything like typically human intentions.
 
Without some idea of their history, conditions, environmental motivations, etc. I doubt there is any way to make even the slightest guess. One good hypothetical example of alien evolution (vs alien philosophies and goals) was presented in Dragon's Egg and Starquake (By Robert Forward) where the story presents life of a most radically different form than ours and shows some of the evolution and consequences.

I would be careful not to assume all religions are theistic or based on belief in a god or gods. Buddhism and Taoism are two religions that aren't.
 
The possibility of other intelligent life forms is certainly interesting.

I'd like to add that the suggestion that depressed and poor people are the one's believing in God is unfounded. Some people who believe in God that aren't depressed and poor. Some people believe in God but don't follow a faith. There is no reason to insult people who aren't even harming you. If you want to insult people who manipulate religious texts for personal use, then you might have justification.

There is no proof god doesn't exist either. Being Agnostic is a much more openly logical choice than Atheism in my opinion. Atheism logic just like faith does. It simply provides a more logical basis to live one's life.

Saying Alien life is not possible would be considered unlogical. Even though we haven't found any you can't deny the possibility. God could be looked at as an Alien.
 
Dooga,
Many of the people around here, who call themselves atheists, would fall into your definition of agnostic. Many definitions of atheism simply involve a lack of belief (i.e. disbelief) in a god or gods - nothing more. It is common usage that contains the idea that atheists all "believe" there is no god(s). Many atheists avoid the term agnostic because of it's philosophical overtones.

As to proof (or in my view at least some credible evidence), then the burdon of proof relies on those making the positive statements, not those having a default "no belief" position. To state one position is more or less logical isn't really true, IMO. However, stating one position is more rational, using Occam's razor, may be supportable.

For instance, if there were no evidence that other planets could exist (which could possible harbor life), then it would be rational to accept that there was no extra terrestrial life. Using the term logical is a little iffy (maybe just personally uncomfortable), being you're not talking about a train of reasoning from evidence, but the presence of, or lack of, evidence.

I agree that insulting believers, by making unsupported statements as to their motivations, is both unjustified and an ad-hominem flaw.

Glenn
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
8K