The Probability of Intelligence

[Sisyphus]

One of the main reasons I don't expect that we'll ever have meaningful communication with an extraterrestrial lifeform is that even on our own planet, where all life probably has common ancestry, the kind of intelligence needed for that sort of communication is basically limited to only one species (us), and even that arising out of some pretty big coincidences.

 

However, many species seem to be on the verge of such capability. As one would expect, several of these are our closest relatives: apes. Our chances of encountering intelligent life would seem more promising if we saw such intelligence arising more independently here on Earth, i.e. in species for which our most recent common ancestor was as unsophisticated as possible. For example, dolphins are more encouraging than chimps, ravens more than dolphins, and octopi more than ravens. Of course, none of those species appear to have their own radio telescopes...

 

I don't really expect a definitive answer, as we essentially have a statistical model of 1 (our own planet), but what are your thoughts on the chances of the kind of intelligence we could have any communication with arising independently, either here on Earth or otherwise?

[starbug1]

I think I have an answer. If we were to contact any extraterrestrial life, or they us, the life would be more intelligent than the octopus and the ape and the dolphin, strictly speaking, as something able to use communication devices and travel is a little out of the ability of an octopus. Communication with extraterrestrial life can be assumed to be more intelligent and therefore on some possible pattern or benchmark for reference, and not just noises made from the vocal chords, but even putting thoughts in our head, or using something like morse code, like was shown in the movie Contact, that is, using maths. Sending television signals back is the best proposition I have seen to the problem of extra. communication. Research Carl Sagan's ideas if you would like to know about this. He was one of the biggest proponents for SETI.

 

I really think that the more primitive an animal, the more complex the communication system. For some crazy reason, I believe extraterrestrial life forms would be much simpler to decipher, much easier than our own cousins, the animals. My reasoning is surrounding evolution. We can always go forward, but never backward. Understanding something with more intellect, insight, or mental capacity may be more within our reach; that is, assuming extraterrestrial life is on a similar evolutionary path as humans, not necessarily human-like, as those aliens depicted in Hollywood films, but not animal-like. Because then we'd be back to square one. Or maybe I'm crazy.

 

Our chances of encountering intelligent life would seem more promising if we saw such intelligence arising more independently here on Earth, i.e. in species for which our most recent common ancestor was as unsophisticated as possible.

 

This kind of evolution is still possible, if humans don't destroy themselves or the earth in the process. It's even possible that such intelligence could arise from something unexpected like the octopus or dolphin before we do, but I think it is unlikely.

[Mart]

originally posted by Sisyphus

I don't expect that we'll ever have meaningful communication

If the minimal level of meaningful communication is via such tools as radio telescopes then we could be in for a longish wait. OTOH if we lower our standards somewhat then we already have meaningful communication with some other species. Naturally, the other species aren't too interested in communicating their thoughts (if they have any) about what they would label (if they could) arcane issues (which, incidently, most humans don't give a FF for).

The question of whether there are extraterrestrial intelligences like ours (ie using sophisticated tools) might depend on how evolution as a process works. We can argue that since humans exist there has to be an unbroken line of ancestors to at least the first living forms. Looking forward from the POV of the first of these forms we could ask whether the possibility of human-type intelligence already existed or whether this possibility itself changes according to circumstances.

[Xyph]

I agree that sapience is probably a very rare phenomenon. Multicellular life is probably quite rare, but likely far more common than the level of sapience that humans have evolved. I'm not sure exactly how rare, but likely rare enough for any civilizations at a similar level of development to our own to be significantly outside the range of current SETI searches.

 

That said, although I expect we'll find (possible quite a few) other complex planetary ecospheres before we find any hint of other intelligent life, its probably still only a matter of time (even if more time than commonly supposed) before we do run into creatures that are obviously sapient.

 

Even if sapience is a very rare evolutionary result, the rarity is probably balanced somewhat by the fact that it only really needs to evolve once on any single world - once it has evolved, it almost guarantees it's own survival, far more than any other evolutionarily aquired traits.

 

While wings, eyes, and pretty much all other limbs and organs (which, at least as far as we can tell from our own world, often evolve multiple times) can wither and become vestigial as organisms use them less, I think it's fairly apparent that it would be very, very difficult, barring some sort of planetary catastrophe, for a sapient species to evolutionarily lose their sapience.

[bombus]

You may be right, but as intelligence is so useful it may be inevitable eventually wherever life exists. However, intelligence (sentience/sapience) may actually be a really bad idea as perhaps intelligent creatures always destroy themselves one way or another. We are destroying our environment and although we know it ('cos we are so intelligent!) we seem unable to stop ourselves due to basic human nature.

 

Life may carry on but we (Homo sapiens sapiens) may be gone in 500 years, and so would have existed for less than 50,000 years! Would we even show up in the fossil record when intelligent land dwelling octopi start developing their own theories of the 6th great extinction!?

[Skylark]

How does the presence of one intelligent species affect the evolution of a second species towards intelligence? I think that man's intellectual development alters the selective pressures for intelligence in other species. I don't see another species gaining our level of intelligence on Earth mainly because we'll drive those candidate species to extinction or relegate them to small zoo populations.

[bascule]

How does the presence of one intelligent species affect the evolution of a second species towards intelligence? I think that man's intellectual development alters the selective pressures for intelligence in other species. I don't see another species gaining our level of intelligence on Earth mainly because we'll drive those candidate species to extinction or relegate them to small zoo populations.

 

Bingo... not to mention we've gone through so many evolutionary watershed events that we're evolving orders of magnitude faster than any other species... aah, the evolution of evolvability is insane

[bombus]

How does the presence of one intelligent species affect the evolution of a second species towards intelligence? I think that man's intellectual development alters the selective pressures for intelligence in other species. I don't see another species gaining our level of intelligence on Earth mainly because we'll drive those candidate species to extinction or relegate them to small zoo populations.

 

We already have killed off other intelligent life forms, the last being Neanderthal man! Ok, technically the same as us, but it signifies how ruthless we'd be with any other intelligent rivals.