Exploring the Future of Humanity: Starman vs. Star Child
Written on
Since its inception in 2002, SpaceX has positioned Elon Musk as a prominent figure in popular culture, often regarded as a pioneer of space exploration aimed at colonizing Mars. To enhance his futuristic image, Musk and his partner Grimes opted for an unconventional name for their son: X Æ A-12. This choice, like the names “Elon Musk” and “Tesla,” certainly embodies a modern flair, especially when juxtaposed with names like “Toyota Prius” or “Nissan Leaf.” Yet, the question arises: is Musk truly the epitome of future-oriented thinking when it comes to space travel? Ironically, the first object SpaceX sent beyond Earth was a Tesla car, humorously piloted by a mannequin dubbed the “Starman.” Is this a prophetic gesture or merely a gimmick?
The gaze of the Starman seems fixated on the rearview mirror, reflecting on a future that has already passed, a tomorrow that ought to remain in the past. Musk has suggested using nuclear weapons to terraform Mars—an idea aimed at heating the planet, melting its ice caps, and releasing CO2 to create a greenhouse effect conducive to human life. However, recent studies from NASA indicate that such terraforming is unattainable with current technology. Nevertheless, Musk continues to enjoy a devoted following, with many supporters, as evidenced by the popularity of his idea of using nuclear power on Mars.
In stark contrast stands the “Star Child” from Stanley Kubrick’s iconic film 2001: A Space Odyssey, which concludes with an ambiguous interpretation of humanity's future. The Star Child symbolizes the potential for human evolution and the philosophical insights gained through space exploration. Why not extend the narrative of 2001 into the present day? After all, we have long surpassed the year “2001.”
Elon Musk represents a charismatic salesperson of futuristic ideals, boasting millions of Twitter followers and capturing public interest with the Mars One colonization project. Yet, the critical inquiry remains: can art, science, and ecology serve as our guiding principles in space exploration, elevating our civilization toward enlightenment?
Although NASA asserts that terraforming Mars is not feasible with present-day technology, let’s entertain the idea that it could be achievable. By contrasting Musk's approach with a more enlightened vision, we can explore the two paths ahead.
The Mirror of Gaze
“When faced with a totally new situation we tend always to attach ourselves to the objects, to the flavor of the most recent past. We look at the present through a rear-view mirror. We march backwards into the future.” — Marshall McLuhan
McLuhan’s words encapsulate the current state of futurism, which remains ensnared in outdated perspectives. Which mirror should we examine? Is it the rearview mirror of destructive technologies and environmental exploitation? Or do we choose the telescopes of our world—tools that reveal our unity as a species amidst a vast universe filled with countless galaxies?
The Biggest Launch
To date, SpaceX’s most notable launch was the Tesla driven by the Starman, heralded as a symbol of a promising space age. Yet, one might argue that the Starman is merely a clever art piece or an extravagant advertisement. Is this vision a continuation of our consumer culture spilling into the cosmos? Space debris already encircles our planet.
The Starman epitomizes prevalent philosophies about space travel. While we appear eager to explore, we are stuck in an autopilot mode, advancing backward into a bygone era of industrial consumption.
Since 2001: A Space Odyssey, NASA and other agencies have sought to follow the Star Child’s path, launching telescopes like Hubble and the upcoming James Webb Space Telescope. These instruments hold more philosophical significance than any potential terraforming of Mars, as they revolutionize our comprehension of the universe. We don’t need to reshape Mars; we must transform our worldview on Earth before taking our next steps.
If we conceptualize telescopes as our eyes, their expanding capabilities reveal a universe that diminishes our significance. In a cosmos filled with trillions of galaxies, recognizing our non-centrality should inspire us to approach space exploration with humility and respect for the celestial wonders we may encounter.
Century of Vision
Musk’s vision for terraforming Mars reflects the industrial mindset of the 19th century, driven by pollution and exploitation that once swept across the United States. His proposals echo mid-20th-century notions of nuclear utopianism, reminiscent of the absurdity portrayed in films like Dr. Strangelove and Planet of the Apes.
Conversely, 2001: A Space Odyssey propels us toward a contemporary understanding of the universe. The Hubble and future telescopes promise to deepen our cosmic exploration. Why not continue this trajectory?
Plan for Mars
Musk’s advocacy for terraforming and Mars colonization inevitably leads to the industrialization and degradation of the planet. This mirrors the historical exploitation of America’s landscapes, which began over a century ago, often at the expense of Native Americans.
As depicted in the painting American Progress by John Gast, these lands were viewed as ripe for exploitation, with nature and indigenous peoples pushed aside in the name of progress. While Mars may be devoid of indigenous life, the implications of our actions remain critical.
By proposing nuclear terraforming, we risk transferring our Earthly conflicts—resource depletion, pollution, and violence—into space. Musk’s vision resembles a modern-day Manifest Destiny on Mars, but it doesn't have to be this way.
What if we adopted a model akin to the establishment of national parks, designed to preserve the planet's beauty amidst historical devastation?
The Value of Mars
We can assess Mars through two lenses: 1) industrial-consumer values or 2) aesthetic-scientific values.
1) Industrial-Consumer Values
The industrial model inevitably leads to a consumerist society, where worth is measured in material possessions and entertainment. Without alternative frameworks, colonization may simply replicate Earth’s history, dominated by human narcissism.
Rather than envisioning a thrilling biosphere with intrepid explorers, we must consider the eventual consequences of industrialization on Mars, paralleling the development of factories and urban sprawl on Earth. As with our own world, global powers will vie for control of Martian resources, ultimately leading to further environmental degradation.
2) Wilderness Mars, Museums, Observatories
Fortunately, an alternative exists—one that promotes a united human perspective. Mars is not empty; it is filled with breathtaking beauty and scientific potential. As with the Grand Canyon, we need not alter Mars; rather, we should explore, study, and safeguard it.
Adopting a National Park model, we could designate Mars as a “Celestial Wilderness,” reserved for artists, scientists, and explorers. While some areas could be set aside for habitation, the vast majority should remain untouched, inviting aesthetic appreciation.
The notion of preserving Mars for scientific and artistic exploration may seem naive, yet Earth already boasts a thriving tourism economy centered on natural beauty. In 2018, over 20 million visitors flocked to American national parks, generating a multi-billion dollar industry.
People travel to these parks for various reasons, including:
- Natural beauty
- Sublime experiences amidst vast landscapes
- Solitude away from urban life
- Ancient ecosystems largely untouched by humans
Imagine if we protected .001% of Mars for ecological preservation, allowing only minimal human activity. Even with Mars’ extensive surface area, this would leave ample room for observatories, museums, and artistic endeavors.
Picture visiting Martian galleries or observatories that showcase our cosmic history. This vision need not be fanciful; we already have similar institutions on Earth, inspired by 2001 and Carl Sagan's Cosmos.
Star Trek?
Upon the establishment of the U.S. Space Force, Musk tweeted, “Starfleet begins.” This statement is misguided. Historically, the Pentagon has not adhered to the ideals of Star Trek. Is Musk simply unaware of the real-world implications of his words, or is he pandering to the military-industrial complex for lucrative contracts?
“Starfleet” will only emerge when humanity unites as a cooperative species, embarking on a journey of discovery. As Captain Kirk famously noted, “Its continuing mission to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no one has gone before.” Unfortunately, the Star Trek films often deviate from this mission.
Existential Stance
Elon Musk’s appeal stems from his alignment with prevailing narratives of self-interest and exploitation.
Starlink Light Pollution
His Starlink initiative aims to launch thousands of reflective satellites into orbit. While they promise enhanced connectivity, they also contribute to light pollution, complicating astronomical observations. Why didn’t Musk foresee this issue if he truly envisioned a brighter future in space? Rather than connecting us to the cosmos, Starlink reflects humanity’s self-centered tendencies.
The Challenge of “2001”
The launch of the Tesla Starman coincided with the 50th anniversary of 2001: A Space Odyssey, a film that offers a profound vision of our potential in a vast universe. 2001 suggests that we, as an evolutionary species, have the capacity to achieve remarkable things. Evolving from primates to pioneers, we possess the ability to explore the stars and understand our place within the cosmos through art, science, and philosophy.
Yet, this achievement presents a paradox: we inhabit a vast and ancient universe, potentially rendering our existence insignificant. Alongside the Hubble telescope, NASA's moon landings remain central to any new philosophical framework for space exploration. We exist in a universe teeming with stars, planets, and the possibility of advanced civilizations, yet our philosophies often neglect this reality.
The Sublime and Radical Wonder
The aesthetics of the sublime form the core of human experiences with nature and the universe. Whether hiking in the Grand Canyon or observing through a telescope, we encounter a tension between our emotions and rationality. In moments of awe, we experience a profound connection between ourselves and the infinite cosmos.
This sense of radical wonder should underpin a 21st-century philosophy of space exploration. After all, 2001 evokes such sublime experiences, solidifying its status as an artistic masterpiece that can guide our journey into the cosmos.
The Ultimate Purpose
Instead of pursuing destructive goals, why not seek radical wonder through aesthetic and scientific exploration? NASA continues to inspire us with breathtaking images from the Hubble telescope and updates from Voyager. Yet, instead of uniting to protect our planet, humanity remains mired in conflict and consumerism. The legacies of Apollo and Hubble deserve better.
The Next Space Human
If we adopt Musk’s approach, we risk becoming conquerors in space. The warnings of Star Trek resonate here, as we may become a society driven by domination, much like the character Khan.
Meanwhile, we can only hope that initiatives like Virgin Galactic evolve towards a more enlightened model. Their philosophy highlights the potential of space exploration to address challenges on Earth, emphasizing our unity as a species.
The Hollywood Vision
As nations militarize space, the narratives of Star Trek seem increasingly irrelevant, overshadowed by the dominance of Star Wars. Mars One may resemble Total Recall, depicting Mars as a corporate playground rather than a site of wonder.
Despite the awe-inspiring achievements of space telescopes, we have yet to realize the vision presented in 2001. The International Space Station, while significant, falls short of the ideals portrayed in the film.
Extinction Event?
Musk’s assertion of needing a “Plan B” is valid, but destroying Mars is not the solution. We should focus on healing our own planet and addressing the tribal conflicts that plague us. The COVID-19 pandemic illustrates our need to respect the natural world rather than colonizing new planets.
For the foreseeable future, the more pressing threat to humanity comes from nuclear weapons, pollution, and climate change rather than astronomical events. The notion of needing a “Planet B” due to our own negligence should serve as a cautionary tale, not an action plan.
Musk: Simulacrum of the Space Future
In conclusion, Elon Musk is not the visionary leader we need for our journey into space. His proposals for nuclear terraforming stem from vanity and a misguided sense of grandeur. Like many wealthy tech entrepreneurs, Musk has capitalized on existing trends but offers a future that is more a reflection of the past than an innovative vision.
As philosopher Jean Baudrillard noted, we inhabit an era where copies replace originals, leading to a culture dominated by superficiality. Musk’s vision is merely a simulacrum of progress, echoing outdated ideas dressed as futuristic aspirations.
A new space philosophy must emerge. The aftermath of 2001 and Hubble leaves us yearning for a hopeful narrative in a universe that highlights our insignificance. Yet, our existence as beings made of stardust connects us to the cosmos. This realization urges us to pursue radical wonder rather than exploitation.
Developing a new philosophy is a complex endeavor requiring collaboration across disciplines. Inspired by figures like Sagan and the themes of 2001, we can take steps toward a more enlightened approach to space exploration, rooted in science, ecology, and cooperation.
Ultimately, let the Star Child guide us. As we venture into the cosmos, let’s embrace radical wonder and strive to become the enlightened beings we aspire to be.
