Introduction to the Fermi Paradox

The Fermi Paradox, proposed by renowned physicist Enrico Fermi, presents a profound contradiction between our astronomical observations and the expectation of alien life. The universe, vast and teeming with stars akin to our Sun, many orbited by potentially life-sustaining planets, stands in unsettling silence. Despite promising conditions and our advanced technological efforts to find extraterrestrial intelligence, we encounter nothing. Why, in a universe seemingly ripe for life, do we find no evidence of other civilizations? Could the answer lie in the complex interplay of biology and the evolution of life?

Overview of Existing Hypotheses

Several hypotheses attempt to explain this paradox:

• The Rare Earth Hypothesis: This suggests that life-breeding environments are so restrictive and demanding that intelligent species are scarce in the universe. Consequently, the likelihood of such species developing space-exploration technology is low. We might, to some extent, be unique.
• Low Technology: We may be unable to detect signals from advanced civilizations due to our still-primitive technology. As our technology evolves, the silent universe might become bustling with signals.
• The Dark Forest: Drawing parallels from Earth’s history, where encounters between disparate civilizations often ended in disaster, this theory proposes that civilizations may choose to remain hidden, fearing other advanced species. This concept has inspired numerous science fiction works, including the famous “The Three-body Problem”.
• The Great Filter: This hypothesis posits that there’s a challenging evolutionary stage from pre-life to a galaxy-colonizing civilization. This barrier could be anything from the genesis of life to the transition from single-cell to multicellular organisms, or an as-yet-unknown future hurdle. If the Great Filter is behind us, it suggests our rarity; if ahead, it could mean advanced civilizations self-destruct before achieving interstellar contact.

The Advancement of Technology Will Kill Space Exploration First

I’ve long been intrigued by the Fermi Paradox, and while all aforementioned hypotheses are plausible, I propose a new one, an offshoot of the “Great Filter”: the advancement of technology might be the ultimate filter for intelligent species like ours.

Contrary to expectations, I’m not focusing on AI, despite its fascinating potential. AI alone won’t prevent species from exploring the universe. Were that the case, the universe should be teeming with intelligent robots, which it evidently isn’t.

So, what technology could deter us from space exploration? It might seem counterintuitive, but to understand this, we first need to examine our motivations for venturing into space:

• Curiosity: A fundamental trait of intelligence, driving us to seek knowledge about our universe, the origins of life, and celestial phenomena.
• Building Connection: The hope of discovering and connecting with other intelligent beings, not merely for scientific collaboration but to understand our place in the cosmos.
• Resource Search: Seeking new materials and energy sources, or even habitats for burgeoning populations.
• Conquest: Historically, a less-discussed motive, but the drive to dominate other species or territories has often fueled exploration.

However, all these motivations are rooted in emotion: curiosity, fear of resource scarcity, the desire for a better life, or the urge to conquer.

This leads to an unconventional thought: What if intelligent species eventually transcend these emotions, such as the fear of death or insatiable desire? The assumption might seem abrupt, but it’s not simple. To explain, let’s delve into my worldview and the principles of Buddhism.

My Shift of Wordview

Growing up, I was often told that the world is beautiful, a belief necessary to avoid a descent into negativity. However, it doesn’t seem to be the case for me, what with all the obstacles and harsh conditions in front of me. I’d always been wondering if there was anything wrong with me. This perspective shifted after encountering Jordan Peterson’s work, which emphasizes life’s inherent suffering and the importance of fighting back to make life bearable. He advocates for extensive reading, as wisdom can be found in the words of others.

His idea also aligns with the book called “The Road Less Traveled,” which states:

Life is difficult. This is a great truth, one of the greatest truths. It is a great truth because once we truly see this truth, we transcend it. Once we truly know that life is difficult—once we truly understand and accept it—then life is no longer difficult. Because once it is accepted, the fact that life is difficult no longer matters.

From my experience, this resonates in two aspects:

1. Life is inherently difficult.
2. Accepting and embracing this difficulty makes life easier.

This view, while not universally accepted, resonates with many. For those who find life carefree or wonderful, I consider them fortunate.

Buddha’s Worldview

Before delving deep into my proposed Great Filter, I want to take a few minutes to talk about Buddha and his worldview. Budda may have nothing to do with aliens, but I think learning his worldview would help you better understand my idea presented later.

Buddha, born over 2000 years ago under far harsher conditions than today, pondered the end of suffering. Unlike the common approach of fighting and striving to fulfill desires, Buddha proposed that suffering stems from desire. Eliminating desire, according to him, would lead to peace. Meditation, still practiced worldwide, was his method to achieve this tranquility.

Thus, we have two approaches to addressing life’s challenges:

1. Externally, fighting to satisfy desires. That is what most people would choose instinctively.
2. Internally, calming our hearts to let desires fade. That is what Buddha advocates.

Often, we combine both two methods, striving until we must accept reality.

Buddha concluded that perpetual happiness is unattainable through the first method. Even temporary successes are soon forgotten amidst life’s constant changes. For instance, the joy of a career promotion may be short-lived, replaced by anxieties about further advancement. This cycle of satisfying greed leads to fleeting happiness.

Buddha focused on the second method, achieving peace through meditation. Regular practice, he taught, leads to true happiness that doesn’t rely on external stimuli and safeguards against life’s hardships. This approach, even in our technologically advanced society, has calmed many.

Calm Down the Future

So, how does this relate to aliens? The theory I propose connects Buddha’s teachings with the Great Filter: Aliens might have perished upon reaching an epiphany. Realizing the pointlessness of external conquests and relentless technological pursuit, they might have turned inward, focusing on spiritual and mental development akin to Buddhism. This shift likely reduced their inclination for interstellar exploration and expansion.

Advanced alien civilizations might have achieved an enlightenment-like understanding, deeming material pursuits and cosmic expansion irrelevant. Their technologies, rather than for exploration, would sustain their civilizations in balance and self-sufficiency. This paradigm shift could account for the lack of observable extraterrestrial life.

Furthermore, if this inward turn is a common evolutionary path, the Great Filter might not be a devastating event but a philosophical and cultural redirection. The cosmic silence might stem not from the scarcity of intelligent life but from their choice for introspective existence, minimizing their observable presence. Just like a lot of people choose not to climb the career ladder, that’s not because they are weak and incapable of doing this, but because they have higher intelligence than most people to choose the path that suits them, instead of just following the instinct coming from genes.

Some people may doubt this proposition. After all, many on Earth already prioritize inner peace over external demands. Yet, our technological progress continues unabated, evident in lunar landings and Mars missions, with interstellar travel on the horizon. We are not stopping at all. So, what’s the disconnect?

It lies in the advancement of other fields, including biology. Even though a lot of people nowadays have realized that incessant desires and pursuits are bringing pain to their lives, even though they want to achieve peace and stop chasing, their genes are hard to change. They have no way to do that. Imagine a future where we can self-modify: enhancing health, strength, and intelligence. But ultimate satisfaction remains elusive. Some might choose to “calm” themselves biologically, achieving meditative peace directly.

Such individuals, experiencing the ultimate enlightenment, might lose the drive for procreation. If more and more people choose to do this, the world’s population will decrease gradually, and, eventually, the scientific community will lack enough talented people to continue the space exploration ambition.

Critics of this theory may argue that curiosity and the exploratory drive are intrinsic to intelligent life. They may contend that inner peace wouldn’t extinguish the thirst for knowledge or exploration. They believe that technological advancements, especially in space travel, might unveil unknowns like new life forms, resources, or physics, fueling further exploration despite philosophical shifts.

However, for the biologically modified, traditional motivations like curiosity or survival might become irrelevant. Extensive modifications could fundamentally alter emotional and motivational frameworks, rendering traditional drivers of human behavior obsolete.

Caveats

Do notice this article doesn’t posit that medication would lead to the extinction of individuals. I don’t have the fortune to reach enlightenment through medication personally, so I’m incapable of informing others what people would do at that stage. Medication and Buddha are only used metaphorically here to tell the user the consequences of changing ourselves. However, I believe that one day, our biological technology could be so advanced that we might be able to modify ourselves, including our emotions, our ambitions, our desires and our goals in this world, something that is even far-fetching in the eyes of Buddha. At that time, some people may choose to decrease their desires to the minimum in order to live a better life. When most people choose to do this, we will no longer have enough ambitious people to develop interstellar technologies. What would you say about that world? Are we still humans if that really happens? Is it the destiny of all the intelligent species? I don’t know, but I’m sure the future will give the homo sapiens an answer.