STANISŁAW
LEM
Back

0:00/0:00

Brief
answers
to cosmic
questions

It is typical for great minds that they can answer the most difficult questions in an accessible way. Here we ask Stanisław Lem about the answers to questions that trouble both humanity and indeed the writer himself.

Lem on igniting the idea of cognition (PR, 1990)00:00

  • If life arises on a planet, does its development always have to lead to the emergence of intelligent beings and civilization?
    Stanisław Lem
    Stanisław
    Lem

    00:00

    I do not think it has to. Simply put, if the conditions are so perfect, life can develop in some primitive forms and not evolve into more complex forms, then it will remain in some phase, like fluid, isotopes, or bacteria.

    There just has to be a certain number of unfavourable factors, some disruptions which, in a way, spur life to produce more and more complex forms and move up the evolutionary ladder. And when this flux is absent, it means stagnation or complete destruction. (PR, 1970)

  • Does extraterestial life exist?
    Stanisław Lem
    Stanisław
    Lem

    00:00

    For an answer to your question, you may look to not the cosmos but the reactions of our Earth’s own scientists. And then you may discern the fact that there has been an oscillation of expectations in the scientific community over the last 150 years. There was a time when it was thought that you had to light triangular-shaped fires in the Sahara and that then the Martians – believed to exist – would see them.

    Today we have pushed expectations and hopes far into space. But if there was no anticipation of finding something, and if scientists were sceptical, then we would have no centres of enquiry at various universities. If there is a commission for communication with other civilizations, then it must be assumed that scientists have some data, even if they are hypothetical, otherwise all this would be wasted effort. (PR, 1970)

  • Do other civilisations exist?
    Stanisław Lem
    Stanisław
    Lem

    00:00

    I believe so. The development of these other civilizations may be much more different to anything we could ever conceive. The technical means of communication may also look – at a highly advanced level of development – completely different to what we may envisage today. There may be circumstances that we cannot account for at all.

    And when we talk about making contact with other civilizations, it is typical of the type of question we put to these world, to their own nature.

    We always demand that these worlds answer us with a „yes” – „no” dichotomy. And experience in a completely different field of science – physics, shows that it is more difficult to answer questions such as whether matter is a wave, or whether matter is a particle, and so on. And when it comes to these types of questions, our world provides an answer fit for imbeciles – simply that the questions were wrongly phrased. Although we cannot imagine how wrongly the question of whether or not other civilizations exist could be posed; other than if the answer were „yes” or „no”.

    And I have just set myself such a task – to find an answer that goes beyond this alternative, lest it be so banal that I end up with either ‘they are out there’ or ‘they are not’. I’m not saying that I know how things really are. I’m just trying to find the words; to create some hypothesis that will be a science-fiction hypothesis, but at the same time it must meet the conditions met by scientific hypotheses.

    This means that it cannot be something trivial – that there are humans or humanoid creatures on other planets, but the entire cosmos has an aversion to any relationship between planets – it is simply too primitive and implausible too far-fetched. So basically, I am struggling to come up with a hypothesis on this subject that would not be like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I would not want this theory to sound as if we will never make contact, and that no one is out there. (PR, 1990)

  • We talk about artificial intelligence, whilst medicine can provide us with artificial organs. And what do you have to say about an artificial conscience?
    Stanisław Lem
    Stanisław
    Lem

    00:00

    I imagine that when someone steals someone else’s property, it must somehow translate into pangs of conscience. For example, someone tries to break into a car that is not his own and first, somewhere from under the muck, there is a voice such as „Get out of here”, and then „Get out or you’re going to get it „, and then a steel lever punches him once in the head and then someone else grabs him by the collar.

    And if that weren’t enough, some skunk scent pops up from an unknown place, so that the robber stinks like crazy for two months. So of course, there are many possibilities.

    I want to say that passive defence against deeds such as the protection of the seventh commandment is beginning to crack. At this point in time, we have to start a counter-offensive, to engage in more active activity. But for this activity to have the nature of such a conscience, we would have to wear headphones on our ears and hear „you hoodlum, you”, whenever we have bad thoughts, „you, hoodlum, you, stop immediately, or something unpleasant will happen to you.” And it is basically possible, but it will all be so artificial.

    The easiest way is to break into a car that is not so protected or just throw the „Walkman” that enjoins us to be virtuous into the nearest bin. On the other hand, if someone has a real conscience, they will not throw it away, will they? Well, not really. That is why a real conscience should be sufficient enough. (PR, 1993)

  • Are you afraid that scientific progress will bring about the extinction or annihilation of humankind?
    Stanisław Lem
    Stanisław
    Lem

    00:00

    Science itself does no such bad things. It is like a kind uncle, dressed as Santa, bringing his little nephew a sack of presents – a razor, a revolver, a bauble, and sometimes some powder which, when pounded, shatters into specs of dust.

    But at the same time, you can say that you can do various useful things with these gifts- you can shave yourself with a razor, you can learn to shoot a target with a gun, train your hand and eye.

    It all depends on what this beloved child will do with these toys. Science, on the other hand, does not invent what is most malicious, but simply finds what it finds on its various quests. Recently it has been shown that it is possible to manipulate a human hereditary substance, and so it is being manipulated. (PR, 1990)

  • Is fast space travel possible?
    Stanisław Lem
    Stanisław
    Lem

    00:00

    If you ask all living physicists, then probably 99.8 percent of all competent physicists would say no. Two hundredths of a percent, would just about… , say yes, and I’ll admit I don’t know the answer, but it seems highly unlikely to me.

    My point is simply this – if there is such a way of traveling or communicating, and it does not only apply to material bodies only, but also to signals sent by light waves or signals; if the distance could be freely reduced between celestial bodies with these extra-fast methods of travelling or sending, if in the end the individual suns and planets could be as close to each other as, say, peas in a pot, there is no doubt that since there are some civilizations in space, we would already have had various visitors, or at least we would have had signals from such civilizations.

    With such proximities, a hundred or even a thousand of the nearest suns and planet would be for such a civilization the same as visiting our closest neighbours' apartment, in the same building, 5 minutes up the stairs. They would simply have appeared.

    My reasoning is not just based on my respect for science, it is based on the fact that neither geological and palaeontological protocols, nor indeed any historical data reveal any visitation to Earth by cosmic beings over the past 30-40 years.  

    It should be reasonable to assume that if there are civilizations in space, and there must be those that are much more advanced than terrestrials, having been born in the same galactic year on all planets. So the more advanced civilizations would know such methods of traveling; if indeed such methods existed. And if they did, they would pop up from time to time, in line with that which is going on elsewhere.

    However, there are no extra-terrestrial beings here, no such  aliens have turned up here so far, which implies that there is very little likelihood that this wonderful galactic mail exists and that science fiction is „fibbing” in this respect, so to speak. (PR, 1984)

  • What visions of the future does science fiction reveal to us?
    Stanisław Lem
    Stanisław
    Lem

    00:00

    Technical reflection, I would say, is a naïve predecessor of science fiction. All the great creators of cosmonautics, prior to its creation, strongly believed that the very fact of the emergence of cosmic travel would ennoble humankind.

    Unfortunately, this has not been the case. The same tools and techniques can be used both for the good of man and against him. So this naïve Promethean myth, believing that once man reaches the stars, he will be somehow ennobled no matter the political and systemic form of society. Unfortunately, this myth has vanished in the face of reality.

    The world has not automatically become a better place with the exploration of space. This naive optimism warmed up science fiction from within, and in particular American science fiction. But ultimately science fiction adopted a bleak outlook – there is no hope and everything will collapse into some monstrous vortex; and it is only a matter of choosing how we perish or for how long we will be in our death throes.

    In my personal reflection I have moved away from naive, sweet optimism, one where everything is going well, where the sea is knee-deep, the oceans can be moved from place to place in buckets, where a hole can be made through which we will be able to pass on all fours, and so on. Whereas on the other hand, I did not want to negate all the opportunities and hopes that might be presented to humanity.

    The proposition is therefore fairly balanced – it is in total acceptance of the sweetened reality and in total rejection of the same. Both of them are tainted with enormous one-sidedness and simplify a reality that is neither perfect nor deserving of sanctification; nor is it resoundingly bleak, and so deserving of being plunged into the pits of hell.