Abstract
The field of Astroethics addresses moral and societal issues arising out of speculation regarding terrestrial contact with extraterrestrial life in both its intelligent and non-intelligent forms. This chapter tackles 15 ethical quandaries, 12 of which are associated with space exploration within the solar system plus 3 with exoplanet communication. Within our solar ghetto, scientists expect at best to find only microbial life, leaving intelligent life to exoplanets elsewhere in our galaxy. The intra-solar system quandaries are these: (1) What does planetary protection mean? (2) Does microbial life have intrinsic value? (3) Should space explorers invoke the Precautionary Principle? (4) Should we clean up our space junk? (5) What should we do about satellite surveillance? (6) Should we weaponize space? (7) Should scientific research take priority over commercial space ventures? (8) Should we terraform Mars? (9) Should we colonize Mars? (10) Should we prepare for bombardment of Earth by asteroids? (11) Should we rely upon a single planetary community of moral deliberation? (12) Should we pursue the good of the galactic commons? The extra-solar quandaries deal with three degrees of extraterrestrial intelligent creatures: (13) those with less intelligence than us Homo sapiens, (14) our Extraterrestrial Intelligent creatures (ETI) peers in intelligence, and (15) ETI who are superior to us in intelligence. To each quandary we ask: What is our terrestrial moral responsibility toward extraterrestrial life? Our answer is grounded in an appeal to a galactic common good.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
“Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World: Gaudium Et Spes, promulgated by His Holiness, Pope Paul VI on December 7, 1965,” No. 26, The Holy See, accessed May 7, 2016, http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html.
- 2.
See: Ted Peters, Futures—Human and Divine (Louisville KY: Westminster John Knox, 1977). Ethics which begins with a vision of a new and improved future and then works to actualize the vision I elsewhere call, Proleptic Ethics. Ted Peters, God—The World’s Future (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 3rd ed., 2015) Chap. 14.
- 3.
Hans Jonas, The Imperative of Responsibility: In Search of an Ethics for the Technological Age (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984) 30.
- 4.
Ibid., 18.
- 5.
“Public theology is concerned with how the Christian faith addresses matters in society at large. It is concerned with the public relevance of Christian beliefs and doctrines.” Byron Williams, “Prophetic Public Theology,” Review and Expositor 11:2 (2014) 159–170, at 160.
- 6.
This list of twelve appears in my previous works such as, Ted Peters, “Stretching Twelve AstroEthical Issues Within Our Solar Ghetto to Address Warfare in the Milky Way Metropolis.” METI (2017); http://meti.org/blog/stretching-twelve-astroethical-issues-within-our-solar-ghetto-address-warfare-milky-way.
- 7.
It is my position that all life is intelligent by definition, thereby eliminating the category of unintelligent life. Ted Peters, “Where There’s Life There’s Intelligence,” in What is Life? On Earth and Beyond, ed., Andreas Losch (Cambridge University Press, 2017) 236–259. Here I follow the conventional distinction in the space sciences between intelligent and non-intelligent life.
- 8.
Nathan Collins, “Stop Pampering the Red Planet,” Scientific American 309:3 (September 2013) 24.
- 9.
Cited by Collins, ibid.
- 10.
See: Ted Peters, “Does Extraterrestrial Life Have Intrinsic Value? An Exploration in Responsibility Ethics,” International Journal of Astrobiology 17:2 (2018) 1–7.
- 11.
Randolph and McKay, “Protecting.”
- 12.
Astroethicist Kelly Smith is reluctant to grant intrinsic value to Martian microbes, especially if it trumps human value. “The idea that Martian microbes have ethical value deserving of serious consideration is a perfectly legitimate one. However, the Mariomaniac view that this value is so great that humanity should forgo any opportunity whatsoever arising on Mars if it conflicts with microbial interests is not credible…while it is clear (at least to the extent that anything in ethics is clear) that humans have very high moral value, it is much less clear if the value of microbes is anywhere as great.” Kelly C. Smith, “The Curious Case of the Martian Microbes: Mariomania, Intrinsic Value, and the Prime Directive,” The Ethics of Space Exploration, eds., James S.J. Schwartz and Tony Milligan (Switzerland: Springer, 2016), 195–208, at 207.
- 13.
David Appell, “the New Uncertainty Principle,” Scientific American (Jan. 18, 2001) 18.
- 14.
“COSPAR Workshop on Ethical Considerations for Protection in Space Exploration, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, 8–10, 2010.
- 15.
Paul Marks, “Clearing the heavens, one piece at a time,” New Scientist 209:2799:22 (12 February 2011) 22.
- 16.
Lee Billings, “Are We on the Cusp of War—in Space?” Scientific American 313:4 (October 2015) 14–18 (15).
- 17.
Ibid., 18.
- 18.
Christopher P. McKay, “Planetary ecosynthesis on Mars: restoration ecology and environmental ethics,” in Exploring the Origin, 259.
- 19.
Mars Direct, http://www.marssociety.org/home/about/mars-direct, accessed 1/25/2013.
- 20.
For an analysis of the Promethean myth combined with the Frankenstein myth, see: Ted Peters, “Playing God with Frankenstein.” Theology and Science 16:2 (2018) 1–6; DOI: 10.1080/14746700.2018.1455264.
- 21.
Linda Billings, “Should Humans Colonize Other Planets? No.” Theology and Science 15:3 (August 2017), 321–332, at 321.
- 22.
Monte Morin, “Russian Meteor was actually a Tiny Asteroid, NASA says,” Los Angeles Times (February 15, 2013) http://www.latimes.com/news/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-russian-tiny-asteroid-20130215,0,5424522.story?track=rss (accessed 2/22/2013).
- 23.
Nature Editorial, “Realities of Risk” Nature (8 January, 2013) https://mail.google.com/mail/?tab=wm#inbox/13c20ba8ce39aa0d (accessed 1/18/2013).
- 24.
United Nations, Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA), 2016 Annual Report; http://www.unoosa.org/documents/pdf/annualreport/UNOOSA_Annual_Report_2016.pdf (accessed 12/15/2017).
- 25.
Al Gore, The Future: Six Drivers of Global Change (New York: Random House, 2013) 364.
- 26.
In Search of a Universal Ethic: A New Look at the Natural Law, §85. http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20090520_legge-naturale_en.html (accessed 12/12/2017).
- 27.
Mark Lupisella, “Cosmological Theories of Value: Relationalism and Connectedness as Foundations for Cosmic Creativity,” The Ethics of Space Exploration, eds., James S.J. Schwartz and Tony Milligan (Switzerland: Springer, 2016), 75–92, at 89.
- 28.
John Hart, “Cosmic Commons: Contact and Community,” Theology and Science 8:4: 371–392 (November 2010), 377. See John Hart, Cosmic Commons: Spirit, Science, and Space (Eugene OR: Cascade Books, 2013).
- 29.
“The United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA) has announced that it will consider drafting protocols for what to do when we finally make contact with extra-terrestrial civilizations in space. What’s prompting the UN to consider this possibility is the fact that astronomers are expected to announce, perhaps later this year or next year, that our satellites (such as Kepler and Corot) have identified earth-like planets in space.” Michio Kaku, “U.N. to Establish Protocols for When We Make Contact With Aliens.” Big Think (2017). http://bigthink.com/dr-kakus-universe/un-to-establish-protocols-for-when-we-make-contact-with-aliens (accessed 12/15/2015.
- 30.
This tripartite division of ETI is revised from previous explorations into this topic. See: Ted Peters, “AstroEthics: Engaging Extraterrestrial Intelligent Life Forms,” in Encountering Life in the Universe: Ethical Foundations and Issues and Social Implications, edited by Chris Impey, Anna H. Spitz, and William R. Stoeger, S. J. (Tucson AZ: University of Arizona Press, 2013), 200–221; and Ted Peters. “Intelligent Aliens and Astroethics.” Space Exploration and ET: Who Goes There? ed., Jacques Arnould (Adelaide, Australia: ATF Press, 2014), 1–20.
- 31.
Marcus G. Singer, “Golden Rule,” Encyclopedia of Ethics, ed. by Lawrence C. Becker and Charlotte B. Becker (3 Volumes: London and New York: Routledge, 2nd ed., 2001) 1:615.
- 32.
Renowned physicist Stephen Hawking presumes alien civilizations will be hostile to Earth, ready to invade and subdue us. On this assumption, Hawking recommends that we cease messaging extraterrestrial intelligence (METI) and electronically hide from ETI surveillance. Stephen Hawking’s Favorite Places, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slhRiO7mDZU (accessed 12/14/2017). “I am not worried about such civilizations,” responds Douglas Vakoch, director of METI. We should show ETI that “it’s more interesting to keep us around as conversational partners than to annihilate us.” Douglas A. Vakoch, “Is Stephen Hawking Building Walls? A Cosmic Dilemma,” Theology and Science 15:2 (May 2017) 134–138, at 138.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Peters, T. (2018). Toward a Galactic Common Good: Space Exploration Ethics. In: Boonin, D. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Philosophy and Public Policy. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93907-0_61
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93907-0_61
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-93906-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-93907-0
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)