Let's assume that there is a Galactic Civilization, but not necessarily one that is "organized into packs".
One universal question that has always interested me is "The rights of the individual vs. the needs and rights of the many."
Or in other words, Government vs. The Solo Being.
When (and if) we were to make first contact with said civilization... which is more likely?
1 - Galactic civilization has banned all "gangsterism", ie, "governments" and insists on the rights of individual "beings".
2 - Only the rights of "gangs", ie, "nations" or "planets" or "systems" matter. Individuals rights are only supported as far as their representative gang affiliations allow.
3 - Some combination of both.
4 - Neither... If so, state your thinking on this alternative.
I think that we as "social monkeys" have evolved to gangsterism to the point of silliness and that in the large universe, the "Being" is the thing. I would bet that before we are "un-quarantined" we will have to lose our penchant for gang violence and coercion which we so blithely call "governmment"
What mechanism would allow the individual to stick up to gangsterism? Technology to defend oneself. Maybe to the point where any individual can implode a star if it's being is threatened. If in the act of killing a stranger, an entire village KNOWS it will cease to exist, soon there is nothing but "welcome stranger" on the village door mats.
What do you think?
Mike
The post that was quoted here has been removedlol
It is rather startling when one first recognizes that our "assumptions" are just evolutionary weirdnesses.
You really don't see "government" as gangsterism?
You and six billion other "partially evolved monkeys". lol (edit) this is a "sasquatch" joke/pun you see. No offence. Just like the phillies.
"The most difficult tree to see is the one we climb to see the horizon."
--another famous old saying I just made up. grin.
you copied it from "cannot see the forest for the trees" 🙂
and government is not gangsterism at its core. its function is to make sure anarchy doesn't take place. of course, thanks to human nature governments perform oppressive actions as well, some necessary for the people, some necessary for the government to feel important and almighty
i say that unless the alien civilization has a hive consciousness(drones and one central intelligence governing all) it will need a form of government just like us. with more or less gangster features as you put it.
Originally posted by ZahlanziBut you are assuming that all evolutionary tracks are "group like" in nature. What if the Tiger evolved to sentience? Can you say, with a straight face... that they would be as concerned with "concensus" as our own communal tribe of apes demands? And more to the point... how would they ever learn to grovel like we have learned through our evolutionary track?
you copied it from "cannot see the forest for the trees" 🙂
and government is not gangsterism at its core. its function is to make sure anarchy doesn't take place. of course, thanks to human nature governments perform oppressive actions as well, some necessary for the people, some necessary for the government to feel important and almighty
i say that ...[text shortened]... ll need a form of government just like us. with more or less gangster features as you put it.
I think you are suffering a lack of imagination, based on a very limited view (earth) as being "universal". Maybe. But more likely... not.
Also, I can live perfectly well without government. I have never used it, nor called upon it for anything. And that includes my own protection and that of my family. But we are all different. That's for sure.
Originally posted by StarValleyWycivilisation is based on cooperation and society. perhaps the tiger would have a more feudal(brutal) society but they would need a government even more than us. again i am sure that civilisation cannot be attained by individuals. of course, once civilisation is attained, some species may evolve as to no longer need company and thus the individuals would isolate themselves. but the easy way is to live in a community. and a community needs a leader.
But you are assuming that all evolutionary tracks are "group like" in nature. What if the Tiger evolved to sentience? Can you say, with a straight face... that they would be as concerned with "concensus" as our own communal tribe of apes demands? And more to the point... how would they ever learn to grovel like we have learned through our evolutionary t ...[text shortened]... based on a very limited view (earth) as being "universal". Maybe. But more likely... not.
Originally posted by ZahlanziOUR civilization is exactly as you describe.
civilisation is based on cooperation and society. perhaps the tiger would have a more feudal(brutal) society but they would need a government even more than us. again i am sure that civilisation cannot be attained by individuals. of course, once civilisation is attained, some species may evolve as to no longer need company and thus the individuals would isolate themselves. but the easy way is to live in a community. and a community needs a leader.
But is it universal?
For example, even in our "civilization" it all starts with the "individual". Without the vast majority being willing to abide by "rules" and "law", there is only anarchy.
But we are only "infants" here. What will we be like when we have technology that guarantees personal safety? And that is just a matter of time, I think. Isn't "fear" the reason we huddle together in the dark against the menace "out there"? Without fear, then why would we cling to each others fur in the dark... as it were?
lol... and don't take this wrong, but what kind of "sentient being" needs to be "led"? A child? Certainly not an adult.
Originally posted by StarValleyWyI don't think so. The advances we make technologically do not ensure the safety of societies. Quite the opposite, they increase the harm that can be done against societies.
[b]OUR civilization is exactly as you describe.
What will we be like when we have technology that guarantees personal safety? And that is just a matter of time, I think.
How long will it be before terrorists get their hands on satellite navigational underwater nukes to create tidal waves on their enemies!? 2 years before the spy-machines fall down from the skies.
A bit of acid never hurt anyone, but I'm sure you get my point.
I have a link you may find interesting..
Originally posted by GascraftA matter of personal confidence and the way we view "others". You obviously fear them. I don't. That's the basic reason for being for "gun control" or against it. I realize that only the person does harm. You subconsciously think it is the "gun". Or in the case of this discussion, I trust the technologies, and you don't.
I don't think so. The advances we make technologically do not ensure the safety of societies. Quite the opposite, they increase the harm that can be done against societies.
How long will it be before terrorists get their hands on satellite navigational underwater nukes to create tidal waves on their enemies!? 2 years before the spy-machines fall down fro nt.
I have a link you may find interesting..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3f1YacuSLc
Ummm... the old beatles song with writhing children has a secret meaning or what? That was a waste of time. But then I'm just a grumpy old man who thought the bugs were pretty stupid in 1964 and have a lower and lower level of "esteem" for them every day since.
That is a quaint notion... that the terrorists would choose to cause waves. Seems a perfectly good waste of heat and radiation. But maybe they are of your generation, not mine. lol
Brings a whole new meaning to the words suicide bombers. lol.
American societies have a view of terrorists such as Al Qaeda, built up through those who plant their brains. This system controlling attitude is largely based on paranoia like the general American populations. I very much doubt the majority of Americans understand the thoughts, actions and intended motives of Al Qaeda etc.
Wouldnt it be ironic if they were using their weapons of mass destruction while Americans were trying to find them, but failed to understand it wasnt actually God encouraging them.
That's me.. I'm done. Have a good day. 🙂.
Originally posted by GascraftNot very coherent and not very cogent there Gas. But what the hey. It is usually the drug addled ones who are "expert" on lumping millions of souls into neat categories.
Brings a whole new meaning to the words suicide bombers. lol.
American societies have a view of terrorists such as Al Qaeda, built up through those who plant their brains. This system controlling attitude is largely based on paranoia like the general American populations. I very much doubt the majority of Americans understand the thoughts, actions and in ...[text shortened]... derstand it wasnt actually God encouraging them.
That's me.. I'm done. Have a good day. 🙂.
Have a good one.
Americans have allowed the wrong invasion of Iraq to exist for so long, so what the hey. They should be pooled together to ensure that the atrocities it committed doesnt happen again.
You can create your own perfect world in America, but at what cost to other nations and societies. Surely America creates terrorism.
See ya.
Originally posted by GascraftIn your opinion. But having a drug addled opinion does not represent a universal truth. I say that you are wrong.
Americans have allowed the wrong invasion of Iraq to exist for so long, so what the hey. They should be pooled together to ensure that the atrocities it committed doesnt happen again.
You can create your own perfect world in America, but at what cost to other nations and societies. Surely America creates terrorism.
See ya.
So? It is just my opinion against yours. Which is no big deal.
More to the point, which of the four options then do you think would accompany the "first contact" situation that is the subject of this thread? You never quite managed to choose one. Which I guess is normal for one not capable of completing a thought.
Originally posted by StarValleyWynow think of the prehistorical ape. they gathered n groups because they could better defend themselves against predators. and in a group you always have someone who is smarter or stronger than the rest and imposes his will. as the apes evolve, the groups get larger and the need for a supreme will is even more obvious.
In your opinion. But having a drug addled opinion does not represent a universal truth. I say that you are wrong.
So? It is just my opinion against yours. Which is no big deal.
More to the point, which of the four options then do you think would accompany the "first contact" situation that is the subject of this thread? You never quite managed to choose one. Which I guess is normal for one not capable of completing a thought.
and i submit that in order for a civilisation to appear, individuals need to meet and exchange ideas on a regular basis. one cannot form an one individual civilisation.
the need for a government is small in let's say a hive-like society. or if the individuals all have the same brain power and will eventually lead to the same conclusion given the same informations(like AI). but even in a hive society, the drones are mindless and the queen is, you guessed it, the queen the monarch, the government. and in the case of AI's, if all make the same conclusion then we could submit that the whole society is a government, the institution that makes decision for a group of people. and the AI's also need company. like distributed computation, a problem may be solved quicker if it is computed by two or more computers,
Originally posted by StarValleyWyAs long as Darwinism exists, it exists for all life. I can't see another way intelligent life could evolve. Which means, gangsterism. It will always be majority rules, it always has. Mainly, this is because there are always a few loonies (not looking at anyone in particular) who try to change facts....
Let's assume that there is a Galactic Civilization, but not necessarily one that is "organized into packs".
One universal question that has always interested me is "The rights of the individual vs. the needs and rights of the many."
Or in other words, Government vs. The Solo Being.
When (and if) we were to make first contact with said civiliza ...[text shortened]... stranger" on the village door mats.
What do you think?
Mike