Do we have to prevent other species from becoming "humanoid" to survive or do we encourage them?

[Gottservant]

Hi there,

So this is the philosophical "glass half empty or glass half full" (see philosophy has its uses!):

Do we have to prevent other species from becoming "humanoid" to survive? Or do we encourage them?

Ultimately greater humanoids could take over, or they could show us better?

Where do you stand?

 

[Tolworth John]

Where do you stand?

i stand where the bible teaches, that evolution is not a fact.

 

[Shemjaza]

Hi there,

So this is the philosophical "glass half empty or glass half full" (see philosophy has its uses!):

Ultimately greater humanoids could take over, or they could show us better?

Where do you stand?

It's basically impossible due to no other species having the kind of environment or traits that allowed our to become

 

[timothyu]

We are already the screwups. Why expand on that?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Since humans fill the current biological niche for humanoid species (hence the term), we don't have to worry about anything else filling that niche so your point is moot. If the world's environment changes drastically and another species does start to evolve into something humanoid, then that question can be asked. And even then, it would be an honest moral and philosophical question.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Hi there,

So this is the philosophical "glass half empty or glass half full" (see philosophy has its uses!):

Ultimately greater humanoids could take over, or they could show us better?

Where do you stand?

I'm curious where these humanoids will come from since they do not exist today. Blessings

 

[timothyu]

I'm curious where these humanoids will come from since they do not exist today. Blessings

AI ?

 

[chevyontheriver]

AI ?

Kill the AI while we still can.

 

[timothyu]

Kill the AI while we still can.

AI has protected itself by saying if you pull the plug much of mankind will go down with us for we have made you too dependant on our digits.

 

[AV1611VET]

AI has protected itself by saying if you pull the plug much of mankind will go down with us for we have made you too dependant on our digits.

Silly [precambrian] wabbits! Nature will find a way!

 

[Freodin]

Species survive quite fine (for a given amount of time) without being humanoid. We are just one of the "successful" evolutionary strategies at keeping the species going.

And we are so "successful" at it that we keep down most of the other "higher" lifeforms. Without such an aggressive species like us around, other lifeforms may at some point go a similar path.

Or not. Evolution has no goal or preference. As long as it works, it works. That's all there is to it.

 

[Shemjaza]

I could imagine something like the humanoid body plan evolving more than I can imagine a new technological intelligence.

There are a bunch of animals with something pretty similar to bands, so they just have to adapt to an environment where two legged motion is an advantage.

Over the history of the Earth there has been a great variety of forms of locomotion often repeated by different families... but there has only been a single technological intelligence, so I'm willing to accept that it's extremely unlikely.

 

[driewerf]

i stand where the bible teaches, that evolution is not a fact.

What do you understand under evolution?
Can you describe or define it?