Humans: Difference between revisions
m (species evolve, older examples) |
(one kind of human,) |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
There is only one | ''' There is only one kind of human on earth''' | ||
All people living in the far future, if any, will be common descendants of those of us who procreate, whatever distinction in origin, conviction or other qualification we might now apply. This thought might help grow a desire to overcome differences, to think of 'us' rather than 'we vs them', to think about others with the same brain cells we use to think about ourselves, to jointly secure the future. There is only one type of human. | |||
[[Talk:humans | See the discussion for efforts to communicate the subject.]] | |||
=== Some thoughts === | |||
What two individuals are identical? | |||
How long till races vanish? Someone alive in 300 yrs has more than 1,000 ancestors alive today (assuming a roughly equal length of generation). If people continue to move and mix even on a modest scale, it is highly unlikely to meet a purely caucasian, asian, african or other being after a few hundered years. | How long till races vanish? Someone alive in 300 yrs has more than 1,000 ancestors alive today (assuming a roughly equal length of generation). If people continue to move and mix even on a modest scale, it is highly unlikely to meet a purely caucasian, asian, african or other being after a few hundered years. | ||
Proud to stem from Charlemagne (approx. 747-814 AD), the famous ruler of Europe | Don't believe all descendants will be common descendants? Think of rapid mixing of different groups e.g., the continuum of people of indigenous and African descent in Cuba. | ||
Everyone has a genetic father and mother. Proud to stem from an important person in the past? Take Charlemagne (approx. 747-814 AD), the famous ruler of Europe. In his generation everyone alive now has a theoretical 2 to the power of 50 ancestors, over a million times world population then. Everyone of European descent has a great many lines that make him/her descendant of Charlemagne. Older example makes the ancestorship even more likely. | |||
In our nature an easily self-reinforcing tendency to divide into groups seems "hardwired" and can dangerously be exploited. Such division into groups can be achieved on the basis of arbitrary and irrelevant "characteristics". We use the the same brain cells to think about us and members of our "group" and different brain cells for members of other groups. | |||
What would I have done had I had her genes and experiences? | |||
---- | |||
Whether all intelligent beings that give rise to civilizations in the future are of human descent is a rather different question. Species evolve and the cognitive power of machines is rising. Admittedly, sentient beings in a far future might not be genetic descendants of today's humans at all. They could be quite different from us. Yet they would (by [[Assumption | assumption]]) be self-conscious and thus share this strange property that makes continuation of civilization [[Milliongenerations:Motivation | worthwhile]]. If the [[Assumption | assumption]] holds that their civilization evolved from ours, they will also be 'information-descendants' who benefit from the useful of what earlier generations discovered. The difficulty of determining the later utility of information with certainty means everyone could contribute relevant bits. Because so much information will be mixed, the argument becomes even more inclusive than the genetic one, even humans without (procreating) genetic descendants participate. | |||
---- | |||
References | |||
: [[How many individuals could there be on earth?]] | |||
: [[population growth | What is the average population growth, and how many could there be at any one time?]] | |||
Latest revision as of 16:20, 3 June 2020
There is only one kind of human on earth
All people living in the far future, if any, will be common descendants of those of us who procreate, whatever distinction in origin, conviction or other qualification we might now apply. This thought might help grow a desire to overcome differences, to think of 'us' rather than 'we vs them', to think about others with the same brain cells we use to think about ourselves, to jointly secure the future. There is only one type of human.
See the discussion for efforts to communicate the subject.
Some thoughts
What two individuals are identical?
How long till races vanish? Someone alive in 300 yrs has more than 1,000 ancestors alive today (assuming a roughly equal length of generation). If people continue to move and mix even on a modest scale, it is highly unlikely to meet a purely caucasian, asian, african or other being after a few hundered years.
Don't believe all descendants will be common descendants? Think of rapid mixing of different groups e.g., the continuum of people of indigenous and African descent in Cuba.
Everyone has a genetic father and mother. Proud to stem from an important person in the past? Take Charlemagne (approx. 747-814 AD), the famous ruler of Europe. In his generation everyone alive now has a theoretical 2 to the power of 50 ancestors, over a million times world population then. Everyone of European descent has a great many lines that make him/her descendant of Charlemagne. Older example makes the ancestorship even more likely.
In our nature an easily self-reinforcing tendency to divide into groups seems "hardwired" and can dangerously be exploited. Such division into groups can be achieved on the basis of arbitrary and irrelevant "characteristics". We use the the same brain cells to think about us and members of our "group" and different brain cells for members of other groups.
What would I have done had I had her genes and experiences?
Whether all intelligent beings that give rise to civilizations in the future are of human descent is a rather different question. Species evolve and the cognitive power of machines is rising. Admittedly, sentient beings in a far future might not be genetic descendants of today's humans at all. They could be quite different from us. Yet they would (by assumption) be self-conscious and thus share this strange property that makes continuation of civilization worthwhile. If the assumption holds that their civilization evolved from ours, they will also be 'information-descendants' who benefit from the useful of what earlier generations discovered. The difficulty of determining the later utility of information with certainty means everyone could contribute relevant bits. Because so much information will be mixed, the argument becomes even more inclusive than the genetic one, even humans without (procreating) genetic descendants participate.
References