Recently a friend of a friend directed me to a post he had written about sentience. He was giving merit to sentience, recognizing its benefits - namely, the ability to self-organize and fight entropy. I added to his post by inquiring into the evolutionary arisal of sentience in humans. Here it is:
Being biased as I am (I enjoy being human and being cognitive), you've got to admit, humans are pretty cool - our ability to create tools is unrivaled. Our tools range from aids for catching/eating food, defense, education, to creating music and enhancing recreation. Our ability to be self-aware and invent is astounding.
I believe sentience arose via evolutionary biology and natural selection. Humans are not great predators and can be easy prey. Without tools, it would have been difficult for us to survive. While we can survive as herbivores, we are easy targets for anything with great speed, mechanical power, or toxic chemical warfare. It was therefore advantageous for humans to gain the ability to be self-aware, to organize, to collect...etc. Our defense lies within our ability to use tools. And, in general, greater cognition allows predators to capture prey which utilize a more advanced mechanical-motor system. Our sentience is for survival.
Why then, have our tools expanded beyond those required for survival? What is the 'purpose' of a violin, for example? What evolutionary advantage does a water ski or a golf club provide? Are we superior in that sense to other animals? Since we no longer compete with other animals for resources, are we permitted to live lives of luxury? Also, our social structures are vast: we've formed communities, governments, class systems, etc. Are we superior because of our ability to organize? Again, I ask evolution for answers: quality of life allows for greater survival. And, here within lies the key: intra-species competition is driving our evolution (though we will constantly be battling microorganisms because their ability to adapt is much more rapid than ours).
It is interesting to observe what qualifies as quality of life. One would argue that tools increase our quality of life. The industrial revolution mechanized many previously hard-labor jobs, freeing workers to specialize and advance business to where it is today - a global marketplace with remarkably advanced communication systems and a greater access to technology and information than ever before (with which to create more tools). One would think that this has allowed humans to be superior in their life strategy than other life forms. More complex, yes. More superior? Tough call.
Despite access to tools, others would argue that our survival depends on our 'pursuit of happiness,' for, unhappy and stressed people tend to be weaker breeders. Evolution depends in large part on reproductive fitness. Interestingly, nations with the greatest access to tools have some of the lowest parent to offspring ratios - thus, reproductive fitness has lowered. With a labor market that has expanded, competition has increased. And, with that increased competition, has come greater stress and isolation (I might be stretching this argument just a tad!). In some cases, I would argue, that elephants have practiced greater social connections than some humans. Soon, if not already, there may be a 'tipping point' where humans cry out to return to their 'roots' - to the thing that makes them 'human' - their ability to connect with others and to the Earth. They may seek to simplify their lives, reduce their tools, and live in an arguably more 'sustainable' pace of life (wow, this argument is getting biased).
So, in the end, is sentience more complex than other life forms? Yes - if you look at the range of human capabilities, we are able to perform more functions than any other animal species. While other animals have AMAZING adaptations to their environments, their cognitive limitations restrict the niches they can exploit. Is sentience more superior? For survival, no - with greater protection against predators via the invention of tools, humans have subsequently increased intra-species competition which has arguably put strains on our reproductive fitness.
I believe sentience arose via evolutionary biology and natural selection. Humans are not great predators and can be easy prey. Without tools, it would have been difficult for us to survive. While we can survive as herbivores, we are easy targets for anything with great speed, mechanical power, or toxic chemical warfare. It was therefore advantageous for humans to gain the ability to be self-aware, to organize, to collect...etc. Our defense lies within our ability to use tools. And, in general, greater cognition allows predators to capture prey which utilize a more advanced mechanical-motor system. Our sentience is for survival.
Why then, have our tools expanded beyond those required for survival? What is the 'purpose' of a violin, for example? What evolutionary advantage does a water ski or a golf club provide? Are we superior in that sense to other animals? Since we no longer compete with other animals for resources, are we permitted to live lives of luxury? Also, our social structures are vast: we've formed communities, governments, class systems, etc. Are we superior because of our ability to organize? Again, I ask evolution for answers: quality of life allows for greater survival. And, here within lies the key: intra-species competition is driving our evolution (though we will constantly be battling microorganisms because their ability to adapt is much more rapid than ours).
It is interesting to observe what qualifies as quality of life. One would argue that tools increase our quality of life. The industrial revolution mechanized many previously hard-labor jobs, freeing workers to specialize and advance business to where it is today - a global marketplace with remarkably advanced communication systems and a greater access to technology and information than ever before (with which to create more tools). One would think that this has allowed humans to be superior in their life strategy than other life forms. More complex, yes. More superior? Tough call.
Despite access to tools, others would argue that our survival depends on our 'pursuit of happiness,' for, unhappy and stressed people tend to be weaker breeders. Evolution depends in large part on reproductive fitness. Interestingly, nations with the greatest access to tools have some of the lowest parent to offspring ratios - thus, reproductive fitness has lowered. With a labor market that has expanded, competition has increased. And, with that increased competition, has come greater stress and isolation (I might be stretching this argument just a tad!). In some cases, I would argue, that elephants have practiced greater social connections than some humans. Soon, if not already, there may be a 'tipping point' where humans cry out to return to their 'roots' - to the thing that makes them 'human' - their ability to connect with others and to the Earth. They may seek to simplify their lives, reduce their tools, and live in an arguably more 'sustainable' pace of life (wow, this argument is getting biased).
So, in the end, is sentience more complex than other life forms? Yes - if you look at the range of human capabilities, we are able to perform more functions than any other animal species. While other animals have AMAZING adaptations to their environments, their cognitive limitations restrict the niches they can exploit. Is sentience more superior? For survival, no - with greater protection against predators via the invention of tools, humans have subsequently increased intra-species competition which has arguably put strains on our reproductive fitness.
No comments:
Post a Comment