Essay Prompt: "Most of the participants in the debate over extraterrestrials (and almost all we have read) are scientists, many of them quite prominent. This might suggest (and indeed is implied strongly in our readings) that the question of extraterrestrials is fundamentally scientific, and can be answered definitively by the methods of science. Why is this suggestion probably not true?"
Possible Theses:
Extrerrestrials exist. .
Extraterrestrials do not exist.
Maybe they exist (agnostic).
(Good, Bad) Arguments can be made for both the existence and non-existence of ets. There is a lack of evidence for both sides of the argument. Is teleology relevant for answering this question? How do arguments for origin of life relate to the answer to this question?
Are we in a better position to answer this question than people of the past?
What would constitute incontrovertible evidence for either side of the argument?
Why is the principle of plentitude so attractive an argument?
It seems like these are the theses we are going to stick with. Anything else?
Introduction
The question of plurality has been a popular topic for centuries, and the debate has taken many forms, including fictional works, philosophical debates, "hoaxes," and scientific experiments. Since Ancient Greece, philosophers, astronomers, mathematicians, physicists and many more have speculated about humanity's uniqueness in the universe. Despite the centuries of attention given to the subject, no definitive answer has been reached, and there is no definintive evidence to prove that extraterrestrial life does or does not exist. Actually encountering extraterrestrial life is the only way to settle the debate, but as far as we know, aliens have never visited Earth, and we do not have the capabilities to exlore the universe looking for extraterrestrial life. Instead, scientists and philosophers make arguments for or against plurality based on knowledge of Earth. Especially in the past century, scientific discoveries and new technology have disproved some theories, expanded upon others, and created completely new dimentions to consider in the debate. However, despite the vast advances in science and technology humans have made in the past hundred years, we are not significantly closer to either proving or disproving the existence of extraterrestrial life in the Universe than the ancient astronomers.
Despite a lack of evidence supporting the existence of extraterrestrial life, we continue to establish and fund large, expensive programs (e.g. the Viking Landers and S.E.T.I.). Perhaps it is the simple human emotional need to not feel alone which causes us to continue and expand our search. The Viking landers provided seemingly negative evidence for life on Mars, but nothing was conclusive, so scientists are still searching. They were able to come up with alternative reasons as to why life could still exist on Mars, despite evidence to the contrary. This can be contributed to our lack of conclusive knowledge on the origin of life. This has resulted in what appears to be an ongoing search that will continue until evidence of life is found, or until we can figure out the exact origin of all life.
There have been many arguments proposed both for and against plurality over the years and no definitive answer has been found. This is due to that lack of evidence on both sides of the argument. There have been many different types of arguments used to justify the various viewpoints on plurality over the years, including suport from analogy, the principle of plenitude, scientific theories, religion, natural theology, and the Coperincan principle. Many of these arguments have been used both as support for plurality and as evidence against plurality. The variablity of the arguments shows that none of them in and of themselves are very strong evidence for or against plurality, but some are stronger when combined with others.
(Next Page) Part 1: Plurality From Ancient Times to the 18th Century
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.