LordIlthari t1_j0fsp8n wrote
Reply to comment by starsandcamoflague in We should dismantle Mars, not colonize it. by [deleted]
Firstly, we can walk and chew bubblegum at the same time. Dominance over space is not contradictory to fixing earth, in fact it will probably help us. We do not abandon earth, we build a million little earths.
Secondly, who’s is it? There is no life there. There are no martians. It belongs to dust and wind. If you say it belongs to God, He made us in his image and gave us the universe. If aliens, which ones? There are none. We are the only sentient life in the universe. And thus the universe is ours by default.
starsandcamoflague t1_j0ft6of wrote
It is not dominance we need, but cooperation and community. We don’t need more than one planet. What we need is to work together to protect the earth from literally dying due to mankind’s need to be superior.
The dominance and superiority kind of thinking leads to thinks like eugenics and other “the Nazis were right actually” kind of shit.
Mars belongs to mars, no one or nothing else. It is not our right to destroy it just because we can.
The way you think is exactly how we got to the point we’re at. It is exactly the kind of thinking that made people rationalise slavery: “well we’re white so we’re superior beings, and these non white people are clearly animals, and therefore they are below us and mistreating them doesn’t matter.”
You can make your ideas as well written as you want, but ultimately all they come back to is an insecure need for superiority and to be the smartest person in the room, without caring who gets hurt along the way.
LordIlthari t1_j0ftkt7 wrote
And there’s Godwin’s law. Yes. I think humanity is superior to a pile of rocks, because the rocks don’t have minds. They don’t think, they don’t create, they are inert matter, and I do not recognize the property rights of a pile of granite. There is no conciseness to Mars, nor even a local biosphere we would disrupt. There is nothing there.
Of course I want humanity to cooperate. Humanity’s habit of killing one another is dramatically inefficient and if we don’t solve it we’ll probably drive ourselves extinct and leave the universe an empty husk filled with nothing but dead rocks when it could have been filled with life.
And we do need more than one planet, because we will need more than one star, unless you fancy humanity being trapped here when the sun goes out.
starsandcamoflague t1_j0ftzdk wrote
Just because something doesn’t have “life” doesn’t mean it’s not important.
Mars is there for a reason, it will have an important role in the stability of our solar system.
Plus, we don’t really know what’s on mars, and there has been tons of UFO files released.
Just because you personally do not know something, doesn’t mean there is nothing there. Things outside of your knowledge do exist, so just because you don’t value something doesn’t mean it has no value.
You may not value a pile of rocks, but I guarantee you that pile of rocks has value.
Your superiority is not the point of the universe.
LordIlthari t1_j0fuk4l wrote
Of course my superiority isn’t the point. There isn’t any point except the one we give it. You seem convinced that I am concerned with this for my own ego. I will dead, long before this project could be even ten percent completed. It’s not even my idea originally. I support this idea not because I want glory, but because I value human life and thus far this seems to be the best idea I’ve seen for getting as much human life as possible. I want there to be a future where every star has quadrillions of people living free, happy lives, because that in and of itself will be good.
starsandcamoflague t1_j0fv5ip wrote
I didn’t say you want glory, I said the thinking behind this idea is based on a need to be superior and dominant. You said it multiple times, that you think humans and dominant and superior and therefore the universe belongs to humans.
That isn’t true. Thinking that way is misguided and has resulted in many bad things happening. It is how horrific things are justified “in the name of science and progress”
If someone is dominant and superior, then someone else needs to be submissive and inferior. Therefore they can be treated badly and it doesn’t matter.
In your idea, mars is inferior. Anything that you don’t think is sentient enough is inferior. All these things without considering why it is there, what important role it is playing in keeping an ecosystem healthy.
LordIlthari t1_j0fvhih wrote
If the universe doesn’t belong to humans, then what does it belong to? And don’t say “the universe” the universe isn’t a person unless you think rocks have souls. There’s nothing else out there but balls of dirt being blasted by radiation. We are alone. If we get a call from a bunch of aliens then I’ll gladly change my mind, but until then, all evidence suggests the universe is dead, empty, barren, and we are the only things that can change that.
starsandcamoflague t1_j0fwvf5 wrote
That is a very sad way to think and live.
The universe isn’t empty and dead and barren.
It sounds like you’re dealing with fear at the vastness of space and our place in it, and you’re dealing with that by choosing to believe that humans, and therefore you, are in control and dominant and superior. That way actually, we’re not insignificant in this universe that you don’t understand, we’re actually the owners of it!
Which by the way, no one owns the universe. Not everything needs an owner.
SuperRette t1_j0g3eor wrote
So far, I like you. A voice of rationality in this thread.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments