Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 9:26 am

rebecca702 wrote:
Dan Rowden wrote:I agree with Carl that "experiment" connotes something false. Humanity is a fact, not an experiment. To say we have failed or even are failing also connotes something false - teleology. To judge "failure" you must have some framework from within which to judge such a thing. What is that framework? What is Humanity's goal or meaning, such that it can "fail" at it?
How about becoming wise? Or at least wise enough to not destroy the planet? But maybe its goal IS to destroy the planet - how should I know?

It would be nice if Humanity adopted such goals, but that's unlikely at any significant level. Of course, part of the problem is that Humanity already believes it has such goals. Humanity already believes it's on the path to Truth. This is really the very first delusion that has to be swept away. Again, that's unlikely to happen.

"For what purpose humanity is there should not even concern us: why you are here, that you should ask yourself: and if you have no ready answer, then set for yourself goals, high and noble goals, and perish in pursuit of them!" Nietzsche

"But tell me my brothers, if humanity still lacks a goal - is humanity itself still not lacking too?" Nietzsche

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 9:31 am

guest_of_logic wrote:
Jason wrote:I find this unusual take on extraterrestrial intelligence to be very thought provoking.
I second that motion. Way cool stuff.

Yeah, I want to Vulcan mind meld with a God Top.

guest_of_logic · Post by **guest_of_logic** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 9:35 am

HUNTEDvsINVIS wrote:( I believe that on a cosmic level, the word purpose has no existence or definition or even a reference, since the universe does not have a human brain or capacities to distinguish between and plan entities. On a cosmic level nothing exists, including the absence of nothing, which we then go on to label as somethingness. Therefore I believe that God is, whatever he comes across as to us, the pure potentiality which is seemingly inherent to what we call "the universe" and therefore the Bible is legitimate even though it is contradictory and therefore I totally believe in God, and also that my love for him may be contradictory. So I actually believe in the biblical goal of love and compassion. Of course, I am still working on my theory every once in a while ).

I'd suggest that your theory needs more work devoted to it than you imply that you're giving it. Any theory that tries to justify the contradictions in the Bible is very suspect to me. How can something contradictory be "legitimate"? What is it that's legitimate when there are two contradictory statements - is it the first one or the second one? Rhetorical question. And if you justify contradictions in the Bible, then why not the Koran and the Vedic scriptures too? They all contradict one another, but that's not a problem, is it? - there is no truth, just a bunch of "legitimate" contradictions. How in the world do you work out how to live your life if you think that biblical contradictions are legitimate anyway? If in one part of the Bible it supports marriage and in another part it warns against it, then it's contradicting itself, which doesn't matter to you because to you its contradictions are legitimate, but how then would you decide whether to get married or not based on biblical advice?

rebecca702 · Post by **rebecca702** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 10:05 am

Dan Rowden wrote:
rebecca702 wrote:
Dan Rowden wrote:I agree with Carl that "experiment" connotes something false. Humanity is a fact, not an experiment. To say we have failed or even are failing also connotes something false - teleology. To judge "failure" you must have some framework from within which to judge such a thing. What is that framework? What is Humanity's goal or meaning, such that it can "fail" at it?
How about becoming wise? Or at least wise enough to not destroy the planet? But maybe its goal IS to destroy the planet - how should I know?
It would be nice if Humanity adopted such goals, but that's unlikely at any significant level. Of course, part of the problem is that Humanity already believes it has such goals. Humanity already believes it's on the path to Truth. This is really the very first delusion that has to be swept away. Again, that's unlikely to happen.

Humanity already believes it has such goals, such as what?

How does it believe it's on the path to Truth? Do you mean like scientists discovering a Unified Field Theory or decoding the human genome?

Loki · Post by **Loki** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 11:28 am

Carl G wrote:Kevin wrote:
we haven't yet detected any other intelligent species in the Universe.
How do you know this? (Being that there is evidence to the contrary.)

I am very much interested in this subject. Carl, can you drop some links to the articles that describe the evidence you speak of?

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 1:02 pm

rebecca702 wrote:
Dan Rowden wrote:It would be nice if Humanity adopted such goals, but that's unlikely at any significant level. Of course, part of the problem is that Humanity already believes it has such goals. Humanity already believes it's on the path to Truth. This is really the very first delusion that has to be swept away. Again, that's unlikely to happen.
Humanity already believes it has such goals, such as what?

Wisdom, peace, survival, perfect ice-cream. Just ask them, they'll tell you.

How does it believe it's on the path to Truth? Do you mean like scientists discovering a Unified Field Theory or decoding the human genome?

Yes, partly that, and via the scientific method in general, but also through political and social evolution and so forth. Most people like to think they're either on the road to Truth or have it via their beliefs. Of course, "Humanity" in this sense is pure abstraction. There are multitudes of views of what truth is and/or how we're working towards it that contradict each other.

"We're all on the path to truth, even though your ideas are false because they contradict mine."

Jason · Post by **Jason** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 1:28 pm

Dan Rowden wrote:Yeah, I want to Vulcan mind meld with a God Top.

It's "Gold Top", Einstein. :P

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 1:31 pm

Not to those who've taken them.

Carl G · Post by **Carl G** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 2:37 pm

Loki wrote:
Carl G wrote:Kevin wrote:
we haven't yet detected any other intelligent species in the Universe.
How do you know this? (Being that there is evidence to the contrary.)
I am very much interested in this subject. Carl, can you drop some links to the articles that describe the evidence you speak of?

http://projectcamelot.org/index.html

Go to "Interviews and Reports." You can open them in YouTube.

Bob Dean would be a good one to start with. John Lear also. Richard Hoagland is interesting, too. And this one, with "Mr. X":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=js1QMYWg54s

Kevin Solway · Post by **Kevin Solway** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 2:51 pm

Carl G wrote:http://projectcamelot.org/index.html

If I had any convincing proof of the existence of aliens, I would put that up-front, the first thing on my website, where it couldn't be missed.

Instead, "Project Camalot" start with "Crystal Child".

Hmmmm.

Hang on a minute. Are they saying that Crystal Child is the alien? In that case, I'm convinced!

Carl G · Post by **Carl G** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 2:58 pm

Ah, a closed mind in action!

No wonder you haven't seen any evidence yet.

Zarina · Post by **Zarina** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 3:34 pm

HUNTEDvsINVIS wrote:Welcome Zarina. It is a good point that you make, namely that we have should not overlook the spiritual and religious achievements or understandings we have reached, and that we should see them as a type of species triumph. You're entirely correct, we give ourselves too little credit for the invention of civilizations. But how do we know that compassion and love is the general and concluding purpose of the universe? Are you speaking from a religious point of view only?

( I believe that on a cosmic level, the word purpose has no existence or definition or even a reference, since the universe does not have a human brain or capacities to distinguish between and plan entities. On a cosmic level nothing exists, including the absence of nothing, which we then go on to label as somethingness. Therefore I believe that God is, whatever he comes across as to us, the pure potentiality which is seemingly inherent to what we call "the universe" and therefore the Bible is legitimate even though it is contradictory and therefore I totally believe in God, and also that my love for him may be contradictory. So I actually believe in the biblical goal of love and compassion. Of course, I am still working on my theory every once in a while ).

No, HUNTEDvsINVIS, I speaking from a point of view of evolutionary purpose as I understand it. Unfortunately, religion haven't precise explanation it's dogmas (although most of all, I consider, are latent laws of universe).
But I think that a purpose of human evolution - to become a perfect man with rich and divine qualities : diverse and deep feelings, sensations, capacity to think wide and wise, and as last achievement - to discover a similar person in our neighbour by means of compassion and love( supreme emotions).

Loki · Post by **Loki** » Tue Jan 06, 2009 1:50 am

Carl G wrote: http://projectcamelot.org/index.html

Go to "Interviews and Reports." You can open them in YouTube.

I just watched "Jessica: Crystal Child"

Fairly impressive story she tells.

PS: I am an indigo child.

Cory Duchesne · Post by **Cory Duchesne** » Tue Jan 06, 2009 2:19 am

Loki wrote: PS: I am an indigo child.

Loki, it concerns me that you assert such a thing. Please consider:

According to psychologist Russell Barkley, the New Age movement has yet to produce empirical evidence of the existence of Indigo children and the 17 traits most commonly attributed to them are so vague that they could describe "most of the people most of the time" and were reminiscent of the Forer effect. Barkley also expressed concern that labeling a disruptive child an "Indigo" may delay proper diagnosis and treatment that may help the child. Others have advised that many of the traits of Indigo children could be more prosaically interpreted as simple arrogance and selfish individualism, which parents with certain New Age beliefs may misperceive.

It has also been hypothesized that rather than being a new step in human evolution, the Indigo phenomena may be the reaction of children watching television shows with an emphasis on magic and New Age-compatible language. An example of this was illustrated in a Dallas Observer article discussing Indigo children, a reporter recorded the following interaction between a man who worked with Indigo children, and a purported Indigo child:
“ Are you an Indigo? he asked Dusk. The boy looked at him shyly and nodded. "I'm an avatar," Dusk said. "I can recognize the four elements of earth, wind, water and fire. The next avatar won't come for 100 years." The man seemed impressed. ”

Readers of the Dallas Observer later wrote in to inform the newspaper that the child's response appeared to be taken from the storyline of Avatar: The Last Airbender; a children's cartoon showing on Nickelodeon at the time of the interview. The editor of the Dallas Observer later admitted they were not aware of the possible connection until readers brought it to their attention.

Loki · Post by **Loki** » Tue Jan 06, 2009 6:55 am

Cory,

You are just relying on hearsay. Until you encounter indigo kids yourself, and until you actually conduct experiments measuring their abilities, you can shut your trap. Thanks.

Elizabeth Isabelle · Post by **Elizabeth Isabelle** » Tue Jan 06, 2009 10:38 am

Loki wrote:you can shut your trap. Thanks.

What an enlightened thing to say. Your advanced spiritualism really reaches out from the screen.

Loki · Post by **Loki** » Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:43 am

Some people need a well timed whack with the 'ol zen stick. Brings them to their senses.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » Tue Jan 06, 2009 1:04 pm

How old are you Loki?

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Tue Jan 06, 2009 1:32 pm

Well, he said I am an Indigo child, not I was one, so maybe there's a clue there :)

Nick · Post by **Nick** » Tue Jan 06, 2009 1:34 pm

Yeah, that's kinda why I was wondering...

mansman · Post by **mansman** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:47 pm

Kevin Solway wrote:
Jason wrote:How are humans close to extinction, Kevin?
In my view, we are possibly close to extinction.

Firstly, it could well happen that 99.9% of the human race are killed by a virulent disease.

Our medicine puts a selection pressure on disease organisms which will create organisms of great virulence.

That still leaves some humans.

I don't trust that the remaining humans will have it together enough to survive, or to continue what we regard to be "civilization".

They might form a suicide cult where everyone kills themselves.

One reason I think it is easy for "intelligent" species, like ourselves, to become extinct, is because we haven't yet detected any other intelligent species in the Universe. I suspect there have been many other intelligent species, but that they became extinct, due to the same forces that threaten to bring about our own extinction.

Yes inteligent aliens may have run out of time (to ring us) but theres a good chance i think some had sufficient time if only the distance would allow. But the distance did not allow, did it? If they didnt find us or other intelligent life then most likely not find good places to settle either. I believe WE also likely have sufficient time to search as far as we'll be able to reach and look but also will come up short finding nothing no aliens no good Earth-Twos.

If finding/reaching new planet homes was reasonably possible to do, then dont you think universe have had already various planet worlds some in communion with each other some not.

If we are ever found out is likely the aliens are more advanced and evolved, resistant to disease super-human and maybe machine like (i dont want to say robots!), and allowing for the thousands++ years needed to accomplish discovery.
Thats where I see our salvation initially lies, first become *fully evolved*self and secure home as invulnerable as possible and THENafter we prepare for extended voyages.
We may never find anyone else (alive), but at least *we* then have greater chance to survive as a species.

M

edited, even I couldnt read it!

rebecca702 · Post by **rebecca702** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 1:43 pm

Hmmm, interesting where this thread has gone. I guess I should have seen it coming. Maybe what I should have asked was, "Do you think the human species was destined to self-destruct, and wisdom/enlightenment is the escape hatch from the impending dead-end?" or some such...

Never mind. Pretty pointless anyway. I just think it's starting to get interesting as far as where people's allegiances lie. We're being forced to decide what is "human", what is sentient life, what is worthwhile saving or nurturing, and exactly why downloading your mind into another body is unethical. Is it? Are women going to be happy about the fact that technology might be taking over the job of the Almighty Womb, and might even do a better job of it? I think it has something to do with the widespread denial of the fact that the human is a machine just like everything else.

Loki wrote:I just watched "Jessica: Crystal Child"

Fairly impressive story she tells.

PS: I am an indigo child.

I tried to watch the video, but can't make it past the first 2 minutes of her talking. Her manner is repelling, I find. Maybe if it's that interesting you can summarize it? Or explain what it meant to you. I don't know much about Indigos except what I learned from a low-budget movie from the library called "Indigo"... I feel like, if these kids could really read people's pasts that easily (or futures, or whatever), why does James Randi still have his million?

Elizabeth Isabelle · Post by **Elizabeth Isabelle** » Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:40 pm

Rebecca, the oversimplification is that Indigos have a maturity beyond their years, yet take longer to grow into their full adult maturity than others. This often leads to frustration in their teachers, parents, or anyone else who has arbitrary authority over them. This difficulty is enhanced by the Indigos intolerance for arbitrary authority or the "because I said so" or "because that's the way it has always been done" line of thinking. Indigos require a logical reason for the way things are done. That sounds contradictory when it comes to the psychic phenomena observations, but to the Indigo who sees/hears/experiences things others don't, it is no more irrational than a partially sighted person being born into a colony of the completely blind.

The intuition is stronger, but due to societies prejudices against psychic phenomena, Indigos may repress that. Even when that is repressed though, people who are not Indigos regard Indigos as just somehow different, but can not usually say exactly what that difference is. As for James Randi's million - not everyone knows about that, and although being partially sighted is more than being completely blind, it can be more like someone who is legally blind without their glasses (not precise enough to do a whole lot, especially when it comes to the details).

This is a good book on the matter. Perhaps your library has it?

Wiki summary

Kevin Solway · Post by **Kevin Solway** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 12:45 am

Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:As for James Randi's million - not everyone knows about that

If they can read people's minds you would think they'd know about it! :-)

brokenhead · Post by **brokenhead** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 5:53 am

Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:Rebecca, the oversimplification is that Indigos have a maturity beyond their years, yet take longer to grow into their full adult maturity than others.

Elizabeth - What is the reason behind the term "Indigo?"

GENIUS FORUMS

Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?

Re: Is Humanity a Failed Experiment?