How the Thing "thinks"

How the Thing "thinks"
Do we all agree that the Thing cells have a collective consciousness?

Yes, the larger the life form, the smarter the thing indeed.

But would The Blair thing be smarter then a Palmer Thing for example if they were both large? I think Blair was more smart then Palmer was, is it the same looking at those Things?

But would The Blair thing be smarter then a Palmer Thing for example if they were both large? I think Blair was more smart then Palmer was, is it the same looking at those Things? No, Blair-thing would most likely be just as smart as Palmer-thing if they were both the same size. The more human intelligence a thing has to devour, the more actual intelligence it receives.

I don't believe that The Thing 'thinks' as such. A Thing imitation behaves exactly as the original organism would under most circumstances. For 'Palmer' (the imitation) to emulate Palmer, it must emulate his brain (almost) perfectly. Of course, 'Palmer' is not Palmer. There are certain circumstances which cause it to Thing Out (threat/assimilation opportunity.) Nevertheless, there is no more reason to suspect a malign intelligence behind the 'decision' to Thing Out than there is to suspect that there is one behind the 'decision' for a photosensitive epileptic to have a fit when they see a strobe light. It is entirely possible that the Thing Out response is purely autonomous and that there is no thought whatsoever behind it. In fact, its entirely predictable nature is perhaps evidence in favour of this theory. Although a certain amount of blind information processing capability is necessary here, and presumably considerably more than that required to trigger the epileptic response, it is, at the end of the day, only a question of degree. I'm in agreement with many aspects of CplFerro's theory which characterizes The Thing as a monster which "isn't there". My understanding of this phenomenon is that when we speak of 'The Thing', what we are referring to is not a distinct entity which absorbs organisms and builds imitations which 'it' inhabits and controls. There is no 'it'. What we are referring to is not a 'Thing', but a process which transforms ordinary organisms into superorganisms (in a profoundly indirect way which involves the complete disassembly of the original.) We all know what such superorganisms can do that the originals cannot. The point is that there is no master intelligence controlling each superorganism, let alone them all. Each one simply reacts to threat/assimilation possibility stimuli in the same way that you would if a doctor were to tap your knee gently with a small hammer, i.e. without any conscious decision making. XidiouX

I mostly agree with you and Cpl Ferro, XidiouX. However wouldn't the Blair-Thing building the alien vehicle imply some sort of master intelligence?

I mostly agree with you and Cpl Ferro, XidiouX. However wouldn't the Blair-Thing building the alien vehicle imply some sort of master intelligence? I see no need for such a master intelligence. An ordinary intelligence, yes, but even then, not Blair's*. Blair wouldn't have known how to build such a vehicle. The form that The Thing took while building this vehicle was very likely that of a member of the same species as the crew of the original spaceship that crashed. XidiouX * Or at least, not wholly Blair's. It might be the case that to build the alien vehicle we saw out of a human helicopter, aspects of both human and alien intellects would be required, or would at least make the job easier. This might imply that a hybrid brain of some sort would be preferential, likely housed within a head which is part-human and part-alien. Of course, this is exactly what we saw with the Blair-monster at the end.

Why wouldn't the Thing be intelligent? It made a keen decision in removing the generator. All humans die, the Thing does not. It goes to fat that the Thing only reacts and goes on instinct. The guys that were assimilated are all key-stone players. Blair as scientist, Palmer as mechanic and the killing of Fuchs. Mac was his prime foe, so it tried to make Mac look suspicious.

Why wouldn't the Thing be intelligent? Because it seems so tactically inept, e.g. Palmer pointing out the escaping head and the risky and needless assimilation of Bennings, the only character who was potentially on The Thing's side. Yet it also squandered some effortless assimilation opportunities. Let's consider the face on the wall. If that was Norris, it could have easily assimilated Copper and MacReady on their visit to the spaceship. Get the pilot first and then the Doc, at the other side of the ship, would have been screwed. If it was Palmer, it could easily have had Childs. And as for Clark... It made a keen decision in removing the generator. All humans die, the Thing does not. It might have needed that for its little engineering project. My suspicion is that the Blair-Thing spent most of its time in a semi- or wholly alien form while it was building this. Firstly, it would do this in order to have access to the alien intelligence required to build it. Secondly, it would need considerably greater physical strength than Blair to tunnel down through the ice. It goes to fat that the Thing only reacts and goes on instinct. The guys that were assimilated are all key-stone players. Blair as scientist, Palmer as mechanic and the killing of Fuchs. Mac was his prime foe, so it tried to make Mac look suspicious. Well, in due course, it would have likely killed or assimilated all of them. In terms of the order, pretty much all of them played important roles within the team and arguments could be made in favour of, for example, assimilating Windows or Gary first. A further example of the apparent lack of intelligence behind The Thing's actions relates to the behaviour of the Palmer-Thing on exposure. It should have immediately, and quickly, killed MacReady and Windows, in that order. I don't think it would have had any difficulty doing this had it chosen this course of action. It could then have done whatever it liked with the others, who were tied down, at its leisure. Instead, it wasted valuable time trying to assimilate Windows, i.e. producing an imitation that would fool no-one in the camp and would only be viable if all the other members of the team were killed or assimilated. It would want to do this anyway in due course, but it clearly got its priorities wrong here. In fact, let's also consider what happened with Norris. The imitation stopped functioning due to heart failure. If there was an intelligence behind the scenes, wouldn't the intelligent thing be to exercise more patience with the response of the other humans to the situation (because they might know something about this) rather than give the game away, and at tremedous risk, so soon? I don't deny that I think that some information processing must take place in order to prompt a Thing-Out and to guide The Thing's subsequent behaviour. However, does that information processing point to: Rationality? I don't believe so. If we assume that the actions of a Thing are guided by the two goals of survival and propagation, then even when these two aims do not conflict with each other, it frequently wastes opportunities and sometimes acts in ways which are, in the stric-*test*-('") sense, insane. Freedom or instinct? When under threat, it often simply attacks the first thing it 'sees' (Copper? Windows?) and gives no thought to the big picture or what would be the most beneficial strategy. That's pure instinct in my book. XidiouX

Hey Xidioux, let me get back to your replies in a couple days. :wink:

Hey Xidioux, let me get back to your replies in a couple days. :wink: Hi Grasshopper, In your own time! :wink: One argument that could be made against what I've said above is that The Thing should be allowed to make mistakes. After all, you and I are conscious, intelligent, thinking beings who are nevertheless not mathematically perfect rational agents. We also make mistakes from time to time. However, it's the frequency with which The Thing makes mistakes that bothers me. In relation to its assimilation mandate, its performance is consistently poor. And when it's under threat, it always seems to attack, and sometimes in a highly inefficient way, the nearest target rather than actually considering what course of action would be of most benefit to it in the long run. XidiouX

Hello Xidioux, Looking at your points, I basically have to agree with you. The main point is that the Thing just wants to get out of Outpost, once it discovered that it couldn't 'smart-out' the humans. The first assimilation (let's presume Norris) was a smart move. No one in the camp had an idea of what was going on. The second move (kennel-scene) was an obvious mistake. The dogs went bezerk and the Thing was bound to be discovered. Taking this in account, I always tend to say that the Thing wanted to be discovered at this time, because of it's origin as a weaon of war. But that's another thread on the board. Once the kennel-scene past, Blair and Mac were the only ones who clearly understood the danger that lies within the Thing. We should keep in mind that Carpenter had just 'so much' time to make his movie. If he would have tried out all options of 'psycho-warfare' and 'deep mistrust within the humans ranks', the movie would been much longer. Another point is that the Thing is not a fighter. It tends to 'flight' more than 'fight'. It has much more power than humans, but moves in shadows. The option to assimilate Palmer and Mac at the saucer scene doe'sn't come really into play. It could have done this, but it didn't want to fight this way. The 'rat-out' of Spiderhead by Palmer was a nice way of Carpenter to ener Mac and his famous 'blood theory'. The audience had to be brought to this point. (it made one of the best lines of the movie.....) So, we can say that the Thing made some bad choices, but it was constantly under stress once is was discoverd for what it is. Intelligence goes only so far as it witts take it. :wink: Looking forward to your reply, Xidioux.

I have always believed that the thing has collective consciousness. Its more awesome and scary i think

By the way very good thoughts you law down here XidiouX I really like your thoughts about how the thing works.

I believe that the thing didnt imitate clark because it knew that clark was the dog handler and that the crew would be very suspicious about him.

View Full Version: How the Thing "thinks"