Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T12:59:04.937Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Common origins and the ethics of planetary seeding

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 September 2016

Tony Milligan
Tony Milligan*
Affiliation:
Department of Theology and Religious Studies, King's College London, 22 Kingsway, London WC2R 2LS, UK
*
e-mail: Anthony.milligan@kcl.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

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.

Keywords

dutyethicsoriginspanspermiavalue
Type
Research Article
Information
International Journal of Astrobiology , Volume 15 , Special Issue 4: The history and philosophy of the Origin of Life , October 2016 , pp. 301 - 306
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ariew, A. (2007). Teleology. In The Cambridge Companion to the Philosophy of Biology, ed. Hull, D.L. & Ruse, M., pp. 160–181. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Attfield, R. (1981). The good of trees. J. Value Inq. 15, 35–54.10.1007/BF00136626Google Scholar
Cicovacki, P. (2012). The Restoration of Albert Schweitzer's Ethical Vision. Continuum, London.Google Scholar
Cockell, C.S. (2005). The value of microorganisms. Environ. Ethics 27, 375–390.10.5840/enviroethics20052744Google Scholar
Cockell, C.S. (2007). Originism: ethics and extraterrestrial life. J. Br. Interplanet. Soc. 60, 147–153.Google Scholar
Cockell, C.S. (2011). Ethics and Extraterrestrial Life. In Humans in Outer Space: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, ed. Landfester, U., Remuss, N.-L., Schrogl, K.-U. & Worms, J.-C., pp. 80–101. Springer, Wien.Google Scholar
Cockell, C.S. & Jones, H.L. (2009). Advancing the case for microbial conservation. Oryx 43, 520–526.10.1017/S0030605309990111Google Scholar
Dancy, J. (1985). The role of imaginary cases in ethics. Pac. Philos. Quart. 66, 141–153.10.1111/j.1468-0114.1985.tb00246.xGoogle Scholar
Genta, G. & Rycroft, M. (2003). Space, the Final Frontier? Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Mautner, M. (2009). Life-centered ethics, and the human future in space. Bioethics 23, 433–440.Google Scholar
McKay, C.P. (2013). Astrobiology and society: the long view. In Encountering Life in the Universe: Ethical and Social Implications of Astrobiology, ed. Impey, C., Spitz, A.H. & Stoeger, W., pp. 158–166. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Milligan, T. (2007). Lockean puzzles. J. Phil. Educ. 41, 351–361.10.1111/j.1467-9752.2007.00566.xGoogle Scholar
Milligan, T. (2015). Nobody Owns the Moon: The Ethics of Space Exploitation. McFarland, Jefferson, NC.Google Scholar
Persson, E. (2014). What does it take to establish that a world is uninhabited prior to exploitation? A question of ethics as well as science. Challenges 5, 224–238.Google Scholar
Rolston, H. (1986). The preservation of natural value in the solar system. In Environmental Ethics and the Solar System, ed. Hargrove, E.C., pp. 140–182. Sierra Club Books, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, A. & McShea, D.W. (2008). The Philosophy of Biology. Routledge, New York.Google Scholar
Rummel, J.D., Race, M.S. & Horneck, G. (2012). Ethical considerations for planetary protection in space exploration. Astrobiology 12, 1017–1023.Google Scholar
Sessions, G. (1995). Deep Ecology for the 21st Century. Shambhala, Boston.Google Scholar
Smith, B. (2002). Analogy in moral deliberation: the role of imagination and theory in ethics. J. Med. Ethics 28, 244–248.Google Scholar
Smith, K.C. (2009). The trouble with intrinsic value: an ethical primer for astrobiology. In Exploring the Origin, Extent, and Future of Life: Philosophical, Ethical, and Theological Perspectives, ed. Bertka, C., pp. 261–280. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, K.C. (2014). Manifest complexity: a foundational ethic for astrobiology. Space Policy 30, 209–214.Google Scholar
Sorensen, R. (1992). Thought Experiments. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sylvan, R. (1973). Is there a need for a new, an environmental ethic? In Environmental Ethics: An Anthology, ed. Light, A. & Rolston, H. III, pp. 47–52. Blackwell, Malden, MA, 2003.Google Scholar
Thomson, J.J. (1971). A defense of abortion. Philos. Public Aff. 1, 47–66.Google Scholar
Velleman, J.D. (2009). How We Get Along. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar