4 ms·
Facing the choice of whether to explore space, consider the worst case scenario. If we explore space, we could potentially destroy the evidence of non-Earth lif
by cgriswald 6y ago
Facing the choice of whether to explore space, consider the worst case scenario. If we explore space, we could potentially destroy the evidence of non-Earth life that we are trying to find. The worst-case scenario from a anthropocentric point of view is that we don't get evidence of non-Earth life. If we do not explore space, we guarantee that worst case scenario. And, ultimately, we doom all Earth-life to extinction in a billion or so years; an extinction we may be able to prevent.
- antonvs 6y agoThe morality of destroying non-Earth life doesn't seem to enter into your analysis.
- cgriswald 6y agoThis is a simplified analysis. On balance, I don't think there is any consistent moral basis for objecting to space travel that is based on not accidentally destroying non-Earth life. Did you have a specific objection in mind? Saying, "It is immoral to risk destroying non-Earth life," would not be enough. One argument is a sort of recursive argument that humans are the best hope for Earth life in the long term, they are also the best hope for solar system life in general. All solar system life is equally doomed—albeit at potentially longer timescales than Earth life.