Showing posts with label animals. Show all posts
Showing posts with label animals. Show all posts

Saturday, June 04, 2011

The Ishmael Imperative


When considering how an advanced non-human intelligence (ANHI) might view life on this planet, we humans almost always assume that it would be interested in interacting with us, because we are the dominant life form. This assumption, however, is more the product of our egotistical view of our own importance, and less about actual reality.

A few quick points to consider:

1. Relative to an ANHI, there might not be any real difference between we humans and other inhabitants of this planet - dolphins, for example, or elephants, or chimpanzees. In much the same way as we tend to lump most animals in together under the category of "animals", perhaps the ANHI would see Earth species in much the same way.

2. We have absolutely no idea how an ANHI would communicate, or what it might be interested in. It stands to reason, looking at things objectively, that it would be just as likely to be interested in a dolphin as it would be a human being. Indeed, perhaps certain animals are more receptive to ANHI communication than we humans are, being less cluttered in their thoughts. Or perhaps they are "smarter" than us, but in different ways?

3. Finally, perhaps a truly advanced NHI would be much more interested in communicating with / interacting with the oppressed and downtrodden, given that they may have evolved into a truly empathic consciousness. Within human society, that would include the poor, the homeless, the mentally ill / challenged, and those who for one reason or another have become social outcasts. It would also include all third world cultures in relation to the developed, Western world. But even those divisions might ring untrue to a truly empathic ANHI when compared with what is arguably the greater divide - how we humans, regardless of class, religion, or any of the other things that divide us from each other, as a species treat all the other inhabitants of this planet.


Is the life of a human being worth more than the life of any other inhabitant of this planet - like this chimpanzee that I saw at the Los Angeles Zoo the other day? We would say yes; an ANHI might not make that distinction. As I wrote on my Facebook status after coming back from the Zoo by way of a stop in Beverley Hills, I saw more "humanity" staring into the eyes of this sad little chimp than I did on all of Rodeo Drive.

I recommend that everyone read the wonderful and thought-provoking book Ishmael, by Daniel Quinn.  The novel is a philosophical examination of the captivity of mankind under a distorted, imprisoning and damaging "civilization". In the end, Ishmael, a gorilla which can communicate telepathically, tells the narrator:
The story of Genesis must be undone. First, Cain must stop murdering Abel. This is essential if you're to survive. The Leavers* are the endangered species most critical to the world - not because they're humans but because they alone can show the destroyers of the world that there is more than one right way to live. And then, of course, you must spit out the fruit of the forbidden tree. You must absolutely and forever relinquish the idea that you know who should live and who should die on this planet.
 * All "primitive" cultures
I think any truly advanced non-human intelligence would agree.


I believe that we will be judged by how we treat the other inhabitants with whom we share this planet. As things stand now, we would be found sorely wanting. Change is imperative -  and not just "at the margins" change which would still have us at the top of the "planetary pyramid", but rather radical and revolutionary change that replaces that pyramid model of order with a different view - a circle, where everyone and everything is interconnected. 

We must become neither "takers" nor "leavers" as envisioned in Ishmael - we must become sharers. Our future depends on it.

This might all sound very "new age" to many readers. To those who would see it that way, I ask one simple question - isn't it about time for a "new age" given how the "old age" has worked out for us, and our fellow inhabitants of this fragile world?

As I wrote in 1992:



In other words, who are we, and more important - who do we want to become?

Paul Kimball