• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Attack of the Uberachnid

Sitaram

kickbox
Camus said that, perhaps, the greatest sin of all is to hanker after some future life and ignore the implacable grandure of the life we already possess.

Some hanker for an afterlife. Others conjure a baby universe and then slip into it through a black hole. Yet others escape into a world of fiction and imagination.

Who might our savior aliens be? What might they be like? Why would they come to assist us and what would they expect in return?

Let us not be hasty. You are not yet ready to hear of the Uberachnid. You must first attend this pre-Uberachnid introductory seminar.

Were the Achaeans attacking Troy or rescuing Helen? And if they were rescuing Helen, well, what were they rescuing her from? Love? Compare and contrast Helen in Troy and Sita in Lanka.

Perhaps we need only be rescued from ourselves.

"The mind is its own beautiful prisoner," as e.e. cummings said. "We has found the enemy, and they is US" as Pogo would say.


Sometimes saviors come in the guise of an enemy. Sometimes they come as missionaries. At other times they are messengers. They are sent as apostles or descend as avatars or rise up as rebels and revolutionaries. Salvation is always an action-packed adventure, with more than a few chase scenes. Even atheism is spiritual in its tones. We may escape God, but we can never escape religion.


Why shouldn't I be totally free to write what I please in the way I please? Why should what I do become a genre. Styles enslave. Anti-style liberates, but is always in danger of stylelessness becoming a style all it's own. Rebellion in itself is stylish apart from its cause. Ask any rebel without a cause.


You see, the body of my anti-novel has a special geometry and each sentence has a mathematical property. I shall leave it to future generations to discover how the body of my writing exhibits all Euclidean solids inscribed within a sphere. If you count the total letters of this work, find the mid-most word, and apply the correct formula, then each sentence will yield the next successive number in a series of prime and perfect numbers. Only I have the gift to write in this fashion. It is by means of these mathematical and geometrical demonstrations that you will know that what I am telling you is the Gospel truth, and anyone other than my genuine self, this author, is a liar and blasphemer, and someone whose company you should avoid.


You have done quite well in the seminar. Well done, good and faithful servants!


I see the vanished races of north American Indians, who dwelt for millennia in that continent, as having been very hardy because of natural selection, and kept hardy as a race by the rigors of survival. Modern man, by contrast, becomes a progressively weaker and less robust species because of high tech and increasing dependence on things like antibiotics, surgical procedures, insulin, etc., which in the short run greatly benefit individuals, but in the long run weaken the species.


I have no real definite notion as to why, but it is interesting that the heart is emphasized more in scriptures, but that the kidneys are also mentioned, that there was some awareness of such anatomy in ancient times.


Note that our word "renal" comes from the same root word as "reins." And should the day come that our heart and kidneys are mechanical, then what shall we say of our soul?


Amoral nature, with its natural selection and survival of the fittest, seems to have a very different agenda which favors groups and species over individuals. Our society now seems to place the well-being and interest of the individual above the well-being and interests of the group as a whole. In the short run this emphasis on the individual is quite benevolent. But what is long-term benovelence? Does long-term benevolence sometimes wear the mask of cruelty and indifference?


Nature makes it difficult for the weak and defective to pass their genes on to another generation, but medicine and modern technology makes it easy for even the infertile to pass on their genetic traits to future generations. For me, the problem is so patently obvious. Physis and Nomos, Nature and Law, mortal enemies for eternity!


Of course, we may ocassionally discover some temporary cure for a particular disease, but then all those little pathogens turn around and produce thousands of generations in a short time, and evolve a resistant strain, so then we develop a different antibiotic, and so it goes, on and on, in a vicious cycle, a Catch-22. Those pathogens desire immortality just as much as we. Their oeuvres are plagues.


As individuals, certainly we benefit from this medicine and technology, but as a species we were obviously better off under the amoral natural scheme of survival of the fittest. Now, as a species, we are gradually becoming weakened and dependent upon that medicine and technology. "Better Living Through Chemistry."


Mind you, I am not saying whether this increased dependence upon medicine and technology and genetic engineering and this progressive weakening of our species is bad or good in the long run. I am merely pointing it out as an observable phenomenon.


I realize that what I am about to say is a far-fetched scenario, but it is not totally outside the realm of possibility and technology. Imagine that genetic engineering is able to make enormous strides during the coming century and develops the technology to totally re-engineer and redesign essential human nature.


Suppose, further, that the technology of artificial intelligence made tremendous strides of advance, and is able to create true intelligence, equaling or exceeding human intelligence. Furthermore, suppose that humanity as a whole is one day able to unite, and sees "the handwriting on the wall" with regard to our solar system's eventual destruction several billion years from now, through the demise of our sun (or much earlier through some enormous asteroid striking the earth.)


Humanity, seeing the eventual destruction of our solar system through some catastrophe, creates vehicles for deep space, interstellar search for another earth-like planet, piloted by the artificial intelligence robots which have a consciousness equal to or exceeding humans, with human re-engineered genetic material on board, as well as a Noah's ark of all plant and animal genetic material, to be deployed if and when another planet is found. One small step for man. One giant step for superman. This is how we shall play galactic Simon Says. If you forget to say "May I" then you must take many umbrella steps backwards into oblivion.


IF such a far-fetched eventuality were to take place, then the temporary weakening and dependence of mankind upon antibiotics and medical technology would be but a temporary phase, as technology matured, and ultimately that future technology would be the savior not only of human life, but also the preserver of all culture, art, science, philosophy.


On the other hand, if we cannot unite as one world nation, with such a common goal, if we squander time and resources in endless guerilla wars and acts of terrorism, then we shall never be able to accomplish such a goal, and when the earth is destroyed by whatever cataclysm (as it ultimately will), then that is the end of our human history, and in some way, all will have been for nothing. We shall be suitors who never know Penelope and that white dwarf, Odysseus, shall consume us all.


I have considered the issue of the evil malevolence of some race beings who posses advanced powerful technology, and it occurred to me that such a race would of necessity have destroyed itself long ago with its own technology had it not addressed its shortcoming of greed, anger, vengeance, hatred. Therefore, I see a powerful advanced race of beings as of necessity benevolent (as a prerequisite for surviving their own super power.)


If I might become Andy Rooney for a minute, I would point how odd it is that we always speak of ourselves as some race. A race is people in a hurry to get somewhere. Where is it that we are trying to get? I forget! St. Paul speaks of winning the good race. Bread and circus races of a crumbling empire go in circles. Circles are perfect but they never lead anywhere.
 
I wrote a little story entitled "Attack of the Uberachnid", to explore certain of these notions, and concepts of ethics. It is an interesting "what if" scenario. Don't forget, Einstein as a teenager imagined the "what if" scenario of riding upon a beam of light.


No one can corner the truth because everyone is too busy working their own angle.


Agnostics believe doubtfully.

At least atheists have the courage of their lack of conviction.


What is "Power"?


The essence of what it means to be a living organism is to strive for, light, warmth, food, seeking pleasure, avoiding pain, a struggle in quest of POWER.


Think about little microbes, striving towards light, nourishment, the very struggle which is essential in survival. It seems to me that the concept of POWER is at the heart of such instincts. This struggle begins on a molecular level as an organic chemical reaction process, and ends on a meta-personal level of corporations, nations and ideologies, struggling for power, survival, and dominance.


We see all life forms struggle to survive and propagate. Struggle seems primary.


But, somehow, inherent in the notion of struggle is power, since struggling itself is a force, and one struggles against some other force. Power lies in one force prevailing over some opposing force. So diversity, difference and opposition is essential for the illusion of power to manifest. There is no power where there is no obstacle or opposition. We cannot be Quixotic without windmills to joust at. In physics, work is defined as moving a mass through a distance. In politics, power is keeping the masses right where they are. Not much work or progress there.


In the evolutionary scheme of things, gradually, complex consciousness and introspection is ushered and the whole mental world of dualities, antinomies, good and evil, pleasure and pain, truth and falsehood, etc.


Allow me to pose for all of you a futuristic science-fiction scenario which will exercise your "moral calculus."


Firstly, we assume that self-defense to defend our lives and existence is morally justified. Secondly, we assume that killing of lower species for food or sport is harmless, and that murder only involves killing the one higher species, man, because man has speech, a soul.


But let us imagine that an alien creature arrives on planet earth, which is so highly evolved that human beings appear as dumb primates in comparison. These super beings communicate telepathically and, furthermore all of their minds are interconnected as one superbrain. These superior beings view us in the same light that we view gorillas and chimpanzees. They see us as capable of some curious tricks, but as not possessing what they define as a "soul." Obviously, we use only verbal language and we are incapable of telepathic communication. Furthermore, if we even possess a soul (which they deem doubtful), we are not interconnected telepathically as a supersoul. Let us give a name to these alien creatures. I shall call them UBERACHNIDS (from Nietzsche's Uberman or superman, and the Greek word "arachnid," meaning spider).


Now, this species of superbeing, the Uberachnid, has a highly specialized digestive system. They may only live by finding warm blooded creatures, inserting their long needle-like fangs into the veins of their victims, and slowing absorbing the body-fluids in an agonizing process with takes several days, before the victim finally dies.


How different is the Uberachnid's moral justification for harvesting and eating humans any different from the human justification for harvesting and eating lower mammals? In fact, the Uberachnid has more of an excuse for its eating habits, since it cannot choose to be vegetarian, whereas humans do have a vegetarian choice.


In light of the superior nature of the Uberachnid, are humans really justified any longer in perceiving themselves as the highest form of life? Can the humans really assume that they possess a soul, since obviously they do not possess the supersoul of the telepathically interconnected Uberachnids?


Such a moral dilemma! If the humans do have it in their power to exterminate the entire Uberachnid species, rendering it extinct, then in some sense they commit a crime against intelligence and life itself. For you see, apart from the Uberachnid's unpleasant dining habits, they are the most admirable community of beings ever to appear in our universe! Crime is unknown amongst the Uberachnid. Poverty is unknown! All diseases have been conquered among the Uberachnid! Furthermore, the Uberachnid have offered to make human life a paradise on earth, and each human will be granted 100 years of life and enjoyment in the perfect health with the appearance of a twenty year old youth! All that the Uberachnid ask of us is that at the end of the hundred years, is that each person voluntarily report to the Uberachnid Cafeteria, to be consumed. The Uberachnid have even devised an anesthetic drug which will not only eliminate any discomfort during the process of being consumed, but will also have mind altering mood altering psychedelic properties such that the victim being consumed will feel that they are in a paradise of ecstasy, and their relative perception of time will be so altered that they will perceived their last few hours of consciousness as an unending eternity of bliss.


It seems that the Uberachnid are far more thoughtful, compassionate and generous to their human herds than humans ever were to their cattle.
 
Back
Top