Anticipation of Judicial Inquisition of Humans by Extraterrestrials
TRANSCEND MEMBERS, 19 Oct 2020
Potential Consequence of Failure to Adhere to Universal Principles of Intelligent Life
19 Oct 2020 – In the midst of a global pandemic widely framed as a war, there is a strong case for recognizing both the civilian fatalities and those whose lives are at stake on a daily basis — in order to reduce the risk to greater numbers of humans. Humans are called upon by authorities to take shelter in their homes to avoid any risk (Cowering for One’s Country in the War against Coronavirus, 2020). It is therefore appropriate to honour those — effectively “on the front line” — who are dying in far greater numbers in the hope of ending the pandemic as soon as possible. As in conventional warfare, they have little choice in performing this duty, having been conscripted and trained to that end.
In the spirit of the cenotaphs in many small towns in the former British Empire, the concern here follows from the inscription on those monuments: Lest We Forget. Beyond the immediate focus in that regard is a wider concern here with the potential implications of those involuntary fatalities as they may be perceived from a more universal perspective.
This follows from the possibility that humanity may eventually make contact with intelligent extraterrestrials — whose existence is variously considered hypothetical, despite the massive investment in detecting extraterrestrial life and the exoplanets which they may inhabit (Daniel Clery, How big money is powering a massive hunt for alien intelligence, Science, 10 September 2020; Parmy Olson, The Hunt For Extraterrestrial Life Just Got A Groundbreaking, $100 Million Investment, Forbes, 20 July 2015). The possibility of such contact is acquiring political dimensions (Abhijnan Rej, What Would Happen If China Made First Contact With Extraterrestrials? The Diplomat, 11 March 2020).
So framed, the focus here is on the non-human species conscripted into the process of testing the many possible vaccines considered vital to a viable response to COVID-19, or to the mutations which may succeed it. Although there are many efforts to document the number of cases of humans testing positive for the virus, and the fatalities which may result, the statistical methodologies and conclusions continue to be in dispute. Far more problematic is the determination of the number of non-human species conscripted into the process of testing vaccines, irrespective of the consequences of their testing positive.
There is a degree of awareness of the number of animals used in biological laboratories for a wide variety of purposes — whether the testing of any drug or product that may be fatal to humans or in preparations for biochemical warfare. It has been estimated that the annual use of vertebrate animals in animal experimentation — from zebrafish to non-human primates — ranges up to 100 million per year. In the European Union, vertebrate species represent 93% of animals used in research, and 11.5 million animals were used there in 2011. By one estimate the number of mice and rats used in the United States alone in 2001 was 80 million. Mice, rats, fish, amphibians and reptiles together account for over 85% of research animals. In addition there is extensive experimentation on invertebrates typically excluded from such statistics.
The proportion of animals specifically used in the development of a vaccine for COVID-19 is seemingly either unknown or unavailable — but may emerge in years to come. Descriptions of the experience of animals in such laboratories, and the manner of their death, have been dramatically presented by those specifically opposed to such treatment, notably People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), Humane Society International, and Cruelty Free International. There is a degree of sensitivity on the part of some laboratories to such treatment and the possibilities of alleviating suffering through alternatives to animal testing.
The purpose of this exercise is however to reframe the relation of humans to non-human species — as it may be perceived from an extraterrestrial perspective, now or in the future. Humans are naturally skilled in framing their treatment of animals — notably justified by particular interpretations of religious scriptures held to be beyond question, as with interpretations of the Bible regarding human dominion over all animals (Bible Verses About Dominion). These interpretations are also held to justify the extent to which animals may be consumed by humans, as well as the treatment accorded to them to enable this, possibly prescribed as ritual practices.
There is however a degree of sensitivity on the part of humans to animal welfare, to the conditions of transport of live animals, and to slaughterhouse procedures. This extends to the procedures of animal husbandry, especially in regard to the conditions experienced by animals in intensive farming installations.
It is questionable whether extraterrestrials — however hypothetical — will appreciate the justifications offered by humans for the treatment of non-human animals. There is also the possibility that human society will itself come to view such treatment as barbaric in some future period — potentially as a consequence of contact with extraterrestrials (or as a condition of such contact).
The argument here follows from related speculations in this regard, given their probable dependence on quite distinctive values and principles — potentially meaningless to humans (Communicating with Aliens: the psychological dimension of dialogue, 2000). Extraterrestrials may have reached the conclusion that any civilization should be encountered on its own terms, according to its own rules.
As previously argued, every effort might then be put in place by ETs to determine what those rules were — just as human colonial powers and missionaries might have chosen to do in their encounter with other cultures (Writing Guidelines for Future Occupation of Earth by Extraterrestrials, 2010). In practice this might be interpreted as the Golden Rule: Be done by as you did. It is of course uncertain whether extraterrestrials would seek the rules in order simply to apply them as such, to use them to develop a higher degree of ‘rapport’ with humans for mutual benefit, or to use such rapport in order to “entrain” humans in unsuspected ways
Humanity has enabled considerable investment in biochemical warfare — and the development of protective measures — with the aid of animals tested for that purpose. There is therefore the additional possibility that a virus such as COVID-19 is an unrecognized form of “contact” initiated by extraterrestrials in response to human under-development — according to principles valued throughout the universe. Colonial powers have not been averse to such forms of “contact” with the indigenous species they have encountered.
Although speculative, the argument is consistent with philosophical intuitions regarding panpsychism, karma, and reincarnation, as well as emerging implications with respect to quantum mind. Whilst severe disruptions to the atmosphere by the arrival of extraterrestrial vessels is now characteristic of fictional representations, it could be argued that this is only suggestive of disruption to the “memetic atmosphere” which could herald any contact. Such disruption is potentially consistent with the increasing chaos of global governance and its leadership (Surreal nature of current global governance as experienced, 2016).
Tags: Extraterrestrial Life, Humanity, Humans
DISCLAIMER: The statements, views and opinions expressed in pieces republished here are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of TMS. In accordance with title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. TMS has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is TMS endorsed or sponsored by the originator. “GO TO ORIGINAL” links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the “GO TO ORIGINAL” links. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Join the discussion!
We welcome debate and dissent, but personal — ad hominem — attacks (on authors, other users or any individual), abuse and defamatory language will not be tolerated. Nor will we tolerate attempts to deliberately disrupt discussions. We aim to maintain an inviting space to focus on intelligent interactions and debates.
Click here to go to the current weekly digest or pick another article: