I will try to be concise and a caveat before we start, I
will be using the idea that integrating AI into a physical human is benign in
and of itself, but by it a great perversion has taken place between man and
God. Call it the mark of the beast, call it secular humanism, call it
perversion, just so long as we agree that this action is benign, but is always
used in a manner that results in sin against God. However, I am using this as a
variable…feel free to swap it out for some other unholy action…perhaps it will
appropriately challenge the logic.
Let’s say a village, detached from all major civilizations,
having no culture connection to anyone, becomes the recipient of the new neural
link. It does not have to be Elon Musk’s product, but something of that kind.
The trade of is that physicalism now dominates your world view. And you would
almost have to since there wouldn’t be any situations that would arise driving
you towards prayer and/or some kind of higher power, because no matter the
problem, the neural link would try to find a solution within the realm of what
a neural link could show… What would you say? However, your answer here only
shows a person’s willingness to blind-faith adopt this behavior.
Let’s sweeten the pot. Now not only is this village
connected to the internet with their thoughts…but now let’s say this village is
mental superior to every other person on the planet. They all have IQs of three
hundred. Their remote village has transformed its rustic ways into a neo-rustic
where with new technology, and simpler methods they retain their village
esthetic, but they figured out ways within their natural environment; the trees
and the rocks and the wind and the sun to create technology that is so
sophisticated you’d swear it was a marvel movie. What do you think about that? Now
we are entertaining jealousy, maybe envy where even though these people are
better and more advanced than anyone before them, we might not care, so long as
we can buy their tech and integrate ourselves with it.
It invites you to leave all that you have behind and join
the village. You see their greatness and instead begin a fandom of the village.
Again, this puts you in a position where your reliance on God or the ethereal
wanes…in the previous paragraph we already removed the need to retreat to God,
but here I think we have crossed into different territory. Now even if you
never retreated to God, but you remained committed that God was there, at this
point, even that is waning.
A little more sweetness does not hurt, lets push on. While
integrating the mind is one thing, what if this village now developed tech that
could enhance their bodies. Tone bodies, never sick, extended life span, … In
combat environments they can lift more than any non-integrated person, they can
run faster and longer, they have quicker reaction times, the better person.
What do you think of that? What if I told you that during this phase, they also
figured out how to make the technology exclusive. You cannot just join the
club. You cannot have this Kool-Aid. Now how do you feel about it? Do the
Olympics matter? Do world records matter anymore?
Now I want to take a moment to pause this experiment to
remind you that I am using this situation as an analog. Most simply this
problem could be stated by saying, “If you abandon faith, you will get cool
stuff and you will be a ‘better’ person.” And what’s more is that you do not have to
abandon faith overtly, you just always resolve issues by defaulting to the
humanistic response.
Back to the thought experiment.
At this point we start thinking quarantine. Like the Village
can be the best at everything but we make rules to restrict our focus of
humanities value and contribution to those unenhanced people.
Did we not just make an, “us vs. them,” situation?
Do we feel in danger, threatened by the far-off presence of
this village?
Advancing towards the purpose of this thought experiment, we
can imagine now that this village has expanded. They now are no longer remote
but rural. They have included more villages and have become a municipality. How
long before we have an enhanced Dubi situation? Better buildings, cleaner
water, better resources, better physical lives. Does this feel like a threat?
More of a threat than had the super-people remained as a village?
Moving on, now I need you to pick a country you feel is
dubious. If you are from the USA, the country might be Russia or China. If you
are from Mexico that country might be the USA. Let’s imagine now that this
municipality is part of your rival-nation’s people. Does this feel like a threat?
Does the “better” person stoke political envy? And from the ground up now
people all around the world are striving to catch up from the ground up.
At some point this is going to be a concern. We can move
from village to city, to county, to region, to state, to country…and each one
is going to give cause for either fear or envy or both. But now let’s make it
really hurt. What if the neighbor to the left of you is one of these enhanced individuals?
Can you love this neighbor as yourself?
And this is the crux of what I am after. Your neighbor does
not hate you for being a person of faith, but what do you suppose the
interaction would be like? Would your enhanced neighbor not default to a
utilitarian mindset on humanity? Is there value for this enhanced individual to
spend their time and energy engaging with you, being neighborly towards you?
Would there even be a social expectation that you, a normy, could even have a
good relationship with some enhanced individual? Or what do you suppose the
social expectation would be? Obviously, I cannot ask you directly but what if I
told you that this is a thought experiment to expose the struggle between the
flesh and the spirit?
Isn’t every sinful thing mankind does not a tempting of fate
against what we know is right and wrong? Example: Isn’t the discussion between
sexual promiscuity and celibacy not an argument for what makes you a better person?
Hedonism says that doing what feels good makes you a better person. And isn’t
the struggle of the celibate person not the internal dialogue of, “but I am
missing out.”?
It's the same with drugs, theft, and all the other sins.
They can be boiled down to this enhanced way of living at the price of
defaulting to a humanistic mindset.
In other words, “This life and the gain I get from it is
more important than any abstention.” Or “This life and the gain I get from it
makes me happier than relying on God for my provision.”
And it always feels like benign. Dry humping isn’t sex, so
its okay. Hand-Jibbers aren’t sex so it’s okay. Oral sex isn’t sex, so it’s
okay. Sex isn’t prostitution, so it’s okay.
Back to my crux question. Can you love this neighbor as
yourself? Would your love towards this neighbor not boil down to a petition to
abandon enhancements? Would you love your neighbor if you did not remind them
what is gained in this life is temporary?
Now let’s get eschatological! What if this enhanced person
wants to do you harm, end your life, destroy your ability to exist within a
proper enhanced society? Can you do anything? No! And this is the idea where in
Revelation 13:7, where the beast was given permission to make war against the
saints.
If you want to stave off such treatment, what should you
do…could you do except to demean such enhancements as necessarily detrimental
to society as a whole. Not letting the mindset gain a foothold.
As such the only argument that can be made here is that of
Rom 1:20 and juxtapose that between the perceived gains of any sinful acts or,
“enhancements”. And what does that look like except to give God credit or
praise which leads us right into the question, “Well, how do you know God did
it?”
And this I think comes down to logic. And I like to sum
these positions up with the presuppositional questions of, “If God, then….” Vs.
“If not God, then….”
Therefore to love a neighbor as yourself who doesn’t hold to
the “If God, then…” mentality, would be to advocate for the “If God, then…”
mentality.
No comments:
Post a Comment