Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

rug

(82,333 posts)
Tue Oct 11, 2016, 07:09 AM Oct 2016

Elon Musk Isn’t Religious Enough to Colonize Mars

Silicon Valley wants to explore space as tech entrepreneurs. We should be traveling as pilgrims.



BY JAMES POULOS
OCTOBER 10, 2016

At a technology conference this summer, Elon Musk suggested that if humanity is not yet living in a computer simulation, it is probably already doomed. The only alternative, he explained, was so-called base reality (what most of us would refer to simply as “reality”), where some calamitous event — whether climate change, nuclear war, or an asteroid — was eventually liable to snuff our existence on Earth once and for all. “Either we’re going to create simulations that are indistinguishable from reality or civilization will cease to exist,” he said. “Those are the two options.”

Of course, Musk has also mentioned a different alternative to extinction: the possibility of leaving this planet and decamping for another. As CEO of SpaceX, Musk is deeply involved, and financially invested, in developing plans for a human colony on Mars in about seven years. But, strangely, Musk hasn’t yet explained whether or not he sees interplanetary life as an alternative to living in a simulation, not just to dying on Earth.

It’s telling that Musk has also elided one crucial aspect of building a Mars colony: who precisely ought to be sent to build it. And that omission bears directly on his recent musings on technological advancement and the earthly apocalypse. Musk, and his Silicon Valley backers, are right that humanity’s destiny might be to extend life to other planets. But Musk’s seeming belief that we’re already stuck in a simulated world leaves only dubious reasons to endorse his understanding of what destiny means — and who ought to fulfill it.

The key is in distinguishing two versions of destiny. The first is relatively more detached from (what seems to be) base reality — that is, the natural world. According to this version of destiny, the purpose of space colonization is fully tied up with the purpose of scientific progress in general, complete with transformational changes to our bodies and minds that don’t just augment or twist our experience of being human but break with nature completely, turning us into post-humans. People dreaming this dream have good reason to prefer that our first Mars colonists would see themselves as being on the frontier of such technological progress and committed to pushing it forward — to making the post-human dream as much of a reality as possible, as quickly as possible.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/10/10/elon-musk-isnt-religious-enough-to-colonize-mars/

22 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Elon Musk Isn’t Religious Enough to Colonize Mars (Original Post) rug Oct 2016 OP
If God wanted us up there on Mars, anoNY42 Oct 2016 #1
Or placed us all inside thumb drives. rug Oct 2016 #2
Well, he clearly said: "Get your ass to Mars." DetlefK Oct 2016 #3
I deeply disagree. DetlefK Oct 2016 #4
I don't think much of the author's idea of "this sweeping journey of civilizations" muriel_volestrangler Oct 2016 #5
I bet you'd like this book. rug Oct 2016 #7
Meh. AtheistCrusader Oct 2016 #19
He misspelled onomatopoeia. rug Oct 2016 #20
Nobody's perfect. AtheistCrusader Oct 2016 #21
I really don't want people who are religious higher than I am in the gravity well. AtheistCrusader Oct 2016 #18
If a religious test were required, who would make the decision as to which religion(s) qualified? Nitram Oct 2016 #6
It's all speculation at this point, of course, but we'll be bringing our ideas with us, rug Oct 2016 #8
Of course we will, but we shouldn't establish a religious test for participation. Nitram Oct 2016 #10
Nor a religious, or other ideological, exclusion. rug Oct 2016 #12
Agreed. But wasn't the article specifically about the need for a religious test? Nitram Oct 2016 #13
I can't get back in now without registering either. rug Oct 2016 #14
The simulation theory is essentially Hinduism bananas Oct 2016 #9
That's right, Hindus and Buddhists see the world as an illusion. Maya. Nitram Oct 2016 #11
Mars is ruled by the Greek Gods Angry Dragon Oct 2016 #15
Is Uranus Titanic? rug Oct 2016 #16
yes Angry Dragon Oct 2016 #17
transhumanism's always stuck relying on matter for immaterial goals: it self-falsifies MisterP Oct 2016 #22
 

anoNY42

(670 posts)
1. If God wanted us up there on Mars,
Tue Oct 11, 2016, 07:18 AM
Oct 2016

he would have miracled our asses up there. (to paraphrase FMJ)

DetlefK

(16,423 posts)
4. I deeply disagree.
Tue Oct 11, 2016, 08:08 AM
Oct 2016

The author postulates an anthropocentric point-of-view that no longer works once you go into space. How are we supposed to even define the destiny of mankind if there are alien races with rivalling destinies? How can we postulate a destiny of colonizing space when mankind depends on a very specific environment to survive?

The author also talks about religious traditions but doesn't realize that they are essentially cultural traditions. Picking and choosing religious traditions would mean picking and choosing the cultural premises on which the civilizations of space-based mankind would be built.

The sheer thought that mankind needs Mars for a mental rebirth, for inspiration, is ridiculous. It is possible to see beauty and sense in the small things. Some swath of pure nature that only exists for your inspiration... That's simply arrogant and, again, anthropocentric.




"would we be best off if our first Martian colonists were religious observers?"

No. Because religion means sticking to explanations even if they don't make sense. With believers there is always the risk that they will do something irrational because their religion says so.
I wouldn't entrust a multi-trillion-dollar-project and the survival of mankind into the hands of people who operate on premises that only exist in their heads.

Religious freedom is nice and all, but that freedom should end where it influences the lives of other people.

muriel_volestrangler

(101,348 posts)
5. I don't think much of the author's idea of "this sweeping journey of civilizations"
Tue Oct 11, 2016, 08:09 AM
Oct 2016

"what was begun with the exodus from Egypt" - which is a myth
"the founding of Rome" - well, a confused start, perhaps an alliance of people on the edge of 2 or 3 existing societies. It has a weird myth about it too
"the Pilgrims’ arrival on Plymouth Rock" - a group leaves one religiously rigid area to set up their own religiously rigid area, much to the detriment of the people already living there
"Abraham Lincoln’s “new birth of freedom,” " - a line from one speech. That's a "sweeping journey of civilization"?

"You don’t have to be pious to think of human history in these essentially religious terms" - no, you do have to be pious. You're taking one particular religion's myth, adding the start of one society among many for no apparent reason, then a religious tiff, then one moment in one country's history, and saying that represents the "sweeping journey of civilizations"? It's just blinkered American Christian "mainfest destiny" nonsense.

Nitram

(22,845 posts)
6. If a religious test were required, who would make the decision as to which religion(s) qualified?
Tue Oct 11, 2016, 09:36 AM
Oct 2016

Columbus sailed to the New World in the name of the Catholic church, but ended up enslaving and murdering the Native Americans he encountered. I would suggest that the initial pioneers to other worlds should be better versed in science and technology than religious dogma of one kind or another.

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
12. Nor a religious, or other ideological, exclusion.
Wed Oct 12, 2016, 12:38 PM
Oct 2016

Any exploration of space beyond robotic probes will be a human endeavor. We are not easily categorized or contained.

Nitram

(22,845 posts)
13. Agreed. But wasn't the article specifically about the need for a religious test?
Wed Oct 12, 2016, 12:49 PM
Oct 2016

Unfortunately I couldn't access the site without registering, but judging by the title of the article and your excerpt, that was my understanding.

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
14. I can't get back in now without registering either.
Wed Oct 12, 2016, 01:04 PM
Oct 2016

But no, I don't think he was proposing a religious test. I think he was objecting to a primarily technological, almost transhumanist, motive for space exploration.

If I can find a workaround the registering page I'll post it. Looks like they slap on the registration page after 12 hours or so.

bananas

(27,509 posts)
9. The simulation theory is essentially Hinduism
Tue Oct 11, 2016, 04:37 PM
Oct 2016

A dream is just a simulation:

http://souljerky.com/articles/carl_sagan_on_hindu_cosmology.html

Carl Sagan On Hindu Cosmology, "The Great Cosmic Lotus Dream"

Hindu religion is the only one of the world’s great faiths dedicated to the idea that the cosmos itself undergoes an immense, indeed an infinite number of deaths and rebirths.

It is the only religion in which the time scales correspond, no doubt, by accident, to those of modern scientific cosmology. Its cycles run from our ordinary day and night to a day and night of Brahma 8.64 billion years long. Longer than the age of the earth or the sun and about half of the time since the big bang. And there are much longer time scales still.

There is the deep and the appealing notion that the universe is but the dream of the god who after a 100 Brahma years… dissolves himself into a dreamless sleep… and the universe dissolves with him… until after another Brahma century… he starts… recomposes himself and begins again the dream… the great cosmic lotus dream.

Meanwhile… elsewhere… there are an infinite number of other universes… each with its own god… dreaming the cosmic dream…

These great ideas are tempered by another perhaps still greater it is said that men may not be the dreams of the gods but rather that the gods are the dreams of men.

Nitram

(22,845 posts)
11. That's right, Hindus and Buddhists see the world as an illusion. Maya.
Wed Oct 12, 2016, 12:38 PM
Oct 2016

But many Christians, too, once considered this world to be of little significance and placed all their hopes into a vision of the afterlife.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Elon Musk Isn’t Religious...