Page Content (OCR)
331 ested people. The triennial bioastronomy symposia have provided another if less frequent forum, although it is one focused almost enitirely on scien- tific questions. Speculations about the consequences of contact have been dominated by Westerners, particularly English-speakers from the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia, with important contributions from several continental European nations. Although Soviet citizens pro- posed many early ideas, far less is heard from contemporary Russia. The debate has lacked significant input from the Earth’s most populous continent: Asia. If work is being done in Asian languages, little of it is being translated and made available in the West. This seems doubly unfor- tunate because of the > long historical traditions of Asian religions, philoso- ehinn 224 eae phies, and worldviews. Some have defended this Occidental bias. Paolo Musso argued that Western culture is the most likely to experience first the “impact of contact” and to have to make the first decisions about managing it. Historian Joseph Tatarewicz, too, found a Western orientation defensible, but he added that it would be fascinating to explore this issue in other cultures, particularly those that have different metaphysics and epistemologies, and where humans have not traditionally occupied so central a place in the universe.” If a tradition of rational thought is to make progress, it is essential that it builds in tolerance. No authority can dictate in advance what can and cannot be believed. Twenty years ago, Notre Dame historian Michael Crowe called for greater humility in dealing with the philosophical, religious, and scientific issues central to the extraterrestrial intelligence debate.** Jumping to con- clusions when facts are so few is plainly premature. We don’t know enough to be savaging those who disagree with us about the probability of contact, or its consequences; we are arguing more about possibilities than about deethe truths. Unless or until contact is actually established, Sagan and Newman observed, this subject is destined to be riddled with uncertainty and honest differences of opinion. No convincing resolution to these issues is likely to come from protracted debates carried on with great passion and sparse data.”° Intellectual Tolerance Non-Western Perspectives Intellectual Tolerance —Charles Freeman, 200274