Abstract
The most skeptical contribution to this volume enumerates and discusses a broad set of challenges connected with the so-called human factor in a mission to Mars. Discussed issues include rationales for a human versus uncrewed mission (the chapter suggests that human missions could be successfully replaced by robotic missions), financial challenges affected mostly by unclear and weak rationales for human mission, challenges of sustainable development, complex hazardous impacts of space environment for human mental, and physiological health. The last of the discussed challenges, the idea of human enhancement applied for the purpose of human deep-space missions, shows how technological issues—mostly long journey or ineffective countermeasures—might affect ethical concerns. While this idea might seem to be too far in the future, the chapter shows that it may be a serious and possibly unexpected long-term consequence of this program. This chapter does not determine whether a human mission to Mars is possible or not, nor whether such a mission makes any sense at all. One side of this chapter assumes that it is hard to find a strong rationale as measured in financial terms. The question of rationale is getting harder when a cost–benefit analysis—including risks for human health and life—is applied. On the other side, these skeptical remarks are designed to show that the idea of making humans a multi-planetary species is, in fact, extrapolation and projection of all problems and challenges known on Earth, which is intensified by putting Mars astronauts in the hazardous space environment.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
American president Donald Trump considers the idea of a space force, and there is also the revival of USSPACECOM . But it seems that these attempts will be limited to Low Earth Orbit .
- 2.
While space robots with full human-like dexterity and cognition can collect or send back Martian sample on Earth, space robotics is still beyond human-like robots.
- 3.
Some brief mentions about space refuges may be found in academic papers, but usually at the margin of other considerations. In contrast to them, it is hard to find scientific publications, which argue for space refuges based on cost to benefit analysis.
References
Barcellos-Hoff, M. H., Blakely, E. A., Burma, S., Fornace, A. J., Jr., Gerson, S., Hlatky, L., et al. (2015). Concepts and challenges in cancer risk prediction for the space radiation environment. Life Sciences in Space Research, 6, 92–103.
Beven, G. (2012). NASA’s behavioral health support for International Space Station (ISS) Missions. Cleveland Clinic Department of Psychiatry and Psychology Grand Rounds. September 13, 2012.
Braddock, M. (2018). Next steps in space travel and colonization: Terraforming, ectogenesis, nano spacecraft and avatars. Significances of Bioengineering & Bioscience 2(4). https://doi.org/10.31031/sbb.2018.02.000541.
Cerri, M., Tinganelli, W., Negrini, M., Helm, A., Scifoni, E., Tommasino, F., et al. (2016). Hibernation for space travel: Impact on radioprotection. Life Sciences in Space Research, 11, 1–9.
Cohen, M. M., & Haeuplik-Meusburger S. (2015). What do we give up and leave behind? In 45th International Conference on Environmental Systems, 12–16 July 2015, Bellevue, Washington.
Crawford, I. A. (2012). Dispelling the myth of robotic efficiency: Why human space exploration will tell us more about the Solar System than will robotic exploration alone. Astronomy and Geophysics 53, 2.22–2.26.
Do, S., Owens, A., Ho, K., Schreiner, S., & de Weck, O. (2016). An independent assessment of the technical feasibility of the Mars One mission plan—Updated analysis. Acta Astronautica, 120, 192–228.
Griko, Y., & Regan, M. D. (2018). Synthetic torpor: A method for safely and practically transporting experimental animals aboard spaceflight missions to deep space. Life Sciences in Space Research, 16, 101–107.
Gyngell, Ch. (2012). Enhancing the species: Genetic engineering technologies and human persistence. Philosophy & Technology, 25, 495–512.
Irschick, D. J., & Higham, T. E. (2016). Animal athletes: An ecological and evolutionary approach. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
Jakosky, B. M., & Edwards, Ch S. (2018). Inventory of CO2 available for terraforming Mars. Nature Astronomy, 2, 634–639.
Kanas, N. (2015). Psychology in deep space. The Psychologist, 28, 804–807.
Kanas, N., & Manzey D. (2008). Space psychology and psychiatry. Cham: Springer.
Kanas, N., et al. (2009). Psychology and culture during long-duration space missions. Acta Astronautica, 64(7–8), 659–677.
Kiffer, F., et al. (2018). Late effects of 1H irradiation on hippocampal physiology. Life Sciences in Space Research, 17, 51–62.
Lee, R. B. (1985). Models of human colonization:!Kung San, Greeks and Vikings. In E. Jones, & B. Finney (Eds.), Interstellar migration and the human experience (pp. 180–195). University of California Press.
Lester, D. F., Hodges, K. V., & Anderson, R. C. (2017). Exploration telepresence: A strategy for optimizing scientific research at remote space destinations. Science Robotics 2, eaan4383.
McBeth, R. A., & Borak, T. B. (2018). Spatial resolution requirements for active radiation detectors used beyond low earth orbit. Life Sciences in Space Research, 18, 52–63.
McKay, Ch P, Toon, O. B., & Kasting, J. F. (1991). Making Mars habitable. Nature, 352, 489–496.
McKay, Ch P. (2009). Planetary ecosynthesis on Mars: Restoration ecology and environmental ethics. In C. M. Bertka (Ed.), Exploring the origin, extent, and future of life: Philosophical ethical and theological perspectives (pp. 245–260). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mehta, S. K., Pierson, D. L., & Ott, C. M. (2012). Early detection of immune changes prevents painful shingles in astronauts and Earth-bound patients. In International Space Station. Benefits for Humanity.
NASA. NASA Langley Research Center’s contributions to the Apollo program. https://www.nasa.gov/centers/langley/news/factsheets/Apollo.html.
Nechaev, A. P., Polyakov, V. V., & Morukov, B. V. (2007). Martian manned mission: What cosmonauts think about this. Acta Astronautica, 60, 351–353.
Ohnishi, T., Takahashi, A., & Ohnishi, K. (2002). Studies about space radiation promote new fields in radiation biology. Journal of Radiation Research, 43(SUPPL), S7–S12.
Ohshima, H. (2012). Preventing bone loss in space flight with Prophylactic Use of Bisphosphonate: Health Promotion of the Elderly by Space Medicine Technologies. In International Space Station. Benefits for Humanity. https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/benefits/bone_loss.html.
Orosei, R., et al. (2018). Radar evidence of subglacial liquid water on Mars. Science, 25(July). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aar7268,aar7268.
Rovetto, R. J. (2013). The essential role of human spaceflight. Space Policy, 29(4), 225–228.
Rovetto, R. J. (2016). Defending spaceflight—The echoes of Apollo. Space Policy, 38, 68–78.
Salotti, J.-M., & Suhir, E. (2014). Manned missions to Mars: Minimizing risks of failure. Acta Astronautica, 93, 148–161.
Schroeder, R. (2018). Microgels for long-term storage of vitamins for extended spaceflight. Life Sciences in Space Research, 16, 26–37.
Shelhamer, M. (2017). Why send humans into space? Science and non-science motivations for human space flight. Space Policy, 42, 37–40.
Slakey, F., & Spudis, P. D. (2008). Robots vs. Humans: Who should explore space? Scientific American. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/robots-vs-humans-who-should-explore/
Smith, C. M., & Davies, E. T. (2012). Emigrating beyond Earth: Human adaptation and space colonization. New York: Springer.
Szocik, K. (2019a). Should and could humans go to Mars? Yes, but not now and not in the near future. Futures 105, 54–66.
Szocik, K. (Ed.). (2019b). Human enhancements in Lunar, Martian, and future missions to the outer planets.
Szocik, K., & Tachibana, K. (2019). Human enhancement or “dangerous” AI? Ethical consequences of advanced progress in human and uncrewed space program (in press).
Szocik, K., Campa, R., Rappaport, M. B., & Corbally, Ch. (In press a). Changing the paradigm on human enhancements. The special case of modifications to counter bone loss for manned Mars missions.
Szocik, K., Wójtowicz, T., Rappaport, M. B., & Corbally, Ch. (In press b) Mission to Mars: A challenge for the ethics of human health and biology.
Tachibana, K., Tachibana, S., & Inoue, N. (2017). From outer space to Earth—The social significance of isolated and confined environment research in human space exploration. Acta Astronautica, 140, 273–283.
Townsend, L. W., et al. (2018). Solar particle event storm shelter requirements for missions beyond low Earth orbit. Life Sciences in Space Research, 17, 32–39.
Valentine, D. (2017). Gravity fixes: Habituating to the human on Mars and Island Three. Hau: Journal of Ethnographic Theory, 7(3), 185–209.
Weinberg, S. (2013). Response: Against manned space flight programs. Space Policy, 29(4), 229–230.
Weintraub, D. A. (2018). Life on Mars. What to know before we go. Princeton University Press: Princeton and Oxford.
Acknowledgements
Many thanks to Jacob Haqq-Misra and Koji Tachibana for their useful comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Szocik, K. (2019). Human Place in the Outer Space: Skeptical Remarks. In: Szocik, K. (eds) The Human Factor in a Mission to Mars. Space and Society. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02059-0_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02059-0_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-02058-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-02059-0
eBook Packages: Physics and AstronomyPhysics and Astronomy (R0)