Last Updated: June 12, 2009
In my last post, I explored some philosophies on fear and applied them to space habitation. Now, I will look at the logic behind my argument. Argumentum ad metum: by using fear of human extinction that is the logical fallacy I commit. The general form of a fear based argument is this:
- Either P or Q is true.
- Q is frightening.
- Therefore, P is true. ~ Wikipedia
I add the line P is a security blanket to make this argument make sense in terms of space habitation. Applying this argument form to times when I use human extinction to support space habitation...
Either having a space habitation and not having a space habitation could be good ideas
Having a space habitation can serve as protection against human extinction
Therefore, not having a space habitation means to absence of this protection
Thus, not having a space habitation is frightening
So, having a space habitation is the good idea
This argument, in addition to Argumentum ad metum, has another logical fallacy - false dilemma. Not having a space habitation does not mean we do not have protection against human extinction. Even if we had a space habitation, we still would not be protected from extinction. Using fear to support space habitation will only lead to this species to run from it's possible death forever. Eventually we will have to die, their will be a time where all the stars burn out in the universe and there is not enough light to support life. Even if we get past that point, it will be hard to escape the big crush (yes, we could jump into another universe... on paper).
Furthermore, there are alot of things we can do to prevent human extinction. Here a list...
- Build up our planetary defenses against asteroids
- Increase our ability to observe space (10 years warning would give us tons of time, even 5 years would work)
- Invent better radiation shielding/energy shields to protect against a gamma-ray burst
- Develop our armor systems to protect ensure we have armor to defeat every weapon in the universe (this would include alien weaponry)
- Ensure we are the most technologically advanced race in the universe
- Get rid of all nuclear, chemical and biological weapons
- Increase our research and improve our response to pandemics
- Conserve our nonrenewable resources
- Prevent and reverse global warming
- Store large amounts of O2 incase of an anoxic event
- Somehow, find a way to prevent a supervolcano
- Protect our current ozone layer or find a replacement
and many, many more things. So, using human extinction to support space habitation may be a logical mistake. Next time, I will look more at fear, then I will find where the human extinction support fits in the space habitation argument.
