Print

[seaotter]

its robotron

[Voodoo Rage]

Very interesting interview. It's nice to see someone with an alternate or semi-fringe hypothesis being able to provide a lucid interview. I always found this topic very fascinating as a big science fiction fan where many authors try to utilize theories of convergence to provide a reasonable explanation for aliens that are still somewhat anthropomorphic in appearance. I've heard authors explain that even on an alien planet things like bilateral symmetry, bipedalism, a brain, spinal cord, etc... are all the inevitable qualities required for a tool making life form. But this does seem to be more of a literary tool than any sort of reality to me.

Not being an evolutionary biologist, I can only offer a very layman's opinion on the subject. It really seems that a lot of what makes us look like we do are really just products of chance that we happened to be evolved from a particular line of ancestors. I don't really see any significant hurdles of an intelligent mollusk involving instead (like depicted in "The Future Is Wild" on the Discovery Channel) or intelligent insect for example. I think it was a gross assumption for  the guest to claim that mammals would have out-competed the dinosaurs regardless of the KT-impact. In the presence of gradual climate change, the dinosaurs would have evolved to adapt no differently than other orders of animals. Heck, birds are essentially dinosaurs that evolved into a particular niche.  A lot of what makes us successful has purely to do with subtle changes in climate and ecological niches that made our particular type of mammal undergo a selection for intelligence. To me, that is a really chance proposition. Considering an alien ecosystem, even on a completely earth like planet is going to undergo it's own cataclysms and climactic shifts on a completely different schedule would make me think that they could pretty much like like anything. As long as they for whatever reason were being selectively driven to favor more intelligent offspring at some point in their evolutionary history I would think all sorts of bizarre life forms are likely.

[mwilley]

Conway Morris repeatedly hints that evolution is being driven, or attracted to certain states.  He seems reluctant to cede the aimlessness of evolution and wants to impart upon it a sense of direction.  He spoke about evolution arriving at similar solutions in distant species, and said that this was the way that evolution 'navigated' to those solutions.
It's a misleading choice of words, and taken with other comments I think shows that he is sneaking purpose into the picture at some level. Not exactly intelligent design, but he seems to be calling our attention to guidance from some source.

[mwilley]

A wonderful example of convergent evolution, but one explained neatly by new techniques in genetic analysis.  There's no 'attractor' here, in the sense that Conway-Morris means.  It is simply physics and chemistry and time.

The whole story, which is amazing, is here:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/02/100205213102.htm

A qualia of the sense of garlic? What?
He argues in a way that I have heard other believers argue, which is that he fires one thing after another, some true, some false, some debatable, but he is attempting to sow seeds of doubt, to allow space for the transcendent, the supernatural and the mysterious.
He comes out with the argument that most of science fails, is proved wrong, as if to suggest that we need something more than science to arrive at certain ultimate answers.  He skims over the fact that the science that has been replaced, is replaced by more and better science.

[Trinoc]

When Simon Conway Morris spoke about "attractors" I wasn't sure whether he really meant directed evolution (i.e. God) or whether he meant it in the chaos theory sense where a system blindly evolves towards a state (or sequence of states) determined entirely by the mathematics of the chaotic system.

For anyone who was able to watch Jim Al Khalili's recent BBC programme about chaos, the latter seems highly likely, but from a Christian I suppose the God hypothesis is more likely.

On the subject of intelligent molluscs, or whatever, I think any intelligent species needs to have the senses and manipulative abilities to use that intelligence to the full, otherwise there will be no selective pressure for intelligence to increase. Molluscs can't do much other than sit under the water filtering food that happens by, and closing up to avoid predators, so I don't think brainy clams are going to evolve any time soon.

On "qualia" ... can someone convince me that this isn't just a word invented by philosophers to describe any mental process they can't explain? It seems to me to be a case of the standard philosophical fallacy: "I've given it a name therefore I understand it".

[GodSlayer]

On "qualia" ... can someone convince me that this isn't just a word invented by philosophers to describe any mental process they can't explain?

qualia is the 'what it's like'ness of something.

you don't ask 'what's it like to be a brick?' because, presumably, it's not like anything--bricks have no qualia.

philosophers DO NOT claim to have it understood. it is one if the huge problems, like consciousness more broadly.

[Steven Novella]

I think Conway Morris meant "attractor" in the Chaos Theory sense.

The interview was edited for time. It is about 10 minutes longer. I may make the entire interview available as premium content.

[Voodoo Rage]

On the subject of intelligent molluscs, or whatever, I think any intelligent species needs to have the senses and manipulative abilities to use that intelligence to the full, otherwise there will be no selective pressure for intelligence to increase. Molluscs can't do much other than sit under the water filtering food that happens by, and closing up to avoid predators, so I don't think brainy clams are going to evolve any time soon.

Don't forget cephalopods like the squid and octopus are mollusks.

I would think that an intelligent body plan capable of civilization would have to minimally have appendages capable to manipulating their own environment. I would also think they would need to be terrestrial since the use of fire seems like such an integral part of our evolution. But even then, it's not that hard to imagine something like a dolphin in hundreds of millions of years being able to build structures and even being able to utilize the energy of undersea vents. A jump in that sort of evolution would require existing dolphins being driven out of their current niche and being forced to adapt differently (much like we were driven out of the jungles and onto the African savannah).

[Trinoc]

Don't forget cephalopods like the squid and octopus are mollusks.

Good point. I don't have a problem with brainy squid evolving.

I would think that an intelligent body plan capable of civilization would have to minimally have appendages capable to manipulating their own environment. I would also think they would need to be terrestrial since the use of fire seems like such an integral part of our evolution. But even then, it's not that hard to imagine something like a dolphin in hundreds of millions of years being able to build structures and even being able to utilize the energy of undersea vents. A jump in that sort of evolution would require existing dolphins being driven out of their current niche and being forced to adapt differently (much like we were driven out of the jungles and onto the African savannah).

I find it hard to see how serious technology could evolve underwater. It would be a bit like if we had needed to do everything from cooking to metallurgy to electronics in a vacuum.

[Mad_Scientist_Working]

I find it hard to see how serious technology could evolve underwater. It would be a bit like if we had needed to do everything from cooking to metallurgy to electronics in a vacuum.

If you go the steampunk route you don't need electronics to make computers.

[hardcoremathuser]

WTN: It's a Slinky!

[salimfadhley]

My first post:

I think that the "whose that noisy" noise is a VLF radio recording.

Atmospheric phemomena (e.g. lightning) can create all kinds of strange noises such as plinks, whoops and all kinds of zany sounding effects that sound like they came from the audio worksop of Wendy Carlos or Iso Tomita.

[Trinoc]

I find it hard to see how serious technology could evolve underwater. It would be a bit like if we had needed to do everything from cooking to metallurgy to electronics in a vacuum.

If you go the steampunk route you don't need electronics to make computers.

Short of leaping directly to optronics, show me a method of making analog or logic circuits with anything like the speed of current (or even early 20th century) electronics without actually using electronics.

[Mad_Scientist_Working]

I find it hard to see how serious technology could evolve underwater. It would be a bit like if we had needed to do everything from cooking to metallurgy to electronics in a vacuum.

If you go the steampunk route you don't need electronics to make computers.

Short of leaping directly to optronics, show me a method of making analog or logic circuits with anything like the speed of current (or even early 20th century) electronics without actually using electronics.

Chemical reactions and how about YOUR FREAKING BRAIN.  And your traveling at the speed of current is a dumb criteria.     Neurons use ionic currents which sure as hell are not traveling as fast as the electrons in your computer or even holes for that matter.

[Voodoo Rage]

I find it hard to see how serious technology could evolve underwater. It would be a bit like if we had needed to do everything from cooking to metallurgy to electronics in a vacuum.

If you go the steampunk route you don't need electronics to make computers.

Short of leaping directly to optronics, show me a method of making analog or logic circuits with anything like the speed of current (or even early 20th century) electronics without actually using electronics.

How about biological computers using something akin to neurons? (totally talking out of my ass here....)

The point being that as Steve pointed out in the podcast, we are kind of constrained to our single data point when it comes to picturing alien technology. It could be something ridiculously bizarre and foreign to what we might conceive of.