contact: long-term implications for humanity · 2014-04-29 · section ii • contact: long-term...

7

Albert A. HarrisonUniversity of California, Davis

Steven J. Dick United States Naval Observatory

INTRODUCTION

Confirmation of the existence of extraterrestrialintelligence (ETI) is one of the major scientific dis-coveries that could instantly alter the course of soci-ety and have profound cumulative effects onhumanity for all time. Confirmation has yet to occur,but changing views of the universe, a parade of scien-tific discoveries, and themes in popular culture haveled to the widespread belief that “we are not alone.”Many people expect that some day we will findincontrovertible evidence of intelligent extraterres-trial life.

Since earliest recorded history, humans have won-dered about the possibility of intelligent life amongthe stars (Dick, 1982). Only in recent centuries, how-ever, have we been able to pursue this problem withthe sophisticated techniques required (Crowe, 1986,1994; Dick, 1996; Guthke, 1990; Shostak, 1998). Inthe 17th through 19th centuries, theory and observa-tion indicated that the same physical laws apply in allplaces and at all times. In the 20th century, growingevidence pointed to the conclusion that the laws ofbiology are universal also. If this is so, then life,including intelligent life, may have evolved in nearbysolar systems.

As we attempt to forecast humanity’s long-termfuture, the possibility of contact between human andextraterrestrial intelligence requires careful thought.Australian astronomer Ray Norris (1998) points outthat our ability to conduct radio telescope searchescontinues to increase dramatically, and estimates a50–50 chance of a confirmed detection within thenext ten years. This estimate is based on only one ofmany possible search strategies. If extraterrestrialintelligence exists, given a thousand-year time per-spective and burgeoning technology, its discoverymay not be so much of a “wild card” as a high proba-bility—perhaps inevitable—event.

The scientists who formulated SETI, the scientificsearch for extraterrestrial intelligence, were keenlyinterested in how people would react to “contact,” orincontrovertible evidence that we are not alone in theuniverse (Finney, 1999; Morrison, Billingham, andWolfe, 1977; Swift, 1990). Most past discussions ofthe impact of contact (Berenzden, 1973; Billinghamet al., 1999; Harrison, 1997; Morrison et al., 1977; USCongress, 1961) were predicated on the microwavesearch strategy, and emphasized people’s initial reac-tions to the discovery of extraterrestrial life.

If extraterrestrial intelligence exists…its discovery may not

be so much of a “wild card” as a high probability

—perhaps inevitable—event.

During the next millennium we may not only establish a perma-

nent human presence throughout our solar system, but also begin

interstellar migration.

Contact: Long-Term Implications for Humanity

Section II

8 Section II • Contact: Long-Term Implications for Humanity • Harrison and Dick

The present essay extends this tradition. Based ona symposium sponsored by the Foundation For theFuture on the Island of Hawaii in July 1999, our essaydraws heavily on the ideas of the participants as wellas on the literature that we cite. In keeping with thegoals and objectives of the Foundation, our discus-sion encompasses a range of search strategies, andemphasizes the long-term consequences: how con-tact with a communicative civilization might shapehumanity over the next thousand years.

Rationale and Justification for the Search

Estimates of the number of extraterrestrial civiliza-tions in our galaxy rest upon an elegant but simpleheuristic known as the Drake Equation. This statesthat the number of extraterrestrial civilizations exist-ing simultaneously with our own depends upon acombination of physical, biological, and social vari-ables (Drake and Sobel, 1992). These are the numberof suitable stars in our galaxy, the fraction of thosestars that have planets, the fraction of those planetsthat give rise to life, the fraction of life forms thatevolve into technologically advanced civilizations,and finally the average longevity of advanced civiliza-tions. (Longevity is important because it affects thechances that civilizations will exist simultaneously.)

In essence, as we proceed through the DrakeEquation we eliminate sites that do not host extrater-restrial civilizations that coincide with our own. Peo-ple who desire a positive search outcome hope thatdespite the many points for elimination, the resultingnumber of civilizations will be large. Since Drake for-mulated his equation in 1961, almost all findingssupport the “many inhabited worlds” hypothesis.These include discoveries that planets are commonrather than rare in other solar systems (Croswell,1997; Goldsmith, 1997; Marcy and Butler, 1998;Marcy et al., 1999); that complex organic moleculesare commonly found in comets and in giant cloudswhere stars and planets form; and that the initiationof life may be a “cosmic imperative” that dependsupon reliable principles of self-organization ratherthan nearly impossible chance events (Davies, 1998;de Duve, 1995; Kauffman, 1995). As suggested by theevaporation of the Cold War, societies may survivetheir own technological adolescence and achieve veryold age with the result that many advanced societiesexist at the present time. Despite growing circum-stantial evidence, we have yet to confirm the exist-ence of any extraterrestrial life.

There are strong justifications for continuing,indeed accelerating, the search. Professional astrono-mers have, in essence, a commission to keep an eyeon the universe. Even as astronomers are obliged toinventory stars and the rest of the physical universe,they must now join with a variety of other disciplinesto survey the biological universe (Dick, 1996). Theirresponsibilities include looking for evidence of cos-mic life in all of its forms, ranging from fossilized sin-gle-celled organisms through technologicallyadvanced civilizations.

During the next millennium we may not onlyestablish a permanent human presence throughoutour solar system, but also begin interstellar migra-tion. As we prepare to move beyond our solar systemover the next few centuries, it will be essential tounderstand the nature and distribution of life withinour part of the galactic neighborhood.

Depending on what we find, our discoveries couldbe crucial for averting disasters ranging from back-contamination and disease through conflict withextraterrestrial spacefarers. The sheer discovery ofany form of life would have profound effects on phi-losophy, science, and religion. The ability to commu-nicate freely with a technologically and perhapsspiritually advanced civilization would intensify andaugment those effects, altering our culture in bothstraightforward and subtle ways.

As we look to the distant future, we should realizethat the dominant microwave search strategy is onlyone way that we could discover extraterrestrial life(Tough, 1999). At some point we may switch toactive SETI (sending encoded signals rather thanpassively receiving them), or major advances in suchareas as transportation and communication may giverise to new search strategies. New scientific discover-ies could generate scientific interest in strategies(such as UFO studies) that are now largely discred-ited or, like planetary archaeology, seem unlikely towork. We must even be open to the possibility thatcontact has occurred in the past and we are livingwith the consequences of this contact. Right now, notone of these strategies has yielded scientific proof.

Section II • Contact: Long-Term Implications for Humanity • Harrison and Dick 9

At the conceptual level, our search for extraterres-trial life is based on a hunger for knowledge and adesire to find new purpose in the universe. At theprocedural level, our search depends upon our cur-rent understanding of interstellar travel and commu-nication and the technologies that are available to us.While we may expect interest in ETI to persist, wecan expect search strategies and technologies tochange, and with these the nature of the post-contactworld.

Common Assumptions about ETI

Despite widespread expectations that the discoveryof ETI will have an enormous impact on humanity inAD 3000, only with very broad strokes can we paint apicture of the future. The consequences of contactfor our descendants will depend upon the nature ofETI culture; the specifics of the contact scenario; andhuman psychology, institutions, and cultures.

Perhaps the greatest deterrent to accurate predic-tions is that since scientists have yet to observe ETIwe can only guess what it will be like. Furthermore,attempts to make such guesses are fraught with haz-ard. We are sensitive to cross-species and cross-cul-tural variability on Earth. How much greater couldthis variability be if we were to extend our observa-tions to biological entities whose genetic and culturalbackgrounds have nothing in common with ourown? Another risk is our tendency to anthropomor-phize, that is, wrongly impute human characteristicsto nonhumans and even inanimate objects. There aremany hypotheses about ETI, but until we actuallymake contact, we will not know which (if any) ofthese hypotheses are correct.

There are at least three ways that these hypotheseshave come about. Some reflect a process called imag-inative production and express human wishes andfears. Imaginative production is evident in precon-ceptions of benevolent space brothers arriving tosolve Earth’s problems, and in evil space invaderswho want to take over our planet. Some of theseimages are contemporary renditions of the angelsand devils that people have imagined since muchearlier times (Thompson, 1991). These images canbe very powerful and have been used to good effect in

science fiction (Billingham et al., 1999). MichaelMichaud eloquently expressed the role of psycholog-ical factors in our thinking about ETI:

In our thinking about alien intelligence, we revealourselves. We are variously hostile, intolerant, hopeful,naïve: influenced by science fiction, we see the aliens asimplacable, grotesque conquerors, or as benign, altruis-tic teachers who can save us from ourselves. Usually wethink of them as superior to us in some way: either theirmiraculous but malevolently applied technology mustbe overcome by simpler virtues, or we must accept themas gods who will raise humanity from its fallen condi-tion. Here we display fear, insecurity, wishful thinking,defeatism, even self-loathing, everything but the calmmaturity appropriate for our emergence into the galac-tic community. We are not ready (Michaud, 1974, 33).

Reverse engineering is a second process that gen-erates expectations about ETI. We begin by acknowl-edging that ETI could be almost anything: a giant gasbag, creatures reminiscent of those portrayed in Alienor Star Wars movies—perhaps even free-floatingconsciousness. However, we then note that oursearch procedures will not lead us to all conceivablelife forms, only a small subset—such as life formsthat transmit microwaves. Once these constraints arein place, we can infer what ET “must” be like, just aswe might make an inference about an automobileengine on the basis of its acceleration and top speed.Compared to the process of imaginative production,which is almost entirely emotional, reverse engineer-ing has elements of rationality and logic.

Universal principles of behavior are the third ave-nue to generating hypotheses about ETI. If successivediscoveries imply universal principles in the physicaland biological sciences, it is conceivable that there areuniversal principles in the behavioral sciences also(Harrison, 1993, 1997). Perhaps there are deep lawsof individual and social behavior that hold true forall species, all times, and all cultures. If so, ourknowledge of biological and social entities on Earthgives us a starting place for organizing our thinkingabout intelligent life elsewhere. Although Earth isonly one case, nested within it is a multitude ofexamples—millions of species, thousands of cul-tures, hundreds of nations spanning a written historyextending back over 5,000 years. Neither reverse

At the conceptual level, our search for extraterrestrial life is based on a hunger for knowledge and a desire to find new purpose

in the universe.

Neither reverse engineering nor the search for universal principles of behavior can give us more

than an educated guess about ETI…


engineering nor the search for universal principles ofbehavior can give us more than an educated guessabout ETI, but they help move us beyond the sheerfantasy of imaginative productions.

Perhaps the most common expectation is that ETcivilizations will be technologically advanced (White,1990). Given present search procedures, we areunlikely to encounter a civilization that is below ourcurrent technological level, since such a civilization isunlikely to use powerful radios, engage in spacetravel, or undertake other activities that we candetect. It seems statistically unlikely that we wouldencounter a civilization that is exactly at our level oftechnological maturity; hence, we expect to encoun-ter civilizations that, compared to us, are technologi-cally advanced. Astronomer Ray Norris (1998)calculates that the average civilization may be two bil-lion years older than our own. Human experiencesuggests that technological advances accelerate overtime; we have seen more technological advances dur-ing the last one hundred years than in the precedingtwo million years. What are the chances that wecould identify, never mind understand, such a soci-ety? It might be much easier for prehistoric man tograsp cellular telephones, computers, lasers, and jettransports.

In our attempts to envision ETI science and tech-nology we must be wary of slipping from science toscience fiction. As we look into the future, we shouldask if our projection conflicts with known theoriesand facts. Years of conditioning by science fictionmay lead us to expect technologies that are not onlybeyond our own current grasp, but are foreverbeyond anyone’s grasp.

We should distinguish between technologies thatare possible in principle (but beyond our currentengineering capabilities) and those that conflict withknown laws of physics. For example, at the turn ofthe 20th century there was no scientific principle thatprecluded humans from flying beyond the speed ofsound, but 50 years had to pass before we had thenecessary technology. Similarly, it may be possible inprinciple to construct a wormhole to facilitate travelbetween remote parts of the universe, but it is cur-rently beyond our capability to do this. Or, we may

be able to alter the perception of the passage of timethrough space travel at relativistic speeds, but neverexceed the speed of light.

There are two ways by which technology that cur-rently strikes us as impossible may become availableto an advanced civilization or to ourselves later on.One possibility is that as we continue to collect andrefine data, seemingly impossible technologies willprove consistent with our current laws of nature(Haisch, Rueda, and Puthoff, 1998). The other possi-bility is that our current scientific framework isfaulty or incomplete. True, science has progressedrapidly during the past century or two, but anothertwo billion years or so would leave ample time forimprovement. Past discoveries took us beyond New-tonian dynamics to relativity. Will future discoveriestake us beyond relativity? We must walk a fine linehere. On the one hand, we must avoid assumptionsthat confuse the public about such matters as inter-stellar or time travel, or divert our attention fromproven options. On the other hand, we would do wellto remember the overworked patent officer who, atthe turn of the 20th century commented that every-thing that could be patented had been patented.

Another expectation is that ETI will be prosper-ous. This extrapolation is based on the associationbetween technological development and quality oflife on Earth. Despite millions of hungry people, theaverage person, at least in technologically advancedsocieties, eats better and lives better than his or herancestors, even 50 years ago (Berry, 1996). Theamount of discretionary income—that is, money notrequired for subsistence—has risen steadily toapproximately 40 percent and will rise further in thefirst decades of our new millennium. The ability totap the immense resources of space should contrib-ute to ET’s wealth.

A third common assumption is that ETI’s civiliza-tion will be stable. It will not have succumbed to run-away technology, environmental disasters, or war.Many people expect ET to have full control of itstechnology, show sensitivity to its environment, and,as we shall see, to be peaceful.

Another common assumption is that extraterres-trial societies will be willing to share informationwith Earth. Giovanni Vulpetti suggests that acting

What are the chances that we could identify, never mind understand, such a society? It might be much

easier for prehistoric man to grasp cellular telephones, computers, lasers, and jet transports.

Many people expect ET to have full control of its technology, show sensitivity to its

environment and…to be peaceful.


under a cosmic imperative, intelligent and self-awaresocieties will explore the universe. As a part of thenatural course of social evolution, such societies willfeel compelled to diffuse high-level life outside of theareas where they originated (Vulpetti, 1998). AllenTough points out that interactive communicationwould allow ETI to satisfy its own curiosity, espe-cially in the humanities and social sciences where itmay be interested in comparative data (Tough,1998b). An outward orientation would allow ETI todetect potential dangers (such as astrobiological haz-ards, war-like societies, and problematic alliances),and form collaborative partnerships (Tough, 1998).Moreover, ETI may be willing to share informationin order to perpetuate its values and endow its ideaswith a degree of immortality (Harrison, 1993, 1997).Historical precedents on Earth show that there is noguarantee that a technologically advanced societywould reach outward (Matloff, Schenkel, andMarchan, 1999), but SETI social scientists find manyreasons that ETI will be forthcoming.

Perhaps some ETI societies will be interested insharing their ideas and others won’t. It is the formersocieties that would help shape humanity in 3000,and it is the former societies that are likely to aggre-gate into a large supranational entity known infor-mally as a Galactic Club (Bracewell, 1975).

OVERVIEW OF SEARCH OUTCOMES

One thousand years from now the Search for Extra-terrestrial Intelligence will be associated with one ofthree outcomes. These are: (1) no evidence of extra-terrestrial intelligence, (2) confirmation of the exist-ence of extraterrestrial intelligence but with little orno additional information, and (3) confirmation ofthe existence of extraterrestrial intelligence coupledwith significant, perhaps rich and detailed informa-tion about our interstellar neighbors. Under the thirdoutcome, we may have entered into interactive com-munication and perhaps earned membership in theGalactic Club.

If we view these outcomes as sequential stages,right now we are 40 years into Stage 1 (no evidence ofextraterrestrial intelligence). We do not know if andwhen we will enter Stage 2, or how long we wouldremain in Stage 2 before entering Stage 3, or even ifwe will enter Stage 2 before entering Stage 3 (whichcould occur if our initial contact is with a member ofthe Galactic Club). A thousand years from now, wecould be at any stage of the search process.

No Confirmation

If the search continues for centuries, perhaps to thedawn of the next millennium, then we will live withthe implication that we are alone in the universe. Wewill conclude that the circumstantial evidenceassembled during the 20th century was misleading.Ben Finney suggests that if we do not find ETI, weourselves may be encouraged to spread the universewith intelligent life:

However sobering [no confirmation would be] forcosmic evolutionists, those interested in human spaceexpansion would certainly take the apparent absence ofextraterrestrials in our galactic neighborhood as agreen light for humanity spreading throughout thatregion. Let us further imagine that through learninghow to settle in and around various planets and smallerbodies of our solar system and the development of pow-erful space drives and multigeneration spaceships,humans would eventually be able to migrate to nearbystar systems and found viable communities there. Thenfrustrated would-be students of independently evolvedextraterrestrials would have the opportunity to studyhow our descendants evolve culturally and biologicallyas they scatter through space… (Finney, 1999)

Would we ever concede that we are alone in theuniverse? Given that beliefs in extraterrestrial lifehave persevered for centuries, it is doubtful that allcitizens of our solar system would accept this conclu-sion. As new generations are born, as new searchrationales are developed, and as new search technol-ogies come on line we might expect sporadic searchesinto the indefinite future.

Confirmation

At the end of a thousand years, we may have detectedunequivocal evidence of ETI but have few or no addi-tional details. This is a standard SETI detection sce-nario: our interception of a carrier wave or “dialtone” from somewhere else in the galaxy. Anotherway that unadorned confirmation could come about

If the search continues for centuries, perhaps to the dawn of the next millennium, then

we will live with the implication that we are alone in the universe.

…a standard SETI detection scenario: our interception of a carrier wave or “dial tone” from

somewhere else in the galaxy.


is through some types of optical detections: forexample, patterns of energy use suggestive of a TypeIII civilization (Kardashev, 1964) or of an interstellarrocket exhaust. Or, we could discover an alien probeor artifact that we could not understand.

Maybe we will intercept a communication that hashigh information content but that is indecipherableto us. Given that our two civilizations may be sepa-rated by millions of years of evolution, translationand interpretation could be very difficult. Perhapswhole careers and institutes will be devoted to theseprocesses, but with very little progress and very littleimpact on our descendants’ daily lives. How wellcould we communicate with humanity of the year3000, much less with even more advanced beingsfrom entirely different genetic and cultural back-grounds?

There may be ethical as well as linguistic barriersto communication. Among the many reasons listedfor our current “absence of evidence” are that ETIcivilizations consider it unethical to alter the courseof a developing civilization, or consider it desirable topreserve some civilizations for future study (Ball,1973). Our ability to learn from ETI may depend ontheir perception of our readiness to acquire advancedinformation or to meet entrance-level requirementsfor the Galactic Club. We must be prepared for thepossibility that we are not considered worth talkingto, or that we will receive limited information thatdoes not put the continuity of our physical, scientific,and moral evolution at risk.

Despite the fact that we may have little or noinformation beyond knowledge that the other civili-zation exists, confirmation would have two profoundimplications. First, it would tell us that we are notalone in the universe, that the rise of intelligent life isnot a unique event. This, by itself, could have a majorimpact on our philosophy, science, religion, andviews of ourselves. Second, confirmation would tellus that civilizations can survive their period of tech-nological adolescence and achieve a level of technol-ogy that makes interstellar communication possible.It would strengthen hope that we can work our waythrough population growth, environmental decline,war, and the other threats that cloud humanity’sfuture.

Confirmation and Information Exchange

Instead of an information-poor “dial tone” type ofsignal, we might receive an “information-rich” signalthat is easily understood by us. Earth’s first contactmight be with a highly experienced civilization thathas procedures for communicating with civilizationssuch as our own. Perhaps they will teach us a univer-sal language, or send a multilayered communicationthat includes different levels of complexity geared todifferent recipients. Perhaps a probe that has beenstudying us for years will know our language andcommunicate immediately in forthcoming anddetailed ways.

If first contact is relatively uninformative, we willnot be content with the sheer fact that we share theuniverse; we will work very hard to learn more. As aresult of many years of hard work, we may partially ifnot fully decode the information. Discovery of life ofany type, ranging from an indisputable fossil onMars to a distant Type III civilization, would acceler-ate the search process and perhaps lead to the detec-tion of different civilizations with which we couldcommunicate. ETI encountered late in the searchprocess may help us communicate with otherwisemysterious civilizations that we had detected earlier.In a thousand years, we may have considerableknowledge of many different extraterrestrial lifeforms and cultures.

On the whole, our ability to enter into a rich andvaried dialogue with ET will depend on several fac-tors. One will be the availability of interactive com-munication technologies such as translatingsupercomputers. Presumably it will be easier to com-municate with a probe that is already within oursolar system, or with a civilization that has commu-nication technology that exceeds the speed of light,than with a civilization whose messages take years toreach us.

Ultimately, our ability to enter into full interactivecommunication will depend on our respective simi-larities and differences. ETI’s information-process-ing capacities may be so great that we cannot keepup. Given an objective reality, humans and ETI mayhave such different sensory and information-pro-cessing systems that they evolve contrasting concep-tions of reality. If reality is socially constructed, or in

Perhaps a probe that has been studying us for years will know our language and communicate immediately in forthcoming and detailed ways.


the eye of the beholder, the lack of a common refer-ence point may make it impossible to communicate.

At the heart of the matter is shared knowledge.Possibilities include a complete overlap in knowledge(Case 1), partial overlap in knowledge (Case 2), andno overlap in knowledge (Case 3). It will be increas-ingly difficult to communicate as we decrease theproportion of shared knowledge. We tend to assumeCase 1 or Case 2, perhaps because if Case 3 provestrue, communication would be impossible. We havealready encountered many situations that fall withinthe very broad Case 2 category (for example, whencultural and linguistic barriers make it difficult tocommunicate with someone from another society)and even some Case 3 situations (for example, cer-tain dead languages, and people whose pathologicalstates make it impossible for them to communicateverbally).

If and when we try to communicate with ETI, wemay believe our dialogue is based on objective reality.Yet our “understanding” may be based more heavilyon our own culture, on our collective unconscious,or on other sources that are shared by humans buthave little or no basis in ETI’s construal of the uni-verse. A test “conversation” might be necessary todetermine if our two societies have similar episte-mologies or “ways of knowing.” It may be that wewould uncover important differences, if, for exam-ple, they had difficulty explaining to us their con-cepts of space and time. This should make us verywary of the possibility of further communication.Or, maybe each species can see only a tiny slice ofreality; trying to communicate by sharing different“slices” of reality could be frustrating and confusing.If their message originates from very far away, we willlearn about their past, not their current circum-stances. If information arrives via a probe, ourunderstanding may be based on a time capsule froma long-dead civilization.

If we are lucky, we will not be stymied by suchproblems. If we are unlucky, humanity in 3000 mayhave had as much as a thousand years to workaround them. At the dawn of the Third Millennium,if multiple contacts have occurred, humanity’s pri-mary task may be to synthesize the knowledge ofmany worlds. This itself raises some interesting ques-

tions, given our problems integrating terrestrialknowledge in our current information age.

POST-CONTACT SOCIETY

Short-term effects of contact will be measured indays, weeks, and months. Long-term effects will bemeasured in decades, centuries, and perhaps millen-nia. Short-term effects will be evident in sharp andintense focus in the media, organizations scramblingto redefine themselves and cope with a new reality,and collective behavior. Long-term effects could per-meate all aspects of our culture and its institutions.Yet we should not take “an assumption of maximumimpact” (White, 1990) for granted, because majorscientific discoveries have not necessarily impactedaverage people who are grappling with the problemsof everyday life. It may be that the only people whoare really interested are academics and the intellec-tual descendants of those who are now involved inSETI.

If contact is delayed for centuries, it will impactpeople who may be very different from us. Recentyears have seen enormous changes in philosophy, sci-ence, and popular beliefs. Certainly, we expect that,compared to people who believed that the Sun circlesthe Earth, who never heard of evolution, and whonever read science fiction, the people of today wouldrespond very differently to ETI. Similarly, the peopleof tomorrow may have values, interests, and technol-ogies that differ substantially from our own and forthis reason react to ETI in ways that we cannot imag-ine.

According to Freeman Dyson, on a time scale of athousand years, we can predict neither technologynor politics (Dyson, 1997). He expects that a thou-sand years from now, there will still be a diversity oflanguages, cultures, and religions. Humanity’smigration to the high frontier will make it possible topreserve, even expand diversity—in essence, vastphysical distances among populations will preventconflict among very dissimilar peoples. Both naturalselection and genetic engineering will increase thegenetic differences among people, and will have initi-ated the process of speciation, the division of ourspecies into many varieties.

Dyson adds that the human population (broadlydefined) will reach staggering size. Our current twopercent per year growth could continue if we spreadout within the solar system. By his calculations, thisrate of growth, over a thousand years, would

It may be that we would uncover important differences, if, for example, they had difficulty

explaining to us their concepts of space and time.


“increase our population and resources and livingspace by a factor of five hundred million” and therewould still be ample reserves for continued growth.

Long before that time, we will be capable of modi-fying our bodies, our own existence. The humangenome will be completely mapped. There will be ameld of biotic and abiotic parts, creating organismsendowed with the capacity to thrive in the currentlethal and improvident environments of outer space.Bioengineered hybrids may set forth on interstellarflights or undertake new kinds of searches for extra-terrestrial life. A thousand years from now, first con-tact with new extraterrestrial civilizations couldoccur so regularly as to evoke little notice, apart fromlatter-day anthropologists and government bureau-crats.

ETI’s impact on us will depend on the specific sce-nario that reveals ETI’s presence. The interception ofan impersonal broadcast from a neighboring galaxywill have less effect than the discovery of a probewithin our solar system. Low-level electromagneticcommunication could have very little effect on usbecause of the steady stream of terrestrial globalproblems inevitably confronting humankind.

In a recent discussion of astrobiology and SETI,Harrison proposed a fourfold classification systemfor detection scenarios (Harrison, 1999b). He beganby noting that the NASA Astrobiology Program andSETI share interests in life in the universe, but thatthere are also important differences. Astrobiologistslean heavily towards the preliminary terms in theDrake Equation (stars, planets, habitability, initia-tion of life) and tend to search for life’s precursorsand for simple forms of life within our solar system.SETI scientists’ interests extend to the final terms ofthe Drake Equation (evolution of intelligence, lon-gevity) and seek advanced technological civilizationselsewhere in the galaxy. Thus, astrobiology and SETIdiffer along two major dimensions: where they con-centrate their search (within or outside of our solarsystem) and the level or complexity of the living sys-tem that they seek (simple or complex). Combiningthe two levels of the two dimensions that differenti-ate astrobiology and SETI yields four detection sce-narios. These were assigned the working titles ofDistant Dust (distal and simple), Microbes on Mars

(proximal and simple), ET Calling (distal and com-plex), and Space Visitors (proximal and complex).This classification captures the weakest possible case(evidence of life’s precursors in distant galaxies) andthe strongest possible case (robot probes, UFOs, andextraterrestrial visitations) as well as the intermedi-ate cases favored in astrobiology and SETI.

The unfolding of any of these detection scenarioswould represent a great scientific discovery and couldhave profound effects on our intellectual and emo-tional lives. Nonetheless, it should prove more chal-lenging easing humanity through some of thesescenarios (Space Visitors and ET Calling) than others(Microbes on Mars and Distant Dust). Furthermore,each scenario has different implications for our sci-ence and technology, our religion and arts, and oureveryday lives. This framework was designed as auseful heuristic for organizing various hypothesesabout long-term and short-term reactions to humanlife. It should be useful also for developing scenario-contingent strategies for managing contact and itsaftermath.

Let us sharpen our focus on a future world wherewe are able to learn about extraterrestrial life formsand cultures. In an informal survey of approximately200 people from 12 countries, Allen Tough (1997)asked, “If a radio dialogue with an extraterrestrialcivilization occurs someday, what questions do youhope to ask, and what topics do you hope we discuss?From this wise, knowledgeable civilization, what doyou want to learn most of all?” This resulted in over athousand questions addressing everything fromeveryday practical matters to profound questionsabout science, religion, and the arts.

Practical Information

Tough’s respondents hoped that through communi-cating with advanced extraterrestrial societies we willgain practical information that will help us solvecontemporary problems, improve the quality ofhuman life, and secure our own future as a species.We imagine ETI as having made technologicaladvances that we seek in our own future: increasinglyminiaturized and powerful information processingdevices; cheap and inexhaustible sources of power;gentle chemical procedures that replace the surgeon’sscalpel; workable means for interstellar travel; pro-

A thousand years from now, first contact with new extraterrestrial civilizations could occur so

regularly as to evoke little notice…

We imagine ETI as having made technological advances that we seek in our own future…


longed life; and cyborgs endowed with near-immor-tality. Perhaps we will be coached in faster-than-lightcommunication, interstellar travel, and other tech-nologies that appear at the cusp between science andscience fiction. If contact leads to the transfer of tech-nology, and if we understand how to use this technol-ogy and are able to cope with the full range ofenvironmental, social, and psychological conse-quences, we may become empowered to solve someof our biggest problems, improve the quality ofhuman life, and accelerate our own evolution.

Interaction with many ETI societies would exposeus to unprecedented levels of diversity and stimula-tion. Over time, knowledge gained from an extrater-restrial civilization could shape human leisure-timeor recreational activities. For example, at some pointpeople may embrace extraterrestrial costumes,dances, foodstuff, and customs. At first, these mightbe mimicked at “trendy” social events. Theme parksor museums could convey a sense of what it might belike to live within ETI society. Amusement park ridescould be based on ETI conveyances (even as imag-ined spaceships shape many amusement park ridestoday). And, if interstellar travel proves to be muchless daunting than it appears right now, then it isconceivable that in a thousand years extraterrestrialsocieties could become desirable tourist destinations.Already, there are energetic efforts to develop spacetourism, including suborbital and orbital flights,space hotels, and luxury cruises around the moon.

On the other hand, we might question whether ornot advanced civilizations would have, or at least use,some of the technology that we impute to them. Forexample, Dyson spheres and omnidirectional bea-cons may be avoided because they constitute needlessexpense, squander resources, and manufacture pol-lution as well as being irrelevant to their life forms.Additionally, we may not be judged “ready” to receivesuch information. After all, would you give a childthe secret code of ballistic missiles just so he or shecould enjoy playing with them? Finally, informationthat is practical to them may or may not be practicalto us, especially if they were radically different fromus, such as would be the case if they were “machineintelligence.” Their ideas may seem very “academic”

to us, depending on the problems that confront us atthat future time.

Perhaps the most exciting prospect is that we willlearn how ET civilizations survived their technologi-cal adolescence. Perhaps they will have a developedempirical field of study that can define critical bottle-necks in civilizational advances and elaborate ways ofnavigating them (Tough, 1986). In the very long run,the challenge will be outliving one’s star, by buildingone’s own “world” or using giant transports tomigrate to another solar system. As far as we can tell,there are no phenomena suggestive of astroengineer-ing in the vicinity of stars about to become red giants.

Answers to Major Questions

Information from ETI may help us grapple withsome of the greatest scientific and existential ques-tions of all time. We, and they, may have a biastowards expecting scientific discourse in part becauseadvanced technology is a prerequisite for interstellarcommunication and in part because science is a con-venient reference point for languages that transcenddifferent cultures. On the other hand, the primacythat we accord math and logic may reflect the factthat on Earth the search is conducted by physical sci-entists. If we restrict our discourse to science, we willeliminate broad spectra of human activities: philoso-phy, humanity, religion, and the arts.

Science

The discovery of extraterrestrial life would have pro-found implications for physical, biological, andsocial science. This discovery would either validate orchallenge our beliefs in the wide-scale applicability ofour own scientific principles. One view is thatalthough ETI will necessarily have to deal with thesame physical universe that we do, their science maybe unrecognizable because they will come from dif-ferent environments, will have different methods ofsensing their environments, and will apply differenttechniques to different scientific topics (Rescher,1985). Another view is that ETI will think like we dodespite their different origins. They will be subjectedto the same general space, time, and materials con-straints that we are, and hence forced to devise sim-ple and effective ways of thinking about the universe.As a result, their science will be easily recognized byus (Minsky, 1985).

…information that is practical to them may or may not be practical to us, especially if they were radically different from us, such as would be the

case if they were “machine intelligence.”


Contact with ETI may expose us to new meta-physics and epistemologies. Post-contact humanitymay be privy to partial or full answers to questionsabout such things as the origin and fate of the uni-verse and the course of evolution and of civilization.We dream of learning “comparative cosmologies,”contrasting theories of the ultimate origin of the uni-verse. We dream also of learning the mathematicaltheory unifying all known forces of nature, or per-haps a theory of the superstrings or a unified theoryof science of a type that we have not yet conceived.

Ben Finney points out that one of the reasons thatthe social sciences lack the maturity of the physicalsciences is that so far we have had only one opportu-nity to study the development of consciousness,intelligence, and culture (Finney, 1999). That is theopportunity available on Earth. He points out thatastronomy, for example, would have not progressedvery far if astronomers had been forced to develop atheory of planetary evolution based solely on knowl-edge of our own planet. We need extraterrestrial civi-lizations “to introduce us to an array of possibilitiesand variations beyond our experience, and also toshock us out of such parochial views as regardingourselves as the summit and final goal of evolu-tion….”

Information about other civilizations would con-fer opportunities for comparative scientific studies ofcultures, life forms, and psychologies. By the year3000, under an information-rich detection scenario,we may have assembled a database containing hun-dreds, perhaps thousands of societies that enduredfrom decades to millions or billions of years. Wemight have, for tomorrow’s social scientists, theequivalent of anthropology’s Human Relations AreasFiles that facilitate cross-cultural studies for anthro-pologists. Historians would be able to do quantita-tive research on comparative civilizations.

Multiple opportunities, notes Finney, could moveus in the direction of consilience, or the unificationof knowledge (Wilson, 1998). So far, only physicsand chemistry have achieved consilience to anyappreciable degree. The chance to study extraterres-trial civilizations may help us build bridges amongthe physical sciences, natural sciences, social sci-ences, and humanities. Finney adds that SETI is oneof the endeavors led by physical and natural scientists

that has welcomed the participation of social scien-tists and humanists.

Religion

We draw a distinction between spirituality and orga-nized religion. Spirituality is an almost mystical senseof purpose and meaning in the universe, perhapsaccompanied by feelings of awe, reverence, and tran-scendence. Spirituality is not inconsistent with sci-ence, and it is evident in discussions of design, order,and beauty in the universe. Spacefarers have reportedspiritual experiences after viewing the Earth from adistance. These “overview effects” often include asense of transcendence, oneness with the cosmos,and universal brotherhood. For example, in an inter-view with Frank White, astronaut Eugene Cernanreported:

When I was the last man to walk on the moon inDecember 1972, I stood in the blue darkness and lookedin awe at the Earth from the lunar surface. What I sawwas almost too beautiful to grasp. There was too muchlogic, too much purpose—it was just too beautiful tohave happened by accident. It doesn’t matter how youchoose to worship God… He has to exist to have createdwhat I was privileged to see (Eugene Cernan, quotedin Frank White, 1987, p. 26).

Astronaut Ed Gibson stated: You can see howdiminutive your life and concerns are compared toother things in the universe. Your life and concerns areimportant to you, of course. But you can see that a lot ofthe things that you worry about don’t make much dif-ference in an overall sense. The result is that you enjoythe life that is before you; you don’t sweat the next mile-stone…. It allows you to have inner peace (Ed Gibson,reported in White, 1987, p. 43).

Organized religion often includes social structure,highly articulated and sometimes inflexible beliefsystems, specific loyalties, and group rituals. Discus-sions of SETI and religion typically center on orga-nized religion and emphasize concerns about sectsthat are characterized by high rigidity and disagree-ment with science. In some cases, narrow religiousbeliefs hold sway over objective evidence and, in thisway, obstruct science. Because of this, it is temptingto expect that ETI will have moved beyond religionand that science will dominate their value system.

Post-contact humanity may be privy to partial or full answers to questions about such things as

the origin and fate of the universe…Spirituality is not inconsistent with science, and it is evident in discussions of design, order, and

beauty in the universe.


One might argue that longevity, a requirement fortheir civilization to overlap with ours, is inconsistentwith organized monotheistic religions typical ofEarth. Despite their positive side, such religions arealso responsible for long-lasting warfare and destruc-tion. Religious warfare, in turn, can lead to thedestruction of a civilization. Hence, the absence ofcompeting religious sects would be one more factorcontributing to longevity. Yet this would not pre-clude spirituality.

When we review the basic principles of the reli-gions that attract broad segments of the world popu-lation (Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam,and Judaism), we find certain similarities. In a studyof this, Douglas Vakoch (1999a) began with a pool of200 principles drawn from the world’s religions. Hegave a sample of these principles to research partici-pants and, on the basis of their responses, organizedthem into 13 clusters. Examples of these clustersinclude giving and helping, forgiving, positiveactions, humility, thanksgiving, and positive atti-tudes. Whether or not similar principles evolve inETI societies, knowledge of them would help giveETI a comprehensive view of humanity.

Contact with an extraterrestrial society couldexpose us to ethical principles developed by creaturesthat are very different from us. Will we be able to rec-ognize and understand the ethics of an advancedsociety, or that of machine intelligence? As it stands,we often have difficulty understanding each other’sethics. If we can recognize ETI ethical principles, inwhat ways (if any) will they correspond with princi-ples already developed on Earth? Longevity mayimply a highly established code of ethics that centerson the perpetuation of individuals and all compo-nents of the natural environment.

Knowledge of extraterrestrial religious beliefscould result in a super-religion that encompassesmultiple intelligent societies. Another possibility isthat some ETI views will, in a sense, validate the basictenets of some terrestrial religions. This couldstrengthen terrestrial religions that have sharedviews, but perhaps spark conflict with religions thatmaintain opposing views. Especially worrisome isthe possibility that ETI beliefs will conflict withmajor world religions. Conflict may be particularly

likely if extraterrestrials have a monotheistic orAdamist-type religion that differs on key points withterrestrial monotheistic religions.

The mere possibility of “saintly” aliens couldeventually force a radical rethinking of Christian the-ology, and may cause a split in the church towardssupport for SETI. Even if their religion prevails, itcould take generations for humans to be absorbedinto their religions. Conflict would depend less onthe objective properties of ETI religion than on howpeople interpret and reinterpret it. Various religionswould look to their own past for guidance.

Surveys suggesting that religious leaders (Alex-ander, 1998) and followers (Ashkenazi, 1990) take arelaxed view of the possibility of ETI may be mislead-ing. Many religions are geocentric and homocentric.This is especially true of Christianity. From theChristian point of view, the discovery might be “tothe Glory of God,” but there will be no consensus. Onthe whole, we will be challenged by the sheer discov-ery of extraterrestrial life; even a single bacterium onMars would have implications for some fundamen-talists. The alternative—that God became incarnateon planet after planet—has an air of absurd theatri-cality to it. Organized religions, however, have thecapacity to change in response to new discoveries,even if historically the response has been slow. Whenthe alternative is extinction, there is strong incentivefor rapid change.

Steven Dick (2000a) notes that growing belief in abiological universe is a worldview, not just anothertheory or hypothesis. This, by itself, is forcing us torethink our theology. We are moving in the directionof a “cosmotheology” that accommodates a universefull of life. Among the principles of that cosmotheol-ogy are that humanity is neither physically nor bio-logically central to the universe; that humanity is atbest somewhere midway in the great chain of intelli-gent beings; and that we must evolve a reverence andrespect for life that includes all of the species in theuniverse. In addition, cosmotheology fosters a radi-cally different conception of God—a God of theentire universe, a God whose roots are found in cos-mic evolution. Dick writes, “With due respect forpresent religious traditions whose history stretchesback four millennia, the natural God of cosmic evo-

Will we be able to recognize and understand the ethics of an advanced society, or that of

machine intelligence?

We are moving in the direction of a “cosmotheology” that accommodates

a universe full of life.


lution and the biological universe, not the supernat-ural God of the ancient Near East, may be the God ofthe next millennium.” Since we are accelerating ourown progress into space and increasing our chancesof encountering ETI, cosmotheology may havetransformed humanity by the year 3000. ETI also willbe aware of the biological universe; perhaps cosmo-theology will become a shared religion.

Politics and Law

In his seminal work Living Systems, James GrierMiller points out a trend towards increasingly largersystems (Miller, 1978). In human history we see ashift from small communities to cities and nations,and now interstate political systems. Thus, someEuropean city-states and principalities first joinedtogether into nations recently have become part ofthe European Union. This tendency to form increas-ingly large sociopolitical units is noted in discussionsof world government (Schenkel, 1999) and of theGalactic Club (Bracewell, 1975). The potentialadvantages of joining together include aggregatedresources and peace.

Miller views supranational systems as relativelyrecent developments. Their evolution is slow and notinviolate: consider the fragmentation of statesaccompanying the dissolution of the Soviet Union.At this point, most supranational entities—such asthe United Nations—exert only spotty control overconstituents’ lives. Still, movement towards suprana-tional entities is a continuation of billions of years ofevolution towards larger, more complex social sys-tems. It points in the direction of world governmentand even larger sociopolitical systems.

Peter Schenkel sees two ways that we on Earthcould unite to solve our planet’s problems (Schenkel,1999). The less painful is to minimize the differencesamong the peoples of the world and increase ourefforts to develop a world government. The morepainful course is for the survivors of a nuclear holo-caust or other disaster of human making to findthemselves compelled down the road to unification.Surviving societies that are older than ours will havefollowed one of these two paths and have establisheda stable government, eliminated war, and developedpositive relationships with other species. Schenkelhypothesizes that contact with such an advancedsociety will inspire Earth’s superpowers “to abandonruinous rivalry and tilt the scales for a peaceful worldgovernment” (Schenkel, 1999, p. 7).

An extended legal framework that encompassesnot only all nations on Earth, but also human societ-ies dispersed throughout the solar system and ETIelsewhere, may govern humanity by the year 3000.Such laws could assure orderly progress of humansinto space and regulate interstellar affairs. The chal-lenge of international law—to find a framework thatis acceptable to diverse people who live under verydifferent circumstances—will be magnified manytimes over as we struggle to organize radically differ-ent and widely separated species.

Simplicity rather than complexity must character-ize any legal framework promulgated for galacticapplication. To survive, it must consist of a few prin-ciples that are at a sufficiently high level of abstrac-tion that they can be creatively adapted to diverse“local” populations and conditions. To draw an anal-ogy from United States law, we expect that this legalframework would bear a closer resemblance to theUS Constitution than to state laws or local ordi-nances. An interstellar legal framework may beoffered to us if we encounter civilizations that havealready formed a supranational entity or GalacticClub. Or, we ourselves may contribute to its develop-ment.

Knowledge about extraterrestrial societies willallow us to evaluate Francis Fukuyama’s (1992)hypothesis that the ascendance of liberal democra-cies on Earth rests on deep or universal principles.Some of those who venture a guess suggest that ETcivilization will be peaceful, since, as noted briefly inour discussion of “Assumptions about ET,” warlikesocieties may earn low scores on the longevity factor.

Despite frightening images of extraterrestrials andtalk of evil empires, Harrison theorizes that mostadvanced civilizations are peaceful rather than bellig-erent (Harrison 1996, 1997). This thesis rests uponconvergent evidence that relations among nations onEarth are becoming less warlike. First is the shiftfrom autocratic forms of government that resolveproblems through force to democratic forms of gov-ernment that seek peaceful, negotiated solutions toproblems (Russett, 1993). Second is a decrease in thefrequency and intensity of war (Fukuyama, 1992;Keegan, 1994; Mueller, 1998), accompanied by

An extended legal framework that encompasses… all nations on Earth…human societies dispersed

throughout the solar system and ETI elsewhere, may govern humanity by the year 3000.


increased interest in nonlethal alternatives (Alex-ander, 1999). Third, mathematical models andgame-theoretic research show that nations thatrefrain from belligerence and enter into defensivepacts are ecologically superior (last longer) than soci-eties that follow aggressive foreign policies (Axelrod,1984; Cusack and Stoll, 1994). This does not violatethe principle of survival of the fittest. The aggressiveskills that assure the survival of wild animals in thejungle are not the same skills that promote a society’ssurvival within even larger social systems.

This type of analysis, which draws on understand-ing life on Earth to forecast life elsewhere, is subjectto two major qualifications. First, we must be sensi-tive to the internal validity of the analysis. Do thedata demonstrate a powerful trend, or are they noth-ing more than random variations that appear impor-tant because they happen at our particular point inhistory? Second, even if these data reflect powerfuland pervasive laws of behavior on Earth, we must becautious about extrapolation to societies that weknow nothing about.

The Arts

All societies on Earth have both creative and per-forming arts, and, if we are willing to include oraltraditions, a literature. These serve both an expres-sive and communicative function, and play on theintellect and emotions of the audience. Our empha-sis on science should not obscure the possibility thatETI will have a creative flair. By the year 3000 ETImay have influenced all of the creative and perform-ing arts. Perhaps we will be delighted by radicallynew art forms, either developed by ETI or collabora-tive projects jointly developed by ETI and humans.Perhaps human art will receive critical acclaim inother worlds.

Would ET art be discernible, much less under-standable to us? Would ETI art be too complex, ordifferent, for us to appreciate? Would ETI music vali-date our ideas of music from space, and would it beattractive to porpoises and whales? Will the limitednumber of basic plots that account for all human fic-tion account for all ETI fiction as well?

John Barrow is among those whose work hintsthat art may have universal components (1995). This

is because some of the attributes that equip us forsurvival also nudge us in the direction of compre-hending art. For example, Barrow notes that planetswith conditions conducive to the evolution of lifealso promote good color vision. Knowledge of ETIart forms will help us evaluate theories that there areuniversal principles of aesthetics, including a strongrelationship between music and mathematics.Indeed, in the movie Close Encounters of the ThirdKind, humans communicated with extraterrestrialspaceships by means of tones and chords.

Even if principles of beauty are not universal,notes Douglas Vakoch, it might be possible for onecivilization to teach its aesthetics to another (Vakoch,1999b). This would require establishing a commonmedium—if ETI has poor vision, for example, itmight be difficult to communicate pictorially—andfinding ways to factor in culturally based artistic con-ventions. Maori artistic conventions, for instance,involve representations of people that are integratedinto abstract forms. Unlike the Maori, visitors fromother societies usually see beautiful abstract formsbut do not understand that these forms representpeople.

Our strategies for communicating our sciencemay be adapted for communicating our art. Vakochpoints out that one way to convey our concepts ofchemistry would be through transmitting at frequen-cies corresponding to a combination of spectral linesassociated with a specific element. The same basictechnique could convey some of our ideas aboutmusic. In this case, we could transmit at multiple fre-quencies that correspond to the tones that constitutewell-tempered polyphonic music (von Hoerner,1974). Through some combination of universals,analogies, and relationships, we might be able to helpanother civilization develop a sense of appreciationfor our graphic arts, our sculptures, and our music.

Changes in Our Views of Ourselves

Post-contact society is likely to affect our views ofourselves in at least three ways. First, it will speedawareness that we are part of the biological universe(Dick, 1996). Contact, even under minimum detec-

Would ET art be discernible, much less understandable to us…would it be attractive to

porpoises and whales? Through some combination of universals, analogies, and relationships, we might…

help another civilization develop a sense of appreciation for our graphic arts,

our sculptures, and our music.


tion scenarios, is likely to accelerate our views of our-selves as part of cosmic man or “interstellarhumanity,” to extend the terminology of Olaf Staple-ton’s “interplanetary man” (Dick, this volume).Many other factors—such as our progress in space-faring—will contribute to our consciousness of thecosmos.

Second, knowledge of relationships among extra-terrestrial subpopulations could help us gain insightinto intergroup relations on Earth. We may learn, forexample, from how ETI societies treat different soci-eties as well as their own subpopulations. This dis-covery could cause us to reflect on how we ourselvestreat people from different cultures and subcultures.By seeing how ETI manages diversity, we may learnnew models for group relations on Earth.

Almost a century of work in psychology and soci-ology shows that other people’s treatment of usshapes our views of ourselves. People who are treatedas competent and worthwhile individuals tend todevelop high self-confidence and perform well. Self-confidence and success tend to feed upon each otherand generate an upward spiral of events. People whoare treated as inferior and incompetent lose self-con-fidence and motivation, and perform poorly. Lowself-confidence and poor performance also feed oneach other, in this case creating a downward spiral.

A very large and important question is howadvanced societies would treat us. Will they considerus equals, protégés, or inferiors? Despite technologi-cal superiority, would they maintain a sense ofrespect towards younger societies, and would theyallow such societies to put their best foot forward?Under a high information-exchange scenario, ETI’sopenness, tolerance, understanding, and ability tohelp younger societies to gain strength would beimportant to us in many ways, including their contri-bution to our views of ourselves.

Whether or not ETI makes advanced technologyavailable to us could be important psychologically aswell as materially. Withholding advanced technologyfrom us could be interpreted as a sign that we havefailed to pass muster as well as a source of frustrationand possibly tensions between the two civilizations.Offering ETI technology to us could contribute to asense of competence and mastery, providing that we

considered ourselves in control of the new technolo-gies and understood their operation. This sensewould be enhanced if we were able to see new appli-cations or find ways to improve it. We could beaffected adversely if we felt controlled by the technol-ogy or didn’t really understand how it worked.

We need to address the possible adverse effects ofcontact—feelings of inferiority, loss of internal senseof control, learned helplessness and the like—through studies of caste systems, colonies, subjectivedeterminants of self-esteem, and the preservation ofidentity following culture contact.

Risks and Concerns

Contact with powerful societies poses certain risks inaddition to possible challenges to our self-confi-dence. One such risk is domination, whether result-ing from military subjugation or misguided attemptsto impose their superior ways on less-advanced soci-eties. A perfect civilization could take pity on a poor,struggling civilization such as our own, uplift it, andin the process destroy our unique properties.

Dominance may be a natural, indeed inevitable,stance of any advanced life form. Drawing on sim-plistic notions of survival of the fittest, it is easy toargue that advanced life elsewhere in the cosmos willtend to control other life. Yet discussions of contacthave downplayed the possibility of military subjuga-tion. Immense interstellar distances would make itextremely expensive and difficult, if not impossible,to conduct interstellar warfare. Furthermore, weexpect that many of the justifications for war will beabsent (for example, an advanced spacefaring civili-zation would have plenty of unoccupied land for thetaking). And, as repeatedly noted, many have specu-lated that societies with great longevity haveadvanced beyond war.

Of course, if these analyses are wrong, and boththe physical and sociological barriers to interstellartravel evaporate, subjugation could be a risk. Given

A very large and important question is how advanced societies would treat us. Will they

consider us equals, protégés, or inferiors?

One such risk is domination, whether resulting from military subjugation or misguided

attempts to impose their superior ways on less-advanced societies.

…the differences in technologies could be far greater than that between slingshots and

thermonuclear bombs.


their vast experience and highly evolved weaponssystems, our contemporary military would not seemto offer much of a defense. If the discrepancy is mea-sured in millions of years of technological develop-ment, the differences in technologies could be fargreater than that between slingshots and thermonu-clear bombs.

Subjugation would not necessarily require actualphysical contact between their civilization and ours.As an alternative, they could deploy proxies on Earthto do their bidding. A powerful group of proxiescould have the knowledge, power, and technology tocontrol humanity, even as colonial troops controllednatives less than a century ago. People on Earth maylose the will to fight the proxies if they do not havethe technology and self-confidence to succeed.

Another clear risk is culture shock, the import oftechnology and ideas that are so radical that they dis-rupt our value system and pose severe threats tosocial order. Culture shock occurs when technologyoutpaces the human capacity to adapt. Again, wemust point to the great discrepancy between the twocultures. We expect ETI to be several rungs ahead ofus on the ladder of civilizations (farming, industry,nuclear, computing, etc.). It is likely not just a matterof their being one step ahead of us, but many steps,each step representing hundreds or thousands ofyears. It could take a long time to grasp—never mindassimilate—such a radically different culture.

Possible Intercivilization Projects

Human history is studded with projects that haverequired immense amounts of financial and materialresources and cutting-edge technologies. Such“megaprojects” (Harris, 1996) have included thepyramids, Stonehenge, the Suez and Panama canals,landing people on the Moon, and the “chunnel” thatlinks England and France. These efforts require sucha stretch of the imagination and such massive invest-ments of resources that they seem almost impossibleuntil they are done. In the case of ancient mega-projects such as the pyramids and Stonehenge, somepeople continue to invoke extraterrestrial interven-tion, despite the fact that engineers have mappedEarthly explanations.

Imagine, then, the magnitude of the projects thatmight be undertaken by a group of advanced civiliza-tions, including human civilization, sharing infor-mation and working in concert. Possibilities includecomparative studies based upon a sharing of infor-mation, vigilance against Von Neumann self-repli-cating probes and other potential threats, directedpanspermia to create additional islands of life, assis-tance with planetary engineering, and in the remotefuture perhaps even the creation of designer uni-verses to create a “multiverse” (Rees, 1997; Smolin,1997).

Interstellar collaboration could allow differentsocieties to utilize their distinctive strengths andcompensate for their idiosyncratic weaknesses. Pre-sumably, by virtue of ecological niche and historicalcircumstances, different societies will have differentintellectual and material resources and will havemade uneven progress in different areas of endeavor.For example, a society that early in the course of itshistory found evidence of other civilizations withinits solar system may have made rapid advances inrockets and spacecraft, while another society, threat-ened by a series of near-calamities, may have pro-gressed dramatically in environmental protection.Societies with complementary strengths could findmany ways to collaborate. If communication werepossible, a society with brilliant theoreticians mightshow a society with the necessary natural resources,technicians, and laborers how to make a workablestarship.

THE NEXT STEPS

The past century has been marked by growing evi-dence for the “many worlds” hypothesis and increas-ing enthusiasm for the idea that “we are not alone.”We have the reason and the technology to expand thesearch. At the same time, we must prepare ourselvesfor the possibility that the search will be successful.This includes finding ways to communicate withETI, better assessing the impact of detection onhumanity, and developing a reply policy.

Possibilities include…directed panspermia to create additional islands of life…perhaps even

the creation of designer universes to create a “multiverse.”


Accelerating the Search

Confirmation of extraterrestrial intelligence couldcome about in any of a number of ways, but givenour known laws of nature and current technology,some search procedures seem more promising thanothers. At present, the favored approaches of mostscientific searchers are radio SETI, which involvesusing radiotelescopes to detect electromagnetic pat-terns that are of extraterrestrial but intelligent origin,and optical SETI, based on searching other segmentsof the electromagnetic spectrum for laser communi-cations or signature patterns of energy use.

Proponents of these dominant strategies note thatmoving information around the universe is incredi-bly more economical than moving matter, and thatwhereas radio and optical signals move at the speedof light, spaceships or probes can move at but a tinyfraction of that speed. From this perspective,expanding the search means involving more radio-telescopes, engaging them in the search a greater per-centage of their time, including more areas of the skyin the survey, and scanning a greater number ofchannels. Radio astronomers could increase thechances of success further by building an observatoryon the Moon, and analyzing anomalous data that arenormally locked in bottom desk drawers.

We can expand the search further by bringing newsearch strategies on line. For example, we might trylooking for small robot probes (Tough, 1998a,1998b). As a result of advances in rocketry and min-iaturization, we are able to send small, sophisticatedinterplanetary probes that collect and return muchmore scientific data than could their larger and moreexpensive predecessors. Whereas seminar partici-pants expressed little enthusiasm for the existence ofself-replicating probes, it is conceivable that follow-ing remote detection of intelligent life on Earth, ahighly advanced civilization could send a probe toour region. To the extent that this is plausible, itwould be worthwhile to broaden the search to lookfor probes or other artifacts in our solar system.

Gregory Matloff and associates raise the intrigu-ing possibility of ETI spaceships or habitats withinour solar system (Matloff, 1999; Matloff, Schenkel,and Marchan, 1999). He suggests that, as their starsleave the main sequence and expand towards the

giant phase, residents of neighboring solar systemscould unfurl giant solar sails and set forth on worldships to our own solar system (Matloff, 1999). Such ajourney could be measured in centuries rather thanmillennia: since life emerged in Earth’s seas, hun-dreds of other stars have come within one or twolight-years of our Sun (Matloff et al., 1999). Starsmay pass within this range every 300,000 years or so.

Certain features make this scenario more attrac-tive than others suggesting that ETI is hiding withinour solar system. Solar sails are more consistent withour current understanding of physics than are someof the other means envisioned for interstellar travel(Matloff et al., 1999). We do not have to wait forbreakthrough propulsion to explain how ETI gothere. Furthermore, Matloff ’s hypothesis is testable. Aparticular type of infrared signature and the proper-ties of the orbit could tip off the presence of an alienhabitat within our solar system (Matloff et al., 1999).Finally, this hypothesis raises many provocative ques-tions about managing contact. If ETI silently orbitsour Sun, and has done so for millennia, it would beup to us to initiate contact. Why have they remainedsilent, and how would they react if we tried to com-municate with them?

Generally, the possibility of face-to-face encounteris left to science fiction writers and UFOlogists.Given our present level of knowledge, a face-to-faceencounter would depend upon both interstellartravel and life support systems that could keep thespacecraft inhabitants alive under all-but-impossibleconditions. Furthermore, unless one wishes tostrengthen the assumptions by presuming that ETIwill set forth in vast armadas, given the vastness ofspace a chance encounter would be all but impossi-ble. Most reports of encounters with extraterrestrialentities or their artifacts are dismissed as misidentifi-cation of natural phenomena (planets, airplanes),deliberate hoaxes, or hallucinations. Given this, sci-entists see such reports as a waste of time. If they stillhave interest, they are likely to be deterred by ridiculefrom the intellectual community. The underlyingreason that many SETI scientists are unwilling toconsider the possibility of ETI in our solar system,writes Michael A. G. Michaud, is “fear that theirenterprise will be discredited by association withUFO advocates” (Michaud, 1998, p. 174).

Radio astronomers could increase the chances of success further by building an observatory

on the Moon…

If ETI silently orbits our Sun, and has done so for millennia, it would be up to us to initiate contact.


We see two areas in which massive changes in ourown science could lead to rapid adjustments in oursearch strategies and perhaps force us to rethink theconsequences of contact. The first of these would bedevelopments in breakthrough propulsion physics,which could facilitate interstellar travel. If we becomecapable of faster-than-light travel, for example, it is agood bet that a much older civilization would also becapable of this feat. Speculation that “they” couldappear in our solar system would be much less far-fetched.

The second revolutionary development would bebreakthroughs in mental telepathy, leading to a reas-sessment of consciousness as a vehicle for interstellarcommunication. Freeman Dyson suggests that, in athousand years, humans may become more inter-ested in mental activities, perhaps experimentingwith radiotelepathy, communication through meansthat are presently unavailable to us, and creating, ineffect, a larger entity, a true group mind (Dyson,1997). Could we ourselves be part of an even greaterconsciousness, one that includes beings not like us?Could we at some point—perhaps following addi-tional evolution—find ourselves communicatingwith creatures from other places, other times? Per-haps rightfully we tend to put such suggestions on anequal footing with reports of a reincarnated ElvisPresley in the parking lot at the local mall. Yet, para-psychologists are employing tight experimentalmethodology, including double-blind procedures, toput remote viewing, mental telepathy, and relatedphenomena on a firm scientific footing (Radin,1997). Certainly, success rates have been high enoughto generate spirited discussion in mainstream psy-chology journals—and to attract research supportfrom national security agencies, the military, andeven the business community (Radin, 1997). Askedin 1992 why SETI did not use some sort of alteredstate of consciousness as well as radiotelescopes tosearch for extraterrestrial intelligence, MIT physicistPhilip Morrison responded that consciousness was“messy” and that he and his associates were havingenough trouble with their equipment as it was with-out adding consciousness into the mix (Mack, 1999,p. 27).

Messy indeed. Most of the carefully conductedresearch suggests that psychic abilities at best pro-

duce only a small performance edge—for example,boosting chance performance of 25% “hits” to some-thing on the order of 35% “hits,” a small but highlyreliable gain given metanalyses of scores of studies,each encompassing an enormous number of trials.Given the small magnitude of these effects, parapsy-chologists suspect that people’s expectations andwishes would completely overpower any psychiccommunications that might emanate from manylight-years away. Nonetheless, there are acceptableways to validate claims of psychic contact with extra-terrestrial beings, such as by soliciting informationthat is not known by us but can be verified usingpresent scientific procedures. For example, any “ET”that is “channeling” information to someone coulddraw our attention to an astronomical event that wehad not yet noticed but that we could confirm withour telescopes. So far, no such claims have been veri-fied.

As a corollary of expanding the search, we shouldmake ourselves a more attractive target for ETI. Forexample, if we suppose that an extraterrestrial civili-zation were to monitor Earth (using either remote orup-close surveillance techniques) with the intent ofself-manifestation following signs of humanity’s“readiness,” then we could try to signify this. Thismight be accomplished, for example, through self-preparation or an open invitation such as the “Invi-tation to ET” that a group of 60 people, primarily sci-entists, has placed on the internet.

Understanding Extraterrestrial Life

Increased knowledge of intelligence and behavioraldiversity on Earth will position us better to under-stand ETI. Psychologists, animal behaviorists, andother researchers have already conducted studies thatwould be of some use for understanding extraterres-trial intelligence, but it is doubtful that many havethought of their work in this context. Black and Stull(1977, p. 100) suggest a direction for such studies:

Our goals should be (1) to catalog and classifybehavioral patterns and cultural differences; (2) todetermine how these are related to the environment,physiology, and evolutionary history of each speciesstudied; (3) to determine what traits, if any, appearcommon to all intelligent animals; (4) to gain experi-

If we become capable of faster-than-light travel, for example, it is a good bet that a much older civilization would also be capable of this feat.

Increased knowledge of intelligence and behavioral diversity on Earth will position us

better to understand ETI.


ence in communication and other extraterrestrial spe-cies; and (5) to develop theoretical models that willallow extrapolation to extraterrestrial cultures, andallow us to evaluate at least semi-quantitatively theuncertainties in such an extrapolation. To the extentthat this might enable us better to understand humanbehavior, it could result in one of the most importantbenefits of the SETI program.

There is a promising model for extrapolationfrom terrestrial to extraterrestrial life (Harrison,1993, 1997) and it is James Grier Miller’s Living Sys-tems Theory or LST (Miller, 1978). Terrestrial andextraterrestrial life reside in the same universe. Theyare constructed of the same elemental buildingblocks, and governed by the same natural laws. Thesame assumptions (empiricism, determinism,monism) and methods that make it possible to con-duct scientific studies of humans should be equallyforceful when applied to ETI.

Any theory that is potentially applicable to ETImust have a broad perspective and have wide-scaleapplicability on Earth. It must offer proven princi-ples that are extrapolated easily to new situations.LST is a universal theory of behavior in the sense thatit cuts across species, forms of behavior, and histori-cal epochs. An outgrowth of Open Systems Theory,with its widely known concepts of inputs, through-puts, outputs, feedback, homeostasis, and entropy,LST is an interdisciplinary framework that integratesall of the biological and social sciences from cellularbiology to international relations. LST is biological,social, evolutionary, and applicable to individualorganisms as well as a spectrum of social entities.

According to LST, after life originated on Earth 3.8billion years ago, it evolved from single-celled organ-isms to increasingly complex biological and socialforms. These are, in ascending order: cells, organs,organisms, groups, organizations, communities,societies, and supranational systems. In the course ofthis evolution certain structures and functions main-tained their identities, although specific manifesta-tions changed. LST proposes that the same terms andprinciples can describe systems at each level,although higher-order systems may have distinctiveemergent properties that are not found at lower lev-els. Consequently, complex systems of differentscales can be disassembled into the same constituent

subsystems and analyzed in terms of the same con-cepts and relationships. Thus there are parallel struc-tures and processes as we move up the scale from thecell to the organization of societies. Living systemscomprise 20 specialized subsystems that have dis-tinctive structures and process matter, energy, andinformation. Such reductionistic building blocksseem plausible for unknown life forms.

Harrison applied a simplified version of LSTinvolving two generic processes (matter-energy andinformation) to three system levels (individual, soci-ety, and supranational system) (Harrison, 1993,1997). He used this framework to organize pasthypotheses about ETI, and generate new ones. Manyof the hypotheses advanced by astronomers, astrobi-ologists, and other SETI scientists are fully consistentwith LST and are occasionally expressed in termsthat are reminiscent of LST terminology. It is notentirely coincidental that Davoust (1991, p. 72)defines life as a “complex, organized open system”and that Seielstad (1989, p. 140) describes sub-systems, systems, and suprasystems as a set of nestedRussian dolls. Living systems theorists and SETI sci-entists are interested in the same phenomena andapply similar intellectual tools. Researchers fromboth traditions are accustomed to thinking in termsof energy, matter, and information; in terms of inter-connections and systems; and in terms of microcosmand macrocosm.

As Molton (1989) points out, in the absence ofprobes and radio signals we are limited to what wecan deduce from ourselves and our terrestrial experi-ence, and without a logical framework we will haveonly random data. We can deduce a great deal fromourselves, and LST is a logical and credible frame-work for organizing our thinking.

Will attempts to anticipate ETI be so much wastedeffort if ETI doesn’t exist, or is never found? By con-sidering the possible natures of the universe, wecome to understand the actual nature of the universe.Similarly, by considering the possible nature of ETIwe may understand more fully the characteristicsthat make us what we are (Ruse, 1985, p. 71):

Exploring the possibility of life elsewhere in the uni-verse is full of philosophical interest. Such explorationputs a bright light on our own powers and limita-tions…. By speculating on what other life forms wouldbe, we see more clearly the nature and extent of ourown knowledge. Such fairy-story telling does not proveanything empirically that we do not already know, butit does force us to think again about ourselves from anovel perspective.

…there are parallel structures and processes as we move up the scale from the cell to

the organization of societies.


Preparing Communication Strategies

How can we hope to communicate with an advancedand distant society whose languages have nothing incommon with ours? How can we communicate witha radically different species? Our current limited suc-cess in communicating with chimpanzees and dol-phins bodes ill for successful communication withoff-world beings.

Further research on interspecies communicationwould expand our overall knowledge of behavior aswell as contribute to SETI (Baird, 1987). Similaradvantages might be gained from studies of peoplewho for neurological or psychological reasons haveextreme difficulty communicating with otherhumans.

We should also accelerate research on interstellarlanguages. This work was initiated by mathemati-cians and physical scientists, who suggest that logic,mathematics, and the physical world offer shared ref-erence points that will facilitate human-ET commu-nication (Freudenthal, 1985; DeVito and Oehrle,1990). Learning one another’s languages via radiocould involve very long and repetitious sequences ofmessages with the two cultures trading facts that theyboth already know long before moving the discus-sion into broader areas such as art, history, and socialscience. Yet there may be ways to speed the process ofacquiring a mutual language or to initiate discussionoutside of physics and math. As already noted, psy-cholinguist Douglas Vakoch is working on means tocommunicate spiritual principles (Vakoch, 1999a)and aesthetics (Vakoch, 1999b). Additionally, wemight entertain the possibility of translating super-computers, working at the highest levels of logic andcurrently known as “theorem proving.”

Anticipating the Post-Contact World

Contact with an extraterrestrial civilization is notpreordained, but it could occur at any time and withthe speed of light. Contact could be a high-impactevent, and, as such, it deserves serious prior thought.Anthropologist Ashley Montagu presents the casewell (Berenzden, 1973):

I do not think we should wait until the encounteroccurs; we should do all in our power to prepare our-selves for it. The manner in which we first meet may

determine the character for all our subsequent rela-tions. Let us never forget the fatal impact we have hadupon innumerable peoples on this Earth—peoples ofour own species who trusted us, befriended us, andwhom we destroyed by our thoughtlessness and insensi-tivity to their needs and vulnerabilities.

We need preparation before confirmation of extra-terrestrial intelligence. For example, it would be use-ful to develop reply strategies prior to intercepting aninitial message. By developing a reply policy beforethe fact, we will maximize our chance of framing amessage that preserves our security, has the supportof broad segments of the population, and (if interac-tive communication is available) encourages a favor-able response. In the absence of advance planning,anyone who has access to a powerful transmitter mayattempt to speak in behalf of humanity.

Advanced preparation must proceed beyond theusual tiny groups of search advocates. Different peo-ple look to different types of leaders to ease humanitythrough detection and its aftermath, so it makessense to involve politicians, military leaders, businessleaders, and religious leaders as well as scientists inthe planning effort. Since contact will involve all ofhumanity, planning groups should have broad inter-national representation. It might make sense for theUnited Nations to be involved, or to convene a WorldCouncil.

Often we hear that when it comes to extraterres-trial intelligence, the only thing that we can expect isthe unexpected! For this reason, it makes sense toplan for many different contingencies. Our planningefforts should include a range of search technologies(radio SETI, optical SETI, interstellar probes), open-ness to many different forms of intelligence, and anawareness that contact could unfold in many differ-ent ways. For example, the consequences for human-ity would be very different if ETI were located in thesolar system rather than in a remote part of the gal-axy, or if recognition of ETI’s existence took the formof a sudden insight or a slow dawning awareness.Other variables include “the other’s” technologicalcapabilities, whether or not ETI took a familiar orunfamiliar form, and our perception of ETI’s per-ceived posture (benevolent, neutral, malevolent)toward humankind.

Our current limited success in communicating with chimpanzees and dolphins bodes ill for successful

communication with off-world beings.

By developing a reply policy before the fact, we will maximize our chance of framing a message that

preserves our security…


Failure to plan could exact a substantial price(Harrison, 1999a). The less planning, the more stressdetection will place on human decision-makers. Ifthere are few time pressures, the result may be“defensive avoidance,” symptomatized by ignoringpotentially important information, procrastinating,disowning responsibility, and “passing the buck”(Janis and Mann, 1985). We might expect someagencies to simply retreat beyond a veil of secrecy, “siton the matter,” and engage consultants who are bet-ter known for their demonstrated loyalty to theagency than for their expertise in shaping post-con-tact civilization. While these agencies dither, self-appointed groups may attempt to manage relationsbetween human and extraterrestrial life.

On the other hand, if there are intense pressures to“do something,” the response is likely to be one ofhypervigilance, rather than defensive avoidance. Thisconsists of panicky, ineffective decision-making(Janis and Mann, 1985). Under this intense pressure,decision-makers are likely to see only a small part ofthe overall picture. They focus on some cues andignore others. It becomes difficult to explore a fullrange of alternatives and think through all of theimplications. They turn first to those solutions thathave worked in the past, and, once having chosen acourse of action, stick with it despite growing evi-dence of a mistake. Hypervigilant people do notmake sufficient allowance for contingencies, normake complete plans for implementing their deci-sions.

Despite the advantages of planning for low-proba-bility but high-impact events, we see very little activ-ity. In many quarters, there is strong reluctance totake the possibility of “contact” seriously. This isunderstandable. Only recently have scientists assem-bled evidence that we may encounter intelligentextraterrestrial life. Many leaders in science, govern-ment, and industry are either unaware of this evi-dence or fail to appreciate its credibility. Decades ofunverified reports (including honest mistakes, delu-sions, and deliberate hoaxes) have tainted views ofthe search enterprise and cooled receptivity on thepart of those who should lead the effort. Even indi-viduals who have strong personal interests mayrefuse to discuss the topic openly because of expectedadverse reactions from their colleagues. The possibil-ity of encountering ETI must be acknowledged morewidely, and more scholars need to be brought into

the loop. Panelists consider it important to involvescholars with strong backgrounds in futures studies,decision theory, decision analysis, game theory, andutility theory, as well as a broad range of social sci-ences and humanities (see “The Role of the SocialSciences in SETI,” this volume).

Keeping in mind that human response will be sce-nario-specific, and that some scenarios seem morelikely than others do, several areas are ripe for sys-tematic study. First, the humanities provide us with avast set of social experiments useful for any assess-ment of potential impacts of contact. Althoughdirect physical, cultural contacts are one form of ana-logue often cited, the long-term impact of high-information contact provided by electromagneticsignals is more analogous to intellectual contactbetween terrestrial civilizations. Particularly relevantis the transmission of knowledge from the ancientGreeks to the Latin West via the Arabs in the 12th and13th centuries (Dick, 1995), an event that led to theEuropean Renaissance. More generally, if one acceptsthe claim that the biological universe is very differentfrom the physical universe, we can study the effectchanging worldviews have had on society (Dick,1995). We can also ask how humans have reacted topast false alarms of extraterrestrial life, whether thecanals of Mars, Orson Welles’ broadcast of War of theWorlds in 1938, the mistaken belief that quasars andpulsars were interstellar navigation beacons, andreports of UFOs (Harrison, 1997). Such analogies,cautiously used, can serve as a starting point for dis-cussion of likely similarities and differences betweenterrestrial and extraterrestrial experiences.

Human imagination is a rich resource for study-ing the implications of contact. The best science fic-tion gives us detailed potential scenarios for differentmodes of contact, ranging from War of the Worlds onthe negative side to Arthur C. Clarke’s Childhood’sEnd, Rendezvous with Rama and 2001: A Space Odys-sey on the positive side. Novels such as StanislawLem’s Solaris raise yet another scenario that must beconsidered: contact with intelligence so differentfrom us that it remains beyond our understanding.

Failure to plan could exact a substantial price.

…the humanities provide us with a vast set of social experiments useful for any assessment of

potential impacts of contact.


Many of the planning efforts so far have beengeared to managing the short-term response, whichmay range from complete apathy to rioting mobs. Sofar, less attention has been paid to the long-termeffects of contact. If we, in fact, encounter a techno-logically advanced and communicative society, thenthe diffusion of science and technology will be a cen-tral issue (Harrison and Elms, 1990). What more canhistory tell us about the introduction of advancedtechnologies into relatively stable “disadvantaged”cultures? What are the variables that determine theacceptance or rejection of new ways? What about theproblem of “culture lag,” a situation that arises whenthe rate of technological change exceeds the rate ofcultural change, with the result that there is a grow-ing gap between technology and its human users?Massive advances in technology can create problemsas well as solve them. For example, technologies thatlead to the extension of the human lifespan by manyyears could also generate monumental environmen-tal, economic, and psychological problems.

Reply Policy

More thought should be given to reply policy; that is,how the Earth might respond if ETI were detected.Most of the preliminary work was conducted by SETIscientists, oftentimes in committees of the Interna-tional Academy of Astronautics (Michaud, 1998). Inkeeping with the dominant radiotelescope searchparadigm, it has proceeded under the assumptionthat ETI will be light-years away and unaware of ourexistence. Under this particular scenario, we mightbe able to proceed at a leisurely pace, holding ourreply until we are confident that we are on safe foot-ing.

Reply policy rests on three fundamental issues.The first is, should we reveal our presence to anextraterrestrial civilization? Even if “most” advancedcivilizations are peaceful and beneficent, we won’tknow for sure about any individual civilization and,if ETI doesn’t already know of our existence, the saf-est course might be to maintain a low profile. Second,if we do choose to reply, who replies? As socially

enlightened members of the international scientificcommunity, many scientists believe that the responseshould be made in behalf of humanity as a whole, sosupranational systems such as the United Nationsloom large in the discussions. Third, what should wesay? The goal here is to frame a response that guaran-tees our own security, reassures “the other,” and setsthe stage for sharing knowledge.

There are two reasons why we need to develop areply policy before actual contact. First, a leisurelypace seems less appropriate following detection ofETI in our solar system than following interceptionof a dial tone at a distance. Second, even if ETI islight-years away, any individual with access to a pow-erful transmitter may choose to reply and may retaincomplete control over the message. This could createan erroneous but powerful first impression thatwould govern the course of future relations. To fore-stall this possibility, Donald E. Tarter suggests thatduly designated authorities should reply instantly. Inthe first reply the authorities would identify them-selves, state that additional information will be forth-coming, and that in the interim ETI should ignoremessages from all other parties (Tarter, 1997).

Closely related to the issue of reply policy is that ofactive SETI: deliberately proclaiming our presence toan unknown civilization. As a result of our use ofenergy or powerful radar broadcasts, another civili-zation may be aware of us already. However, deliber-ate action on our part should increase our visibility.If our current passive strategy is successful, we canallay lingering insecurities by simply not responding.If active SETI is successful, we may find ourselvesdrawing the attention of an unwelcome acquain-tance. Another concern with active SETI is that hun-dreds of years (or more) may pass between the timethat we make our presence known and the time thatwe receive a response. A response that would delightus today may be less welcome to humanity in the year3000.

By the dawn of the 21st century, there had beenseveral ad hoc radio broadcasts and even discussionsof launching a private interstellar probe. Perhapsthese efforts have a very low probability of success.Nonetheless, since any one of these could affect bothpresent and future generations, there would be an

If we, in fact, encounter a technologically advanced and communicative society, then the diffusion of

science and technology will be a central issue.

…if we do choose to reply, who replies?

…hundreds of years (or more) may pass between the time that we make our presence known and

the time that we receive a response.


advantage if humanity as a whole, perhaps operatingthrough the United Nations, were able to regulatesuch efforts. This is unlikely because of the largenumber of legal and technical problems that wouldhave to be solved in order to do this. Free speech is apart of many cultures, and given current technologyit would be difficult if not impossible to suppress“rogue” broadcasts.

By the year 3000, as a result of some mixture ofcareful planning, trial and error, and accident,humanity may have worked through the issues ofactive SETI and reply policy. We speculate that at thattime humanity may be quite comfortable interactingwith ETI, and not at all worried about reply policy oractive SETI.

Developing Educational Programs

Advanced preparation should include educationalprograms for preparing people for the possibility ofcontact. SETI provides a wonderful “hook” forengaging people in science. Properly designed educa-tional programs can enhance people’s understandingof astronomy and life sciences, as well as acquaintthem with SETI and its possible aftermath. The SETIInstitute’s “Social Implications” report (Billinghamet al., 1999) devoted close attention to this andlooked to broad partnerships including planetariaand libraries as well as schools, colleges, and univer-sities. This report also described how SETI scientistscould work with the news and entertainment mediato educate people and help shape public opinion. Amultimedia approach can help, for example, by usingthe visual arts to make the extraterrestrial presencereal but in nonthreatening ways.

Several education efforts are already underway.The SETI Institute’s “Life in the Universe” curricu-lum is noteworthy in part because it is under transla-tion into different languages to make it moreaccessible to the world’s population. The SETI Aus-tralia Centre also has a large educational component.Relevant also are the websites and outreach programsmaintained by the NASA-Ames Astrobiology Insti-tute.

Specific target populations include the media,opinion leaders, and children. The media must behighly informed so that it can provide high-qualitycoverage even in the event of rapidly unfolding

developments. Politicians, scholars, business mag-nates, military officers, and other opinion leadersmust be informed, because they will help shape thereactions of the many people who look to them forguidance. Children are important because it is theywho will carry on the search, and their generationmay be the first to experience the full impact of con-tact. As a useful spin-off, educational efforts aimed atchildren will help them separate science and fiction,and nudge them toward careers in science and tech-nology.

In addition to reaching individuals, we need toreach organizations and institutions that will havemuch to do with managing contact and its aftermath.These include intelligence-gathering organizations,legislative and regulatory bodies, the military, themedia, and professional organizations of all sorts.

Preparing Ourselves Spiritually and Psychologically

Those of us in the SETI community are self-anointedto lead the search and help manage the conse-quences. But are we prepared personally? Accordingto Zen, everyone is an enlightened individual. Are wetruly ready to encounter an “alien mind”? As long aswe quibble among ourselves, can we consider our-selves ready for contact?

Those of us engaged in the SETI enterprise spendsubstantial time addressing purely scientific issuesand intellectualizing the impact of contact. Perhaps itwould be useful to supplement these efforts by devel-oping inner strengths to brave confirmation and thepost-contact world.

Taking our cue from the Buddhist tradition, wemight spend more time in self-contemplation,becoming more at ease with ourselves and oneanother. If we can’t relate to our fellow humanbeings, how can we expect to understand beingsfrom another part of the galaxy? The qualities weseek are openness to new experience, comfort withourselves, and sensitivity and compassion for others.

CONCLUSION

No one is sure whether or not ETI exists, and, if itexists, whether or not it will be detectable to us.

Specific target populations include the media, opinion leaders, and children.

If we can’t relate to our fellow human beings, how can we expect to understand beings from

another part of the galaxy?


Nonetheless, growing circumstantial evidence andaccelerating search technologies have marked thepast four decades. Those who are willing to guesswhen contact will occur couch their estimates indecades, not in centuries or millennia. If theirguesses prove accurate, humanity in the year 3000will have long since discovered extraterrestrial life.

The impact of the detection of extraterrestrial lifewill depend upon the nature of ETI, the unfolding ofthe contact scenario, and the people involved. If infact ETI meets optimistic expectations (advanced,beneficent, communicative), we speculate that fol-lowing an initial period of confusion and consterna-tion, interstellar relations will be marked by threestages. During Stage 1, humans will have strong, pos-itive attitudes towards ETI. This will stem in partfrom the benefits of receiving ETI’s largesse and inpart from a human tendency to become emotionallyenamored of older, wiser, richer, and more powerfulindividuals. Inevitably, at some point, ETI will fallshort of our descendants’ expectations. Perhaps ETIwill not have the information that they want, will notbe inclined to come to humanity’s rescue, or willreveal something that we interpret as a serious flaw intheir character or society. Or perhaps some of ETI’sadvice won’t work, or will have hidden, undesirableconsequences.

Stage 2, then, will be predominated by suspicion,cynicism, and negative emotions—all proportionalto the height of the expectations generated earlier.However, if interaction continues, Stage 2 also willpass. As future generations of humanity gain moreexperience, they will develop a more complex pictureof ETI and enter Stage 3. At that point, people will nolonger view ETI as gods or devils, but as complexcreatures with unique patterns of strengths andweaknesses. Humanity in the year 3000 may havemature, Stage 3 relations with many different ETIcivilizations.

REFERENCES

Alexander, John (1999). Future War: Non-Lethal Warfare in theTwenty-First Century (St. Martins Press, New York).

Alexander, Victoria (1998). “The Alexander UFO Religious Cri-sis Survey.” http://www.anv.net/nids/articles/alexander/survey/_religion.html (National Institute for Discovery Science, LasVegas).

Ashkenazi, Michael (1992). “Not the Sons of Adam: ReligiousResponse to ETI,” Space Policy, 8, 341-350.

Axelrod, Robert (1984). The Evolution of Cooperation (BasicBooks, New York).

Baird, John (1987). The Inner Limits of Outer Space (The Univer-sity Press of New England, Hanover, NH).

Ball, John A. (1973). “The Zoo Hypothesis,” Icarus, 19, 347.

Barrow, John (1995). The Artful Universe (Clarendon Press,Cambridge, UK).

Berenzden, Richard (1973). Life Beyond Earth and the Mind ofMan NASA SP-328 (National Aeronautics and Space Administra-tion, Washington, DC).

Berry, Adrian (1996). The Next 500 Years: Life in the Coming Mil-lennium (W. W. Freeman and Company, New York).

Billingham, John; Heyns, Roger; Milne, David; et al. (1999).Social Implications of the Detection of an Extraterrestrial Civiliza-tion (The SETI Institute, Mountain View, CA).

Black, D. C., and Stull, M. A. (1977). “The Science of SETI,” inMorrison, Phillip; Billingham, John; and Wolfe, John, eds.(1977). The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence. NASA SpecialPublication SP 419 (National Aeronautics and Space Administra-tion, Washington, DC), 93-120.

Bracewell, Ronald (1975). The Galactic Club: Intelligent Life inOuter Space (San Francisco Books, San Francisco).

Crosswell, Ken (1997). Planet Quest: The Epic Discovery of AlienSolar Systems (The Free Press, New York).

Crowe, Michael (1986). The Extraterrestrial Life Debate, 1750-1900: The Idea of a Plurality of Worlds from Kant to Lowell (Cam-bridge University Press, Cambridge; Dover reprint, 1999).

Crowe, Michael (1994). Modern Theories of the Universe: FromHerschel to Hubble (Dover, New York).

Cusack, Thomas R. and Stoll, Richard A. (1994). “CollectiveSecurity and State Survival in the Interstate System,” InternationalStudies Quarterly, 38, 33-59.

Davies, Paul (1998). The Fifth Miracle: The Search for the Originof Life (Penguin Press, London).

Davoust, Emmanuel (1991). The Cosmic Water Hole (MIT Press,Cambridge, MA)

De Duve, Christian (1995). Vital Dust: Life as a Cosmic Impera-tive (Basic Books, New York).

DeVito, C. L., and Oehrle, R. T. (1990). “A Language Based on theFundamental Facts of Science, Journal of the British InterplanetarySociety, 43, 561-568.

Dick, Steven J. (1982). Plurality of Worlds: The Origins of theExtraterrestrial Life Debate from Democritus to Kant (CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge).

Dick, Steven J. (1995). “Consequences of Success in SETI: Les-sons from the History of Science,” in G. Seth Shostak, ed.,Progress in the Search for Extraterrestrial Life (Astronomical Soci-ety of the Pacific, San Francisco), 521-532.

Dick, Steven J. (1996). The Biological Universe: The TwentiethCentury Extraterrestrial Life Debate and the Limits of Science(Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).

Dick, Steven J. (1998). Life on Other Worlds (Cambridge Univer-sity Press, Cambridge).

Dick, Steven J. (2000a). “Cosmotheology,” in Steven J. Dick, ed.,Many Worlds: The New Universe, Extraterrestrial Life and its Theo-logical Implications (Templeton Press, Philadelphia).


Dick, Steven J., ed. (2000b). Many Worlds: The New Universe,Extraterrestrial Life and its Theological Implications (TempletonPress, Philadelphia).

Doyle, Stephen G. (1996). “Post Detection Global InstitutionalArrangements.” Paper presented at the 47th International Astro-nautical Congress, (Beijing, China, October).

Drake, Frank and Sobel, Dava (1992). Is Anyone Out There?: TheScientific Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (Delacorte Press,New York).

Dyson, Freeman (1997). Imagined Worlds (Harvard UniversityPress, Cambridge, MA).

Finney, Ben (2000). “Consilience and the Unity of Knowledge.”In Guillermo Lemarchand and Karen Meech (editors), Bioastron-omy ’99—A New Era in Bioastronomy, Proceedings of a Conferenceheld on the Kohala Coast, Hawaii, 2-6 August, 1999, ASP Confer-ence Series 213. Reprinted in this volume.

Freudenthal, Hans (1985). Excerpts from “Lincos: Design of aLanguage for Cosmic Intercourse,” in Edward Regis, Jr., ed.,Extraterrestrials: Science and Alien Intelligence (Cambridge Uni-versity Press, New York), 215-228.

Fukuyama, Francis (1992). The End of History and the Last Man(Avon Books, New York).

Goldsmith, Donald (1997). Worlds Unnumbered: The Search forExtrasolar Planets (University Science Books, Sausalito, CA).

Guthke, Karl (1990). The Last Frontier: Imagining Other Worldsfrom the Copernican Revolution to Modern Science Fiction (Cor-nell University Press, Ithaca, NY).

Haisch, A., Rueda, A., and Puthoff, Hal (1998). “Advances in theProposed Electromagnetic Zero-Point Field Theory of Inertia.”Paper presented at the 34th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Pro-pulsion Conference and Exhibit, (Cleveland, Ohio, July).

Harris, Philip R. (1996). Living and Working in Space, Second Ed.(Wiley-Praxis, Chichester, UK).

Harrison, Albert A. (1993) “Thinking Intelligently About Extra-terrestrial Intelligence: An Application of Living Systems Theory,”Behavioral Science, 33, 189-217.

Harrison, Albert A. (1996). “On the Relative Preponderance ofBelligerent and Peaceful Civilizations: Implications for SETI.”Paper presented at the 47th International Astronautical Congress,(Beijing, China, October).

Harrison, Albert A. (1997). After Contact: The Human Responseto Extraterrestrial Life (Plenum, New York).

Harrison, Albert A. (1999a) “Confirmation of ETI: Initial Orga-nizational Response.” Paper presented to the 50th InternationalAstronautical Congress, (Amsterdam, the Netherlands, October).

Harrison, Albert A. (1999b). “Proximity, System Level, and theHuman Response to Extraterrestrial Life.” Paper presented atCultural Implications of Astrobiology Symposium, (NASA–AmesResearch Center, November).

Harrison, Albert A., and Elms, Alan C. (1990). “Psychology andthe Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence,” Behavioral Science,35, 207-218.

Janis, Irving L., and Mann, Leon (1985). Psychological Analysis ofConflict, Choice and Commitment (The Free Press, Homewood,IL).

Karadashev, Nicolai (1964). “Transmission of Information byExtraterrestrial Civilizations,” Soviet Astronomy, 8, 217, reprintedin D. Goldsmith The Quest for Extraterrestrial Life (University Sci-ence Books, Mill Valley, CA), 136.

Kauffman, Stuart (1995). At Home in the Universe: The Search forthe Laws of Self-Organization and Complexity (Oxford UniversityPress, New York).

Keegan, John (1994). A History of Warfare (Vintage Books, NewYork).

Mack, John E. (1999). Passport to the Cosmos (Crown Publishers,New York).

Marcy, Geoffrey W. and Butler, R. Paul (1998). “Detection ofExtrasolar Giant Planets,” Annual Review of Astronomy and Astro-physics, 36, 57-97.

Maruyama, M., and Harkins, A. (1975). Cultures Beyond Earth:The Role of Anthropology in Outer Space (Vintage Books, NewYork).

Matloff, G. L. (1999). “Interstellar Solar Sailing: Comparison ofFive Candidate Sail Materials.” Paper presented at the 50th Inter-national Astronautical Congress, (Amsterdam, the Netherlands,October).

Matloff, G. L., Schenkel, P., and Marchan, J. (1999). “Direct Con-tact with Extraterrestrials: Possibilities and Implications.” Paperpresented to the 50th International Astronautical Congress,(Amsterdam, the Netherlands, October).

Michaud, M. A. G. (1974). “On Communicating with Aliens.”Foreign Service Journal, June, 33-40.

Michaud, M. A. G. (1998). “Policy Issues in Communicating withETI,” Space Policy, 14, 173-178.

Miller, James Grier (1978). Living Systems (McGraw-Hill, NewYork).

Minsky, Marvin (1985). “Why Intelligent Aliens will be Intelligi-ble,” in Edward Regis, Jr., ed., Extraterrestrials: Science and AlienIntelligence (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge), 117-128.

Molton, P. M. (1989). “An Experimental Approach to Extraterres-trial Life,” Journal of the British Interplanetary Society, 42, 423-429.

Morrison, Phillip, Billingham, John, and Wolfe, John, eds.(1977). The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence. NASA SpecialPublication SP 419 (National Aeronautics and Space Administra-tion, Washington, DC).

Mueller, John (1988). Retreat from Doomsday: The Obsolescenceof Major War (Basic Books, New York).

Norris, Ray P. (1998). “Can Science Survive a SETI Detection?”Paper presented at the International Conference on SETI in the21st Century, UWS Macarthur, (Sydney, Australia, October).

Norris, Ray P. (1999) “How Old Is ET?” Paper presented to the50th International Astronautical Congress, (Amsterdam, theNetherlands, October). Reprinted in this volume.

Radin, Dean (1997). The Conscious Universe: The Scientific Truthof Psychic Phenomena (HarperEdge, San Francisco).

Rees, Martin (1997). Before the Beginning: Our Universe and Oth-ers (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).


Rescher, Nicholas (1985). “Extraterrestrial Science,” in EdwardRegis, Jr., ed., Extraterrestrials: Science and Alien Intelligence(Cambridge University Press, Cambridge), 83-116.

Ruse, M. (1985). “Is Rape Wrong on Andromeda?” in EdwardRegis, Jr., ed., Extraterrestrials: Science and Alien Intelligence(Cambridge University Press, Cambridge), 43-78.

Russett, Bruce (1993). Grasping the Democratic Peace (PrincetonUniversity Press, Princeton, New Jersey).

Seielstad, George A. (1989). At The Heart of the Web: The Inevita-ble Genesis of Extraterrestrial Life (Harcourt Brace Jovanavich,Boston).

Schenkel, P. (1999). “Contact with ETI: Implications for a NewWorld Order.” Paper presented to the 50th International Astro-nautical Congress, (Amsterdam, the Netherlands, October).

Shostak, Seth (1998). Sharing the Universe: Perspectives on Extra-terrestrial Life (Berkeley Hills Books, Berkeley, CA).

Shostak, Seth (1998). “The Lifetime of Intelligent Civilizations.”Paper presented at CONTACT XV, (Santa Clara, CA, March).

Smolin, Lee (1997). The Life of the Cosmos (Oxford UniversityPress, Oxford).

Swift, David (1990). SETI Pioneers (University of Arizona Press,Tucson, AZ).

Tarter, D. E. (1997). “Security Considerations in Signal Detec-tion.” Paper presented at the 48th International AstronauticalCongress, (Milan, Italy, October).

Thompson, Keith (1991). Angels and Aliens: UFOs and the MythicImagination (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).

Tough, Allen (1986). “What Role Will Extraterrestrials Play inHumanity’s Future?” Journal of the British Interplanetary Society,39, 491-498.

Tough, Allen (1991). Crucial Questions About the Future (Univer-sity Press of America, Lanham, MD).

Tough, Allen (1997). “What People Hope to Learn from OtherCivilizations.” Paper presented to the 48th International Astro-nautical Congress, (Turin, Italy, October). Acta Astronautica, inpress.

Tough, Allen (1998a). “Interstellar Probes Within SETI, 1960-1998.” Paper presented to the 49th International AstronauticalCongress, (Melbourne, Australia, September–October).

Tough, Allen (1998b). “Small, Smart Interstellar Probes,” Journalof the British Interplanetary Society, 51, 167-174.

Tough, Allen (1999). “A Long-Term Perspective on InterstellarContact.” Paper presented to the 50th International AstronauticalCongress, (Amsterdam, the Netherlands, October).

U. S. Congress (1961). “Proposed Studies on the Implications ofPeaceful Space Activities for Human Affairs.” Report of the Com-mittee on Science and Astronautics, U. S. House of Representa-tives, 87th Congress, First Session, prepared for NASA by theBrookings Institution (U.S. Government Printing Office, Wash-ington, DC).

Vakoch, D. L. (1999a) “Communicating Scientifically FormulatedSpiritual Principles in Interstellar Messages.” Paper presented tothe 50th International Astronautical Congress, (Amsterdam, theNetherlands, October).

Vakoch, D. L. (1999b). “The Aesthetics of Composing InterstellarMessages.” Paper presented to the 50th International Astronauti-cal Congress, (Amsterdam, the Netherlands, October).

Vakoch, D. L., and Lee, Y. (1997). “Reactions to Receipt of a Mes-sage from Extraterrestrials: A Cross-Cultural Empirical Study.”Paper presented to the 48th International Astronautical Congress,(Turin, Italy, October).

Von Hoerner, S. (1974). “Universal Music?” Psychology of Music,2, 18-28.

Vulpetti, G. (1998). “On the Viability of the Interstellar Flight.”Paper presented at the 49th International Astronautical Congress,(Melbourne, Australia, September–October).

White, Frank (1990). The SETI Factor. (Walker and Company,New York).

White, Frank (1987). The Overview Effect (Houghton Mifflin,Boston).

Wilson, E. O. (1998). Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge (Knopf,New York).

contact: long-term implications for humanity · 2014-04-29 · section ii • contact: long-term...

Documents