Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Overcoming Bias Commenter's avatar

Thank you for indulging with my thought process.Off late I have been using the word entity to describe similar traits. The reason for that choice of word are as follows:- It allows me to remove physical attributes - It leaves me with enough room to talk about intelligence at various levels such as intelligence at a microscopic level to intelligence at a larger social level

On the above line of thought, in my opinion, when we talk about future of life in the universe we should split it further- Future of life form as an entity ( notice how I’m not making it specific here )- Future of life form as a physical manifestation in human form perhaps ?- Future of life form as a non-physical manifestation

One of the pieces I’m personally struggling with is dynamics around whenever the topic of generic vs specific comes and whether one holds more meaning than other. Allow me to elaborate, in the above context a generic life form would be, as I understand from your posts, some form of life whereas as biologists see ( once again from your posts ), life as a specific form of what we call biological in nature. I believe both are valid lines of thought even though it is true that our biological form gives us certain disadvantages when it comes to universe faring entities but on the other hand, a generic meaning of life could as well mean that it exists in current universe just our brain is unable to comprehend it.

Expand full comment
RobinHanson's avatar

What is your suggestion for better terminology?

Expand full comment
12 more comments...

No posts