Stephen Hawking, a British physicist regarded by many as the most famous living scientist, recently was in the news for saying that we should stop trying to contact extraterrestrial intelligent life because it could be dangerous for us. In a documentary for the Discovery Channel he warned, "If aliens visit us, the outcome would be much as when Columbus landed in America, which didn't turn out well for the Native Americans." His argument is that if aliens could come to our planet travelling across light years they must have developed a superior civilization and can easily colonize or destroy us.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/space/article7107207.ece
The question is should our quest for knowledge be thwarted by fear of unintended consequences? What if we could benefit from their advanced civilization? What if we stopped splitting the atom fearing that it may lead to nuclear weapons? Is there something as dangerous knowledge?
I believe that knowledge is a neutral entity but it is human beings who corrupt for their own personal gain. More knowledge could hurt us so long as it was the hands of a trustworthy person. Hawking is right to suggest that we stop looking for aliens. In history whenever one group of people gained knowledge over another they used it to overcome a lesser society.
ReplyDeleteFor example, when Africa was first visited, European soldiers used to trade their more advanced guns and complex alcohol for slaves and other "necessities".
Humans have this innate curiosity to know more no matter the consequences therefore even protesting against this quest may be futile. I suggest the search for more knowledge continues and we face whatever comes our way.
This is a classic case of "What you don't know won't hurt you." Human beings are natural inquirers. We constantly question ourselves and the world around us. We simply want to know even if the knowledge gained has no practical use. Even though what Stephen Hawking said about extraterrestial life might be true, we, as human as we are, could not stop our quest for knowledge even if we wanted to because it is innate-programmed into our DNA and like a thirst that can not be quenched-It is who we are. I however don't believe that there is any such thing as dangerous knowledge but rather the manner in which knowledge gained is used is what may be categorized as good or bad. It is for this reason that one might say that not all knowledge should be made available to everyone even though we have a right to information. In summary, it may be better that some knowledge not be gained due to its destructive potential and not because the knowledge in itself is dangerous. This however will not stop our hunt for knowledge.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate Mr. Hawking's point. However, his idea is merely conjecture. He cannot show that necessarily, life forms capable of travelling to Earth are more advanced than men are.
ReplyDeletePossibly, it is just their physical construction that would make such things possible. Who knows?
Even if the aliens are more advanced in knowledge than we are, making contact with them first, if nothing will give us some time to prepare in advance for an attack, should they decide to attack us.
We might possibly be able to create a good impression that would avert an attack.
Generally speacking, I think we should not be afraid to pursue knowledge. Howvever, we should exercise some caution if we can predict that the likely outcome of further investigation will be disastrous. For example, the splitting of the atom leading to the creation of the atom bomb. If sceintists could have predicted that this would lead to he development of a terrible weapon, they should not have proceeded.
In the 1940's though, they had very little option. In the mist of a a full scale World War, it was winner take all and it was vital that the deadly weapon of the atom bomb be created.
I agree with Stephen Hawkings. Anything could happen however we may never know until we actually come into contact with them but that may have its own consequences. Probably the reason they have not contacted us yet is sign of their own intelligence despite the fact that there might be some distance to cover. To me all knowledge is dangerous but what matters is how the knowledge is used.
ReplyDeleteShawn said: "We simply want to know even if the knowledge gained has no practical use". But what if sometimes we really don't want to know? These might be situations where we are selfish - maybe because knowledge can bring responsibilities that we might perfer to shirk.
ReplyDeleteBut are there situations in which ignorance is morally preferable to knowledge. For example, Huntington's disease is a genetic disorder that results in mental disintegration at a relatively late stage in life, and there is no effective treatment. Its inheritance pattern is dominant, so this means that if you have the allele you will pass it to half of your children.
You are young and seemingly healthy - should you go for the test? What is the right thing to do? On what basis should the decision rest? For some people, this is a real dilemma, not a hypothetical situation.
I agree with Shawn about the “what you don’t know wont hurt you”. However there maybe something more to the knowledge, the knowledge can open doors to greater possibilities and this is why we human beings are Homo sapiens and so the knowledge of the world cant just be locked up without us exploring them. I personally do not believe in aliens not just from the view of science but also in the bible I have heard no such things like extraterrestrial intelligent life forms. God made us rulers over the earth and so I do not believe that these ‘aliens’ are possible. And furthermore although knowledge of them may open up doors, we cannot be fully sure of their capabilities and so it may be that their main aim is to destroy life on earth. So is it not safer to continue to live our lives in the safety of the knowledge we have presently?
ReplyDeleteOn Mr. Kitching's point about Huntington's disease I believe gaining such knowledge is a personal decision since it is knowledge about yourself. Like I said early, everyone has the right to information and exercising that right is a personal choice. In this situation, knowing and being ignorant has its implications and it really is up to the individual to evaluate the repercussions of each choice before making the decision. There may be such a thing as the ethically right thing to do but that does not change the fact that the individual is still entiltled to a choice regardless of whatever ethical implications it may have.
ReplyDeleteThere is a question I keep asking myself each time, I hear about people wanting to know more of something and it is: Should all nkowledge be open or be known by all? Are we safe to know somethings and unsafe to know somethings? This question has been posed many times and answers have been given. Knowledge can be a box of 'pills' which can be dangerouse to children and be helpful to an ill mother.As Mr Kitching put knowledge can either be voluntary or ivoluntarily.One can decide to go for the test and get results whilst someone can decide to stayout of the dilemma. So what is it with knowledge that drives scientists to be able to perform experiments that can be so harmful to fellow human beings as to fet results(Nazis) What is it with humans that drives us to use billions of dollars for a 48hr trip to the moon and back? Shawn says that we simply want to know though what you might want to know may have no use to you. This is quite true but do we just want to know though what we want to know may be of no value to us? Scientist go to the extent of betting their lives for a certain thing to happen.Is it just curiosity that drives us to want to feed our brains with more and more knowledge? Do we want to learn more and more because it's our destiny to do so? I believe knowldge as Stephen Hawking tries to warn us can be very dangerous to the right people at the wrong time and the reverse is often true too.I see Mr. Hawking using aliens as a metarphor for all the dangers in the world( weird isn't it!)Though , I strongly believe that humans should not stop their search for more and more knowledge, I think it should be done in more 'considerate' ways.
ReplyDeleteHmmm!!!!
ReplyDeleteAliens? I think humans’ quest for knowledge and discoveries id getting out of hand. i fully agree with Hawking to stop looking for extraterrestrial intelligent life.AS Shawn stated ''what you don’t know will not kill you". Just maybe humans have come to the point where everything that needs to be discovered by man has already and the remaining are the dangerous ones therefore their discoveries will lead to destruction. I seriously don't know what aliens are or why they exist. I can’t understand why scientists will waste so much time and money discussing such? As Chelsea said knowledge is a neutral entity and it is what we do with it that determines it’s whether it’s bad or n good. I think we should search for knowledge within our reach and not go to the extreme of going to mars, space etc to discover things that make human existence more complex and difficult. Lets learn and live outside the fear of aliens.
to being with, i would just like to say that where would we humans be if we were not curious or tried to experiment into fields where we had no idea what they entailed? i think the main and obvious reason why we humans have developed to this point is mainly because of our 'innate curiosity.' we just want to know more? but in this case, i may have to agree with Hawkings. there just has to be a limit to our continuous search for even more knowledge. maybe you guys may not have noticed this but there have already been so many side-effects that have sprouted up since our search for knowledge begun. when paper was first created, who knew that so many trees would be felled so quickly. the production of cars and all the toxins that are being emitted from the factories and cars. the invention of electricity has now led to the use of so many natural resources which is destroying the Earth at an exponential rate. the list of the harm that we have brought unto ourselves is endless. however, this may not necessarily mean that this knowledge we've found is 'harmful knowledge.' I think that its all about how this knowledge is used. the invention of dynamite by Alfred Nobel was deemed safe till 'certain people' found out that it could be used otherwise. as seen here, it all depends on the person utilizing this piece of knowledge. who knows if we will even have a world to boast of when the aliens decide to pay us a visit?
ReplyDeleteI gree to a very large extent with chelsea and tope,and i Think the danger and the fear should
ReplyDeletelounge around the unknown.What tells us that the supposed "aliens" would be useful,helpful and especially harmless to us and on the other hand,what tells us the contrary?I think until we can answer these questions,let's keep ourselves occupied with the alarming instant global issues like global warming and the rest.In short,let's solve the emergency first.
Claire D.
Firstly , I would like to comment by commending Stephen Hawkins on his theories and his profound ability to think beyond planet earth.However, I feel what he is putting on the table is not substantial enough to spark a pandemic interest.Personally, aliens have no effect in my life as I do not believe in them this is due to my religious beliefs.I feel it is unnecessary and costly to spend time and money researching on such claims.Not only because I do not believe in aliens, but aliens or not it will not be beneficial to the entire planet to investigate further into this matter.I feel as Homo Sapiens we sometimes get too far ahead of ourselves and try and go beyond our boundaries in matters that are not a matter of urgency.
ReplyDeleteThis post brought to mind one of the poems that we studied in our english HL class last semester- "Astronauts". The main theme that this poem commented on was the futility of our continous quest for knowledge. As a person, i believe that there is obviously a need for curiousity as without it the human race could never have developed to the state that we have attained, if people in the middle ages had decided to be complacent and had not made any attempts to discover new things we would not have a lot of the things that we take for granted today; the things that facilitate our daily lives. However, I can understand the reasoning behind the statement that Hawkins is making here as knowledge is not always necessary or even beneficial. This all runs back to the idea that Shawn postulated of what you don't know not being able to hurt you..it comes down to whether we should reall risk opening ourselve's up to dire consequences in the pursuit of more knowledge about things. The knowledge in question here is not necessary for the advancement of the development status of the human race or inreasing the amount of knowledge available to the entire race. So, in this case it is possible for us to forgo the knowledge to evade the risk.
ReplyDeletelast semester, for English Hl we had to write a commentary on this poem "astronauts" which was about the greater human desire for knowledge of the unknown... and the apparent fruitlessness of it all. Robert Hayden says "What do we ask of these men? what do we ask of ourselves?" as to whether or not there is any sense in this man's claims... i can give no answer, but i do think the whole "aliens are out there" notion is to best confined books like the 'Animorphs' series. however, i do think that continued attempts to contact extra-terrestial life can prove dangerous for humans. these numerous voyages to mars and the moon are not because we are literally looking for life, no. but it is because of the human desire for inquiry, knowledge and discovery. the openness of the unknown gives us the security of hope, that the answers to our numerous questions are out there. imagine waking to find that there are no answers to your questions. the answers arent out there or around here. imagine the despair that would trigger, the distance we would fall from self-actualisation. continued attepmts to contact extra-terrestial life are not dangerous because aliens will come an colonize us. far from it. they are dangerous because we may find, with absolute certainty, that our many deeper questions simply cannot be answered
ReplyDeletehola hola guys.i personally agree with Hawking that some knowledge is deadly and it better for us humans not to temper with it.on the other hand when talking about the possibilities of aliens coming to earth from the science fiction movies i have watched can benefit aliens can help discover great knowledge that can benefit our human race such as cures to diseases and the likes but humans will tend to manipulate these creatures and cause damage to the world for instance by using them as weapons and other deadly things.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhy should we let our fears overcome us just because of 'consequences' that we aren't even sure they exist? In order to acquire knowledge, we must be prepared to go that extra mile and take risks and at least give it a try. Who knows what we are missing due to our own fears? Lets worry about the knowledge first then the consequences can follow if at all they'll come.
ReplyDeleteAbout benefitting from 'their' advanced civilization, if at all we can get a chance to learn from them, why not? so long as we know exactly what we are up to. we should always be ready to learn as from where/who we are learning from, it doesn't matter as long as we get the knowledge that we are looking for.
Also, i personally don't think knowledge is dangerous. Knowledge on its own is not dangerous. I think it depends on who has the knowledge, the intentions of the person acquiring the knowledge and the level of knowledge obtained. If someone goes to acquire some knowledge about something for harmful intentions, is it the knowledge that is bad or the person? or is the knowledge rather making the person 'bad' or the person is making the knowledge 'bad'? which is which? Lack of knowledge may sometimes be very harmful too much of it too isn't good either so I just think that someone should rather be 'well informed' rather than just gathering too much knowledge for nothing.
What Laylat is saying is true, we don’t have to let our fear of the unknown hinder us from progressing and thinking outside the internal thinking box. As humans are naturally inquisitive and they’ll forever seek for answers even if those answers come with serious consequences.
ReplyDeleteWe turn to do things that suitable to us and we don’t seem to mind or care about what our actions do to the other organisms for as long as we are happy. We try to acquire seek knowledge and understanding through different means, no matter how dangerous the thing might be.
In the case of aliens, we are not even sure if they exist. But we try to understand things that are not even on our planet just to be familiar with the other places surrounding our planet. If the aliens do exist then we are bound to learning more if they decide to visit our planet. They might be dangerous but for all you know they might also be very fun to leave with.
I honestly think knowledge is safe when we all know what we want to do with it.Hawking's interview on the news only proves to us that sometimes we can search for something that we think is most useful but we might not know what harm it might cause us. Like in the science fiction movies, we see some scientists inventing some dangerous diseases without knowing what danger they are putting everyone in.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Laylat in saying that we should not let our fears prevent us from gaining knowledge.Humans are curious and will always be curious. Our various discoveries over the centuries have either made us or broken us therefore we should move forward in our quest for knowledge. And soon ,who knows the aliens might either help us as a race or destroy us.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all i will like to say there are consequences for every action we take. Also, every discovery has geared toward a negative path. For example computers and scientific study concerning atoms etc. However, it is obvious that with the discovery of these humans have benefited massively. Knowledge in itself is not dangerous but the way in which it is applied can be dangerous. How certain is this prediction. From what did he base this conclusion on ? I think we should bear in mind that predictions most of the time, especially scientific ones, are based on induction and this can be falsified . So why dont we experiment and ind out for ourselves first. I will like to add that i dont find Stephen Hawking making this prediction as wrong. I just think that should not stop as in our quest for knowledge.
ReplyDeleteUmm....hus Mr. Tee???? anywayz yea i also think we shouldn't let our fear of the unknown prevent us from expanding our knowledege of outer space. If we are able to find life on another planet then wouldn't they have 2 be worried cuz we've got more advanced technology??? lik what if we got there first? I think it'll be really cool 2 discover a whole new species living under different conditions from us i mean humans have speculated over this for years and years, making movies n books and all that about it. I don't think we should stop looking. like sed b4, we cud learn a whole lot more- maybe if we looked at things from a different perspective u kno like if we had an opinion from "outside". lol
ReplyDeleteThere are risks associated with every endeavour we take in this life. There is the probability that the outcome will be unpleasant, although these probabilities obviously differ for different situations. However, if we lived our lives considering all potential hazards, we would never be able to live meaningful lives. For example, there is the risk that your next flight abroad will be the victim of a terrorist attack; there is the risk that your next walk will result in your being knocked down by a vehicle; there is the risk that you could be struck by lightning when you’re outside during a heavy downpour. However, none of these risks deters numerous people from living normal lives. This approach towards the risks of life, I think, should also be applied to the quest for knowledge, albeit more carefully. With the acquisition of knowledge, the very best we can do before actually acquiring the knowledge is to speculate about possible benefits and dangers, and we could be seriously flawed. Not until the knowledge has been realised can we then even begin to get some degree of certainty about possible benefits and hazards. After all, if you think about it, you miss 100% of the shots you never take, so we could miss out on the next potential elixir of life, or “panacea” to global hunger, if we are worried about problems. For example, if the use of missiles as weapons had deterred any investigation into rocket science, we would probably not have satellites orbiting the earth with benefits such as intercontinental telecommunications, weather forecasting, geological exploration, etc and also, we probably won’t be on the moon now. If ammonia’s potential use for explosives had deterred any further investigation, we wouldn’t have the Haber process to produce optimum yields of ammonia for uses as diverse as fertiliser, polymers, etc.
ReplyDeleteAlso, scientific knowledge builds on previous knowledge. What if the knowledge we’re deterred from acquiring because of potentially pernicious effects, is the crucial missing link to gaining other more enhancing knowledge?
And ultimately, when you think about it, whether knowledge is used for good or for evil really depends on the possessor of the knowledge, his intentions, his own moral code or code of conduct, etc. I don’t think knowledge is necessarily inherently harmful, but can be twisted for devious aims.
So, let us not deprive ourselves due to speculations.
Mr. Hawking probably does have a point, when he says that the people who manage to move across light years first, maybe more advanced than all the rest. But I think there is a problem somewhere in his logic.
ReplyDeleteHe says we should stop trying to contact aliens because if they get here first they might colonise us etc. But if we are the ones trying to contact them, how does that lead to them getting here first. Drawing parallels with the native americans does not really hold because the american indians were not the ones trying to communicate with Europeans. The Europeans who were looking for knowledge were the ones who went there and colonized the Americas (whether that was a good or bad thing is another matter). If he's comparing us to the native americans and wants us to sit here and not look for knowledge, then someone else, who is looking for knowledge, will come here and find us and the rest will be history.
I would absolutely concur with what sam sarp said as life is actually akin to a minefield of risks, though this should not deter us from living normal lives. What i'd like to add, however, is that a cursory glance at the subject in question shows that it is a very contentious issue. I do not think that there is a line that clearly delineates knowledge that is progressive and that which result in a retrograde step, but allowing this uncertainty to preclude any endeavour that may yield knowledge that would better our understanding of the world would be devastating to the quality of our lives. In effect, though the acquisition of some knowledge may present some risks, i believe that the advantages outweigh the demerits and to make this knowledge acquisition more feasible, we must devise methods to alleviate any unforseen contingencies.
ReplyDeleteAmPoNg
Knowledge is one thing, and utilizing knowledge is another....and truthfully speaking, knowledge is always be utilized; whether we live to see it or not.
ReplyDeleteI do believe there is something as 'dangerous knowledge'. It is in our nature that we continually strive for knowledge, but isn’t there a limit? If we had stopped the splitting of atoms, and halted in the production of nuclear weapons, then maybe so many lives could have been saved. What if in our yearning to benefit from these ‘advanced civilisations’ of these extra-terrestrials, it results in the signing of our own death warrants?
For example, no mother takes a knife and tells her 3 year-old, “This object can be used to stab people who slight you.” Obviously that is DANGEROUS knowledge to the child at that point in time!
In relation to the question at hand, I agree to an extent, with Stephen Hawking on this matter...for the survival of the human race, we should stop trying to contact these aliens. We will never be sure whether these aliens are insatiable creatures and are more destructive than we humans are? Then it will end up like in the case of the Native Americans against the Spain-led Columbus; who were initially welcoming but oblivious to the ulterior plans of the pilgrims.
However it is an impossible feat to tell a human being to stop in his or her quest for knowledge he or she can eventually assert. It is ‘settling’ for the ordinary, and human beings are not known for this; humans are not used to living in a ‘what if?’ world if they can help it. Even if trying to contact aliens is hypothetically made illegal, for example, some people will still go incognito to find out the truth of their existence.
Like I stated earlier, there is knowledge and there is also utilising knowledge; it is totally how we humans use such knowledge that classifies it as ‘dangerous knowledge’. What if we had stopped the splitting of atoms; then we would not have discovered the essential use of uranium. What if we stop contacting these aliens; then we will never know first of all whether they exist and whether the human race could have benefited from them. Even in the parallel above, we realise that the ‘knife’ is a very useful object to human beings, and in this case this mother’s child may grow up to learn that fact and this knowledge has been put to good use.
Knowledge might be classified as ‘dangerous knowledge’ because it’s not being put to good use at that time. I do understand Stephen Hawking’s fear, however, we have never in our quest for knowledge been veered off course by the fear of ‘unintended consequences’; it’s a risk we humans are forever willing to take.
Shawn said that this is a simple case of 'what you din't know cannot hurt you'. First of all, I think what you don't know can hurt you really bad(I doubt the habiatants of Hiroshima and Nagasaki ever knew of an American attack and we all know what happened after that even though unfortunately they don't). In any case, I believe that this goes beyond that.
ReplyDeleteI would however disagree with hawking because if we, a relatively intelligent species, have began questioning the possibility of extraterresterial life how wouldn't we expect aliens of a higher intelligence to come looking for us either way?
Knowledge , as Chelsea said is neutral it goes to help some and it ends up a detriment to others. That doesn't outweigh the greater for expanding our knowledge base. Genetic engineering can create super-viruses or save lives by battling cancer. Like a coin everything has two sides. Neither side of a penny determines the value of it.
No matter what we do, there will always be a good side and a bad side to everything. There will always be a risk associated with knowledge that humans gain, whether we realize it now or in 10 million years. As man learns more, I think we're only finding more information that will lead to our own destruction (to put it in a blunt manner). But since we can't avoid the risks, I don't think that we should stop trying to know more. We SHOULD do our best, though, to make sure what we know isn't used for evil. And there IS such a thing as knowing too much. The only thing is, I don't even think we would recognize it when it happens.
ReplyDeleteAndrea
In my opinion, a every kind of knowledge is to some extent dangerous knowledge because there is always the possibility that knowledge will be used for evil even though it may be meant for the most harmless intent. The economics concept of opportunity cost can be applied to the effect that there is always a cost or a danger, of sorts, to the acquisition or non-acquistion of knowledge because in gaining knowledge, we activitate the potential for it to be used for evil and in ignoring it entirely, you throw away the benefits that could be elicited from the knowledge thereof, which could harm us in the long-run e.g. ignoring warnings of potential extra-terrestrial hostility.
ReplyDeleteI therefore subscribe to the argument that knowledge be searched for, whether dangerous or not because for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. For every evil force, there is a potential good force to counter it, for every knowledge, there is the safe and the dangerous-ying-yang.
In my opinion, a every kind of knowledge is to some extent dangerous knowledge because there is always the possibility that knowledge will be used for evil even though it may be meant for the most harmless intent. The economics concept of opportunity cost can be applied to the effect that there is always a cost or a danger, of sorts, to the acquisition or non-acquistion of knowledge because in gaining knowledge, we activitate the potential for it to be used for evil and in ignoring it entirely, you throw away the benefits that could be elicited from the knowledge thereof, which could harm us in the long-run e.g. ignoring warnings of potential extra-terrestrial hostility.
ReplyDeleteI therefore subscribe to the argument that knowledge be searched for, whether dangerous or not because for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. For every evil force, there is a potential good force to counter it, for every knowledge, there is the safe and the dangerous-ying-yang.