FPQ22: Aliens?!!

Fandango provocatively asks…

“Are we alone in this vast and expanding universe? Do you believe that intelligent, alien life exists? Defend your answer.”

I think it’s highly likely that intelligent, alien life exists now, or once did and died out, which of course could divert us into an interesting discussion about the nature of time itself and if it exists.

My defense is basically why not? There are so many planets with so many atmospheric configurations over such a vast amount of time… why wouldn’t intelligent life have appeared (and possibly disappeared) on places other than Earth? It’s rather egocentric to believe that we’re the only intelligent life that exists anywhere.

I use the word “intelligent” very broadly of course, in case any aliens 👽 are reading my post and rolling their glowing eyeballs.

20 responses to “FPQ22: Aliens?!!

  1. Aliens 👾 👽 are even on WordPress?

    Liked by 1 person

  2. “It’s rather egocentric to believe that we’re the only intelligent life that exists anywhere.” Yes, and it’s rather egocentric to believe that God, allegedly the creator of the universe, would pick this one planet, Earth, out of all the planets in this vast, ever expanding universe as the one and only place where intelligent life exists. But then again, God is a creation of man, so there you go.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Ooh! I have an idea. Supposedly there are multiple creation myths in the Bible ~ maybe they’re for different planets!

      Liked by 2 people

      • There are multiples. The first chapter of Genesis was probably written during the Babylonian exile, which is why so much of it matches some pretty ancient near/mid-east mythology. The older bit is Chapter 2, which was probably written in about 900BC when King David (if there was such a guy) was running the place. Detailed readings give you totally different sequences, different gods, and different tone.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Because it’s egocentric doesn’t make it wrong. I mean, it IS wrong, but because it’s egocentric isn’t a REASON it’s wrong. It’s wrong because of chemistry, physics, biology, the nature of deep space/time, and statistical probability, in fact wrong to a very high confidence level. But to say it’s wrong because being a blushing, digging my toe in the dirt humble sort SEEMS like it ought to be real evidence, is in fact kinda silly, and leads to a vast and splendidly off-base variety of thinking errors.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. A religious question, because there is no data to inform an answer beyond how we as individuals understand our relationship with the cosmos.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. There are no actual facts – they all relate to one mode of thought or another. There are creation myths for every religion, not just Christianity or the Jewish religion. And there are creation myths from ancient civilisations, like the Mayans and Aztecs. It seems that humankind needs to create creation myths. I believe there has to be life other than ours in this vast universe – the question is – is there sentient life – or, even better, where does the sentient life hang out in our universe?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Yes, lots of myths. It is interesting that we feel the need to create these stories. And what a shame the “intelligent life” on one planet can’t work together for the betterment of all!

      Liked by 1 person

    • Oh, there are all kinds of actual facts — modes don’t matter at all. This kind of sentiment, in fact, is skidding right up against Asimov’s complaint that “equality” these days seems to mean “my opinion is as good as your fact” which is absolutely not true. Ever. I do agree with the rest of your comment with one caveat: If you can’t define “sentient” or if you make “sentient” to mean “human-like” you’re done for before you start. If we’re gonna do that, we’d just as well define “sentience” as that worldview being generally possessed by white males over 50 which means anyone who operates with a different standard, or worldview is, by definition, not sentient. Incidentally, I’ve argued for this standard, but can’t seem to make any headway, particularly among the non-sentient, so I’m guessing you might also have problems with whatever definition you have in mind.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. I’ll argue it some time, Asbestos Dust.


Your thoughts?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.