I don’t think that he was trying to say that the earth is appallingly insignificant to earthlings. I think it’s meant to be an ego check or a reality check for those that can’t fathom how our world looks from that perspective. I’d go as far as to say that he meant the opposite. That instead of jockeying for position on this tiny mote of dust people should try to live more peacfully especially if this is all there is.
That’s where this comes in: “there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves. It is up to us.”
The fine line between humanism and nihilism is, to me, the difference between hope and despair. For all practical purposes, Xema, you’re right. So one explanation might be a broad interest in the continuation of our species.
George Carlin of all people made this point a different way: Environmentalists aren’t really concerned about the Earth, which can take care of itself. Environmentalists ultimately are concerned about the continued habitability of the Earth for humans (and perhaps others).
I’m not doing this point justice, but perhaps you’ll get my drift. We’re not in GD, after all.
Sagan was a huge influence on me, and I miss him. The epilogue of Billions and Billions is required reading for any Sagan fan.
I saw this differently. What makes this view of earth so astonishing isn’t so much the smallness of earth, but the contrast between all that exists upon and within our world and our minds, and the absence of anything remotely similar in the rest of the vastness of our solar system. I reflected upon the idea that “…the aggregate of all our joys and sufferings”…etc. appears to be something unique, or at the very least rare in our universe, and that it should be cherished, nurtured, and protected – not annihilated over what amounts to petty concerns in larger scheme of things.
Thank you to all who are commenting upon this. This thread got off to a rocky start, and I’m so pleased that there are others here who find this sort of thing worthy of sharing.
