11 ms·
Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa.
- ninguem2 14y ago>He was a member of the German rocket development team at Peenemünde Just the guy to be answering ethical questions...
- aroberge 14y agoAnyone who discounts a thoughtful response based on some other criteria than that found in that response is not someone qualified to comment about ethics.
- ninguem2 14y agoThe important things are not what he discusses but what he doesn't discuss. For instance, why the space program is supported instead of other initiatives in science and technology or the connection between the space program with defense and propaganda. On the other side of the coin, he doesn't address the use of foreign aid as a tool of international relations and how it destroys local markets for food production. How corruption and lack of infrastructure often thwart well-meaning programs. He was a smart guy who could spin a good yarn and seemed to care. I sincerely doubt that he did and don't value his opinion.
- jlgreco 14y agoYou were doing pretty well there, then dove back into the ad hominem. Who he is as a person is entirely irrelevant, if you want to criticise the letter then criticise the letter, not the man.
- ninguem2 14y agoI am talking about my emotions, yes. All I can say, if you don't like it, is that I am sorry. But I don't believe one can have an entirely objective discussion on this topic which will arrive at an incontrovertible answer. Most tech inclined people (e.g. HN readership) are positively biased towards the space program. I am not, despite the fact that I fit the profile. I think it's science done for the wrong reasons. In addition, I don't like this guy and I expect to disagree with him and I can't change that.
- jlgreco 14y agoThe issue is not that you don't agree with other people here. The issue is that you were disagreeing incorrectly.
- Philadelphia 14y agoI think the fact that someone was an actual Nazi is enough to raise doubt about any moral arguments he makes.
- matt4711 14y agodid you even read the other comments? "He was also drafted into the Wehrmacht to fight on the Eastern front" doesn't seem like he had a lot of choice there...
- PakG1 14y agoThat's classic ad hominem logic.
- Spooky23 14y agoHe was also drafted into the Wehrmacht to fight on the Eastern front, was wounded in the Battle of Moscow, and was the only member of his platoon to survive Stalingrad. The world isn't some Hollywood movie where the good guys and bad guys are clearly delineated.
- JamesLeonis 14y agoEinstein was German as well. Do we discount him as well? Most of our early rocket scientists were ex-German scientists taken from Nazi Germany.
- patio11 14y agoIt certainly reads better than "We need to funnel some money to the guys who build the rockets so that, if the Russians get frisky, we can credibly threaten to can end the world."
- Rastafarian 14y agoOr "99% of US Congressmen own shares in the military–industrial(–congressional) complex, so we need any excuse to funnel $trillions over there"
- ghotli 14y agoMan if that's true it really ruined my day. Do you have proof?
- patdennis 14y agoIt's not true. If it was nearly that simple, it would be a lot easier to fix.
- quaunaut 14y agoDingdingding. It's more that military contractors have jobs in literally every district in the country, which makes anything done against them 'hurting jobs', etc. There's a lot of money funneled in that direction, but it isn't because of cronyism or anything- just pure hard corporate strategy choices.
- cpeterso 14y agoBut who would fix that problem? Congress?
- patdennis 14y agoWe're talking about changing fundamental aspects of our society, not patching some code. It would require a massive cultural shift, on a number of levels.
- jxcole 14y agoI don't know if this makes me cruel, but whenever people talk about donating money to starving children in Africa, I always imagine the following: If I were to donate some amount of money to starving children in an impoverished nation every year I could, theoretically, bring some of them out of starvation. However, these children would then grow into adults, and then these adults would have children of their own. The number of these new children would almost certainly be higher than the number I originally helped bring out of famine, so at that point there would be just as many if not more starving children than we had to begin with. So in my mind the question really goes the other way, how does donating money to buy food for starving children in Africa improve Africa's condition in the long term? What problems caused these nations to produce more children than food and what is being done to eliminate the source of these problems, rather than just the symptoms?
- Gustomaximus 14y agoI think this logic is fine if you then donate to a cause that seeks to solve the longer term problems. But otherwise despite being a short term solution, feeding a hungry child means a hell of a lot to that person. And if you found yourself in a similar situation I think you would be happy for someone to skip the logical arguement and just give you a meal.
- aderyn 14y agoFertility rates in poor countries correlate heavily against the number of children dying young (http://www.bit.ly/QrJnFj http://www.bit.ly/QrJnFj), as well as against the number of malnourished children (http://www.bit.ly/QrJArU http://www.bit.ly/QrJArU). One intuitive explanation is that if you know that only a fraction of your children will survive to adulthood, you're likely to have more of them. Of course that's not the full explanation, and another reason is that the availability of birth control and sexual education in these countries tend to be poor. Nevertheless, I think your worried about a scenario that for the most isn't very likely. Typical aid is not just used to buy food, but also to fund education and infrastructure investments, all of which has worked to lower the fertility rates in the past. There are other reasons to hesitate in regards to the effectiveness of aid money, but IMHO this isn't one of them. :)
- 14y ago
- mseebach 14y agoSo the argument that research for the sake of research is worthwhile is perfectly sound, the condescending "let me explain to you how a budget works" and "it's not my decision to spend the money" parts certainly rubs me the wrong way.
- drucken 14y agoHow on Earth is that condescending? How is a nun in middle of Africa meant to have even a basic understanding of how a specific government's budgeting and economic system works? I am willing to bet the vast majority of Americans themselves (to this day) have no idea of even the basics so simply explained by Dr Stuhlinger, yet it was a critical part of the bigger picture.
- ams6110 14y agoI thought it weakened the piece. The story of the microscope made the point, the letter could have been ended there and been much shorter/stronger.
- drgath 14y agoWeakened the piece? The microscope-story was just fluff to prime the reader to be open to the idea that science can benefit humanity. It was loosely based on real events, and the quotes from the count assuredly are made up. Still, a good story though. Had he ended there, the letter would lack any real substance to argue his point.
- jlgreco 14y ago> "he microscope-story was just fluff to prime the reader to be open to the idea that science can benefit humanity." Not just that, but to drive home that although the benefits of research may not be known at the time they are nevertheless existent.
- JohnsonB 14y ago>How is a nun in middle of Africa meant to have even a basic understanding of how a specific government's budgeting and economic system works? She can't have read a few books on economics? His explanation was pretty basic and nothing that couldn't be found in econ 101 textbooks. He essentially just assume she was uneducated.
- override 14y agoThis was posted a week or so ago on another site here wasnt it?
- PakG1 14y agoThis is also a perfect parallel to CEOs who have to justify to their shareholders why they spend so much money on R&D.
- nathan_f77 14y agoThis letter is timeless, and provides such brilliant perspective. It's a fantastic answer to questions I've also been thinking about. As an aside, I wonder if something so convincing could be written about military spending.
- TheComedian 14y agoI think you can certainly make an argument for military spending in terms of the side benefits associated with developing any complex technology, but I don't think the societal cost of increased militarization justifies military spending.
- will_work4tears 14y agoOnly if it is done right.
- Jtsummers 14y agoHe answered that after a fashion. Military spending has the potential to bring about many of the same scientific, engineering and medical discoveries, but at the cost of increasing the conflict driving many of the societal problems that they could solve (poverty and disease in war torn countries -- see Afghanistan in the 1980s, caught in the crossfire).
- saraid216 14y ago"Tell me, do you plan to report on the millions we've saved by advancing medical technology or kept from starvation with our intelli-crops? All those breakthroughs, military funding, honey." -- Tony Stark, Iron Man. I agree with TheComedian that the drawbacks mitigate the benefits a lot, though. The thing about space exploration is that the drawbacks are purely speculative (alien regard, exoplanet contamination, etc.) and are a lot easier to dismiss.
- joering2 14y agoOk, so the story with microscope was a good one. I was initially shortsighted. But coming back to the recent Mars mission, anyone has any ideas, more or less accurate/detailed, of how this particular mission will/could benefit our civilization? This is a serious question.
- RandallBrown 14y agoUnlike other mars rovers, Curiousity isn't solar powered. It's nuclear powered. RTGs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_gen...) are not new, but I have no doubt that plenty of refinements went into the process to make this one better and more efficient. Now what if this is the next fuel source for cars? We could dramatically cut down on our use of fossil fuels. That's pretty world changing. The automated landing represented a huge engineering challenge as well. Lots of lessons learned can likely be transferred to earthly pursuits. Imagine a rescue helicopter that can automatically fly into dangerous situations and save people. Imagine robots that are faster and more efficient at producing or harvesting food. Then of course, every time we land on a planet, we get better at it. The earth has a finite surface area. Barring major catastrophes, we'll probably fill it up eventually. If the experiments of today can provide a place for the people of the future to move, I think that will be the biggest contribution.
- joering2 14y agoGreat read, thanks Randall! [+1]. Interesting points, but I don't believe in next 100 years we will be able to live on Mars, or there will be enough justification to move there and spend trillion to pursue that vision (of course this mission only gets us closer). Not only its still extremely expensive to fly there, further the only way to live there is under the shelter, which would cost hundreds of times more than building something similar on Earth. One could only hope that down within the further explorations, there will be possibilities to either mine or produce something that Mars' atmosphere is perfect for, and something that would cost much more to accomplish here on Earth. Eventually, possible monetary gains would create entire new industry with trillion poured in. Wonder what Mars atmosphere is suitable to produce.
- tmoertel 14y agoDoes anyone know how this letter first came to be published? Update: Google Books answered the question for me: > Dr. Stuhlinger responded to the sister in a letter that was published by NASA/George C. Marshall Space Center in 1970 titled "Why Explore Space?" [1] http://books.google.com/books?id=qXuLydSqzDQC&lpg=PA55&ots=xlTrDlHmdf&dq=Ernst%20Stuhlinger%20Sister%20Mary%20Jucunda&pg=PA55#v=onepage&q=Ernst%20Stuhlinger%20Sister%20Mary%20Jucunda&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=qXuLydSqzDQC&lpg=PA55&#...
- repoman 14y agoWell, US produces lots of surplus every year. We don't give them out. Instead, we burn them. Really now?
- slowpoke 14y agoI did not know the SU actually turned off all radio transmissions and sent out ships to assist in the recovery of Apollo 13. That is an impressive display of human compassion, even inmidst the Cold War (though the cynic in me assumes there were ulterior motives, as well).
- phene 14y agoI'm sure they wouldn't have minded getting a hold of the lander capsule, either. They were not just acting compassionately.
- vacri 14y agoA more curt, but more direct response would be: As a Christian Nun, you wouldn't even be in Zambia if it weren't for explorers increasing the bounds of our knowledge. Apart from the Copts in Egypt, there's not a lot of 'native' Christianity in Africa.
- WiseWeasel 14y agoI doubt it would have the same impact; I don't think the Catholic church is anticipating the conversion of godless Martians.
- Rastafarian 14y agoOn the other hand exploration and colonization can make place for many more billions of potential Catholics and ensure the sect survival in case of a global extermination event.
- vacri 14y agoGiven the location she may have been a C of E nun, but if she was Catholic, another curt response would have been: Why doesn't the Catholic Church spend its incredible wealth on the starving children? Why is it immune from the question of 'what's more important than hungry kids'? The Catholic Church is an astoundingly wealthy organisation and could make a mint from sales of both art and property, both of which they have plenty lying unused.
- astine 14y agoYou'd be surprised. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/the-pope/8009299/Pope-Benedict-XVIs-astronomer-the-Catholic-Church-welcomes-aliens.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/the-pope/8009299/Po...
- MarkMc 14y agoI don't buy the argument. A $100b space mission is going to have a bigger benefit to the desperately poor than a $100b medical research program? No way. But then, why does the space program need to be defended like that? People prefer buying big TVs, big cars, big houses instead of giving the money to starving Africans. So why not view the space program as just an extension of that?
- saraid216 14y agoBecause hedonism isn't really a good argument when being offered to a nun.
- simonbrown 14y agoBecause the government is the one spending the money.
- coldarchon 14y agoI don't buy the argument that giving money keeps Africans from starving. 100 years ago the population of Sudan had 1,800,000 people, while according to a census some years ago they managed to multiply by 20. The population is estimated to be at more than 25 times what it had been 100 years ago, to be at 48,000,000. And yet there is hunger every year. Did the arable land multiply by 25?
- fragsworth 14y agoThis guy has incredible tact, and knows his audience well. > Ever since this picture was first published, voices have become louder and louder warning of the grave problems that confront man in our times: pollution, hunger, poverty, urban living, food production, water control, overpopulation. He even took care not to mention climate change, which I assume was in case the reader has a strong bias against it.
- jmah 14y agoI'm not sure climate change was particularly well-known in 1970.
- chris_wot 14y agoNot true. While not as widely known, it was still causing concern amongst scientists. Wikipedia is particularly helpful here: see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_climate_change_science#Scientists_increasingly_predicting_warming.2C_1970s http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_climate_change_scien...
- btilly 14y agoThat letter was written in 1970. The possibility of human-caused climate change did not start come to the awareness of the general public until 1988, and did not become a political issue until this millennium. He therefore cannot legitimately be criticized for his inability to predict where science would go in future decades. However he can legitimately be praised for being prescient about the role of satellites in researching a number of environmental problems, including global warming.
- mturmon 14y ago"he can legitimately be praised for being prescient about the role of satellites in researching a number of environmental problems" Good catch to notice that. I was impressed this too, but didn't post until I saw your reply. To me, Earth remote sensing is the most clear-cut example of near-term benefit to humanity by space technologies. It's amazing what can be done -- way beyond inputs for weather forecasts. You can assess health of forest canopy from space (because you can measure water content of leaves -- it's a delicate measurement, but it can be done). (Hyperspectral radiometer) You can measure full-air-column CO2, CO, and other gases, from space. You can measure sea surface salinity and temperature, and even surface wind velocity, from space. (microwave radiometer, radar scatterometer) You can measure tiny post-earthquake land deformations -- not at selected sites, but continuously over a broad area. (Radar interferometry) All this is way beyond where it started, with pictures of cloud formations. Having these physical inputs allows much better modeling and prediction of all kinds of activity: weather/ecology/seismicity.
- Rhino55 14y agoWe have a space program because of Sputnik. This letter is a load of BS, space exploration is all about international politics. tl;dr America, fuck yeah
- pippy 14y agoI'd love to compare $billions in expenditure / angry letters from conservative nuns, for both NASA and the Department of Defense. Even better would add the estimated lives saved by NASA technologies and DoD bombs.
- malkia 14y ago"You may ask now whether I personally would be in favor of such a move by our government. My answer is an emphatic yes. Indeed, I would not mind at all if my annual taxes were increased by a number of dollars for the purpose of feeding hungry children, wherever they may live." Amen to that.
- antidoh 14y agoCoupled with improving the effectiveness of distribution of aid to recipients, which would involve increasing the cooperation of the recipient governments and decreasing the corruption of those same governments and independent thugs, alluded to in the letter. And now it gets complicated. Money is necessary but far from sufficient, and the problem is very much not lack of resources.
- roel_v 14y agoSpending more dollars does not feed starving children. Hunger is not a problem that is caused by a lack of food, we have plenty and also plenty of resource to feed every living person. Hunger is a political problem, caused by corrupt, malfunctioning government, or no government at all.
- confluence 14y agoA relevant quote: > When he [Michael Faraday] demonstrated his apparatus [the dynamo] to His Majesty's Government, the prime minister, Sir Robert Peel, asked, "Of what use is it?" To which Faraday replied: "I don't know, but I'll wager that some day you'll tax it." - Michael Faraday Source: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/A_Race_on_the_Edge_of_Time http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/A_Race_on_the_Edge_of_Time http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamo We will tax space in good time my fellow skeptics. All in good time.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- vincentperes 14y agoSomebody said "It's not by looking at improving the candles that we would have discovered electricity.". Like fundamental research, a lot of people are having a hard time to understand that it is a long term investment.