Would you step in to save humanity if you could?

[William]

For example - if you were leader of an Extraresstrial race of sentient space-faring beings and had the technical ability to show the human race how to get out of its current predicaments, would you give the order to do so?

If "yes" or "no", why?

[nobspeople]

[Replying to William in post #41]

The question is "Why" They have the ability, why don't they want to use it?

Could be bored with us now. Or decided it's not a good idea or their resources could be used better elsewhere where living things actually care about each other more than about themselves.

Do we have evidence which might support the idea that they ever cared?

I guess it depends on in there are any ancient texts showing this to be so.
But no I don't have any personally

Do we have evidence which might support that at some time in human existence, they even tried?

See previous answer

More interesting as in more productive?

Maybe, but I don't think it's necessary

Implying that they once saw it a worthy cause to invest time and effort into, but have since come to a greater realisation that it is actually time wasted which would be better spent in other pursuits.
What are those other pursuits?

Maybe they're now more concerned with bee population than human population

It would just seem like everything is part of an immense vacation, because 'technology'...so why involve ones time in working on using said tech, to save humanity?

Why indeed

The question is "If You Could" obviously your above reason for not, are not because you can't. They are because you won't.

Absolutely

[William]

[Replying to William in post #41]

The question is "Why" They have the ability, why don't they want to use it?

Could be bored with us now. Or decided it's not a good idea or their resources could be used better elsewhere where living things actually care about each other more than about themselves.

Do we have evidence which might support the idea that they ever cared?

I guess it depends on in there are any ancient texts showing this to be so.
But no I don't have any personally

Do we have evidence which might support that at some time in human existence, they even tried?

See previous answer

More interesting as in more productive?

Maybe, but I don't think it's necessary

Implying that they once saw it a worthy cause to invest time and effort into, but have since come to a greater realisation that it is actually time wasted which would be better spent in other pursuits.
What are those other pursuits?

Maybe they're now more concerned with bee population than human population

It would just seem like everything is part of an immense vacation, because 'technology'...so why involve ones time in working on using said tech, to save humanity?

Why indeed

The question is "If You Could" obviously your above reason for not, are not because you can't. They are because you won't.

Absolutely

I am not convinced by your argument as it appears to be based more upon human standards rather than elevated standards which we could expect from a thoroughly more advanced ET species.

There is no clarity of reasons therein. If such were to try, such would have firstly gone through the process as a thought experiment and realized before they began, that they would have to quit, and so would not have begun.

I am happy for now to presume that not all of the stories of gods were made up by humans around campfires. Interaction has occurred, as far as my own studies show me...

[nobspeople]

[Replying to William in post #41]

The question is "Why" They have the ability, why don't they want to use it?

Could be bored with us now. Or decided it's not a good idea or their resources could be used better elsewhere where living things actually care about each other more than about themselves.

Do we have evidence which might support the idea that they ever cared?

I guess it depends on in there are any ancient texts showing this to be so.
But no I don't have any personally

Do we have evidence which might support that at some time in human existence, they even tried?

See previous answer

More interesting as in more productive?

Maybe, but I don't think it's necessary

Implying that they once saw it a worthy cause to invest time and effort into, but have since come to a greater realisation that it is actually time wasted which would be better spent in other pursuits.
What are those other pursuits?

Maybe they're now more concerned with bee population than human population

It would just seem like everything is part of an immense vacation, because 'technology'...so why involve ones time in working on using said tech, to save humanity?

Why indeed

The question is "If You Could" obviously your above reason for not, are not because you can't. They are because you won't.

Absolutely

I am not convinced by your argument as it appears to be based more upon human standards rather than elevated standards which we could expect from a thoroughly more advanced ET species.

There is no clarity of reasons therein. If such were to try, such would have firstly gone through the process as a thought experiment and realized before they began, that they would have to quit, and so would not have begun.

I am happy for now to presume that not all of the stories of gods were made up by humans around campfires. Interaction has occurred, as far as my own studies show me...

I never claimed to speak for an advanced society in any way; that's above my pay grade (and, I suspect, everyone's pay grade that's existed). I only offered 'possibilities as I see them'.
I, too, believe interaction (your words) has occurred as well - maybe even continues.

[William]

[Replying to William in post #41]

The question is "Why" They have the ability, why don't they want to use it?

Could be bored with us now. Or decided it's not a good idea or their resources could be used better elsewhere where living things actually care about each other more than about themselves.

Do we have evidence which might support the idea that they ever cared?

I guess it depends on in there are any ancient texts showing this to be so.
But no I don't have any personally

Do we have evidence which might support that at some time in human existence, they even tried?

See previous answer

More interesting as in more productive?

Maybe, but I don't think it's necessary

Implying that they once saw it a worthy cause to invest time and effort into, but have since come to a greater realisation that it is actually time wasted which would be better spent in other pursuits.
What are those other pursuits?

Maybe they're now more concerned with bee population than human population

It would just seem like everything is part of an immense vacation, because 'technology'...so why involve ones time in working on using said tech, to save humanity?

Why indeed

The question is "If You Could" obviously your above reason for not, are not because you can't. They are because you won't.

Absolutely

I am not convinced by your argument as it appears to be based more upon human standards rather than elevated standards which we could expect from a thoroughly more advanced ET species.

There is no clarity of reasons therein. If such were to try, such would have firstly gone through the process as a thought experiment and realized before they began, that they would have to quit, and so would not have begun.

I am happy for now to presume that not all of the stories of gods were made up by humans around campfires. Interaction has occurred, as far as my own studies show me...

I never claimed to speak for an advanced society in any way; that's above my pay grade (and, I suspect, everyone's pay grade that's existed). I only offered 'possibilities as I see them'.

Which is contrary to the thread subject...you have to first think about how an advanced species would most likely do things. The question was not "what would you do as a human being?"

I, too, believe interaction (your words) has occurred as well - maybe even continues.

I don't know that I believe it. I see it as a possible occurrence ....

[nobspeople]

[Replying to William in post #45]

you have to first think about how an advanced species would most likely do things. The question was not "what would you do as a human being?"

I stand by what I said as what I offered can (maybe even does) apply to any civilization possible of thinking about such a thing, be them more or less advanced than us.
I could have offered any type of 'Star Trek' like technologies, or beyond (pun intended), but thought going down that rabbit hole would be counterproductive of the thread topic.

I don't know that I believe it. I see it as a possible occurrence ....

Appreciative of the correction

[William]

[Replying to William in post #45]

you have to first think about how an advanced species would most likely do things. The question was not "what would you do as a human being?"

I stand by what I said as what I offered can (maybe even does) apply to any civilization possible of thinking about such a thing, be them more or less advanced than us.
I could have offered any type of 'Star Trek' like technologies, or beyond (pun intended), but thought going down that rabbit hole would be counterproductive of the thread topic.

Nevertheless, what you offered was not in line with what the thread topic was asking for...

I don't know that I believe it. I see it as a possible occurrence ....

Appreciative of the correction

[William]

I think that - as the leader of an advanced ET species, I would help out in the background - nudging humanity toward information which would assist them in deciding the best direction they could go.

I [my species] would have contact with some of the more wise who have invested in preserving themselves through the gaining of riches in which makes it possible for them to have a fighting chance to survive as carriers of human genetics [humanity in potential.] and so - in those ones - I [my species] do already assist in 'saving humanity'.

As to those things which potentially make habitat unviable for humans - such as nuclear bomb deployment - I would hack their systems and prevent this from occurring.

As to 'the multitudes' I would leave them to their selves and if they continue to choose lawlessness then they can suffer the consequences as they will. I will not interfere with their choices.

As to the innocent who will suffer at the hands of any choices made in relation to the lawless, My [Our] apologies for not stepping in but I like to think that within 'the multitudes' there is potential for their number to grow to outweigh the number of the lawless, thus ensuring they can built a paradise for themselves without our interfering and doing it for them.

Perhaps my [species] might be wrong in our thinking there exists such potential within the masses - but we are under the impression the universe is designed in such a way as to "root out the weeds" while remaining equally under the impression that we are not the "gardeners". It is what it is.

As to if some catastrophic event engineered through the universes processes - such as a meteor strike which would cause humanity to become extinct, [We would not save those rich people in their underground mansions as they invested in themselves rather than in humanity] we would [and do already] harvest the necessary data in which to create more human forms in our laboratories as and when required - which would be - when we found a suitable planet in which to plant them - thus "saving humanity"

So we are planters of seed and the reapers of the minds which come from that. But we are not gardeners, as the particular seed planted has [potentially develops] a mind of its own and need learn just how best to use it.

What we think in relation to the OP question. The answer is "yes" [resoundingly]

[Purple Knight]

For example - if you were leader of an Extraresstrial race of sentient space-faring beings and had the technical ability to show the human race how to get out of its current predicaments, would you give the order to do so?

If "yes" or "no", why?

Show them, yes. Tell them, yes.

Help them, no.

The truth, however, is that plenty of people understand what the problems are already, and no one listens to them. So offering this sort of help wouldn't make any difference, unless the brainwashing being done to humans by other humans is only just strong enough to hold, as long as aliens don't appear and set everything straight.

I don't think it's a huge deal to violate the Prime Directive if the only thing being passed is advice. Not even information, as in, here is how you build a replicator now no one goes hungry agai- OH MY GOD HOW DID YOU MAKE TEN TRILLION BABIES WHILE I WAS TALKING? (This is what would happen, btw.)

Advice I don't see a problem with. They're free to take it, or not. If I know I'm right, the worst case scenario is they ignore me, which has the same result that would have come about naturally anyway. If I give them that replicator, however, no one is free not to use it; it's too useful. And consequently, no one is free not to be buried in ten trillion new humans because humans can't control their population.

The truth of the Prime Directive is not some lofty moral idea that cultures and peoples deserve to develop free of interference (if that was true, why is it okay to talk to the Klingons? Just because they have warp doesn't mean they can't be influenced). Nor is it the slightly more practical truth that you might be doing more harm than good. The ultimate truth is that if a species is destined to destroy itself because it's either not smart enough, or just too darn lazy to address the problems it creates, it deserves to die. This is not about volcanoes. This is not about natural disasters (unless your sun has been going nova for a very long time and you deliberately ignored it).

This is about not saving people from themselves. You oughtn't save people from themselves. It's a bad idea if you're a warp-capable civilisation in a fantasy universe and it's a bad idea if you're just one person faced with another one person who makes repeated bad choices and expects to be bailed out.