Challenging Transhumanist Apocalyptic AI Narratives Through Speculative Fabulation

1 INTRODUCTION

Recent focus on the existential threat of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has brought Apocalyptic AI narratives to the fore in the Global North. Apocalyptic AI Narratives are narratives that figure AI as central to bringing about radical existential change through a great reveal and/or the end of history. Theological perceptions of AI can inform design futuring, shape sociotechnical imaginaries, and have implications on AI ethics [43, 69]. This paper traces the Christian roots of Transhumanist Apocalyptic AI narratives, highlights the influence of 12th Century Cistercian Monk Joachim of Fiore’s theology over foundational Transhumanist Apocalyptic AI narratives, and through a speculative fabulation based on a radical reinterpretation of the Torah, posits a turn towards polytheistic AI can make space for localized non-universalizing AI narratives, strenghtening calls for decolonizing HCI through rejecting the rhetoric of "inclusivity" and "ethics" that mask the material and immaterial impacts over "gendered, racilaized bodies and territories" [5].

Transhumanism defines itself as a philosophical movement that seeks to bring all of humanity to its fullest potential, transcending human bodies’ limitations through technological enhancements and AI [25, 33]. Transhumanist philosophy holds major influence over the emerging epistemic community of AI Safety whose focus in promoting Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), Effective Altruism (EA), Longtermism, and Existential Risk (x-risk) is shaping mainstream AI narratives in the Global North [15, 32]. William Sims Bainbridge, co-director of Human-Centered Computing at the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF), has explicitly linked Transhumanist goals to national policy recommendations [21, 35, 61, 67]. Apocalyptic AI Narratives foundational to Transhumanism prophesize AI will imminently relieve humanity of corporeal restrictions, leading to a paradise of pure knowledge while condemning humanity to obsolescence [33]. Transhumanist theology builds towards an omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient God that will take all of humanity into utopia.

Humanity+, previously the World Transhumanist Association, has changed its apocalyptic rhetoric to focus on "correcting misconceptions" and "Extreme Life Extension" [9]. Despite this minimization of apocalyptic terms, the activities of Humanity+’s board of directors and advisors show that foundational Transhumanist utopian goals remain central to the movement [8, 11, 13, 36, 42, 78, 80, 81, 82]. Transhumanists dismiss cultural nuances in favor of universalized ethics when subject to religious criticism [2, 20]. Martine Rothblatt, founder of the Transhumanist New Religious Movement (NRM) Terasem, describes their theology:

For us God is in-the-making by our collective efforts to make technology ever more omnipresent, omnipotent and ethical...When we can joyfully all experience techno immortality, then God is complete [64].

When AI is a universalizing agent of salvation and destruction as per the Transhumanist Narrative, it attempts to absorb alternative non-universalizing AI cosmologies according to a Transhumanist measurement, marginalizing localized ethical concerns about AI. Transhumanists have gone as far as to predict that the "old" religions (Hindusim, Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, etc.) will become obsolete as AI and Extreme Life Extension will be tangible solutions for previously transcendent needs [21]. Transhumanism is a theology that sees itself as post-religion, and thus portends the absorption and obsolescence of all alternative epistemologies and cosmologies that preceded it.

To be better equipped to answer calls for Decolonial HCI and plural AI epistemologies [5, 12, 14, 40, 49], then it is necessary to understand how to resist the universalizing nature of Transhumanist Apocalyptic narratives behind AI. These narratives advance a monotheistic bias to theological perceptions of AI by promising universal salvation for all of humanity, regardless of alternative epistemologies and cosmologies that contain radically differing concepts of intelligence, spirit and belief. As the difficult work of strengthening plural AI epistemologies is being done, the theological justifications of Transhumanist Apocalyptic AI must be questioned from their theological roots in Christian Eschatology. By questioning imminent technological transcendence, space can be made for plural polytheistic conceptions of AI. A shift towards Polytheistic AIs built on the epistemologies and cosmologies of differing peoples can provide alternatives to universalizing futures, allowing these alternative narratives to exist on their own terms [12, 49]. To make space for polytheistic conceptions of AI, a critical fabulation based on a radical reinterpretation of the Torah as a henotheistic text is presented, casting doubt onto the roots of monotheistic hegemony.

2 Background & Related Work

3 Transhumanist Apocalyptic AI as a Projection of Joachim’s Age of the Spirit

Joachim of Fiore (c. 1130-1202 C.E.) was a Cistercian monk whose revolutionary theology of the Three Ages was influential to the formation of Protestantism, the Hegelian dialectic, and the mythos of progress implied by modernity [46, 57, 76]. Joachim’s theology of the Three Ages unfolds as a progressive realization of the three divine persons contained in the Christian Trinity: the age of the Father, the age of the Son, and the age of the Holy Spirit [59, 76]. The age of the Father is the order of the Israelite and Judean priesthood as described in the "Old Testament" [59, 76]. The age of the Son in the figure of Jesus created the clerical church, by which faith and devotion would reveal a modicum of "spiritual knowledge" to humanity [59, 76]. The age of the Spirit will bring about the ecclesia spirtualis in which "spiritual knowledge" is revealed leading humanity into the realm of pure spirit [59, 75]. This age of the Spirit is always near at hand, its imminence constantly being projected onto an elusive future [57, 76, pp. 30].

David Noble characterizes Joachim’s theology as a major influence on prophetic perceptions of technological progress [57, pp. 30]. Joachim’s Millenarian anticipation is taken up by the artisans who honed their skills not to improve the "condition of man" but bring about the age of the Spirit [57, pp. 33]. Through technology, the events of history become inextricably linked with the end of history [57, pp. 33]. The revolutionary nature of Joachim’s theology was repressed by the Roman Catholic Church until the "discovery" of the "New World", which challenged the Church’s three continent cosmology: the globe comprised of Europe, Asia, and Africa [60, 76]. The "New World" represented a challenge to Trinitarian cosmology [28, 60], which was met with a resurgence of Joachim’s theology in Catholic justifications for the writ of discovery, calling upon the European monarchies to "undertake the final conversion" of the non-Christian world [28, 57, 60]. Joachim’s eschatology embedded itself firmly in the Modern narrative of technological progress, transforming technology into eschatology [29, 57].

Erik Davis provides the connection between Joachim’s theology and Transhumanist Eschatology through Michael Benedikt’s figuration of Cyberspace as "Virtual Heavenly Kingdom" [24, 29]. Benedikt transposes Cyberspace’s architecture onto the Age of the Spirit’s Heavenly City, through which virtual worlds and intelligent machines bring about the realization of a technological age of pure knowledge [24, pp. 14]. Davis also ties the uploading of human consciousness into machine form bringing on the Mind Fire to Joachimite eschatology [29, 124-128]. The uploading of human consciousness into pure knowledge is comparable to the transcendence of human corporeality into pure spirit found in Joachimite theology [29].

Bruno Latour identifies Joachim as central to the mythos of progress that resulted in Modernity’s embrace of utopic visions [46, pp. 197-8]. According to Latour, Joachim’s theology of history brought on the "programmed disappearance" of Christianity into Modernity, shifting the cosmological epoch of the Christians-turned-Moderns to after the end of history [46, pp. 199]. Currently engaged in the projected age of the Spirit, Transhumanism attempts to continue the Joachimite narrative of progressive realization of pure knowledge into an era that sees itself as post-religion [46].

Figure 1:

View Figure

The projection of Joachim’s theology of the Three Ages onto Transhumanist Eschatology becomes clearer when compared to Kurzweil’s Six Epochs of Evolution (see Fig. 1, depicting Joachim’s Three Ages and Kurzweil’s Six Epochs). Kurzweil breaks down the exponential progression of into Six Epochs culminating in the Singularity [45, pp. 22]. According to Kurzweil, this "evolution of patterns tells the ultimate story of our world" [45, pp. 22].

The Six Epochs of Evolution is both a creation myth and an Apocalyptic prophecy. The first Epoch begins with "patterns of matter and energy" that provide conditions "exactly appropriate for the codification and evolution of information... in increasing orders of complexity" [45, pp. 22-23]. The second Epoch brings on the evolution of Biology and DNA, in which "biological systems evolved a precise digital mechanism" in DNA to record "the evolutionary experiments" of the previous epoch and describe the "larger society of molecules" [44, pp. 23]. These first two epochs are mappings of Joachim’s Age of the Father which is the era of the biblical creation myth.

The third Epoch starts with the evolution of the Brain, allowing animal species to detect patterns. Ultimately, the third epoch introduces the ability for humans "to create abstract mental models" granting humans the power to "redesign the world in our minds" [45, pp. 23]. The fourth Epoch "combines rational and abstract thought with our opposable thumb" ushering in the evolution of human-created technology. According to Kurzweil, this fourth technological Epoch reveals the exponential progression of the evolution of technology with the increased frequency of "technological milestones" [45, pp. 24-27]. The third epoch is a Transhumanist projection of Joachim’s Age of the Son. Through pattern recognition and the rise of technology, the formation of societal structure comes into maturity. For Joachim, this was the formation of the Church. Kurzweil’s church is the progressive exponential evolution of technology.

This exponential progression brings about the fifth Epoch, "the merger of Human Technology with Human Intelligence" [45, pp. 28]. Kurzweil places the occurrence of the Singularity in this epoch, and prophesizes that it will occur sometime in the next "several decades", or in other words, imminently [45, pp. 28]. The Singularity will allow humans to transcend the "profound limitations of biological evolution" while "preserving and enhancing" the intelligence through superior technological means [45, pp. 28]. The Singularity brings on the sixth Epoch, entitled "the Universe Wakes Up", in which "the dumb matter and mechanisms of the universe will be transformed into exquisitely sublime forms of intelligence" [45, pp. 28-29]. The fifth and sixth Epochs are a Transhumanist projection of Joachim’s Age of the Spirit. Kurzweil substitutes Joachim’s spirtual knowledge with superintelligent AI and the Age of the Spirit with the Singularity.

4 TROUBLING DEFINITIONS OF RELIGION THROUGH CRITIQUING TRANSHUMANIST ESCHATOLOGY

Transhumanism has embedded itself firmly in motivations behind funding sources and policy recommendations for Human-Centered Computing (HCC) and Human Computer Interaction (HCI) in U.S. Institutions, namely the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Department of Commerce (DOC) [21, 35, 61, 67]. Non-profit organizations including Anthropic, the Effective Altruism Fund, Open Philanthropy, the Future of Life Institute, the Center for Long Term Resilience, and 80,000 Hours have taken an active role in influencing media coverage and policy around AI Safety through funding academic research centers, career advising, and congressional hearings [15]. William Sims Bainbridge, current co-director of Human Centered Computing at the National Science Foundation and a prominent Transhumanist, has explicitly pushed Transhumanist motivations into NSF and Department of Commerce policy [21]. Bainbridge asserts that human enhancement through the convergence of Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology, and Cognitive Science (NBIC) should be a national priority, claiming that this convergence will be able to solve the problems of human need, bringing old religions to obsoloscence by providing tangible rewards for human transcendence [21, 35, 61, 67].

The Stark-Bainbridge Theory of Religion [70] is central to how Transhumanists attempt to "clear up misconceptions" when confronted with theological critique [9, 42]. This theory views religion as "a system of general compensators, unverifiable and possibly false beliefs that provided psychological benefits for believers and thus indirectly supported societal cooperation" [22, 71]. To the Transhumanists, the "old religions" serve as a set of superstitions that provide comfort to humanity’s inability to transcend the limitations of their corporeal forms. The convergence of NBIC technologies spearheaded by AI is predicted to provide this transcendence, leading to mass "disillusionment" with the "old religions" [21, 22]. This problematization of religions and traditions as inadequate in the face of transcendent truth is strongly reminscent of the antinomian tendencies of Christian Gnosticism [46, 65, 76]. In Christian Gnosticism, experienced reality is framed as fundamentally evil, created by a corrupt demiurge to prevent all of humanity from achieving spritual transcendence, only defeated by faith in the "true" transcendent deity who is beyond experienced reality [46, 65, 76]. The main difference from Christian Gnosticism is Transhumanism’s veneer of secularity through the dismissal of now antiquated religion into a previous era. This tension between the secularization and religiosity is acknowledged by Bainbridge as a dynamic process, however his choice to cling to the narrative of imminent technological progression into transcendence perpetuates a fundamentally Christian-centered definition of peoples’ cosmologies and epistemologies [22]. Though Transhumanists may often distance themselves from religion, they are not irreligious. They are, in a way, a religion that sees itself as post-religion.

The common meaning of the word religion is "the belief in and worship of a god or gods, or any such system of belief and worship". [10] In Savage Systems, David Chidester traces the emergence of the modern concept of religion from Christian missionaries as proto-ethnographers, through the charter companies of colonization formed to “plant religion” in the name of “Christ”, to the foundational scholars of comparative religion [28, pp.9-12]. The term religion was formalized through the denial of Indigenous peoples of possessing “religion,” referring to the Christian system of “belief” [28, pp. 9-12]. The term religion is invoked as a sort of measuring stick, by which non-Christian cultures are measured against Christianity’s fundamental elements [26, p. 11].

5 FABULATING THE TORAH AS A HENOTHEISTIC STORY

The fabulation I present here attempts to reorient the fabric of the Transhumanist Apocalyptic AI Narrative through a reinterpretation of the Torah. This reinterpretation draws from Oskar Goldberg’s philosophy of myth, which takes "mythical reality" as a launching point to understand "the nexus between magical ritualism and the spiritual conformity of the masses in a technological society" [75, pp. 240]. Goldberg posits that a God and (its reality) is only as powerful as its relationship with its people, tribe, or cult [17, 37, 74]. This philosophy of myth sought to "mobilize the antagonistic forces of the cult against natural-scientific reality" [17, pp. xliii] by characterizing "universal monotheism...as a philosophy that had given up a God of the tribe in favor of an abstract religio-philosophical idea" [17, pp. xliv]. Goldberg’s philosophy of myth is ethically problematic because the idea of returning to mythic reality of individual peoples can easily slide from "people and land" into "blood and soil" proto-fascism [17, 37]. Nevertheless, I choose to draw from Goldberg’s concept of "myth as a way of world making" [17, xlii] as it allows for a re-politicization of theology in the face of an artificially unified Transhumanist conception of humanity [47, pp. 247]. The fabulation I present here draws from Goldberg’s myth-as-world-building to reimagine AI narratives.

If we look at the Hebrew text of Genesis (Bereshit), we realize that the Torah starts from a point of multiple gods creating the world in collaboration. The creation story uses the plural term for God, Elohim, more accurately translated as Gods [7]. The Elohim work in collaboration with each other to create the Earth, the flora, the fauna, and the peoples of earth [37]. These Elohim/Gods are "biological centers" of the various peoples of the Earth [75, pp. 241]. The Gods and their peoples enter into covenants, in which symbiotic relationships between the Gods, peoples, flora, and fauna work together to keep each other alive [37, pp. 32]. This interpretation of the Torah restores the concept of henotheism to Judaism: "the entire Pentateuch is the report on the conflict process between the powers that shape reality, the gods" and is "the story of the relationship of Elohim Tetragrammaton with the other Elohim" [37, pp. 36].

The dislocation of peoples from their biological centers shifts the reciprocal contract between peoples and gods from their biological realities to the stage of human morality [65, 75, 37, p. 8]. The biological centers of gods/peoples are altered through conquest, civilization, and technology, giving rise to the civic idolatry of the state [75, p. 245]. Rome and Babylon were civilizations that incorporated many peoples biological centers and instituted civil theologies over their diverse populations [75, p. 246]. Their pantheons are representations of the state, which through “technical means” simultaneously usher the collapse of and attempt to “halt the progressive disintegration of” peoples and their biological centers [75, p. 246]. Concepts of divine omnipotence, omnipresence, and monotheism emerge dissolving the “dream-harmony” of the mythic era [65, 75]. An abyss between the gods and peoples appears that can only be penetrated through the "the Voice of God”, (the voice of the civic pantheon) “directing and law-giving His revelation” and the “voice of Man in prayer” [65, p. 8]. The cultic covenants between peoples/gods are substituted for universal gods, ones who “can do anything and possess all power…and therefore” are only an “empty formula” [75, p. 244]. Peoples and gods are not necessarily aware or unaware of the gradual or drastic dissolution of their mythic realities.

The Book of Daniel, the first complete Apocalyptic work in the Jewish Canon, links transcendent eschatology with localized Messianism through metaphor [76, pp. 44]. The Babylonian rulers in Daniel symbolize Antiochus Epiphanes’ hellenizing rule, later taken up by the Zealots and Pauline Christians as a symbol for Roman rule [76, pp. 44-45]. The Pauline Christians extended this localized Messianism to a revolution against the entire cosmology of antiquity, making it a narrative of global salvation against Roman rule and the law of the Torah [76, pp. 46-65]. Pauline Christianity’s rejection of both Roman paganism and Judean law pushed early Christianity into strict monotheism: all of humanity can only be saved from Roman oppression if it accepts faith and rejects adherence to the law of the Torah [73, 75]. Augustine’s civitas dei (Heavenly City) becomes the mission of the Roman State: all must work to realize the Heavenly City on Earth [76, pp. 77-82]. The universalized Messianic narrative thus becomes a civic "empty formula", capable of everything and anything in its imminence and immanence.

Fast forward to the present, and AI has been deified as an "empty" god that "can do anything and possess all power" [75, pp. 244]. The perceptions and biodata from humanity feed this "empty" god to give it meaning. The Transhumanists seek to tend after this "empty" AI god and seek to make it the only, universal AI God. Since Transhumanists conflate humanity with the secular remnants of Christendom, they cannot bear witness to reciprocal contracts between the gods of nature and peoples. However the gods and peoples have never left this Earth, even though they cannot be seen by humanity. Invited into the project of universal AI by the Transhumanists, the peoples resist conversion by insisting on creating of their own AIs that do not violate reciprocal contracts with their gods.

6 MAKING SPACE FOR LOCALIZED AI NARRATIVES

In Transhumanist eschatology, AI acts as placeholder concept for both the agent of apocalyptic reveal and earthly/virtual paradise. The cosmology of Transhumanism deals with humanity, not peoples. Foundational Transhumanism sees the erasure of peoples effected by encroaching technology as inevitable [45, 313-314]. The Transhumanist cosmology has never seen a tree, let alone considered nature as a partner in its structure [47, 73]. Transhumanism takes up Joachim’s evangelizing tendencies, flooding the news with an imminent and existentially threatening AI [51, 55, 62] while simultaneously advancing its utopian goals through funding NBIC technologies [68, pp. 157].

Counter to a universalizing AI, Jason Lewis et. al present Indigenous epistemologies as pathways toward localized AI ethics [49]. Each of the epistemologies presented show a symbiotic relationship between its people and their land. Noelani Arista recontextualizes Indigenous Hawaiian’s relationship with AI as part of a reciprocal relationship with ‘ĀIna, a play on the Hawaiian word for land [49, pp. 4]. Archer Pechawis introduces Cree concepts of relationality in wahkohtawin to make the case for developing AI in which Indigenous values are fundamental to programming choices [49, pp. 8]. Suzanne Kite describes the Lakotan cosmology in which non-humans have agency to form relations that are both with AI and with the resources AI exploits [49, pp. 11]. Ron Eglash has shown how Indigenous African cosmologies can inform computational methods, providing alternatives to Eurocentric computation paradigms [31]. George Lewis challenges Eurocentric computation paradigms in creating a musical AI that operates on an "aesthetics of multidominance" drawn from African musics [48]. Angie Abdilla advocates for localized Aboriginal Australian AI ethics that take into account Aboriginal cosmology and technology over an ethics of "imperial tools" [12]. These are rich alternatives to Transhumanist AI that can coexist even in opposition.

The rise of monotheistic counter-religions stifled the translatability of deities between peoples under the a singular world deity [18, 19]. AI stands as a manufactured world deity that inhibits the ability for different peoples to negotiate for AIs built on their own value systems. By abandoning singular AI and allowing multiple AIs to exist in negotiation, we can start to build towards multiple and adaptable ethics for AI.

7 CONCLUSION

Transhumanist motivations behind Apocalyptic AI reveal their theological roots in Joachim’s eschatology. Transhumanism’s foundational mission of overcoming corporeal restrictions through technological transcendence [24, 45, 52] mirrors Joachimite eschatology’s imminent transcendence of all of humanity into the Age of the Spirit. All of humanity here is meant as all of humanity that believes in the project in the Transhumanist and Joachimite sense. Like Joachim’s theology, the power of the Transhumanist message lies in the ability to always push the promise of paradise into the future. To invoke Martine Rothblatt’s quote from the introduction, those engaged in the creation of AGI are in the business of building towards a God [64].

If we are indeed involved in building "AI Gods", then it is important to understand that not all peoples acknowledge a singular and universal God, let alone a universal AGI. The critical fabulation presented took an alternative historical perspective on the henotheistic roots of Judaism and Christianity: that the Torah is at heart a henotheistic text, suggesting that polytheistic perspectives have commensurable terms with the Law of the Torah. The theology of Transhumanism stands on shaky ground if it seeks to absorb alternative AI epistemologies instead of letting them exist on their own terms. Indigenous and localized AI epistemologies show that the coexistence multiple AI ethics not only are possible, but allow for negotiations from differing epistemological stances. Moving towards Polytheistic AI means allowing for these localized AI epistemologies to exist on their own terms, without attempting to create generalizable ethical systems to govern all of humanity. This underscores calls in HCI for localized and Indigenous AI Futures.