There seem to be quite a few possibilities that you haven’t considered.
For example, on this website, we tend to assume that in the very near future, artificial intelligence will replace human intelligence as the guiding force on this planet; certainly before anyone gets to colonize the other worlds of this solar system, let alone the rest of the universe.
You also reject (“that would be impossible”) the idea of a biosphere in which suffering doesn’t dominate. But in fact we don’t even know what the relationship between matter and consciousness is. We don’t know all the possible modes of being.
You also don’t mention the idea that values like yours could actually drive an expansionist cosmic civilization. It might wish to prevent panspermia, or it might wish to save suffering worlds that already exist.
There is also something implausible about your scenario, according to which all spacefaring civilizations in the universe come to the same precautionary anti-life conclusion, and that’s why the universe still seems to be in a “wild” state everywhere: all alien life with technology is virtuously staying on its homeworlds in order to not accidentally create suffering biospheres, and even refrains from making megastructures so as not to tempt others into space. Too many other value systems and pathways of civilizational development are possible, for this to be a universal outcome.
I will also say that if you want your reasoning to affect the future of this planet’s technological civilization, you need to somehow enhance your understanding of normal human psychology and normal human expectations. Writing to strangers who never had your thoughts, and then condemning them as ignorant and immoral when they don’t adopt your conclusions, is a pathway to irrelevance.
There seem to be quite a few possibilities that you haven’t considered.
For example, on this website, we tend to assume that in the very near future, artificial intelligence will replace human intelligence as the guiding force on this planet; certainly before anyone gets to colonize the other worlds of this solar system, let alone the rest of the universe.
You also reject (“that would be impossible”) the idea of a biosphere in which suffering doesn’t dominate. But in fact we don’t even know what the relationship between matter and consciousness is. We don’t know all the possible modes of being.
You also don’t mention the idea that values like yours could actually drive an expansionist cosmic civilization. It might wish to prevent panspermia, or it might wish to save suffering worlds that already exist.
There is also something implausible about your scenario, according to which all spacefaring civilizations in the universe come to the same precautionary anti-life conclusion, and that’s why the universe still seems to be in a “wild” state everywhere: all alien life with technology is virtuously staying on its homeworlds in order to not accidentally create suffering biospheres, and even refrains from making megastructures so as not to tempt others into space. Too many other value systems and pathways of civilizational development are possible, for this to be a universal outcome.
I will also say that if you want your reasoning to affect the future of this planet’s technological civilization, you need to somehow enhance your understanding of normal human psychology and normal human expectations. Writing to strangers who never had your thoughts, and then condemning them as ignorant and immoral when they don’t adopt your conclusions, is a pathway to irrelevance.