Most scientists agree that if any aliens visit us, they would be more advanced than us. The scientists also say that they aliens would probably not be hostile. However, humans have a long history of being hostile to civilizations that are less advanced than them.

When Europeans first started going to Africa, they found African tribes with less technology. As a result, the Europeans took the Africans, and made them slaves.

When Europeans first started going to America, they began killing the Native Americans. Then they took their land, and made them live on little reservations.

As you can see, humans have had a long history of being hostile to civilizations less advanced than them. What makes you think the aliens won't be the same way?

> Most scientists agree that if any aliens visit us, they would be more advanced
> than us. The scientists also say that they aliens would probably not be
> hostile. However, humans have a long history of being hostile to
> civilizations that are less advanced than them.
>
> When Europeans first started going to Africa, they found African tribes with
> less technology. As a result, the Europeans took the Africans, and made them
> slaves.
>
> When Europeans first started going to America, they began killing the Native
> Americans. Then they took their land, and made them live on little
> reservations.
>
> As you can see, humans have had a long history of being hostile to
> civilizations less advanced than them. What makes you think the aliens won't
> be the same way?
>

What makes you think that human nature is a universal constant? We could be the exception, rather than the rule.

---

You will be assimilated...bunghole!

> Most scientists agree that if any aliens visit us, they would be more advanced
> than us. The scientists also say that they aliens would probably not be
> hostile. However, humans have a long history of being hostile to
> civilizations that are less advanced than them.
>
> When Europeans first started going to Africa, they found African tribes with
> less technology. As a result, the Europeans took the Africans, and made them
> slaves.
>
> When Europeans first started going to America, they began killing the Native
> Americans. Then they took their land, and made them live on little
> reservations.
>
> As you can see, humans have had a long history of being hostile to
> civilizations less advanced than them. What makes you think the aliens won't
> be the same way?

It's not just humanity that shows a predisposition towards violence when it concerns a dominant-subserviant interaction. Every day in "the wild", we see predatory actions taken by species of animals that are driven by biological stimulus, not to mention what we conceive to be territoriality. Ants will swarn any invaders approaching the hive, including ants of the same type, bees will be incredibly possessive upon intrusion into the hive.

Human beings believe that we're superior to everyone else. Helps to be driven by the id> in all of us. You could say that our history has shown us to be afraid of whatever we can't understand and that drove us to exploit, fear, and indeed kill others that we perceived as lesser. Survival of the fittest is driven by natural selection and evolution,(sorry Church people!) Modern day thinking is shaped by our society's changed needs and we've become more benevolent towards "third world" countries. Maybe this might be the same mindset that others view us upon contact.

Then again, it might just be easier to play cosmic billiards and dump our planet down the corner pocket.

---

> What makes you think that human nature is a universal constant? We could be
> the exception, rather than the rule.

Short answer: Occam's Razor. The simplest answer is a technological race would develop as we developed, through competition for survival.

As I stated in another post in this forum, there's a valid line of logic that says that a species develops the ability to create and use technology because initially it gives a survival advantage in an intensely competitive environment. The goal of technology is to be dominant in one's environment, and that implies an instinct for selfishness (or "species selfishness" in any case). It is extremely unlikely that a species would develop the complex changes for "extreme" intelligence needed for abstract concepts, the ability to use complex tools, AND the capacity for language to pass on information without natural selection reinforcing success.

Our only example so far of a technological species-- humans-- has a barely checked competitive and combative nature about it despite how "enlightened" we've become socially. Given we don't yet fully understand the effort it will take to become a starfaring race, we have little else to speculate on the
social and moral philosophy required for the endeavor. Our own space race seems to make progress only in response to direct competition and ultimate reward, be it winning the Cold War or the X-Prize. Look what lack of "purely scientific curiosity" and obvious tangible reward did for SETI's funding in the US Congress.

Frankly we have little data to indicate a starfaring race WOULDN'T be as selfish and hostile as we are. The only counterargument seems to be a species has to limit aggression to survive its own nuclear age. So far we seem to be doing that without shedding the basic hostilities that are at our core as a species.