How are humans any different from the wraith

[TuesdayRain]

Heffa means it is a cnocept created by humans - not Stargate. It's a valid point though, how can we judge whether another species is sentient when there is no clear communication between them and us. There are certain obvious markers such as the concept of existance in the long term, but who can really say.

We freely acnowledge that Wales and Dolphins are intelligent but people still hunt them and we could do more to see that they don't get trapped in fishing nets but we don't.

Consciousness or sentience is not a concept created by humans nor is it something that can eventually be evolved or developed. You're born with a consciousness, a sense of awareness, and perception and feeling. If you believe in a god, then you can say you were created with a consciousness. If you don't believe in a god, then you can say it just is. Regardless, it is not a concept humans "created." Also, there are some things that will never become sentient no matter how long the time. A plant will not become sentient. The desk that you are using to type your posts on this forum will not become sentient no matter a hundred years go by.

Based on the definition of sentient, then we have some sort of standard to which we can say whether something is sentient or not and it clearly is not defined by whether communication exists between two different species. However, if the two species are human and Wraith, then there is clear communication. In the show, humans and Wraith have communicated and have clearly spoken in the presence of each other.

[TuesdayRain]

The original question was "How are humans any different from the Wraith?"

The one thing that makes us different from the Wraith is our willingness to put our own lives in danger and for some to give the ultimate sacrifice to help others, even strangers. Take for example firefighters and the military. Our military have given their lives to protect us and the values we hold dear. They do this for an entire nation of people they don't even know. A firefighter will risk his own life to save yours. Using the example about the bucket of water and the stranger next to you. Yes, that's a stranger next to you and I believe that's why such an example was chosen. Sure if it was your wife or your child, you would save them by pouring the bucket of water on them instead of saving yourself. But here is where we humans are different than the Wraith. There are some of us who would save that stranger. That is what makes us sentient. We have a conscious. We can make a choice and that choice does not necessarily mean choosing to save ourselves. We can see other's needs above our own. And can you live the rest of your life knowing that you saved yourself and watched someone else die? For the Wraith, the answer to that is yes. They can and have watched others die in front of their eyes as they suck the life out of a human being.

The overwhelming defense of the Wraith killing humans is that they need to survive. To me, that is not a defense. The Wraith also has a choice. Do you steal food because you are not able to pay for it? You are hungry. You need the food. Those of us with a sense of morality, will not choose to break the law to justify the end. The Wraith must find alternatives. They are supposedly technologically advanced, so much so that even the Ancients couldn't defeat them. With such technology, why haven't they found another food source in all this time? Maybe it's just the fate of their people.

[jenks]

The original question was "How are humans any different from the Wraith?"

The one thing that makes us different from the Wraith is our willingness to put our own lives in danger and for some to give the ultimate sacrifice to help others, even strangers. Take for example firefighters and the military. Our military have given their lives to protect us and the values we hold dear. They do this for an entire nation of people they don't even know. A firefighter will risk his own life to save yours. Using the example about the bucket of water and the stranger next to you. Yes, that's a stranger next to you and I believe that's why such an example was chosen. Sure if it was your wife or your child, you would save them by pouring the bucket of water on them instead of saving yourself. But here is where we humans are different than the Wraith. There are some of us who would save that stranger. That is what makes us sentient. We have a conscious. We can make a choice and that choice does not necessarily mean choosing to save ourselves. We can see other's needs above our own. And can you live the rest of your life knowing that you saved yourself and watched someone else die? For the Wraith, the answer to that is yes. They can and have watched others die in front of their eyes as they suck the life out of a human being.

The overwhelming defense of the Wraith killing humans is that they need to survive. To me, that is not a defense. The Wraith also has a choice. Do you steal food because you are not able to pay for it? You are hungry. You need the food. Those of us with a sense of morality, will not choose to break the law to justify the end.

Those of us with a sense of morality would not consider it a crime to do that. What makes you think that Wraith won't give their lives for other people also? What little evidence we've indicates that they will, actually.

The Wraith must find alternatives. They are supposedly technologically advanced, so much so that even the Ancients couldn't defeat them. With such technology, why haven't they found another food source in all this time? Maybe it's just the fate of their people.

Why must they? We don't have to eat meat, but we still do. We could easily decide to stop eating living creature but we decide not to, how are we any different?

[Jill_Ion]

How does her sentence answer her question? The human definition of 'sentient' compares other species to humans. If we ever do get out into space and meet alien life forms they mightn't be anything like us in the way they perceive things because they evolved under different circumstances. This doesn't necessarily mean that they won't be sentient, though.

Humans are trying to creat A1s and, if we succeed, we'll be faced with questions concerning what sentience actually is. The STNG episode 'The Measure of a Man' addresses this issue. I'm giving a link to the Memory Alpha site's summary -

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/The_Measure_of_a_Man

Her first sentence was that we made up the word and meaning of sentient. So, if we're making up the rules, then we have the right/duty/responsibility/whatever to play by those rules. If we define sentient, and that term seems to be evolving as we gain better understanding of the other beings on this planet, then we can decide what is or is not sentient.

Sentient is an adjective just like any other adjective. Blue is an adjective too and we humans have general rules about what blue is. So, there may be different shades of blue, as there are different interpretations of "sentient," but since we have decided what blue is, then we can say what is or is not blue.

Quite possibly, if we encounter other species in space, they may be more advanced technologically or farther along their evolutionary scale. They may see us not as sentient, if they have that term in their vocabulary, but that's OK because it's their definition. We have ours and will apply that to them too.

It's all good.

[Jill_Ion]

Those of us with a sense of morality would not consider it a crime to do that. What makes you think that Wraith won't give their lives for other people also? What little evidence we've indicates that they will, actually.

Why must they? We don't have to eat meat, but we still do. We could easily decide to stop eating living creature but we decide not to, how are we any different?

Good thing you put "living creature," because we have to eat things that were at one time alive, be it animals or plants. As TOOL says, "This is necessary. Life feeds on life..." Just watch any nature program. Something's gonna eat something else.

I think the Wraith bring out a primal instinct in us because we aren't the top of the food chain in Pegasus.

[elbo]

The humans are really different than the Wraith. Their are a lot of differences and here are few that pop in my mind right now:

1. We don't have telepathic abilities;
2. We don't have their strength or regenerative abilities;
3. Our diatery requirements allow us to spare the sentient beings;
4. We have different reproductive methods;
5. The humans respect the rights of each individual and don't use kamikaze tactics;
6. We don't have organic based techology;
7. We do not require hibernation;
8. We have found common ground with other species, etc.

The Wraith have been written like some specie, created from an unfortunate mutation, who spend their entire time either hibernating, either looking for food or means to make their food more consistent, in a constant hunt and war from when they awaken until they go to sleep. No other qualities and preocupations and hobbies have been assigned to them, and from here the question, for what they live for? We don't know if they have spiritual values, creative atributes or somethigelse to suggest that they have a higher purpose than to satisfy their most basic needs.

But yes we have things in common with the Wraith, things that don't make us alike but show that we are also organic beings so we must eat, dress, etc.(on the expense of other life forms), things that show that we want to live and consequently fight for survival of our race. Those are not only common ground with the Wraith, but fundamental requierments for creating a civilasation. If we don't want to survive, we cannot create a civilasation so we simply cease to exist.

The Wraith on the other hand are a fundamental enemy to humans. We can't speak about comparisons of the 2 civilasations, which is esentially better or worst, because their very existence is a threat to our survival and it must be eliminated.

I know that few characters in SGA tried to compare Wraith with humans, speculating and distorting the comparison on the common survival aspects of both species, but at the end of the day don't even matter how many things we have in common: either we kill them, either they feed or kill us, there is no middle way. They could be much better than us in any aspect (not the case), as long as we are just food to them, we still have to extinct them, in order to survive.

And BTW, different morality rules, or Geneva conventions and prisoner rights that we have here on Earth, COULD be blend to any extent in this war or other, with different predator species. Simply because this for specific situation we don't have morality rules in place; we have morality rules to deal in conflicts of ideologies, disagrements,etc. but not instinct; we cannot take that from Wriath so we cannot find commond ground and co-exist with them, consequently we cannot apply any of our moral laws to them; i guess we can, but with what finality? I think that applying our morality to the Wraith can be interpreted like a imoral act with regrads to our own kind.

But to came back to : "How we are any better than the Wraith?" over-used expression.

I don't see why the need to compare ourself to every specie that we encounter. Who cares who is better? And even if we reach the conclusion that we are better or worst or the same, what good will this do. Is not that if we think we are better this is a universal truth. The word "better" means something different form human to human, not to mention from race to race or specie to specie. And better from what aspect, better warriors, better musicians,etc.? This is what i call creating a artificial moral dilemma, unecesarely and irrelevant to the context.

At the end of the day, the Wraith only major flaw is their digestive system and huger that burn in them and the fact that their food source is much more resiliant than is a tomato for us. They are practicaly forced to hunt, unable to use their time in folowing other higher purposes. There is nothing to envy to them or their way of life and also not very much to blame (because of the lack of choise), so from my point of view any comparison of humans with the Wraith is ofensive and futile.

[TuesdayRain]

Those of us with a sense of morality would not consider it a crime to do that. What makes you think that Wraith won't give their lives for other people also? What little evidence we've indicates that they will, actually.



Why must they? We don't have to eat meat, but we still do. We could easily decide to stop eating living creature but we decide not to, how are we any different?

What makes me think that the Wraith won't give their lives for other people is the fact that they have already taken hundreds of thousands of lives without little regard. Anyone that has killed so many seem far from making any sacrifices to save others. And we have seen in the "Defiant One" and a Wraith Queen take the lives of other Wraith for their own surivival. These facts are what make me believe that the Wraith will not give their lives for others.

And why must they find alternative food source? Because if they do not, they will perish. Humans will continue to fight the Wraith and there may come a time when the Wraith will lose and when that happens, their human food source will not succumb so easily. Or, the Wraith will kill all the humans and there will be no human food left. What are they going to do then? So finding an alternative food source is for their survival.

[crazylizzie]

Good thing you put "living creature," because we have to eat things that were at one time alive, be it animals or plants. As TOOL says, "This is necessary. Life feeds on life..." Just watch any nature program. Something's gonna eat something else.

I think the Wraith bring out a primal instinct in us because we aren't the top of the food chain in Pegasus.

yes!! finally someone said this... because, really, when it comes down to it, it's who is at the top of the food chain. humans are so used to being at the top of the food chain, the big man, the one that no other species can harm, that when something (alien, in this case) comes along that is bigger, meaner, and has an appetite for them, they are immediately termed evil, because in the scheme of things, from the view point of humans, they are evil, they murder humans... that is a sin for all apparent moral purposes.

however, take it out of context, take it in the context of the world of wraith and there are some very interesting questions raised. for instance, unless i have missed something, the wraith do not farm humans. they cull humans, yes, go to worlds and "gather" humans for food, sort of like farming crops in a way, go and scythe the human population for food source, but there is no active farming of humans. they are no breeding farms, no hormones farms etc. now, it might only be a matter of time until the writers think of that and put that in there, but before they were woken from stasis by shep and his crew, the wraith visited planets on average every 50 years. this just sounds like good farming... let the crop grow, mature, and then harvest it. so... at the base level, how is that evil? because they are harvesting humans? but to them humans is merely a food source, something they eat.

and then there is the idea of wraith society. who is to say what is considered a sin in their society. do they kill one another? seems to me that they go to great lengths to NOT have their kind killed. there is a society there, with rules, and morals, the audience just has not been fully told about them.

anyway. i have blabbed. but in the end... it is just a matter of perspective. to the wraith, humans are food, sentient or not, thinking or not, they are a food source, and it just so happens that particular trait places them at the top of the food chain. to humans, it makes them evil, outside of the picture of human understanding, it makes them natural and no different than humans eating ANY food source.

[placid]

Dogs are intelligent? We eat pigs, they're more intelligent.

I mentioned cannibalism too, presumably you'd consider people to be smarter than both dogs and pigs?

[ciannwn]

5. The humans respect the rights of each individual and don't use kamikaze tactics;

We haven't seen any humans in SGA use kamikaze tactics. The word 'kamikaze' is Japanese, however, and 'kamikaze tactics' refers to the following -

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk...ld_war_two.htm

Kamikazes and the creed that went with the kamikazes in World War Two is usually associated with those Japanese pilots who flew into American warships in an effort to sink them. However, there were other forms of kamikazes such as the human torpedoes that the Japanese used in the Pacific.

At the end of World War Two, American Intelligence interviewed those who had joined the 205th and had survived – probably because their ‘turn’ had not yet arrived for a plane or attack. In these interviews it became clear that sacrificing your life for your country was perfectly acceptable in a Japan that had been dominated by the military for years.

I don't see why the need to compare ourself to every specie that we encounter.

We real life humans have only encountered the Wraith on TV. The Wraith are a fictional race created by human writers who obviously got a lot of their ideas from various real life human cultures/attitudes. Humans are capable of treating their fellow humans in the way that Wraith treat humans except that eating one's fellow human isn't a common policy. It has been known, though.

And better from what aspect, better warriors, better musicians,etc.? This is what i call creating a artificial moral dilemma, unecesarely and irrelevant to the context.

The episode 'Michael' was based on some of the issues we're talking about in this topic.

MICHAEL: So what are you saying, that-that being a Wraith is some kind of disease -- something you think you can cure? What gives you the right to do this to me?

Then there's -

TEYLA: You may not understand this now but making you human ... I believe this could make your life better.

MICHAEL (sarcastically): Really? Because from what I was told, you made me human in order to make your lives better.

(Teyla stares at him, unable to argue against that.)

MICHAEL: So tell me then: what makes being human better than being a Wraith?

TEYLA: They are evil. They kill us, feed on us, show no mercy, know nothing of compassion ...

MICHAEL: And humans are different?

TEYLA: Yes.

MICHAEL: So what you did to me -- that was done out of compassion?!

(Again, Teyla cannot answer.)

The Atlantis human characters have been presented with moral dilemmas concerning Wraith in 'Poisoning The Well', 'Michael', 'Allies', 'Misbegotten' and 'Common Ground'.

Spoiler:

In 'Common Ground' Sheppard was faced with the moral dilemma of whether or not to let the Wraith go. The Wraith had behaved honourably in that he'd given Sheppard his life back and, earlier on, he seemed to think that his own weakened condition was jeopardising Sheppard's chances of escaping.

WRAITH: If I could just move faster ...

(Trying to speed up, it groans and falls to its hands and knees in exhaustion.)

SHEPPARD: We'll rest here a few minutes.

WRAITH: You should go on without me.

The dilemma, of course, was that allowing the Wraith to go meant that he was free to feed on other humans in the future.

Meanwhile, Kolya, a human, was using the Wraith as a 'torture instrument' in the hope of blackmailing Weir into handing Ladon over. In the process he was torturing both the Wraith and Sheppard, a member of his own species.

Maybe the whole point of presenting the Wraith as they are is to make viewers think about the way that humans (as a species in general) are capable of behaving towards other humans. Wraith hunt humans for sport while Roman citizens attended the Games where they could watch all kinds of atrocities committed on humans for entertainment purposes etc. etc. etc.

[Mousie]

[QUOTE=TuesdayRain;6921570]

Consciousness or sentience is not a concept created by humans.

Who created it then it then? God, aliens. I know we are born with it but I meant humans have defined and categorised it not a TV programme

nor is it something that can eventually be evolved or developed.

Says who? I freely admit that I'm no scientist but how do you know. Do you just not watch all those episodes about the Ancients, episodes about a society that evolved into different plane of existance, a higher form of conciousness.

You're born with a consciousness, a sense of awareness, and perception and feeling. If you believe in a god, then you can say you were created with a consciousness. If you don't believe in a god, then you can say it just is. Regardless, it is not a concept humans "created." Also, there are some things that will never become sentient no matter how long the time. A plant will not become sentient.

Probably, but again how do you know, something could happen to change its genetic structure, most likely an outside influence, but it could happen

The desk that you are using to type your posts on this forum will not become sentient no matter a hundred years go by.

Yes I realise that, I'm not an idiot

Based on the definition of sentient, then we have some sort of standard to which we can say whether something is sentient or not and it clearly is not defined by whether communication exists between two different species.

Yes but these are all human definitions and whilst we have to react to things based on our understanding of the situation at hand, out in space things could be different and we have to be more open minded

[Mousie]

????

you think??
anyone that would kill someone for FUN!? is pretty mad in my book, even if it is a mob mentality thing, i'm of the opinion that mob mentality is not a sane behaviour.

I understand what you are getting at I just meant they aren't considered mad in the clinical sense, they just have no morals and don't care about the consequences of their actions. It probably closer to sociopathy which is a mental illness but it is different to madness.

[jenks]

I mentioned cannibalism too, presumably you'd consider people to be smarter than both dogs and pigs?

Yes. Point?

[jenks]

What makes me think that the Wraith won't give their lives for other people is the fact that they have already taken hundreds of thousands of lives without little regard. Anyone that has killed so many seem far from making any sacrifices to save others. And we have seen in the "Defiant One" and a Wraith Queen take the lives of other Wraith for their own surivival. These facts are what make me believe that the Wraith will not give their lives for others.

We've seen Wraith sacrifice their own lives for the good of the hive on many occasions.

And why must they find alternative food source? Because if they do not, they will perish. Humans will continue to fight the Wraith and there may come a time when the Wraith will lose and when that happens, their human food source will not succumb so easily.

So, nothing to do with morality then.

Or, the Wraith will kill all the humans and there will be no human food left. What are they going to do then? So finding an alternative food source is for their survival.

Why would they do that? Anyway, none of this has anything to do with your original argument, the one that tried to explain how Humans are morally superior to Wraith. I've never seen a race in Stargate that has committed acts any more evil than the human race has been know to do.

[elbo]

We haven't seen any humans in SGA use kamikaze tactics.

I agree. But we saw Wraith. Their only defence in space battles are to use darts with Wraith Drones and Wraith Warriors like rocket interceptors. Also they use the same "living amunition" for suicidal missions like the one in "Siege", to destroy Atlantis with the darts, or to damage the city with their individual self-destruct. The ideea is that their society is totaly different than ours, anyone but the Queen is expandable and they have no fear of death.

The episode 'Michael' was based on some of the issues we're talking about in this topic.

MICHAEL: So what are you saying, that-that being a Wraith is some kind of disease -- something you think you can cure? What gives you the right to do this to me?

Then there's -

TEYLA: You may not understand this now but making you human ... I believe this could make your life better.

MICHAEL (sarcastically): Really? Because from what I was told, you made me human in order to make your lives better.

(Teyla stares at him, unable to argue against that.)

MICHAEL: So tell me then: what makes being human better than being a Wraith?

TEYLA: They are evil. They kill us, feed on us, show no mercy, know nothing of compassion ...

MICHAEL: And humans are different?

TEYLA: Yes.

MICHAEL: So what you did to me -- that was done out of compassion?!

(Again, Teyla cannot answer.)

I recall this and both are right in their own way. What is so hard to understand? Wraith and humans are 2 mutual exclusive species that cannot exist in the same time and space, cannot co-exist. No specie's morality can be applied to the other because of that.

The Wraith cannot be blamed, because they are driven by instinct, and we cannot be blame because we are driven by self-preservation. Apart from this common ground, which is survival, Wraith and Humans are 2 entire different species.

We cannot be expected to stay beside our own morality, because that morality was created in regards with beings that posess free will, not in regards with a instinctual/predator specie like Wraith, and also the Wraith cannot be expected to be faithfull to our morality when that morality contradict their own existence and survival.

The Atlantis human characters have been presented with moral dilemmas concerning Wraith in 'Poisoning The Well', 'Michael', 'Allies', 'Misbegotten' and 'Common Ground'.

In 'Poisoning The Well', someone suggest that we should apply Geneva convention to a Wraith prisoner, which we specificaly capture for torture and information in "Suspicion", which is a artificial dilemma, meaning that it has a refference in our own morality and principles and laws, but applied to the context is a non-sense. Insead of creating a dilemma in my mind, it only raised the question if some characters really are where they supposed to be!? Evaluating species, making decision that affect the mankind, playing like military tacticians and strategysts, issueing irrelevant moral judgements,etc.

The Michael experiment, again was never a moral dilemma. To be human means more than to look like one, because somoene mess with your DNA. The Wraith, like Michael said wasn't a diseas, but a already established specie. If you retract the phisical caracteristics you won't create a human (but a mutated Wraith), because that individual has no human concience to revert to, because he was born Wraith, and wasn't mutate in Wraith. Ronon was right. So not being human, you cannot apply human morality to him, he remains the same predator/instinctual driven individual with we are in war for survival with and we can experiment on him any way we deem necesarely, without creating artificial moral dilemmas about human rights and stuff.

We have the same artificial moral dilemma in 'Misbegotten' and 'Allies' and Carson is wrong when he says "Any way we rationalise we still allow that Wraith to kill humans" and "Wraith being and unnatural state". I think that this has more to do with not knowing the definition and meanings to "humans" and "specie", which is strange for an experienced doctor who delt with numerors alien orgsnisms.

In 'Common Ground' Sheppard was faced with the moral dilemma of whether or not to let the Wraith go. The Wraith had behaved honourably in that he'd given Sheppard his life back and, earlier on, he seemed to think that his own weakened condition was jeopardising Sheppard's chances of escaping.

The dilemma, of course, was that allowing the Wraith to go meant that he was free to feed on other humans in the future.

Meanwhile, Kolya, a human, was using the Wraith as a 'torture instrument' in the hope of blackmailing Weir into handing Ladon over. In the process he was torturing both the Wraith and Sheppard, a member of his own species.

In this case i agree. Because the Wraith in CG, was entirely different than what we knew about the Wraith so far: he accepted Shepp like an equal, trying to justify Wraith feeding instinct (unseen), show compassion by stopping the feeding process and as you said act honorably and truthfull to his word.

So you see, the only way to create a real moral dilemma, is when the individual you are trying to apply it, show few of our own moral values, because our morality code was created and exist only because our co-existence with other individual sowing a moral common ground. The morality is not unidirectional, but is heavily influenced by the extrenal factors. Trying to apply our morality in regards with beings thay don't share any of our values is always artificial and a waste of time.

Maybe the whole point of presenting the Wraith as they are is to make viewers think about the way that humans (as a species in general) are capable of behaving towards other humans. Wraith hunt humans for sport while Roman citizens attended the Games where they could watch all kinds of atrocities committed on humans for entertainment purposes etc. etc. etc.

This is a matter of evolution. While the Wraith are uniform evolved to a certain point in all Pegasus Galaxy, the different humans societies spread in 2 different galaxies are on different evolution levels. But the fact that we are not nothing like Wraith like a specie, make this a futile comparison. We can be cruel, compassionate, etc, but noone force those choises to us so we cannot be compared with the Wraith.