4 ms·

As a doctrine, colonization hasn't worked too well for humanity. It assumes an ethnocentric view where the colonizer has the right to take or use resources that

As a doctrine, colonization hasn't worked too well for humanity. It assumes an ethnocentric view where the colonizer has the right to take or use resources that they believe they "discovered". Just because there aren't any humans there, doesn't mean it doesn't already belong to someone. And just because we are able to take over a moon, doesn't mean we have the right to. Instead of colonizing, we should be talking about zero impact exploration where we leave things exactly as they were before we arrived. Then focus on using what we learn to fix and protect our own planet.

shadowprofile77 7y ago
Belong to who? All known solar space and beyond is literally devoid of any life at all. Are you assuming super aliens? Or perhaps a god of some kind, who pre-claims ownership? And if so, how did these beings get their "right" to have it?. What exactly countermands our right to the take over the moon or any other part of local space? Name some concrete thing, not just an arbitrary notion of rights. The obvious from these, to what purpose zero impact exploration of space? Sure, nothing should be destroyed just because... But you do realize that you're not talking about fragile ecosystems here, but vast dead landscapes that are the literal products of cataclysmic destructive processes that are in many places still ongoing? Your comment is so absurdly out of context for the environments we're all discussing here that it's tempting to think you're trolling.
- marcusKral 7y ago
  And that's exactly the problem... we don't know what we don't know. We are assuming life exists only in the form that we have encountered it on Earth. And we're assuming that just because we can't find something, that it isn't there. We are taking all things solely from our perspective and we are convinced that they can't be any other way. This seems extremely egocentric and could be disastrous when encounter something far outside of our narrow perspective. And what if we find a bacteria on Titan that lives beneath the surface but is harmful to humans, will we exterminate it for our own sake? What level of intelligence is required before we attribute value to another species. As far as rights are concerned, this is a real issue. If the first country to Titan plants a flag and then says, "This moon is ours". Does that make it theirs? Will countries fight wars to protect their perceived rights to a particular moon? It may be arbitrary but that doesn't mean it isn't real. National boarders are arbitrary but they are very real. But in the same case as with countries, what gives us the right as a species to go a moon and claim it. Is it a right based on force, an ethical right, a right of first claim? The very idea of colonization assumes certain rights. The question is what are those rights based on? And no I'm not trolling. It's sad that we are prepared to discuss ideas without being prepared to discuss the underlying philosophies. I'm simply saying that before we consider what to colonize or how, we should consider whether the very notion of space colonization is valid. This isn't a moot point. If we're wrong, at worst it could mean the end of our species. All cases of colonization on earth have lead to genocide or war... no exceptions. Why do we think space colonization will be different?
egdod 7y ago
> Just because there aren't any humans there, doesn't mean it doesn't already belong to someone. There isn't anyone there, human or otherwise. > And just because we are able to take over a moon, doesn't mean we have the right to. Sure it does.

shadowprofile77 7y ago

Belong to who? All known solar space and beyond is literally devoid of any life at all. Are you assuming super aliens? Or perhaps a god of some kind, who pre-claims ownership? And if so, how did these beings get their "right" to have it?. What exactly countermands our right to the take over the moon or any other part of local space? Name some concrete thing, not just an arbitrary notion of rights. The obvious from these, to what purpose zero impact exploration of space? Sure, nothing should be destroyed just because... But you do realize that you're not talking about fragile ecosystems here, but vast dead landscapes that are the literal products of cataclysmic destructive processes that are in many places still ongoing? Your comment is so absurdly out of context for the environments we're all discussing here that it's tempting to think you're trolling.

marcusKral 7y ago
And that's exactly the problem... we don't know what we don't know. We are assuming life exists only in the form that we have encountered it on Earth. And we're assuming that just because we can't find something, that it isn't there. We are taking all things solely from our perspective and we are convinced that they can't be any other way. This seems extremely egocentric and could be disastrous when encounter something far outside of our narrow perspective. And what if we find a bacteria on Titan that lives beneath the surface but is harmful to humans, will we exterminate it for our own sake? What level of intelligence is required before we attribute value to another species. As far as rights are concerned, this is a real issue. If the first country to Titan plants a flag and then says, "This moon is ours". Does that make it theirs? Will countries fight wars to protect their perceived rights to a particular moon? It may be arbitrary but that doesn't mean it isn't real. National boarders are arbitrary but they are very real. But in the same case as with countries, what gives us the right as a species to go a moon and claim it. Is it a right based on force, an ethical right, a right of first claim? The very idea of colonization assumes certain rights. The question is what are those rights based on? And no I'm not trolling. It's sad that we are prepared to discuss ideas without being prepared to discuss the underlying philosophies. I'm simply saying that before we consider what to colonize or how, we should consider whether the very notion of space colonization is valid. This isn't a moot point. If we're wrong, at worst it could mean the end of our species. All cases of colonization on earth have lead to genocide or war... no exceptions. Why do we think space colonization will be different?

egdod 7y ago

> Just because there aren't any humans there, doesn't mean it doesn't already belong to someone. There isn't anyone there, human or otherwise. > And just because we are able to take over a moon, doesn't mean we have the right to. Sure it does.