What would be the correct traits for humans irl?

[Xoatl]

If we were to know all the other intelligent life in our galaxy, took an average and compared that to humans. I think we'd be Individualist and Communal. That's it.

Although it's Egalitarian now, which I wouldn't exactly call humans.

 

[daBiggestOrk]

One could make a case for resilient. It's just sad how much that trait sucks.

I still hold unto "adaptable". Most mammals cannot naturally exist across as wide as biosphere as humans can with very simple methods.

While we are certainly adaptable compared to non sentient mammals, would we truly be exceptionaly adaptable compared another sentient species? if we have the adaptable trait then most aliens must have some kind of physical disadvantage preventing them from adapting to environments. IMO a species with adaptable trait has resilience or can change their body in a short time to be comfortable in the middle of the Sahara or the top of Mount Everest naked with no equipment.

Tbh though I think everyone should have at least 40% habitability of all of the planets. Given the tech level none of the colonizable planets should be a problem for most species.

 

[Kryndude]

lol fixed. goddammit spellcheck

lol, I was like, "uh... yeah... true, sexual inequality was always there."

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

IMO a species with adaptable trait has resilience or can change their body in a short time to be comfortable in the middle of the Sahara or the top of Mount Everest naked with no equipment.

This is the same reason I don't buy humans being "slow breeders"- I think that's more fitting for species like the Jehet'ma, where an individual is some sort of sprawling fungal forest "macrocolony".

 

[I am Sovereign]

-we are naturally spiritual. it is infarct a core human trait present through our entire history from the earliest evidence we have and often literally the foundation of the first civilizations. anyone who says religion will go away or is harmful is ignorant of this predisposition and is probably a bit of an A.

Anyone who says religion wont go away or isent harmful is ignorant and is probably a bit of an A.
[read the quote audience]

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

Anyone who says religion wont go away or isent harmful is ignorant and is probably a bit of an A.

I'd say the same of anyone aggressively anti-religion, actually.

Speaking as an agnostic, I'd absolutely agree that humans are pretty naturally superstitious and that spirituality and religion come naturally to us. Can these things be used as justification to commit wrongs against other humans? Sure. So can basically anything. Religion has been behind a lot of pretty bad stuff, but that's probably mostly because it's one of the oldest forms of mass-identity we have. Pretty much any cause or belief system can be radicalized.

There's also nothing about religion that is inherently "ignorant"- plenty of scientists are (and historically, were) religious.

 

[neusaap]

Any religion-followers that try to aggressively impose their religion (be it through the government or terrorism) (and atheism is included as a religion imo) are a no-go to me. What people believe is their business, but if christians don't want to work on sundays they should not push a law through that makes it illegal for stores to be open on sundays, so that they don't lose out on the customers that otherwise would come on sundays to stores that are open is also a no-go for me.

There is nothing harmful in believing in a deity, even if there isn't one.

 

[I am Sovereign]

Any religion-followers that try to aggressively impose their religion (be it through the government or terrorism) (and atheism is included as a religion imo) are a no-go to me. What people believe is their business, but if christians don't want to work on sundays they should not push a law through that makes it illegal for stores to be open on sundays, so that they don't lose out on the customers that otherwise would come on sundays to stores that are open is also a no-go for me.

There is nothing harmful in believing in a deity, even if there isn't one.

Atheism is the lack of religion as black is the lack of colors in physics. Though thats a bit off topic but I had to say that.

 

[Jakobus]

Adaptive is probably spot on. Humans not only survive, but thrive enough to have spare time and develop a culture (art, litteratur though not always written) in any possible environment from Amazonas to Sahara to Greenland.
Connected to that, Spiritual is also probably in there since most of this early/primitive manifestations of culture circles around a belief in higher powers. Even today, in mostly secular societies, people STILL develop rituals, though not always of religous nature, to commemorate important occurances in life (like birth, death , important sports events, you name it...)
Militarist is propbaly also a given. Large-scale conflict between gifferent groups of humans can be seen at every level, and every known human culture has developed a philosophy towars warfare. (See John Keegan, The History of Warfare).
On Xenophobe/Xenophile we are probably in the middle. We certanly have ample evidence of goups bashing other groups, but we are also known to learn from different cultures, and demand for exotic goods has long been a driving force in global trade.
I also guess we should be seen as Nomandic (or better as somebody here put it, Pioneering). As mentioned, we have spread to every possible corner of your Planet except Antarctica. Today people live even there out of sheer curiosity, not because we actually NEED to be there. During the age of colonization, millins of people were perfectly willing to leave their homes and emmigrate to a completely different continent. We, as a species, are very easily stirred by new frontiers. Kennedy's "We chose to go to the mon not because it is easy but because it is hard" had a powerful resonance even though there was no objective need to go to the moon. Planning are under way for missions to Mars, and I bet when the first larger colony is established, the r won't be any shortage of volonteers even though they will NEVER see earth again...
Las, as a species, would consider us Slow Breeding. Right up until modern medicine, giving birth was incredibly dangerous. Our offspring is a long time in the womb compared to others of about the same size, is completely helpless at birth and by the time we are fertile, most other has already died from old age...

 

[NHunter_rus]

• Repugnant (as someone above said, the things we do...)
• Slow Learners (because our history tends to repeat itself - we never learn)
  • Or maybe not, since one could make a cause for Quick Learners...
• Resilient (guerrilla warfare)
• Adaptive (mostly via tech rather than naturally, but should still count)
• Nomadic

Can't add more: out of trait choices.

 

[SuperGeek89]

After reading this thread I've been inspired to redo the traits of my custom human empire. What do you guys think of:

-Quick Learners (don't really know really know if there is enough evidence to support this but it just "feels" right)
-Nomadic (we'll settle almost anywhere just for the sake of curiosity)
-Adaptive (this one has been rather consistent and it does make sense)
-Slow Breeders (because 18-21 years to reach full maturity is a little absurd, plus in my current game the most populous species are slow breeders so not much of a down side)
- Deviants (lets face it if you put four humans in a room and ask for their opinion of something you'll get five different ones)

As for ethos I'm sticking with Fanatic Individualists and Militarist.

 

[I am Sovereign]

After reading this thread I've been inspired to redo the traits of my custom human empire. What do you guys think of:

-Quick Learners (don't really know really know if there is enough evidence to support this but it just "feels" right)
-Nomadic (we'll settle almost anywhere just for the sake of curiosity)
-Adaptive (this one has been rather consistent and it does make sense)
-Slow Breeders (because 18-21 years to reach full maturity is a little absurd, plus in my current game the most populous species are slow breeders so not much of a down side)
- Deviants (lets face it if you put four humans in a room and ask for their opinion of something you'll five different ones)

As for ethos I'm sticking with Fanatic Individualists and Militarist.

Yeah deviant for sure. In the end all those ethos represented in the game were and are in some form present amongst our species even if some drasticaly more then the other (militarists > pacifists/ xenophobe > xenophile) for the largest part of our history.

Concerning quick learners I think that this is just mistaken or mixed up in our heads with being adaptive.

 

[Aed]

I'd say communal and weak for sure, humans are very social creatures and while we have quite robust bodies, we aren't really that strong. Possibly adaptive and intelligent too.

 

[I am Sovereign]

I'd say communal and weak for sure, humans are very social creatures and while we have quite robust bodies, we aren't really that strong. Possibly adaptive and intelligent too.

I wouldnt say we are intelligent. Scientific progress is and was made by minority group of individuals. And the planet is filled with some realy dumb people some of them even in government positions.

 

[scaper12123]

I think, at the end of the day, our traits would be intelligence and sedentary. The entire development of humanity has been one long quest for us to get into a position where we would have to exert ourselves as little as possible. As for our ethics, well, you tell me good sir: what do you think the most common beliefs amongst humanity are? The answer is none of them, because every person will probably see humanity as valuing different things based completely on their own values.

Right now, I'd say humanity is militarist, spiritualist, and individualist. Militarist because humans are very protective of their stuff, spiritualist because many people right now are seeking true value to their existence usually in the form of a higher power, and individualist because humans want to stand out amongst one another.

 

[DanubianCossak]

If we were to know all the other intelligent life in our galaxy, took an average and compared that to humans. I think we'd be Individualist and Communal. That's it.

Although it's Egalitarian now, which I wouldn't exactly call humans.

You can google Geert Hofstede's web site and check it yourself.

China : 1,380,500,000 : individualism index 20/100 (highly collectivist culture)
India : 1,309,420,000 : individualism index 48/100 (somewhat collectivist culture)
Indonesia: 260,581,000 : individualism index 14/100 (highly collectivist culture)
Brazil: 206,848,000 : individualism index 38/100 (majority collectivist culture)
Pakistan: 195,128,000 : individualism index 14/100 (highly collectivist culture)
Nigeria: 186,987,000 : individualism index 30/100 (highly collectivist culture)
Bangladesh: 186,987,000 : individualism index 20/100 (highly collectivist culture)
Japan: 126,950,000 : individualism index 46/100 (somewhat collectivist culture)
Mexico: 122,273,000 : individualism index 30/100 (majority collectivist culture)
Philippines: 103,486,000 : individualism index 32/100 (majority collectivist culture)
Ethiopia: 101,853,000 : individualism index 20/100 (majority collectivist culture)

^ thats the first 12 most populous countries in the world, i didnt list US, which is the only one among those that ranks with individualism higher than 50%. Vast majority of human cultures/societies are highly collectivist.

 

[Ur-Quan Lord 13]

You can google Geert Hofstede's web site and check it yourself.

China : 1,380,500,000 : individualism index 20/100 (highly collectivist culture)
India : 1,309,420,000 : individualism index 48/100 (somewhat collectivist culture)
Indonesia: 260,581,000 : individualism index 14/100 (highly collectivist culture)
Brazil: 206,848,000 : individualism index 38/100 (majority collectivist culture)
Pakistan: 195,128,000 : individualism index 14/100 (highly collectivist culture)
Nigeria: 186,987,000 : individualism index 30/100 (highly collectivist culture)
Bangladesh: 186,987,000 : individualism index 20/100 (highly collectivist culture)
Japan: 126,950,000 : individualism index 46/100 (somewhat collectivist culture)
Mexico: 122,273,000 : individualism index 30/100 (majority collectivist culture)
Philippines: 103,486,000 : individualism index 32/100 (majority collectivist culture)
Ethiopia: 101,853,000 : individualism index 20/100 (majority collectivist culture)

^ thats the first 12 most populous countries in the world, i didnt list US, which is the only one among those that ranks with individualism higher than 50%. Vast majority of human cultures/societies are highly collectivist.

It missed Russia. Russia is #9. Doubt it would be "individualist" though. And even less likely to be "egalitarian" vs "authoritarian".

Anyway, for traits, you have to think how humanity would compare to "average of all sentient life throughout the galaxy" which is impossible, since if there is sentient life in the galaxy, we don't know anything about it.

But, since the baseline in the game is that your home planet population can go from 8 billion to 16 billion in no time, I'd say humans are slow breeders compared to that.

Also, we live on all biomes on earth, but a whole arid planet or tundra planet? I think that'd be tough for us without some better tech. Adaptive, but not highly adaptive.

Anything else, which doesn't establish baseline numbers, is tough. Strong cases for resilient (which is, unfortunately, a useless trait in this game) and communal and deviant and nomadic. Maybe not nomadic, but definitely not sedentary. I really think communal, but definitely not solitary. I could easily see the case for conformist vs deviant, just impossible to gauge without a baseline...

As for ideology, in this game that's not race specific at all, every race drifts everywhere, they just start somewhere based on their dominant government when they become spacefarers. In 1.5 it seems like traits will actually influence where you drift, somewhat.

Where is humanity right now? Most governments are authoritarian, but not fanatic about it, the fanatic usually fade or adjust quickly. I'm not sure most people are authoritarian (hence deviants). I think we tend towards xenophobia (we'll eat your food if it's tasty but don't come over here and try to marry us!) Definitely militaristic (pacifism is a new thing brought up thanks to world wars, our closest evolutionary cousins rip each other's faces off.) Definitely inherently spiritualist (we are biologically wired to have religious experiences, more useful back when we didn't know anything, and as we drift towards materialism some people are trying to violently pull us back.)

I'd go militarist xenophobe, then either authoritarian or spiritualist, as kinda our "default". Geez, we suck huh? Nah, we're still good empathetic people, just sometimes let our instincts get in the way.

 

[Redwallzyl]

I wouldnt say we are intelligent. Scientific progress is and was made by minority group of individuals. And the planet is filled with some realy dumb people some of them even in government positions.

Our genetic diversity is pretty huge in comparison to other species. Things like "geniuses" wouldnt even be possible for the most animal species on our planet. If there were turtlepeople for example they would be more or less of the same intelligence not so humans.

that's not right at all. our genetic diversity is actually vary low. we went through a bottleneck at some point in the past, i forget exactly when, where vary few humans existed. their is more diversity present in a single population of chips then in our entire species.

 

[Nesos]

I would say Adaptive and Communal. If you just compare us to other animals on this planet, I think we would also be Intelligent and Weak.

 

[I am Sovereign]

that's not right at all. our genetic diversity is actually vary low. we went through a bottleneck at some point in the past, i forget exactly when, where vary few humans existed. their is more diversity present in a single population of chips then in our entire species.

Oh dam you are right. I read it up seems like we could(theory) lost our variety 70.000 years ago where the overall population might went down to estimated 15.000-30.000 Individuals.