Good aliens are bad?

[Vultur]

I don't think aliens would necessarily be unbeatable (I doubt technology keeps on going exponentially for that long). If they land on Earth -- any carbon-based organism can be blown to bits. And barring deflector shields (which I doubt are really practical for ANYBODY) a nuke will still take out a spaceship.

It's all guessing till we actually meet aliens, though.

I wouldn't want benevolent dictatorship of aliens. For one, we'd lose our edge honed by troubles. Secondly, I wouldn't trust them to be really good.

[eburacum45]

In some ways not allowing the benevolent alien dictators to take over is condemning a lot of people to a lot of needless suffering, because we will take a long time to get to the level of wellbeing that a benevolent alien dictatorship might offer. We might not ever reach that level at all- if our civilisation collapses, it would be difficult to build it back up with most of the fossil fuels gone.

So by rejecting the benevolent alien dictator's offer, we might increase suffering on our planet immeasurably- all because a few troublesome individuals want to be independent. Do we have that right?

(answers on a postcard, please)

[Neverfly]

In some ways not allowing the benevolent alien dictators to take over is condemning a lot of people to a lot of needless suffering, because we will take a long time to get to the level of wellbeing that a benevolent alien dictatorship might offer. We might not ever reach that level at all- if our civilisation collapses, it would be difficult to build it back up with most of the fossil fuels gone.

So by rejecting the benevolent alien dictator's offer, we might increase suffering on our planet immeasurably- all because a few troublesome individuals want to be independent. Do we have that right?

(answers on a postcard, please)

A dictators "offer"!?!

Offer...


Hmmm...


When did all this stop making any sense?

[geonuc]

When did all this stop making any sense?

Right after the aliens landed.

[Neverfly]

Right after the aliens landed.

They came to enlighten us in the CT forum?

[toothdust]

They came to enlighten us in the CT forum?

Apparently "chosen ones" have nothing better to do than peruse astronomy forums.

[eburacum45]

A dictators "offer"!?!
Offer...
Hmmm...
When did all this stop making any sense?

Yes; they can offer us a much greater standard of living; we can accept, but still be prevented from ever reaching their much greater degree of freedom and wellbeing.

Why do you expect benevolent dictators to only offer bad things? A dictator who offers only good things would have much more support.

Of course, as I pointed out, the true oppression lies in the denial of the potential of the human race- they could fear what we might become and attempt to trap us in a hedonistic false paradise. We would become a race of docile lotus eaters. That would be the sensible thing for them to do, given the vast resources that an advanced and alien civilisation could have available.

Benevolent dictators are benevolent - that is what they do. We would become a docile, happy race, and they might skim off the few individualists for their own purposes. A stable benevolent dictatorship like that could last for millions of years- and the human race would advance just so far, and no further. We would never progress far enough to become credible rivals for them- so they win, all round.

[eburacum45]

Here's a Bob The Angry Flower cartoon which says it very well.
http://www.angryflower.com/borg27.gif
If the aliens are selling something really addictive, we are sunk .

[toothdust]

Yes; they can offer us a much greater standard of living; we can accept, but still be prevented from ever reaching their much greater degree of freedom and wellbeing.

Why do you expect benevolent dictators to only offer bad things? A dictator who offers only good things would have much more support.

Of course, as I pointed out, the true oppression lies in the denial of the potential of the human race- they could fear what we might become and attempt to trap us in a hedonistic false paradise. We would become a race of docile lotus eaters. That would be the sensible thing for them to do, given the vast resources that an advanced and alien civilisation could have available.

Benevolent dictators are benevolent - that is what they do. We would become a docile, happy race, and they might skim off the few individualists for their own purposes. A stable benevolent dictatorship like that could last for millions of years- and the human race would advance just so far, and no further. We would never progress far enough to become credible rivals for them- so they win, all round.

But if their motive is to stifle our evolution; culturally, biologically, and technologically for their own motives/security, then they are most certainly not doing it for benevolent reasons. I would call that kind of stifling of a society malicious.

[John Jaksich]

One of the things I noticed when reading the posts is: if they are well-meaning aliens...this would imply that they ( or are familiar with our form of ethics ) are ethical...they thus would want to help us evolve to the next level...our misfortune lies in the assumption that we do not deserve to be treated better. Humanity is not perfect--but in IMO we could use some boost in our evolutionary path...hopefully to a more enlightened state (and aid us in the elimination of our man-made problems).

...even if it is a second coming of Christ...does anyone really know for sure what will transpire (the Christian bible is and has been subject to different interpretations from generation to generation--dogma excluded)?

Get me off the soapbox...

[toothdust]

One of the things I noticed when reading the posts is: if they are well-meaning aliens...this would imply that they ( or are familiar with our form of ethics ) are ethical...they thus would want to help us evolve to the next level...our misfortune lies in the assumption that we do not deserve to be treated better. Humanity is not perfect--but in IMO we could use some boost in our evolutionary path...hopefully to a more enlightened state (and aid us in the elimination of our man-made problems).

...even if it is a second coming of Christ...does anyone really know for sure what will transpire (the Christian bible is and has been subject to different interpretations from generation to generation--dogma excluded)?

Get me off the soapbox...

Edit: And maybe the way to help us to that enlightened state is...to do nothing. To see if we can figure it out ourselves. I think if they did just outright tell us, it would be similar to ancient teachings we are already familiar with. Maybe we already know the path to higher levels of consciousness, its just that we are not paying attention.

Depends on your definition of the "second coming of Christ". This could mean anything from the literal (a man appears, he is Christ), to a revival in practice of his true teachings: peace, love, tolerance, cooperation.

All this assuming he did even exist (though I think the teachings (for the most part) are right on).

[John Jaksich]

Dear toothdust,

I am not inclined to state my personal beliefs explicitly...but it is my opinion that we might be overdue for an (evolutionary) overhaul of the sort where enlightenment is more than a frame of mind...but a state of being. Too much blood, lives and sanity have been shed... and I am not quite sure what this state of being would be ... The vast majority of humanity knows the difference between right and wrong... but not all have the same opportunity that I or you may presently may possess. That is like night and day...


I never intended to say that "' the enlightened state would lead to nothing...'" or to "'figure things out for our selves'"... that is our current state of affairs for the most part... I am assuming that we (the vast majority of humanity) is working for a better day... and that we may need a hand-up to the next step in the evolutionary ladder...

I have no argument with the Christian teachings but with those who misuse or abuse it for their selfish needs...above the good of the whole. I am also a forgiving person...for the most part...

[Neverfly]

Yes; they can offer us a much greater standard of living; we can accept, but still be prevented from ever reaching their much greater degree of freedom and wellbeing.

Why do you expect benevolent dictators to only offer bad things? A dictator who offers only good things would have much more support.

Of course, as I pointed out, the true oppression lies in the denial of the potential of the human race- they could fear what we might become and attempt to trap us in a hedonistic false paradise. We would become a race of docile lotus eaters. That would be the sensible thing for them to do, given the vast resources that an advanced and alien civilisation could have available.

Benevolent dictators are benevolent - that is what they do. We would become a docile, happy race, and they might skim off the few individualists for their own purposes. A stable benevolent dictatorship like that could last for millions of years- and the human race would advance just so far, and no further. We would never progress far enough to become credible rivals for them- so they win, all round.

Dictators do not "offer" anything.

What you just described is truly horrifying.

[eburacum45]

Dictators do not "offer" anything.

Only the unsuccessful ones offer nothing, or only offer bad things. The Romans knew that, as a dictator, to keep people happy you had to offer Panem et circenses, bread and circuses; the necessities of living plus a little bit of luxury. Otherwise you wouldn't last long, and neither would your state.

An advanced civilisation could offer us bread and circuses beyond our wildest dreams, while still suppressing our true development.

What you just described is truly horrifying.

Absolutely.
But imagine the boot on the other foot. What if, during the process of exploring the galaxy, we found a race of relatively low tech but highly intelligent and warlike aliens? Would we step in and give them all the benefits of our civilisation, only to see them overwhelm us a few millenia later with our own technology? It is an ethical dilemma, and perhaps a benevolent form of oppression is a good policy choice.

[toothdust]

Dear toothdust,

I am not inclined to state my personal beliefs explicitly...but it is my opinion that we might be overdue for an (evolutionary) overhaul of the sort where enlightenment is more than a frame of mind...but a state of being. Too much blood, lives and sanity have been shed... and I am not quite sure what this state of being would be ... The vast majority of humanity knows the difference between right and wrong... but not all have the same opportunity that I or you may presently may possess. That is like night and day...

Oh I totally agree that humanity is evolving towards a profound state of enlightenment. And yes, not just being really smart, but perceiving the whole universe in a frame of mind we can only begin to imagine. Personally, I think the future state of mind of humanity is bound to be psychedelic in nature.

I never intended to say that "' the enlightened state would lead to nothing...'" or to "'figure things out for our selves'"... that is our current state of affairs for the most part... I am assuming that we (the vast majority of humanity) is working for a better day... and that we may need a hand-up to the next step in the evolutionary ladder...

No no. You read it wrong. I was saying the best thing enlightened ET's could do is nothing, as in do not intervene, to let us find out own path to enlightenment and higher states of consciousness.

I have no argument with the Christian teachings but with those who misuse or abuse it for their selfish needs...above the good of the whole. I am also a forgiving person...for the most part...

Agreed. All ancient religious teachings have been used to commit atrocities throughout history. Sad.

[Neverfly]

Evolution does not have a goal or a path.
Evolution is not designed nor defined.

Evolution is just the survival of what works.
There is no such thing as interference in "Natural Evolution." That is purely a human whim and not a reality.
If an alien comes along and devours us- That IS natural evolution.

If we encounter a less technological race than ours in the future and we interact with them, we are not interferring in their natural evolution anymore than a predator of their world would be by eating them.

Have we evolved into special better beings? Not really.

For as much as we would like to believe that we have, we remain animals, acting like animals, killing and exploiting.
Awareness of it does not necessarily lead to pacifism.

Nor, does evolution demand that it does.
Perhaps it MIGHT lead that way with humans... But even then, I would strongly disagree. We seem delusional- ignoring our faults and thumping our chests with pride about the few things that are good about us.

[Vultur]

I would be deeply suspicious of any alien that seemed to be being altruistic.

If we met a low-tech aggressive species? I'd say don't share technology (at least the useful-for-war kinds) and let them develop - to a point. But leave a heavily armed ship in-system just in case they ever move against us.

[agingjb]

I suppose Iain M Banks' Culture is a reflection on this theme, and I think Jack Williamson "The Humanoids" was as well (although it's a very long time since I read it).

Anyway, I'd be happy to live in a stable part of the Culture (or on a Varley Titan that wasn't disintegrating).

[John Jaksich]

Dear toothdust

I am entitled to my opinion...however as to scientific evidence ... there is most certainly very little if any..."the most fantastic claims definitely need the most rigorous tests..."

[Ilya]

I suppose Iain M Banks' Culture is a reflection on this theme,

Yes. Hence the standard complaint of those who do not like Culture -- "Humans in it are basically pets". But most of them are happy pets, and the unhappy ones have an option of leaving.

and I think Jack Williamson "The Humanoids" was as well (although it's a very long time since I read it).

Huge difference between Culture and "The Humanoids" is that people in the latter are NOT happy -- they are blatantly aware of the options taken away from them, -- and have no way to opt out. Also, my impression is that Williamson's Humanoinds are much more paternalistic than Banks' Minds -- in Culture you can still do foolish things as long as you only endanger yourself. In "The Humanoids" no remotely dangerous activity is allowed.

Anyway, I'd be happy to live in a stable part of the Culture (or on a Varley Titan that wasn't disintegrating).

Do you mean, before Titan/Gaia went senile?

[agingjb]

Yes, Williamson and Banks take or imply opposing views, both dealing with the issue. As I read Varley, for most of their time Titans are arguably benevolent, which may or may not delight their inhabitants (original or acquired).

[eburacum45]

I am rather fond of the fact that the first book in the Culture series was written with a protagonist who hated the Culture . When I first read Consider Phlebas I thought to myself 'what is this bloke Horza wingeing on about? The Culture is perfect!'

Gradually it dawned on me that the Culture was also a perfect tool of oppression, and the people within don't even realise it.

[marsbug]

And interestingly the Culture doesn't advance or change much, isn't it described at one point (not in consider phlebas, I think its excession) as being like an idealistic teenager who refuses to grow up? And many dictators begin as over zealous idealists....

[tnjrp]

I must say you lot have a widely different idea of "oppressive" from that of mine if the Culture counts as oppressive by your standards. But to itch his own, as they say.

Anyhow, can't recall the teenager bit in Excession (doesn't quarantee a lot tho I only just finished it), but it is stated that the Culture is indeed consciously staying Involved instead of moving on to all-out Sublimation. IIRC it's also said that they aren't quite absolutely certain if they are doing the right thing, but they think what they are doing is still better than leaving things be.

I can imagine an advanced and essentially benevolent alien civilization might very take take that same stance with us, at that.

[toothdust]

Dear toothdust

I am entitled to my opinion...however as to scientific evidence ... there is most certainly very little if any..."the most fantastic claims definitely need the most rigorous tests..."

Uhhh...I was agreeing with you. Of course you are entitled to your opinion! And most certainly wild claims require wild evidence.

Edit: now that I re-read my response to yours, I guess I wasn't totally agreeing with everything you said. What do you mean by a "hand up to the next step evolutionary ladder"? I could give you some wild ideas of mine of certain little somethings here on Earth that could propel our consciousness far beyond what we dream is possible.

[Neverfly]

One of the things I noticed when reading the posts is: if they are well-meaning aliens...this would imply that they ( or are familiar with our form of ethics ) are ethical...they thus would want to help us evolve to the next level...our misfortune lies in the assumption that we do not deserve to be treated better.

No.
It is that we do not want to be helped.
What we feel we deserve has much to do with it. But not because our esteem is low- but because it is high.

The next evolutionary level- Can you define it?
Is it automatically something "good"?

Do you understand Evolution?

We can evolve- but we cannot unevolve.
We are what our current state in evolution has defined us to be.

We do not want justice. We want vengeance.
We are driven by selfishness and self interest.
We do not choose our leaders based upon merit of leadership. We choose them based on whether they will pander to our self interests.
We choose our laws to allow us revenge. To enable us to find scapegoats- someone to blame.
We do not run our society based upon perfection- Because it is simply Not Our Nature. It becomes destructive.
Look at the civilization around you. Look at the foundations upon which it is built.
An alien coming along is not going to change that. We are what we are. We are not designed for perfect society.
We will revolt.
It is what we are. Any Technologically advanced alien, by the definitions given in this thread is going to know that. They are going to know that any attempt to contain or control us will lead either to revolution or our destruction. If they were to make the attempt anyway, they would not be benign after-all and their motives questionable.
The only way an alien race could change us is to re-engineer us at the genetic level. To completely change us into something else. We would no longer be human.
And our "next Evolutionary Level"...
Our evolution will not be determined by quality of genes, but by who breeds the most.
You cannot say with certainty whether not in a few millenia the human race will not consist of trailer trash.

[agingjb]

I suppose the Culture could turn up and give each of us, individually, a choice: stay here and be free, or move to a Culture environment of our choice and be sustained by the Minds and Drones.

[marsbug]

I must say you lot have a widely different idea of "oppressive" from that of mine if the Culture counts as oppressive by your standards. But to itch his own, as they say.

Anyhow, can't recall the teenager bit in Excession (doesn't quarantee a lot tho I only just finished it), but it is stated that the Culture is indeed consciously staying Involved instead of moving on to all-out Sublimation. IIRC it's also said that they aren't quite absolutely certain if they are doing the right thing, but they think what they are doing is still better than leaving things be.

I can imagine an advanced and essentially benevolent alien civilization might very take take that same stance with us, at that.

I don't recall which book it was, but you've put it better anyway. I don't consider the culture oppressive, as everyone has the right to leave, but I would have a hard time trusting something as far beyond me in all ways as a Mind. One of them determined to aqquire power for itself could take the culture and make it into something horrible without anyone even noticing, and at any point in the books that might have happened!

The difference between the culture (or alien ruled earth) as a paradise and as a cage with golden bars seems to me to teeter on a knife edge, and if it fell off then the citizens would be able to do little, even if they could pull themselves out of their blissfull haze for long enough to want to!

[tnjrp]

I would have a hard time trusting something as far beyond me in all ways as a Mind

Certainly, and this would also apply to any interactions we could possibly have with most any kind of alien that would be able to pay us a visit in the first place -- not just to those that might decide to do a bit of "humanitarian" work on the side while they're around. We only could be sure of their beneficence (of whatever form) after the fact. OTOH trusting them would not, I think, be necessary for the net result of their actions to be "good" in the context of greater humanity.

[PraedSt]

I am rather fond of the fact that the first book in the Culture series was written with a protagonist who hated the Culture . When I first read Consider Phlebas I thought to myself 'what is this bloke Horza wingeing on about? The Culture is perfect!'

Gradually it dawned on me that the Culture was also a perfect tool of oppression, and the people within don't even realise it.

Loved that book. And Player of Games.

The Culture is supposed to be a symbiotic society isn't it? Equal status? I get round my instinctive loathing, by assuming that this is the case, and treating Minds as individual people. The cool ships and the Orbitals also help.