Why Outer Space Should Not Be Militarized

President Donald Trump announced his intentions of forming a sixth branch of the US military. His proposal would be known as a space force. The militarization of outer space would create a major threat to humanity. The danger is present in the spreading of war zones beyond our planet. The cost would be immense to train soldiers, build space craft, and maintain programs. There is risk that also comes with extended periods in outer space. Human health may not be fully protected or maintained. The development of a space force would harm the more important objectives of space exploration. Discovery, the accumulation of new knowledge, and a greater understanding of the universe in its entirety should be the goals of space program. Such objectives could be an international effort, with various nations working on space exploration projects. Although  space race was the product of Cold War conflict and competition, this should not be the behavior or mentality of the contemporary period. Space exploration should be about increasing scholarship in regards to an unknown environment, not making space into another theater of war for the sake of militarism. Astronomers, astrophysicists, aeronautical engineers, and astronauts should object to the militarization of space. Space explorers and scientists should be examining the nature of the universe. Space exploration can create many opportunities for employment, business enterprise, advancement of civilization, and an understanding of mankind's place in existence. Science should be a humanitarian endeavor with the intent of improving lives and environments. A space force would only create more confrontation and a global arms race. Trepidation about developing a space force may seem misplaced, but this development will not longer be science fiction. It could easily become a reality within a few centuries. Technology has rapidly advanced and there is no reason to assume that it would stop. The exploration and possible colonization of space  would represent  a remarkable achievement in humanity's scientific progress. A space force could reverse such accomplishments. The militarization of space would have negative consequences that are vast and permanent.
       Spacecraft would have to be more developed for a proposed military force in space. Although details are limited about the space force, it may be modeled on the US Navy. Meaning that there will be space ships patrolling certain areas of the Solar System or possibly distant galaxies. This would require the construction of multiple space stations to house soldiers and staff. Space craft would have to be durable enough to sustain long term use and extremely low temperatures. Building a spacecraft that can attain high speeds would not make reaching particular destinations easier. There are places that are lightyears away and reaching them would take an entire human life cycle. Humanity's only solution to this problem of travelling far distances would be to some how manipulate traversible wormholes. If such structures could be manipulated it is possible to find short cuts through large distances of outer space. This would have to be a precondition before the creation of any space force.Otherwise, space soldiers would either have to start serving in their early youth and if they do return to Earth settle for a late retirement. Wormholes theoretically could also be used for time travel as some astrophysicists have suggested. The physical barrier is that they would have to be  large enough to fit spacecraft. It is not entirely known if  this type of travel could be safe or as convenient as theorized. Outer Space may be one of the harshest environments that humanity will travel in.

The only place humanity been on is the moon. Other forms of space exploration has been done with satellites, robots, probes, and  telescopes. The Hubble Telescope produced more information than what a crew of astronauts would have done. Sending astronauts to various areas of space entails a huge amount of danger and immense costs. Space shuttles have been retired in favor of a new generation of spacecraft. The Orion spacecraft shows promise in terms of durability and efficient engineering design. Many more will have to go into production to allow for a space force to operate. Unlike other spacecraft of the 20th and early 21st century, Orion has been made specifically to travel further compare to its predecessors. Space vessels are being made smaller. There may be a more practical reason for this development. The combination of space debris from launches and satellites has become a concern. Such a build up could pollute  the Solar System or more space as humanity begins to colonize it. Space debris could be reduced with spacecraft that is diminutive in size. The problem is that production of smaller craft would have to be large enough to allow for a substantial space force. Sending a battalion or even a company of soldiers could be a finance and logistical challenge. Obviously, seeing as this space force is part of the US military the spacecraft would most likely have to be weaponized in some way. 

The new generation of spacecraft would not be able to support large artillery attached to it. Due to temperature, weight, and the microgravity environment this would be more of an engineering failure. The weapons would have to be laser based. There remains a technological issue with this as well. Such a weapon would require a large amount of energy. It would need enough power to inflict damage on other spacecraft. Semi-conductor lasers do not have the power to cut through metal, but a laser to be made into an effective weapon would require further technological advancement. This could also require, if developed a field test. The laser would have to be developed on Earth and experimented with. Then it would have to be attached and mounted on the spacecraft and then tested in space. This could take a number of years or decades to ensure effectiveness. Spacecraft was not intended to be designed for combat. Its main purpose was for transport, housing accommodation, and scientific observation in the Solar System. The current spacecraft being produced now, would not be enough for a large scale military force. A new form of spacecraft would have to be designed if it is going to be similar to a combat vehicle or naval ship. Airplanes did not begin as technology used for combat. Gradually, they were developed for that purpose starting with World War I. Tanks were made with the purpose of being used in military operations firing shells and transporting soldiers. Creating a fleet similar to that of Star Wars or Start Trek  may not be possible under the current technology. There needs to be a greater understanding of the ecology and astrophysics of outer space before attempts are made to build a space force. 

     Human health also raises a concern. Seeing as humanity is born into an environment of gravity going into space for long periods effects musculoskeletal health. The microgravity environment could cause muscles to atrophy. What can be observed from the health conditions of astronauts can provide predictions of how a soldier in the space force would react to this environment. Bone mass loss can occur in space. The threats to muscloskeletal health can effect men and women, but there may be a more pronounced difference due to sex differences. If women on average have lower bone and muscle mass, this means they would have a worse outcome in terms of health in a space environment. There are some cases in which astronauts may experience visual impairment and hearing loss. Orthostaic intolerance and struvite kidney stones also are conditions that can arise in the bodies of space travelers. Soldiers also face numerous health issues on Earth. Musculoskeletal injuries, chronic traumatic encephalopathy, and post traumatic stress disorder are becoming more common for US soldiers. Physical injuries can happen during basic training and preparation for military occupational specialty. The attrition rate can be high in physically demanding occupations. Medical discharge, stress, or a harsh workplace contributes to this. Building a space force would increase the number of medical discharges. If they are high on Earth, it should be assumed that it would be higher in space. If a space force is to travel to other galaxies and planets, there must be considerations from the astrobiological perspective. There could be multitudes of organisms and microorganisms that may be dangerous. If there are Earth like planets, there is a possibility that bacteria or viruses could exist in their ecosystems. Animals or certain plants may be harmful to human life. There should be no attempt to bring any organism from other planets back to Earth. The effects on people or the wider environment could pose high risk. Space also can be a place of  immense radiation levels. The Earth is protected by its magnetic field. 

When space travelers depart, they face more radiation that what they would normally be exposed to. A soldier on a space force could be risking fertility. The proposed space force would either be in space long periods of time for patrolling or would have to rotate similar to an astronaut's schedule. This is the same problem with the attempted mission to Mars. Astronauts would not be in the physical shape once the they reached the planet, due to changes of the muscular and skeletal system. New technologies such as the advance resistive exercise device have been developed to combat the effects of microgravity on the human body. The technology would have to advance further, if a space force is to remain in such an environment. Living in space may put travelers at risk for cancer depending on the level of radiation they are exposed to. A soldier who enlists in a space force would have numerous medical conditions, if  occupational safety is ignored. Space stations would not be adequate enough given the current technology to house the new branch of the military and their families. New born babies could be susceptible to particular conditions related to space travel. If adults experience such conditions in space, this would likely be worse for a growing body of an infant. As a precaution, soldiers of the space force would have to leave their families on Earth. Long space journeys could have an effect on mental and physical health. Planners of the new space force should be solicitous of the factors that could cause harm or either death to soldiers. 

         War has been a persistent threat to humanity. The 20th century saw mass global conflict starting with World War I and World War II. After such devastation, there was a movement to resolve international disputes peacefully. This was the intention of the United Nations, but it was dominated by the superpowers of the United States and the Soviet Union. Even after the Cold War, there still is conflict. The creation of a space force only opens up another theater of war. Wars have been conducted from the land, air, and sea. The 21st century has also given rise to a new type of warfare. Hacking and espionage through the internet are cyberwarfare  which the US and Russia may be engaging in. Space would just become another area of combat, even though various nations share the same planet. The race to build space forces would inevitably lead to countries competing with one another in a mass arms race. The United States, Russia, China, France, Germany, and the UK  would then attempt to construct space based weaponry. The potential for mass conflict on the Earth and in space would increase with the establishment of a space force. There have been programs that sought to militarize outer space. The Strategic Defense Initiative was a product of President Ronald Reagan's aggressive anti-communism. This was a program that was designed as an anti-ballistic missile system that would deflect attacks from other countries. Using innovative technologies SDI was going to be the most impervious missile defense system. The proposal intended for laser and mirror  systems  to either intercept missiles form land or in outer space. SDI was started in 1983 and gradually drew criticism. What was later dubbed the "Star Wars" program cost billions and jeopardized negotiations with the U.S.S.R in 1986. 

The program would require more technological advancement and more energy than the Reagan administration realized. The program was abandoned and some felt that it was ludicrous science fiction. Although the proposals for a space force may parallel the SDI program, there is a slight difference. The Trump administration seeks to boost military spending possibly higher than what the Ronald Reagan presidency did. NASA would be tempted to be a large part of the development of the space force, simply because more funds means they could do other projects in the future. The military industrial complex will expand into outer space. The amount of profit would be too great for arms manufacturers to ignore. Corporations and governments who believe in geopolitical hegemony will work to develop space forces for permanent warfare. This would be an abuse of scientific knowledge and engineering.  Extending human conflict into outer space would open unknown perils. Before going into space, there must be conflict resolution on Earth. 

         Building a space force would require a significant amount of funds to maintain. The costs would have to factor the construction of spacecraft, the supplies for soldiers, benefits, healthcare, pension plans, and wages. The United States spends a large portion of its budget on its military. If a space force is going to be created the federal income tax would have to increase. Taxes generate revenue for the US government, but many American citizens are unsatisfied with the rate. Disproportionately, the middle class and working class Americans pay more federal income tax. These groups would be paying for the establishment of a space force. Collectively, such revenue may not be enough so long as wages remain stagnant in the workforce. There are solutions to this. The wealthiest would have to either pay more income taxes or there would have to be private investment from various companies. Under a supply side economic model this would not be sustainable. National debt could become so enormous that the country would face recession. Space exploration may have high costs, but it provides valuable information. A space force from an economic perspective would be a terrible decision. The only way it would be a fruitful benefit was if  more natural resources could be found on Earth like planets. The Earth's fossil fuels are a finite resource and they will be depleted based on the rate of human consumption. Extracting natural resources from other planets, rather than on Earth could be more profitable and safer. It would definitely help preserve the condition of Earth's environment. This would take decades of development and planning. Actual execution of missions would be even more arduous. Most American citizens would not be willing to pay for developing a space force. The congress and senate would most likely not approve of legislation to establish a space force based on the astronomical costs. 

        The establishment of a space force also raises concerns about the environment of space itself. Human environment interaction  can result in pollution. The exploration of space has led to the accumulation  of space junk . If space travel is going to rise of the course of a few centuries this may create an environmental protection issue. The amount of space junk around Earth must be removed some how before an entire force of soldiers goes off into space. If a space force will be going to other planets and back this will add to the gigantic amounts of space debris already around Earth. 

   

Human civilization will have to confront pollution on multiple fronts. Space, the atmosphere, and the oceans. The problem with outer space is that its size would make protection also insuperable. The danger is that human beings would replicate the space debris conditions on Earth in other areas. If such pollution and waste propagates, traveling through space or to other planets would be even more unsafe. An effort to clear the space junk would have to be a precondition for mass travel through space with a military force. Regulation of travel and waste disposal would have to be a top priority. Otherwise outer space could be nothing more than an area filled with debris from spacecraft and satellites. The proposed space force will most likely consist of large numbers of soldiers, support staff, and civilian workers from the Pentagon. The higher the population, the more pollution and generation of waste. What is known about human behavior on Earth demonstrates that an environmental protection policy must be implemented before ambitious projects are started. Space already is a rough environment. It is a place of blackholes, gamma ray bursts, and asteroids. Humanity could have the potential to either make such an environment secure for travel or cause permanent damage to particular planets or systems. A conservative political administration would not have concerns for environmental protection. If the policies on Earth are the same, such advocates would surely replicate them in space. The long term travel of the space force poses complications to the environments of other galaxies and planets. 

      The militarization of outer space should not happen. The risks to human health, international peace, environment, and economic welfare are too great. Space should be explored for the sake of human knowledge, not for military or imperial endeavors. The United States realizing it has challenges from other world powers wants to reassert itself. The world now functions on a multipolar power structure and the days of the US being the sole superpower are coming to an end. This dramatic shift in international affairs may be a cause for conflict. The nations of the world should seek peace and collaboration. Space exploration can be the unifying force between the nations of the world. Astronomers, astrophysicists, astrobiologists  aeronautical engineers, and astronauts from all over the world could cooperate on terraforming  and space colonization projects. Militarism has caused mush devastation throughout human history. Armies are not the liberators of people, rather they are the conquerors. The military is not a humanitarian organization and it is not interested in the higher aspirations of science. The space force proposal is being presented as a humanitarian and exciting new development when there are obvious motives behind its development. The US weaponizing space would put the world at its mercy, if it an do it effectively. The sudden rush to create such a military force is a way to threaten other countries, specifically Russia and China. Such behavior should not continue in the future. Callous action could result in mass global conflict, only this time space would be another front. Outer space should be available and open to all nations. A humanistic approach relative to science should be taken. A space force is not needed, because there are no imminent threats from space. Comets and potential changes in the Sun are matters of concern. Yet, these events may happen far off in the future. Efforts should be directed toward leaning more about the Solar System and Milk Way Galaxy. More effort should be made to successfully get astronauts to Mars. The Donald Trump administration has promised to expand that NASA goal and mission, but it is dubious such a program will come into existence. There seems to be more enthusiasm for science with conservatives when it has a military application. Otherwise, particular factions reject common scientific knowledge such as evolution and climate change. If any organization is to be formed it should be for the purpose of gathering further information on space and the universe as a whole. The military should not be involved in dictating scientific policy and NASA should not be pressured into producing for a space force program. Space exploration, settlement,  and the discovery of new knowledge are the only activities humanity should invest in relative to the universe.              

  

   

     

   

The Mobius Strip

The mobius strip is a structure that is a one sided band form by combining  ends of a rectangular strip after first giving one of the ends a half twist. One strip of the end  will be twisted 180°.  August Ferdinand Mobius  was the mathematician and professor that made the discovery of this shape late in his career. Johann Benedict Listing would also make contributions to the articulation of its topological properties. Both  mathematicians produced their findings around 1858. Although it is not realized the mobius strip has many applications to science, art, engineering, and mathematical theory. The one sided structure has been used to present geometric models of the universe, molecular structure, and architectural design. Magicians use the mobius strip for their tricks. The mobius strip can be commonly seen as a the recycling symbol on bins. The mobius strip did not gain wide recognition till after the death of the mathematicians who explored it attributes. The mobius strip can sometimes be described as a twisted cylinder. The one sided surface is non orientable. The mobius strip can not however, be classified as a true surface, rather a  surface with a boundary. This seems like a bizarre concept to many observers. A surface without a boundary describes a topological space that is revealed by edges and vertices of a set of triangles.

The mobius strip has to be expressed  in a form of equation. Parametric equations are ways in which certain elements of topology can be explained in Euclidean space. This is where classical geometry and topology differ. Topology focuses on the arrangement of shapes rather than strict emphasis on angle, distance, and measurement. Euclidean geometry has its limitations when describing particular shapes. The mobius strip would not have been discovered under a method using classical geometry. Topology breaks down shapes into nodes and connections. This approach allows shapes like the torus, mobius strip. and klein bottle to be comprehended. Topology was developed from graph theory in Leonard Euler's work The Seven Bridges of Konigsberg . This mathematical puzzle asked if it was possible to cross all seven bridges in the Baltic sea port with one route. Euler was able to demonstrate that this was not possible due to the number of connections. It was not a matter of the actual distance or orientation. It had to do with the connections or rather vertices. There was no solution to this mathematical problem, because a person would have to either cross a bridge twice or avoid one all together. This was written by Euler in 1736, but he had no idea how mathematics would advance in the 19th century. Euler laid the foundation for August Ferdinand Mobius  and Johann Benedict Listing. Topology seeks to see the nodes and connections in shapes. There is to this branch of mathematics a similarity  in shapes. Shapes remain the same no matter how much they are distorted. 

The mobius strip and the topology it represents branches off into other questions. Homotopy and homology. Homology examines the the structure in relation to algebraic sequence to topological structures. Homotopy puts emphasis on the study of the information related to the spaces of the shape. It also takes into account how functions behave and why they cause certain formations. Both homotopy and homology are needed to explain the attributes of the mobius strip. Topology also explores how geometric functions can be entangled or deformed. Multidimensional surfaces are known as manifolds and classical geometry would not have enough tools to describe these shapes. Topology can be applied to technological use. A pivotal use is for cooperative swarmbots. These diminutive robots manipulate topological spaces to monitor the environment. This allows for discovery of areas to place cell phone masts to enable reliable signals. Geographical information systems utilize topology in relation to maps through domains and boundaries. It may be possible that the mobius strip was stumbled upon prior to the 19th century. There is no recorded evidence that mathematicians came across such as structure. The mobius strip was the first one-sided surface studied by scientists. The shape is one of the most recognizable features of topology known to the general public.   

References 

Picker, Clifford. Math Book . New York: Sterling, 2009. 

Jackson, Tom. Mathematics An Illustrated History of Numbers. New York: 

             Shelter Harbor Press, 2012. 

  Weisstein, Eric. “Möbius Strip.” Wolfram MathWorld, Wolfram MathWorld , mathworld.wolfram.com/MoebiusStrip.html.

Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. “Möbius Strip.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 19 Apr. 2017, www.britannica.com/science/Mobius-strip.

The Meaning of Human Existence (2014)

The Meaning of Human Existence is a book written by Edward O. Wilson a pioneer in the field of sociobiology. Edward Wilson is both a naturalist and biologist who has spent decades studying the links between genes and behavior.Detractors claimed his views were too mechanistic or eugenic. Critics failed to fully comprehend the concepts of sociobiology. Organisms can be the products of both their genes and environment. Humanity is the product of both. The constant mystery is why organisms and biomes evolved the to what they are now. The Meaning of Human Existence  discusses science, philosophy, and its relation to existential thought. Wilson argues that humanity has acquired enough knowledge and experience to question what is existence and humanity's role in the cosmos. Edward Wilson also is convinced that this can be done in a testable manner. His perspective is that science and the humanities have grown too far apart. The problem with modern accumulation of knowledge is that it has become too grounded in specialization. He eloquently describes this about  this phenomenon when referring to academia. There is a human epoch in which people will be able to control and manipulate their own biology. This advancement does produce a dilemma as Wilson proclaims in the text. Wilson asks a few questions that have  been with humanity since it became curious. Does humanity have a special place in the universe ? What is the meaning of our personal lives ?  One would suspect that humanity may be unique in the sense that it is the dominant species on Earth and controls the biosphere to a degree. These questions of existence and meaning have been puzzling philosophers, scientists, and religious scholars. Such an answer would have to be a complex one. This may not necessarily be true. Edward Wilson gives a synopsis of human evolution, natural history, philosophy, and provides an explanation into the nature of existence. This is articulated in a series of essays in the book. The Meaning of  Human Existence  will make a reader see the world and universe in a completely different way.  
     The first essay discusses the connotations of meaning. Wilson states "in ordinary usage" the word "meaning " implies intention, intention implies design, and design implies a designer." This is more of the religious conviction of meaning. The other concept of meaning is as Wilson explains are the events of history and their networks of physical cause and effect. Events as Edward Wilson writes can be random, however they can later probability of later events. Reaching the full understanding of meaning would require a worldview of science. To answer such questions Wilson proposes that there should be a collaboration between the humanities and sciences. The vast body of human knowledge has become to separated, even when there are numerous connections. Wilson is proposing a scientific based understanding of human existence through means of self-understanding. As there is a push by some for greater understanding it poses a dilemma. The possibilities of manipulating human biology or even taking control of our own evolution is a reality. The power of genetic engineering and transhumanism is in civilization's grasp, but the problem remains should such actions be done. Wilson expresses that society should understand fully why humanity evolved in such a way before proceeding to alter it.

The question of existence requires multiple disciples to answer. Such questions are either discussed in terms of proximate or ultimate causation. This relates to living organisms and life function. Human beings have cells and  organ systems, but the reason why remains a mystery. These two techniques of explanation are required to reveal the significance of life. There is one flaw with Wilson's argument. Humanity did not "emerge entirely on its own."  Through evolution humans became the sole survivors of a primate species. Early humans were part of an ecological system much like today. Each organism functions on a trophic level requiring others. Relations could either be symbiotic or parasitic. Organisms do not simply emerge on their own. Evolution is one part of the emergence of species, but environment is critical. A change in geological conditions radically altered animal as well as plant life. If were not for the extinction of the dinosaurs and the rise of  mammal life there would not be humanity. What did emerge on its own was human civilization. No other animal on Earth has produced civilization like humankind. Music, science, and the arts are a testament to humankind's unique skill. Edward Wilson is correct on one position. Humanity is not here for a specific goal  nor   to answer to a higher power. This is why wisdom as Wilson explains based off the comprehension of ourselves should be our guide rather than piety. Doing this could be humankind's only salvation and key to the improvement of  persistent societal ills. The public must have a strong understanding of human biological evolution and history. 

        Human evolution must be fully understood if one is to understand the world and the societies that emerged. The second essay in Wilson's book explains that human history does not begin with the rise of civilization. He proclaims "the human condition is a product of history- not just six millennia of civilization but very much further back, across hundreds of millennia." Evolution explains much of animal and human behavior. There is a level of eusociality present in the animal kingdom. The term describes the true social condition and how a group raises offspring across multiple generations. Organisms that show eusociality appeared late in biological evolutionary history. Compared to insects and bacteria  the emergence of humans is fairly recent. The origins of human behavior began with a change in diet and anatomical change. Eusociality emerged in australopithecines when their diet became based around meat. This cause the intestines to become shorter, resulting in more metabolic function shifting to other areas of the body. Gradually, the cranial volume would increase and the brains of  primates would become more complex. The rise of hunting and campsites only caused eusociality to become more entrenched. These early structures required both cooperation and competition to function. The members that were part of this were provided shelter and protection. Humanity gained a level of social intelligence, which required calculated thoughts. The two early primates that provide some clues to the riddle of humanity are the homo habilis and the homo erectus. 

Homo Habilis

Two million years ago the homo habilis existed. These animals had human like bodies, but their cranial capacity was smaller. It has been estimated close to or less than 600 cubic centimeters. From homo habilis onward the cranial volume would increase. Homo erectus would gain more cranial capacity at 900 cc. Homo sapiens would see an increased cranial volume of 1,400 cc. This dramatic change in the brain was one of the most amazing events in biological history. The structures of the brain became more complex and allowed for more intelligence. The increase in intelligence also meant that social behavior was going to change. This would alter the course of world history. The genus homo could soon become the dominant species of the globe. Paleontologists and evolutionary biologists have the task of trying to figure out the social nature of the early primates. These forces are either part biological or environmental. There are competing theories that have emerged in the scientific community which attempted to describe the rise of advanced social behavior. 

Homo Erectus 

Kin selection is one theory that describes individuals favoring relatives and offspring within a group. This theory attempts to explain altruism that occurs among members of the same group. The reasoning behind such social behavior is that more genes can be passed on based around inclusive fitness. Inclusive fitness refers to the combined effects of reproduction and survival upon the individual. A group that helps one another at least in this theory has a better chance of passing on genes through altruism, rather than split competition. Multilevel selection has an opposing view. Natural selections operates on two different levels. Individual selection places another organism in competition or collaboration with another. There is a group selections in which units compete with other groups. Although it is difficult to test or  form an experiment for these theories, it seems that nature follows the multilevel selection based on observations of animal behavior. When applied to human behavior it become more apparent. People compete for jobs, resources, and land at an individual level. Nations are a collective and compete with each other for world influence. Chimpanzees compete with other groups of Chimpanzees for territory. Primates compete for mates on an individual level. Edward O. Wilson reveals that he favors this theory, because to a degree natural history confirms it. However, both theories must be vigorously tested to become scientific fact. 

What should also be understood is that evolution does not follow a linear path. It is like a tree with multiple branches. What binds the homo group, ardipithecus group, pananthropus group, and australopithecus group was that they probably emerged from a common genetic ancestor. While humanities can provide answers to early forms of art, it is important that there is an understanding of the anatomical,biological, and physiological elements of human nature. Sadly, the public has either a limited comprehension of evolution or a huge amount of suspicion. Wilson does make a cogent point in stating " what counts for long term survival is an intelligent self-understanding , based upon a greater independence of thought than that tolerated today in even our most democratic societies." The lugubrious aspect of the situation is that societies that claim to be free and democratic are more closed minded. Evolution is either attacked by the right as being false or the left as promoting justifications for an unequal society. Such accusations  lack credibility, but they have gained popularity among the public and more so in the United States. The real challenge is not only having a collaboration among the humanities and science, but defeating a powerful anti-intellectual movement. The teaching of intelligent design or fabricated history continues to stifle generations of students. If Wilson's vision is to be a reality it will require a complete restructuring of the public school system and a new approach to pedagogy. 

        The discussion of human existence will inevitably lead to questions of ethics. Edward Wilson poses the question to the reader : are human beings naturally righteous or prone to malevolence? Wilson seems to believe that people can be both a bit of both. The essay "Evolution and Our Inner Conflict" gives readers an examination into the debate of nature versus nurture. Wilson does clarify that humanity is not driven solely by instincts, but it cannot be ignored they are part of human behavior. Concepts such as right and wrong may just be artificial constructions to justify behavior that is either controversial, questionable, or abhorrent. Alleles the multiple forms of the same gene do effect human beings, just like their environments.   

Psychologically there is a desire to be part of a social network. This is also biologically based through multilevel selection. Humans can be friends or competitors. They may work in groups or on an individual level. The desire to be part of a group was most likely based on survival in the evolutionary past. A sense of belonging is not only helpful for one's physical security, but sense of worth. There is a negative consequence of this social behavior. Edward Wilson explains : "an amplification of this evidently inborn predestination leads with frightening ease to racism and religious bigotry." This genetic predisposition to group collectivist behavior could cause as Wilson puts it "good people doing bad things ."To explain human atrocities away by behavior is too simplistic. It could be that in reality there are not righteous people; just others who are more in control of their impulses. There is a reason children must have discipline and there are laws in place. Humans are still animals and to a degree have negative impulses. What makes humanity unique is that it has developed self control and systems of order to manage behavior. Altruism relative to biology is more of a practical mechanism, rather than an ethical one. There is a conflict between the altruist behavior and the selfish behavior which developed during human evolution. Yet, it is difficult to say that humanity is both simultaneously sinner and saint. The increase in brain complexity in terms of memory, reasoning, and the prefrontal cortex demonstrate that we are a rational and calculating species. Calculating a outcome may not always involve  ethical or altruistic  conduct. This partially explains why humanity engages in war and murder. This does not involve all members, however it takes significant portions. Mankind may be more malevolent than Edward O. Wilson realizes. Philosophy has struggled with the question of what is ethical and science may not be able to answer such a question. Psychology does have some indications. By stander effect may be the result of the desire to survive (driven by genetic elements ), rather than  take a risk helping someone in danger. Environment is a powerful force on people. To say that genetics is solely the basis of human behavior would be incorrect. The debate is not whether it is nature versus nature. The real inquiry is how much to nature and nurture collaborate with one another. When this interaction is understood for these two factors only then will there be a lucid explanation into human behavior. 

      Wilson makes the argument for the unity of human knowledge. Since the Enlightenment civilization has advanced technologically and scientifically at a fast rate. Humanity explained the existence and the world in terms of natural philosophy. Francis Bacon called this "the empire of man ." The Enlightenment was the quest to master rationality and to create a world based on wisdom. These ideas were effectively abandoned by the 19th century. The rise of Romanticism as an artistic and ideological movement challenged the reason based system of the Enlightenment. The humanities would then become separate from the sciences. As science became more rapid in its discoveries, they were not able to solve humanities pressing problems. The French Revolution, the rise of Napoleon and then his fall resulted in a backlash. Europe would return to political conservatism in the form of monarchy. Revolutions would happen again in 1848, but it seemed as if the dreams of rational societies based on natural rights were still elusive. Philosophy, the arts, and sciences became distant from one another. There is no reason why they should be. Edward O. Wilson wants there to be a renaissance of human knowledge. The sciences and the humanities must collaborate with one another and become the core of modern education. What hinders modern academia is that specialization has been the foundation. Scholars and students must have at least a basic understanding of other subjects. A university for example should not just be a place for learning or career building, but an area that discovers new knowledge. Literature, art, and theater are just as important as biology, physics, mathematics,chemistry,  and astronomy. To reach self-understanding there must be a full comprehension of knowledge. Humanity can be curious. That tendency seems to be strongest when it is related to anthropocentricity. When information is relative to the human experience it generates more interest. The sciences and humanities are linked by the common origin being born of the human mind. The human brain is the most complex organ producing thoughts, emotions, and the creativity seen in all subjects. This explains why humanities are also an important part o humanity. 

       The text poses a question in one essay asking what would we use to impress extraterrestrials. Certainly, our technology would not be on the same level. However, our art and various cultures would be something they would not have seen. The chapter " The All Importance of  the Humanities" demonstrates that humanities or sciences should not be presented as separate, The unique cultural evolution that has emerged since human existence has to be one of the most astounding phenomenons. Humanities is the product of cultural evolution and it can be seen early on in human history. Cave paintings show that our early ancestors had creative minds. 

Gene culture coevolution demonstrate that natural selection is still acting upon human beings. Both genetic and cultural changes can effect the trajectories of one another. Music, writing, and art are the products of humankind's ambition to create and be innovative. Wilson describes the humanities best as : " They are a natural history of culture, and our most private and precious heritage." Science and the humanities have a common goal of giving a description of existence. These two fields of study only differ in method and particular techniques to reach an answer. As applied science continues to advance in areas biotechnology,nanotechnology, and robotics humanity will need some form of reasoning and ideological guidance. There will be major economic, social, and political changes that will  spread across the globe. Robotics will change the labor market and possibly cause workers to lose jobs. There is more human migration than ever before. Genetic variation of the human species is increasing, which is the result of mass movements of populations. Humanities could be a means of creating a stable world in one of constant change and chaos. Edward O. Wilson warns that we should not depart away from our genetically inherited nature. This he believes is expressed in the humanities. It may already be too late to preserve the biological human nature as Wilson refers to it. Transhumanism will definitely be the wave of the future. Like any technology or scientific advancement it can either be used for positive or nefarious purposes. Holding on to humanities may preserve society from becoming automatons. Humanities has a place in society, but transhumanism will also be present. Evolution and biology can be erratic, it is just now humanity will gain more control over it. There should not be trepidation in regards to this change. If technoscientific advancement is regulated serious problems can be avoided. Wilson is correct to support the humanities, yet  the words of caution seem overly fearful about technoscientific change. The humanities will be safe as long as humanity has a desire to create art, music, film, and literature. 

        There is the possibility that we are not alone in the universe. Wilson suggests that there may be some form of live beyond the Solar System. Earth was born at least 4.54 billion years ago and as time past life emerged. The earliest forms of life were microorganisms. Microbes may be the species that truly rule the galaxy. If humanity discovers life it would probably be microbes. If it is on land or sea it microbes would still be the majority. Earth contains a multitude of microbes. This includes protists, fungi, algae, archaeans, and picozoans. Astronomers and astrophysicists have suggested that there are Earth like exoplanets, so the idea of microbes existing there does not seem like science fiction. 

The Milky Way Galaxy 

 Based on what is known about organisms that live in extreme environments on Earth (extremophiles ), harsh environments on other planets would not be a challenge for microbes. There are also microbes known as subterranean lithoautotrophic microbial ecosystems. They can be found in soil and rock fissures. Such organisms gain their energy form the Earth's rocks. Future space exploration may see even more exoplanets detected. Searching will require robots and space telescopes to search for life in Oceans or rock structures. When this book was published only 900 had been discovered and the numbers have increased since then. Finding life either unicellular or multicellular  would be an incredible achievement. Edward Wilson is skeptical that intelligent life would be prevalent. Although it is not impossible, it may just be rare. After all humans are different from other animals on Earth and it took millions of years of evolution to reach it current level of intelligence. When the discussion of  intelligent life form  existence is mentioned Wilson relies too much on speculation. There are assumptions that they would be land dwelling creatures, be relatively large, and would have cephalization. He provides an image of an anthropomorphized organism. This may not be the case if such organisms exist. Assuming that evolution functions in the same manner or differently depending on  the environment  extraterestrial life would look radically different from humans. Every animal on Earth has gone through some form of biological evolution and may continue to do so depending on conditions of their biomes. There is also the likelihood that many species both simple and advance would become extinct before humanity reaches them.  The Meaning of Human Existence  mentions how biodiversity is critical to survival of various species. This functions on three levels : ecosystems, species, and genes. Wilson has warned that humanity's disregard for the environment and playing roles in the accelerated extinction of particular species is an attack on humanity itself. Pollution and the use of fossil fuels has cause irreversible damage. Humanity may find itself extinct before finding other among the stars. Knowing this there could have been life in the universe, but was wiped out. There is a tendency to see the Earth as a unique and special place, but it is one of many planets. When more exoplanets are discovered this will open up more questions into the nature of existence. 

          The Meaning of Human Existence also discusses the concepts of free will and instinct. Wilson proclaims "instinct in humans is basically the same as instinct in animals." He goes on to say " however it is not  the genetically fixed, invariant behavior displayed by most animal species." The argument is that human beings use both reason and emotion, which creates this difference. People are more emotional, than rational. This projects itself in high risk behavior or deleterious actions. At times this would contradict the desire for survival. Human behavior is not entirely cultural or biological. It is a combination of both. To choose one over the other reduces a complex story of human evolution and environmental change. This is not to say that human nature is driven by simple instinct. The cerebrum that evolved in humans gave them the ability to have a wide range of learning and reasoning ability. Other animals require just instinct for survival. Sea turtles when they are born know to head to the sea when they hatch. The three spined sickleback fish changes its behavior when territory and mates are being sought after. The human brain evolved to contribute to survival. As social organization became more pivotal intelligence was require to keep the human species going. Humankind did not have the adaptations of claws, large teeth, or high running speed to compete with larger animals. That was why communication in the form of language was a major turning point in human history. Instinct allows organisms to have a sense of their surroundings and possibly warn of danger. If instinct has a biological basis this questions the concept of free will. Maybe people are not really in control of their choices. Free will and consciousness seem to be questions best left to philosophers rather than scientists. Neuroscience wants to  elucidate the nature of consciousness through a scientific method. The Brain Activity Map Project wants to document every element in regards to the change of neural activity of the human brain. Wilson poses a the question of free will's existence. He delineates it as this : " yes, if not in ultimate reality, then at least in the operational sense necessary for sanity and the perpetuation of the human species." There could be free will and it may have started when the first humans became self aware. The moment early genus homo species realized they were different from other animals could be the point in which some free will manifested. However, it is too early to make proclamations about free will or consciousness. More must be discovered about the human brain and biological evolution to make a conclusion. 

        The topic of religion inevitably will be mentioned in discourses on existence. The wonderful aspect of  The Meaning of Human Existence is that it does not avoid a controversial subject. All around the world there have been various peoples and civilizations who believe in a higher power. This is not just a sociological factor, but a biological one. Such beliefs may have been a survival mechanism in the Paleolithic and Neolithic past. It provided an explanation to the world and existence, when there was no other method of doing so. Creation myths as Edward Wilson explains were designed to keep cohesion in a tribal group. The problem with religion is rigid dogma, which has caused much conflict both in the past and in the present. Religion is caught in an Absolute Paradox as articulated by Soren  kierkegaard. Fixation on dogma is not only impractical it is impossible to achieve in praxis. Most religions would be difficult to follow perfectly. Everyone is not always going to be a good Christian, Jew, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, or other all the time. There is nothing wrong with having a belief system, the problem is irrational devotion to ideas that lack evidence or support. Dogma can even infect science. Scientism can also be similar to religion in its worship of the field. This would not be an alternative to the religious dogma that has been resurrected in the 21st century. The reason people keep their religion is because they want to convince themselves life has meaning and purpose. The idea that meaning is something that has to be discovered through thought and serious introspection holds too much uncertainty. There is also another matter which induces more trepidation. Death will come to us either by natural causes, disease, or murder. Many are comforted by the idea that their is the immortality of the soul or an afterlife. There is no evidence for an afterlife or a powerful deity that controls human destiny. Faith does not equate to fact. Edward Wilson articulates this as not a debate of fact versus faith, rather understanding what is existence on both a scientific and philosophical level. Dogma must be discarded  as well as the tribal gods and demons. This task is insuperable. It is almost shocking that in an age of advance science and technology, there are large sections of society that cling to superstition. Only with the promotion of scientific literacy can such religious fundamentalism be challenged. 

       The true meaning of human existence is not based on the act of creation, rather it is found in science and the natural history of the past. Humanities can explain the human condition, but science provides the technical articulation of natural phenomena. To have a full grasp of existence, an individual should obtain a strong knowledge base of both fields. Humanity may be an accident as the book suggests. Yet, this is not an argument for nihilism. There is an opportunity for greater freedom and wonder. There is promise with new technology that could improve health, infrastructure, or explore space further. This could be threatened or stopped if warfare, fanaticism, or anti-intellectual fervor becomes predominant. The Meaning of Human Existence   is an proposing a new paradigm of scientific humanism. Science and the humanities will be sued to improve civilization and society. There must be a counter to extremism represented in the form of creationism, climate change denial, or a general anti-science sentiment. With threats to humanity such as war, poverty, economic turmoil, or environmental decline the need for self-understanding is more important than ever. People must have the knowledge and tools to navigate a rapidly changing world. Cautious approaches should be made with new technologies and advancements. Too much is already known to stop the further manipulation of our own biology and environment. Providing an exact answer to human existence is just as arduous as providing solutions to the world's problems. Creation myths or explanations based on the religious or supernatural cannot answer such a complicated and intricate question. Doing so would be intellectually dishonest. It is worse to provide a wrong answer as truth,  than to say one simply does not know . There is an  answer to the meaning of human existence.Wilson sees the answer coming from both the humanities and science,because they have an origin in the human mind. Only then will humanity have a full understanding of existence. The Meaning of  Human Existence is a refreshing examination of science and the past of humankind . If humankind is to have a future it must comprehend the natural world and the organisms that reside in it. Whatever the true meaning of existence is, the possibilities are endless.