I know I’m a few years behind, but I just checked out a copy of LONELY PLANETS: The Natural Philosophy of Alien Life (2003) by David Grinspoon. He does, of course, have a “doctor” in front of his name, but it appears that he doesn’t use it very often. He also has the endorsement of Neil deGrasse Tyson – the quintessential new face of astronomy and the immediate successor to Carl Sagan.
Tyson said of Grinspoon’s book “…brings together what has never before been synthesized…he is a planetary scientist as well as dreamer, born of the space age.”
As is apparent to anyone who reads my blog, I LOVE aliens! I write about aliens! I do (guardedly) believe that there is intelligent life “out there, somewhere” – HOWEVER, I don’t believe that we have any real proof yet and that it is, at this point, an intellectual and philosophical exercise. Be that as it may, I’m approaching the end of Grinspoon’s book and have skimmed his website (http://funkyscience.net/) several times. While it’s been “frozen” on his newest Pluto/Horizon book, I find myself looking forward to following this guy for some time to come!
I’m well into the book now (page 229) and I got my own copy on Wednesday through a Half-Price Books near me. After (*gasp*) dog-earing my Library copy, I transferred the noted pages to my own book.
Grinspoon flits effortlessly between history, the present, and the future. Occasionally, all three collide as when he begins to talk about the shift from the “wacky” field of exobiology to what that same field has become today: Astrobiology. It’s legitimized and not only is it part of NASA, it has its own Homepage (https://astrobiology.nasa.gov/)
What is it? Grinspoon defines it this way: “Astrobiology…is not for profit…We explore space for reasons that are romantic and idealistic…[it is] a scientific movement that is justified fundamentally on spiritual grounds…also potentially revolutionary in its attempt to reverse the slide toward increasing scientific specialization and isolation. We want to blur the borders and tear down the walls that modern academia has erected. Astrobiology at its best is a step toward the reunification of science and, perhaps, the rebirth of natural philosophy.” (p243)
Wow.
Astrobiology, the concept of discovering life somewhere besides Earth, is the foundational belief of NASA's astrobiology program. With it comes a strong belief: “I think we’re going to have strong indications of life beyond Earth within a decade, and I think we’re going to have definitive evidence within 20 to 30 years,” said NASA chief scientist Ellen Stofan."
While the science of astrobiology has no detractors, what happens once we DO discover life elsewhere and in particular if we discover intelligent life elsewhere does indeed seem to have provoked dissent among the ranks. Some individuals have taken to the blogosphere and conference circuit with extreme confidence that their opinion alone is the correct one. To ME, they seem to flail wildly and appear to be close relatives of Chicken Little. One of their names became instantly recognizable by a large portion of the English-speaking world several years ago, and even before his recent passing, was spoken in the same sentence as Galileo, Newton, Einstein, and...Stephen Hawking; who said a bit before his death, that contact with aliens will be BAD: “One day, we might receive a signal from a planet like this, but we should be wary of answering back. Meeting an advanced civilization could be like Native Americans encountering Columbus. That didn’t turn out so well”.(https://www.sciencealert.com/stephen-hawking-warns-that-we-might-not-want-to-reach-out-to-aliens)
Another, not-so-well-recognized-name, a science fiction writer popular in the 80s and 90s, David Brin has added his voice to Hawking's warning, “Optimistic scholars may be right that we have nothing to fear from that eventual encounter with wise beings from the stars. Still, we cannot be reminded often enough to look back on our own history of contact among humans here on Earth, a litany of dire cautionary tales. We are, all of us, descended -- only a few generations back -- from folk who suffered horribly because they weren't ready for the challenges brought on by new vices, new technologies, new diseases, new ideas, new opportunities, new people. And those ancestors were the lucky survivors! Many peoples and cultures – including every species of hominids other than our own – left no descendants at all...How ironic that this reminder should come from someone who is a dedicated believer in the new!...Ironic, and yet somehow apropos. For I would rather bet on a horse that I know – human improvability and progress -- than on salvation from some hypothetical super-beings high above...We have tried that route, countless times before, and the lesson has always been that we should rely (mostly) on ourselves...In this article I've only touched on just a few of the dangers conceived by various gloomy thinkers and writers over the years. I could go on, but a complete listing isn't necessary. What matters is the lesson, one of circumspection and caution. The worst mistake of first contact, made throughout history by individuals on both sides of every new encounter, has been the unfortunate habit of making assumptions.
"It often proved fatal.” (http://www.setileague.org/iaaseti/brin.pdf, page 22)
While he doesn't talk specifically about first contact, the general sense I gather from his writing is that he isn't quite to negative as the two quoted above...
Once we reach chapter 17, Grinspoon takes a decidedly spiritual turn – not Christian, certainly, he has the most respect for Buddhism: “Although I’ve never found a religion that seems a perfect fit, I love what I know of the teachings of Buddhism. Its most important principle seems to be compassion. If there is a perfect spiritual principle, I would vote for this.” (p384)
He takes time explaining complexity theory, though the book was published in 2003 and in 2018, Wikipedia has this to say: “The term complex adaptive systems, or complexity science, is often used to describe the loosely organized academic field that has grown up around the study of such systems. Complexity science is not a single theory—it encompasses more than one theoretical framework and is highly interdisciplinary, seeking the answers to some fundamental questions about living, adaptable, changeable systems. The study of CAS focuses on complex, emergent and macroscopic properties of the system. John H. Holland said that CAS ‘are systems that have a large numbers of components, often called agents, that interact and adapt or learn.’” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_adaptive_system)
It’s hard to summarize briefly what Grinspoon lays out in this chapter, but let me take a stab at it. Grinspoon wonders, (I think this is gist of it) if Earth itself is alive in a unique way.
The idea stems from the observation that not only does the planet – it’s temperature, composition, distance from the Sun, mass, and every other factor that we used to call the abiotic factors of an ecosystem – affect the biotic, but that the biotic factors are intimately entangled with the abiotic factors. It certainly seems logical, but in 2013, Toby Tyrrell, professor of Earth System Science (https://www.southampton.ac.uk/oes/about/staff/lrtt.page) seemed to drive a stake through the heart of the hypothesis: “I believe Gaia is a dead end. Its study has, however, generated many new and thought provoking questions. While rejecting Gaia, we can at the same time appreciate Lovelock's originality and breadth of vision, and recognize that his audacious concept has helped to stimulate many new ideas about the Earth, and to champion a holistic approach to studying it”. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesis)
I'd never run across this more science-based Gaia theory. Grinspoon's presentation and enthusiasm for it won me over and the idea that biotic and abiotic factors are more intertwined than we thought is compelling. Even so, I'm not going to begin to worship Mother Earth. My basic belief is that while they have trouble stomaching any sort of supreme being or supernatural guidance, many scientists seem to hold with the idea that there's "something beyond us".
While I call that "something" a Someone, they struggle to give it a different name and add concrete proofs to construct a something to believe in. I am a realist -- I suppose, except in my belief in God and in the Redemption of Humans through his sacrificial death on the Cross. Was his sacrifice on the Cross for ONLY Humans, or was it for ALL beings who broke covenant with Him and chose disobedience over obedience? No idea.
I suppose in that, as well as in the argument over the efficacy of shouting out our presence to a universe that holds malevolent Intelligences who will soon come to stomp us out...I can only join with the rest of Humanity and wait and see.
Whew…lots to think about. Lots to consider.
Lots to figure out how to incorporate into my writing! I’ll take up the end of the book next week!
Image: https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgUGOthVSNSUaxivRh0p8U5Ub4NEr0KxiZyPOIBI91G4gAPdcWmSQ-krJynDH2RQu93hHeS6EFbgOFZiDNaZ3M35LGLVbwklBZDB_dEB6symLvWTaYSgbFymOAqbFO4rVwd4qGcEBnzlDk/s1600/Unknown-4.jpeg
No comments:
Post a Comment