Even the title of Christopher E. Mason‘s article told the whole story. We do have moral obligations, at least in my eyes, which are always at a cost, though. My question is, does this supposed necessity of moving humanity on out and away from our home planet address the issues? At a childish level, I think it does. But, as implied by those words, I can only see this as avoidance, avoidance of our unwillingness to discover our place within reality. We trust in our corporate selves rather than our self known through community.
My own desire to explore space doesn’t make necessary our trashing every solar system we might be able to wander off toward. Without owning into our own drive to dominate, reality we may be more akin to the viruses we strive to keep our distance from.
Again, this doesn’t mean that we should not be struggling in this direction, but rather, that we must be more focused on learning to live within this ecosystem. So then, I am not opposed to Dr. Mason’s encouragement. His ideas bring out that joyful child within me, who loved dreaming out trekking off into the unknown quadrants of space.
Since those early years, I have discovered other fascinations. For instance, space exploration followed by colonization doesn’t begin to address domestic violence, inequality, wars, famine, nor poverty. None of those are reasons to avoid such effort, yet those issues make it clear that we need to keep space exploration in concert with all those other issues.
Many reasons to keep NASA and all of its’ kindred up and running have addressed fragments of humanity’s needs. I want weather satellites, mass communication and accompanying research to keep going. At the same time how are we to use those to address the core issues laced through population growth?