Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!right!szabonj From: szabonj@right (Nick Szabo) Newsgroups: sci.space Subject: Re: the un/manned debate Message-ID: <121@beaver.cs.washington.edu> Date: 11 Feb 89 23:35:59 GMT References: Sender: news@beaver.cs.washington.edu Reply-To: szabonj@right.UUCP (Nick Szabo) Organization: U of Washington, CSCI, Seattle Lines: 33 In article EHARNDEN@AUVM.BITNET (Eric Harnden) writes: >i think it's neat. i want to go. So do I. But even more, I want humanity in general to go, to stay. >if i can't go, i want my son to. Same here. And the best way to insure our sons (and daughters!) will go is to work on long-term projects, that will produce the discoveries and new technology we need for economically viable, sustainable space settlement. > the problem is, of course, that the unmanned advocates have every >statistical reality on their side. So why support uneconomical, unscientific space activities, which detract from progress towards our goal? >on the other hand, the umanned folks lean on rationality as their only >argument. We have not ignored the emotional and cultural aspects. A vigourous exploration of all parts of the solar system will be at least as culturally uplifting and emotionally edifying as manned space shots to LEO. >a little enthusiasm is good for anybody, and should not necessarily >equate one with a coke-head. I would go farther. A *lot* of enthusiasm is *essential*. But it must be combined with the cold, hard weighing of the facts, or it is useless. Nick Szabo szabonj@fred.cs.washington.edu