Let's hope the aliens will be rational

Stephen Hawking is worried about meeting up with aliens. (He wouldn't be doing this to drum up business for an upcoming book or media presentation would he?) He's afraid they won't be the nice peaceful beings portrayed in the scientific romances we call SF. He claims it's completely rational to believe in aliens, and thus seems to imply that it's irrational not to believe in aliens. Let's take a look at this bit of space ship speculation.

Quotes and comments;

A. 'The BBC News reported that Hawking considers it “perfectly rational” to believe that aliens exist, but he also believes we should do everything possible to avoid making contact. He said, “We only have to look at ourselves to see how intelligent life might develop into something we wouldn’t want to meet.” [1.]

- Hawking tells us that it's perfectly rational to believe aliens exist. Is it? (As an aside, why is it people so often add the adjective perfectly to rational? Does anyone know what perfect rationality would be like? does such a concept make sense? Oh well; never mind... we shouldn't nitpick, we've got bigger fish to fry.) How is it 'perfectly' rational (I guess ordinary rationality isn't enough for Hawking) to believe in aliens? Well; a belief in aliens is neither rational or irrational. Such a belief doesn't exist in a vacuum; it's a reasoned (rational) deduction from a set of presuppositions. i.e. if (and only if) you believe living organisms on earth somehow 'emerged' from inert matter (without intelligent interference) in a purely 'natural' process, then, if similar planets exist in the cosmos, it's rational to believe the process might well have happened other times.

In other words; the conclusion isn't rational, but the process is, or might be rational. What conclusion we come to (about aliens or about anything else) will depend upon our starting assumptions. In the case of Hawking; the reasoning might go something like; since there is no creator God (no one has seen him around Oxbridge, thus disproving his existence) and since 'life' emerges naturally from inert matter (as easily as a lie from the mouth of a professor) then it's rational (ie. logical) to believe this process has happened elsewhere in the cosmos, and thus it's rational to believe aliens exist elsewhere in the universe.

I prefer to say that aliens might exist, but if they do they would be beings created by God. I maintain this is also a rational statement. The conclusion is based on some assumptions. I take as a starting point that God exists; I then take the view god created all things including all life forms we know about. I believe that it's impossible for living organisms to 'emerge' from inert matter. In addition I take the orthodox position that God governs the universe by a providential plan. Therefore my conclusion that if aliens are discovered they will have been created by God; the same God who created mankind. Though it may not seem so to some, I maintain that this conclusion is every bit as rational as the one made by Hawking.

- Is it 'rational' to compare humans and aliens? Is it 'rational' to make deductions about aliens based on human behavior? How would we know one way or the other? (I don't think it would be rational unless we just assumed that aliens and humans were more or less the same; but we have no evidence for this assumption.)

- I wonder what Carl Cosmos think of this fear mongering by Hawking? I don't think he'd be amused. (Maybe the NASA gang should have included a book on logic, along with the Beatle music and other trivium they sent up into space.) Is this fear rational or not? Well; it again depends on your starting assumptions. Conclusions aren't rational or irrational. It's the reasoning process that is either rational (logically valid) or not rational.

Summary;
In Don Quixote our hero goes mad (if madness it is) from reading too many romances... and I fear Hawking has gone mad from reading too many scientific romances. Having abandoned his creator he's left with no limits on his thinking. If anything is possible then all manner of stupid ideas must be taken seriously; as seriously as any others. The implication of this is that there are no rational or irrational ideas, there are only possibilities... which are limitless. This I think explains the wild invention of current Sf and fantasy; these authors have drunk deeply at the bowl of limitless possibility. I sometimes look through the summaries of these stories, and it's staggering. They're so strange one is disinclined to read them. Each author strives to outdo his rivals in sheer bizarreness. If anything is possible, it soon becomes clear that nothing is all that interesting. (The idea anything is possible is one of our great myths; one of our great 'fictions'.) In terms of Biblical theology, God determines what is possible; and thus there are rational limits on possibility.

- Do I think aliens exist? No I don't; but I have no way of knowing one way or the other.

Notes;
1. Cosmologist Suffers Paranoid Delusions: Media Promotes His Views; Creation/Evolution Headlines 04/26/2010
“They’re coming to get us, and I’m sure of it, because I know everything.” What would you think of someone who talked like that? What if he were one of the most famous cosmologists alive today? The man is Stephen Hawking – that wheelchair-bound math wizard who talks with a speech synthesizer and once fell into a black hole in The Simpsons.
2. Stephen Hawking warns over making contact with aliens
'Prof Hawking thinks that, rather than actively trying to communicate with extra-terrestrials, humans should do everything possible to avoid contact.' BBC
- I'm not sure about this, but is he saying we should treat them like an ex spouse?
3. 'Prof Hawking said: "To my mathematical brain, the numbers alone make thinking about aliens perfectly rational. "The real challenge is to work out what aliens might actually be like."
- This is a classic example of how Darwinian thinking works. First, you assume evolution is true, and then you say to yourself, 'since evolution is true, what else would necessarily have to be true?' In other words, you take a flying leap (even if you're in a wheelchair I guess) over the impossibly difficult part and go on with the easy bits.
- How does he know he has a 'mathematical' brain? The fact he's better than most of us at math doesn't mean the essence of S. Hawking is equal to this ability... that the essence of his person is mathematics. The essence of man isn't some intellectual ability but his spiritual nature; the fact he was created by God for a relationship to God. The essence of man is therefore the image of god; and this is as true for S. Hawking as it is for anyone else.
4. 'Professor Cox added: "Closer to home, the evidence that life could exist on Mars is growing.'
- I've said it before, but it bears repeating; there is no such thing as life. What we see around us are living creatures, we do not see life. (We need to get rid of the old Greek idea of thinking in terms of abstractions.)
5. The next episode of his Discovery Channel series, Moskowitz revealed, is titled, “The Story of Everything.”
- Story is about it. [Hawking is famous for making absurdly big claims; claims he can't back up.] If you want the truth, read Genesis. (Hopefully you'll feel inspired to read the rest of the book.)
- I've heard that Hawking is a big SF fan.