Red Dust And First Principles #383

Guest article by Syed W H Shah

Dear friends of Daily Philosophy,

I’m sorry about last week’s missing article — it was the first week of the teaching term for us, and I had a lot of work to do to prepare for classes. Now that this is done, I hope that I will be able to send you this newsletter with the usual regularity.

Today we have a fascinating thought experiment by Dr Syed W H Shah: Can social contract theories actually apply to human colonies in other worlds? Does it make sense to speak of a state of nature on Mars, or an “open society” on a Jupiter moon? I’ve always been fascinated by science fiction and the prospect of living outside of Earth, so I find this kind of examination irresistible. I hope that you will also find it interesting.

And with this, let’s welcome Dr Shah. Have a great weekend and see you next week!

— Andy

Red Dust And First Principles — Does Political Philosophy Apply On Mars?

By Syed W H Shah

Imagine this: a future where the first 5,000 humans set foot on the rusty plains of Mars, not as curious tourists, but as determined settlers. Earth feels like a distant memory — both in terms of distance and emotion. Communication is slow, supply ships come only twice a year, and survival relies entirely on working together. In this uncharted territory, do the political ideas we brought from Earth still make sense? Or is it time to rethink everything from the ground up?

This isn't just a thought experiment; it's a real philosophical conundrum: Can the political philosophies developed on Earth, in completely different circumstances, truly apply to life on Mars?

Political philosophy has long wrestled with questions about the state of nature, the social contract, justice, authority, and freedom within the context of societies on Earth — home to billions, shaped by centuries of history, and woven into cultural, economic, and ecological complexities. Mars offers a starkly different backdrop. It reduces humanity to its core, forming a small, vulnerable community whose survival hinges on technology, trust, and a fragile balance of cooperation and authority. These conditions urge us to revisit political philosophy not just as an abstract theory but as a practical roadmap.

Survival First: Hobbes, Locke, and Mill

On Mars, essentials like oxygen, food, and water aren't just nice-to-haves; they're vital for life. John Locke's [1] ideas about natural rights: life, liberty, and property start to blend with our responsibilities. If someone refuses to fix the life-support systems, it's not just a matter of personal freedom; it's a serious risk to everyone's survival. Locke [1] believed that civil society exists to safeguard these rights, but on Mars, rights and responsibilities become one and the same. You can't claim ownership of property without also taking part in caring for the delicate environment that makes it possible.

John Stuart Mill's [2] harm principle, which allows for limiting freedom to prevent harm, takes on a whole new level of importance. On Earth, choosing not to vaccinate might endanger others over time; on Mars, neglecting to repair an oxygen valve could endanger the entire habitat in mere hours. The Martian setting pushes Mill's principle to its breaking point, requiring that nearly every action be evaluated based on its potential impact on the community.

Thomas Hobbes's [3] view of life in a state of nature as "nasty, brutish, and short" rings true in this context. The harsh Martian environment might compel settlers to accept strong leadership, at least at first, to avoid chaos and ensure survival. A governing body or council could hold significant power, justified by the constant threat of extinction. However, Hobbes [3] also reminds us that authority must be embraced willingly, as part of a social contract formed out of necessity. Once stability is reached, Locke's focus on consent and liberty will come back into play, urging settlers to seek self-determination.

In practice, this means that early governance on Mars might look like a technocratic emergency system, but as survival becomes less of a daily struggle, the push for more inclusive systems will grow. The balance of Hobbes's necessity, Locke's consent, and Mill's harm principle highlights the core challenge of life on Mars: survival requires certain limits, but those limits can't overshadow the need for freedom.

Building Community: Rousseau and Arendt

Jean-Jacques Rousseau [4] provides a fascinating link between survival and freedom. He believed that true liberty isn't just about doing whatever we want; it's about following laws that we help create the general will. On Mars, where resources are limited and teamwork is essential, Rousseau's ideas become incredibly important. Settlers need to view themselves as co-creators of the rules that balance their individual needs with the survival of the group.

This idea of the general will also helps bridge the gap between expertise and democracy. When it comes to decisions about oxygen distribution or building habitats, we can't just leave it to the experts, especially since these choices impact everyone's life. Rousseau would argue that these rules only gain legitimacy if they reflect the collective will of the colony, rather than being dictated by a select few.

On the other hand, Hannah Arendt [5] reminds us that politics isn't just about rules; it's also about creating spaces for freedom. Her idea of the "space of appearance" highlights our need for a public realm where people can come together to act and speak. For Arendt, mere survival without political engagement is just existing; to be truly human, we need spaces for discussion, creativity, and recognition.

The challenge on Mars is that survival often requires silence, obedience, and order. However, if settlers don't foster Arendtian spaces — like forums, councils, and assemblies — they risk losing the very humanity they aim to protect. Arendt challenges us to consider: can we design Martian habitats not just as life-support systems, but as places for dialogue, deliberation, and public action? Only then can Mars avoid turning into a technocratic prison disguised as a colony.

Authority and Its Limits: Plato and Popper

In the early days of Mars, leadership will probably be in the hands of engineers, biologists, and other specialists. Plato's [6] concept of philosopher-kings, wise rulers whose knowledge ensures order feels particularly relevant here. Just as Plato’s ideal city relied on wisdom for guidance, a Martian colony might need leaders who blend technical expertise with a strong moral compass. After all, a poorly designed oxygen system isn't just a technical blunder; it could lead to a political disaster.

However, Plato [6] cautioned against rulers slipping into tyranny. Simply having knowledge doesn't guarantee justice. A society that completely relies on experts risks creating a detached elite, out of touch with the people they govern.

Enter Karl Popper [7], who serves as a necessary counterbalance. His advocacy for the "open society" emphasizes that political systems should embrace criticism, correction, and change. On Mars, there will be a strong temptation to stifle dissent in the name of efficiency. Popper warns that this is exactly how closed societies form, allowing errors to go unchallenged.

For Mars, this tension is clear: while democratic processes may feel slow, suppressing them could lead to alienation and rebellion. Therefore, a sustainable governance model for Mars must merge Plato's appreciation for wisdom with Popper's call for openness, establishing accountability mechanisms even during crises.

Images: Midjourney

Justice and Human Dignity: Rawls and Sen

Once governance is established, we start to grapple with deeper questions of justice. John Rawls's [8] concept of the "veil of ignorance" serves as a guiding principle: when creating laws, settlers should act as if they have no idea what their future role in society will be, ensuring fairness for those who are most vulnerable. When we think about Mars, this means setting up institutions that don't favor the first engineers who arrive over later immigrants, or one group of settlers over another. If resources like oxygen, water, or food are hoarded, we could see inequality escalate into conflict.

Amartya Sen [9] takes this a step further by focusing on capabilities, the genuine freedoms that give life its meaning. Just surviving on oxygen and calories isn't enough. A fair Martian society must empower settlers to learn, create, and thrive. Education, health, and social engagement are just as crucial as engineering. Sen's perspective reminds us that living without dignity is only living half a life.

Take, for instance, the distribution of limited energy resources. A Rawlsian approach would advocate equal access to basic power for heating and lighting. Meanwhile, a Senian viewpoint would push for investments in communication systems, which are vital for education and democratic participation — capabilities that are essential for human flourishing, even in an alien environment.

Freedom, Power & Vigilance: Sartre and Foucault

Jean-Paul Sartre [10] teaches us that freedom isn't something handed to us; it's something we forge through our choices. Even in the toughest situations, it's our actions that define who we are. When Martian settlers arrive, they won't just take on existing political systems; they'll actively mold them with every choice they make about cooperation, fairness, and governance. The essence of existential freedom will be inescapable, even on Mars.

On the other side, Michel Foucault [11] warns us that power often lurks within the frameworks we establish. Think about it: surveillance systems tracking oxygen consumption, biometric scans for safety, and the constant recording of tasks, these might start as necessary tools for survival but can quickly morph into instruments of control. On Mars, the distinction between discipline and domination could become dangerously unclear.

Foucault urges us to stay alert: who's keeping an eye on those in charge? How can we create systems that safeguard without stifling? Mars calls for not just technological advancements but also innovative political thinking, ensuring that our safety measures don't turn into invisible shackles.

The Martian Mindset: Engineering Paradigm

Philosophy alone won't suffice when it comes to preparing for life on Mars. The University of Bremen's Martian Mindset project [12] introduces a groundbreaking approach to production and survival in extreme scarcity. It's not just about psychology; it's a comprehensive interdisciplinary framework that weaves together engineering, materials science, robotics, astrobiology, and human factors.

At the core of the Martian Mindset are four key scarcities — materials, energy, labor, and information — that shape life on Mars. This scarcity-driven approach compels us to rethink how societies source, process, and operate. What we get is a model that's not only applicable to Mars but also relevant for Earth's green transition.

Sourcing: Researchers are innovating (bio-)electrochemical techniques to extract metals, plastics, and oxygen from low-grade Martian regolith — without leaning on fossil fuels. On Mars, waste transforms into raw material. This concept could revolutionize recycling and resource management back on Earth too.

Processing: Low-energy production systems need to provide "good enough" parts that can handle impurities. Here, flexibility and efficiency take precedence over perfection. This "good enough" mindset challenges our Earthly obsession with flawless consumer products, nudging us toward resilience and practicality.

Operating: Human-robot teams play a crucial role. Production must be adaptable in the face of uncertainty, utilizing limited data and remote-control systems that still allow for some autonomy. Predictive digital twins and data-driven control methods help guide real-time decisions, ensuring we can adapt in environments where mistakes can have dire consequences.

To put these ideas to the test, Bremen's demonstrator facility is building real Martian-like production systems like creating a rover wheel entirely through scarcity-driven methods. This serves not just as proof of concept for Mars, but also as a blueprint for sustainable industry on Earth, where resource depletion and climate change are pushing us to rethink how we produce.

Working groups are bridging the gap between philosophy and engineering, focusing on digital modeling of production processes.

Conclusion: Mars as a Mirror

Mars brings to light some age-old philosophical questions. To survive, we need authority, but to truly be free, we need a voice. While expertise can keep us safe, legitimacy hinges on consent. Laws should protect life, but they must also uphold dignity and justice. The Martian experiment shows us that political philosophy isn't just a relic of the past, it's absolutely vital.

If we can blend Hobbes's realism with Locke's emphasis on rights, Rousseau's idea of the general will with Arendt's concept of public space, Plato's wisdom with Popper's openness, Rawls's notion of justice with Sen's focus on capabilities, and Sartre's idea of freedom with Foucault's vigilance, then perhaps Mars can steer clear of the mistakes we made on Earth.

The Martian Mindset enhances this vision. By merging engineering innovation with collaboration across disciplines, it roots philosophy in real-world application. Mars challenges us to face scarcity, interdependence, and fragility — while also inspiring us to create societies that are resilient, just, and free.

The red dust isn't just an empty canvas. It's imbued with human hopes, fears, and dreams. Our mission isn't just to survive beneath alien skies; it's to forge a society that respects freedom, justice, and dignity from the very start. In this way, Mars transforms from being merely humanity's next frontier into its most profound philosophical experiment.

Dr. Syed Waqar Hussain Shah is a Lecturer in Chemistry at Hazara University Mansehra, Pakistan. His research focuses on harnessing non-covalent interactions to develop eco-friendly materials and processes that can impact medicine, the environment, industry, and energy. Dr. Shah has a deep appreciation for art and philosophy. He's especially intrigued by how these disciplines might evolve as we embark on our journey toward living on Mars.

References

[1] Locke, J. Two Treatises of Government; Laslett, P., Ed.; University of Cambridge, 1988.

[2] Mill, J. S. On Liberty, Kitchener.; Batoche Books Limited, Canada, 2001.

[3] Thomas Hobbes. Leviathan; Richard Tuck, Ed.; Cambridge University Press, 1996.

[4] Rousseau, J.-J. The Social Contract; Bennett Jonathan, Ed.; Oxford University Press, 2017.

[5] Arendt, H. The Human Condition; Canovan, M., Ed.; The University of Chicago Press, 1998.

[6] Plato. The republic, Translated By Tom Griffith, Geuss, Ray.; G.R. F. Ferrari, Ed.; Cambridge University Press, 2019.

[7] Popper, K. The Open Society and its Enemies: The Spell of Plato; George Routledge & Sons, Ltd. UK, 1947.

[8] John Rawls. A Theory of Justice, Revised.; Harvard University Press., 1999.

[9] Sen, A. Develeopment as Freedom; Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., New York, 1995.

[10] Sartre, J.-P. In Existentialism from Dostoevsky to Satre; W. Kaufman, Ed.; Meridian Publishing Company, 1989.

[11] Michel Foucault. Discipline and Punish (Translated from French by Alan Sheridan), 2nd ed.; Vintage Book, 1991.

[12] Bremen University. The Martian Mindset (https://www.uni-bremen.de/en/the-martian-mindset/research).