Humanity should colonize space in order to survive but not with embryo space colonization

Abstract

The embryo space colonization (ESC) concept is an interesting, very rational and quite effective way to guarantee the survival of the human species, as long as the technology is achieved and no unforeseen complications arise during even many millions of years journey to an exoplanet. Despite these formal advantages of the concept, this paper points to a number of arguments against its validity. These arguments revolve around two issues. One is to point out that while the concept of saving the Homo sapiens species is noble and should be supported, the way of saving humanity envisioned by the ESC departs from what should be understood by the concept of saving humanity through space colonization. The second issue is to draw attention to the ethical controversies that make this concept perhaps unsuitable for implementation at all. At least some of these objections do not address the concept of saving humanity by sending adult living persons on space missions.

Metahumanism, Euro-Transhumanism and Sorgner’s Philosophy. Technology, Ethics, Art

“…Space travel may concern our solar system or other ones. Any plan for space travel in our solar system (involving the launch of a process to colonise and consequently build permanent settlements on other planets) must consider the human body's inability to survive in space (Campa, 2020;Szocik, 2021Szocik, , 2019. The development of increasingly advanced technologies able to protect us from, for example, sun radiation hundreds of times superior to those we have to bear on Earth and from very different climate conditions from those we are used to may offer a temporary solution, but to build permanent settlements on other planets, we have only two possibilities (Balistreri & Umbrello, 2022b).…”

Modifying the Environment or Human Nature? What is the Right Choice for Space Travel and Mars Colonisation?

“…Therefore, it would be naive to think that a program of (bio)enhancement or redesign of human nature could be the solution for space travel or, possibly, allow our species to emigrate to other planets in the event of existential risk. The more life conditions on Earth become ever more complex, for example, due to reckless innovation programs or natural disasters, migration to other planets may be our only chance of survival [11][12][13]. 3 However, says Fukuyama, enhancement is never a morally acceptable solution, as it would lose (perhaps irreversibly) those essential characteristics that support the "sense of who we are and where we are going, despite all of the evident changes that have taken place in the human condition through the course of history" ([10], p. 101).…”

Beyond the planetary boundaries: exploring pluralistic accountability in the new space age

“…There are several controversial programmes aimed at guaranteeing the survival of the human species in case of an environmental disaster or the Earth's resource depletion – for example, the Embryo Space Colonization, which involves the transportation of frozen human embryos from Earth to other extrasolar planets (Edwards, 2021; Szocik, 2021). Nevertheless, as mentioned in the expertise section of the framework, stakeholders want information on the impact of such initiatives, even if they do not have the technical knowledge to understand them.…”

“…In particular, missions to explore and make other planets like Mars habitable and space tourism are often motivated by humankind's survival imperative. The goal of solving environmental problems and preserving our species drives space colonisation activities (Szocik, 2021). According to Elon Musk, "The future of humanity is fundamentally going to bifurcate along with one of two directions: Either we are going to become a multiplanet species and a spacefaring civilization, or we are going be stuck on one planet until some eventual extinction event" (Drake, 2016).…”