Blog #12 Are We On Track? An Original Essay

by JM Strasser

Life seems rare. Earth may be the only planet in our solar system to have life. It may have started elsewhere, like Mars, and transferred here. From a practical standpoint, we are alone in this solar system. The rest of the galaxy should have the same odds, given the mechanism of evolution. In simple terms, I mean- whatever works. This idea determines survival and, therefore, the development of life.

Even though the odds of life forming are small, with so many planets, quite a few should be populated, and quite a few of those with intelligent life. In that group, many scientists believe that only one intelligent species that reaches sentience exists on a planet. Sentience is similar to sapience, but they are both a roundabout way of describing a species with consciousness. Indeed, we do not understand how or in what way animals are intelligent. Recent years have brought much data to show that animals are, in certain species, more intelligent than we ever guessed. However, humans are the dominant species on Earth. The evidence of this is humans are the only species that can. Whoops, the mistakes of old because now we know animals can do many of those ‘only’ things. I would say the difference is something you feel. Animals cannot function in our society without humans to take care of them. They survive well out in the ‘wild,’ but could they ever organize and care for many other than themselves or ultimately pilot a spaceship and get off this rock? As I will explain, getting off the planet must be done to survive in the long run. Survival would require this step. What are the odds we will survive?

If there are many planets with intelligent life, then there would be individuals who study that life, cataloging some remarkable data. Somewhere out there, a sociologist examines the development of a species. What would she find as she sat in her office with that fabulous view, desk piled high with records? Thousands of worlds, some thriving, some destroyed, each with its own story.

We know humans go through specific stages before they become adults. Many theories have been proposed but the idea of definite steps in development has been well established. On About.com: Psychology, Kendra Cherry discusses the theories. “Child development that occurs from birth to adulthood was largely ignored throughout much of history. Children were often viewed simply as small versions of adults and little attention was paid to their many advances in cognitive abilities, language usage, and physical growth. Interest in the field of child development began early in the 20th-century and tended to focus on abnormal behavior. More recent theories outline the developmental stages of children and identify the typical ages at which these growth milestones occur.” (1)

Jean Piaget wrote about the four levels. The Child Development Institute lays out his theory. “He (Jean Piaget) was not a psychologist. He was a developmental biologist who devoted his life to closely observing and recording the intellectual abilities of infants, children and adolescents. The stages of intellectual development formulated by Piaget appear to be related to major developments in brain growth.” (2) Animals, too, go through similar steps, with rates that are much shorter. At Northwest K9, Dr. Joël Dehasse of Belgium shows us that Puppy Development follows similar lines. “(Nevertheless,) a dog’s ethogenesis evolves in (at least) three overlapping phases, each related to a particular system: the _neuro-vegetative_ (neuro-glandular) – 1 to 7 weeks, the_ emotional_ (limbic) system – 3 ± ½ to 12 ± 5 weeks, and the _cognitive_ system (cortex) – 5 ± 1 to 18 ± 10 months).” (3)

Life develops on Earth through certain stages; the organism will enter adulthood if nothing major happens. Evolution is simply the mechanism that produces a population that survives (hence successful) with enough less successful genes for any changes that occur and, at the same time, not too many to produce extinction. If this concert works for organisms, does it work for groups of organisms, specifically intelligent organisms?

In the 1920 Encyclopedia, in the Anthropology Section Part 6 on the Development of Civilization, the development follows a pattern just as it does in individuals. “The conditions of man at the lowest and highest known levels of culture are separated by a vast interval; but this interval is so nearly filled by known intermediate stages, that the line of continuity between the lowest savagery and the highest civilization is unbroken at any critical point.” (4)

The common element is going through these steps in a particular order. Without that order, development is disrupted and can result in incomplete maturity. The amazing thing (or maybe not because we are here) is that organisms and civilizations do mature most of the time.

Progress then seems to go along a prescribed route, but what about the development of a planet, specifically looking at the sentient species? Could such steps exist here as well?

First, our galactic scientist would need to define success. What would be the indicator of a fully mature species and planet? She would say success in any life would primarily be survival. In addition to that, it could be a healthy survival, one not quickly taken away. A planet and species must have a stable or increasing number of species above the survival threshold.

What would this planet and species look like? What would be their characteristics? Our galactic scientist would argue you need a social creature because individuals would not achieve these goals alone. The degree would be on the order of the Bell curve. The most successful creatures would be social and in the center of the graph. I don’t think you have to stretch much to figure out the steps our sociologist would find. These steps would be similar to a sentient species and civilizations but on a planet-wide basis.

In Step I, the creatures would start by wandering around in small groups but soon discover that the more minds involved, the more problems are solved. Larger groups form.

In Step II, our creatures discover agriculture. This innovation is progress because staying in one place and learning how to increase food yield is much easier. In addition, group-to-group raiding develops to obtain resources, speeding development along.

Step III finds the groups grow in size and become more specialized. New professions spring up, and the creatures are even more dependent on each other. Leaders emerge, encouraging the division of labor. Most creatures would end up as laborers rather than as leaders. Many are still wanting but are better off than being on their own. Our sociologist now looks for war, not the tiny skirmishes of before. The population would increase and also go through some die-offs due to those wars but also disease and famine.

Onto Step IV, our creatures have progressed to more or less universal education. Some of the old reasons for poverty still exist. However, poverty means a lack of material wealth, not the grinding needs of Step III and before. Our creature’s offspring are better off than they were. Not all groups are in the same step but going through the same steps. They can benefit from other group’s progress by watching. When these new technologies are available through trade, development speeds up.

Step V calls for a back step. The creatures become complacent. They have lived long enough to forget what it is to survive. They don’t believe that there is any danger that was so familiar to their ancestors: starvation, disease, and death. Some want to test it a little, some a lot, and some are appalled at even the thought. They go backwards.

In this step, they learn how to get away with learning less and are even given adult rights without responsibilities; inevitable consequences occur when the children fail to live up to these rights. Crime can go unpunished, countries threaten war, and the recipients let it pass, all because they feel something is more important, something on a higher spiritual level, forgetting that if you are dead, there is no higher potential to reach.

War is fought with much scrutiny, especially on the ‘innocent,’ creating a different battlefield. Targets are increasingly noncorporeal, i.e., the enemy’s weapons or the means of production of weapons. The ‘enemy’ is treated well; torture is hotly debated and only left to foremost leaders rather than average soldiers. Even to the point of discussing cessation of hostilities before completing objectives. Much of this is progress in empathy, but if you are dead, that progress is worthless.

Our creatures take the significant advances of technology for granted; any missteps are deemed indications of complete failure. Minor threats are exaggerated without real threats (death, disease, famine). The memory of the past is left to few and often to those who would distort it for the political agendas of the present.

So, there is a pause. The creatures question the wisdom of the past; distrust of the leaders and philosophers is common. Making yourself vulnerable is said to be the ‘only’ answer. The new mantra is ‘Can’t we all just get along?’.

To graduate to Step VI, our sociologist must admit, ‘You must all get along.’ The problem is that the beings within the same species are different from each other. How can you live together when each is so different? She would say there isn’t a specific way. Indeed, there are probably many ways, but you have to achieve this. In the past, getting along was done by force, which can only take a civilization so far. Maximum participation of every creature must happen in solving these ‘big’ survival issues in Step VI.

Our alien sociologist would remind us that each step is necessary for development, even if this feels uncomfortable. All of it was necessary: leaders, division of labor, war, the elite, the hoards of peasants, and the mighty priests. It all works well until you come to a place where problems get too complex.

Our creatures must use ALL minds to achieve the next step. Peter Levine cites a study illustrating the relationship between political participation and economic success in his blog for Civic Renewal. “It probably won’t surprise you that there’s a positive relationship between political participation and social/economic development. In countries where people are doing better (living longer, attending more years of school, spending more money), they also vote, protest, and petition more.” (5)

Our sociologist would cite the elimination of the old ‘starvation, disease and death’ added to that guaranteeing the freedoms of individuals as appropriate steps to take. The achievements won’t happen if you don’t allow the freedom to choose. Freedom would allow our creatures to feel “safe” enough to reach out and listen to their fellows, even those from the other groups, and add their voices. In this environment, thorough education without (much) political agenda would develop, much of it self-administered, especially in the beginning.

In addition to a thorough education, a new openness would take place. The government must become transparent so the citizens understand its function and administration. All power originates from the citizens, and those citizens must learn to wield that effectively instead of being led or victimized. We are waking up to this here on Earth and in the United States. Recently, the whole process of creating law has been suddenly wide open. In a recent article on Personal Democracy Forum Tech President, the answer to the question ‘How Did the Internet Affect the Health Care Battle of 2009-2010?’ Micah L. Sifry answered, “1. It forced the process much more into the open, and 2. The relatively open process fueled a lot of passionate engagement on all sides. The overall effect was for many more voices to speak effectively in the process. It appears that most of these voices tended to make the discussion more polarized, but I think that may be an oversimplification. MoveOn, for example, may have worked for most of last year to push the debate to the left, but in the last few weeks, after its membership voted overwhelmingly to support Obama’s approach, it helped rally progressive activists to support the bill.” (6) We haven’t taken the step of taking or regaining control, but we are certainly becoming more aware of how it all works.

Step VII, the enormous technical task of leaving the planet, is undertaken. Our sociologist would tell us that leaving the planet is the first step to establishing other bases and spreading your population. Leaving Earth raises the odds of survival if a disaster occurs on the home planet.

In Physical Geography.net, there is a discussion on this theory of organisms and survival. A Study Guide on The Introduction to the Biosphere discusses the long-held axiom of the necessity of organisms moving is discussed. “Most organisms have the ability to move. Through movement species have the ability to colonize new habitats and expand their geographic range. Evolutionary adaptations that allow a species to expand their geographic range may also make a species more resilient to environmental change. Once dispersed, a species can colonize a habitat if a vacant site for colonization is available and if the abiotic conditions are right. Finally, colonization leads to establishment.” (7) The advantages for movement are listed in General Entomology discussion from NC State University. “This long-distance movement, called *migration*, is a survival strategy with at least six potential advantages:

 1. escape from natural enemies

 2. find more favorable growing conditions

 3. reduce competition or relieve overcrowding

 4. locate new (or unoccupied) habitats

 5. disperse to alternate host plants

 reassort the gene pool to minimize inbreeding.” (8)

Movement at this level is well accomplished by the lesser organisms. Indeed look at the distribution over our own planet. However, the bigger the job is, the farther the movement must be which makes the process more difficult to impossible for them to accomplish. They have to depend on the organisms that develop intelligence for that scale of movement, especially off their planet of origin. Through the technological innovations that hallmark intelligent species, organisms can ‘hitch’ a ride to fulfill this need. In Space Daily, Terra Daily discusses the need for the intelligent specie of Earth- Humans- to help with migrations. “Moreover, to avoid extinction from minor cosmic catastrophes mankind can use actualized scientific knowledge to protect its’ world by sending rockets with nuclear warheads to intercept incoming comets or asteroids. However, animal and plant populations must eventually be dispersed to other planets, or space habitats, that have been terraformed, to avoid major cosmic catastrophes that will cause extinction.” (9)

Accomplishing Step VII is like becoming an adult, like a parent who puts their life on hold to care for the offspring. Our alien sociologist sits back and marvels that any species has managed it. The old fear of blowing ourselves up and the inevitable fractioning of a society trying to figure things out all contribute to possible failure. As species become more powerful, so do their mistakes.

So, are we on track? Will we survive and achieve the stars? We have made it to the moon. We have redefined war even when we fight those who have not. Now, we question all we do to the point where we are vulnerable. Is our development on this planet like individual and civilization development in that maturity does come unless something massive comes along? It is incredible how individuals survive this crazy society and how civilizations made steady progress to the world we have now. If this is the case, I would say we are in Step V. We have the task of balancing old wisdom and new wisdom.

We have to learn that the mature definition of peace is not ‘just get along’ but rather a complex dance between peoples that respects other individuals and their opinions while honoring their own at the same time and putting this all together and agreeing on what is best for all- the faithful ‘servant of the people’ idea, unlike the past, where the easiest way to achieve cooperation and collaboration was by submission or aggression. If we humans don’t reach a consensus (that is hard work), that will lead to no solution, and the problem will surface (often violently) later. My gut says we will, but we will undoubtedly stumble.

Footnotes

1. Child Development Theories

Major Theories of Child Development

By Kendra Cherry, About.com Guide

http://psychology.about.com/od/developmentalpsychology/a/childdevtheory.htm

2. Stages of Intellectual Development In Children and Teenagers

http://www.childdevelopmentinfo.com/development/piaget.shtml

SENSORY, EMOTIONAL, AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE YOUNG DOG

Version 1.1 – 6 Feb.97

Dr. Joël Dehasse

3 ave du Cosmonaute

1150 Brussels – Belgium

This article has been published extensively, with images and charts, in _The Bulletin for Veterinary Clinical Ethology_, Vol.2, n°1-2, pp 6-29, 1994 (Brussels).

http://www.nwk9.com/dehasse_pupdev.htm

4. Articles from the _Encyclopaedia Britannica_,

9th Edition (1875) and 10th Edition (1902)

1902 Encyclopedia > Anthropology > Development of Civilization

Anthropology (Part 6)

VI. Development of Civilization

http://www.1902encyclopedia.com/A/ANT/anthropology-06.html

5. A blog for civic renewal

May 22, 2006

political participation and economic success

Peter Levine

«”Civic Renewal in America” | Main | the power of community organizing »