I read an interesting article about terraforming Mars, which has peaked the interest of the philosophy world. I won't get into that particular article but suffice it to say that there is a debate between whether it is ethical or not to alter the surface of a planet. The particular article I read summarized some other views and then presented that so long as there are no living organisms on the planet they contended that it was ethical to alter the planet because it would bring about greater knowledge of our own planet.
I guess that conversation is very far removed from the world we live in (earth), but it got me thinking about our planet...
Humans aren't the first living creatures on Earth. One theory submits that the original life on earth wasn't developed on earth but rather escaped some other planet and survived on an asteroid that impacted earth.
Another unique aspect of Earth is that it is in fact unique--the more that astronomers look out into the universe, the more they find rocks that are nothing like our own and those rocks appear to be common, yet our Earth, a pale blue dot, has an abundance of water. Lots of rapid change from weathering and from life(ok that's a cheat because we're the only planet we know with life :P) . A unique atmosphere. Basically, the more astronomers look into space the more they realize that our planet is uniquely suited to house life and yet those other planets and asteroids and moons are inhospitable.
So that gets me thinking. If these other planets aren't suited for life at the present moment, what good are they? Are they nothing more than intergalactic monuments? Nature's art? Points in space that are good for nothing more than to look at for a brief moment and then to look away to something more interesting?
The universe is vast and incomprehensible in it's entirety. If a person had the ability to spend a day on one celestial body per day and then travel to another body in mere moments and on that new hunk of rock they could explore and enjoy and exist, they would still only experience a tiny speck of what is actually out there, and yet if you look at life as a sensory experience that you are limited in how many experiences you have, then the universe is irrelevant because it is so large that you could never experience it all.
My point is, I think from a utilitarian point of view, there is not a lot of utility out there that we know of in outer space. Our planet is very much usable in its present state for whatever we wish, and it appears to have the capacity to heal itself given enough time.
The great fear that most people have is that what we are doing to the Earth is altering it in a way that will destroy all life on the planet. I guess there is a fear that we will ruin this great gem we have and make it unusable and then it will become just like all the other planets in the universe.
Thinking of it in that manner, I return to my original statement: Humans weren't the first living organism on earth. Though some people might say "we have as much a claim to this earth as any other living organism", I disagree. --It is difficult to explain in words here a concept I am trying to explain, so try to take this next part for its bigger meaning than the base words I will use.--I believe that we have as much of a claim on the earth as we can wage war with other living organisms to take it.
In a cubic yard of soil there are many many organisms, and above that soil there may be many many more organisms, all living and existing in very close proximity to one another--some even on top of one another. Those organisms appear to work in concert with one another, where one produces more wastes, another comes in to get rid of those wastes. There is a sort of market economy of life existing in this very small area.
That said, humans come along and they alter their surroundings for themselves. Much like the earthworm or the ant moves debris from the surface and feeds on it, thereby altering its surroundings, the human exists as one component of a bigger part of this planet.
Do you think the earthworm knows of the presence of the human working the surface of the field above it? Do you think the human knows of the presence of whatever force is shaping above it?
Cue Pocahontas music: "You can own the Earth and still all you'll own is earth until you can paint with all the colors of the wind."
What if the universe was moving in a direction that we cannot comprehend just yet because we are so tiny? What if we--and all life--play a role in the universe on a grander scale of time that we cannot see because we don't live long enough?
I think the Earth is inherently balanced.
I think it would be difficult for us as a species to go extinct because we know too much about the workings of our Earth and other life on it and can utilize that knowledge to remain alive. --Maybe not all of us, but some of us will always persevere.
However, what part could a resource hogging human being that severely alters the environment, destroys other species play?
No comments:
Post a Comment