Extraterrestrial Contact: The Great Debate

Humans tend to have a monolithic and yet shallow view of First Contact.  This is especially true of Direct First Contact, a scenario in which aliens make contact in close proximity to Earth, or on Earth, thus enabling humans and extraterrestrials to have an actual conversation and begin a relationship. Such an event would be extraordinary and most of us agree that it would have a profound impact on the human civilization. But after the awe and wonder we will have to move forward. So, I ask- what happens next?

The optimists would say we would go skipping down the path to a grand new future. The cynics say we would be destroyed, either by aliens with evil intentions, or by ourselves, as our society in thrown into chaos. As with all extremes, both of those poles seem rather unlikely. What does seem likely is the messy middle- a little of this and a little of that, much that we never expected, and plenty of serious challenges. Those challenges are likely to be based on the great debate. The topic for discussion: What do we, as a human society, do next? Do we open relations with extraterrestrials or keep them at a distance? How much access do we give them in communication? Do we control who they communicate with? Who does all of this deciding, anyway? Does the United Nations take the lead? Do scientists lead the effort? How much is this situation about diplomacy and how much is it about science? What do we ask the extraterrestrials to tell us about themselves? Do we want scientific information? Do we want information about their technology? Who decides what we want to know about? Do they even care what we want? How do we deal with that?

I could go on for a good bit. You get the picture. There would be a million questions and many of them quite pressing in a Direct First Contact situation. Decisions would have to be made. In the end, one hopes anyway, those decisions probably wouldn’t be made by a small group of people. If news of Direct First Contact does indeed reach the entire human population, humans from all corners of the globe will rightfully demand some sort of input into what decisions are made. We would most likely rely on our national governments to relay those concerns and expect governmental leaders to act on our behalf. Those concerns may be wide ranging and divergent. People in one nation, and from a certain culture, could feel very differently about First Contact from people in another nation, and from a different culture. We may have 20 different opinions about any one particular question. And most likely nations and cultures would be divided in opinion within themselves.  

If national governments are the only representation for the people of planet Earth, there would need to be a forum for governments to debate the options and decide a path forward. The most logical forum would be the United Nations, as it is made up of most nations on Earth. Other International groups are less representative or designed for specific tasks- such as the World Bank or the International Monetary Fund. Scientific groups, such as the International Astronomical Union, while representing scientists worldwide, do not have experience in diplomacy or wide-ranging international policy. They would be hugely helpful for input and expertise, but no scientific body is designed to debate policy and make governmental decisions. That only leaves one real choice.

There is a regular debate in the United Nations on many different issues. The framework and infrastructure for debating issues of extraterrestrial contact are in place and ready to go, even if that particular subject has never been seriously considered. Sure, there would be plenty of additional work to set up additional committees and sub-committees, but even some of these already exist. One would imagine that the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space might be a good place to start (even if they have failed to plan for this eventuality).

The discussion needs to involve all nations and come from many different perspectives.  It should not be controlled or dominated by powerful governments or institutions. There is no doubt that nations such as the United States, Russia and China will have a huge role in the post-First Contact decision making. However, they would need to respect other nations, listen to the diversity of opinions, and then allow the General Assembly to make decisions.

It will be hard, because there will be a lot of different voices. The fringes would need to be heard, despite how unsettling their points of view may be to the majority.  Diversity would be critically important and we would actually have to listen to each other. We might even change our opinions as a result and come up with new ideas. This would be the fruit of the process. In this particular debate there would be no precedent to examine. Perhaps some finer points could be gleaned from examining our past, but for the most part we will need to look towards the future with imagination and using critical thinking. We will be making decisions that could affect many generations to come.

There will be a big internal struggle. Post First Contact decision making cannot be controlled by politicians, corporations and those seeking to keep power or acquire new power. If that sounds like a tall-order, it would be. After all, who appoints representatives to the United Nations?  Governments.  And that, of course, means politicians and bureaucrats. Politicians and bureaucrats are heavily influenced by corporations and lobbyists- it’s how most governmental systems work. It will be impossible to stop all influence, and of course, corporations and interest groups deserve to be heard as well.

If it all sounds like a nightmare, it certainly could be. Post First Contact decision making will need to be led by tough and rational facilitators who have a greater calling: the betterment of humanity. Once again, I point to the formation of the United Nations. This is their charge. This is why the body exists. Would First Contact challenge an already at times beleaguered and often maligned organization? Most likely. This would be the time for the United Nations to step up and make a difference. If the body has been searching for a purpose, as critics have implied, contact with extraterrestrials would appear to be a pretty good reason for existing. Will the United Nations need to change, become more responsive and better administered? Of course. But all of that would have to start somewhere.

Time for you to chime in with your criticism of the UN. Join the conversation on the Alien First Contact Facebook page.

Extraterrestrial Contact: The Problem with What We Want

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.

Extraterrestrial Contact: The Transparency Divide

I often speak of the importance of transparency in any contact with an extraterrestrial civilization. That concept of transparency refers to how human institutions should share all possible information about extraterrestrials with the public. I’m not speaking of any current situation. I don’t believe humans have had contact with extraterrestrials, yet. But there is a flipside to this argument: what expectations do we have for extraterrestrials in regard to transparency? The simple answer is- high expectations.

Transparency is just the latest buzz word for an integral part of human life. Most elements of human society consider honesty and openness to be important and admirable behaviors. They are also behaviors that we often fail to live up to.  That’s quite the dichotomy and one that visiting aliens might have trouble understanding. Honesty and openness are behaviors that we strive for and yet the gray areas are much more common. It would be tough to explain to extraterrestrials the concept of the white lie. Complete honesty and openness could cause chaos in our daily lives, and yet we hold such behavior in high esteem.

So, if the concept of transparency, tied to the human behaviors of honesty and openness, is so complicated for humans, what hope do we have of communicating this concept to aliens? It’s an important consideration. Any direct extraterrestrial contact will likely have an element of fear for humans. The only way to quell that fear is through communication. Extraterrestrials would need to let us know their motives for making contact and make clear their goals for having a relationship with the human race. Honesty is a pretty big part of that communication. How do we trust aliens we know nothing about? One would imagine that their concept of honesty and openness could be quite different from ours- especially when you consider how complicated it is here on Earth.

The situation has been made worse by our colorful imaginations. Books and movies have portrayed so many fearful and disturbing images of alien contact that it would be tough for visiting extraterrestrials to overcome the weight of popular culture. The claims of those humans reporting alien abductions would suddenly need to be reevaluated. Skepticism and caution on our part would require us to take the fears and concerns seriously. We would need honest and upfront communication from aliens. Have they been here before? What previous contact have they had with humans, if any?

Direct First Contact makes one thing easier. If it occurs in the human realm, which I would define as our solar system, it becomes our playing field. Visiting extraterrestrials would need to operate on our terms and work to make us comfortable. If aliens are able to visit our solar system they would be far more technologically advanced. That would put humans and extraterrestrials on unequal footing. The only way to even out the equation is to play by our rules. Our house, our rules.

One would expect visiting extraterrestrials to consider human public relations issues in order to put the best foot forward. Whether or not we believe them is another matter entirely. I suppose that would depend on the quality of their PR plan and the circumstances behind First Contact. A poorly executed First Contact plan could lead to immediate distrust and fear. That wouldn’t help anyone.

The next question is whether we humans would be able to uphold honesty and openness in First Contact? If governments, and other institutions, attempt to keep First Contact under wraps, it will send a message to extraterrestrials: we don’t really value honesty and openness. We just like to talk about it. Provide us lip service and that will be fine.

Lip service- from aliens or from our government could prove to be disastrous. First Contact would create a huge upheaval in human perspective and have a ripple effect throughout human society. Fear and distrust in humans could hurt the relationship with extraterrestrials and, in turn, hurt human civilization. If we are to truly benefit from extraterrestrial contact, human perceptions of honesty and openness will have to be the goal of humans and aliens alike. Extraterrestrials may not fully understand it and humans may have trouble living up to it, but in the end transparency will be the most important part of the new relationship.

Join the conversation on the Alien First Contact Facebookpage.

Extraterrestrial Contact: The Sexual Divide

Take a few steps back for a moment and have a look at the human civilization. We’re a fornication-happy bunch. So much of our culture is driven by sex: music, literature, dance and art. Our interactions often have a sexual component, whether intentionally or in a more subconscious form. The basic foundation of our society- the family unit, is, needless to say, organized by sex. Sex goes way beyond the biological function in the human civilization. The question is: how would reproductive needs drive the growth and development of an extraterrestrial civilization?

This may seem like a small consideration in the wake of First Contact. However, considering how important sex is in the development of our civilization, it’s possible that in the long term our relationship with an extraterrestrial civilization might come down to how well we can understand, and relate to, their reproductive needs and how it manifests in their civilization.

It seems likely that extraterrestrial reproduction would be very different than human sexual functions. It could be a difference that would be hard for us to grasp. This might actually be the best case scenario. There is also the possibility that it could be similar to human functions, but different enough for us to perceive it as gross. Once again, that may sound like a minor thing, but think of all the ways human sexuality comes out in our civilization. And then consider the implication if our reproductive behaviors are disgusting to extraterrestrials and their reproduction is disgusting to us. It seems like that could have a big impact on a new relationship.

There is the possibility that sexual reproduction would no longer be a biological function for extraterrestrials. If they are advanced enough in technology, they might have moved beyond biological needs and reproduce in an entirely technological way. Or perhaps they could live in a virtual state without reproduction at all? This too would impact the relationship between humans and extraterrestrials. We could view extraterrestrials that live in a technological realm, and no longer have biological functions, as even more threatening.

So, what to do? I suppose the only hope would be education. We would have to learn about them and they would need to learn about us. We’ll probably have some similarities and most likely many differences. There will be those in our society who will be “grossed-out” by extraterrestrials and let that gut reaction impact their perception. There will be those of us who push back at those gut reactions and work to appreciate the beauty of another life form. Perhaps alien Kinsey reports could help us along the way.

What do you think of the prospect of alien sex? Join the conversation on the Alien First Contact Facebook page.