Can I ask someone to rebuttal my argument against human space flight?

[ChrisA]

Hello, would someone be interested in providing arguments defending human spaceflight vs unmanned spaceflight?

The only good argument for manned spaceflight is the same argument we use to justify "summer vacation". There is no economic justification for flying to Rome and looking at a 2,000-year-old sports stadium or hiking a trail in the mountains. We do those things because we like doing those things.

As robots and AI get even better in the best century there will be even less reason to send people to space, except for tourism.

It's impossible to argue against tourism. It is what people like to do and they don't need a reason.

 

[arturo.v.dominguez@gmail.]

The only good argument for manned spaceflight is the same argument we use to justify "summer vacation". There is no economic justification for flying to Rome and looking at a 2,000-year-old sports stadium or hiking a trail in the mountains. We do those things because we like doing those things.

As robots and AI get even better in the best century there will be even less reason to send people to space, except for tourism.

It's impossible to argue against tourism. It is what people like to do and they don't need a reason.

As robots and AI get even better in the best century there will be even less reason to send people to space, except for tourism.

I’m almost tempted to say that Zager and Evans were prophets, ala Nostradamus. What I’m saying if you were to turn what they wrote into a quote you would have a hard time convincing anyone, based on what you say here that they weren’t. So, I will go ahead and use it as a quote for emphasis: “In the year 5555 Your arms are hanging limp at your sides Your legs got nothing to do Some machine's doing that for you”

That notwithstanding I believe you are ignoring the human need/want found in their sense of adventure. Sure, a thrill found due to curiosity can inspire some to first go out and seek confirmation of what they may already know: like yeah, the stadium is old, but wow to actually have been there. Or seeking relaxation in a vacation where in you hike in a mountain.

I think those two fall more into the category of doing something out of the ordinary when it comes to having a fulfilling personal life. Going out into the unknown even when you know that there are real/unexpected dangers that may need to be, overcome. That is outside of the thrill-seeking realm of the vacation.

The thing is that as a vacation destination anything beyond near earth thrill rides is a long way, away. Something that’s not likely to happen even within the confines of our solar system until humans can get there and back. So, they can tell their friends and family what a thrill their latest vacation/adventure was.

 

[Ken Fabian]

The line between "vacation" and "extreme sport vacations" isn't very wide. Mountain climbing, canyoning, rafting and kayaking, spelunking, mountain bike riding. The sense of danger is part of the attraction. A portion of the population take enjoyment from challenges and from intense physical activities that make those brain chemicals that we like. Humanity is in no danger of losing our ability to engage in physically demanding activities.

We go to known places because we know what is there, using regular means of transport, usually to places with facilities - or the desired lack of them. Those headed into true wilderness without knowing what to expect are rare exceptions - and on Earth they will still expect sources of water and (to some extent) food and the makings of shelters. And have expectation of rescue if it goes wrong.

They aren't adding anything to human knowledge. It still sounds like vacation - indulging in unnecessary danger for the fun of it - not "exploration".

Everywhere in space remotely worth "exploring" will get explored remotely. The human drive to discover and learn is real and valued but the need for on-site human presence is superceded.

There won't be anywhere to go in person in space that wasn't already explored remotely, robotically.

 

[arturo.v.dominguez@gmail.]

The line between "vacation" and "extreme sport vacations" isn't very wide. Mountain climbing, canyoning, rafting and kayaking, spelunking, mountain bike riding. The sense of danger is part of the attraction. A portion of the population take enjoyment from challenges and from intense physical activities that make those brain chemicals that we like. Humanity is in no danger of losing our ability to engage in physically demanding activities.

We go to known places because we know what is there, using regular means of transport, usually to places with facilities - or the desired lack of them. Those headed into true wilderness without knowing what to expect are rare exceptions - and on Earth they will still expect sources of water and (to some extent) food and the makings of shelters. And have expectation of rescue if it goes wrong.

They aren't adding anything to human knowledge. It still sounds like vacation - indulging in unnecessary danger for the fun of it - not "exploration".

Everywhere in space remotely worth "exploring" will get explored remotely. The human drive to discover and learn is real and, valued but the need for on-site human presence is superseded.

There won't be anywhere to go in person in space that wasn't already explored remotely, robotically.

For the most part I agree with what you are saying here: Yet there are at least two paradoxes you introduce in here.

1.) There won't be anywhere to go in person in space that wasn't already explored remotely, robotically. Just as in the days before Columbus sailed the ocean blue by the time people started more than just looking for places to visit the exploration of the places, they settled in was all but done along with the knowledge that sources of food and water were at hand.

2.) The human drive to discover and learn is real and valued but the need for on-site human presence is superseded: Unlike the scientific community which is satisfied with advancing knowledge. While the funding for the continuation of their quest must come from those whose curiosity extends from their ability to participate in the advancements via self-actualization.

 

[Classical Motion]

We will have to use robots for the deep sea. We shouldn't let space tease us.