-2
$\begingroup$

So here's my idea: Every 2 years the class I civilization is inspected by an outside Class III civilization. If the Class I civilization has made progress then they will move on. If the Class I civilization has made little to no progress the outside class III will take away a certain piece of critical technology (this could be computers, servers, farming equipment) As you can imagine, the Citizens hate it. So they work and they work in fear of getting their things removed. This creates a sort of "tree effect" in the evolution. The Class III thinks that this fear then generates more productivity and will cause them to expand at an exponential rate. But does this fear actually work?

(for anyone wondering, I'm referring to the Kardashev scale)

Does this method have a positive or negative effect on the development class I civilization.

Directly from wikipedia (Kardashev scale)

A Type I civilization—also called a planetary civilization—can use and store all of the energy available on its planet.

A Type II civilization—also called a stellar civilization—can harness the total energy of its planet's parent star (the most popular hypothetical concept being the Dyson sphere—a device which would encompass the entire star and transfer its energy to the planet(s)).

A Type III civilization—also called a galactic civilization—can control energy on the scale of its entire host galaxy.

$\endgroup$

closed as too broad by Hoyle's ghost, JBH, user535733, Gryphon, elemtilas Feb 3 at 5:32

Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer. Avoid asking multiple distinct questions at once. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Hello Adrien. This question is broad, vague, and opinion-based. It's basically inviting a discussion, but SE is not a discussion forum. The format is one-specific-question/one-best-answer. How will you judge the quality of an answer? How can we even know, if you don't defined your two civilizations? "class III" is, frankly, meaningless even using the Kardashev, which is based (as I recall) only on energy consumption, this means nothing. Worse, we need to now the psychology, technology, demographics, politics, etc., of the class I. I'm going to vote OT:Unclear. $\endgroup$ – JBH Feb 3 at 3:28
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ "Effective" does not mean efficient, moral, or appreciated. "Progress" seems undefined - a new type of vehicle undercoating might count. Endless coercion seems like a great way to foment a rebellion...or to be painted quite badly in the history sims. $\endgroup$ – user535733 Feb 3 at 3:44
  • $\begingroup$ What do the classes mean? How can a a technology, critical or otherwise, be "taken away"? $\endgroup$ – elemtilas Feb 3 at 5:31
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ "Forced Evolution to Turn a Class I to a Class III civilization" : And for my next question I will be asking how to achieve FTL by selectively breeding hamsters : what you've done is take two unrelated concepts & ask how to achieve one with the other, this needs editing to make some sort of sense or deleting $\endgroup$ – Pelinore Feb 3 at 15:17
  • $\begingroup$ No critique, but this reminded me of the "Shadows" from "Babylon 5" a bit :) $\endgroup$ – DrCopyPaste Feb 4 at 14:40
1
$\begingroup$

The beatings will continue until morale improves.

We really don't know if these concepts work for civilizations other than human ones. But from child psychology, we know this works spectacularly poorly on children. They do indeed learn to avoid the negative stimulus, but rarely in the direction that is intended.

The more nefarious part appears when they grow up. The scars of their childhood cause them to act in undesirable ways. Its harder for them to be stable in life.

This approach may push a civilization towards Class II, but it also comes at a great cost. THe stability of this civilization will start to erode. Desperation to avoid punishment will lead to tremendous efforts to avoid it which prevent the civilization from stabilizing normally.

If you have ten million Class I civilizations, and you only need to evolve one Class II to consider the effort successful, this can work. EVentually you may get a civilization whose scars turn out to be beneficial.

And if you think about it, that's how evolution works as well.

$\endgroup$
-1
$\begingroup$

What is a Class I civilization? What is a Class III civilization? For that matter, what is a Class II civilization, and why is it left out of the picture?

If the Class III civilization is defined as superior in every (for various values of every) way, then obviously the Class III approach works. If it didn't, the Class III wouldn't be a Class III.

As for evolution, the answer is no. Genes simply don't spread that fast.

Furthermore, taking away technology will cause disruptions in the Class I, making it impossible to progress, which will result in further removals, etc. So the policy of the Class III is nothing more than a thinly-disguised program of oppression and domination which will end with the Class I effectively forced back into the Stone Age.

Which means that the Class III is not living up to its description. Apparently its philosophy is to destroy any other lesser civilization which it encounters while at the same time claiming to be helping them. Not a nice bunch.

$\endgroup$

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.