They would still be unable to advance technologically, this is not about “rivaling” senses, but technological advancement.
and how do you explain humans advancing technologically then?
By using their sight to see dangerous phenomena from a safe distance.
i’m pretty sure you are just a human who incorrectly assumes sight is required for advancement
you can also use touch to perceive most phenomena and sacrifices as well
You are just assuming that sight isn’t needed for advancement.
Ignoring that they wouldn’t be able to learn metallurgy, they wouldn’t be able to learn about microscopic phenomena or the cosmos.
With sight you can easily make primitive tools that increase your visive range to include very far away objects or very tiny objects just by using glass lenses.
They wouldn’t be able to learn about electro-magnetism either, and don’t say “They could have organs that sense electro-magnetic fields” because organs that are made to sense electro-magnetic of other animals are used pretty much exclusively in water since outside they greatly loose their sense.
1 Like
well yeah but they could make sacrifices to give their descendants have the ability to see,
cameras were likely invented accidentally btw
1 Like
my troll senses have picked up something here
what are yall discussing?
They’re discussing blind civilizations and the advancement of technology
Well you are limited to implanting cameras into your brain if you want to not have to make as many sacrifices and get more detailed information and that is if you know how the brain works and know how to make digital cameras which would happen accidentally due to lack of sight and would probably use something like just photovoltaic grains connected by wires so the invention that you were attempting to make would probably be a solar panel
Also this discussion has gotten off topic, this is where it started
https://community.revolutionarygamesstudio.com/t/quick-question-thread/153/1858?u=willow
You first need to have the technology to do that first.
This is the underwater civ problem all over again.
And I said they would get the technology by trying to invent solar panels but using sediment of the materials they need to make the solar cells connected by wires, basically black and white photography using broken solar panels and wires to connect them to a brain
How would they know light is a resource they could harvest if they can’t see it?
Like with Underwater Civs, I think blind civs are possible but the presented arguments have more holes than a termite infested tree
They wouldn’t have access to those materials since you need to mine and refine them first, and even if they did they wouldn’t be able to make cameras because their lack of sight prevents them from even realizing they made them even if they did them on accident.
Also, even if they did cameras on accident they wouldn’t be like digital cameras that you can just transfer the images throught cables lol, and even if they did you can’t just attach cables to a brain.
Also, they wouldn’t discover electricity to begin with
Says somebody who never tried inventing cameras without eyes
Because it’s impossible, why don’t you try inventing cameras without eyes since you believe it’s so possible?
Oh, we would also have to wipe your memory of the concept of cameras, sight and light.
Is it even possible for them to obtain fire?
Since a blind species is going to be subterranean (either burrowing like moles, earthworms, and caecilians, or cave-dwelling like olms or cave fish),
because on earth-like planet they would get outcompeted by sighted species if they spent any significant time out.
So they would not be outside enough to learn to use fire from natural sources; Yes there are ways to make fire underground (flint and pyrite, or good ol’ bowdrill) but humans invented these techniques after we were already using fire, which why I’m unsure.
Not to mention smoke would be extremely deadly in such an enclosed space.
And lastly, I don’t think cave-dwellers could even make civilization due to lack of calories, caves are one of the most food poor environments on earth (at least barring alternative energy sources like radiation on other planets, which as an earthling I can’t predict the outcome of);
Olms are literally apex predators and they’re tiny and stand completely still most of the time.
1 Like
Almost forgot this wasn’t the quick questions thread.
They could just be a species that never evolved eyes though
They would get outcompeted by species with eyes.
2 Likes
To elaborate on why they’d be outcompeted:
I don’t think it’s evolutionarily possible for eyes not to evolve in an environment with light, at least under a long time scale.
By my unprofessional count there is at least 5 different instances of eyes evolving:
Summary
- Vertebrates
- Arthropods
- Molluscs
- Annelids (Leeches do in fact have eyes)
- Some species of jelly fish have eyespots
Additionally, while I’m uncertain about these ones, it’s possible they’re also separate:
- Molluscs twice, Cephalopods and Gastropods
- Arthropods twice, True Insects and Arachnids
- Some snakes have pits that sense infrared, which could be considered a simple ‘eye’
The thing about eyes is that they are nearly always beneficial if there is light, even in minute amounts like the deep ocean, so you need a pretty strong justification as to why they aren’t there.
1 Like
well duh unless a species was eating all the eyes because it needs the photoreceptive compounds for its own eyes because it doesn’t make any meaning once all the eyes were gone they would become blind