> Life arising only once could very well be the more plausible option
Indeed I feel like coming to this conclusion is something that the authors - and most of us rationalist types - do not _want_ to come to.
Because if you accept that hypothesis, then it follows as a consequence that an alternative view of the world makes a lot more sense: what if, rather than living in an emergent, random universe where life sprouts up everywhere, hundreds of billions of times, but somehow _always_ disappears before we can ever observe it outside Earth, we are instead living at the center of a universe where we are the sole intelligent species that ever existed? In that system of the world, the universe is being directed by beings existing outside its bounds - gods. A simulation created and managed by uncaring observers - as hypothesized by the likes of Elon Musk? Or a benevolent God in the Judeo/Christiano/Islamic tradition?
The truth is that this alternative is being rejected a priori, indeed not even acknowledged, by the authors of the article or most people in this thread, because it is an affront to their core beliefs, not through pure logical reasoning.
Indeed I feel like coming to this conclusion is something that the authors - and most of us rationalist types - do not _want_ to come to.
Because if you accept that hypothesis, then it follows as a consequence that an alternative view of the world makes a lot more sense: what if, rather than living in an emergent, random universe where life sprouts up everywhere, hundreds of billions of times, but somehow _always_ disappears before we can ever observe it outside Earth, we are instead living at the center of a universe where we are the sole intelligent species that ever existed? In that system of the world, the universe is being directed by beings existing outside its bounds - gods. A simulation created and managed by uncaring observers - as hypothesized by the likes of Elon Musk? Or a benevolent God in the Judeo/Christiano/Islamic tradition?
The truth is that this alternative is being rejected a priori, indeed not even acknowledged, by the authors of the article or most people in this thread, because it is an affront to their core beliefs, not through pure logical reasoning.