How do you conduct xenoanthropology after first contact? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern) The network's official Twitter account is up and running again. What content…Making the First contactWhat would benevolent aliens look like for first contact?Faking first contactHow can I make the cultural evolution of my world believable?International Rivalry During First ContactWhat is the most efficient and safest way to communicate with an alien should first contact occurs?How would first contact be with “post-organic” aliens?Would Aliens Look Like Humans, or Totally Different?How long would a location have to be quarantined to form a functional society?Aliens performing successful medical procedure on humans at first contact?
Does Parliament hold absolute power in the UK?
Simulating Exploding Dice
Was credit for the black hole image misattributed?
How does ice melt when immersed in water?
Format single node in tikzcd
How can I define good in a religion that claims no moral authority?
Is every episode of "Where are my Pants?" identical?
Windows 10: How to Lock (not sleep) laptop on lid close?
How can I protect witches in combat who wear limited clothing?
How did the audience guess the pentatonic scale in Bobby McFerrin's presentation?
The following signatures were invalid: EXPKEYSIG 1397BC53640DB551
Mortgage adviser recommends a longer term than necessary combined with overpayments
Wall plug outlet change
Make it rain characters
The variadic template constructor of my class cannot modify my class members, why is that so?
Relations between two reciprocal partial derivatives?
Can a 1st-level character have an ability score above 18?
Derivation tree not rendering
Is there a writing software that you can sort scenes like slides in PowerPoint?
First use of “packing” as in carrying a gun
How to stretch delimiters to envolve matrices inside of a kbordermatrix?
How to copy the contents of all files with a certain name into a new file?
What is this lever in Argentinian toilets?
Take groceries in checked luggage
How do you conduct xenoanthropology after first contact?
The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)
The network's official Twitter account is up and running again. What content…Making the First contactWhat would benevolent aliens look like for first contact?Faking first contactHow can I make the cultural evolution of my world believable?International Rivalry During First ContactWhat is the most efficient and safest way to communicate with an alien should first contact occurs?How would first contact be with “post-organic” aliens?Would Aliens Look Like Humans, or Totally Different?How long would a location have to be quarantined to form a functional society?Aliens performing successful medical procedure on humans at first contact?
$begingroup$
In the very near future, humans (somehow) travel to a distant planet - and discover aliens who turn out to be uncannily like us. Their appearance is, to put it bluntly, freakish, but they are humanoid bipeds, and their life cycles, family structures, and basic needs are all reminiscent of human biology, albeit with the occasional surprising quirks. Their civilizations appear - at least at first glance - to have technologies, religions and political institutions analogous to bronze and late stone age cultures from the ancient Near East. It is not immediately obvious at first contact whether the differences run deep or are best said to be merely contingent.
Naturally, the very first thing the humans conclude is that these strange creatures are a veritable goldmine for the social sciences, and so they drop in teams of socio-cultural anthropologists (and perhaps also a scattering of psychologists, sociologists, economists, etc,) to do field research. The aliens prove very accommodating to all this... at least for now.
Given current academic practices, how do these anthropologists first go about it? Most especially, what are the major questions to ask, and models to test? What is the likely order of priorities, and what (aside from the blunt fact of meeting aliens, anxiety over whether contact is even desirable, and excitement no longer having only one species to study) is most likely to generate controversy or excitement?
Edited Note: I recognize that dropping in an "away team" is not wise or realistic, but take the question scenario as written.
society aliens culture anthropology bronze-age
New contributor
$endgroup$
|
show 11 more comments
$begingroup$
In the very near future, humans (somehow) travel to a distant planet - and discover aliens who turn out to be uncannily like us. Their appearance is, to put it bluntly, freakish, but they are humanoid bipeds, and their life cycles, family structures, and basic needs are all reminiscent of human biology, albeit with the occasional surprising quirks. Their civilizations appear - at least at first glance - to have technologies, religions and political institutions analogous to bronze and late stone age cultures from the ancient Near East. It is not immediately obvious at first contact whether the differences run deep or are best said to be merely contingent.
Naturally, the very first thing the humans conclude is that these strange creatures are a veritable goldmine for the social sciences, and so they drop in teams of socio-cultural anthropologists (and perhaps also a scattering of psychologists, sociologists, economists, etc,) to do field research. The aliens prove very accommodating to all this... at least for now.
Given current academic practices, how do these anthropologists first go about it? Most especially, what are the major questions to ask, and models to test? What is the likely order of priorities, and what (aside from the blunt fact of meeting aliens, anxiety over whether contact is even desirable, and excitement no longer having only one species to study) is most likely to generate controversy or excitement?
Edited Note: I recognize that dropping in an "away team" is not wise or realistic, but take the question scenario as written.
society aliens culture anthropology bronze-age
New contributor
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Hi, welcome to Worldbuilding.SE! If you havent already, please read our Tour page. In your last paragraph, you are asking several different questions instead of one, some users may view this question as being too broad because of that. I advise you to try and only have one question, just to be on the safe side. Also, you should briefly explain what some of the quirks are, what you mean by “at least at first glance” and “... at least for now”. Explaining what these terms mean here may help people better answer your question.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
Apr 8 at 0:44
$begingroup$
I've just noticed your edited note, and I find myself confused. What, exactly, are you asking? If dropping in a field team is a critical part of your scenario, and you know it's not realistic, are you asking us to invent a scientific scenario where anthropologists would deliberately contaminate their site and then make their observations? The only way I can think that someone would drop in a field team would be if they're not scientists.
$endgroup$
– Tim B II
Apr 8 at 5:22
4
$begingroup$
Surely as an Alien species visiting another planet we would have an societal duty to perpetuate the need for visitations to include a certain probe in certain orifices...
$endgroup$
– Blade Wraith
Apr 8 at 8:12
1
$begingroup$
"anthropo-", from greek "anthropos", meaning "man" or "human". Xenoanthropology might therefore be the study of foreigners, or perhaps humans from another world. Maybe "cultural xenology" is a better fit, alongside xenosociology?
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
Apr 8 at 9:11
$begingroup$
@StarfishPrime You're technically right, but for practical purposes, the term "human" can be extended to any conscious being that has a concept of culture.
$endgroup$
– Tomáš Zato
Apr 8 at 12:09
|
show 11 more comments
$begingroup$
In the very near future, humans (somehow) travel to a distant planet - and discover aliens who turn out to be uncannily like us. Their appearance is, to put it bluntly, freakish, but they are humanoid bipeds, and their life cycles, family structures, and basic needs are all reminiscent of human biology, albeit with the occasional surprising quirks. Their civilizations appear - at least at first glance - to have technologies, religions and political institutions analogous to bronze and late stone age cultures from the ancient Near East. It is not immediately obvious at first contact whether the differences run deep or are best said to be merely contingent.
Naturally, the very first thing the humans conclude is that these strange creatures are a veritable goldmine for the social sciences, and so they drop in teams of socio-cultural anthropologists (and perhaps also a scattering of psychologists, sociologists, economists, etc,) to do field research. The aliens prove very accommodating to all this... at least for now.
Given current academic practices, how do these anthropologists first go about it? Most especially, what are the major questions to ask, and models to test? What is the likely order of priorities, and what (aside from the blunt fact of meeting aliens, anxiety over whether contact is even desirable, and excitement no longer having only one species to study) is most likely to generate controversy or excitement?
Edited Note: I recognize that dropping in an "away team" is not wise or realistic, but take the question scenario as written.
society aliens culture anthropology bronze-age
New contributor
$endgroup$
In the very near future, humans (somehow) travel to a distant planet - and discover aliens who turn out to be uncannily like us. Their appearance is, to put it bluntly, freakish, but they are humanoid bipeds, and their life cycles, family structures, and basic needs are all reminiscent of human biology, albeit with the occasional surprising quirks. Their civilizations appear - at least at first glance - to have technologies, religions and political institutions analogous to bronze and late stone age cultures from the ancient Near East. It is not immediately obvious at first contact whether the differences run deep or are best said to be merely contingent.
Naturally, the very first thing the humans conclude is that these strange creatures are a veritable goldmine for the social sciences, and so they drop in teams of socio-cultural anthropologists (and perhaps also a scattering of psychologists, sociologists, economists, etc,) to do field research. The aliens prove very accommodating to all this... at least for now.
Given current academic practices, how do these anthropologists first go about it? Most especially, what are the major questions to ask, and models to test? What is the likely order of priorities, and what (aside from the blunt fact of meeting aliens, anxiety over whether contact is even desirable, and excitement no longer having only one species to study) is most likely to generate controversy or excitement?
Edited Note: I recognize that dropping in an "away team" is not wise or realistic, but take the question scenario as written.
society aliens culture anthropology bronze-age
society aliens culture anthropology bronze-age
New contributor
New contributor
edited Apr 8 at 4:18
Flux
New contributor
asked Apr 7 at 23:08
FluxFlux
816
816
New contributor
New contributor
$begingroup$
Hi, welcome to Worldbuilding.SE! If you havent already, please read our Tour page. In your last paragraph, you are asking several different questions instead of one, some users may view this question as being too broad because of that. I advise you to try and only have one question, just to be on the safe side. Also, you should briefly explain what some of the quirks are, what you mean by “at least at first glance” and “... at least for now”. Explaining what these terms mean here may help people better answer your question.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
Apr 8 at 0:44
$begingroup$
I've just noticed your edited note, and I find myself confused. What, exactly, are you asking? If dropping in a field team is a critical part of your scenario, and you know it's not realistic, are you asking us to invent a scientific scenario where anthropologists would deliberately contaminate their site and then make their observations? The only way I can think that someone would drop in a field team would be if they're not scientists.
$endgroup$
– Tim B II
Apr 8 at 5:22
4
$begingroup$
Surely as an Alien species visiting another planet we would have an societal duty to perpetuate the need for visitations to include a certain probe in certain orifices...
$endgroup$
– Blade Wraith
Apr 8 at 8:12
1
$begingroup$
"anthropo-", from greek "anthropos", meaning "man" or "human". Xenoanthropology might therefore be the study of foreigners, or perhaps humans from another world. Maybe "cultural xenology" is a better fit, alongside xenosociology?
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
Apr 8 at 9:11
$begingroup$
@StarfishPrime You're technically right, but for practical purposes, the term "human" can be extended to any conscious being that has a concept of culture.
$endgroup$
– Tomáš Zato
Apr 8 at 12:09
|
show 11 more comments
$begingroup$
Hi, welcome to Worldbuilding.SE! If you havent already, please read our Tour page. In your last paragraph, you are asking several different questions instead of one, some users may view this question as being too broad because of that. I advise you to try and only have one question, just to be on the safe side. Also, you should briefly explain what some of the quirks are, what you mean by “at least at first glance” and “... at least for now”. Explaining what these terms mean here may help people better answer your question.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
Apr 8 at 0:44
$begingroup$
I've just noticed your edited note, and I find myself confused. What, exactly, are you asking? If dropping in a field team is a critical part of your scenario, and you know it's not realistic, are you asking us to invent a scientific scenario where anthropologists would deliberately contaminate their site and then make their observations? The only way I can think that someone would drop in a field team would be if they're not scientists.
$endgroup$
– Tim B II
Apr 8 at 5:22
4
$begingroup$
Surely as an Alien species visiting another planet we would have an societal duty to perpetuate the need for visitations to include a certain probe in certain orifices...
$endgroup$
– Blade Wraith
Apr 8 at 8:12
1
$begingroup$
"anthropo-", from greek "anthropos", meaning "man" or "human". Xenoanthropology might therefore be the study of foreigners, or perhaps humans from another world. Maybe "cultural xenology" is a better fit, alongside xenosociology?
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
Apr 8 at 9:11
$begingroup$
@StarfishPrime You're technically right, but for practical purposes, the term "human" can be extended to any conscious being that has a concept of culture.
$endgroup$
– Tomáš Zato
Apr 8 at 12:09
$begingroup$
Hi, welcome to Worldbuilding.SE! If you havent already, please read our Tour page. In your last paragraph, you are asking several different questions instead of one, some users may view this question as being too broad because of that. I advise you to try and only have one question, just to be on the safe side. Also, you should briefly explain what some of the quirks are, what you mean by “at least at first glance” and “... at least for now”. Explaining what these terms mean here may help people better answer your question.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
Apr 8 at 0:44
$begingroup$
Hi, welcome to Worldbuilding.SE! If you havent already, please read our Tour page. In your last paragraph, you are asking several different questions instead of one, some users may view this question as being too broad because of that. I advise you to try and only have one question, just to be on the safe side. Also, you should briefly explain what some of the quirks are, what you mean by “at least at first glance” and “... at least for now”. Explaining what these terms mean here may help people better answer your question.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
Apr 8 at 0:44
$begingroup$
I've just noticed your edited note, and I find myself confused. What, exactly, are you asking? If dropping in a field team is a critical part of your scenario, and you know it's not realistic, are you asking us to invent a scientific scenario where anthropologists would deliberately contaminate their site and then make their observations? The only way I can think that someone would drop in a field team would be if they're not scientists.
$endgroup$
– Tim B II
Apr 8 at 5:22
$begingroup$
I've just noticed your edited note, and I find myself confused. What, exactly, are you asking? If dropping in a field team is a critical part of your scenario, and you know it's not realistic, are you asking us to invent a scientific scenario where anthropologists would deliberately contaminate their site and then make their observations? The only way I can think that someone would drop in a field team would be if they're not scientists.
$endgroup$
– Tim B II
Apr 8 at 5:22
4
4
$begingroup$
Surely as an Alien species visiting another planet we would have an societal duty to perpetuate the need for visitations to include a certain probe in certain orifices...
$endgroup$
– Blade Wraith
Apr 8 at 8:12
$begingroup$
Surely as an Alien species visiting another planet we would have an societal duty to perpetuate the need for visitations to include a certain probe in certain orifices...
$endgroup$
– Blade Wraith
Apr 8 at 8:12
1
1
$begingroup$
"anthropo-", from greek "anthropos", meaning "man" or "human". Xenoanthropology might therefore be the study of foreigners, or perhaps humans from another world. Maybe "cultural xenology" is a better fit, alongside xenosociology?
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
Apr 8 at 9:11
$begingroup$
"anthropo-", from greek "anthropos", meaning "man" or "human". Xenoanthropology might therefore be the study of foreigners, or perhaps humans from another world. Maybe "cultural xenology" is a better fit, alongside xenosociology?
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
Apr 8 at 9:11
$begingroup$
@StarfishPrime You're technically right, but for practical purposes, the term "human" can be extended to any conscious being that has a concept of culture.
$endgroup$
– Tomáš Zato
Apr 8 at 12:09
$begingroup$
@StarfishPrime You're technically right, but for practical purposes, the term "human" can be extended to any conscious being that has a concept of culture.
$endgroup$
– Tomáš Zato
Apr 8 at 12:09
|
show 11 more comments
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Actually, I wouldn't be 'dropping in' a team of xenoanthropologists; the first step in their scientific process would be 'observation', and preferably in an environment that precludes interaction (and therefore potential contamination of the culture).
Your anthropologists, and the rest of your scientists bar a special field team which I'll get to later, should be in orbit with absolutely no contact with this race. You use drones and stealthed sensors to pick up all the information you need, and then its shared with a team up top. That team will include linguists, psychologists, economists, anthropologists, etc., all of which contribute theory in their discipline to a more complete picture of how this race lives today.
Unfortunately, these teams won't have access to the one dimension of data that we take for granted here on Earth; time. In other words, they'll see current practice, but won't know how it formed or what aspects of their culture are new, what parts come from ancient sources or practices, etc.
A really simple example of this is that many of us who are in our 50s now were raised with parents who strictly told us to 'eat everything on our plate' at mealtimes. None of us knew why at the time, but our parents were almost pathological about it. That's because they were raised by parents who had grown up during the depression, and their parents had told them to eat everything on their plate knowing it might be the last meal they get for a while. They learnt the habit because of the emotional intensity of their parents, and passed it on with some intensity, which is only now starting to die away as a parenting practice in some quarters.
So, when your anthropologists see children being chastised for what looks like a minor transgression, is that because of something in the environment now, or something that happened historically?
Enter the one field team you need; archaeologists. Your drones and satellites need to be capable of deep scans, and they need to find remote, preferably uninhabited areas where there are remains in the ground of cities, burial sites etc. that can be excavated and studied. This field work should be done without interaction with the locals, and fills that missing dimension of historical perspective for your anthropologists.
The practical upshot of all this is that the way your anthropologists would begin their studies is observation; either from an orbital platform with remote feeds, or from inside some form of duck blind, but the ONE thing they wouldn't do is interact with the culture. That would effectively contaminate the site and make many of their subsequent observations invalid.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Even with the new edit (the requirement of a ground team) this is still the best answer. Just have them drop in and stealth observe without interaction - just as biologists do when studying animals - so as not to affect/contaminate their behaviour (put on covert trackers, use covert cameras, study abandoned burrows/houses, tranquilize and take measurements etc). Just like the aliens do here on earth ;)
$endgroup$
– B.Kenobi
Apr 8 at 23:35
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The scientists are excited that they have a "natural experiment" and a species with ZERO shared ancestry to humans
Tim B II did a great job explaining your first question: "What is the likely order of priorities" (observation! without contaminating! and the need for archaeologists to put that observation into perspective). Much later down the line you can send in anthropologists to ask why the do certain behaviours and to run controlled studies (like they do here on earth).
I'll answer your second question "and what is most likely to generate controversy or excitement." As a biologist who studies animal and human behaviour, the answer is: you have a natural experiment with no contamination from shared ancestry, allowing you to make causal inferences about behaviour and culture.
In the sciences there are two major ways you can carry out research: observational (i.e. field research) and controlled (i.e. lab research). Field research is great because you see super real behaviours but cant control for anything (e.g. you may think island societies do x because of y but you didn't control for z which is the actual cause). Lab research is great because you control for everything but sometimes you've made it so controlled/sterile that the behaviours you are seeing aren't natural so don't actually tell you that much (e.g. you do research on parental effects of x on a behaviour but your subjects don't have access to y which is necessary for creating the natural behaviour). Having a completely separate group of animals or humans is a great "natural control" (a kind of natural experiment) meaning you can get the benefits of both field and lab research. For example you want to see the effects that living underground and eating insects has on a vertebrate. You can look at moles and say "they have super tiny eyes, so living underground must cause small eyes" but you can't prove that because what if the ancestor of moles had tiny eyes for some other reason before it moved underground, and you thats why moles have small eyes. Enter the Marsupial mole: this mole is a marsupial, so it is super unrelated to the placental moles BUT they look almost identical. Looking at both moles we can now say that evolving small eyes is probably a result living underground and not just that both moles had ancestors with small eyes (that both moles look so alike is because of convergent evolution)
To understand behaviour, "natural experiments" are great: you don't have to intervene in the subjects lives (good for ethics, and especially good in your scenario of not wanting to disturb the aliens), you get natural behaviours, you can often control for shared ancestry (yay your aliens have ZERO shared ancestry), you can often control for certain variables (e.g. you can show that smoking causes cancer by looking at countries with different smoking rates - hopefully other variables, like city density, diet, pollution levels etc, are controlled for naturally in your "experiment". Your planet likely has a lot of differences to earth (that you are now controlling for) but enough similarities to result in similar behaviours/social structures)
The behavioural biologists and anthropologists are very excited to have this other species to double check (and form new theories) on the origins of all sorts of behaviours and the effects of all sorts of environmental and social pressures on behaviour and culture. In fact every sub-field of biology is salivating at the thought of this find (and hopefully loads of other plants and animals on the planet)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Interviews with minimal impact
In addition to the great answer by Tim B II, they might want to interview individuals. Pretty much the only reasonable way to achieve that while minimizing the impact on their society and possible contamination of their practices would be the "alien abduction" sci-fi trope.
I.e. they'd want to interview a selection of people, but they'd want to do that by abducting them without anyone knowing about it, and after the interview returning them right back to where they were - after pumping them full of amnesiac drugs so that they don't know what happened and don't know what questions were asked.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
+1. and add a anal probe for good measure. who knows what they're hiding in the old prison wallet...
$endgroup$
– B.Kenobi
Apr 8 at 8:41
1
$begingroup$
@B.Kenobi while the local ethics board is likely to disapprove anal probing without a good reason, you might want to implant a surveillance device to conduct further studies about the environment and community of the specimen, and the rectum is as good a place for such an implant as any other.
$endgroup$
– Peteris
Apr 8 at 8:45
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "579"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Flux is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f143458%2fhow-do-you-conduct-xenoanthropology-after-first-contact%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Actually, I wouldn't be 'dropping in' a team of xenoanthropologists; the first step in their scientific process would be 'observation', and preferably in an environment that precludes interaction (and therefore potential contamination of the culture).
Your anthropologists, and the rest of your scientists bar a special field team which I'll get to later, should be in orbit with absolutely no contact with this race. You use drones and stealthed sensors to pick up all the information you need, and then its shared with a team up top. That team will include linguists, psychologists, economists, anthropologists, etc., all of which contribute theory in their discipline to a more complete picture of how this race lives today.
Unfortunately, these teams won't have access to the one dimension of data that we take for granted here on Earth; time. In other words, they'll see current practice, but won't know how it formed or what aspects of their culture are new, what parts come from ancient sources or practices, etc.
A really simple example of this is that many of us who are in our 50s now were raised with parents who strictly told us to 'eat everything on our plate' at mealtimes. None of us knew why at the time, but our parents were almost pathological about it. That's because they were raised by parents who had grown up during the depression, and their parents had told them to eat everything on their plate knowing it might be the last meal they get for a while. They learnt the habit because of the emotional intensity of their parents, and passed it on with some intensity, which is only now starting to die away as a parenting practice in some quarters.
So, when your anthropologists see children being chastised for what looks like a minor transgression, is that because of something in the environment now, or something that happened historically?
Enter the one field team you need; archaeologists. Your drones and satellites need to be capable of deep scans, and they need to find remote, preferably uninhabited areas where there are remains in the ground of cities, burial sites etc. that can be excavated and studied. This field work should be done without interaction with the locals, and fills that missing dimension of historical perspective for your anthropologists.
The practical upshot of all this is that the way your anthropologists would begin their studies is observation; either from an orbital platform with remote feeds, or from inside some form of duck blind, but the ONE thing they wouldn't do is interact with the culture. That would effectively contaminate the site and make many of their subsequent observations invalid.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Even with the new edit (the requirement of a ground team) this is still the best answer. Just have them drop in and stealth observe without interaction - just as biologists do when studying animals - so as not to affect/contaminate their behaviour (put on covert trackers, use covert cameras, study abandoned burrows/houses, tranquilize and take measurements etc). Just like the aliens do here on earth ;)
$endgroup$
– B.Kenobi
Apr 8 at 23:35
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Actually, I wouldn't be 'dropping in' a team of xenoanthropologists; the first step in their scientific process would be 'observation', and preferably in an environment that precludes interaction (and therefore potential contamination of the culture).
Your anthropologists, and the rest of your scientists bar a special field team which I'll get to later, should be in orbit with absolutely no contact with this race. You use drones and stealthed sensors to pick up all the information you need, and then its shared with a team up top. That team will include linguists, psychologists, economists, anthropologists, etc., all of which contribute theory in their discipline to a more complete picture of how this race lives today.
Unfortunately, these teams won't have access to the one dimension of data that we take for granted here on Earth; time. In other words, they'll see current practice, but won't know how it formed or what aspects of their culture are new, what parts come from ancient sources or practices, etc.
A really simple example of this is that many of us who are in our 50s now were raised with parents who strictly told us to 'eat everything on our plate' at mealtimes. None of us knew why at the time, but our parents were almost pathological about it. That's because they were raised by parents who had grown up during the depression, and their parents had told them to eat everything on their plate knowing it might be the last meal they get for a while. They learnt the habit because of the emotional intensity of their parents, and passed it on with some intensity, which is only now starting to die away as a parenting practice in some quarters.
So, when your anthropologists see children being chastised for what looks like a minor transgression, is that because of something in the environment now, or something that happened historically?
Enter the one field team you need; archaeologists. Your drones and satellites need to be capable of deep scans, and they need to find remote, preferably uninhabited areas where there are remains in the ground of cities, burial sites etc. that can be excavated and studied. This field work should be done without interaction with the locals, and fills that missing dimension of historical perspective for your anthropologists.
The practical upshot of all this is that the way your anthropologists would begin their studies is observation; either from an orbital platform with remote feeds, or from inside some form of duck blind, but the ONE thing they wouldn't do is interact with the culture. That would effectively contaminate the site and make many of their subsequent observations invalid.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Even with the new edit (the requirement of a ground team) this is still the best answer. Just have them drop in and stealth observe without interaction - just as biologists do when studying animals - so as not to affect/contaminate their behaviour (put on covert trackers, use covert cameras, study abandoned burrows/houses, tranquilize and take measurements etc). Just like the aliens do here on earth ;)
$endgroup$
– B.Kenobi
Apr 8 at 23:35
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Actually, I wouldn't be 'dropping in' a team of xenoanthropologists; the first step in their scientific process would be 'observation', and preferably in an environment that precludes interaction (and therefore potential contamination of the culture).
Your anthropologists, and the rest of your scientists bar a special field team which I'll get to later, should be in orbit with absolutely no contact with this race. You use drones and stealthed sensors to pick up all the information you need, and then its shared with a team up top. That team will include linguists, psychologists, economists, anthropologists, etc., all of which contribute theory in their discipline to a more complete picture of how this race lives today.
Unfortunately, these teams won't have access to the one dimension of data that we take for granted here on Earth; time. In other words, they'll see current practice, but won't know how it formed or what aspects of their culture are new, what parts come from ancient sources or practices, etc.
A really simple example of this is that many of us who are in our 50s now were raised with parents who strictly told us to 'eat everything on our plate' at mealtimes. None of us knew why at the time, but our parents were almost pathological about it. That's because they were raised by parents who had grown up during the depression, and their parents had told them to eat everything on their plate knowing it might be the last meal they get for a while. They learnt the habit because of the emotional intensity of their parents, and passed it on with some intensity, which is only now starting to die away as a parenting practice in some quarters.
So, when your anthropologists see children being chastised for what looks like a minor transgression, is that because of something in the environment now, or something that happened historically?
Enter the one field team you need; archaeologists. Your drones and satellites need to be capable of deep scans, and they need to find remote, preferably uninhabited areas where there are remains in the ground of cities, burial sites etc. that can be excavated and studied. This field work should be done without interaction with the locals, and fills that missing dimension of historical perspective for your anthropologists.
The practical upshot of all this is that the way your anthropologists would begin their studies is observation; either from an orbital platform with remote feeds, or from inside some form of duck blind, but the ONE thing they wouldn't do is interact with the culture. That would effectively contaminate the site and make many of their subsequent observations invalid.
$endgroup$
Actually, I wouldn't be 'dropping in' a team of xenoanthropologists; the first step in their scientific process would be 'observation', and preferably in an environment that precludes interaction (and therefore potential contamination of the culture).
Your anthropologists, and the rest of your scientists bar a special field team which I'll get to later, should be in orbit with absolutely no contact with this race. You use drones and stealthed sensors to pick up all the information you need, and then its shared with a team up top. That team will include linguists, psychologists, economists, anthropologists, etc., all of which contribute theory in their discipline to a more complete picture of how this race lives today.
Unfortunately, these teams won't have access to the one dimension of data that we take for granted here on Earth; time. In other words, they'll see current practice, but won't know how it formed or what aspects of their culture are new, what parts come from ancient sources or practices, etc.
A really simple example of this is that many of us who are in our 50s now were raised with parents who strictly told us to 'eat everything on our plate' at mealtimes. None of us knew why at the time, but our parents were almost pathological about it. That's because they were raised by parents who had grown up during the depression, and their parents had told them to eat everything on their plate knowing it might be the last meal they get for a while. They learnt the habit because of the emotional intensity of their parents, and passed it on with some intensity, which is only now starting to die away as a parenting practice in some quarters.
So, when your anthropologists see children being chastised for what looks like a minor transgression, is that because of something in the environment now, or something that happened historically?
Enter the one field team you need; archaeologists. Your drones and satellites need to be capable of deep scans, and they need to find remote, preferably uninhabited areas where there are remains in the ground of cities, burial sites etc. that can be excavated and studied. This field work should be done without interaction with the locals, and fills that missing dimension of historical perspective for your anthropologists.
The practical upshot of all this is that the way your anthropologists would begin their studies is observation; either from an orbital platform with remote feeds, or from inside some form of duck blind, but the ONE thing they wouldn't do is interact with the culture. That would effectively contaminate the site and make many of their subsequent observations invalid.
answered Apr 7 at 23:27
Tim B IITim B II
32.8k674130
32.8k674130
1
$begingroup$
Even with the new edit (the requirement of a ground team) this is still the best answer. Just have them drop in and stealth observe without interaction - just as biologists do when studying animals - so as not to affect/contaminate their behaviour (put on covert trackers, use covert cameras, study abandoned burrows/houses, tranquilize and take measurements etc). Just like the aliens do here on earth ;)
$endgroup$
– B.Kenobi
Apr 8 at 23:35
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
Even with the new edit (the requirement of a ground team) this is still the best answer. Just have them drop in and stealth observe without interaction - just as biologists do when studying animals - so as not to affect/contaminate their behaviour (put on covert trackers, use covert cameras, study abandoned burrows/houses, tranquilize and take measurements etc). Just like the aliens do here on earth ;)
$endgroup$
– B.Kenobi
Apr 8 at 23:35
1
1
$begingroup$
Even with the new edit (the requirement of a ground team) this is still the best answer. Just have them drop in and stealth observe without interaction - just as biologists do when studying animals - so as not to affect/contaminate their behaviour (put on covert trackers, use covert cameras, study abandoned burrows/houses, tranquilize and take measurements etc). Just like the aliens do here on earth ;)
$endgroup$
– B.Kenobi
Apr 8 at 23:35
$begingroup$
Even with the new edit (the requirement of a ground team) this is still the best answer. Just have them drop in and stealth observe without interaction - just as biologists do when studying animals - so as not to affect/contaminate their behaviour (put on covert trackers, use covert cameras, study abandoned burrows/houses, tranquilize and take measurements etc). Just like the aliens do here on earth ;)
$endgroup$
– B.Kenobi
Apr 8 at 23:35
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The scientists are excited that they have a "natural experiment" and a species with ZERO shared ancestry to humans
Tim B II did a great job explaining your first question: "What is the likely order of priorities" (observation! without contaminating! and the need for archaeologists to put that observation into perspective). Much later down the line you can send in anthropologists to ask why the do certain behaviours and to run controlled studies (like they do here on earth).
I'll answer your second question "and what is most likely to generate controversy or excitement." As a biologist who studies animal and human behaviour, the answer is: you have a natural experiment with no contamination from shared ancestry, allowing you to make causal inferences about behaviour and culture.
In the sciences there are two major ways you can carry out research: observational (i.e. field research) and controlled (i.e. lab research). Field research is great because you see super real behaviours but cant control for anything (e.g. you may think island societies do x because of y but you didn't control for z which is the actual cause). Lab research is great because you control for everything but sometimes you've made it so controlled/sterile that the behaviours you are seeing aren't natural so don't actually tell you that much (e.g. you do research on parental effects of x on a behaviour but your subjects don't have access to y which is necessary for creating the natural behaviour). Having a completely separate group of animals or humans is a great "natural control" (a kind of natural experiment) meaning you can get the benefits of both field and lab research. For example you want to see the effects that living underground and eating insects has on a vertebrate. You can look at moles and say "they have super tiny eyes, so living underground must cause small eyes" but you can't prove that because what if the ancestor of moles had tiny eyes for some other reason before it moved underground, and you thats why moles have small eyes. Enter the Marsupial mole: this mole is a marsupial, so it is super unrelated to the placental moles BUT they look almost identical. Looking at both moles we can now say that evolving small eyes is probably a result living underground and not just that both moles had ancestors with small eyes (that both moles look so alike is because of convergent evolution)
To understand behaviour, "natural experiments" are great: you don't have to intervene in the subjects lives (good for ethics, and especially good in your scenario of not wanting to disturb the aliens), you get natural behaviours, you can often control for shared ancestry (yay your aliens have ZERO shared ancestry), you can often control for certain variables (e.g. you can show that smoking causes cancer by looking at countries with different smoking rates - hopefully other variables, like city density, diet, pollution levels etc, are controlled for naturally in your "experiment". Your planet likely has a lot of differences to earth (that you are now controlling for) but enough similarities to result in similar behaviours/social structures)
The behavioural biologists and anthropologists are very excited to have this other species to double check (and form new theories) on the origins of all sorts of behaviours and the effects of all sorts of environmental and social pressures on behaviour and culture. In fact every sub-field of biology is salivating at the thought of this find (and hopefully loads of other plants and animals on the planet)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The scientists are excited that they have a "natural experiment" and a species with ZERO shared ancestry to humans
Tim B II did a great job explaining your first question: "What is the likely order of priorities" (observation! without contaminating! and the need for archaeologists to put that observation into perspective). Much later down the line you can send in anthropologists to ask why the do certain behaviours and to run controlled studies (like they do here on earth).
I'll answer your second question "and what is most likely to generate controversy or excitement." As a biologist who studies animal and human behaviour, the answer is: you have a natural experiment with no contamination from shared ancestry, allowing you to make causal inferences about behaviour and culture.
In the sciences there are two major ways you can carry out research: observational (i.e. field research) and controlled (i.e. lab research). Field research is great because you see super real behaviours but cant control for anything (e.g. you may think island societies do x because of y but you didn't control for z which is the actual cause). Lab research is great because you control for everything but sometimes you've made it so controlled/sterile that the behaviours you are seeing aren't natural so don't actually tell you that much (e.g. you do research on parental effects of x on a behaviour but your subjects don't have access to y which is necessary for creating the natural behaviour). Having a completely separate group of animals or humans is a great "natural control" (a kind of natural experiment) meaning you can get the benefits of both field and lab research. For example you want to see the effects that living underground and eating insects has on a vertebrate. You can look at moles and say "they have super tiny eyes, so living underground must cause small eyes" but you can't prove that because what if the ancestor of moles had tiny eyes for some other reason before it moved underground, and you thats why moles have small eyes. Enter the Marsupial mole: this mole is a marsupial, so it is super unrelated to the placental moles BUT they look almost identical. Looking at both moles we can now say that evolving small eyes is probably a result living underground and not just that both moles had ancestors with small eyes (that both moles look so alike is because of convergent evolution)
To understand behaviour, "natural experiments" are great: you don't have to intervene in the subjects lives (good for ethics, and especially good in your scenario of not wanting to disturb the aliens), you get natural behaviours, you can often control for shared ancestry (yay your aliens have ZERO shared ancestry), you can often control for certain variables (e.g. you can show that smoking causes cancer by looking at countries with different smoking rates - hopefully other variables, like city density, diet, pollution levels etc, are controlled for naturally in your "experiment". Your planet likely has a lot of differences to earth (that you are now controlling for) but enough similarities to result in similar behaviours/social structures)
The behavioural biologists and anthropologists are very excited to have this other species to double check (and form new theories) on the origins of all sorts of behaviours and the effects of all sorts of environmental and social pressures on behaviour and culture. In fact every sub-field of biology is salivating at the thought of this find (and hopefully loads of other plants and animals on the planet)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The scientists are excited that they have a "natural experiment" and a species with ZERO shared ancestry to humans
Tim B II did a great job explaining your first question: "What is the likely order of priorities" (observation! without contaminating! and the need for archaeologists to put that observation into perspective). Much later down the line you can send in anthropologists to ask why the do certain behaviours and to run controlled studies (like they do here on earth).
I'll answer your second question "and what is most likely to generate controversy or excitement." As a biologist who studies animal and human behaviour, the answer is: you have a natural experiment with no contamination from shared ancestry, allowing you to make causal inferences about behaviour and culture.
In the sciences there are two major ways you can carry out research: observational (i.e. field research) and controlled (i.e. lab research). Field research is great because you see super real behaviours but cant control for anything (e.g. you may think island societies do x because of y but you didn't control for z which is the actual cause). Lab research is great because you control for everything but sometimes you've made it so controlled/sterile that the behaviours you are seeing aren't natural so don't actually tell you that much (e.g. you do research on parental effects of x on a behaviour but your subjects don't have access to y which is necessary for creating the natural behaviour). Having a completely separate group of animals or humans is a great "natural control" (a kind of natural experiment) meaning you can get the benefits of both field and lab research. For example you want to see the effects that living underground and eating insects has on a vertebrate. You can look at moles and say "they have super tiny eyes, so living underground must cause small eyes" but you can't prove that because what if the ancestor of moles had tiny eyes for some other reason before it moved underground, and you thats why moles have small eyes. Enter the Marsupial mole: this mole is a marsupial, so it is super unrelated to the placental moles BUT they look almost identical. Looking at both moles we can now say that evolving small eyes is probably a result living underground and not just that both moles had ancestors with small eyes (that both moles look so alike is because of convergent evolution)
To understand behaviour, "natural experiments" are great: you don't have to intervene in the subjects lives (good for ethics, and especially good in your scenario of not wanting to disturb the aliens), you get natural behaviours, you can often control for shared ancestry (yay your aliens have ZERO shared ancestry), you can often control for certain variables (e.g. you can show that smoking causes cancer by looking at countries with different smoking rates - hopefully other variables, like city density, diet, pollution levels etc, are controlled for naturally in your "experiment". Your planet likely has a lot of differences to earth (that you are now controlling for) but enough similarities to result in similar behaviours/social structures)
The behavioural biologists and anthropologists are very excited to have this other species to double check (and form new theories) on the origins of all sorts of behaviours and the effects of all sorts of environmental and social pressures on behaviour and culture. In fact every sub-field of biology is salivating at the thought of this find (and hopefully loads of other plants and animals on the planet)
$endgroup$
The scientists are excited that they have a "natural experiment" and a species with ZERO shared ancestry to humans
Tim B II did a great job explaining your first question: "What is the likely order of priorities" (observation! without contaminating! and the need for archaeologists to put that observation into perspective). Much later down the line you can send in anthropologists to ask why the do certain behaviours and to run controlled studies (like they do here on earth).
I'll answer your second question "and what is most likely to generate controversy or excitement." As a biologist who studies animal and human behaviour, the answer is: you have a natural experiment with no contamination from shared ancestry, allowing you to make causal inferences about behaviour and culture.
In the sciences there are two major ways you can carry out research: observational (i.e. field research) and controlled (i.e. lab research). Field research is great because you see super real behaviours but cant control for anything (e.g. you may think island societies do x because of y but you didn't control for z which is the actual cause). Lab research is great because you control for everything but sometimes you've made it so controlled/sterile that the behaviours you are seeing aren't natural so don't actually tell you that much (e.g. you do research on parental effects of x on a behaviour but your subjects don't have access to y which is necessary for creating the natural behaviour). Having a completely separate group of animals or humans is a great "natural control" (a kind of natural experiment) meaning you can get the benefits of both field and lab research. For example you want to see the effects that living underground and eating insects has on a vertebrate. You can look at moles and say "they have super tiny eyes, so living underground must cause small eyes" but you can't prove that because what if the ancestor of moles had tiny eyes for some other reason before it moved underground, and you thats why moles have small eyes. Enter the Marsupial mole: this mole is a marsupial, so it is super unrelated to the placental moles BUT they look almost identical. Looking at both moles we can now say that evolving small eyes is probably a result living underground and not just that both moles had ancestors with small eyes (that both moles look so alike is because of convergent evolution)
To understand behaviour, "natural experiments" are great: you don't have to intervene in the subjects lives (good for ethics, and especially good in your scenario of not wanting to disturb the aliens), you get natural behaviours, you can often control for shared ancestry (yay your aliens have ZERO shared ancestry), you can often control for certain variables (e.g. you can show that smoking causes cancer by looking at countries with different smoking rates - hopefully other variables, like city density, diet, pollution levels etc, are controlled for naturally in your "experiment". Your planet likely has a lot of differences to earth (that you are now controlling for) but enough similarities to result in similar behaviours/social structures)
The behavioural biologists and anthropologists are very excited to have this other species to double check (and form new theories) on the origins of all sorts of behaviours and the effects of all sorts of environmental and social pressures on behaviour and culture. In fact every sub-field of biology is salivating at the thought of this find (and hopefully loads of other plants and animals on the planet)
edited Apr 8 at 4:19
answered Apr 8 at 4:14
B.KenobiB.Kenobi
43718
43718
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Interviews with minimal impact
In addition to the great answer by Tim B II, they might want to interview individuals. Pretty much the only reasonable way to achieve that while minimizing the impact on their society and possible contamination of their practices would be the "alien abduction" sci-fi trope.
I.e. they'd want to interview a selection of people, but they'd want to do that by abducting them without anyone knowing about it, and after the interview returning them right back to where they were - after pumping them full of amnesiac drugs so that they don't know what happened and don't know what questions were asked.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
+1. and add a anal probe for good measure. who knows what they're hiding in the old prison wallet...
$endgroup$
– B.Kenobi
Apr 8 at 8:41
1
$begingroup$
@B.Kenobi while the local ethics board is likely to disapprove anal probing without a good reason, you might want to implant a surveillance device to conduct further studies about the environment and community of the specimen, and the rectum is as good a place for such an implant as any other.
$endgroup$
– Peteris
Apr 8 at 8:45
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Interviews with minimal impact
In addition to the great answer by Tim B II, they might want to interview individuals. Pretty much the only reasonable way to achieve that while minimizing the impact on their society and possible contamination of their practices would be the "alien abduction" sci-fi trope.
I.e. they'd want to interview a selection of people, but they'd want to do that by abducting them without anyone knowing about it, and after the interview returning them right back to where they were - after pumping them full of amnesiac drugs so that they don't know what happened and don't know what questions were asked.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
+1. and add a anal probe for good measure. who knows what they're hiding in the old prison wallet...
$endgroup$
– B.Kenobi
Apr 8 at 8:41
1
$begingroup$
@B.Kenobi while the local ethics board is likely to disapprove anal probing without a good reason, you might want to implant a surveillance device to conduct further studies about the environment and community of the specimen, and the rectum is as good a place for such an implant as any other.
$endgroup$
– Peteris
Apr 8 at 8:45
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Interviews with minimal impact
In addition to the great answer by Tim B II, they might want to interview individuals. Pretty much the only reasonable way to achieve that while minimizing the impact on their society and possible contamination of their practices would be the "alien abduction" sci-fi trope.
I.e. they'd want to interview a selection of people, but they'd want to do that by abducting them without anyone knowing about it, and after the interview returning them right back to where they were - after pumping them full of amnesiac drugs so that they don't know what happened and don't know what questions were asked.
$endgroup$
Interviews with minimal impact
In addition to the great answer by Tim B II, they might want to interview individuals. Pretty much the only reasonable way to achieve that while minimizing the impact on their society and possible contamination of their practices would be the "alien abduction" sci-fi trope.
I.e. they'd want to interview a selection of people, but they'd want to do that by abducting them without anyone knowing about it, and after the interview returning them right back to where they were - after pumping them full of amnesiac drugs so that they don't know what happened and don't know what questions were asked.
answered Apr 8 at 7:56
PeterisPeteris
5,2651424
5,2651424
2
$begingroup$
+1. and add a anal probe for good measure. who knows what they're hiding in the old prison wallet...
$endgroup$
– B.Kenobi
Apr 8 at 8:41
1
$begingroup$
@B.Kenobi while the local ethics board is likely to disapprove anal probing without a good reason, you might want to implant a surveillance device to conduct further studies about the environment and community of the specimen, and the rectum is as good a place for such an implant as any other.
$endgroup$
– Peteris
Apr 8 at 8:45
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
+1. and add a anal probe for good measure. who knows what they're hiding in the old prison wallet...
$endgroup$
– B.Kenobi
Apr 8 at 8:41
1
$begingroup$
@B.Kenobi while the local ethics board is likely to disapprove anal probing without a good reason, you might want to implant a surveillance device to conduct further studies about the environment and community of the specimen, and the rectum is as good a place for such an implant as any other.
$endgroup$
– Peteris
Apr 8 at 8:45
2
2
$begingroup$
+1. and add a anal probe for good measure. who knows what they're hiding in the old prison wallet...
$endgroup$
– B.Kenobi
Apr 8 at 8:41
$begingroup$
+1. and add a anal probe for good measure. who knows what they're hiding in the old prison wallet...
$endgroup$
– B.Kenobi
Apr 8 at 8:41
1
1
$begingroup$
@B.Kenobi while the local ethics board is likely to disapprove anal probing without a good reason, you might want to implant a surveillance device to conduct further studies about the environment and community of the specimen, and the rectum is as good a place for such an implant as any other.
$endgroup$
– Peteris
Apr 8 at 8:45
$begingroup$
@B.Kenobi while the local ethics board is likely to disapprove anal probing without a good reason, you might want to implant a surveillance device to conduct further studies about the environment and community of the specimen, and the rectum is as good a place for such an implant as any other.
$endgroup$
– Peteris
Apr 8 at 8:45
add a comment |
Flux is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Flux is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Flux is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Flux is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f143458%2fhow-do-you-conduct-xenoanthropology-after-first-contact%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Hi, welcome to Worldbuilding.SE! If you havent already, please read our Tour page. In your last paragraph, you are asking several different questions instead of one, some users may view this question as being too broad because of that. I advise you to try and only have one question, just to be on the safe side. Also, you should briefly explain what some of the quirks are, what you mean by “at least at first glance” and “... at least for now”. Explaining what these terms mean here may help people better answer your question.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
Apr 8 at 0:44
$begingroup$
I've just noticed your edited note, and I find myself confused. What, exactly, are you asking? If dropping in a field team is a critical part of your scenario, and you know it's not realistic, are you asking us to invent a scientific scenario where anthropologists would deliberately contaminate their site and then make their observations? The only way I can think that someone would drop in a field team would be if they're not scientists.
$endgroup$
– Tim B II
Apr 8 at 5:22
4
$begingroup$
Surely as an Alien species visiting another planet we would have an societal duty to perpetuate the need for visitations to include a certain probe in certain orifices...
$endgroup$
– Blade Wraith
Apr 8 at 8:12
1
$begingroup$
"anthropo-", from greek "anthropos", meaning "man" or "human". Xenoanthropology might therefore be the study of foreigners, or perhaps humans from another world. Maybe "cultural xenology" is a better fit, alongside xenosociology?
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
Apr 8 at 9:11
$begingroup$
@StarfishPrime You're technically right, but for practical purposes, the term "human" can be extended to any conscious being that has a concept of culture.
$endgroup$
– Tomáš Zato
Apr 8 at 12:09