3 ms·

> The goal of this essay is to persuade you that we shouldn’t send human beings to Mars, at least not anytime soon. The thing that troubles me about these take

> The goal of this essay is to persuade you that we shouldn’t send human beings to Mars, at least not anytime soon. The thing that troubles me about these takes is the "we." There is no singular "we" in the world. Using the singular "we" deceives people into thinking that it is binary choice. In actuality, there are potentially many nations, many companies, and many people who can pursue resources and make a choice without impacting others. It has no more impact on you than your neighbor deciding whether to buy an insurance policy or not. Humanity is not a single mass of protoplasm, thank goodness.

wilsonnb3 4y ago
It is pretty clear to me that “we” in the article refers to NASA/the US Government rather than humanity.
- komali2 4y ago
  That still doesn't make sense - as the author writes, such a project would require several miracles to survive the multiple election cycles it would go through. Why do people consider themselves a "we" with their government when said government regularly goes against the polled preferences of its citizens. Clear examples in the USA include the fact that weed is criminalized in its country and a huge swath of its citizens are imprisoned for marijuana crimes despite the nation's citizenry as a whole not wanting this. Another example includes the citizens preference for a guaranteed right to women's healthcare, and the government's failure to enshrine this right, or in some local cases, to actively outlaw women's healthcare. So when people use "we" and include their government despite not living in democracies, I get confused.
alehlopeh 4y ago
And yet every single discussion about space exploration (including this one) is full of people espousing the hypothetical “we, humanity” as though it were a singular entity capable of making decisions. This kind of fanciful thinking is a reliable tell that a person belongs to the “religion” mentioned in TFA.

wilsonnb3 4y ago

It is pretty clear to me that “we” in the article refers to NASA/the US Government rather than humanity.

komali2 4y ago
That still doesn't make sense - as the author writes, such a project would require several miracles to survive the multiple election cycles it would go through. Why do people consider themselves a "we" with their government when said government regularly goes against the polled preferences of its citizens. Clear examples in the USA include the fact that weed is criminalized in its country and a huge swath of its citizens are imprisoned for marijuana crimes despite the nation's citizenry as a whole not wanting this. Another example includes the citizens preference for a guaranteed right to women's healthcare, and the government's failure to enshrine this right, or in some local cases, to actively outlaw women's healthcare. So when people use "we" and include their government despite not living in democracies, I get confused.

alehlopeh 4y ago

And yet every single discussion about space exploration (including this one) is full of people espousing the hypothetical “we, humanity” as though it were a singular entity capable of making decisions. This kind of fanciful thinking is a reliable tell that a person belongs to the “religion” mentioned in TFA.