Phil Elmore: Individual Authoring Services

Could Space Aliens Embrace Objectivism?
by Phil Elmore

Once, while discussing Objectivism, I was told this:

Your whole philosophy would break down as irrelevant the moment the SETI team shows that we are not the only intelligence in the universe.

This, of course, is a pretty silly tactic to use in a debate about philosophy -- but it's an interesting idea nonetheless. After thinking about it, I decided there's nothing to stop space aliens from becoming Objectivists, if they're willing to learn.

Reality -- that which dictates what humans or aliens must or must not do to promote and sustain their lives -- is not altered by the fact that somewhere, some other form of life undoubtedly exists. Stabbing a finger through the eye of a fellow human who has not wronged me is immoral. Thrusting a tentacle through the brain of a fellow Jovian might be a requirement of my alien reproductive cycle, and thus moral, if my physiological requirements for life render it a necessity. But the objective principles through which I arrive at these decisions of ought based on is remain the same, and thus what is moral in the abstract remains unchanged despite the fact that specific pronouncements of morality or immorality can only be made based on the requirements of life. (To put it another way: what keeps me alive and rational may change depending on my species, but the need to stay alive and be rational does not.)

Aliens similar to us would have similar life requirements. Aliens remarkably different from us might well have different requirements (but we couldn't begin to discuss that until we knew what those requirements were). Aliens capable of relating to us in any way would presumably also have to integrate sensory data into concepts, and thus would reason. The concepts of rationality and irrationality remain the same.

I suppose a contrarian could point out, since he or she is free to create hypothetical aliens in any fashion he or she wishes, that the hypothetical aliens possess brains that operate unlike humans' brains in every conceivable and inconceivable way, rendering their process of reasoning unfathomable to us. But their requirements are the same as ours, if they are mortal beings possessing biological life as we do: their task is to integrate their sensory data into concepts in order to make decisions regarding what they must or must not do in order to remain alive.

The foundation of objective ethics doesn't change simply because one creature's moral guidelines prompt it to seek out a nitrogen-oxygen atmosphere, while another's prompts it to seek out an atmosphere rich in cyanide gas. Their specific requirements may differ, but the fundamental tasks presented to mortal beings existing in the real world (or on other worlds within reality) are the same.

To say, "Your ethics can't be objective because nowhere do they address specific scenarios to determine what is moral or immoral for space aliens" is essentially absurd. It's a hypothetical with no definable parameters, which can be expanded at will to form any counter-argument one wishes. It does not constitute a convincing indictment of Objectivism.

At any rate, we can debate alien morality when the aliens arrive. Until then, we must be content with the metaphysically given.