The Dark Forest Theory

Picture this: you are a hunter in the forest. It's dark, you have a torch and a spear. You don't know anything outside of the small area you've built a tent in. You could explore outside of it, go hunting, or you can turn off the torch to prevent people or other beasts like lions and bears coming. What do you do?

This is the Dark Forest Theory - the idea that it is better to hide from aliens than it is to make ourselves known. One thing is certain: evolution ensures survival of the fittest. Is it not the nature of living beings to destroy competition?

In his book by the same name, Liu Cixin purports this is why there is a cosmic silence. It is better to be unknown to aliens because everyone is hostile. But, curiously, in his first novel of the Remembrance of Earth series, an alien civilization detects a signal from Earth. However, the listener, instead of alerting his peers and attacking Earth, tells the Earth to not respond.

This is why I don't subscribe to the Dark Forest Theory. First, I find it difficult that a species which has formed methods of detecting civilizations light years away, is afraid or otherwise threatened by the one detected. Consider this: we develop faster-than-light method of exploring distant star systems. If we were able to do this, that would mean a lot of things for our technology and our understanding of the universe. I can't imagine what our day-to-day life would be like. If we were able to detect civilizations, I'm almost certain we could handle war.

Second, even if my first point is incorrect, this theory assumes that one of the main reasons for hostility is for resources. However, the Galaxy, let alone the Universe, has an abundance of resources. Surely it would be more costly to attack and destroy an entire civilization for two or three planets? And if it is worth going to war over, surely that would have made themselves detectable?

Third, and this could just be naivety, I reject the proposition that all aliens that are more advanced would be so hardened and evil that they would destroy whole civilizations. War, I understand, but to actually eliminate an entire species of sentient live? That's a new level of genocide that I don't think anyone could do without serious pushback from other members of their own species. Put it this way: we find primitive aliens that we are more advanced. You're telling me that we, as a species, would be unified in the decision to destroy the species? I could tell you for sure that I would be dissenting.