. 24/7 Space News .
The Problems in Thinking about Humans and Space

what happened?
by Mathew Faulk
Los Angeles - Oct 13, 2003
What are the philosophical and social implications of human space involvement? What does it mean that humans have the ability to venture out into the cosmos, have come to manifest a society that extends into space? What does this say about humans and reality?

Humanity, in some respect, has come to extend beyond the world or planet from which humanity itself arose, and from which the world view that is unique to this worldly existence arose. There is an aspect of human society that is beginning to flow out beyond this planet in both physical existence and in thinking, and both in manners unique to this era.

In physical existence humans have now come to explore reality beyond the earth, into space and the surrounding cosmos. We have embarked upon the journey of space exploration, exploring reality beyond the terrestrial. This is manifest in, and manifests the presence of, people in space and social behaviors that extend beyond only a worldly end or intention.

There are now substantial aspects of human life that are being directly confronted with this phenomenon. Human society must contend with, move out into keeping within the mind the consciousness of, the universe beyond the planet and the activity going on there.

From asteroids, to nuclear accidents, to spy satellites, to random chunks of debris (old solid rocket boosters) falling into the middle of some African farm; we must go about our daily lives having consciously to consider and think about space beyond the planet, and in a manner unique to our times.

Space, so far as it is presenting itself today, is therefore a new form of human related phenomena, one specifically lacking in any serious philosophical contemplation or address by both philosophers and everyone else involved, as it stands in contemporary form.

It is time we look seriously into space exploration and what exactly this activity means for human existence and experience, for human existence and experience have now expanded into encompassing more directly this domain.

But the human person has always looked to the heavens: in astrology, astronomy, maritime navigation, Newton's calculus, Galileo's heavenly revolution, Aristotle, Plato, Chinese Zodiac and on. The stars have always been within our view.

However, we are now interacting with them, are entering into that space, in a manner that none before have. There are actually people in space as we speak, continually orbiting this globe within several small cylindrical modules known as the International Space Station, and since 1998.

People have actually landed on the moon, and probes are drifting towards and circling other worlds, even landing on their terra-firma. These are the things of fairy tales and mythology, people on the moon, and traveling vast distances to reach barren but beautiful red, gray lands. These are only recently even the things of fantasy, where before such ideas and sights would be seen as super-human or even godly.

Nor is outer space the only domain of space exploration newly breaking free in fresh forms. We have peered into reality as much as we have looked out at it. On the micro, extending to the quantum level, there is an equal amount of universe, space in which we are now directly engaged in a rather unique manner.

In some respect, on every level we seem to be expanding. But there are problems as well, practical implications and dilemmas, not only theory and curiosity. Ethical and religious issues, environmental concerns, political and economic issues, aspects extending into the very basis of human existence are now beginning to come directly to the fore.

One of these basis to be explored philosophically, is the very manner in which we view space and space exploration, how we actually conceptualize it in our minds, those of us directly involved, and those not.

For those involved there are goals, desires, dreams, economical, political, control, and power interests. We all want to do something, and something in space, but also something unique to us and our agendas.

This is the main problem facing the human person today, and especially within space exploration. Some want military might and secret supremacy, some want to explore and venture, others see a platform from which to gaze and study more accurately and freely, groups advocate economic freedom and feeding the globe, while racing in sporty new flying contraptions might enthuse another, or some might desire simply to look and experience it, then come to reflection and action in existence from it.

But how to do anything with so many ideas and views, where everyone has something to say and a solution, or a critique and warning? We have so many differing and conflicting interests to get us off the ground that we can never get enough momentum going in any one direction, with enough force, actually to get off the ground in a really sufficient manner.

So what are we going to do folks? If we want to go to space, and bring to fruition the benefits there-from, spread the potential and possibility to those who would, then we need to come together and do something, actually do it, rather than pulling strings, talking, or letting things go hoping something will come, or just watching something manifest itself.

There is no better way to do this than dialogue, communication, community building. Those of who are interested in going and doing must come together to go and do, because our task is of a kind in which there must be community involvement.

But again, how to get so many differences connected and working together? Perhaps looking at some positives will help us gain a vector. There are certainly a lot of us here talking about it, websites, papers, articles, communities, industries, news flashes etc. So there is already a large infrastructure there. But it seems that everyone is arguing and talking, debating, unhappy with the way things are, the way things are being done, unsatisfied with what we have from where we have been and what we know.

Therefore, the ability to do what we desire in space, the very things that it seems we should be able to do, extend far beyond what is actually done. There is an infrastructure capable, and people willing, but it is simply not being utilized to its fullest ability.

There needs to be a revolution, then, specifically within those areas involved in utilizing the ability we have, in allowing those people who want to, to come together and work together. There needs to be a forum. But this too may be short sighted.

Perhaps the ability does not exist, perhaps space is still too far off and we are still too far underdeveloped to even consider actually entertaining any real thought of humans in space or venturing into that domain, not for exploration, not for science, not for humanity, not for anything. Perhaps we are dreaming beyond our means, and need to face up to the facts: humans as they stand today are incapable of really going to space, they just don't have it in them, or perhaps aren't quite up to the challenge.

Is this the answer; is this what we are left with? Should we just let it go, settle and be content, accept that our dreams and something we see as wonderful and beautiful will never happen, is actually not beautiful, or even a possibility? Should we simply accept our incapability, or should we believe in the ability and work to actually exercise it?

There are also those issues against space exploration, therefore bringing forth ethical concerns. Perhaps space exploration is wrong, it is the wrong track, and we are lost in such an attempt. There are social issues that we should be able to resolve before even considering space exploration, feeding people for example. Or perhaps space exploration is only a western venture, only something the western, specifically white world, does, and imposes it upon everyone else.

Which side to take, what is the real state of reality? These are all areas in which philosophy itself generally dwells, and does offer much help, scientific, cultural, aesthetic, political, economical, and social. So why isn't philosophy more directly involved in space exploration? Because no one believes that philosophy can help, or they are afraid.

This however, is wrong. Space is a new environment, a new place, and so new political, scientific, environmental, social, economical activities, foundations, are needed. Perhaps things not thought of before, and perhaps a few of these other areas will fade into obscurity, like economics or perhaps politics.

But generally speaking, any and all activity in any of these areas in the world, our economic systems, social systems, political systems, environmental systems etc., all originate from and are directly based and built upon philosophy and philosophical systems. Rather, where these foundations are established is in philosophy.

Therefore, because space is a new area, needing new systems and approaches, thinking to establish how to maneuver and exist within this domain, is needed, what are primarily activities historically entertained and dealt with by philosophers.

But where does this lead us, or rather, leave us? As is already demonstrable, philosophy is specifically and traditionally used to dealing with all of these issues in mass, as a profession, conducting professional research in these areas, and producing actual solutions. And as is observable in political systems, organizational systems, scientific and mathematical systems etc., those deemed as successful are as such to some extent due to their philosophy, but so too for those seen as not successful.

Therefore, philosophy is one of those basic areas that lies as the foundation to a successful project. Rather, a successful group is as such due to its adherence and unity in a common philosophical foundation; or philosophy plays a direct role in every aspect of any human activity, and perhaps mostly that activity of space exploration or human space involvement. It is therefore a good solid philosophical foundation, or the lack thereof, that stands as the basis for many of the problems within space exploration.

This leaves those involved, the media, the industry, the government, in the need of create a place for philosophers at this table and at this time; this will take an active attempt to include philosophers and philosophy.

But what about space, what about the problems facing us today, getting there, the Orbital Space Plane, nuclear propulsion, weapons and military space? Can I, or philosophy, begin to offer anything here? Perhaps, for these are certainly areas not strange to philosophy in general. The philosophy of technology, for example, deals directly with technological development and therefore does have something to say even about these technological problems facing us currently.

For instance, what should the primary focus be in designing and developing human space involvement technology or specifically human space transport systems: economics, politics, human life, safety? Take the newly proposed Orbital Space Place, now entering its second stage of evaluation.

Given the recent shuttle tragedy and other space mishaps, perhaps the initial and primary focus should only be on simply being able to successfully transport humans within the space environment safely, reliably, and successfully, before any cargo, scientific, or economic concerns should even enter the picture.

After all, space exploration is a human activity, without humans it would not exist. Humans and the human person should therefore be the central focus when considering any topic related to this endeavor.

Considering the space plane, depending on the focus, the overall design will change, for example whether to build a system using wings like planes and the shuttle, or a capsule. In the even that a focus is needed on first being able to successfully transport humans in space reliably and safely, then it seems that the basic design of any system should revolve around and evolve from those technologies with the greatest success in this area.

To date, this seems to be a capsule based design, where first and foremost the capsule should be built to sustain the greatest of possible abuse and still maintain a safe environment for humans, only when this is achieved should the system be expanded to incorporate cargo and other platforms. And only upon these criteria should such a project be awarded to a contractor, the one who ensures this single aspect, safe, reliable, and successful human space transport.

But even this area becomes delicate, with many nuances involved. For instance, what about private companies, and regulations for this domain, like those groups now competing for the x-prize? There is currently a rather large hullabaloo concerning the regulating body, and the actually regulating legislature for this new industry of private human space transport companies.

Without due political and social philosophical grounding and support, this effort will only snowball. What should the basis and focus of regulation be, and what should the limits be? Where should the domain of regulation end and begin? If safety is the main concern, at what point do we say "ok, this system is safe enough?" If safety regulations do not accept some kind of risk, new systems and new ways for approaching human space flight, and space access, experimental craft, will be stifled.

No system is absolutely risk free, or absolutely safe, there must be a limit. Regulation and legislation must consider this. There also must be enough room in regulation and legislative philosophy to allow for private start ups and entrepreneurial expansion, the development of high risk but potentially large pay off technology. The exploration of technologies that might initially be unsafe and risky, but that might potentially provide in development the highest level of safety and reliability (nuclear or high density energy and propulsion sources fall into this area).

There are also issues concerning international law, or space ownership and extraterrestrial property. When someone else to land on the moon, say China, what happens if they make claim on that body? Should people even be allowed to own property in space? Should governments and nations be allowed to expand into claiming as a part of their nations, extraterrestrial domains? What happens if a country breaks international law concerning space, how should such laws be enforced? What happens if someone breaks a law in space and no one else is there to enforce it? Should there even be law in space? (Perhaps not, it is conceivable that laws should only apply to human settlements, organizations and structures, not to space or other worlds themselves).

These are all issues that we are going to have to face, and very quickly. We need to begin supporting and funding people to research these areas, to provide a framework and foundation from which to approach and solve these problems, to begin a tradition and establish the foundation from which standards and quid pro quo can be established.

For example, if human freedom and trying to allow people to maximize their potential or develop in their own unique way is the goal, then we should not see space as a resource, but as a home, not as something to posses, but as something to share and participate in. As well space should be open to every individual, if her or she chose to live and pursue that form of life.

But space and existing in space is not necessarily married with any certain type of culture or technique of approach, with any certain type of lifestyle or any specific way of living. As there were many different maritime cultures, and methods for approaching transportation over sea, space too may be approached from differing methods and cultures, techniques.

The differences between the Russian and U.S. space industry attests to this, both having pinnacle successes, and both having greatly different philosophical foundations and approaches to their explorations and ventures beyond the stratosphere. No one culture or way of approaching space is therefore the right way, or has the right to dominate over others. Space is nothing to fight over or compete with philosophically, but something that may help in uniting and expanding individuals and groups.

As was stated in the earlier half of this paper, there is hardly a culture known that has not in some respect been involved in space, that has not looked at the stars and pondered, that has not developed some cultural relation to the heavens. Space is a common experience that all human cultures and societies can and do share in.

Like food and eating, or physical function, humans also share the common sky, look at stars, and have a cultural tradition somewhere revolving around and dealing with space. Perhaps now we are more able to start looking into these commonalities. Perhaps humans will not unite down here on earth, but will do so in space, after we get off this rock, yet to return and establish or begin a new area in human existence.

Moreover, we live in a global world, yet only a handful of people have actually ever seen it, the globe. The global community is, therefore, not yet a village. There are still far off lands, and peoples who are not oriented to a global humanity. This is because we are not yet acting like a fully global humanity. We do not have the right perspective; we have not yet established a common philosophical tradition to unite us, and perhaps we never will or never should. Perhaps there will always be peoples not involved in space.

If so, then they should not be forced to get involved: those countries entering into that domain should not force it upon those who are not and do not. Space offers us this, however, the ability to begin developing a truly global philosophy, one that takes into account a global humanity, and one exercised by the global humanity, in their common goal and involvement in space.

But, because space is now reaching the point of directly involving all of us, through communications, economics, military, international relations, and perhaps soon, transportation and energy, we are now faced with addressing space in our philosophies and bringing philosophy into space, whether we like it or nor, and whether we want to or not. And though no group or nation should force space upon others, space might be forcing itself upon us.

In our ever-growing attention to the fragility of our existence, that there are phenomena and activities so humungous and colossal that were we any where near them, or were we to drift in their vicinity, we would be no more; therefore, we must face and develop a philosophy of space, as a priority, as the human activity capable and steeped in a tradition of dealing with these issues, albeit, the single domain particularly oriented to doing just this.

Mathew Faulk is a long time reader of SpaceDaily and can be contact via Mfinity1@[email protected] - remove @NOSPAM@ and replace with a single @

Related Links
SpaceDaily
Search SpaceDaily
Subscribe To SpaceDaily Express

The Exploration of Space and Homeland Defense
Los Angeles - Oct 08, 2003
Our dependence on centralized systems - for power, water and other critical resources - has left us increasingly vulnerable. Negligence and enemy attack alike can threaten millions with a single-point failure. Space research can pioneer technologies to free us from dependence on these fragile, outdated systems while opening up the solar system to human exploration.



Thanks for being here;
We need your help. The SpaceDaily news network continues to grow but revenues have never been harder to maintain.

With the rise of Ad Blockers, and Facebook - our traditional revenue sources via quality network advertising continues to decline. And unlike so many other news sites, we don't have a paywall - with those annoying usernames and passwords.

Our news coverage takes time and effort to publish 365 days a year.

If you find our news sites informative and useful then please consider becoming a regular supporter or for now make a one off contribution.
SpaceDaily Contributor
$5 Billed Once


credit card or paypal
SpaceDaily Monthly Supporter
$5 Billed Monthly


paypal only














The content herein, unless otherwise known to be public domain, are Copyright 1995-2016 - Space Media Network. All websites are published in Australia and are solely subject to Australian law and governed by Fair Use principals for news reporting and research purposes. AFP, UPI and IANS news wire stories are copyright Agence France-Presse, United Press International and Indo-Asia News Service. ESA news reports are copyright European Space Agency. All NASA sourced material is public domain. Additional copyrights may apply in whole or part to other bona fide parties. Advertising does not imply endorsement, agreement or approval of any opinions, statements or information provided by Space Media Network on any Web page published or hosted by Space Media Network. Privacy Statement All images and articles appearing on Space Media Network have been edited or digitally altered in some way. Any requests to remove copyright material will be acted upon in a timely and appropriate manner. Any attempt to extort money from Space Media Network will be ignored and reported to Australian Law Enforcement Agencies as a potential case of financial fraud involving the use of a telephonic carriage device or postal service.