“At the core of NASA's future space exploration is a return to the moon, where we will build a sustainable long term human presence” (NASA website, 2009)
2009 was a great year for space exploration! The 40th anniversary of the Apollo 11 moon landing marked a new era for our future in space. Key landmarks include the European Space Agency’s appointment of its first European Commander to the International Space Station. In October, the 60th International Astronautical Congress took place in South Korea. Then there were continuing attempts from South Korea to launch its first rocket in the aftermath of the ongoing controversy about North Korea’s testing of rocket technology in outer space. NASA even managed to identify water on the moon.
In a time of potentially catastrophic climate change, our need to consider the exploration of outer space is greater than ever. This need is made visible by the rise of various networks that are contributing to the establishment of governmental policies that will oversee our move into outer space, either as visitors or inhabitants. The importance of ethical debate within such conversations is signaled by the work of such organizations as UNESCO, which held its first congress on the ethics of outer space in 2004.
Applying ethical guidelines that will accommodate the wide and diverse interests of a global community presents considerable challenges and inhibits the willingness of space agencies to commit wholeheartedly to any such implementation. After all, haven’t societies been trying to find common ground on such values for at least half a century?
Are there no ethical principles we can share to help guide our colonization of outer space? If not, then how do we deal with some of the fundamental questions that govern such work? For instance, what obligations do we owe to the various life forms we send there, or those we might discover? Can we develop a more considerate approach to colonizing outer space than we were able to achieve for various sectors of Earth?
And what are our expectations of astronauts? What are we actually asking them to do and will they be aware of what they're getting themselves into? Could our inevitable public surveillance of their behavior become too much of an infringement on their personal privacy? While it is tempting to believe that an astronaut’s time in outer space involves a lot of free floating antics and admiring the view, astronauts are hooked up to monitoring devices and poked and prodded ad infinitum to find out what happens to biology when it is outside of Earth’s atmosphere.
Humanity has a moral obligation to discover, create and support emergent life forms via space exploration. This obligation arises from the discovery itself, the mere possibility of developing such technology. However, to understand the value of such achievements and why we should pursue them further requires that we connect space exploration to a long chain of other discoveries that have incrementally extended our reach. Consider that the first liquid-fuelled rocket was launched in 1926 by the American Robert Goddard, the same year that John Logie Baird demonstrated the first true television system.
Our neglect of the intimate set of connections that describe technological histories limits our ability to make sense of present-day interventions or their politics. Moreover, our failure to use these achievements wisely limits our ability to survive as a species. I am not going to argue that the end is nigh unless we find a way of colonizing outer space, though there are some people that would find little difficulty in accepting this proposition. But our obligation goes beyond the pursuit of new frontiers for its own sake, or our own survival. To this end, the exploration of outer space is far from a luxury. Rather, it is an integral component of a flourishing society. Without pursuing the most complex scientific challenges, we will want for solutions to many of our immediate social needs. Moreover, the goods of space exploration far exceed the symbolic value of landing on the moon or orbiting the earth. A vast amount of research and development derives from space exploration. For example, the United Kingdom’s 2007 Space Policy inquiry indicated that the creation of space products contributes two to three times their value in GDP.
Admittedly, many will have reservations about investing into space exploration given ongoing economic doom and gloom. This is why we should derive our imperative from moral, rather than scientific reasons.
Consider for a moment the holy grail of space exploration: the discovery of life outside of Earth, not just some kind of water, but sentient life -- the kind that has eyes. While there is a limit to how much one should be distracted by such ideas, it is useful to illustrate how the pursuit of extraterrestrials is increasingly aligned with other human practices.
After all, how should we treat the creation of new life forms, which derive from a range of cross-genetic breeding practices? Our own modification of the species pool through selection, modification, or transgenics creates a situation where distinct species properties emerge as a result of radical human-made interventions. We might even claim that such interventions transcend evolutionary processes.
In what sense should such entities be reasonably claimed as Earthly? When an asteroid enters the Earth – or when a shuttle returns - does our planet become less Earthly? It seems to me that we need to debunk the idea that Earth can be treated as an isolated structure, since we know it is not. We are already extraterrestrial in the most meaningful sense of the term. Thus, extraterrestrial ethics applies to life in general. It meets with the expansion of recently developed concepts such as ecosystem health as a broad area of moral concern along with the principle of procreative beneficence -- the idea that our capacities of begetting new lives should be utilized to optimize human flourishing in its broadest sense. It promotes the principle of autonomy, while recognizing that individual decisions have consequences for others.
For me, the appeal of pursuing outer space begins with the imagination of new life forms. It is necessary that we consider our obligations to such lives and what responsibilities we should articulate for their continued survivability.
Decades after the beginnings of the first space race began, the next giant leap for humanity seems more to do with coming to terms with what we want from the next era of space exploration. To answer this question, we will need more than just scientists to tell us what is possible.
or Beyond Technological Smartness; or What Artificial Agents Get Up to When You Leave the Room
Read and comment on blog posts from h+ editor RU Sirius and others.
I had a friend a few years back that wanted to start a commune growing there own food and such. I thought she was some left wing nut. After...
Who are you to decide what god would like or dislike? I think god wants the best for my children.
Doesn't EVERYONE think Sweet Polly Purebred is hot?
Oh, and yeah, you're more or less right about the other stuff, too.
It is vague and partly erroneous to claim it is unhealthy to "coat our bodies with chemicals". A more accurate claim is that it is unhealthy to...
Comments
Ad personams won't make you
Ad personams won't make you appear any wiser. You lose.
Da Prime Directive
Follow the "Prime Directive" suggested in "Star Trek" series.
non sequitur
"In a time of potentially catastrophic climate change, our need to consider the exploration of outer space is greater than ever."
WTF does climate change have to do with anything? You could as easily say, "In a time with the potential for Ebola to mutate and go airborne."
I'm guessing the word "narrative" is involved.
FOCUS people!
Ethics Alien to Aliens
Why assume aliens would have ethics?
"humanity has a moral
"humanity has a moral obligation to discover, create and support emergent life forms via space exploration. This obligation arises from the discovery itself, the mere possibility of developing such technology. "
I'm at a complete loss as to how to extrapolate from the mere ability to accomplish something the moral obligation to do it. Even a moment's thought will produce dozens of counter-examples, including the discovery of nuclear fission. On the model proposed, it would appear that there was an equal moral obligation to develop an atomic bomb as well as reactors for power.
As for the life forms we might encounter, it is difficult to see how any moral relations would arise previous to our actual meeting and subsequent evaluation of, among other things, how these other living beings stand in relation to ourselves, whether they are inferior or superior, conscious or otherwise, friendly or hostile, beneficial or inimical ...
Here's hoping that we find
Here's hoping that we find extraterrestials tastier than they find us. More butter-sauce !!
Agree with earlier poster.
Agree with earlier poster. Once I hear climate change mentioned, the credibility of the writer or speaker goes out the window. Google climategate.
As soon as you mentioned
As soon as you mentioned climate change, you lost all credibility.
Does this guy not realize...
Can we develop a more considerate approach to colonizing outer space than we were able to achieve for various sectors of Earth?
that without inconsiderate colonization, Professor Miah would not be where he is, enjoying the fruits of a wealthy society?
A quote from George Orwell:
Pacifists are people who haven't faced the unpleasant facts of life, either economically or politically; if they did face those facts, they wouldn't be pacifists for long.I don't want to mention the
I don't want to mention the N-word here to prevent the summoning of Godwin's Law. But is it all right for the parent poster to loot and burn other harmless civilizations since without Hernán Cortés and his fellow conquistadores the world would be different?
The fact is, for better of for worse we don't know.
Only the one holding the bigger gun can entertain these ideas, which suddenly melt away when s/he finds that the gun's muzzle is the wrong way round.
Don't expect anyone to think
Don't expect anyone to think too highly of your opinions whenever you attempt to make them wear your favorite brand of hair shirts.
Ugly fact is that we will always "encroach".
"Encroach"? Currently,
"Encroach"? Currently, everyplace we know of in space is fatal to any Earth animal life (including Human) within minutes of exposure! *There are no indigenous people to exploit!*
I hate to use exclamation points, but this is such a major difference from any previous "colonization" that I feel we should embrace the change; space colonization and exploitation, in this solar system at least, forces a change in ethical behaviour due to the simple lack of any native biology in any area where we settle and seek to thrive. Plus, how could one pollute a place that'll kill you in minutes?
Post new comment