The article discusses the survival argument for establishing off-world colonies, suggesting that they are essential for humanity's continuity in the face of potential extinction scenarios, such as asteroid strikes or nuclear warfare. While the cost of establishing these colonies is high, the potential benefits of preserving humanity during catastrophic events may justify the expenditure. Counterarguments highlight that resources could alternatively be used to address earthbound threats, such as climate change, raising moral questions rooted in utilitarian ethics regarding the most effective allocation of resources for survival.
In the face of existential threats, establishing off-world colonies serves as a rational strategy for ensuring the survival and continuity of humanity and civilization.
Utilitarian ethics weighs the long-term benefits of off-world colonies against the immediate positives of addressing terrestrial threats, creating a complex moral landscape.
Collection
[
|
...
]