PRESENTERS AND ABSTRACTS

ETI and Evidence for Theism

In their 2021 paper, ‘Houston: Do we have a problem?,’ McIntosh and McNabb survey various objections raised against Christian belief from the existence of ETI. The authors argue that ultimately all the objections surveyed are found wanting. The conclusion is that existence of ETI is consistent with theism and more specifically, Christian belief. McIntosh and McNabb’s 2021 strategy is purely defensive in nature. In this paper, we go on offense. We argue that the existence of ETI would help confirm the theist hypothesis over its naturalist rival. We do this first by introducing a basic Bayesian framework which will be utilized to make our argument. We then discuss the problem of abiogenesis and the likelihood of abiogenesis occurring on many planets throughout the universe. Finally, we engage two objections to our thesis that stem from the possibility of panspermia. 

Topology and Protest Before the Law

We must imagine Kafka’s man from the country as the original space interpreter. More than 70 years before self-proclaimed “Raumdeuter” Thomas Müller set forth to cultivate his special power “to find space, space invisible to the non-Raumdeuter,” the former had long discovered the space of law, a space that has fallen through the analytic cracks of non-topological Raumdeuter – those who read the story through a topographical perspective. I argue that Derrida’s interpretation of a “topographical system of law” essentially misses the legal event that takes place before the law. The failure to register the legal event should be attributed to the insufficiency of the topographical perspective he employs to represent the simultaneity of being inside and outside the law, which indicates the need for a different mode of spatial representation. Such an alternative mode is intimated by Derrida’s differential topology of law centered on the law’s “present différance,” which stages his claim that the law marks a self-prohibiting non-place that annuls its own taking place. In opposition to Derrida, my analysis explores a topological framework. With topology, the law can be represented as a non-orientable surface with a single hole for which the binary distinction between inside and outside does not hold. With every attempt to enter it, we end up appearing before the law – which, coincidentally, is exactly where the law takes place. This simultaneously strengthens the thesis that the man from the country – far from resignedly subjecting himself to the law’s imperative – is on a mission to subvert it. His waiting and relentless questioning must be recognized as an indictment, as a series of acts of resistance culminating in the final “question” aimed at interrupting the violence of the law that arrests agency and denies a future.

Eternal Weights of Goodness

The frontiers of human limitation are expanding and with it so too are our identities. The age old question of who we are and what is our relationship to the universe remains a source of intrigue. In an unexpected breakthrough reading of Hegel, a timely perspective may have been uncovered on physics, metaphysics and ethics at a level of concretion that may not have been achieved scientifically before or since. This new level of clarity can establish strong moral guidance in a super-coherence which grasps the essence of what it means to be a good human being on any planet or at any point in space. Our being is space and our self is time: together the universal manifold determinations of our notion create an inward spaciousness that remains ever living in the entropy of what appears to be an inflationary universe. 

An Assay on The Hobbesian Trap and Axioms of First Contact

Discussion surrounding first contact with extra-terrestrial intelligence (ETI) is hotly debated in the literature. This paper responds to claims made by Jebari and Olsson-Yaouzis that the ‘dominant thought’ in the philosophy of language indicates that communication with ETI would not be possible, and that the resultant uncertainty forces us into the Hobbesian Trap—the proclivity to adopt pre-emptive military strategies as a function of mutual distrust and fear of imminent attack. The ‘dominant thought’ in the philosophy of language constitutes largely behaviourist thinking and hinges on ‘shared human context.’ However, shared universal contexts, together with the potential existence of post-biological ETI, suggest that communication at a level sufficient to interpret basic dispositions (what I call the level of ‘performative function’) may be possible.

Deploying both philosophical and game theoretical analyses, this paper provides several refutations and a repudiation of Jebari and Olsson-Yaouzis's claims: I correct the assumption that ETI would necessarily adopt a game theoretical rationality, critique the notion that ETI would choose a risk-dominant strategy rather than a payoff-dominant strategy, repudiate the claim that communication with ETI would not be possible, and show how the Hobbesian equivalence principle is violated in a proximal first-contact situation. Finally, in the absence of game theoretic decision-making (and inline with the calls from the Billingham report), this paper commences work on the development of an incomplete set of Axioms of First Contact from which to generate a definitive groundwork for both post-detection protocol and rules of engagement. An open invitation to other contributors to criticise, augment, and advance this bottom-up approach to first contact is extended.

Against the Supposed Obligation to Maximize the Longevity of the Human Species

The standard moral argument for establishing self-sustaining human colonies on other planets is an argument from principle: 1. We have a moral obligation to pursue courses of action that are likely to maximize the longevity of the human species. 2. Interplanetary colonization is likely to maximize the longevity of the human species. Therefore, we have a moral obligation to pursue interplanetary colonization. Debate typically focuses on the second premise. The first premise is rarely argued for, presumably because most people already accept it as true. In this paper I argue that premise 1 is probably false. First, I criticize a recent presentation of a popular argument that denying premise 1 is impossible because it would be logically incoherent to give ethical reasons for allowing the extinction of the only known species with a concept of ethics. For this argument to work, it would have to be the case that it is logically incoherent for us to sacrifice ourselves for the sake of things we value, and that is absurd. Second, I offer a fanciful example that shows that it is possible to be in a situation in which one ought to act so as to secure the extinction of the human species. This is a last-humans-style example, in which it is clear that the only remaining humans should sacrifice themselves for the sake of the non-human things they value. Finally, I argue that our position in the real world is relevantly similar to the position of the last humans in my fanciful example. That is, I use my fanciful example to ground an argument from analogy for the conclusion that we probably should prefer our own extinction sooner rather than later. Premise 1 of the standard argument for space colonies is therefore probably false. 

The Impact of Off-Earth Relocation and Settlement on Geo-Oriented Religious Traditions: A Case Study

This paper examines the impact of off-Earth relocation on religion. While thoughts of living in outer space are not new, the possibility of doing so became greater with the advent of human space flight and the subsequent discovery of exo-planets. Much of the critical thinking about religion and outer space since then has focused on exotheology, the effect on religious beliefs of the discovery of life beyond Earth. This emphasis affirms Western Protestant biases by privileging beliefs over practices while also advancing the modern myth of space exploration and human relocation as amoral inevitabilities. Both of these premises overlook the impact that leaving the Earth might have on religious traditions whose practices are reliant upon some aspect of Earthly existence (“geo-orientation”), irrespective of their beliefs. As a result, little work has been done on the practical effect physically relocating religion into deep space might have. Using Judaism as a case study, this paper explores the possible impact that extra-planetary relocation might have on a religious tradition in which some of its practices—by Divine mandate or human tradition—are tied to specific locations, elements, or aspects unique to Earth. It offers a corrective to the Western Protestant bias of belief over action while problematizing the scientific portrayal of space exploration as morally neutral. It argues that, for some, relocation might not only be less preferred; it might also have a dramatic and lasting impact on how that religion is practiced and understood. 

Sci-fi and the Morality of Space Exploration: Reflections on the Trolley Problem

The science fiction genre can be a useful tool to explore multiple scenarios for the future. An examination of the depiction of space exploration expressed in television and film from a philosophical lens can inform us on the nature of humanity, its ever-expanding place in the cosmos, and the varying and widespread implications of such expansion.  One example of this is the Kobayashi Maru test in Star Trek, which creates a no win-scenario that is like the ethical and psychological thought experiment known as the Trolley Problem. In both cases, a person is placed in a utilitarian ethical dilemma of deciding whether to sacrifice the few to save the many. However, human fallibility can take this situation which appears as clear as light and dark into the morally gray since utilitarianism is unbounded, and any crime can be justified.

This talk will examine the ethics and philosophy of space exploration as depicted in television and films such as Star Trek and Star Wars from the perspective of humanism, utilitarianism, and eco-nihilism and discuss how considerations regarding space exploration place us in our own version of the Trolley Problem.

Do the needs of humanity outweigh the potentially harmful effects of space exploration on other planets and humans? What will prevent our current moral, political, socioeconomic, and environmental problems from following us into the final frontier? Is humanity intrinsically valuable and therefore is space exploration obligatory and within the moral high ground? Will space exploration create a new age of colonialism and oppression? Should humanity accept its fate and choose not to explore? Is utopia possible? Can the sins of the past inform humanity’s decisions about the future?

These questions and more shall be discussed in the presentation.

Implications of Extraterrestrial Life for Christian Theology

One of the concerns about extraterrestrial life is the implications it would have for both the truth of Christianity and our understanding of Christian theology. There are people who have lost their faith due to their belief in aliens, or who reject Christianity because of their beliefs about other life. But is such a worry warranted? Would the existence of other worldly life necessarily pose problems for Christianity? There are many assumptions and questions regarding this topic. This paper will explore such questions while considering various scientific, philosophical, biblical, and theological parameters. For example, while there may be serious scientific questions about the factuality of such life, this paper will assume certain beings do exist and will address questions and issues for what that would mean for Christianity. Regarding the scientific and philosophical framework, only certain kinds of beings can exist. Further, while life may exist, the concern in this presentation is about rational life. How would such rational beings that can exist relate to sin and salvation? Would Jesus have had to die for them as well? Many claim that since the Bible does not mention aliens, they do not exist. Is such a claim warranted? The purpose of the paper is simply to explore the questions that arise in the discussion of extraterrestrial life and Christianity to see what is and is not necessitated. For example, can Christianity (and our understanding of theology) be true if such beings do in fact exist? Given the recent discussions in ufology, many apologetic questions relating to Christianity are being asked. It is my hope this paper will further the discussion on this topic.