Ethics of Terraforming

RELATED SITES

When addressing such a strong issue as terraforming, many ethical considerations arise. There have been many philosophical debates over this topic, and both sides have very strong opinions. Many view altering an entire planet as a power that should not be in the hands of those of us on Earth, that we would be "playing God". However, man is doing this in many areas already, developing things that we never thought possible.

Some who are pro-terraforming, hold the homocentric point of view that "It is humanity's moral obligation to make as much of the universe suitable for human life as possible" says planetary expert, Richard L.S. Taylor. Pro-terraformers make the argument that, since Mars had evidence of water flowing on it in the past, and that it possibly held life form, if we terraformed it, we would simply be restoring it to the way it naturally was. Also, that bringing it "back to life" would make our universe more beautiful, rather than having a dead planet. Another reason they have for wanting to terraform Mars is for a "backup plan." They believe that at any time many things could happen to Earth, such as an asteroid hitting it, ozone layer depletion, etc. Therefore, terraforming Mars provides an alternate place to move civilization.

Those who are against terraforming believe that we have no right to alter an entire planet’s make-up simply for our own desires. They believe that life on Mars is probable, even if it is simply microbes, that it should be preserved and studied in its natural state. They believe that conducting experiments about the surface, atmosphere, and other things, may lead us to discovering more clues about how life was created within the solar system. And that destroying these things would be a huge mistake. Those against terraforming also believe that it is an issue that would take so much time and money, that it would not even be worth it.

Although these arguments seem to be on completely different sides of the spectrum, there have been ways of compromising suggested, such as "partially" terraforming. One suggestion is to "....build domes over craters and leave those areas untouched. Like nature reserves here on Earth, these domes would be windows into the past and could offer scientists and observers of the future an unscathed window into the past" (RedColony, I will put this in bibliography).

Who knows if we will ever actually terraform Mars, arguments will probably always continue about whether it is right or wrong. What do you think?