Space Ethics

Human survival is currently threatened by many existential risks. Because humankind is the only known species capable of complex morality, if humankind went extinct, morality would die with us. Given that the existence of humankind is a precondition for morality, therefore the first principle of morality should be, as Hans Jonas noted, that humankind must exist. Compared to ensuring human survival, all other moral values and actions are secondary. While protecting human life on Earth is the obvious choice for human survival, as long as humanity is in only one place, it will never be completely safe. Because space settlement gives humankind the opportunity to significantly raise the chances of survival for our species, it is therefore a moral imperative to settle space as quickly as possible.

If we had the ability to terraform Mars, would it be morally permissible to do it? This chapter surveys three preservationist arguments for the conclusion that we should not terraform Mars and three interventionist arguments that we should. The preservationist arguments appeal to a duty to conserve objects of special scientific value, a duty to preserve special wilderness areas, and a duty not to display vices characteristic of past colonial endeavors on Earth. The interventionist arguments appeal to a duty to fulfill our pioneering nature, a duty to extend the lifespan of our species, and a duty to restore the ecosystems Mars may once have housed. The preservationist arguments are stronger than the interventionist arguments; terraforming Mars is probably morally wrong.

This​ ​ article​ ​ offers​ ​ two​ ​ arguments​ ​ for​ ​ the​ ​ conclusion​ ​ that​ ​ we​ ​ should​ ​ refuse,​ ​ on​ ​ moral grounds,​ ​ to​ ​ establish​ ​ a​ ​ human​ ​ presence​ ​ on​ ​ the​ ​ surface​ ​ of​ ​ Mars.​ ​ The​ ​ first​ ​ argument​ ​ appeals​ ​ to​ ​ a​ ​ principle constraining​ ​ the​ ​ use​ ​ of​ ​ invasive​ ​ or​ ​ destructive​ ​ techniques​ ​ of​ ​ scientific​ ​ investigation.​ ​ The​ ​ second​ ​ appeals to​ ​ a​ ​ principle​ ​ governing​ ​ appropriate​ ​ human​ ​ behavior​ ​ in​ ​ wilderness.​ ​ These​ ​ arguments​ ​ are​ ​ prefaced​ ​ by​ ​ two preliminary​ ​ sections.​ ​ The​ ​ first​ ​ preliminary​ ​ section​ ​ argues​ ​ that​ ​ authors​ ​ working​ ​ in​ ​ space​ ​ ethics​ ​ have​ ​ good reason​ ​ to​ ​ shift​ ​ their​ ​ focus​ ​ away​ ​ from​ ​ theory-based​ ​ arguments​ ​ in​ ​ favor​ ​ of​ ​ arguments​ ​ that​ ​ develop​ ​ in​ ​ terms of​ ​ pre-theoretic​ ​ beliefs.​ ​ The​ ​ second​ ​ argues​ ​ that,​ ​ of​ ​ the​ ​ popular​ ​ justifications​ ​ for​ ​ sending​ ​ humans​ ​ to​ ​ Mars, only​ ​ appeals​ ​ to​ ​ scientific​ ​ curiosity​ ​ can​ ​ survive​ ​ reflective​ ​ scrutiny.

This article compares how the ethical systems of Kant, Mill, and Aristotle might react towards and treat extraterrestrial non-life, extraterrestrial non-intelligent life, and extraterrestrial intelligent life. It concludes that even in the absence of extraterrestrial life, the thought experiment still leads to insights for how these systems operate, and that further investigation of ethical systems as applied to space may well lead to more insights.

Engineering is vital for human civilization, at least in part because of the role it plays in science. Without the engineering sciences, we would not have experiments in physics like the Large Hadron Collider, biomedical engineering, or space exploration. Yet the role of engineering in science has gone largely unnoticed by philosophers until recently. This course will begin by introducing the engineering sciences, including their methodologies, ontologies and epistemologies, as well as their relation to the other sciences. We will then examine two main cases in depth: bioengineering and space science. Through a close analysis of these cases we will apply what we have learned in the first half of the course, and at the same time, try to use the cases to illuminate fundamental philosophical issues, such as the goals, ethics and future of the engineering sciences.

With an increased focus on the benefits afforded by advances in space exploration, this chapter examines the lack of ethical underpinning in space activity. It is suggested that policymakers within national space agencies and commercial ventures have been understandably, focused towards the technical, and to a lesser extent the political dimensions of space activity at the expense of ethical considerations. This chapter considers the underpinning ethics of space governance and establishes normative values in respect of space law, human spaceflight, orbital debris and the protection of extraterrestrial environments. The chapter argues that the search for a normative ethical position underpinning space activity is important for future sustainable space activity as an increasing range of diverse actors seek to exploit the opportunities afforded by the space industry

There is growing academic attention being directed towards the technical and engineering issues that face human spaceflight in respect of a journey to Mars. Often overlooked in such discussions, however, are the legal and ethical underpinnings that are needed to regulate human behaviour on such an extraordinary mission. This chapter will examine key issues in respect of law and ethics that will face humans on a long duration spaceflight and any subsequent human habitat or colony. This inquiry will examine the existing framework covering long duration spaceflight aboard the ISS and contrast this with legal issues in respect of the welfare of the crew and potential issues relating to the administration of justice for interplanetary travellers.  There will be an analysis of the environmental impact of long duration space activity and the extent to which legal regulation should be used to embed environmentalism as a core mission value. Given that there is an emerging consensus on the damage caused by existing space activities, it is contended that any new regulatory framework should embed a commitment to environmental protection within the fabric of rules governing human behaviour in outer space and should be at the forefront of such policy discussions. It is maintained that such legal and ethical issues are not only vital in respect of any human-crewed mission to Mars, but will become the template for the way in which policy regarding all long duration space flight and constitute the lodestar for normative behaviour in this context.

In this paper I discuss a variety of ethical concerns raised by worldship travel. In particular, I argue that there are many ways in which worldship travel risks wrongfully exploiting the shipborn—the generations of persons who are born and must live their entire lives aboard ship. Avoiding this exploitation means striving to instigate only worldship missions that grant the shipborn a range of personal freedoms, including educational freedom, vocational freedom, and reproductive autonomy.

One chapter of the 2015 Lutheran University Press Festschrift for Ted Peters, this chapter looks at Ted Peters work on theology and ethics as it relates to astrobiology. It first considers possibilities for convergences and divergences between humans and other intelligent creatures (including ETIs), then considers some scenarios for possible contact with ETIs (including transhumanism, moral imperialism, and extinction), then considers the significance of these ideas for theology and ethics.

The space programme is driven by many imperatives, of which the most overt are economic and geopolitical. There is evidence that we are at the beginning of an acceleration of the space programme, which will raise issues of industrialisation, pollution and militarisation, with attendant ethical considerations and legal issues. In this paper I consider the current issues, relate them to questions of human rights and sustainability and, this being an astronomical publication, I argue that astronomy itself provides one foundation for notions of human rights and sustainability. Astronomers should have the confidence to bring their history to the global discussions now taking place.

The 21st century is the time of a deepened ethical awareness of ecology. Among the topics that have been gaining more and more recognition are the ethical issues connected with restoration ecology, sustainability, the importance of insects (bees, for example) for the environment, the environmental impact of the fashion industry or of the meat and dairy industries. A notable example of a relatively new ethico-ecological topic is the ethics of space: according to some ethicists, we can no longer think that ecology is restricted to the condition of our planet alone. Apart from gaining recognition within the academic discourse, some of these topics are becoming increasingly popular on the level of everyday functioning and lifestyle choices. Such lifestyle choices may be connected with what one eats, with the way one travels during holidays or commutes on a daily basis, with buying local goods instead of those transported internationally, with reducing the amount of waste one produces (the zero-waste lifestyle), or with buying clothes that have been manufactured without causing environmental damage. In fact, we are faced with a multitude of new everyday practices motivated by the ethical concern for the environment, and these practices in themselves are worthy of research.

Multiple searches hunt for extraterrestrial life, yet the ethics of such searches in terms of fossil and possible extant life on Mars have not been sufficiently delineated.  In response, in this essay I propose a tripartite ethic for searches for microbial Martian life that consists of default nonharm toward potential living beings, default nonharm to the habitats of potential living beings, but also responsible, restrained scientific harvesting of some microbes in limited transgression of these default nonharm modes.  Although this multifaceted ethic remains secular and hence adaptable to space research settings, it arises from both a qualitative analysis of authoritative Buddhist scriptural ethics as well as the quantified ethnographic survey voices of contemporary American Buddhists.  The resulting tripartite ethic, while developed for Mars, contains ramifications for the study of microbes on Earth and further retains application to other research locations in our solar system.

The possibility of seeding other planets with life poses a tricky dilemma. On the one hand, directed panspermia might be extremely good, while, on the other, it might be extremely bad depending on what factors are taken into consideration. Therefore, we need to understand better what is ethically at stake with planetary seeding. I map out possible conditions under which humanity should spread life to other solar systems. I identify two key variables that affect the desirability of propagating life throughout the galaxy. The first is axiological and depends on which value theory in environmental ethics is correct. The second is empirical and depends on whether life is common or not in our region of the universe. I also consider two ethical objections to an interplanetary life-seeding mission: the risk of interfering with indigenous life and the risk of increasing suffering in our galaxy.

Even minimal or suggestive evidence for life on Mars places ethical constraints on future Mars missions. In order to conserve Mars's scientific value, the international community should tighten planetary protection protocols and ban crewed missions to the surface of Mars.

A genuine political realism about space settlements might allow for the endorsement of a form of settlement democracy, albeit subject to constraints. The value and defensibility of establishing any particular settlement will then depend, in part, upon the constraints which need to be brought to bear in order for survival to be possible. As a more detailed breakdown, section 1 will try to show that although there may be strong pressures toward authoritarianism in space, some non-authoritarian political structures may nonetheless provide the most pragmatic candidate option. Section 2 will attempt to strengthen this claim by drawing a connection between democracy and social hope, with the latter functioning as a key aspect of any sustainable and worthwhile political culture. Section 3 will transition more directly to the context of space and will look at the issue of abortion in a space settlement in order to make a case for constraints upon democratic deliberation. Section 4 will argue that Rawlsian deliberation might provide a way for we who are not actually space colonists to realistically theorize such constitutional constraints. Section 5 will conclude by suggesting some space-sensitive modifications to the Rawlsian approach.

If space explorers discover a biosphere supporting life on an off-Earth body, should they treat that life as possessing intrinsic value? This is an ethical quandary leading to a further question: how do we ground a universal moral norm to which the astroethicist can appeal? This article closely analyzes various forms of responsibility ethics and finds them weak because they commit the naturalistic fallacy--that is, they ask nature to define the good. The good, however, is self-defining and not derivable from nature. Even so, a revised responsibility ethic could ground its universal norms on the fact that life and only life can experience and appreciate the good. Conclusion: living creatures posses intrinsic value both on Earth and elsewhere in the universe.

: Faced with a choice between attempting to seed another world with terrestrially-sourced microbes (with which we would have a shared origin) and microbes sourced from elsewhere within the solar system (whose origins might therefore differ), would we have any non-instrumental ethical reason to favour the terrestrial microbes? What follows will argue that in relation to the goals of promoting life similar to our own, or even simply microbial life, we might conceivably make such an appeal and do so in a defensible manner. However, in no case would such a consideration operate as a silencer for rival considerations (such as likelihood of success, enhancing diversity or historical justice). The thought experiment serves to highlight the diversity of considerations which are in play in ethical deliberation about matters of astrobiology and the role of practical wisdom rather than trumping considerations.

This essay concerns the process of how we develop astrobiological morals by examining some of the compromises within ethical argumentation.  I illustrate these compromises by turning to Saturn’s moon Titan to provide an ethical theory challenge in terms of protecting Titan life, should life be found there, as well as protecting the habitats of that life and enabling the scientific study of that life.  Through analysis I find that an intrinsic value approach to astrobiological ethics may, in this case, provide better absolute protection for Titan life.  However, an American Buddhist approach, which arises from alternative, deontological ethical presumptions, in this analysis may provide better protection for the habitats of life as well as stronger arguments for the scientific study of extraterrestrial life.  In the end we find that the ethical models that we bring to our work strongly color the ethical outcomes that we realize because of the limited, yet still valuable, nature of all forms of ethical argumentation.

Space Activity began in the late 1950s as a means of promoting the ideologies of two superpowers. As these two great nations strove for supremacy in space, so Space Law was centred around governmental activity. Space activity has evolved from this, becoming increasingly commercial and involving many other actors. This has created regulatory uncertainty which needs addressing. Before the regulation can be addressed it is necessary to understand what ethics or values should shape a new legal order for space. This paper will propose that future space activity needs to be governed from a normative position which promotes an ecological and sustainable position for human activity in outer space.

Global space ethics review offers a method of protecting terrestrial and extraterrestrial interests during human interactions with space and celestial objects. This chapter considers how a robust space ethics review system could be developed and monitored over time to ensure adherence to ethical principles. After briefly introducing the concept of space ethics, this chapter considers various methods of asteroid deflection, evaluating whether these could be ethically acceptable. It then continues by identifying some potential threats to human health and wellbeing posed by space exploration, including risks to global biosecurity, before outlining the proposed global space ethics review process intended to avoid or mitigate these risks.

Denna artikel är den andra i en serie om två artiklar som introducerar astrobiologins filosofi. Detta är ett förhållandevis nytt och i Sverige nästan okänt forskningsfält som dock befinner sig i snabb tillväxt internationellt. Ämnet presenteras här i form av exempel på några centrala frågeställningar inom området. I den här artikeln presenteras några frågeställningar hemmahörande i praktisk filosofi

Abstract In the broad context of intergenerational justice, this paper is an effort towards developing a theory of an ethics of life. My thesis is that that continuity of life is the foundation for an ethics of life. The fundamental question associated with the ethics of life is, ‘What is best for life.’ Following brief discussions about life and the long-term continuity challenges life will face as the sun begins to die, three legs of a triad for an ethics of life will be proposed and explicated.

The search for biosignatures and for life itself draws upon a strong background intuition that life matters in a deep way. Not just human life or sentient life, but life as such. Accordingly, biocontamination is a matter which concerns ethics as well as the protection of opportunities for science. However, this idea that life has value is a difficult intuition to tease out and understand, and even harder justify. It is difficult to make sense of in the light of 'the parallel case,' i.e. our largely instrumental treatment of microbial life here on Earth. In what follows, some tentative moves will be made in order to help us to understand the widespread intuition about life's importance. These moves will then help us to understand what is problematic about crashing tardigrades onto the lunar surface, and our ethical responsibilities in relation to any microbial life found in situ, elsewhere in the Solar System. The approach does not call upon rights theory, or focus upon individual microbes as the bearers of such rights. Attention is shaped by a more aggregate focus, and the concept of inherent value is qualified in order to draw out the relational dimensions of human valuing, and the pragmatic dimensions of an inclusion of the standing of microbial life within a social ethic.

With Kelly C. Smith, Keith Abney, Gregory Anderson, Linda Billings, Carl L. Devito, Brian Patrick Green, Alan R. Johnson, Lori Marino, Gonzalo Munevar, Michael P. Oman-Reagan, Adam Potthast, James S. J. Schwartz, John W. Traphagan, Sheri Wells-Jensen.

Global space ethics review offers a method of protecting terrestrial and extraterrestrial interests during human interactions with space and celestial objects. This chapter considers how a robust space ethics review system could be developed and monitored over time to ensure adherence to ethical principles. After briefly introducing the concept of space ethics, this chapter considers various methods of asteroid deflection, evaluating whether these could be ethically acceptable. It then continues by identifying some potential threats to human health and wellbeing posed by space exploration, including risks to global biosecurity, before outlining the proposed global space ethics review process intended to avoid or mitigate these risks.

Astroethics runs speculative scenarios regarding possible contact and communication with extraterrestrial life. Within the framework of  astrobiological assumptions that exoplanets with a longer evolutionary history may have developed proportionately more intelligent life and more advanced civilizations, this article readies us on Earth for three scenarios: (1) extraterrestrial life that is less intelligent than Earth's Homo sapiens; (2) extraterrestrial life that is our peer in intelligence; and (3) extraterrestrial life superior to us in intelligence, science, technology, social organization, and civility. How might our moral obligations be formulated accordingly?

If we ever decide to start geoengineering another world, and maybe even terraform a world that is not presently habitable for humans, it is also highly probable that it will become less habitable for any indigenous life. Making sure, or at least trying to determine the probability that a potentially habitable world is in fact uninhabited will thus be an important step before we start any geo-engineering on that world, and possibly even before we let humans land there in the first place.

A paper looking at why constrained dissent might be unavoidable but justifiable and constructive within a future space settlement and why, in the absence of any possibility of dissent at some particular location, we might not be justified in establishing any such settlement at the location in question.