This month marks five years since I wrapped up the manuscript for “Human Forever: The digital politics of spiritual warfare.” By fall, it was in print, as an e-book, and even registered on the Bitcoin blockchain. It’s still exclusively available in Bitcoin.
While some viewed its specialized focus as a downfall, it has been recognized today as a smart move to “niche down.” “Human Forever” has undeniably made a lasting impact.
The book raises a pivotal question: Why do we presume that posthuman intelligence aligns with our views on progress and the ultimate good?
Working with a fairly slim set of influences and goals gave me a unique foresight into the coming five years. It might seem surprising since so much has evolved, especially in AI.
The ongoing relevance of my argument is, I believe, due to its deeper narrative—what underlies technology itself. The key inquiry was about seeking something more foundational and intrinsic to our human identity.
While many today debate the hierarchy of technology versus politics, “Human Forever” sought to prioritize the spiritual dimensions of our existence over both.
Interestingly, few were addressing these themes in 2021, yet now they are gaining traction.
This isn’t entirely unexpected. As I elaborate in the book and subsequent essays, there’s a cultural and social resurgence of spirituality, even drawing from ancient traditions that many thought would remain in the past. This resurgence can largely be attributed to the nature and velocity of technological advancement.
Nowadays, technology has developed to a point where it challenges the complex intellectual justifications previously used to explain human existence without any spiritual or divine framework.
Even those at the forefront of AI development—possibly even more so—find themselves gravitating towards spiritual ideologies, from traditional Christian denominations to quirky new belief systems.
In contrast, the tech industry still largely favors associates who prefer to replace established religions rather than recognize or respect spiritual followers.
Welcoming Change
I’ve recently pinpointed two emerging trends relating to the ideas in “Human Forever.”
The first is a wave of awareness about what’s at stake in maintaining our freedoms and authority in the digital age.
Notably, we’ve seen perspectives shift, even echoed by Palantir’s CEO, Alex Karp. Among major tech players, there’s a growing recognition of key concepts outlined in the book, especially regarding how control of technology reflects sovereignty. As competition among nations escalates, there’s a pressing need to safeguard the collective memory—our shared essence—and combat the psychological dangers posed by a kind of enslavement, which some theorists warn about.
In the book, I highlighted how Bitcoin presents an exceptional avenue for ordinary individuals to regain autonomy in this digital era. It’s relatively accessible and does not require faith in larger institutions, which often carry significant trust issues.
Yet, I’m still holding out for tech leaders to rally around this message. For the broader public, though, it might be more beneficial for them to learn and navigate this landscape independently.
The Worldly Conundrum
The second trend that stands out is, frankly, unsettling.
There’s this paradox: Many of those enchanted by the notion of developing AI into a self-improving intelligence seem to accept that these machines will adhere to distinctly human ideas of “progress.”
Somehow, they believe that the machines we create to surpass human limitations won’t challenge our understanding of improvement and excellence.
Terms like improvement, progress, and perfection echo the ideology that drives AI aspirations. Yet, for those without divine guidance on their true meanings, these concepts are, well, rather human.
If we’re designing machines aimed at shedding the limitations associated with human intelligence, shouldn’t we question the expectation that they uphold modern human values?
Why do we presume that posthuman intelligence values what we define as “the ultimate good?”
Interestingly, this reliance on human-centered definitions mirrors similar trends in some prominent anti-AI movements, which emphasize human identity symbols.
Both sides seem hesitant to confront historical lessons. Straying from divine definitions of improvement and progress often leads to outcomes that are not just contrary but sometimes catastrophic.
A Nuanced Frontier
Though today’s religious teachings can be quite contradictory, they largely converge on one point: working outside divine guidance tends to be a mistake, especially if we end up delegating responsibility to our own flawed institutions.
Despite historical imperfections, these influences remain potent. A rigid secular humanism can sabotage the well-meaning ambitions of both AI advocates and critics.
For many, particularly in the U.S. and around the globe, Christianity may be the only resonant and reliable framework of spiritual authority available.
This poses unique challenges in America compared to other nations.
Just as establishing an AI-led theocracy isn’t feasible, neither would a Christian one be without complications. The U.S. must strive to reconcile the relationship between spiritual authority, governance, and technology.
Better to take action now than to worry about whether we have enough time.
