(no subject)

[hermionesviolin]

Lileks slams Patrick Stewart for saying he thinks humans have no business traveling in space. Now, i agree that it’s a bit off-putting for someone who "did a good job of portraying a civilized, intelligent explorer who projected the values of Western Civ into the inky void while confronting the baffling nuances of worlds we have yet to imagine" (as Lileks says of Stewart) to say he opposes space travel (though this has slightly more to do with my insistence on only involving myself than with things i support [so i think it’s somewhat hypocritical to do a show all about space travel if you think space travel isn’t all that great a thing] than with a mentality closer to “don’t bite the hand that feeds you”) but as i’m not all that interested in space travel and tend to think the money spent thereon could be far better spent.

Lileks continues:

"I would like to see us get this place right first before we have the arrogance to put significantly flawed civilizations out onto other planets," Stewart said.

Oh: right. Actor talking. “Get this place right.” What would that look like, exactly? And how would we know? If in 2079 there’s one monomanical Marxist sub-saharan leader starving his people for political gain, does this obligate other nations to shut down their rocketry programs until the guy dies and crop production returns to pre-tyrant levels? “Arrogance to put significantly flawed civilizations out onto other planets.” So it’s arrogant to put Americans on Mars, because our myriad “significant” flaws would somehow contaminate the gentle Martian polity that reigns today.
The 63-year-old British actor says manned missions are too expensive. "It would take up so many resources, which I personally feel should be directed at our own planet," he said.

Making movies takes up many resources which could be directed at our own planet. For that matter, millions of pounds are spent in England annually for theater productions – I propose a ten-year moratorium on all stage shows, with the money distributed directly to our own planet. And after we have gotten things right on this planet we can get back to such frivolous luxuries as theater. What’s that, you say – theater employs many people? Theater inspires imaginations, adds to our store of knowledge, helps us define what it means to be human?

And exploring other words doesn’t, eh. Noted: the future of humanity shall consist not in getting this place right but watching angry Pinter screeds about that wretched meat we know as our own flawed species. And when we leave the theater we can look up and behold an infinite world we must never pollute.

Okay, i have definitely argued that it’s not fair to insist that you can’t spend any non-essential time or money on anything other than improving the world just because there is still work to be done, but i’m also a fan of prioritizing, and while i’m sure some space programs have real value, i tend to think the money could be better spent on so many other things.

I actually struggle a lot with the purpose and worth of art/literature and the study thereof, with the whole idea of devoting your life/time/money to art when there is so much work to be done in terms of basic survival, with how much government should be involved in funding the arts (this also goes back to my issues with "No one will pay for this, but it should exist, so the government should pay for it").

My thinking tends towards "greater good" a lot, so i'm inclined to compromise that private entities can spend their money however they want but governments have an obligation to do the best stuff with their money. This of course is used as arguments for such things as space programs and art as well as against.

Blah, i used to be articulate, at times even eloquent.

Comments

[rhipowered.livejournal.com]

I think Stewart is quite right...we do need to spend some time cleaning up our own planet first. Maybe we should dedicate money from the military.

And theatre is not a 'frivolous luxury.' Theatre is expression that costs far less than a space mission, and as a cynic, I think Lileks isn't taking into consideration the fact that the American government, which would be the primary proponent of a Mars mission, does precisely dick for the arts at the moment as is.

[sigh] I'm not thinking coherently enough to talk about this.

[sigrun.livejournal.com]

This is only my opinion & I am a space nerd so I'm probably biased but ... I think it's important to properly fund the space program. A lot of the technological advances they've made have trickled down to us, such as : MRIs, microwaves, cell phones, bulletproof vests, & fiber optics. That's just naming a few.

NASA's budget is less than 1% of the total federal budget. I personally think it's money well-spent. Especially since one day we might have to look to the skies for survival. With global warming currently as bad as it is, this planet may not be able to sustain life forever. We'd be out of luck by then if we hadn't continuously made advances in space travel.

Okay, science fiction may have seriously clouded my brain but ... my main point is - their budget isn't going to break any bank. I could think of a number of frivolous programs that cost a lot more than that.

Blah, i used to be articulate, at times even eloquent.

I think you get your point across a lot better than I do! [Which means it sucks to be inarticulate me.]

[hermionesviolin.livejournal.com]

:P You made a lot of good points.

I hadn't thought about trickle-down technological advances.

I don't have a breakdown of the federal budget, so i don't know exactly what 1% is compared to the percentage other things get.

Part of my problem with the whole space "exploration" thing is that i don't think we're going to find any place that can sustain human life, so i would much rather focus on making it so that this planet doesn't become uninhabitable.

[zzrg.livejournal.com]

I really don't get the slam on Patrick Stewart. I think the press is guilty of trying to create a little news here. He said. I would like to see us get this place right first before we have the arrogance to put significantly flawed civilizations out onto other planets. He did not say we should never go. He did not say we someday will not be zipping around the universe in most cases being the good guys. He does however imply that we probably have a ways to go before it is the best idea in the world and that we should consider other priorities. I have had thoughts myself that would be nice if we spread through the universe as sort of a benign pathogen instead of a virulent physical/social/spiritual disease.

(I know it is science, but the mental picture I got of the Spirit rover locking some of its wheels so others could spin and dig trenches in untouched soil of the Martian desert like a teenager in his first 4x4 was a little disturbing.)

"Get this place right.” What would that look like, exactly? Well we have made some good starts in that direction, but I still see some room for improvement. A couple of general areas where I would like to see improvement. Have better control over communicable diseases on Earth before we start spreading them through the universe. I would like to see we can take care of our own environment a little better before we start effecting others. A couple more centuries since the last world war would be nice. A mass exodus from Earth might help the planet, but I cannot think but help that is cheating a little.

Still, I do not want to be too cautious. It is just the nature of man to get it wrong a bunch of times before we get it right. I am sure the same will prove true when we step onto the galactic stage. On the other hand, I want us to do our best when we do get around to trying, hopefully having from all of our mistakes to date.

It all boils down to when we are ready for space exploration and opinions on that should be wide and varied. I am conflicted because while space exploration does provide a lot of benifits for society and the planet in general, it would be a mistake to think that most of our space exploration to date has not been driven by politics and/or aimed to benifit the military industrial complex. Bush's willingness to suddenly pump up the space program only makes me think that Haliburton will get the space exploration contract or Spirit discovered oil when it landed.

LOVE the picture!

[hermionesviolin.livejournal.com]

I really don't get the slam on Patrick Stewart. I think the press is guilty of trying to create a little news here.

Well, Lileks is a pundit, but this isn't from a syndicated column or anything, is from what is basically his equivalent of a LiveJournal. And checking his citation, it's the NY Post ;) (Sheesh, since when does Lileks read the Post?)

He did not say we should never go.
Good point. Though i also think Lileks has a point that saying we have to get this place right first puts going pretty squarely in the "never" time bracket.

Have better control over communicable diseases on Earth before we start spreading them through the universe.

Ooh, good call.