Advertisement

The Ethics of Outer Space: A Consequentialist Perspective

  • Seth D. Baum
Chapter
Part of the Space and Society book series (SPSO)

Abstract

Outer space is of major interest to consequentialist ethics for two basic reasons. First, the vast expanses of outer space offer opportunities for achieving vastly more good or bad consequences than can be achieved on Earth alone. If consequences are valued equally regardless of where they occur then achieving good consequences in space is of paramount importance. For human civilization, this can mean the building of space colonies or even the macroengineering of structures like Dyson swarms. However, as a practical matter for contemporary decision making, there should be less effort directed towards space colonization and more effort towards preventing civilization-ending catastrophes. Preventing the latter will ensure that future generations of humans will then have the opportunity to colonize space. The second reason why space should be seen as having a major importance for consequentialist ethics is the possibility that humanity may encounter an intelligent extraterrestrial civilization. This possibility poses difficult questions concerning which consequences should be pursued, given that any extraterrestrials who are in a position to make contact with us are also likely to be significantly more advanced than humanity. If they are indeed more advanced, then better consequences might accrue if humanity defers or even commits some form of civilizational suicide in order to make more space for their expansion. This possibility may also lead humans to rethink our own relation to less advanced other species on Earth.

Keywords

Consequentialism Ethics Extraterrestrials Outer space Space colonization 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Jacob Haqq-Misra, Ravi Kumar Kopparapu, and Tony Barrett provided helpful suggestions for the development of this paper. The editors provided helpful feedback on an earlier draft. Any errors or shortcomings are the author’s alone.

References

  1. Adams, F. C. (2008). Long-term astrophysical processes. In N. Bostrom & M. M. Ćirković (Eds.), Global catastrophic risks (pp. 33–47). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Adler, M. D., & Posner, E. A. (2000). Implementing cost-benefit analysis when preferences are distorted. Journal of Legal Studies, 29, 1105–1147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Asimov, I. (1979). A choice of catastrophes: The disasters that threaten our world. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  4. Barry, B. (1989). Utilitarianism and preference change. Utilitas, 1, 278–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baum, S. D. (2009). Cost-benefit analysis of space exploration: Some ethical considerations. Space Policy, 25, 75–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baum, S. D. (2010a). Is humanity doomed? Insights from astrobiology. Sustainability, 2, 591–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baum, S. D. (2010b). Universalist ethics in extraterrestrial encounter. Acta Astronautica, 66, 617–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Baum, D. (2012). Value typology in cost-benefit analysis. Environmental Values, 21, 499–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Baum, S. D., Haqq-Misra, J. D., & Domagal-Goldman, S. D. (2011). Would contact with extraterrestrials benefit or harm humanity? A scenario analysis. Acta Astronautica, 68, 2114–2129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bradley, B. (1998). Extrinsic value. Philosophical Studies, 91, 109–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bostrom, N. (2003). Astronomical waste: The opportunity cost of delayed technological development. Utilitas, 15, 308–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ćirković, M. M. (2002). Cosmological forecast and its practical significance. Journal of Evolution and Technology, 12.Google Scholar
  13. Cockell, C. S. (2005). Planetary protection: A microbial ethics approach. Space Policy, 21, 287–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cockell, C. S. (2007). Originism: Ethics and extraterrestrial life. Journal of the British Interplanetary Society, 60, 147–153.Google Scholar
  15. Cockell, C. S., & Lee, M. (2002). Interstellar predation. Journal of the British Interplanetary Society, 55, 8–20.Google Scholar
  16. Cowen, T., & Parfit, D. (1992). Against the social discount rate. In P. Laslett & J. Fishkin (Eds.), Justice between age groups and generations (pp. 144–161). New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Diamond, J. (1999). To whom it may concern. New York Times Magazine, 5, 68–71.Google Scholar
  18. Drexler, K. E. (2013). Radical abundance: How a revolution in nanotechnology will change civilization. New York: PublicAffairs.Google Scholar
  19. Dyson, F. J. (1960). Search for artificial stellar sources of infra-red radiation. Science, 131(3414), 1667–1668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fogg, M. J. (2000). The ethical dimensions of space settlement. Space Policy, 16, 205–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Glover, J. (Ed.). (1990). Utilitarianism and its critics. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  22. Haqq-Misra, J. (2012). An ecological compass for planetary engineering. Astrobiology, 12, 985–997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Haqq-Misra, J., Busch, M. W., Som, S. M., & Baum, S. D. (2013). The benefits and harm of transmitting into space. Space Policy, 29, 40–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Holbrook, D. (1997). The consequentialistic side of environmental ethics. Environmental Values, 6, 87–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kaku, M. (2005). Parallel worlds: The science of alternative universes and our future in the cosmos. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  26. Michaud, M. A. G. (2007). Contact with alien civilizations: Our hopes and fears about encountering extraterrestrials. New York: Copernicus.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Milligan, T. (2015). Nobody owns the moon: The ethics of space exploitation. Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company.Google Scholar
  28. Ng, Y.-K. (1991). Should we be very cautious or extremely cautious on measures that may involve our destruction? Social Choice and Welfare, 8, 79–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ng, Y.-K. (2003). From preference to happiness: Towards a more complete welfare economics. Social Choice and Welfare, 20, 307–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Niemi, G. J., & McDonald, M. E. (2004). Application of ecological indicators. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics, 35, 89–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Nordhaus, W. D. (2007). A review of the stern review on the economics of global warming. Journal of Economic Literature, 45, 686–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. O’Malley-James, J. T., Cockell, C. S., Greaves, J. S., & Raven, J. A. (2014). Swansong biospheres II: The final signs of life on terrestrial planets near the end of their habitable lifetimes. International Journal of Astrobiology, 13, 229–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Perrings, C., & Hannon, B. (2001). An introduction to spatial discounting. Journal of Regional Science, 41, 23–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Petigura, E. A., Howard, A. W., & Marcy, G. W. (2013). Prevalence of Earth-size planets orbiting sun-like stars. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110, 19273–19278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Portney, P., & Weyant, J. (Eds.). (1999). Discounting and intergenerational equity. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
  36. Price, C. (1993). Time, discounting and value. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  37. Rolston, H., III. (1986). The preservation of natural value in the solar system. In E. C. Hargrove (Ed.), Beyond spaceship earth: Environmental ethics and the solar system (pp. 140–182). San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.Google Scholar
  38. Rønnow-Rasmussen, T., & Zimmerman, M. J. (Eds.). (2005). Recent work on intrinsic value. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  39. Sagan, C., & Newman, W. I. (1983). The solipsist approach to extraterrestrial intelligence. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society, 24, 113–121.Google Scholar
  40. Scheffler, S. (1982). The rejection of consequentialism: A philosophical investigation of the considerations underlying rival moral conceptions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Scheffler, S. (Ed.). (1988). Consequentialism and its critics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Seligman, M. (2010). Flourish: Positive psychology and positive interventions. The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, University of Michigan, October 7, 2010.Google Scholar
  43. Shostak, S. (no date). Should we broadcast? And what if we find life in the solar system? SETI Institute, http://www.seti.org/seti-institute/should-we-broadcast-and-what-if-life-in-solar-system
  44. Smith, D. M. (1998). How far should we care? On the spatial scope of beneficence. Progress in Human Geography, 22, 15–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Stern, N. H. (2006). Stern review: The economics of climate change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Tännsjö, T. (1998). Hedonistic Utilitarianism. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Tonn, B. E. (1999). Transcending oblivion. Futures, 31, 351–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tonn, B. E. (2002). Distant futures and the environment. Futures, 34, 117–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Global Catastrophic Risk InstituteSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations