![The Great Filter theory finally solved [1292x918 - 259KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/NvkH7D.png){kind=link}
But you’re assuming that a civilization must be human-like. If ever we were to discover a T3 civilization I’d think it would most likely be a hivemind type structure. Think like ants, or termites, but on a galactic scale. To me, consumerism is such a human concept that it seems silly to assume that any other species would fall subject to it. I mean there is literally no other species on earth that is subject to consumerism, why would alien species be likely to?
I mean there is literally no other species on earth that is subject to consumerism...
Except for all of them. What do you think the signs that say;
Don't feed the wild animals it creates a dependent population. bad thing bad thing bad thing
...describe?
That's consumerism. The "dependent" population is bad because it dies off. When an entire local, natural fauna dies off it causes significant ecological disharmony and damage.
Your problem is you're limiting what "consumerism" means for everything to what it specifically means for humans. That's ridiculous.
Just like "racism" doesn't exist with nonhuman species. Except it does.
Except that even in your example, the “consumerism” of other species doesn’t exist without humans providing it. There aren’t any squirrels giving up their acorns so they can have nicer tree holes
Sure because we rarely see populations die off due to nature being too bountiful randomly. Except we do. More specifically with plants.
Balance is a natural byproduct if existence in nature in the biological sense. Climate and whether can throw that balance off and end up causing a mass death of local ecological species.
We don't see it (that way) because we do see it and it's just natural. As a new balance is established in the ashes of the old unbalance.
You're again thinking of things on human terms. Stop it. You are limiting how you see the question so much by doing that.
All higher species on Earth are prone to addiction as far as I can tell. Arguably, addiction is a biological necessity. There aren't many situations where seeking more of a good thing isn't evolutionarily successful. There can be particular niches that go against this principle and they may even be the ones eventually surviving a "consumerist" selection event but from an evolutionary point of view I would expect a civilization to evolve from a consumerist species.
I also reject the hive-mind hypothesis. This could be more of a terminology issue but, as I understand the term, in a hive-mind, every single mind is less important to the collective and overall survival is easier leading to a weaker evolutionary drive towards higher intelligence. A highly interconnected individual-based civilization seems more likely to me. It has all of the upsides and none of the downsides when compared to the true hive mind.
(post is archived)