UPLifting: Differing Telos?

Twink (neptune@mars.superlink.net)
Mon, 24 Nov 1997 06:27:11 -0500 (EST)

At 09:37 PM 11/23/97 -0800, Michael M. Butler" <butler@comp*lib.org> wrote:
>>} I don't think you are taking the point I'm tryiing to make, which is
>>that molluscs } are very nearly as different from us, evolutionarily, as
>>insects. This almost puts } them in the microorganism camp
>>I don't now what that means.
>Well, permit me to tell you what I meant to mean. :) I meant to mean that
>their goals and our goals may not be any more copasetic than our goals and
>(hypothetical) microorganism goals.

But current humans have goals that are not copasetic. For instance, Janet
Reno's and the Branch Davidians, Jeremy Rifkin and many of us, Saddam
Hussein... etc. ad nauseam!:) Is there any reason to believe all sophoctopodes
would coordinate together in a way humans do not? (This is not a trait of
humans alone. Chimps have wars too.) Heck, there are even humans who
believe humanity should cease to exist -- e.g., deep ecologists, religious

>>Current phylogenetic trees have all
>>animals as one small branch of life. The real evolutionary diversity is
>>in the bacteria and archaea; animals are just rearrangements of masses
>>of the animal eukaryotic cell.
>>Molluscs are different, yeah. "In the microorganism camp", probably
>I apologize for my part in the misunderstanding. I was not referring to raw
>genome similarity. OK?

I think the point was that molluscs might be more closely related to us, ergo,
more likely to allign with us. If relatedness is a key, then they are.
I doubt it is. In fact, I bet genetic similarity is not helpful at all.
Ideology and
motives will most likely depend on other factors.

BTW, I believe the rational thing -- what benefits their long range self-
interest -- for sophoctopodes to do would be not to war against humans.
The benefits of sentient diversity benefit them as well as us.

Daniel Ust