87 réponses à ce sujet

[Dean_the_Young]

There's virtually nothing about our social structure that has to do with us being bipedal. Indeed, social structures do trump physical attributes alone (or else humans wouldn't dominate), but being a biped doesn't necessitate any of them, though I'd love to hear why you think we wouldn't have our organizations if we walked with four legs and two arms and the same brain rather than two legs and two arms and the same brain.



What's far more important to our social structure isn't that we have legs, but rather that our children take a long time to form (nine monthes), are generally born not by the lot but by one, and then are not only weak at the time of birth, but remain too weak to survive on their own after birth for a great deal of time. An biological weakness (weak children) became an evolutionary social strength (evolution forcing humans to stay together and cooperate in order to continue breeding).



But even that had nothing innate to being bipedal that couldn't apply if we had four, or six, or a dozen legs.





The closest thing to 'more favorable to social structure' argument I can plausibly think of is that bipedal people take up less horizontal space... which is more because we're vertically oriented while more legs allow more stable horizontal orientation. But a lack of horizontal space hasn't been that great a barrier to society for most of human development.







The simplest, most logical reason why most the Council space-faring species are bipedal besides a 'writer fiat' is that evolution is sooner to evolve four limbs than six, and that the 'head start' on limbs-that-could-be-manipulators is important enough.

[Dean_the_Young]

Archontor wrote...

ounce again paraphrasing tv tropes in africa some tribes utilise 'endurance hunting' which is basicaly calmly following a gazell or antelope until it collapses and is theorised to be the oldest hunting method in human history

And those tribes are not the dominant peoples of this planet.

The dominant peoples don't hunt their food. They grow it.


Besides which, 'endurance hunting' is applicable to all predator species who happen to have higher endurance than their prey. There are a number of species who tire their pray before killing and/or consuming them. It isn't in the least something only available to, or dominated by, bipeds: you give me a horse with a saddle and you walking, and I will get away from you. 'Outwalking the horse' strategems largely succede because animals, like the rest of us, don't want to run any faster than they normally have to, and so they don't run far, and don't have the brains to know they should.

also i should point that another advantage humans have is that for some reason we can resist a large amounts of poisons

Lots of species have higher poison tolerance than we do. It has nothing to do with being biped, and everything to do with population density and environment: species acclimate to what they naturally encounter, while more compact populations breed (and become immune to) more diseases that can affect others.

[88mphSlayer]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

There's virtually nothing about our social structure that has to do with us being bipedal. Indeed, social structures do trump physical attributes alone (or else humans wouldn't dominate), but being a biped doesn't necessitate any of them, though I'd love to hear why you think we wouldn't have our organizations if we walked with four legs and two arms and the same brain rather than two legs and two arms and the same brain.

because we aren't ants, we have to use our limbs and hands to construct shelter and grab food, we have larger brains than usual we need to balance our head above our slim body, we can't use our teeth to kill things we need to make tools

[Dean_the_Young]

Uh, ants use their limbs and appendages to make shelters and grab food. They're kind of famous for building their own homes, and while it's true they do have evolved large mandibles, that's just one of many kinds of manipulators out there. Like our lips.

Having a larger brain is a coincidence of evolution, not to balance our heads: our neck bones and muscles provide infinitely more support and control, than a fluid-filled sac, while our ear canals provide our sense of balance. The brain doesn't act as a centrifugal force, nor does it perform the balance functions, nor does it 'sense' things on its own. These apply to all animals.

There are hundreds of species that don't have the teeth to kill things, or even kill things at all. Besides poisons, traps, and other appendages to kill things, a number of species eat plants. We're omnivores, yes, but that has nothing to do with being bipedal. We can kill and consume a lot of things without needing complex tools, and that's exactly what we did before we evolved to where we are today.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 16 janvier 2011 - 04:51 .

[Archontor]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Archontor wrote...

ounce again paraphrasing tv tropes in africa some tribes utilise 'endurance hunting' which is basicaly calmly following a gazell or antelope until it collapses and is theorised to be the oldest hunting method in human history

And those tribes are not the dominant peoples of this planet.

The dominant peoples don't hunt their food. They grow it.


Besides which, 'endurance hunting' is applicable to all predator species who happen to have higher endurance than their prey. There are a number of species who tire their pray before killing and/or consuming them. It isn't in the least something only available to, or dominated by, bipeds: you give me a horse with a saddle and you walking, and I will get away from you. 'Outwalking the horse' strategems largely succede because animals, like the rest of us, don't want to run any faster than they normally have to, and so they don't run far, and don't have the brains to know they should.

also i should point that another advantage humans have is that for some reason we can resist a large amounts of poisons

Lots of species have higher poison tolerance than we do. It has nothing to do with being biped, and everything to do with population density and environment: species acclimate to what they naturally encounter, while more compact populations breed (and become immune to) more diseases that can affect others.

I must note that those endurance hunting people were dmoinant for a time untill technology rendered it obsolete. (just as many cultures were dominant until something changed and they were obsolete.

The poison restance thing was a rebuttal to your argumant that our only advantadge was intelligence and tools.
 (btw we can resist many nutritious poisons, which is usefull) also other advantadges include that we have greater resistance to shock (as in the mental aspect of trauma not elctricity.)

finaly your horse argumant is flawed, presumably i would be chasing you, therfore to beat me you used a horse which is outsmarting me (btw i think that's the first time i think i've used someone outsmarting me to try and win an arguement.)

[Weiser_Cain]

88mphSlayer wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

There's virtually nothing about our social structure that has to do with us being bipedal. Indeed, social structures do trump physical attributes alone (or else humans wouldn't dominate), but being a biped doesn't necessitate any of them, though I'd love to hear why you think we wouldn't have our organizations if we walked with four legs and two arms and the same brain rather than two legs and two arms and the same brain.

because we aren't ants, we have to use our limbs and hands to construct shelter and grab food, we have larger brains than usual we need to balance our head above our slim body, we can't use our teeth to kill things we need to make tools

I just used my teeth to kill pineapple chunks. My body is anything but slim and my head just kind sticks out of the trunk, no neck.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

It is a shame there aren't more aliens like the Hanar and Elcor in the Mass Effect universe. It comes off as really underdeveloped sometimes.

[Bebbe777]

Mass Effect is not alone with this you know



Star Trek

Star Wars

Stargate

[Eddo36]

So let's copy the trend some more. We put human personalities into different body types and what do we get.... aliens.

Modifié par Eddo36, 16 janvier 2011 - 07:26 .

[Suron]

is it really that much of a shock or anything? how much would anyone relate to truly "alien" species....one or two really off-the-wall aliens are fine (like jellyfish..which aren't even really alien since they are STILL modeled after something we know)....but to have the majority would just make things trite and no one would give a crap about any of them.



sorry the name escapes me but would anyone (besides hentai tentacle freaks..I mean fans) care if say Garrus wasn't a turian but one of those jellyfish? (fans of blasto? pfff...people say they like him cause it's hilarious to imagine one of those Jellyfish being like Clint Eastwood)



so seriously..is it that hard to figure this out? fact is until/unless we ever actually meet "real" aliens they'll always ALWAYS be grouned in one form or another to "human" standards and/or maneurisms...

[Dionkey]

I think the personalities part is a little too far. Its not like emotions can change as we meet new races, everything can get angry,sad,lonely,happy, etc..

[The Unfallen]

You people forget about the Hanar...



Elcor...



Volus...



hell what about the freaking Vorcha which have (and I quote from the Codex) no terrestrial analogue

[Eddo36]

^ Those races are similar to some human stereotype groups.

[Spornicus]

It's because Shepard can have sex with humanoid aliens, which, in the end, is what the fans want. Variety in their boning. If there were more aliens like the hanar and rachni, there would be less things to romance.

[Eddo36]

Something wrong with romancing hanar and rachni? They are intelligent.

Modifié par Eddo36, 16 janvier 2011 - 07:42 .

[JuicElawl]

i didn't study evolution science in school, but i think it makes sense that land based animals, as they get larger and larger, have evolved to be mostly quadruped. four legs are probably the minimum amount of support required for a stable base and stable locomotion. any more limbs than four, it would be a waste of energy to keep that extra flesh and tissue sustained.

bipedal creatures with opposable digits would evolve from the 4 legged creatures. so i guess it can be reasoned that many intelligent species would be bipedal anyway?

[Praetor Knight]

Eddo36 wrote...

I've come to the conclusion that the alien races are psychologically same to humans and with the same average IQ. Same mental behavior, just different body forms. Oddly.

Salarians may talk a bit faster, and asari may have more life experience by living 1000 years, but that's it. Turian honor is only a cultural and not a racial thing.

Anthropomorphism may help explain how humans can relate to aliens.

I'd call that empathy myself.

[Spornicus]

Eddo36 wrote...

Something wrong with romancing hanar and rachni? They are intelligent.

Are you sure you know what sex is? I mean, the physical limitations...where would you put it?

[JuicElawl]

my fem shep was lusting for pitne for. she was so attracted to bad boys like him.

[Spornicus]

JuicElawl wrote...

my fem shep was lusting for pitne for. she was so attracted to bad boys like him.

Well duh, it's Pitne For. When he walks into a room, he OWNS it.

[Archontor]

Eddo36 wrote...

^ Those races are similar to some human stereotype groups.

Why yes elcor are tech support workers, the volus are space nerds and the vorcha are the creepy people who sit in the corner chatting to people who aren't there

[Habelo]

Well krogans are more reptillian. Rachni are more ant like. Its just that mammals with intelligence have the same psychology.

[Weiser_Cain]

Spornicus wrote...

Eddo36 wrote...

Something wrong with romancing hanar and rachni? They are intelligent.

Are you sure you know what sex is? I mean, the physical limitations...where would you put it?

The Asari got around this limitation.

[Eddo36]

^ Exactly. Just use your imagination.