Delinking God: Can technology help answer the ultimate question?

Technology is creating new interactions around us, and as it develops further, will science change the way we interact will God? Picture courtesy: IntelligenceSquaredUs

Science, by its very nature, has always been known to contest the presence of God. Facts and laws rock its world, and not so much mythologies and prayers. It’s like no amount of praying can change the result of scientific experiments, but even a slight change in pressure can lead to vast variations. That’s just how it is. However, faith is a different emotion/instrument altogether. And even though while science doesn’t directly question the faith individuals repose in what is often termed divine, it argues that a supposed power that assumes command over the universe may not exist, that there isn’t any evidence. And it’s often in that mass-scale invisibility of any such evidence, on either or all sides, that the argument is often lost.

But that evidence, in some form, may soon be upon us; if it’s needed or desired is a different questions altogether. With constant acceleration in the speed of scientific and technological innovation, sparked by the mind’s curiousness and the heart’s desires that are nudged by our political-economic systems and amplified by our personal stories, a new space is being unlocked; a space of infinite possibilities that’s never been seen before, but perhaps only imagined. And that space may lead us to an answer then at best, or a reformed question at the least.

Of the many such technological advancements, two are of particular interest – the progress in the field of cryonics and the announcement of setting up of a company to ‘increase the brain’s bandwidth’ by implanting electrodes in it and connecting it to the Internet. While we can debate if the latter will lead to mechanised humans or a humanised Internet, both of these developments promise to take us from humans, as we know ourselves, to super-humans, as we sometimes imagine.

A Brain Booster

Let’s start with Neuralink. The company (the homepage for which is already up) is popular entrepreneur Elon Musk’s brainchild and aims to make humans smarter by implanting electrodes in the brain via surgeries to enable faster communication and internet-enabled brains – like a merger of artificial intelligence with human intelligence. To talk purely in terms of speed of communication, Musk envisions increasing the speed of human-to-human communication from about 1 byte per second (yes, they’ve calculated that too) to at least 1,000 bytes per second (the speed at which your pen drive transfers data to your computer).

Musk and his company Neuralink aim to merge human and artificial
intelligence. So will AI change the current human understanding of a God?
Picture credit: WeCanChange

Neuralink literally imagines a world so integrally connected via the Internet and these implanted chips that’d give our spiritual gurus a complex. In a post where he elaborates on the vision, Musk says we could then open car doors just by thinking about them and communicate emotions just by feeling them. Magic, as we may have called such events, may finally be a mass realisation, but via the route of science.

So humans would be thinking faster, communicating faster and building faster too. For the tools that we build, build us over time as well. Musk sees this as an inevitable step to mitigate the scope of artificial intelligence overtaking human intelligence as he preps to give the human mind new powers.

And while there are huge ethical and moral questions that this raises altogether (that this essay does not engage with), while bearing a danger warning as well, the idea of imaginations like Neuralink becoming plausible points towards a future where humans are god-like too many. Some may still argue that this is part of God’s plan or that humans are over-reaching themselves, but the fact that we are closing that gap is a crucial takeaway here. It’s a gap that has always existed (created) in our minds about what is humanly possible and what is in God’s powers.  For else, how else can define God as something other than human without that gap?

While ideas of technologies like these close those gaps, they’ll coax us to question the existence of God even more. Many may then tilt towards what many rationalists term atheism. But given the power and realms of human creativity, it could, of course, lead to a recalibration in our imagination of God and it’s powers, because a powerless God has never excited, supported or divided the world.

Powerful, Yet Perishable?

At the Cryonics Institute, human bodies are frozen
in these cylinders with the hope of technology
advancing to revive life in the future.
Picture credit: Cryonics Institute

Now that humans are on track to become smarter, much faster than nature intended, let’s also talk about how other technologies push boundaries to make humans immortal. That’s where cryonics has us enthralled.

We’ve seen a lot of this in science fiction, but what we may have missed is the real progress that’s been made in this space. Scientists and innovators have frozen over 350 bodies and brains in the last few years with the aim of reviving them or placing the brains in new bodies (or carriers as they can be thus called) in the coming decades. We've heard that story before, of God coming back from the dead. The concept of Cryonics has long been used in movies - most popularly in the from of cryo-sleeping in Avatar. But it's being practiced now with children as young as seven asking for their bodies to be frozen after their death.   

And Neuralink-enabled humans will get us there faster too, won’t they? And along the way, medical science is also making big breakthroughs by curing life threatening diseases and developing bionics – artificially created human limbs to be used on our bodies that our chip-ed brains will be able to control. And then creating and growing human tissue cannot be far away.

In effect, such technological advancements where we repair and replace humans limbs and tissues in ways that they never reach an expiry date will make us immortal. After all, it is a question of time against our physical abilities when it comes to survival. Plus we’ll have the options of tailored diets to keep the immune system strong and limb replacements to ensure the carrier remains fit. And just in case an illness or old-age get the better off us, cryonics will rescue us and keep the brain alive, a smartened one at that, and get us a new carrier too.

Meanwhile, we’ll also be tampering with climate control to have the best weather conditions to live in a pleasant environment, and live longer as well. Aren’t the experiments with creating artificial rain a big sign of that? Mythologically we’ve believed in stories of a God who can make it rain, divide seas or create storms in an instant, and now science and technology are unlocking those powers for us, literally making humans the new 'rain gods'. As things progress here too, they’ll make extreme heat conditions bearable and pleasant, and could wipe out the fear of droughts and famines. All under human control, aren’t those magical powers too now?

Superhuman Syndrome

While we may be decades, even centuries, away from such realities at mass scale, there are certain signs that humans will not let that objective go. And when they become real, they’ll toy with our norms. Our bodies may not be as central to the human experience, as they are to us now. They may just be carriers, the shape and look of which could perhaps be influenced or even tailored to our content. Will everyone look the same way then or will we lose the emphasis on external beauty? In such a reality, fairness creams will have no place, and brain implants may be mainstay, and also a concern. In a world where humans are smarter and immortal, nothing would be beyond them.

And while those norms are toyed with, our understanding of God will face a tough test as well, especially with humans having not much to fear. While understanding the meaning of God still requires greater study and is something that’s highly subjective to religions, regions, cultures and individuals, let’s look at a broader understanding at the risk of over-simplifying God. No offence meant to anyone in the course of this brief investigation.

We can be omnipresent too, as the use of 3D holograms by
Turkish President Erdogan (above) and Indian PM Modi
to address rallies has shown. Picture courtesy: Youtube

As most our religions tell us, isn’t God smarter than all of us and immortal too? Well, technology may soon have that covered. Can’t God do magic and be omnipresent and all-aware? The Internet already has us broadcasting ourselves all over and we may soon begin teleporting too while controlling objects with our thoughts and the Internet of Things, so that’s on the menu as well. 

Further, isn’t fear an emotion that generally invokes and reminds us mortals of God, with the fear of death and health being supreme? Well, with that fear gone, what reminders may we have?

And then, in our subjectively shaped understandings, there’s more to God. Kindness, forgiveness and the notion of wisdom – now those are still beyond being guaranteed by technology as of now. While all knowledge can be put in our minds, how we use them may sill be different and subject to interpretation, unless it can all be computer coded as technology would have us believe. And that’s a big enough void that may still give God space to survive.

And as all those understandings come together, we may be closer to a renewed understanding of God. Many will question the idea on grounds of there being no gap that remains between God and the new immortal, powerful humans, while others may stick to the idea of the wisdom still evading mankind, perhaps for we continue to question God. Perhaps as norms evolve and there are global nudges, we may have a new kind of God, or none at all.

 

Not that this is a big indicator of our faith in God, but when was
 the last time you voluntarily visited a religious centre like a
temple, mosque or a church?   Picture credit: TourMyIndia

And as we’ll recontextualise God in that reality, there’s likely to be greater faith in science than in the almighty. While the use of technology and the connected and consumer-led nature of our lifestyles today are already making people busier and less likely to go to religious centers (not that this can be treated as a sign of faith in God alone), in that future then, where will our God reside? Will we link to God or delink? This is a question that’ll continue to challenge our ideas even then. But would it even matter? 

However, the possibility of machines and artificial intelligence taking over a lot of human jobs could mean a lot of free time for humans - more so due to high unemployability than choice; regardless though, a lot more free time then could see an enlargement of the idea of God for the benefits that religion has to offer.  

This superhuman of the future would also redefine our world, but what definition it gives would be shaped by the worldviews that the creators and owners of such technologies embrace. Given that such technology would not come cheap and may take time to reach everyone (if at all), would constructivist ideas prosper or will the global battles of today literally play out in our mind spaces then with a new kind of fear being invoked? While governments may weaken in the face of ever-rising commercial interests, there may be insecurity about interception of thoughts as the creators of such technologies hold the power to our minds and life spans.

Or perhaps will smarter humans work harder to further democratise the use of technology? There are many ways it could all play out, but in all those scenarios, it’s our worldviews and beliefs that may still hold weight. So to keep the promise of a bright future alive, let’s also focus, in our present, on helping build collective worldviews that put humanity first as we give context to our connected worlds and continue to imagine the future. And as we adjust to that reality then, how will you think about God?

Temples in India to the ‘Joy’ of success: Comparing paths to feminism

In the movie Joy, Jennifer Lawrence plays a single mother whose struggles are fueled by the non-recognition of creativity at home and the absence of economic opportunity outside, all subject to the undercurrents of neoliberal individualism that influence her decisions and help her define her road to success. Photo credit: Joy, the movie

There are numerous objectives or quests in life, from individual and societal to national and global, and correspondingly and arguably there are numerous ways of achieving them. With that in mind, this essay focuses on understanding the definition of feminism and the various approaches towards advancing or enforcing it.

The first month of the year highlighted two approaches to the cause of feminism. While one long unfolding incident in the Indian state of Maharashtra saw a group of women frame their argument around the “right to pray” (a socio-political rights approach) in their quest for practicing feminism, the other was a break from tradition in Hollywood to depict lone women in their fight for justice with the release of Joy, a film inspired by the life of Joy Mangano and her struggles as a single mother as she built her own business empire (an economic rights approach).

While it is imperative to underline that individual beliefs, life experiences, immediate needs and larger political social and economic environments prevalent and dominant in the surroundings have a lot to contribute towards their actions, it would be a mistake not to see how both these disparate approaches that sought to achieve different goals fall under the wider umbrella of realising feminism and advancing the cause of gender equality.

While as individuals, one may be subject to limitations in terms of what goal(s) among these (social, political or economic rights) we are able to focus on and correspondingly what road we take in our struggles to achieve them, as societies and larger communities it is essential for us to work towards protecting and ensuring an all-inclusive enforcement of feministic ideals and to perpetually interrogate and adjust the road we take to achieve those goals. Because to realise feminism in all it’s earnest, equality needs to be protected and ensured across all realms (social, political and economic among others). And what road we take to do that may well define how we look at feminism it self.

But who or what defines feminism?

For all further references, it is imperative to define the meaning of feminism as understood and studied by me. Feminism, as its name suggests, was born as the idea of advocacy of women’s rights. But it has grown into a bigger idea today. Today it stands for equal rights for all, across all realms. It’s an all-inclusive understanding and approach towards advocating equality.

However, as the definition of feminism has itself evolved and enlarged to encompass more than women’s rights, it will only be wise to recognise that this definition may further evolve over time. And what will affect this definition or the realisation of these values are not just other socio-political or economic factors, but also the approach we take towards practicing feminism. For the architecture we design, also designs our perspectives. Since the journey is part of the destination, it holds enough power to influence the ride and throw up its own set of challenges. In the words of Professor Nancy Fraser, our critique of sexism may “supply the justification for new forms of inequality and exploitation”.

This temple at Shani Shingnapur, Maharashtra, was the subject of a debate around the equality of rights for women when it comes to praying there. About 1,000 women had together to storm this temple to enforce their rights. Photo credit: The Indian Express

The two approaches

So in the two cases described above, while the parent idea is that of feminism, the goals and approaches to them are part of the subsets of socio-political and economic rights and opportunity respectively.

Social solidarity - The Shani Shingnapur temple issue: In brief, this one’s about a 1,000 women led by Trupti Desai gearing up to storm a temple in Shani Shingnapur, a village in western Maharashtra. At this temple, women were not allowed to set foot on the open platform where the idol is installed. Men, however, could do so, for a fee. Here’s the full story. Though this doesn’t directly concern the subject of this essay, here’s also a take on if we should even care about temple entry, and that even when we do, putting it all under the umbrella of the ‘right to pray’ is not the best thing to do.

So this quest for demanding equal rights stemmed from the discrimination at a place of worship and it took a socio-political approach to enforcing it. Social solidarity, something that has long been a characteristic of the feminism struggle, is what Desai sought in this path to tackle gender discrimination. The recent appointment of women qazis in Jaipur and their resolve to bring in a feminine perspective when it comes to pronouncing judgments is another example of social solidarity being the go to approach to advance feminism.

Neoliberal individualism – Joy, the movie: This one’s a story inspired by the life of Joy Mangano, a single mother entrepreneur whose home-made mop made her a fortune. Here’s more about the movie. So in this case, Joy’s story draws from her fight for freedom and opportunity while struggling with the disappointments of a life curtailed by her modest surroundings, and complicated by the responsibilities of being a single mother of three, a supporting child to her divorced parents and a lone bread-earner.

But this story chalks closer to the path of entrepreneurism, a spirit that’s fostered by the invisible hand, as Joy earnestly grabs or even creates economic opportunities that help her build a huge business and rewrite her circumstances. Her quest for feminism is fueled by the want and need of a better quality of life, and she sees economic equality and opportunity as the road to it and she fights for it. This story also goes a long way to show how the quest for feminism and the path we take to it is also a product of the times we live in. Joy, in the US, is subject to the undercurrents of neoliberal individualism that influence her decisions and actions, and while hers is a story of success, it must also be seen as a success story of capitalism feeding off the ambivalence of feminism.

What road to take: Solidarity or individualism?

On the onset it may not seem to matter, but while in the short-term capitalism demands equality in all respects so as to ensure that the invisible hand thrives, in the long-term unattended (read: unregulated) capitalism also does have a huge tendency to fall prey to corruption and thus advancing itself while reshaping what it feeds off, thereby, in this case perhaps, creating a form of neoliberal feminism.

And while social solidarity may have been the go to approach for feminists, in contemporary times, the lure of this form of solidarity has been dominated by the overarching attraction of individual success stories. It has also been diluted by ideas that exist at the very peripheries of capitalism and feminism and stand for gender equality but can be maneuvered to feed capitalism while advancing feminism in the short-term, and hurting the overall quest for it in the long-term. The “feminist critique of the family wage” and it’s implications is an example where this complexity can be further observed.

So while in Maharashtra socio-political rights and social solidary defined their path for gender equality, in the US that quest was defined by neoliberal individualism for Joy, with each quest being subject to its context.

Perhaps, another characteristic of feminism then, is that while it advocates equality, it recognises that there may not be a particular approach to enforce it and that the quest and the approach may themselves be defined by the times and the context. And while this definition evolves, it may not be in a strict solidarity or in naively taking neoliberal individualism as the approach that feminism may find its best friend, but perhaps in a new form of balance that may reside between these and perhaps others.