Space Cadets: Human Society and Its Discontents

By Sally Raskoff

When do humans cease to be human?

I was with some friends and astronomers looking through a telescope the other day and the conversation turned to space colonization. As the astronomers went on to talk about terraforming Mars and other fascinating topics, I wondered how life off the planet would affect humans and human society. 

We have a few examples of real humans living in closed environments for limited time-- the NASA International Space Station, Antarctic science stations, and Biosphere 2 -- and we have plenty of fictional examples of humans in such situations, like Star Trek and most science fiction writing.   

But if we create space communities where human lives are spent entirely off of this planet, we should consider how human societies may differ -– and whether or not we can consider such people still human.

Societies are based on interactions with not only each other but with our environment. When we send people to live in a closed environment, they take their culture with them, yet a new culture emerges the longer they stay in the new place. 

If you have ever gone camping or traveling, you experience a similar phenomenon. As you take your cultural expectations, you set up what feels comfortable in the new setting. You may have a new bed to sleep in and different food to eat but we often seek comfort in familiar clothing or ritualistic behaviors. 

Culture shock, which you might experience when traveling, offers some insight into how we change when immersed in new cultures. However, in a space colony, especially for the first group of inhabitants, the new culture must first be created! Thus some elements of the off-planet culture will most likely retain aspects of our earth-bound society. 

Whether human society is sustainable on another planet remains to be seen. Containing conflict and violence would be one challenge, and there are many other issues that we may not realize until we try it. This is not just a sociological question. 

Biologically, we may not be capable of reproduction in the same manner as we do here on earth. Our bodily cycles are tied to the rotation of the earth and to others. Our physical reality emerged and evolved from our experiences and resources here. If reproduction were possible on another planet, would people born there still be considered human beings? What if their births were dependent on new reproductive cycles emergent in space living and/or technological assistance that replace human gestation?

Current space programs have very specific psychological criteria for selecting space-bound participants. People must be very open, communicative, and flexible to deal with living in such confined spaces with others for any length of time. Clearly not every person is well suited to thriving or even surviving in such a situation.

Would we have a new way of stratifying humans? Instead of race, ethnicity, social class, gender, sexual orientation, and age, we could use on-planet and off-planet birth distinctions to distribute power and wealth, opportunity and education. 

Do I have a good science fiction story going here? I’m not so sure it’s only fiction, as people have been working on how to live in a closed environment for some time – we haven’t yet figured it out yet and it is dependent upon technology that has not yet been invented. However, technology isn’t the only factor for a successful off-planet venture. Nor is it even the most important.

Setting up an intentional society would prove to be difficult, especially considering the lack of success we have in existing here. Can we really engineer a self-sustaining society without creating a totalitarian culture? 

Different sociological perspectives offer very different answers. Structuralists assume the need for structure, viewing people as interdependent, yet dysfunctions threaten the balance of the system. Conflict theorists acknowledge the potential for power abuses among the different positions and relationships in sustaining their existence. Symbolic interactionists focus on how meaning varies for the human participants and how difficult and exciting such experiences would prove to be. 

How would post modernists weigh in? Since French social theorist Jean Baudrillard wrote that the (first) Gulf War didn’t happen as it played out in the media, would such lived experiences be interpreted as surreal since earthly contact would also play out via media connections? From the perspective of those in the colony, would an earth-bound existence be the unreality?

Can we effectively design a society with a minimum of social problems? Considering space colonization really focuses us on society back here on earth – if we could design such a society, why don’t we do that here on earth? If we can’t figure it out here, how on (or off) earth can we do it elsewhere?

Comments

[Lyndsie]

This article got me thinking. It made me think would we really be considered humans if we did not live on earth. Would we be considered humans if our reproduction system changed, and how would we create a human-like life up there?
I have two sides to this article. One part of me says “yes, we would be human still” and the other side says “no, we wouldn’t.”
I think that in space, if we got enough people to want to try something new, to step out of their boundaries. We could create a new life up there. We could start fresh and start new. I really believe we could make an even better life in space. People wouldn’t have to worry about environmental stress such as pollution which would give people the right to have better health.
Maybe we could even find new technology up there and new kinds of life. Just imagine new ways of transportation and cheaper transportation. You never know, maybe outer space could change us humans forever? But would that still make us humans? I don’t know, that one is up for debate.
I think if humans are simply living in space and make a new environment, economy, and culture or what ever is necessary for comfortable living will still make us humans. Talking about changing reproduction systems is another thing. I think once the genetic makeup of a human is changed into the new and unknown is where the line is crossed. That is what I now believe to be considered as a new species. Maybe we could even call it a modified human??

[SCOTT]

"It came burning hot into my mind, whatever he said and however he flattered, when he got me home to his house, he would sell me for a slave."

—John Bunyan

[x-ray fluorescence]

Hi,
Very nice informative post. It made me think would we really be considered humans if we did not live on earth.I really believe we could make an even better life in space also.

[Andy Landin]

It is just a question of time when we will begin to colonize on other planets. Mars will probably be the first planet for human exploration. We face numerous problems before this is possible; gravity is one of these problems. Will we be able to reproduce? If this is a biological impossibility, we may have to rely on technology to help us just as Raskoff writes in her article. Will this discourage people from living in a society on another planet? Probably not. For the sake of mankind there would be a lot of volunteers. A more significant problem in this closed environment would be getting along and cultural differences. However culture shocks would over time adapt into routine and develop into a new culture, unique for this colony. But more probably would NASA or whoever is in charge match people with the same culture and personalities for a mission like this.
Raskoff bring up a good point regarding the influence from Media. What can you trust and not? This is an absolute key for a functioning society in a closed environment; having a good contact with the outside world. If a command central were running the show it would also prevent a totalitarian leadership to develop.

[Lizbeth]

I found this article very interesting. I believe that human beings worry to much about appearance and how to make our world "better." It is really true that there is an stigma when it comes to aging. No one wants to be old, but when you are young you don't have that many opportunities to succeed. It's funny how social expectations don;t let young and smart people to find their dream job just because of their appearance. My companies like to employ people with experience, and they don't really consider young people but how are young people going to get experience if they are not given the chance? On the other hand, media is always promoting many cosmetic products to make people (especially women) look young. So my question is, is it good to be young or not?

[Rachel]

Living in a closed space on another planet would almost definitely lead to a Totalitarian society. A completely new culture must be established and a strong leader is the best, most efficient way to provide direction for the new inhabitants. Initially, these directives may be for safety or to allow continuation of this new (maybe) society. However, it is apparent from Earth's history how quickly these positions of power can turn sour.