IGM Alien Intelligence

Interesting article at Phys.org this morning. The headline reads thusly: E.T. not likely to have human-like intelligence: Astronomer.
The astronomer, a Dr. Charlie Lineweaver, speaking at a conference in Australia, says he is reviewing the major patterns of evolution on earth. Apparently, he plans to make the case that since no other life form has evolved intelligence closely resembling ours, it is unlikely that an alien life form would develop intelligence similar to our own. Really? I guess that makes sense. In fact, it makes such good, obvious sense, that I daresay it might be a waste of time and money to actually study it. But then he goes on to say;

“If human-like intelligence were so useful, we should see many independent examples of it in biology, and we could cite many creatures [which] had evolved on independent continents to inhabit the ‘intelligence niche'.

Since when did usefulness become a hallmark of evolution? I thought it was all random, accidental, processes— mute, blind, and wandering on the winds of chance. Oh wait, once a mutation occurs and is “useful”, it begins to breed true. I believe the phrase is “natural selection”. Interesting word, selection. It implies a number of possible scenarios and a process of decision-making (selection). Sounds almost like some kind of intelligence is involved, doesn’t it?
And is the good doctor implying that intelligence isn’t useful? And if that were the case why would it exist at all? Because according to the laws of evolution, intelligence is no more important, or likely, than yellow feathers or scales or a noxious odor. Many scientists claim that intelligence actually gets in the way of survival, that it is a hindrance. Of course, if that were accurate, intelligence would not have been “selected” and bred true. Right? Personally, I find intelligence pretty handy.
But that’s not what piqued my interest. It was the notion that we might not recognize alien intelligence, even if we saw it. Then how would we be able to determine something was intelligent? We have examples in the animal kingdom (here on earth) of very complex social structures, and behavior sets, all of which effectively mimic intelligence. But ants and birds aren’t “intelligent”. Do you remember that episode of Star Trek (the original) where they encounter a blob of mobile rock that turns out to be a silicon-based, intelligent life form? Spock uses his mind-meld to figure out the thing was only trying to protect its young from a mining operation. (The young being round blobs of pure silicone about the size and shape of a breast implant. But not as hard.) But the humans had no way to communicate with the creature, no way to test for intelligence.
I’ve had an idea for a novel in mind for some time based on this very problem. It’s a First Contact story. Humans encounter life somewhere in the galaxy. The aliens are obviously intelligent (they are in a starship) but do not answer our attempts to communicate. The entire book would be an account of the humans attempting to communicate with the aliens, and the aliens trying to do the same. But the two species are so different, so “alien” that a common ground is never found—perhaps cannot be found. The end of the book would be the human expedition finally giving up in defeat and leaving the alien craft floating in interstellar space. The aliens leave as well, and continue with their journey of exploration. I haven’t written it yet because of the obvious challenge of writing from the point of view of a species with which humans are unable to communicate and where there is no chance of common understanding. Tricky, but I’m mulling it over.
I would counter Lineweaver’s thesis by arguing the following: If we encounter intelligent aliens whose “type” of intelligence is sufficiently foreign to our own that we can’t test for it, we will never know they are intelligent. Unless they display mastery over technology, which means they will be similar enough to us that we will be able to communicate somehow.
Many of us suspect that whales and dolphins (among others) are intelligent. But we can’t be sure because we can’t communicate with them. And being able to learn is not a reliable indicator—science is training bacterium to perform tasks. (Of course, by that standard, men and women won’t think of each other as intelligence.) Having a rudimentary language, it seems to me, is not sufficient proof either. Most animals communicate with each other, and many do so with us, but their levels of intelligence do not rise to the self-aware, sentient ability to form abstract ideas and concepts (which do not exist in nature) necessary to include them in the inner circle. At least we don’t think so. We can’t communicate with them well enough to find out.
As some of you know, I firmly believe (and I’m being serious here) that the universe is full of intelligent life. Further, I believe it is human life, with necessary adjustments for varying environments. I do not rule out new species of alien intelligence—that would be a bonus—but my belief is a matter of faith. It is not based on any evidence—other than God’s announcement to Moses and others that He builds planets for his children and populates them across the universe. What? You hadn’t heard? Earth is one of a limitless number of such worlds. But that’s just me. Anything Moses says that God says-- I’m taking to the bank.