First of all, I must explain you how we can define a species from the sophiologic point of view.
For me, as the first law of sophiology is THE SPECIALISATION LAW, a species is a category of CAPs that have the same specializations.
In biology, for instance, what we currently considered to define a species were these two elements:
- looking the same way
- being able to reproduce with each other.
But what criterions should we use when classifying atoms, stars, rocks, flowers? Which criterions to use when defining the human species, which is much more than looking the same way and being able to reproduce with each other? It is obvious that the old way to define species of things or phenomena (in sophiologic terms, to define a class of complex associative phenomena) gives no more satisfaction to our needs. The sophiologic way to create definitions has always in view the specialization law, which says that every CAP must undergo a process of structural and functional specialization.

Do we want to properly define a CAP? Nothing simpler:
- we find the structural specialization (that makes CAPs of the same class NOT to look the same way but to be the same);
- we find the functional specialization (what makes CAPs NOT work with each other but work the same way with the environment).
Now, we have an instrument that allows us to settle definitions for all categories of CAPs. That is because formerly we did not have a universal system to define species (it is clear that the system used in biology, for instance, does nor work in other scientific fields). Sophiology allows us to use the same way for gorillas or diamonds:
- gorillas are blood and flesh (let’s skip the biological details) and diamonds are pure carbon;
- gorillas are specialized to interact with the African rainforest, as diamonds are practically not interacting with the environment.
Don’t forget that my goal here was not to compare gorillas to diamonds, but to prove that sophiology provides us with a universal way to define phenomena. You may try it in your field of interest, and you’ll find out that it works in every single situation.

As a general mention, structurally speaking, CAPs are all parts of the multi-level complexity of the universal matter - when we mention their structural specialization we have in fact in view their position on the steps of this unique scale. As regards the functional specialization, we find here those elements that make the difference between very resembling CAPs - structurally speaking, man and chimpanzee are practically identical; but functionally speaking, they are very different.

I must already warn you about the traps that common thinking brings into sophiology. Because you’ll try to apply the criteria exposed before to define MAN. And you’ll get stacked! Because defining MAN is the ultimate challenge to human wisdom, and every scientist endowed with the power of reflexion has tried in his time to give an answer to this question: WHAT IS MAN? with all his subsequent issues: WHAT IS MANKIND? WHERE ARE WE COMING FROM? WHAT IS OUR NATURE? WHAT SHOULD BE OUR DESTINY?

As I am not an entomologist, I am not going to review all the answers given these last 2000 years. But I must tell you that every one of these answers was a failure, because every one was trying to establish a pattern starting from the descriptions of the structure of the human being and of its species.
As you have already understood, it is enough to put into light the functional specialization of a CAP to find what in classic logic used to be called the specific difference that helped to build a definition.
But what is the functional specialization of man? Man is present in every place of this planet, from the bottom of mountains to the deeps of the oceans. He managed to become the master of every single ecosystem of this planet, acting everywhere as the major predator.
In the same time, do not forget that every specialization is somehow a dead-end of evolution. Every specialized species has no more perspectives of evolution (in other words, living in optimum equilibrium with it’s environment – one of the stupid frequently asked questions during anti-evolutionism debates is “why apes are no more evolving into men these days?”). When degresivity occurs, the usual issue is degradation of the quality of life and, finally, death. In a word, every specialized species lives and dies with its environment.
But man is special. He is not only able to take advantage of every ecosystem on the face of Earth, but he seems to be able to escape to any pressure that the terrestrial environment could put on him. This means not only that man is a major disturbing factor to the ecological balance, but this also makes from man a species beyond the limits of the terrestrial ecosphere.

In sophiologic terms, man is a despecialised species, which means:
- that man has not reached his specialization within the limits of the terrestrial ecosphere
- that mankind will reach his specialization far beyond the limits of the terrestrial ecosphere.
Now you understand why stars always fascinated man: not only he was attracted by the mystery of the distant lights, but he also had the intuition of a unique destiny. A destiny that must carry humankind from the tall grass of the Equatorial savannahs, from “the shore of the Cosmic ocean” (Carl Sagan) to the position of dominant species on a cosmic scale.
What now about “little green man”, “Alien” and “encounters of the 3-rd degree”? I am more and more convinced that species like man are very rare on the cosmic scale. Why? Because the specialization law acts always and everywhere and, in common words, pushes every species to a specialization that finally means an absolute limitation of the evolutive power, usually within the limits of the planetary ecosphere.
Man still has an outstanding evolutive power, which could be effective not only within the limits of the terrestrial ecosphere, but first of all beyond the said limits. Man is the only species endowed with reason on Earth, and this singular status makes him a “rara avis”.
Once, I was convinced that reason must consequently make its apparition everywhere where life managed to evolve to higher patterns of organization (Isaac Asimov and Carl Sagan - to mention only two of the most known names - had exactly the same conviction). Now, I am convinced that reason is a “rara avis” not only on Earth, but also on a cosmic scale, and I think that Homo sapiens is perhaps the only species endowed with reason in the whole Universe (or, at least, in our galaxy). So what if we are alone? Loneliness is a burden only for weak natures, those natures that cannot carry the weight of a peerless destiny. In fact, this changes nothing from the destiny of mankind. On the contrary, this gives more importance to the biped species. This means that the restless flame of reason is a very rare supply, which can be found on a tiny planet of a common star belonging to an anonymous branch of an ordinary galaxy...
Bur what an adventure in view! Looking for his specialization, man is already preparing to leave the shores of the “cosmic ocean” and sail to the horizon. Scientists and science-fiction writers are modeling the conquest of the cosmic space, and everything they are able to imagine is going to be surpassed by the achievements of the terrestrial cosmic fleet and of the terrestrial colonists. And man is going perhaps to find his specialization only after the complete conquest of the cosmic space. In a relatively short lapse of time, humanity could become a true cosmogonic force, involved in the major flows of substance and energy. As humanity has a unique destiny, his importance in the evolution of the universal matter becomes even more important. His goal must be to spread the flame of reason across the Universe. If the poet is right and man is “dust of stars”, then his destiny is to return to the stars as their equal.
Therefore, we could call the destiny of mankind A PATH OF LIGHT.

Man is the result of the action on Earth of the laws that sophiology put into light. His journey to the stars, as well his life on distant planets, is going to be ruled by the same laws. Being accustomed to the existence and the action of these laws, man is much more competent than before to build his future. Mankind was always very interested by the future. But every individual, common people or scientist, has his own future. Now, for the first time in the history of mankind, we are aware of the laws that rule our existence. This allows us to make, for the first time in the history of mankind, believable predictions and forecasts.

THE FUTURE IS NO MORE GOING TO BE WHAT WE SOUGHT IT COULD BE.
SOPHIOLOGY IS THE SCIENCE THAT CHANGES OUR FUTURE.