The extraterrestrial hypothesis: an epistemological case for removing the taboo

Abstract

The extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH), the hypothesis that an extraterrestrial civilization (ETC) is active on Earth today, is taboo in academia, but the assumptions behind this taboo are faulty. Advances in biology have rendered the notion that complex life is rare in our Galaxy improbable. The objection that no ETC would come to Earth to hide from us does not consider all possible alien motives or means. For an advanced ETC, the convergent instrumental goals of all rational agents – self-preservation and the acquisition of resources – would support the objectives of removing existential threats and gathering strategic and non-strategic information. It could advance these objectives by proactively gathering information about and from inhabited planets, concealing itself while doing so, and terminating potential rivals before they become imminently dangerous. Other hypotheses of ETC behavior, including the zoo/interdict hypothesis and the dark forest hypothesis also undercut the claim that the ETH is highly improbable, and the ETH overturns none of our well-tested scientific knowledge. It follows that evidence offered in its support need not be extraordinary. The fact that most reports of unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP) have natural or human explanations does not count against the ETH. Inference to the best explanation offers a way to find evidence for the hypothesis and some evidence exists, some of it taking the form of reliable witness reports. The most plausible alternative explanation for some UAP declines in probability over time. A hypothesis that does not contradict well-established facts or theories, is not highly improbable for other reasons, and explains otherwise unexplained evidence is a rational hypothesis. Since the ETH meets this test, it should be evaluated alongside other possibilities when the case-specific evidence warrants it.