Decolonizing technosignatures: Reimagining technosignatures through an Indigenist lens

Technical Summary: Decolonizing Technosignatures through an Indigenist Lens

Problem Statement
The current paradigm for searching for technosignatures—signs of advanced extraterrestrial civilizations—is fundamentally limited by a Western scientific framework that equates detectability with "pollution." Existing proposals for technosignatures (e.g., industrial byproducts, radio leakage, light pollution, and megastructures like Dyson spheres) rely on identifying deviations from natural signals. The author argues that this approach inherently searches for civilizations that are extractive, wasteful, and destructive to their environments. By defining technosignatures solely as anomalies or pollution, the search excludes civilizations that maintain a supportive, non-destructive relationship with their natural surroundings. This bias may contribute to the Fermi Paradox, as the search is restricted to a specific, potentially self-destructive subset of possible civilizations while ignoring those that are sustainable and thus less detectable.

Methodology
The paper employs a theoretical and philosophical methodology, utilizing Indigenous ways of knowing to critique and reframe the concept of technosignatures. The author, identifying as Mi'kmaw and Settler, contrasts Western scientific methodologies with Indigenous epistemologies.

• Western Science Framework: Characterized by objective knowledge, disciplinary silos, and a hierarchical view of nature where humans are the apex. This framework drives the current search for technosignatures as deviations from the natural order.
• Indigenous Framework: Characterized by relational knowledge, (w)holistic understanding, and the view that nature is sacred, familial, and kin. In this view, knowledge carries responsibility, and technology must support rather than harm natural systems.
  The paper applies these contrasting frameworks to the definition of technosignatures, arguing that the current definition is a product of colonial methodology. It references the concept that "pollution is colonization" (Liboiron, 2021) to posit that searching for pollution is effectively searching for colonial societies.

Key Contributions

1. Reframing Technosignatures as Colonialism: The paper posits that the dominant view of technosignatures is not neutral but is born from Western Science and is colonial in nature. It argues that by searching only for pollution, astronomers are implicitly searching for civilizations that mirror the destructive colonial history of Earth.
2. The "Two-Eyed Seeing" Approach: The author proposes applying the philosophy of Two-Eyed Seeing (Bartlett, Marshall, & Marshall, 2012), which utilizes Western Science as one lens and Indigenous methods as a second, to build a more profound understanding of technosignatures and galactic evolution.
3. Hypothesis on Sustainable Civilizations: The paper suggests that civilizations adhering to Indigenous relational principles would likely not produce the high-impact, detectable signatures currently sought. Instead, their technologies might support or enhance natural biosignatures rather than deviate from them.

Results and Arguments
The paper does not present empirical data or new observational results. Instead, it presents a logical argument derived from the synthesis of Indigenous philosophy and SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) theory:

• Detectability Bias: Current detection capabilities require signals to be significant deviations from natural processes. If a civilization operates in harmony with nature (as per Indigenous methods), its technological footprint would likely be indistinguishable from or supportive of natural biosignatures, rendering it invisible to current search strategies.
• The Fermi Paradox Connection: The author suggests that the Fermi Paradox may be partially explained by this methodological blind spot. If the most common or mature civilizations are those that have moved beyond the "polluting" phase of development, they would not emit the "pollution" signals we are currently scanning for.
• Limitations of Current Search: The paper concludes that the current research field is looking for a specific, likely short-lived or self-destructive subset of civilizations. It argues that the search for "pollution" is a search for a specific type of colonial society, not a universal definition of technology.

Significance and Claims
The paper claims that the field of technosignature research must "decolonize" its approach to be truly inclusive and scientifically robust. The significance lies in the recognition that the current search parameters are culturally specific and potentially exclusionary.

• Modest Claims: The author is modest regarding immediate practical application. The paper acknowledges that it is "not obvious" how the field can currently accomplish this decolonization, given that technologies consistent with Indigenous methods would likely not offer signatures detectable by current astronomical facilities.
• Future Direction: The primary contribution is a call to expand the conceptual definition of technosignatures. The paper suggests considering signatures that mimic or strengthen biosignatures, or deviations that are subtle and less destructive. It advocates for a shift in the research community's philosophy to include Indigenous methods, thereby potentially revealing a more diverse and sustainable picture of life in the Galaxy.