How would the process for uplifting a species work?

[Techno-Druid]

Just curious, I was kind enough to not touch this subject for a few months, but I've been thinking once again that if we are to uplift a species (whatever species that may be), how should the process work?

Uplifting as a concept can imply both cultural uplifting (which has taken place with some human cultures in the past and present) and biological (done via genetic engineering).

For example, if we are to uplift a large terrestrial, sentient species by biological enhancement to make them sapient and give them a human level of reasoning and the various types of human intelligence, then what do we do after?

Do we simply take a hands off approach and allow them to completely create cultures and civilizations without the direct interference of humanity? Or do we teach them our established morals, languages, taboos and concepts of law and either allow them to self-govern themselves or assimilate them.

(You have to admit, these threads are still better than all the Donald Trump threads on this forum)

[wrathblade]

Easy! we DON'T!
Best way to start a war is to create a beeing thats capable of thought on a human level!

Also WHY would we do this???
Are the going to be cheap labor? we'd practically just call them slaves.
Are the going to replace us? aka enhance the human body with dna mapping and adjustments?
Will the be made to go places we cannot aka long space travels?

There so many things that will go wrong when our little pets retaliate against our control.

[GennGreymane]

Lets not

would lead to revolution!

[Simulacrum]

The easy answer is that it's such a horrifyingly immoral premise that you wouldn't do it unless you had some purpose in mind for the species you were creating, in which case it'd depend on the purpose you had in mind for it.

[Techno-Druid]

Lets not

would lead to revolution!

Why though? Why do we have the Frankenstein's Monster paranoia that if we create advanced A.I or uplift a species they will suddenly go crazy and start a violent revolution?

Not that there wouldn't be pain and conflict, but wouldn't it make more sense in the distant future for hypothetical uplifted species to protest through entering into politics to ensure that their communities are taken care of or protesting peacefully.

[Dezerte]

I question whether it's even moral to uplift another species to begin with.

[Guyv3r]

Teach them religion and watch them doom themselves

[Independent voter]

I was thinking the same thing. I don't know if they covered it in the movie or not.

[Dhrizzle]

We wouldn't uplift them to the level of humans or even give them sapience. We'd give them some improvements for communication, allowing them to use language the same way humans do, maybe enhance their problem solving skills (though it would make more sense to use a creature that already has problem-solving skills) and adapt their pleasure centres so they derive satisfaction from pleasing/obeying humans. Then we'll put them to work in places they're well adapted to, things like Octopuses being used for operating things underwater or in space, primates and possibly rodents working in the infrastructure of a city etc.

After we develop super-intelligent benevolent AI and completely hand over society to machines I daresay any species uplifted in his way will be allowed to have their own communities and "cultures," watched over by our machine overlords/slaves.

[Revi]

No idea why you'd want to do this. It seems like an awful thing to do.

[Hiricine]

You really couldn't create a new intelligent species without at the bare minimum of several thousands of years of selective breeding, and even then you'd probably fail it. If you bred something to be intelligent and it didn't have opposable fingers it'd really be a wreck because they couldn't even reliably use tools effectively that weren't made specifically for them, and those would be a pain in the ass. Think about a dog trying to drive a car.

If you did have to pick a species, for that very reason, the very easiest non-primate would probably be raccoons because of their opposable digits.

[Techno-Druid]

I question whether it's even moral to uplift another species to begin with.

That's a good question. I think that moralty can be subjective, one would argue that it would be immoral to not offer the privileges we enjoy to closely linked species that share the same basic emotional complexity and self-awareness as us (elephants, apes, dolphins, seals, etc).

That's why I like the realistic implications of uplift, it's hardly talked about in name (although featured all across literature and other media a lot for a long time) and it's rarely looked at as much more than a trope or metaphor for an oppressed or oppressive ethnic group or culture.

[Kelathos]

Ignorance is bliss. Leave them to nature.

[Shalcker]

We wouldn't uplift them to the level of humans or even give them sapience. We'd give them some improvements for communication, allowing them to use language the same way humans do, maybe enhance their problem solving skills (though it would make more sense to use a creature that already has problem-solving skills) and adapt their pleasure centres so they derive satisfaction from pleasing/obeying humans. Then we'll put them to work in places they're well adapted to, things like Octopuses being used for operating things underwater or in space, primates and possibly rodents working in the infrastructure of a city etc.

I think most of culture/civilization comes from mechanisms of accumulating and preserving knowledge of "solved problems" past generation boundaries.

Strike out early self-reinforcing learning out of those species and effective mechanisms of general knowledge transfer (for example rather then giving them speech give them ability to recognize and get instant emotional impact from specialized training symbols), and you can have smart self-aware sapient species that you can teach what you need with good mix of extrinsic rewards and that will be completely unable to function as civilization without humans instantly reverting to primitive level, thus never rising to the level of "civilizational threat".

...hell, get current humans out of civilization and you'll get just a really smart animal as real "Mowgli" stories show.

After we develop super-intelligent benevolent AI and completely hand over society to machines I daresay any species uplifted in his way will be allowed to have their own communities and "cultures," watched over by our machine overlords/slaves.

Or we can keep those machines as "generational memory aid" for those species, thus removing need to create knowledge transfer mechanisms for "uplifted" species, and having ability to wipe out their generational knowledge reverting all their gains in a pitch.

[Deleted]

A delusion of grandeur, is my only answer.

[Jessicka]

Are you sure you want this?

[Zephire]

I would assume we introduce them to our ways, no? Better give them a sound foundation then letting them start from scratch. Both for us and for them. From there we might go our separate ways.

I can see why we wouldn't uplift anything considering how much problems we cause among ourself, with only humans. However, we're still capable to do great things and it would be sad if we limit ourself due to some bad examples.

[Techno-Druid]

I would assume we introduce them to our ways, no? Better give them a sound foundation then letting them start from scratch. Both for us and for them. From there we might go our separate ways.

I can see why we wouldn't uplift anything considering how much problems we cause among ourself, with only humans. However, we're still capable to do great things and it would be sad if we limit ourself due to some bad examples.

I like this way. I would realistically want people to consider an uplift an equal being deserving of human rights rather than a mere animal or slave. This seems like a vert respectful way to uplift.

[Kujako]

Have sex with everything, see what happens?

[Deleted]

I like this way. I would realistically want people to consider an uplift an equal being deserving of human rights rather than a mere animal or slave. This seems like a vert respectful way to uplift.

Realistically speaking ; It's delusional and plain stupid.

If humans were as agressive as ants, for instance, the world would have been blown up over 7 times over.

Humans are bad enough, we don't need to make more variations of humans.