Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
I've always felt like a lot of the assumptions in Fermi's Great Filter feels off. Like, the way we talk about "intelligent life" feels iffy, both in astrophysics and other fields. I'm not great at articulating this, but if you're one for video essays, Dr Fatima Abdurrahman recently made a video that captured much of what I'd struggled to say on this. (https://youtu.be/_tw0aqmnmaw)
I can't guarantee I'll watch that video, but I can guarantee I intend to watch it when I can.
Generally speaking, though, I do agree that most people's idea of "intelligence" is very anthro-centric, if that's what you mean.
No pressure to watch the video, especially as not everyone enjoys consuming content in that form.
Anthrocentrism is part of what I mean, especially if we consider that historically, colonialism has had a lot of power to draw the line between who "counts" as fully human or not. A depressingly common motif is the cyclical logic of "this is what we understand human intelligence to be" -> "these people do not have the signifiers of human intelligence that we understand" -> "therefore these people aren't intelligent" -> (those people are less likely to be considered as the general understanding of 'intelligence' expands and evolves).
Yeah, the sociological side of "quantified" intelligence has a whole host of issues.