Human history in space has had its highs and lows. We have witnessed many epic scientific breakthroughs, and we have also witnessed space become a tool for political contention. Today, probes and vehicles can explore far more deep-space universes than ever before, and Voyager has even reached the interstellar medium; we are considering colonizing other planets and are confident that we have the technological capabilities to do so. But the key question is not whether it can be done, but whether we should do it. Is space travel ethical? Do you like to explore the truth? Are you often curious? If so, come and follow us!
Broadly speaking, ethics is a system of moral principles that influence our daily choices. Judging whether something is ethical depends primarily on the trade-offs of individual and collective trade-offs. Therefore, the reference to space travel requires a trade-off between the dangers of the space mission itself and the threat to other planets and the degree of benefit to humanity as a whole.
Taking NASA as an example, think first: Is space research good for human beings? In fact, many of the technologies we use today benefit from these studies. Every year since 1976, NASA has published Spinoff, which lists a number of new technologies that are open to the public from (at least a portion) of space research — an average of about 50 per session, including laser eye surgery, satellite GPS, prosthetics, 3D printing, memory foam, and water purification technology.
NASA's research has made many advanced surgical procedures possible, and the close monitoring of astronauts has also allowed us to further understand the limits and potential of the human body. Thanks to the work of NASA and other space agencies, we know more about Earth's home than ever before — including climate change, air quality, water, and soil. In summary, space research can effectively expand the length, breadth and depth of life, thereby helping the construction of modern society, and the benefits to mankind are enormous!
But space travel as a profession, its high-risk nature is also undeniable. Most obviously, astronauts face mechanical failures, technical failures and the risk of crashes. If a spacecraft or spacesuit malfunctions during launch or flight, it will be a major and fatal disaster. In addition, the space environment is not only uninhabitable, but also damages the human body in a slow, covert way. Weightlessness can cause muscle atrophy and bone degeneration, as well as damage to vision and disrupt the immune system. Because of the extreme isolation experienced by astronauts, there are also many concerns about the psychological impact that space travel may have.
Another long-term risk is radiation, which NASA considers to be one of the most threatening factors in space, which can continue to damage astronauts' central nervous systems and cause cancer during and after daily life. Therefore, although the radiation protection equipment of modern spacecraft is more advanced and complete than ever, some scientists have always opposed long-term outer space missions.
The authenticity of the danger is unquestionable: both during missions and during training, astronauts have been killed and astronauts have been seriously injured. However, while there is a lack of objective statistics on the astronauts' overall health and physical condition, it is generally accepted that, given the intense physical training, they are less likely to die from natural causes such as cardiovascular disease than the average person. Therefore, although the working environment of astronauts is more dangerous, their bodies are also more resistant to manufacturing than ordinary people. Whether it is moral or not should also be a question that the upper leaders need to consider.
So far, the topic has only been halfway said; although various moral dilemmas have emerged at the micro level, we still need to think about it at the macro level. We're in an era when we're already thinking about colonizing other planets – but should we? Do we have this power? This is a question that sits between planetary protection laws and space research practices.
In the late 1950s, most of the actions to stop human pollution of space were carried out under the guidance of the International Space Research Commission (COSPAR). In 1967, with the signing of the Outer Space Treaty, some guidelines were updated. One of them is that when we go into space exploration, we should have the awareness of trying to avoid leaving biological traces in space, and the idea of colonizing other planets today poses a serious challenge to this; and human beings are also going farther and farther down the road to becoming more numb to interstellar pollution.
In a way, it's a contest between us and the vast unknown. Because it has never existed outside of Earth, it is impossible to predict exactly what effect human existence will have on those places. However, some people believe that the impact of human existence on the earth is precisely why we should not think about other planets. More serious than the problems that have been caused by climate change, nuclear leakage and large-scale deforestation are that the basic biological presence of human beings on the earth has affected the structure of the atmosphere, leading to the spread of bacteria and changing the way the earth operates.
With this in mind, if you want to survive elsewhere in the solar system, you need to carry out the work of terraforming the extraterrestrial environment from the beginning. Because other planets cannot naturally evolve into habitable conditions, large-scale and fundamental transformation measures must be implemented immediately. But if we can really move, can the landform of Mars and the clouds of Venus really be transformed into the way we want it to be? If, in the distant future, we succeed in colonizing another planet, but also deplete its resources and cause its climate change, is colonization still the right choice? If, one day, humans become an advanced race that can jump on the planet and embark on the path of constantly searching for new hosts, they will be followed by a series of death hells. This is a rather pessimistic picture of humanity, and we may even be labeled "parasitic" for it, but it is also it that highlights the importance of space ethics.
Relatively speaking, humanity is still in the early stages of space exploration compared to the expected goals, and it is time to make basic rules, all based on the assumption that there is no other life in the universe. If there are creatures on the planets visited, or on the planets colonized by the target, then whether all life is equal will become a new point of controversy.
Will humans stop interstellar travel for the benefit of alien species? Or will it continue with an exploration plan that is essentially an invasion? The Outer Space Treaty is controversial on many fronts, especially when it comes to the protection of ecosystems on other planets. Theoretically, a single footprint of humanity could bring all deadly pathogens anywhere off Earth, and any potential life form could be directly threatened by human existence. Another view is that no matter where humans go, it will improve the local space environment, after all, while it has a negative impact, we also have a positive impact on the earth.
Once again, we are bound by a vast unknown: no one knows what the impact of human visits on another planet will be. So for this, either think long-term, make predictions and take risks; or be cautious and conservative, stop where you are, and do nothing.
The ethical issues of space travel have become increasingly complex, and with the growing desire to explore, they have reached an unprecedented level of importance. What is your opinion? Are there anything we missed? Please let us know in the comments.
Related knowledge
Planets are celestial bodies orbiting stars or stellar remnants that are dense enough to form circles on their own mass but not enough to produce thermonuclear reactions. And, according to the International Astronomical Union (not including all planetary scientists), it also has to clean up its own nearby regions. [b] [1] [2]
The word planet is very old, often associated with history, astrology, science, mythology, and religion. Apart from the Earth itself, the five planets of the solar system are often visible to the naked eye. These planets were considered sacred in many early cultures, or as messengers of the gods. With the continuous advancement of scientific knowledge, humans have changed their view of planets, including many objects that are not planets. In 2006, the International Astronomical Union (IAU) formally adopted a resolution defining planets within the solar system.
The resolution remains controversial because it excludes many objects of sufficient planetary mass based on their orbital position and the reasons for orbiting the object. Although the eight objects discovered before 1950 can still be called planets by definition, some objects, such as Ceres, Homo sapiens, Marriage, Vesta (all objects on the asteroid belt of the Solar System) and Pluto (the first overseas object to be discovered), which were once considered planets by the scientific community, are no longer considered planets in the current definition.
Ptolemy believed that planets orbited the Earth through the averaging wheel and the current wheel. Although the idea of planets orbiting the sun has been proposed many times, it was only in the 17th century that this claim was supported by evidence obtained by Galileo Galilei with his first astronomical telescope observations. Meanwhile, through a careful analysis of the pre-telescope observations collected by Tycho Brahe, Johannes Kepler discovered that the planet's orbit was elliptical rather than circular. As observation tools continued to advance, astronomers found that each planet rotated like Earth around an axis that tilted relative to the polar axis, and also had the characteristics of ice sheets and seasons. Since the dawn of the Space Age, close observation by space probes has found that other planets and Earth share features such as volcanic activity, hurricanes, tectonics and even hydrology.
FY: Off