From: Amy Hebert <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 04:06:02 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 17:52:37 -0400 Subject: Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude >Subject: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude >From: Mark Cashman <email@example.com> >Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 02:43:48 -0400 >To: firstname.lastname@example.org >4) Can non-human goals be extracted from out-of-context slices >of behavior and, if so, how is that to be done reliably? Interesting concepts, Mark. Perhaps we cannot understand non-human beings, their behaviors, their goals from a human point of view. It would be like saying birds, reptiles and primates all think and act alike. However, there is one common point at which we all meet to some extent or another - we exist in the same reality, whatever it may be. That we perceive them and they perceive us indicates one common ground where we meet. We interact in this time and space dimension on some level or another and that is where it all begins. It is not necessary to classify other worldly/dimensional beings according to what it means to be human or what we _think_ it means to be "alien". We can allow them to exist - anywhere in the universe whether here or there - without making them extensions of ourselves or us extensions of them. We may not understand them but we can accept their existence as a part of this universe we all share. Just as we accept the existence of elephants, ants and turtles, we can accept their existence and our own. I think we, as humans, are coming to realize these facts about all life in the universe no matter how many lies and illusions surround the truth. And this does not make us one but rather one of _many_ lifeforms that exist in the universe. We may not know the intent of other worldly/dimensional beings any more than they may understand us. All that can be done is to speculate intent based on behavioral patterns we have studied before. And since most behavioral studies thus far have been based either on human, plant or animal behavior, we naturally generalize our theories to all beings we encounter. Considering the difficulty of observing beings of other worldly/dimensional origins, we have little to correlate with previous behavioral studies and therefore speculate and theorize far beyond the meager data obtained thus far. With so little to go on and such a need to understand, any data - accurate or false - is used in attempts to know the unknown. Although there is much room for improvement, I see these attempts to understand other worldly/dimensional beings (you may call them "non-human' or whatever turns your crank) as a natural growth process that occurs when one species encounters another hitherto unknown species. And this applies to "them" as well no matter how long "they" may have been here observing us. I evaluate behaviors according to what one does stopping just short of assigning intent. I look for consistancies that transcend illusion and imagination. As my old psych professor used to say, "We can't observe thoughts so don't tell me what the client is thinking, tell me what they are _doing_." Without deducing intent, describe the behaviors. What one _does_ speaks louder than what one says or what we think they are saying. Amy Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp