File :-(, x, )
"Uplifting" other species Anonymous
What do you think of the idea, /an? If you've read the book, you already know, but to those that don't, "uplifting" is the idea of making other species more intelligent. Do you think it should be done?
>> Anonymous
through genetic modification? sounds like fun!
>> Anonymous
It can't be done so why talk about if it should be done?
>> Anonymous
its probably some new age hippy crap
>> Anonymous
I own the book Startide Rising, but haven't yet gotten past the second chapter. David Brin isn't the most captivating writer...

But I like the idea of uplifting, if only for species that are on the cusp of human-like sentience. Give bottle-nose dolphins another couple of million years and they'll be on our level, since if you look at all the different species of dolphin, then in terms of intelligence they vary in a similar way that apes do.
>> Anonymous
>"uplifting" is the idea of making other species more intelligent.

*cough*humans*cough*
>> Anonymous
>46716 Give bottle-nose dolphins another couple of million years and they'll be on our level,

Of course, in that time, we will be a million years ahead of them. They will be like our retarded, fish eating cousins of the sea. Then we will also do experiments on humans, as they appear to be very, very stupid to us Homo-Superiors.
>> Anonymous
>>46716
>>46745

you seriously think that humans will still be around in a million years? not only will humans be gone by then, we will have destroyed most life on the planet as well. my guess is that in a million years cockroaches and rats will be the most intelligent things on earth.
>> Anonymous
>>46716

let's all repeat it once more, together:

evolution does not make things smarter, or more complex. evolution simply makes things better adapted to their particular environment.
>> Anonymous
HOW THE FUCK ARE DOLPHINS SUPPOSED TO USE TOOLS
>> Anonymous
>>46842

telekinesis?
>> Anonymous
This uplifting shit is just that, shit. Anthrocentric hippies don't realize that most human behaviours have been inherited from whatever our missing link's ancestors were, which in turn comes from wherever the fuck else and has been inherited by nearly all vertebrates with a stable core temperature.

Take flocking for an example. Pet birds get tame because they can accept the human(s) as part of their (small) flock. Likewise, dogs can accept a human as the pack superior. This is distinct from any sort of an "teaching animals to be like humans" thing in that the animals in question already possessed the traits for flocking or for having an oligarchical pack, and not because a brand new fundamental behaviour has been instilled through hippy crystal bullshit.

An interesting example in the other direction would of course be the so-called feral children, and the stories of children raised by e.g. wolves or such. Meaning that this stuff can, under some circumstances, go both ways.

My point here is that "uplifting" is american hippy crystal bullshit. Humans, as any "higher" animal in the sense of "has eyes, is not an insect", have a set of behaviours. A miserable little pile of secrets, if you will. Any animal has that. Sometimes these behaviours can be compatible if both species' temperaments are also. If human-friendly or even human-dependent species are kept separate from their wild and/or feral counterparts, about fifty (probably more, I don't remember) generations down the road you get what is called a domesticated species.
>> Anonymous
>>46842
pehensile penis
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>46856
>> Anonymous
This is all assuming nuclear war doesn't happen.

Nuclear War = My Greatest Fear
>> Anonymous
>>46702

Sure, whatever. Guess it might be both entertaining and sociologically and psychologically enlightening. A species with radically different wiring, pumped up to human-like smartosity, might have a lot to offer in terms of alternate problem-solving capabilities. Assuming whatever enhancement process you're talking about leaves the key differences between human and animal neurology intact, that is.

Now, uplifting humans or animals to superhuman intelligence, that's another proposition altogether, one which I endorse that much more vociferously. It might go some way towards preventing>>46875, too.


>>46716

Firstly, see>>46803. Secondly, considering the present state of research on the subject, who's to say certain cetaceans aren't already sentient (by whatever criteria you're using), possibly even more so than humans? Their natural environment isn't exactly one that lends itself to tool use, nor to social behaviors more complex than those they already exhibit, and it seems a mite unscientific of you to assume that some cognitive faculty or other of theirs is inferior on the basis of their accomplishments as a civilization, so to speak. By that logic, Cro-Magnon man would have been subhuman.

>>46856

lol wut?
>> Anonymous
If one were to attempt to "raise" the intelligence of, say, Dolphins, Chimps or Bonobos, I believe that you would have to basically breed for intelligence. Selectively breed those of which ever species you are working on for the most intelligent of the group, and keep going with it until you get to the point where it is capped out, and see what that level is.

It would be like that experiment with the Silver Fox to make them more docile.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tame_Silver_Fox

The Fox experiment tool Silver Foxes and bred them for tameness, and another group for aggression. They kept taking the tame foxes and breeding them together and the Aggressive ones and breeding them together. After around 50 years, they tamed the Fox, which is considered to be a very, very short amount of time as far as domesticating is concerned.

So I think you could take the same theories and breed for intelligence.
>> Anonymous
>>46882

how do i misread OP?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
but they would steal all our lolis ;_;
>> Anonymous
>>46874
It's called furry baiting.