Well maybe it is just as well that we are in fact a carbon based life form-- it may help our survival!
My guess is that if life arose in the absence of carbon, then the organisms would remain simple and of limited diversity. If that had happened on earth, there might have been no opportunity for the evolution of a fish, let alone the staggeringly complex brain supporting the human level of intelligence. Still, that's only a guess. I'd be interested in an expert view (any links?
)
Certainly the theory of comets carrying 'life' through space seems to gain credence now.
Right. It seems that wherever complexity is possible it will probably occur, given time. And from the evidence of comets, meteorites and interstellar dust clouds, the greatest complexity results from the electrical properties of the carbon atom.
That seems to be more likely than any of us reaching Type 1 civilisation
Yes, it does look that way given our species' track record and the current status of the planet we've re-made for ourselves. It's the logical prognosis. That said, I actually feel optimistic (so much for emotion, eh!). What I feel, or intuit, is that our descendants will pull through with flying colours. All we have to do is get the ball rolling in the right direction. I feel confident that we'll succeed, perhaps because so many have already started to work at it. It doesn't require any fundamental adjustment to human 'nature', just an awareness of the big picture and a correspondingly enlightened self-interest coupled with due care for our children's children.
I disagree with Ian McEwan (see signature below). What we often call our 'nature' is a crude and stereotyped caricature of human behavioural response to the environment, often cited in support of defeatist arguments. In reality, that behavioural response is flexible, so I don't think it's the limiting factor. Rather, I think the limitation is in culture and society - but both seem to be evolving in a generally positive way by virtue of the flexibility of our 'nature'.
