= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
RobertWiblin comments on SIA won't doom you - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (31)
It is strange how people still seem to think this argument has something to do with doomsday - when what it actually about is a failure to make progress towards galactic civilisation.
I've pointed this out several times now - and so far nobody has even attempted to make a case for terminal setbacks - rather than roadblocks. Doomsday makes for better headlines, I guess.
[Update 2010-11-05] - K.G. now discusses such an case in her thesis - available from: http://meteuphoric.wordpress.com/2010/11/02/anthropic-principles-agree-on-bigger-future-filters/
That's because chances for us to go extinct seem many. If we are necessarily held back from space for thousands of years, it's very unlikely we would last that long just here on Earth.
Usually, the people who think this sort of thing count there not being any humans around as us "going extinct". That is all very well if you are fixated on the human form - but it is not a valid concept in the context of the Fermi paradox - since our post-human offspring are likely to be far more capable of executing the task of forming a galactic civilisation than we are.
If you think that there are many chances for civilization to go extinct - then I beg to differ. The chances of civilization going extinct are pretty miniscule - in my estimation. Discussion of that happening usually has far more to do with memes, mind viruses, manipulation, exploitation and paranoia than it does to do with actual risk.