Malcolm Gladwell has a knack for digging deeper into human reality. He enjoys applying criticism to common lines of thought. Gladwell has a book review in the New Yorker that examines the life and thinking of German-born economist Albert Hirschman. I found two points particularly helpful for taking a critical look at commonly held ideas in regard to extraterrestrial contact.
The first Hirschman
point is that hard undertakings are often better for humans in the long run
than easy undertakings. And the corollary: if we knew something would be tough
we might not take on the challenge. Thus, humans often benefit from a certain
amount of ignorance. The example
Gladwell refers to in his article is the digging of a railroad tunnel through
the Hoosac Mountain range in Western Massachusetts in the mid-nineteenth
century. It was expected to be an accomplishable engineering project, even if
it was subject to much debate at the time. In the end, it cost 10 times what
was projected and the construction work took 193 lives. The tunnel opened up
the mills of Northwestern Massachusetts to trade in the growing West. What
would have happened to the Massachusetts economy if the tunnel had never been
dug? If developers had known the true cost and trouble would they have
attempted such a scheme? Would the critics have won out? The tunnel is still in
use today.
I think that Hirschman’s
proposition applies to extraterrestrial contact. For the most part, humans
paint a rather rosy picture of what first contact will bring for the human
race. Of course, there are those who can only consider disaster due to war with
aliens. Everything we imagine seems to fall along those two poles: wonderful
contact or deadly contact. How about another possibility: arduous contact? Is
it possible that contact with aliens would provide many challenges for human
society, challenges that we did not anticipate and challenges that would take
many years of hard work for us to deal with? If we knew how tough it would be,
would we choose to pursue a relationship with extraterrestrials?
The second Hirschman
point that applies to first contact is the idea that the challenges in life
often benefit us in ways that easy actions do not. It’s not just a matter of
what the struggle will provide in the end, but also what the process of the
struggle will provide of benefit. I’ll give me own shameful example here. I
have a 1952 Ferguson tractor that does not run. I have attempted to fix the
tractor over and over again, and yet I do not have the skills to keep it
running. I could go out and buy a new tractor and be rid of the problem
altogether. This would certainly solve my tractor problem easily. However, if I
persevered and forced myself to learn how to repair the tractor imagine the
knowledge I would gain? I might be able to rebuild my chainsaw if it was to
break. Or perhaps I could better repair my lawn mower? There would be many
benefits that would come from doing the hard thing- learning how to fix that
damn tractor.
Another, much more
extreme example is war. Advances in radar, sonar, jet engines, nuclear
technology and the development of early computers are a direct result of
research done during World War Two. Satellites and space exploration came out
of the Cold War. Anxiety and fear act as catalysts to innovation during war.
The problem is that by removing obstacles you remove the fuel of anxiety and
worry. I’m certainly not proposing that we torture ourselves to stimulate
innovation. However, we do need to consider the implications of cheap knowledge
and what is lost if we don’t forge ahead in our own, laborious way.
One could
also argue that the Cold War caused economic stagnation and great waste in the
1950’s and 1960’s, because of the vast amount of money put into nuclear
weaponry and defense research and development. How could have humanity
benefited if such money was used for medical research? Still, it goes back to
anxiety and worry. Money really wasn’t the fuel for Cold War research. The fuel
was fear. Would AIDS drugs have been developed so rapidly if it wasn’t for fear
in the gay community and the immense education and lobbying effort by gay
political organizations that came as a result? When considering human
development we can’t forget the important role of group psychology.
There is the
possibility that anxiety and worry will fuel a technology quest in the wake of
First Contact. If we’re concerned about our safety we may put effort into
bolstering space monitoring and defenses. A certain amount of effort would be a
practical response. However, if we let fear and anxiety rule the day we may end
up squandering both resources and opportunities. Like everything else in human
society there will be a necessary balancing act. Perhaps anxiety should prod us
and yet not rule us?
But let’s get back to the primary issue. Humans
often mention all of the wonderful technical knowledge that we could get from a
relationship with extraterrestrials. They could give us a new perspective on
the laws of science and show us how to build everything from space-faring craft
to planet-sized climate adjusters. We could be given the technology to generate
cheap, non-polluting power. Imagine all of the human problems we could solve? What would come of us after many years of
this knowledge transfer? Hirschman would probably be worried about the infantilization
of the human race. He watched such problems develop all over the globe, as he
did work for the World Bank and other organizations assisting developing
nations. When given technology and infrastructure outright, these nations
didn’t develop in the same way as Western nations. The supposed colonial
beneficence proved to be worthless in places like the Congo. That Belgian
infrastructure lies in ruin today (relatively minor next to the real tragedy-
the Belgian Congo genocide). Taking a society away from an organic path of growth
is both dangerous and stupid. Perhaps we need to learn from our mistakes, lest
we become victims of the same problem.
Struggle, no matter
how horrible the consequences for the participants, is often best for long term
growth. Hirschman points to the wars European settlers had with Native
Americans in settling North America. These dangers kept settlements in close
contact with established Eastern cities. Thus, the United States developed the
infrastructure and the close cultural ties to progress faster (and clearly this
example does not address the disastrous impact to the Native Americans). In
Brazil, where pioneers did not face such challenges in the hinterlands, Hirschman
points out that the settlers became isolated and thus regressed economically and
culturally. I’m not proposing that European conquest of the Americas was a good
thing; it certainly wasn’t for Native Americans. However, the struggle forced
the European settlers to devise new strategies, which ultimately helped their
society thrive.
Can we afford to
gain knowledge without working for it? What would happen to the fundamental
process of science? Today, knowledge is earned with the sweat, toil and tears
of many researchers. Think of all the ancillary knowledge that comes when
trying to tackle one big problem. Research in cancer gene therapy has led to
new cancer cell targets for other therapies. Roy Plunkett of Kinetic Chemicals accidentally invented Teflon while attempting to make a new CFC refrigerant.
Can humans afford to
skip the hard work and go straight to the front of the line? How will we
understand technology without the foundation that comes from developing that
technology? This is not to say
there may not be ways to benefit from alien knowledge. But it seems a good idea
to put a great deal of thought into the implications of alien information,
before we become the recipients of such “gifts” of knowledge.
Perhaps,
well-meaning extraterrestrials may already think this way. Imagine how angry
some humans would be if extraterrestrials refused to give us information about
their scientific discoveries? Albert Hirschman would probably understand and
applaud such a decision. He would know that we are better off in the long-run,
if we follow our usual process in development: hard work, many mistakes, and
plenty of detours, before coming up with that big breakthrough. After all, such
a process may not just be a human behavior- it may be a fundamental process for
the development of intelligent life.
Join the conversation on the Alien First Contact Facebookpage.
2 comments:
Excellent points. One of the most important ancillary lessons that comes through the arduous process is how to self-limit. Simply because we have the means to do a certain act does not mean that such acts should be undertaken. Might does not mean right.
Humanity is much, much too far from being ethically capable of handling advanced technologies and knowledge. It would be even worse than anything we can refer to in human history. Imagine modern day America handing over its technical knowhow to Nazi Germany in WWII..... Times ten million.....
The humans of 2013 typically think of themselves as so advanced in terms of ethics and values, yet a majority of the planet kills animals for fun/pleasure (I.e., taste.... As food).
Anon: it seems to be a matter of the rate of development of our society versus the rate of development of our technology. But the big question would be whether aliens would care? Would they have a set of morals that we could understand? Even without morals practicality may dictate how they interact with us. If they give us advanced technology would we use it to destroy each other, as you suggest? If the aliens wanted to see humans progress as a civilization then they would probably think twice before giving us any help. Thanks for commenting. Good post.
Post a Comment