swatt (10/21/82)
Well this has certainly been an interesting discussion. I would like to add several modest points. 1) The notion that greater technological capabilites also denotes vastly greater intelligence escapes me. First, I doubt anyone can give an acceptable definition of intelligence, except that it is: a) A quality that one being possessing it recognizes in another. b) What the intelligence tests measure. I doubt on either scale intelligence per se has increased significantly since the days of the Wright brothers, or even since Archimedes (those Greeks were a SMART bunch ...). I certainly wouldn't be too snobbish to sit down and talk with say, Newton, even though he might have nothing to say that I couldn't read in books. Thus the gap in technological and social sophistication between ourselves and the Greeks of Pericles' day could be closed in a generation at most. 2) Trying to prove that other civilizations do or don't exist reminds me of Hegel's philosophical proof that there could ONLY be 8 planets (an effort which has not endeared him to scientists). If we find other life (or they find us) then we will know for sure; until then, it's all speculation. 3) Just because it's speculation doesn't mean it's pointless. There is, after all, a public policy issue here, which is how much money to spend on attempting to contact other civilizations. - Alan S. Watt