Skip to main content

Equity and Democracy: Seeking the Common Good as a Common Ground for Interstellar Communication

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Extraterrestrial Altruism

Part of the book series: The Frontiers Collection ((FRONTCOLL))

Abstract

What cultural traits could we possibly share with any extraterrestrial civilization? It could be argued that every civilization has to face the same challenge: How to distribute resources between different tasks and/or individuals. Limitations of resources and conflicting interests are likely to be universal problems. In many cases, no perfect solution exists and cultural tradition plays a role in the choice of the allocation procedure. Being simultaneously universal and culturally oriented, the allocation problem is especially suitable as a topic of discussion between civilizations. Two theories attempt to solve the problem of fair resource distribution: equity theory and social choice theory. Both theories are described within a mathematical framework, which eases their translation into interstellar messages. Equitable sharing procedures and electoral procedures are intellectual tools developed to deal with conflicting individual interests for the best outcome for the group at large. Therefore, both equity and social choice theories are products of civilizations seeking to better manage interactions between individuals with selfish tendencies. In such circumstances, altruism should emerge as a prized quality that would be encouraged by extraterrestrial societies, but that is difficult to achieve at the level of individuals due to natural tendencies for selfishness. Therefore, social choice and equity theories are topics of discussion that should provide common ground for communication with any civilization that is struggling, like we are, to build a fairer society.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    This definition is so compelling that the ability to select the Condorcet’s winner has become the standard benchmark used to compare election methods.

  2. 2.

    Approval voting was used in the longest living democracy in history, the Republic of Venice, from 1268 to 1797. It is used now by the United Nations as well as by many scientific societies, including the Mathematical Association of America, the American Statistical Association, and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.

References

  • Arrow, Kenneth J. 1963. Social Choice and Individual Values, 2nd edition. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brams, Steven J., and Alan D. Taylor. 1996. Fair Division: From Cake-cutting to Dispute Resolution. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brosnan, Sarah F., and Frans B. M. de Waal. 2003. “Monkeys Reject Unequal Pay.” Nature 425:297–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Condorcet, Marie Jean Antoine Nicolas Caritat. 1847 [1782]. “Discours prononcé dans l’Académie Française le jeudi 21 février 1782.” In Oeuvres de Condorcet, Volume 1, edited by A. Condorcet O’Connor and M. F. Arago, 389–415. Paris: Firmin Didot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Condorcet, Marie Jean Antoine Nicolas Caritat. 1785. Éssai sur l’application de l’analyse à la probabilité des décisions rendues à la pluralité de voix. Paris: De L’Imprimerie Royale.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conradt, Larissa, and Timothy J. Roper. 2003. “Group Decision-making in Animals.” Nature 421(6919):155–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, Robert A. 1991. Democracy and Its Critics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Borda, Jean Charles. 1781 [1770]. Mémoire sur les élections au scrutin. Histoire de l’Académie Royale des Sciences. Accessed January 1, 2013. http://gerardgreco.free.fr/IMG/pdf/MA_c_moire-Borda-1781.pdf.

  • Dumas, Stéphane. 2011. “A Proposal for an Interstellar Rosetta Stone.” In Communication with Extraterrestrial Intelligence (CETI), edited by Douglas A. Vakoch, 403–411. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dutil, Yvan, and Stéphane Dumas. 1998. “Active SETI: Targets Selection and Message Conception.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Astronomical Society, Austin, Texas, January 9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duverger, Maurice. 1951. Les partis politiques. Paris: Colin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fehr, Ernst, and Urs Fischbacher. 2003. “The Nature of Human Altruism.” Nature 425:785–791.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freudenthal, Hans. 1960. LINCOS: Design of a Language for Cosmic Intercourse. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, Albert A. 1997. After Contact: The Human Response to Extraterrestrial Life. New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, Albert A. 2013. “Cosmic Evolution, Reciprocity, and Interstellar Tit for Tat.” In Extraterrestrial Altruism, edited by Douglas A. Vakoch, 3–22. Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • McConnell, Brian. 2001. Beyond Contact: A Guide to SETI and Communicating with Alien Civilizations. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, Samuel, III. 1984. “A Comparison of Efficiency of Multialternative Electoral Systems.” American Journal of Political Science 28(1):23–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ollongren, Alexander. 2012. Astrolingistics: Design of a Linguistic System for Interstellar Communication Based on Logic. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puxley, Phil. 1997. “Execution of Queue-scheduled Observations with the Gemini 8 m Telescopes.” In SPIE Proceedings, Vol. 3112, Telescope Control Systems II, edited by Hilton Lewis, 234–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reijnierse, J. Hans, and Jos A. M. Potters. 1998. “On Finding an Envy-free Pareto Optimal-Division” Mathematical Programming 83(2):291–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. 1762. Du contrat social, ou Principes du droit politique. Amsterdam: M. M. Rey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, Stephen J. 1998. Fair Division Using Linear Programming. Preprint. Ames, IA: Department of Mathematics, Iowa State University.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yvan Dutil .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Dutil, Y. (2014). Equity and Democracy: Seeking the Common Good as a Common Ground for Interstellar Communication. In: Vakoch, D. (eds) Extraterrestrial Altruism. The Frontiers Collection. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37750-1_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37750-1_17

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-37749-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-37750-1

  • eBook Packages: Physics and AstronomyPhysics and Astronomy (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics