Living in a multispecies society

[Independent voter]

What would we do with the bovines? They can't control their bowels.

[Sci Fi Samurai]

I'm not sure that human level AI is a good idea. It always makes me think of Frankenstein, where he pursued the success of a goal irrespective of the ramifications. The result was that he created something he loathed that, eventually, gained enough awareness to recognize that it was loathed and then loathed itself. I'd worry that the burden of misery would render the endeavor more cruel than anything.

I also figured that genetic modification might be ridiculed at first, but it wouldn't be long before people began to edit their appearances like bigger dicks/boobs whatever. Something like that would probably catch on fast and go from a slow roll to a sudden avalanche. Making kitty cat faces etc after would easily segue after that.

[Deleted]

As long as there's a futanari planet I agree with Connal

Concise and to the point. As expected.

[Shalcker]

Add Bowel control vis adding genetic traits that give them bowel control? Hehe...

Just make them wear pampers as required attire.

[I Push Buttons]

If they are conscious, and "better" it does not bother me, personally. But we can choose to merge with the machine(or biological creation), instead of being supplanted by it.

But your wanting to merge with them, with their being conscious and knowing they are better than you, might bother them. In fact its almost a forgone conclusion, especially if we model them after ourselves.

*looks at thousands of years of racial tension and the idea of racial superiority*

[Paperfox]

We are already living in a multi-species environment. Think of all the dogs and cats living with us.

[Spl4sh3r]

One thing I can see coming if we have multispecies is places that only allow one species. So like human only area so that we human can interact only with other humans. Similar to how some nudist areas only allow naked people and so on.

[May90]

I don't think it is necessary. The way I see it, a multispecies society isn't principally different from a multinational or a multiracial society, it just requires individuals to be more open-minded.

Unless we are talking about different species of entirely different evolutionary stages which physically cannot live together, such as humans and lions, for example. You are unlikely to build a society of humans and lions without making humans into prey, or lions into slaves. In such cases, I suppose, segregation is necessary, to prevent the species from harming each other.

Where the threshold is between the two, I don't know. I suppose any combination of intelligent species can live together in a single society, given a certain minimal technological level to accommodate for everyone's needs without resorting to violence - but, again, where a beast ends and an intelligent creature starts is a difficult question.

---

On the other hand, for example, domesticated types of dogs and cats live just well along with humans, not harming each other any more than humans harm each other. Perhaps, regardless of the species, given a certain amount of exposure to the society, they in some way eventually necessarily integrate into that society. If that is true, then perhaps we've been looking at this question at the wrong angle. Perhaps all species can live in a society, although some might need temporary special treatment to integrate them. For example, if you capture 1000 jungle panthers and release them in the middle of Times Square right now, it will be a slaughter - but if you first form a natural park for those panthers, then slowly open this park up for visitors, then in 50 years panthers from that park could be let in on the streets without any damage done to either them or anyone else.

[kail]

It will depend on behavior and average intelligence of the new species/AI.

[vilememory]

We can't even get along with our own species! Holy fuck and you want to throw in more? Hell many groups will kill each other on skin coloration. Others will kill their own skin coloration because they happen to live on the wrong side of a rock! All those on the left side are scum, only we right siders are in the right. See those assholes? They butter the bottom of their toast, we gotta wipe them out.

[May90]

I agree with the sentiment, and that would be my ideal outcome. However currently, as we stand, we are having issues dealing with people that are different religions, genders, sexual orientations, or skin pigment... so I have doubt that, as is, humanity will accept equal rights (lawful ones) for Human/Animal Hybrids, AI/Robots, or heavily modified humans.

I think as time goes on... maybe... but honestly, I think without some major cultural shift in our thinking, most humans will not accept things they will see as "not natural". Which to most people that support transhumanism has no real meaning, and is just a moral judgment, but to lay people that seems to be something very important.

Not everyone entering the society accepts its values, that is true. However, as long as legal laws of that society are applied equally to everyone, I think long-term any intelligent species is going to adapt to living in that society and accept, at least partially, its values. I would also argue that societies of the future should be built with the idea of different individuals having completely different values in mind, so integration itself can become a more foggy and less relevant term, as essentially anyone let in, as long as they don't physically harm others, will be considered integrated.

Also, I think AIs/robots will be a much lesser problem than, say, an alien civilization built on "survival of the strongeth" (like Protheans from Mass Effect), as those AIs/robots will be a human product, and there will necessarily be natural mechanisms in them facilitating integration. A completely different alien race with completely different values might see us as little more than pests to be exterminated, and, in fact, our extermination might just be their physiological need. I still think a multispecies society can work in such cases, but individuals from one or both sides will need to be willing to reject a lot of their values, and, I suppose, in some extreme cases it might not be possible in practice.

[Masark]

1) No two species can occupy the same niche in a given biosphere.

Why do you presume this applies to intelligent species?

[Demona3]

I saw this the other day... is this what you are getting at? 'Cause... /headdesk
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...uman-body.html

[Deleted]

That would be great. But our first intent will be to create slaves which will make our lives better.

And we know from history what slaves always will try to do.

And sorry, but mankind isnt able to learn from history. The last year shows that more than ever before.

Oh really? I haven't really seen a cow rebellion yet.. or a horse rebellion, or cat rebellion for that matter. If we were to create robot servants, who in their right mind would try to give them minds that emulate humans? It would be far easier to just make them without ambition and desires.

Hell just look in the mirror, you yourself are largely driven by your basic core programming such as seeking food when youre hungry, avoid getting hurt, wanting to .. um, multiply. and not many go against that even though we think we have free will. Most people wont even go against less important instincts such trying to avoid being an embarrassment.

Now sure, theyre might be defective robots (and even then far less than humans willing to go against instincts as robots dont have natural mutations through mixing their genes, theyre manufactured). But assuming you get a few here and there, they would just be defective units and other robots would look at them as some kind of freaks, much like humans, when they see people who go against instincts. They wouldnt join them in a rebellion.

[Theodarzna]

Why do you presume this applies to intelligent species?

Species are species. I see no apt reason why two species will co-exist in the same niche.

[Independent voter]

Jessica Rabbit and her husband Rodger.

[Dezerte]

I think modified humans will be accepted fairly smoothly- we're practically already started this process, we modify ourselves (e.g. tatoos) and we use synthetic parts (e.g. pacemaker). But I think uplifted non-humans are going to have issues being recognized. AI could potentially face the same issues as well.

The latter two are of course also problematic ethically speaking. How would an uplifted animal really feel? Can you imagine yourself living with a horse's body? I think we'd need to be proceed very very carefully here if we even should try. AI's may be a bit of a mixed bag depending on what you mean, AI as in an artificial human mind will run into the same issues as the uplifted animals - the human mind is not designed mentally to use a synthetic body, but perhaps if we can create a synthetic body that is so real it may not be an issue. But will the first human-AI posses one of these bodies? Or will it be stuck inside a computer, perhaps housed within a crude robot like ASIMO? Imagine what that would do to the human mind.

I see no reason why we should create a human AI and while the prospect of creating life is intriguing it is wrought with ethical problems. I do however see AI's that are "better" than us in the sense of raw power and speed (e.g. robotic manufactures of cars) becoming more and more advanced. While removing all the "faults" of the human mind (e.g. self-preservation, greed, anger, etc). As an added bonus a robot uprising is highly unlikely in this scenario.

[Theodarzna]

They can... it just tends to not work well.. Lions, Tigers, and Wolves share a few different places (or border each other) apex predators rarely get along.

Though I do find it interesting that we befriended two species that are apex predators (in their environments) as our main "pets"... Cats and Dogs. Cats still kill more critters than any other pets.

My hope would be that given enough resources, and enough intelligence/compassion/empathy, etc, two human level intelligent beings can co-exist on the same planet. Of course, I could be wrong.

They are pets though, that isn't a system of equality. We sterilize them and keep them about for our amusement. Even Dolphins and such whom are intelligent we mostly hunt and or keep around for our own amusement.

[Powerogue]

I had a discussion with @Connal recently about posthumanism, the possibility of parahumans (genetically modified humans with genes taken from the genomes of other species), A.I and even slightly less probable beings such as biological uplifts. The main point being how living in a multispecies society would/could/should work.

Obviously in a world where augmentation and gene editing become a norm (or at least a sizable minority practice these tools for biohacking) there will always be those who oppose this or prefer to stay unmodified.

Connal suggested that one way to bypass the significant differences that could arise in this hypothetical future is the essentially segregate different people to different planets.


I'm interested in having a wider discussion with more diverse opinions.

Cute in concept, but we have no other habitable planets available. The sheer terraforming that would be required to make one even remotely homely would be a lot of work, and even then would these parahumans even want to live there?

It's not a matter of "if" so much as "when", but I do think we're a ways off growing people wings. It'll start with small things like eradicating genetic diseases.

[Halicia]

Cute in concept, but we have no other habitable planets available. The sheer terraforming that would be required to make one even remotely homely would be a lot of work, and even then would these parahumans even want to live there?

It's not a matter of "if" so much as "when", but I do think we're a ways off growing people wings. It'll start with small things like eradicating genetic diseases.

Inhabitable by what ? Oxygen-breathing humans ?

The most viable solution aside from cosmetic DNA tweaks for posthumanism, imo, is consciousness-transplanting into a cybernetic host of some sort. I find little reason why the moon or nearby planets (aside from the gaseous ones) wouldn't be a suitable home for beings that have little need of the atmosphere. In fact it might be preferable, if the real estate on earth is at a premium, and such digital beings could migrate hosts without the need of physically escaping the gravity well of Earth.

My "concern" in this regards though, is what say, if any, would a cybernetic transplant have in a democratic society. If they are deemed "a citizen" then the population of Immortals will eventually exceed that of mortal humans, and well... you know what happens to minorities in a democracy. If they are deemed non-citizens (a likely event given the inevitable death of the mortal "egg" they are hatched from), then they will have no effective say in their government... and I think the results of that isn't hard to predict. Tea Party on the Moon ? Maybe there's a middle ground to be found, but I think that only buys time until the problem of one extreme or the other comes to fruition.