Thinkers February 26 2013: IS THERE PROGRESS IN EVOLUTION?

welcome to Thinkers!
[2013/02/26 15:36]  Extropia DaSilva: and today the topic we are arguing tooth and nail over is..
[2013/02/26 15:36]  Extropia DaSilva: IS THERE SUCH A THING AS PROGESS IN EVOLUTION?
[2013/02/26 15:37]  ArtCrash Exonar: Depends on your definition of progress.
[2013/02/26 15:37]  Extropia DaSilva: To which I say…yes!
[2013/02/26 15:37]  Extropia DaSilva: Before there was just random chance…
[2013/02/26 15:37]  Zobeid Zuma: YES! For a specific definition of progress.
[2013/02/26 15:37]  Extropia DaSilva: then there was a record of the past..
[2013/02/26 15:37]  Dizzy Banjo: so do you mean that the process of evolution itself evolves?
[2013/02/26 15:38]  Extropia DaSilva: and from that there evolved at least one species that could, at least imperfectly, plan for the future.
[2013/02/26 15:38]  ArtCrash Exonar: I think an argument can be made for increased complexity, but as for objective progress, only in terms of niche survivability.
[2013/02/26 15:38]  Extropia DaSilva: Pretty much, yes, Dizzy.
[2013/02/26 15:39]  Dizzy Banjo: hmm but evolution IS progress already
[2013/02/26 15:39]  ArtCrash Exonar: There are lots of examples of the ‘best’ of any particular trait being extinct.
[2013/02/26 15:39]  ArtCrash Exonar: Evolution isn’t progress, it is only adaptability to conditions.
[2013/02/26 15:39]  Zobeid Zuma: You need to take a bigger view.
[2013/02/26 15:39]  Extropia DaSilva: How inevitable was it that a species would develop that could discover the very process of natural selection that lead to its existing?
[2013/02/26 15:39]  Dizzy Banjo: do you mean evolution happening at a faster rate?
[2013/02/26 15:39]  Zobeid Zuma: ArtCrash is telling the currently fashionable view among evolutionary theorists, but I believe there is one thing they overlook.
[2013/02/26 15:39]  ArtCrash Exonar: I don’t think we are inevitable, actually.
[2013/02/26 15:40]  Extropia DaSilva: Not necessarily..
[2013/02/26 15:40]  ArtCrash Exonar: I think humans are a complexity outlier.
[2013/02/26 15:40]  Extropia DaSilva: Although, technology evolves ten million times faster..
[2013/02/26 15:40]  Extropia DaSilva: so if we say technology is a continuation of biological evolution, that would be a speedup.
[2013/02/26 15:40]  Zobeid Zuma: There has been a gradual trend over the history of life on Earth towards more and more complex organisms. This is limited primarily by the details of microbiology.
[2013/02/26 15:41]  Dizzy Banjo: indeed. technology and nature evolve at very different rates. however you could say that our technology is part of our nature
[2013/02/26 15:41]  Zobeid Zuma: Complexity is useful. Sophistication confers an advantage — but it’s not easy to achieve.
[2013/02/26 15:41]  Extropia DaSilva: Then again, considering the biomass of them, you could say that complex organisms are but a teeny percentage compared to the bacterial forms.
[2013/02/26 15:42]  ArtCrash Exonar: Example of non progress in evolution. The best teeth for grinding that ever existed were the plant eating dinosaurs of the late cretaceous. They are now extinct. Mammal grinding teeth are a much less efficient tool.
[2013/02/26 15:42]  Zobeid Zuma: And we seem to have beem bumping up against the limits of DNA for a while — dinosaurs were not *much* less complicated than today’s higher animals.
[2013/02/26 15:42]  Extropia DaSilva: Hello Shay:)
[2013/02/26 15:42]  Zobeid Zuma: You’re looking at the trees and not seeing the forest, Art. 🙂
[2013/02/26 15:42]  Extropia DaSilva: how so, Zo?
[2013/02/26 15:42]  Ivy Sunkiller: hoy hoy
[2013/02/26 15:43]  Extropia DaSilva: heya Ivy:)
[2013/02/26 15:43]  Ivy Sunkiller: sorry for being late, SL is not in best form after rolling restarts today
[2013/02/26 15:43]  ArtCrash Exonar: With evolution, you have to build on whatever you have to start with. So progress is measurable only in terms of adapting to specific conditions.
[2013/02/26 15:43]  Zobeid Zuma: A particular type of grinding tooth isn’t the issue. The issue is complexity.
[2013/02/26 15:43]  Aeni Silvercloud: hello 🙂
[2013/02/26 15:43]  Extropia DaSilva: And Aeni too:)
[2013/02/26 15:43]  Extropia DaSilva: No, Art..
[2013/02/26 15:43]  Ivy Sunkiller: hoy Gwyn
[2013/02/26 15:43]  ArtCrash Exonar: So if evolution is all about progress, then how come there are species unchanged for hundreds of millions of years?
[2013/02/26 15:43]  Zobeid Zuma: That means the whole organism… and subtle things like behavior.
[2013/02/26 15:43]  Extropia DaSilva: that is only true of natural selection..
[2013/02/26 15:44]  Extropia DaSilva: Because Darwin’s theory does not say all animals must evolve at the same rate.
[2013/02/26 15:44]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: “hoy” sounds about right
[2013/02/26 15:44]  ArtCrash Exonar: Some don’t evolve at all when they fit their niche.
[2013/02/26 15:44]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: /me is angry at Darwin… of the Apple persuasion
[2013/02/26 15:44]  ArtCrash Exonar: So no progress for them.
[2013/02/26 15:44]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: /me rolls up her sleeves and drops a comment out of the blue
[2013/02/26 15:45]  Zobeid Zuma: You can also see the increasing importance of *learned* behavior. I think this is at least partly due to the limitations of encoding behavior in DNA.
[2013/02/26 15:45]  Shay Ellison: so is this about the evolution of evolution?
[2013/02/26 15:45]  Dizzy Banjo: /me waves at Gwyneth
[2013/02/26 15:45]  ArtCrash Exonar: This is about the definition of progress.
[2013/02/26 15:45]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: “Progress requires a HUMAN to define what it is. Species couldn’t care less about what we think that ‘progress’ is”
[2013/02/26 15:45]  Extropia DaSilva: But anyway, as I was saying, natural selection is limited to modifying what it has, but technological evolution can make paradigm shifts, say, from the propellor to the jet turbine.
[2013/02/26 15:45]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Hiya Dizzy, so nice to see you! Or rather, your cloud.
[2013/02/26 15:45]  Shay Ellison: not necessarily. some animals are competent engineers that work from a beginning.
[2013/02/26 15:45]  Zobeid Zuma: We have traits being passed down from generation to generation through teaching and learning rather than genetically.
[2013/02/26 15:46]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: I’d say, Extie, that’s because we humans are intelligent; but there are no Intelligent Designers for evolution 🙂
[2013/02/26 15:46]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: /me ducks quickly in case some creationist has sneaked in this discussion
[2013/02/26 15:46]  Extropia DaSilva: so I would say technological evolution is a progress from natural selection, since the former can plan for the future and make irreducible complexity, whereas nature cannot.
[2013/02/26 15:46]  Ivy Sunkiller: not yet 🙂
[2013/02/26 15:46]  Dizzy Banjo: perhaps we should consider what DNA would consider progress. after all we are simply machines for preserving DNA 🙂
[2013/02/26 15:46]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: heh Ivy
[2013/02/26 15:46]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Dizzy makes my point 🙂
[2013/02/26 15:46]  Extropia DaSilva: I do not follow your point, Gwyn.
[2013/02/26 15:46]  Shay Ellison: unfortunately our technological evolution doesn’t always take into account natural evolution
[2013/02/26 15:46]  ArtCrash Exonar: Humans are a complex outlier of evolution. It is not yet decided whether we are capable of surviving.
[2013/02/26 15:46]  Shay Ellison: and could impact the natural evolution in ways we don’t realize yet
[2013/02/26 15:47]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: We’ve done pretty well so far, Art 😀
[2013/02/26 15:47]  Ivy Sunkiller: technological evolution *is* natural evolution
[2013/02/26 15:47]  Zobeid Zuma: Yes, we are a weird experiment.
[2013/02/26 15:47]  Extropia DaSilva: More like, will impact, Shay.
[2013/02/26 15:47]  Extropia DaSilva: Wrong, Ivy..
[2013/02/26 15:47]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Shay: we ALREADY are doing that: we “invented” artificial selection.
[2013/02/26 15:47]  ArtCrash Exonar: Well, Gwyn I can name 20 ways that we can terminate ourselves by accident.
[2013/02/26 15:47]  Shay Ellison: let me put it this way. the random mutations that happen between species, the subtle changes over time often take hundreds if not thousands of years
[2013/02/26 15:47]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: I can name a million ways I can die in the next five seconds; what does that prove? 😛 Onlyh that live is fickle
[2013/02/26 15:48]  Ivy Sunkiller: technology is made (so far) by humans, humans are made by nature, thus technological evolution is a product of nature
[2013/02/26 15:48]  Zobeid Zuma: Have we, Gwyn? 70,000 years ago we nearly went extinct. We’re the last surviving hominids, all the rest have died out. And a mere few thousand years ago we were still trying to get the upper hand over African lions.
[2013/02/26 15:48]  Ivy Sunkiller: </troll>
[2013/02/26 15:48]  Shay Ellison: meanwhile our pollution is doing a fine job changing future generations.
[2013/02/26 15:48]  Shay Ellison: of US
[2013/02/26 15:48]  Zobeid Zuma: Our “success” is a very very recent phenomenon.
[2013/02/26 15:48]  Shay Ellison: in timespans we can see too.
[2013/02/26 15:48]  Extropia DaSilva: If technology were natural selection, then the lightbulb would have been created via step by step modifications to the candle, with every intermediate step viably functional. This is not how it happened:)
[2013/02/26 15:48]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: My point, Extie, is that the idea of “progress” is a human concept. Nature doesn’t have that concept; Nature is not “intelligent”
[2013/02/26 15:48]  Shay Ellison: progress is a concept animals seem to understand as wel.
[2013/02/26 15:48]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Zo: well, the mere fact we’re chatting here is because we DID survive 😛
[2013/02/26 15:48]  Dizzy Banjo: perhaps not intelligent in the way we define it
[2013/02/26 15:48]  Shay Ellison: they just measure progress in more finite moments.
[2013/02/26 15:49]  Shay Ellison: humans look towards the abstract progress.
[2013/02/26 15:49]  ArtCrash Exonar: Yes, Gwyn I think you make a great point. Progress is a subjective valuation.
[2013/02/26 15:49]  Zobeid Zuma: That’s a moot point, Gwyn. We don’t care what nature would think is progress, if nature were able to think. We care about what we think is progress. So let’s discuss that!
[2013/02/26 15:49]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Shay: aye, animals as sentient beings, certainly. But it’s not the animals that “decide” how they evolve….
[2013/02/26 15:49]  Shay Ellison: we may be the only creatures that act and think in abstract and conceptual ways. how we define progress is just one of them 😉
[2013/02/26 15:49]  ArtCrash Exonar: Was it progress when we hunted the carrier pidgeon to extinction?
[2013/02/26 15:50]  Dizzy Banjo: but if we are tools for the preservation of DNA then we could become more efficient tools  or the system could become more efficient somehow. not sure
[2013/02/26 15:50]  Extropia DaSilva: But that counts as progress! Once natural selection could not plan for the future, did not understand its own underlying mechanism, has no subjective valuation, no plans of any kind…and now there is technological evolution with all those things. Evolution is being guided now, whereas before it was blind to the future.
[2013/02/26 15:50]  Zobeid Zuma: I think increasing complexity and sophistication counts as progress. I think the history of life on earth shows that trend, so that’s progress in my view.
[2013/02/26 15:50]  Shay Ellison: but humans also change not just the environment, but other species directly.
[2013/02/26 15:50]  Shay Ellison: most other animals either eat or leave others alone 😀
[2013/02/26 15:50]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: What I mean, Zo, is that attributing “progress” to “natural selection” is just like asking: “What would oranges think, if oranges were able to think?”
[2013/02/26 15:50]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: A pointless exercise.
[2013/02/26 15:50]  Extropia DaSilva: No
[2013/02/26 15:50]  Zobeid Zuma: And I just explained why you’re wrong, Gwyn. 😛
[2013/02/26 15:50]  Shay Ellison: only pointless without the human element, yes
[2013/02/26 15:50]  Shay Ellison: because the progress of nature is what we envision
[2013/02/26 15:50]  Shay Ellison: nature doesn’t care otherwise.
[2013/02/26 15:50]  Extropia DaSilva: We are discussing EVOLUTION. Natural selection is a special case, applicable to the biological world ONLY.
[2013/02/26 15:50]  Shay Ellison: well nature doesn’t care, it’s we who do 😀
[2013/02/26 15:51]  ArtCrash Exonar: Is it progress that we are destroying the biosphere that supports our lives?
[2013/02/26 15:51]  Extropia DaSilva: But we are not.
[2013/02/26 15:51]  Shay Ellison: depends on how narrow your view of progress is I suppose.
[2013/02/26 15:51]  Zobeid Zuma: And Extie wants to take us somewhere different… but my hypothesis does tie in with that, albeit loosely…
[2013/02/26 15:51]  Shay Ellison: a CEO that owns a polluting industry may only care about the progress of profits.
[2013/02/26 15:51]  Shay Ellison: but that’s not really evolution based
[2013/02/26 15:51]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: You mean about “I think increasing complexity and sophistication counts as progress.”? Is that your explanation,. Zo? Because, well, again, that’s what you — a human being with a mind of your own — think about what progress is. Or are people here really discussing if evolution is intelligent and has a mind of its own? 😛
[2013/02/26 15:52]  Zobeid Zuma: I hope they aren’t, Gwyn.
[2013/02/26 15:52]  ArtCrash Exonar: Many are the cases of overpopulation of species leading to extinction of them.
[2013/02/26 15:52]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Good. Whew.
[2013/02/26 15:52]  Extropia DaSilva: The biosphere now has the ability to monitor the state of its own health and guide the infant Noosphere to alleviating problems.
[2013/02/26 15:52]  Shay Ellison: that would imply that God allowed evolution to happen and that all mainstream religions, christianity in particular, got it wrong 😀
[2013/02/26 15:52]  Extropia DaSilva: I agree with the last part of that statement, Shay:)
[2013/02/26 15:53]  Zobeid Zuma: We started at the beginning (before all of you were here) by stating that “progress” would have to be carefully defined if we were to make any, um, progress with this discussion. 😀
[2013/02/26 15:53]  Shay Ellison: so the evolution of our understanding of progress?
[2013/02/26 15:53]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Nah Shay, as we discussed last week, a lot of branches of Christianity postulate evolution and natural selection as mechanisms created by God and part of His Divine Plan.
[2013/02/26 15:53]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Zo: well sure
[2013/02/26 15:53]  ArtCrash Exonar: I’m thinking most definitions of progress when looking back at how evolution got there become circular arguments.
[2013/02/26 15:54]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: And what definition _are_ you using? 🙂
[2013/02/26 15:54]  Zobeid Zuma: Anyhow, if I’m right, we’ve gone as far as we can with DNA. Memetic advancement is the only way forward. And that includes the type of technological advances that Extie mentioned. 😀
[2013/02/26 15:54]  Shay Ellison: good question.
[2013/02/26 15:54]  Extropia DaSilva: we have not come up with one..
[2013/02/26 15:54]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: O-kay…
[2013/02/26 15:54]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: So…
[2013/02/26 15:54]  Extropia DaSilva: I just think it pretty self-evident that technological evolution is a progression from natural selection.
[2013/02/26 15:54]  ArtCrash Exonar: Oh we are a long long way from DNA’s possibilites for humans.
[2013/02/26 15:54]  Extropia DaSilva: I mean..
[2013/02/26 15:54]  Dizzy Banjo: perhaps progress = a more efficient form of preserving DNA
[2013/02/26 15:55]  Zobeid Zuma: Increasing complexity and sophistication. That was my idea of progress.
[2013/02/26 15:55]  Extropia DaSilva: consider the other great extinctions..
[2013/02/26 15:55]  Shay Ellison: or progress is whatever we apply it to
[2013/02/26 15:55]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ah. Ok. That, at least, is a good working definition.
[2013/02/26 15:55]  Shay Ellison: if I wanted to destroy the environment for most life on earth, I’d find the pollution to be progress 😉
[2013/02/26 15:55]  Extropia DaSilva: There was nothing that could see the writing on the wall and try to reverse those extinctions..
[2013/02/26 15:55]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: And your argument, Extie & Zo, is that DNA cannot come up with further complexity & sophistication increase?
[2013/02/26 15:55]  Extropia DaSilva: now, with the 6th Extinction, there is.
[2013/02/26 15:56]  Shay Ellison: provided we don’t exterminate ourselves first
[2013/02/26 15:56]  Zobeid Zuma: Mostly my argument. I think Extie left DNA behind before we even started. 🙂
[2013/02/26 15:56]  Extropia DaSilva: Of course:)
[2013/02/26 15:56]  Shay Ellison: we aren’t even cannibals, so it’s all wasteful with the killing we do
[2013/02/26 15:56]  Shay Ellison: humans are humans worst enemy and all that.
[2013/02/26 15:56]  Extropia DaSilva: But DNA…
[2013/02/26 15:56]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ok. So what arguments are you using for saying that DNA hit a dead end and is worthless?
[2013/02/26 15:57]  Shay Ellison: that’s a little blunt. if DNA were worthless. . . .
[2013/02/26 15:57]  Extropia DaSilva: well, now, of course, we have biotech and can engineer genomes to suit some purpose.
[2013/02/26 15:57]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Worthless from now on, I mean.
[2013/02/26 15:57]  ArtCrash Exonar: The fact that we might exterminate ourselves is total proof that evolution does not progress. Evolution only is concerned with adaptation to niche.
[2013/02/26 15:57]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: So, yes, Extie. Now we have Intelligent Design.
[2013/02/26 15:57]  Extropia DaSilva: yes we do.
[2013/02/26 15:57]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: I mean, now we have intelligent humans designing genomes 🙂
[2013/02/26 15:57]  Shay Ellison: you mean, we’re intelligent in our design? *gasps*
[2013/02/26 15:57]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: But we’re a product of DNA anyway, so…
[2013/02/26 15:57]  Extropia DaSilva: Yes.
[2013/02/26 15:57]  Extropia DaSilva: I am not:)
[2013/02/26 15:57]  Zobeid Zuma: A couple of things. First, it looks to me like we have a gradual trend towards more sophisticated life forms — which was very rapid at first (Cambrian explosion) but very slow progress recently.
[2013/02/26 15:58]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Now we have “small but efficient” — virii, bacteria…
[2013/02/26 15:58]  Zobeid Zuma: It suggests to me that complexity confers an advantage, but it’s getting harder and harder to increase. It’s bumping up against a technical limit.
[2013/02/26 15:58]  luisa (luisa.bourgoin): Intelligent Design does not worry me. It’s the NearIntelligent Blunder that can happen while tinkering on things. The first “Bluescreening Creature” we will create
[2013/02/26 15:58]  ArtCrash Exonar: Interesting side point: it is looking like the Cambrian explosion was due to the development of sight and the eye.
[2013/02/26 15:58]  Dizzy Banjo: ah it’s almost midnight here. lovely to chat with you all briefly !
[2013/02/26 15:58]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: (bye Dizzy!)
[2013/02/26 15:58]  Extropia DaSilva: Bye!
[2013/02/26 15:58]  Dizzy Banjo: cu!
[2013/02/26 15:59]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: (so glad to see you around!)
[2013/02/26 15:59]  Extropia DaSilva: There is a book that makes that case, Art..
[2013/02/26 15:59]  Zobeid Zuma: Second observation, we see higher animals passing along more and more behavior through educational processes rather than genetically. Because the genes can’t handle any more.
[2013/02/26 15:59]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ok, now you’re talking, Zo 🙂
[2013/02/26 15:59]  Extropia DaSilva: I believe it was due to A) predation and B) the contintents breaking apart which released more free oxygen.
[2013/02/26 15:59]  Shay Ellison: well if instinct is hard wired, knowledge is aquired.
[2013/02/26 15:59]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Aye, both observations are good, strong arguments.
[2013/02/26 15:59]  ArtCrash Exonar: The genes will soon be handling it through genetic manipulation.
[2013/02/26 15:59]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: At least at a reasonable limited time scale.
[2013/02/26 16:00]  Shay Ellison: a few hundred years vs several thousand?
[2013/02/26 16:00]  Shay Ellison: and she crashed.
[2013/02/26 16:00]  Shay Ellison: ahh the evolution of lag in SL
[2013/02/26 16:00]  Zobeid Zuma: Energy is important. I saw a report that credited the sucess of humans almost entirely to using fire.
[2013/02/26 16:01]  Shay Ellison: wb. seems you progressed from your first SL crash experience 😉
[2013/02/26 16:01]  ArtCrash Exonar: Yes, cooking of food specifically.
[2013/02/26 16:01]  Extropia DaSilva: Would you agree that the existence of a technological species means we cannot be certain that the sun will go nova in X number of years, since that species might intervene with the process?
[2013/02/26 16:01]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: /me is pushing her iMac to extreme limits and will probably crash more
[2013/02/26 16:01]  Zobeid Zuma: That was the one, ARt. 🙂
[2013/02/26 16:01]  Shay Ellison: we can’t be sure of any of that for one reason
[2013/02/26 16:01]  ArtCrash Exonar: cooked food allows for more calories to be digested and that leads to larger brain size
[2013/02/26 16:01]  Shay Ellison: right now we STILL can’t intervene with the sun’s lifecycle. yet
[2013/02/26 16:02]  Shay Ellison: besides, our sun may not be large enough to go nova
[2013/02/26 16:02]  Extropia DaSilva: Yes but we have a few billion years in which to develop the ability.
[2013/02/26 16:02]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Extie: it’s a reasonable assumption with which I agree
[2013/02/26 16:02]  Shay Ellison: but it can still swallow up the earth if it expands as much as the cosmologists theorize
[2013/02/26 16:02]  Extropia DaSilva: Not nova..
[2013/02/26 16:02]  Extropia DaSilva: sorry.
[2013/02/26 16:02]  Extropia DaSilva: My mistake..
[2013/02/26 16:02]  Zobeid Zuma: It’s fascinating to look at human history through the lens of energy sources. It’s always been a huge factor.
[2013/02/26 16:02]  ArtCrash Exonar: I guess you could add more hydrogen to your sun to make it last longer… heh
[2013/02/26 16:02]  Shay Ellison: though there is a massive star with it’s axis tilted in our direction
[2013/02/26 16:02]  Extropia DaSilva: But it will become a red giant and then, after that, a white dwarf.
[2013/02/26 16:02]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Civilization is about energy sources….
[2013/02/26 16:03]  Extropia DaSilva: good point Gwyn.
[2013/02/26 16:03]  Shay Ellison: observations of it’s intensity and distance suggest it might be one of those gamma spitters, and our solar system could be in it’s gunsite 😀
[2013/02/26 16:03]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: /me *nods* @ Art
[2013/02/26 16:03]  Zobeid Zuma: Well, it would only fry *half* the earth, Shay. 🙂
[2013/02/26 16:04]  Shay Ellison: okay, what about the blending of nature into technological progress?
[2013/02/26 16:04]  Extropia DaSilva: I guess it is hard to talk about progress in evolution when we only have one planet on which evolution actually ocurred..
[2013/02/26 16:04]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: A pretty good argument for ‘evolution’, Extie …— lifeforms evolve until they are able to change their environment so that they don’t need to adapt to it any longer, but change the environment to suit them instead 🙂
[2013/02/26 16:04]  Shay Ellison: why are inventors and scientists studying the habits and patterns of other animals that are not as complex?
[2013/02/26 16:04]  Extropia DaSilva: Well, technology is a programing of nature, since every technology must use a natural principle.
[2013/02/26 16:04]  Shay Ellison: we don’t need to incorporate the walking patterns of a gecko or lizard into a robot
[2013/02/26 16:04]  Shay Ellison: or how avian creatures flap their wings
[2013/02/26 16:04]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Hehe somnething in that, Extie
[2013/02/26 16:05]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Shay: indeed, we can use *wheels*
[2013/02/26 16:05]  Shay Ellison: but science is studying what nature can do so well that our technology can’t
[2013/02/26 16:05]  Shay Ellison: a bit of irony there, don’t you think?
[2013/02/26 16:05]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: uh-huh
[2013/02/26 16:05]  Zobeid Zuma: But some of those animals have very efficient walking patterns. Why not take advantage of that?
[2013/02/26 16:05]  luisa (luisa.bourgoin): evolution takes so much time! curious to see if simulation could speed that up
[2013/02/26 16:05]  Shay Ellison: walking mech tanks might be sooner than sci-fi would have us believe
[2013/02/26 16:05]  Extropia DaSilva: well it is true. There is always a natural principle underlying a technology. For instance, the principle that for every action is an equal and opposite reaction underlies rockets and jets.
[2013/02/26 16:06]  Extropia DaSilva: yes..
[2013/02/26 16:06]  Shay Ellison: and for a while our technology since the wheel centered around the wheel. a human construct that works for us
[2013/02/26 16:06]  Shay Ellison: now we’re diving back into nature to learn all the things we skipped out on.
[2013/02/26 16:06]  ArtCrash Exonar: There is a large body of work regarding this topic in the literature and the consensus seems to be. That progress in evolution does not in general exist except for specific cases in which you define it that way. The reasons mostly hinge on all the examples of extinction.
[2013/02/26 16:06]  Extropia DaSilva: That BIG DOG and a Biped equivilent have been made by DARPA, for instance.
[2013/02/26 16:07]  Shay Ellison: if we can engineer better spider thread than what nature can do, that might be progress. on nature.
[2013/02/26 16:07]  Shay Ellison: but only measured by what our technology can do that nature already does very well
[2013/02/26 16:07]  Extropia DaSilva: But are they talking about evolution in general, or natural selection?
[2013/02/26 16:07]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Aye, Art. When this topic pops up, the problem is philosophical: we look at nature from the perspective of a species that can think and examine patterns.
[2013/02/26 16:07]  Extropia DaSilva: But that is progress!
[2013/02/26 16:08]  Shay Ellison: maybe we’ll build a better centipeede. imagine the impact on transportation over any terrain
[2013/02/26 16:08]  Shay Ellison: trains won’t be restricted to rails
[2013/02/26 16:08]  Shay Ellison: I would call that progress
[2013/02/26 16:08]  Extropia DaSilva: The process of natural selection evolved minds that could think and examine patterns, and therefore give birth to scitech:)
[2013/02/26 16:08]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Yeppers 🙂
[2013/02/26 16:08]  ArtCrash Exonar: But is it progress when Greek and Roman wisdom is lost for centuries? It happened that way.
[2013/02/26 16:08]  Zobeid Zuma: The problem with “consensus” in science is that it tends to change from one generation of scientists to the next. Right now paleontology is still heavily rooted in morphology, much more than microbiology. But that will change.
[2013/02/26 16:08]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Hard to escape the Anthropic Principle… 🙂
[2013/02/26 16:09]  Zobeid Zuma: We’ve started seeing some great results coming out of the microbiology side, but it’s only the tip of the iceberg.
[2013/02/26 16:09]  luisa (luisa.bourgoin): progress is not easy to define. looks like nature “just is” or “survives”
[2013/02/26 16:09]  Shay Ellison: but implying what THINK is progress for nature, when we’re still trying to understand it, just feels like building a bridge from the middle without any support, rather than from the beginning and end side.
[2013/02/26 16:09]  Zobeid Zuma: That’s Thinkers for ya, Shay. 😀
[2013/02/26 16:09]  Shay Ellison: and how do we really know where nature is supposed to go next when we keep tampering with it?
[2013/02/26 16:10]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Heh Zo. Yes, indeed. When I read about how quantum mechanists routinely come together to vote on which interpretation of quantum mechanics they like best, I have to say that Extie’s view that the Many-Worlds interpretation might actually be a better one…. but it has been consistently voted down. Science by consensus and democratic vote, indeed….
[2013/02/26 16:10]  Extropia DaSilva: I do not like the term tampering.
[2013/02/26 16:10]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Shay: hehe love the analogy!
[2013/02/26 16:10]  ArtCrash Exonar: Just look at human history. Freedom can easily be replaced with despotism. Things can go both ways.
[2013/02/26 16:10]  Shay Ellison: tampering if often inadvertant
[2013/02/26 16:10]  Shay Ellison: is still tampering
[2013/02/26 16:10]  Extropia DaSilva: To say Tampering implies we are doing something wrong and there is a ‘right’ way to go about things.
[2013/02/26 16:11]  Shay Ellison: it’s in our nature to try something new, just for the sake of seeing if it works
[2013/02/26 16:11]  Zobeid Zuma: Nature is “supposed” to go wherever we suppose that it will go. We can be the ones who make it happen, too.
[2013/02/26 16:11]  luisa (luisa.bourgoin): term carries valuating
[2013/02/26 16:11]  Extropia DaSilva: The sad fact is that any choice we take, including the choice to do nothing, is bound to have some negative consequence for the environment.
[2013/02/26 16:12]  ArtCrash Exonar: Speaking of ‘freedom’ vs ‘heirarchical control’. Who is to say which of those is progress? Both can be considered so by different people.
[2013/02/26 16:12]  Aeni Silvercloud: goodnight!
[2013/02/26 16:12]  Zobeid Zuma: We’ve already jumbled things up a lot in a very short time, around the world. There’s no going back to “the natural order” even if we wanted to.
[2013/02/26 16:12]  luisa (luisa.bourgoin): nini Aeni
[2013/02/26 16:12]  Extropia DaSilva: so whatever we do, some are bound to hold up their hand and ask ‘uhh..why are we so dumb as to be doing this? Look what damage it is doing!’.
[2013/02/26 16:12]  Nepherses Amat: hello : )
[2013/02/26 16:12]  Extropia DaSilva: Hiya!
[2013/02/26 16:12]  ArtCrash Exonar: heya
[2013/02/26 16:12]  Nepherses Amat: is this the discussion or am I here at wrong time?
[2013/02/26 16:13]  Extropia DaSilva: This is the discussion:)
[2013/02/26 16:13]  ArtCrash Exonar: you are 45 minutes late!
[2013/02/26 16:13]  ArtCrash Exonar: haha
[2013/02/26 16:13]  luisa (luisa.bourgoin): my living room looks like beeing in “natural order” at the moment
[2013/02/26 16:13]  Nepherses Amat: damn
[2013/02/26 16:13]  Nepherses Amat: I hate reality
[2013/02/26 16:13]  Extropia DaSilva: It is OK..
[2013/02/26 16:13]  Extropia DaSilva: You are welcome to drop in at any time..
[2013/02/26 16:13]  Extropia DaSilva: so the topic is..
[2013/02/26 16:13]  Extropia DaSilva: IS THERE SUCH A THING AS PROGESS IN EVOLUTION?
[2013/02/26 16:13]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Aye, notn that we have mad emuch progress… (bad pun intended)
[2013/02/26 16:13]  Nepherses Amat: No
[2013/02/26 16:13]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: *made much
[2013/02/26 16:14]  Zobeid Zuma: Too late, we already decided there is. 🙂
[2013/02/26 16:14]  luisa (luisa.bourgoin): what is progress? can (must!) you value it in numbers, that is
[2013/02/26 16:14]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: And I second Neph’s vote! lol
[2013/02/26 16:14]  Nepherses Amat: OMG really?
[2013/02/26 16:14]  Extropia DaSilva: Give us a reason for why you think not.
[2013/02/26 16:14]  Shay Ellison: no, we are struggling to define what we mean by progress before applying it to evolution. 😀
[2013/02/26 16:14]  luisa (luisa.bourgoin): on travel, progress equals distance. but then there is a destination
[2013/02/26 16:14]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Well, I gave one 😛
[2013/02/26 16:14]  Shay Ellison: whether it’s natural or technological, societal, economical, etc
[2013/02/26 16:14]  Zobeid Zuma: I’m not struggling, I defined it early on. But for some reason the rest of the audience has now readily accepted my definition and followed from there. 😛
[2013/02/26 16:14]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Good point, luisa — is there a ‘destination’ for evolution?
[2013/02/26 16:14]  Nepherses Amat: well for one thing, I am leading a discussion with a documentary on Friday night in RL about “the call of life facing the mass extinction”
[2013/02/26 16:15]  Shay Ellison: and evolution doesn’t really have a concrete end
[2013/02/26 16:15]  Zobeid Zuma: has not accepted, even. 😛
[2013/02/26 16:15]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: I’d say, evolution is the travelling — not the reaching of a destination.
[2013/02/26 16:15]  Shay Ellison: there’s a direction and a lot of what ifs. infinate amount
[2013/02/26 16:15]  ArtCrash Exonar: I think it isn’t hard to define a specific thing as progressive. But once you do you have to see that it can also fall down and disappear depending on circumstances….
[2013/02/26 16:15]  Shay Ellison: we measure progress in small chunks of time, though. even us humans.
[2013/02/26 16:15]  Nepherses Amat: the point is we are near the end, what is the destination?
[2013/02/26 16:15]  Shay Ellison: end of what?
[2013/02/26 16:15]  Extropia DaSilva: Yeah it does. The saturation of the universe with sublime thinking subsrates, effectively turning the entire universe into God.
[2013/02/26 16:15]  Nepherses Amat: human life on earth, and I am not a kook
[2013/02/26 16:16]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Oooh I like that, Extie 😀
[2013/02/26 16:16]  Nepherses Amat: http://www.thecalloflife.org
[2013/02/26 16:16]  Zobeid Zuma: This explosion of complexity that we humans have created in our culture, in a short time, is just an example of what happens when you leave behind the limitations of DNA genetics.
[2013/02/26 16:16]  Shay Ellison: humans have already demonstrated leaving a planetary body and comming back alive.
[2013/02/26 16:16]  Shay Ellison: know other creatures on earth that can do that
[2013/02/26 16:16]  Nepherses Amat: hmm
[2013/02/26 16:16]  Shay Ellison: besides the ones humans sent away? 😀
[2013/02/26 16:16]  Extropia DaSilva: Posthumanity is the destination, but not the FINAL destination. It is just where the technological species on this planet is headed, one way or the other:)
[2013/02/26 16:16]  Nepherses Amat: humand died out and came back ???
[2013/02/26 16:16]  Shay Ellison: some famous chimps and monkeys that don’t get near the credit they deserve
[2013/02/26 16:17]  luisa (luisa.bourgoin): humans tend to speed things up, agreeing. if we really get a lever on designing live, it will feel like fast forward evolution
[2013/02/26 16:17]  Shay Ellison: all I can say is I’ll meet MY end eventually, but the rest of humanity will blunder on
[2013/02/26 16:17]  Nepherses Amat: it may not
[2013/02/26 16:18]  Shay Ellison: what happens afterwards is meaningless to me once I’m dead
[2013/02/26 16:18]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Well, I think that I can agree with Zo on one point. If by progress is meant “increased complexity and sophistication”, even if both are just human ideas, we can certainly agree that we humans are able to do a much better work in far less time than natural selection.
[2013/02/26 16:18]  Nepherses Amat: http://calloflife.org/
[2013/02/26 16:18]  Extropia DaSilva: Maybe you discover it was not exactly the end, Shay? You never know!
[2013/02/26 16:18]  Shay Ellison: that is for the next universe to show me. lol
[2013/02/26 16:18]  luisa (luisa.bourgoin): Neheres, whats behind that url? can you explain in a single chatline?
[2013/02/26 16:19]  Nepherses Amat: yes I tried
[2013/02/26 16:19]  ArtCrash Exonar: Geee, if I close these 27 programs on my computer it runs faster. Is this progress? Well it is if your definiition is fast running. But if your definition is lots of choice, then no. So we have to admit progress notions are relative and can’t apply to evolution in general.
[2013/02/26 16:19]  luisa (luisa.bourgoin): … before I head into that browser, and prolly crash
[2013/02/26 16:19]  Shay Ellison: when I’m old and feeble I’ll probably take comfort in death at some point. might lead to a new beginning, but while I’m alive I only care about this world.
[2013/02/26 16:19]  Nepherses Amat: it is a marvelous documentary of the most recent science that humans are in denial and grief about
[2013/02/26 16:19]  Shay Ellison: I mean if we’re gonna measure progress by humans, look at how we use religion.
[2013/02/26 16:19]  Shay Ellison: is that really progress? lol
[2013/02/26 16:19]  Nepherses Amat: the fact is we have about 10 years to turn things around
[2013/02/26 16:19]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ah yes, the 6th Extinction…
[2013/02/26 16:19]  Nepherses Amat: this is a fact
[2013/02/26 16:19]  Extropia DaSilva: I think it is progress that natural selection lead to technology, since the latter can anticipate the future AND learn from the past, whereas NS only learns from the past.
[2013/02/26 16:19]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: 10 years, huh? 🙂
[2013/02/26 16:19]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Can we postpone this dicussion to 2023? 🙂
[2013/02/26 16:20]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: *discussion
[2013/02/26 16:20]  Nepherses Amat: yes, because by 2050 we got 9billion
[2013/02/26 16:20]  Nepherses Amat: ppl
[2013/02/26 16:20]  Extropia DaSilva: Good.
[2013/02/26 16:20]  ArtCrash Exonar: I’m on board with you Neph, but people call us fear mongers.
[2013/02/26 16:20]  Shay Ellison: china already limits how many children every couple can have
[2013/02/26 16:20]  Nepherses Amat: and 50% of species now alive weill be extinct
[2013/02/26 16:20]  luisa (luisa.bourgoin): where’s my “teh end iz near OMG” cardboard sign
[2013/02/26 16:20]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Extie: I agree
[2013/02/26 16:20]  Nepherses Amat: there is a simple soulution
[2013/02/26 16:20]  Shay Ellison: meanwhile some churches require you to go out and multiply
[2013/02/26 16:20]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Neph: kill half the population? 🙂
[2013/02/26 16:20]  Shay Ellison: in america we seperate those two so each can do their own destructive think without being a check on the other
[2013/02/26 16:20]  Nepherses Amat: end capitalism, it is not sustainable, but THAT is like saying the F word
[2013/02/26 16:20]  Nepherses Amat: no
[2013/02/26 16:21]  Shay Ellison: farfenkuger?
[2013/02/26 16:21]  Extropia DaSilva: 9 billion of the most complex structures the world has ever known. 9 billion minds of astonishing power, networked like never before. If that cannot find a way out of the deep shit we are in, what can?
[2013/02/26 16:21]  Nepherses Amat: and I mean Feminism
[2013/02/26 16:21]  luisa (luisa.bourgoin): yes, war is usually the answer on population numbers
[2013/02/26 16:21]  Shay Ellison: and we’re so divided even now
[2013/02/26 16:21]  ArtCrash Exonar: Shay, so true. I went to a funeral of a friend who was a Mormon, he had 31 grandchildren.
[2013/02/26 16:21]  Shay Ellison: as a whole species, we haven’t advanced
[2013/02/26 16:21]  Nepherses Amat: they seem to think that biologically we cannot wrap our minds around this extinction
[2013/02/26 16:21]  Shay Ellison: cause we can’t even get along with each other.
[2013/02/26 16:21]  Nepherses Amat: that we just cannot do it
[2013/02/26 16:21]  Shay Ellison: dogs and cats often make better companions
[2013/02/26 16:21]  Zobeid Zuma: You know Communist countries have *horrible* environmental records, right?
[2013/02/26 16:21]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Right, so you don’t need to kill half the population, just the ones having money above a certain threshold?
[2013/02/26 16:22]  Extropia DaSilva: That is just not true, Shay.
[2013/02/26 16:22]  Shay Ellison: tell that to the bible belt people in the south
[2013/02/26 16:22]  Nepherses Amat: but I think that is because we have given up polyphasic consiousness
[2013/02/26 16:22]  Shay Ellison: and compare them to the city dwellers further north
[2013/02/26 16:22]  Nepherses Amat: I am in the south right not
[2013/02/26 16:22]  Extropia DaSilva: A.what consciosness?
[2013/02/26 16:22]  Nepherses Amat: polyphasic
[2013/02/26 16:22]  luisa (luisa.bourgoin): You know capitalism countries have *horrible* environmental records, too, right?
[2013/02/26 16:22]  Shay Ellison: even government is divided. depending where you live you suffer through one kind of tyrannical policy over another
[2013/02/26 16:22]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: What’s a polyphasic consciousness?
[2013/02/26 16:22]  Extropia DaSilva: Could you define it for me?
[2013/02/26 16:23]  Shay Ellison: we haven’t even evolved on simple things, like our concepts of love. that’s why several states outlaw two men or two women sharing a legal marriage contract?
[2013/02/26 16:23]  Nepherses Amat: we westerners seem to think that only beta, waking conciousness is “real” and science is the only way to know Reality
[2013/02/26 16:23]  Shay Ellison: and that’s easy to verify, just look up their laws and constitution
[2013/02/26 16:23]  Shay Ellison: so yeah, we’ve devolved a bit as we evolve elsewhere.
[2013/02/26 16:23]  Nepherses Amat: dream events are “not real”
[2013/02/26 16:23]  Shay Ellison: if our societal evolution doesn’t keep pace, does it really matter how good our tech is?
[2013/02/26 16:23]  Zobeid Zuma: Not that bad, Luisa. We’ve cleaned up our act a lot in the USA over the last 50 years or so. Obviously there are still problems… but it’s not clear to me that “capitalism” is the cause, or that getting rid of it is the answer.
[2013/02/26 16:23]  Nepherses Amat: we cannot support the tech
[2013/02/26 16:23]  Shay Ellison: we barely understand the tech!
[2013/02/26 16:24]  Nepherses Amat: tech means mining, mining means transporting
[2013/02/26 16:24]  luisa (luisa.bourgoin): sweeped below the chinese carpet
[2013/02/26 16:24]  Shay Ellison: that’s part of the problem
[2013/02/26 16:24]  Nepherses Amat: that means oil OR
[2013/02/26 16:24]  ArtCrash Exonar: This brings up an interesting question. Is there such a thing as devolution? I think not. Only evolution in a different direction.
[2013/02/26 16:24]  Extropia DaSilva: Well, both waking reality and dreams are mental models created by the brain.
[2013/02/26 16:24]  Nepherses Amat: soy, which means cutting down rainforests to grow soy
[2013/02/26 16:24]  Shay Ellison: we exploit our tech like we exploit the environment. we also exploit each other
[2013/02/26 16:24]  Nepherses Amat: you assume no reality out there?
[2013/02/26 16:24]  Zobeid Zuma: Today’s technology is dirty because it’s still crude and needs further development. The way to go is forward, not back.
[2013/02/26 16:24]  Nepherses Amat: that our perceptions are connected to nothing?
[2013/02/26 16:24]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Good point, Art. From the perspective of Planet Earth, it doesn’t care if the next sentient species descends from cockroaches, which are better suited to a post-human environment.
[2013/02/26 16:25]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Hear hear, Extie
[2013/02/26 16:25]  Extropia DaSilva: I assume a reality but do not presume to think that how I perceive it is identical to how it actually IS.
[2013/02/26 16:25]  Shay Ellison: lol, saving the planet. translation: save the environment so it will still sustain us.
[2013/02/26 16:25]  Shay Ellison: earth won’t care what happens to us
[2013/02/26 16:25]  Extropia DaSilva: yes it will.
[2013/02/26 16:25]  Nepherses Amat: right! so why do we negate events in dreams are real?
[2013/02/26 16:25]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Exactly, shay
[2013/02/26 16:25]  Nepherses Amat: or what they mean?
[2013/02/26 16:25]  Nepherses Amat: right, earth does not care
[2013/02/26 16:25]  Extropia DaSilva: The Earth cares because we care.
[2013/02/26 16:25]  Nepherses Amat: we ARE Earth
[2013/02/26 16:26]  Shay Ellison: I’ve yet to meet Gaia 😉
[2013/02/26 16:26]  Extropia DaSilva: Yes, thank you.
[2013/02/26 16:26]  Nepherses Amat: we are here
[2013/02/26 16:26]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Oh, only in that sense
[2013/02/26 16:26]  Extropia DaSilva: Gaia exists.
[2013/02/26 16:26]  Nepherses Amat: behind the computers
[2013/02/26 16:26]  Nepherses Amat: Gaia, WE are Gaia
[2013/02/26 16:26]  Extropia DaSilva: Right.
[2013/02/26 16:26]  Shay Ellison: and at what point is evolution destructive to other species?
[2013/02/26 16:26]  Extropia DaSilva: Always.
[2013/02/26 16:26]  Shay Ellison: if we can literally drill to the center of the world
[2013/02/26 16:26]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: I’d say always, yes
[2013/02/26 16:26]  Shay Ellison: well, no world means no everything that matters here
[2013/02/26 16:27]  Nepherses Amat: ?
[2013/02/26 16:27]  Nepherses Amat: this is so fast!
[2013/02/26 16:27]  ArtCrash Exonar: Gaia exists in the form of all of the biosphere is interrelated and affected by the whole.
[2013/02/26 16:27]  Shay Ellison: if tech allows us to drill to the center of a rocky planet, is it worth using?
[2013/02/26 16:27]  Zobeid Zuma: Gaia is merely a strange attractor in a semi-stable, mathematically chaotic system.
[2013/02/26 16:27]  Shay Ellison: evolution of the tech, or evolution of our motives? our reasoning?
[2013/02/26 16:27]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Most species evolve towards destroying every other species competing for the same habitat.
[2013/02/26 16:27]  Shay Ellison: advanced tech in a primitive mind can be dangerous
[2013/02/26 16:27]  Zobeid Zuma: Which we have ludicrously anthropomorphized, I might add.
[2013/02/26 16:27]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: I said “most” because obviously we also have good examples of symbionts, but they are exceptional.
[2013/02/26 16:27]  Shay Ellison: advanced tech in an intelligent and sadistic mind, even more dangerous.
[2013/02/26 16:28]  Extropia DaSilva: Gaia is various thermostatic systems, for instance keeping oxygen from becoming too high or too low, or the seas from becoming too salty or not salty enough.
[2013/02/26 16:28]  ArtCrash Exonar: Gwyn, our problem is that we occupy so many niches, so we are destroying everything! heh
[2013/02/26 16:28]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Art: yes!
[2013/02/26 16:28]  Nepherses Amat: ok, you need copper for wires, that means mines, that means transportation
[2013/02/26 16:28]  Extropia DaSilva: No we are not!
[2013/02/26 16:28]  Nepherses Amat: to get the raw materials for tech, we must consume nature
[2013/02/26 16:28]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Well, we are behaving slightly better these days 😉
[2013/02/26 16:28]  Nepherses Amat: not really
[2013/02/26 16:28]  Nepherses Amat: people donot know the facts
[2013/02/26 16:28]  Shay Ellison: depends. societal evolution still has a ways to go
[2013/02/26 16:29]  Shay Ellison: and we have the ability to ignore facts
[2013/02/26 16:29]  Extropia DaSilva: what facts are they?
[2013/02/26 16:29]  Shay Ellison: be scared by facts
[2013/02/26 16:29]  Nepherses Amat: that was my point
[2013/02/26 16:29]  Zobeid Zuma: Or recycle the material from past refuse. After all, the atoms are still around. It just takes energy and sophisticated processing.]
[2013/02/26 16:29]  Shay Ellison: lash out cause of facts taht contradict what we believe.
[2013/02/26 16:29]  Extropia DaSilva: I will only be scared by facts when I know, beyond any doubt, that there is no solution.
[2013/02/26 16:29]  Nepherses Amat: we ignore the facts, the docu I was talking about says we are hardwired to be unable to accept them
[2013/02/26 16:29]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: Depends on the viewpoint, Neph. A typical example: a fridge would consume 10x the power in the 1950s to do pretty much the same. Of course, what it means today is that we have 20x more fridges than in 1950, but… the point is that we’re better at taking advantage of natural resources.
[2013/02/26 16:29]  Nepherses Amat: well buy the movie
[2013/02/26 16:29]  Shay Ellison: would it be a stretch for some Camping follower who wants to bring about the rapture, to use advanced tech to exterminate man with the push of a button
[2013/02/26 16:29]  Shay Ellison: to actually do it?
[2013/02/26 16:30]  Extropia DaSilva: what movie?
[2013/02/26 16:30]  Zobeid Zuma: /me has two fridges.
[2013/02/26 16:30]  Nepherses Amat: plastic is the first thing ever created that something doesnot eat
[2013/02/26 16:30]  Shay Ellison: the progress of tech doesn’t match with the ethical progress we as a species have endured
[2013/02/26 16:30]  Nepherses Amat: Call of Life: Facing the Mass Extinction, that movie
[2013/02/26 16:30]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: You’re allowed to buy 8 more, Zo 🙂
[2013/02/26 16:30]  Extropia DaSilva: Yes it would be a stretch, since the tech would have so many failsafes the chances of success would be minimal.
[2013/02/26 16:30]  Shay Ellison: progress applied to a concept is even more difficult to agree on.
[2013/02/26 16:30]  Zobeid Zuma: But one of mine might date from the 1950s…
[2013/02/26 16:31]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: uh-oh!
[2013/02/26 16:31]  Extropia DaSilva: I will have to watch it. Or read the book if there is one.
[2013/02/26 16:31]  Shay Ellison: we can measure progress on concrete things. talking about the genome and the limits of our DNA understanding
[2013/02/26 16:31]  Shay Ellison: but if we can’t live together as a species, if we are at war with each other
[2013/02/26 16:31]  Nepherses Amat: you have to buy it or go to a screening, I am giving a screening
[2013/02/26 16:31]  Nepherses Amat: I bought a copy to do small screenings
[2013/02/26 16:31]  Extropia DaSilva: But war has been in decline throughout history.
[2013/02/26 16:31]  Nepherses Amat: how can you say that?
[2013/02/26 16:31]  Extropia DaSilva: Because it has.
[2013/02/26 16:32]  Nepherses Amat: wow
[2013/02/26 16:32]  ArtCrash Exonar: Only in that 100 percent of people were at war and now it is less…. heh
[2013/02/26 16:32]  Shay Ellison: technology increases as the deaths by instruments of war decrease, you know why? you really know why?
[2013/02/26 16:32]  Zobeid Zuma: I’m not sure about “decline throughout history”. It certainly has been in decline since WW2 though. I think it’s gotten too expensive.
[2013/02/26 16:32]  Extropia DaSilva: We are now in the most peaceful era in all of humanity.
[2013/02/26 16:32]  Shay Ellison: you know what the “Cold War” was about, right?
[2013/02/26 16:32]  Extropia DaSilva: Yes.
[2013/02/26 16:32]  Shay Ellison: the type of weaponry involved, ande why we didn’t bother to use them?
[2013/02/26 16:32]  luisa (luisa.bourgoin): one day could place on toppic how “war” has changed recently
[2013/02/26 16:32]  Extropia DaSilva: Yes.
[2013/02/26 16:33]  Shay Ellison: but our evolution as a species, doesn’t scale with our tech
[2013/02/26 16:33]  luisa (luisa.bourgoin): “Cool war” was the next big thing
[2013/02/26 16:33]  Extropia DaSilva: Not yet.
[2013/02/26 16:33]  Shay Ellison: and when we measure progress in nature, it’s because of our interaction with it.
[2013/02/26 16:33]  Nepherses Amat: more ppl di in wars
[2013/02/26 16:33]  Zobeid Zuma: Used to be, your army only needed some food and some spears, and they could go and pillage. It was profitable. It’s not so profitable when each cruise missile costs X million dollars.
[2013/02/26 16:33]  Shay Ellison: nature that we leave alone, that we don’t live with, doesn’t matter to us.
[2013/02/26 16:33]  Nepherses Amat: oops gotta go!
[2013/02/26 16:33]  Extropia DaSilva: Yes but there are also more people alive today..
[2013/02/26 16:33]  Nepherses Amat: sorry nice to meet you
[2013/02/26 16:33]  Shay Ellison: there’s no progress for us cause we aren’t inhabiting every mountaintop in the world
[2013/02/26 16:33]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: That was quick,Neph!
[2013/02/26 16:33]  ArtCrash Exonar: fast poofer
[2013/02/26 16:33]  ArtCrash Exonar: haha
[2013/02/26 16:33]  Shay Ellison: now THAT might be a measure of progress, whether we can build on mountains
[2013/02/26 16:33]  Shay Ellison: turn them into cities
[2013/02/26 16:34]  ArtCrash Exonar: Like she got caught being in sl by someone!
[2013/02/26 16:34]  Shay Ellison: but only if we’re there to care.
[2013/02/26 16:34]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: You conspiracy theorist, you!
[2013/02/26 16:34]  Shay Ellison: otherwise what a lemur does in an uninhabited part of the world doesn’t really matter to us.
[2013/02/26 16:34]  Shay Ellison: progress is a human concept.
[2013/02/26 16:34]  Shay Ellison: lions and bears and tigers, don’t care! lol
[2013/02/26 16:34]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: I think I said that before, Shay… hehe
[2013/02/26 16:34]  Extropia DaSilva: so it is not fair to say war is worse now because more people die. 1% killed among 9 billion would make more dead than 99% killed out of a world population of 100,000 but I would argue the latter would be worse.
[2013/02/26 16:34]  luisa (luisa.bourgoin): a highly political concept
[2013/02/26 16:34]  Gwyneth Llewelyn: “progress is a human concept”
[2013/02/26 16:34]  Shay Ellison: lol, then we’ve gone full circle.
[2013/02/26 16:35]  Shay Ellison: but hey, I agree with you on it too
[2013/02/26 16:35]  Extropia DaSilva: OK my time is up!
Advertisements
This entry was posted in after thinkers. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s