Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow
Homo
Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow
Introduction
Yuval Noah Harari is an Israeli historian
and philosopher and the most widely-read writer in the present world. His main works are Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind, Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow, and 21 Lessons for the 21st Century. In Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow, Yuval Noah Harari speaks
of the possible futures for humanity grounded on its past. In this, he inspects
cognitive revolution, scientific methodology, Artificial intelligence,
post-humanism, and the combination of biotechnology and information technology
through free will, consciousness, and intelligence. This work is an attempt to
discuss certain possibilities rather than prophecies. Homo Deus is populated with ideas that will make us question the
direction that the world is going in and if you like this direction. The
possibility of Homo Deus in the
future is highly elaborated in this work. The following are the important ideas
and views that Harrari holds.
The New Human Agenda
Harari argues that, in the history of
the human race, the human being had undergone many sufferings and death treatment.
Therefore, sapiens aspire for new
two agendas in their lives; one is to achieve immortality and another aim of
humanity is to achieve universal happiness. Homo
sapiens, Harari suggests, is not the pinnacle of being evolution but through
bioengineering, there is a possibility to create Homo Deus with god-like abilities. Harari uses the term Homo Deus[1] to illustrate certain
features of future humans. Harrari debates, “up till now, increasing human
power relied mainly on upgrading our external tools. In the future, it may rely
more on upgrading the human body and mind”[2]. It may lead to the
emergence of new human species by fulfilling the dreams of our ancestors. He
asserts that monumental advances approach rapidly by relying on biological
terminology. Homo Deus follows
standard biological nomenclature, denoting the genus and species, as does Homo sapiens. Homo Deus would be as different from sapiens as sapiens are from
now-extinct human species. Like this, future advances will be more dramatic
than the earlier agricultural or industrial revolutions. The species name Deus[3]
displays the expected capabilities of
this human species. The term Deus is
an allusion to the Latin word for “god,” and it is Harari’s opinion for the
humans to “upgrade themselves into gods”. The newly crafted beings do not lack
anything and they will be having complete control over the whole earth.
Modern beings had control over the earth but they were liable to the laws of
biology. Even though many technologies cured many diseases, they could not
indefinitely extend their lives. But in the status of Homo Deus, they would be free from all the constraints of the earth
and they would be having a God-like control over the whole world to reshape it
into the new realm. Harari sketches of “biochemical pursuit of happiness”[4] that echoes the role of
scientific advancements in the future of humanity. He considers happiness as
a result of the chemical process. He argues that it is possible to deploy
this process through the use of psychiatric drugs. Harari describes this as
“rigging the system”.[5] The ability to accomplish
something through new technology does not assure the merit of doing it. For
universal happiness, we should take a new step with our new technologies. Humanity
is on the cusp of achieving incredible capabilities to reshape ourselves and
our planet. Even though many ethical questions emerge with these types of
developments, Harrari does not try to give any answers to any of the questions.
I think that, as human beings become gods, they may try to acquire the ethical
obligations of gods. Harrari says that humans may not be ready for such
responsibilities. Even though he proposes many ideologies he fails to answer
the ethical questions.
Homo Sapiens
Conquers the world
Harrari names part one of the books as Homo Sapiens conquers the world and it
is divided into the Anthropocene and
the human spark. Historical developments of humans and relations to the other
species are underlined in this part. Harrari calls the current era as the Anthropocene dominated by humans.
Harari debates that our relationship with animals aligns with the evolution of
religion. As he states, “the theology...of religions...revolved around the
relationship between humans, domesticated plants, and farm animals”.[6] Agricultural revolution
had helped humans to be superiors to the animals. Humans began to believe in
superhuman gods, theism emerged and it centered humanity as the highest form of
beings on earth. Animals were treated with lower status and they remain were
ingrained by millennia of evolution. Harari debates all organisms as algorithms.
Religious views directly trace the evolution of scientific knowledge. The
scientific revolution, Harari states, gave us direct control over the natural
world, and thus eliminated the need for godly intercession. The decline of the
theism also is seen in the world and he also supports the humans’
characteristic beyond the superintelligence. As technology takes on roles
previously filled by deities, those deities are given new purposes or disappear
entirely.[7] Similarly, the expansion
of scientific understanding has undermined monotheistic views about the soul.
As Harari argues, “the theory of evolution cannot accept the idea of souls,”
their supposedly indivisible nature is inconsistent with the process of
evolution.[8] When sciences progress
the answers of the theistic religions are no longer valid and religions are
nothing but shared myths that humanity had trusted on. Harari states that
religious beliefs are not from the supernatural powers but from the humans
themselves. Therefore as the world changes the evolution of religions also
happens. Harrari states why humans are superior to all other life forms. He tells
that monotheism had suggested humans as
special because they are the only organisms with an indivisible soul. Harrari
suggests “humans may be unique as the only organisms to experience
consciousness or a collection of subjective experiences that we refer to as the
“mind”.[9] While animals and
computers respond automatically and unconsciously to stimuli, they do not
experience sensations like anger, pain, and joy. Humans as a complex algorithm
fulfill all the functions of the same as a computer program.[10]
But my observation is that his attitude
may lead to many ethical dilemmas. If humans are not fundamentally different
from computers, they do not deserve the same status as they hold now. We don’t consider the needs of the computer.
In the same way, his attitude tells the world that it is not necessary to
provide any look at the need of humans. At present, the superiority of
human intelligence sureties Homo Sapiens'
preferential treatment. Inorganic algorithms will likely surpass the organic
ones shortly, depriving humans of their exceptionalism. To address
this possibility, humans have sought a unique quality that would justify their
role as the ultimate ethical authority. Harari utterly castoffs the existence
of the soul. He considers humans as the only beings, organic or inorganic, with
a self-conscious mind. The evidence for this is far from certain.[11] Thus humanity’s status as
the supreme being is uncertain. If and until scientific research can prove that
humans have some unique trait that cannot be reproduced by inorganic life,
humans are susceptible to losing the long race of evolution. We have a tendency
to consider ourselves as the highest form of evolution and but he considers it
as a temporary condition. He presents the possibility of a highly modified
version with all its perfection. Human is superior because of our ability to
cooperate in extremely large groups. We are the sole species with the capacity
to create imagined, inter-subjective orders. All societies and revolutions are
based on shared concepts that do not exist in the physical world, yet motivate
and organize human behavior. Because these orders have dominated and shaped
history, we must understand their role to understand the future.
Harrari transcripts that domesticated animals generally live pitiful lives of
suffering and neglect. Their physical needs are met so they can be useful to
humanity, but their social and emotional needs are considered superfluous.[12] Homo Sapiens are warned by Harrari, that a similar fate would
be faced by humans too in the
future. Therefore, before that happens we should reconsider the treatment of
the lesser organisms.
Homo Sapiens
gives meaning to the world
The second part of the book is named Homo Sapiens gives meaning to the world
and it is divided into the storytellers, the odd couple, the modern covenant, and the humanist revolution. Harrari presents the important role of shared
myths and stories in the developments of humanity. Humanity’s uniqueness comes
from a triple-layered reality. Humans have objective entities and subjective
sensations. Humans also hold an inter-subjective reality; shared myths and
concepts, such as religion, money, and corporations, that do not exist in
objective reality. Shared myths
developed after the cognitive revolution and it had given Home sapiens the ability to create and describe intangible ideas.[13] These shared myths
permitted humans to cooperate in large numbers, a capacity that had been
previously limited by the need to know every member of a cooperative group
personally. Writing systems, Harari argues, were essential to the development
of human societies. While shared myths provide the basis for cooperation,
writing allows for algorithmic functions by documenting reality beyond the
capacity of a single human brain. Over time, however, writing shifted from
simply documenting reality to shaping it directly. Myths that are reinforced by
supposed evidence from objective reality are more convincing.[14] Harrari also tells us that
these stories will become increasingly important as they begin to reshape our
minds through advancing technology. Near-future technology may allow us to
alter students’ brain chemistry directly by changing what and how they learn. Harrari
describes how science and religions are related. Harari defines religion as
an all-encompassing story that legitimizes certain norms and values by
appealing to superhuman laws.[15] His argument is that
science consents us to control our objective and subjective and subjective
realities so that they match our inter-subjective one. He also presents
the dependence on science and religion. Science is simply based on facts but it
relies on ethical judgments provided by the religion too. Harari’s argument is that
religious beliefs often imply factual claims suggests that advances in
scientific knowledge will not singlehandedly solve humanity’s ethical dilemmas.[16] Religion and science are inseparable. Harari
notes that modern science emerged in a religiously extreme Europe. Neither, he
argues is truly interested in finding the truth. Harari argues that we often use
science not “to question these dogmas, but rather to implement them”.[17] Religion seeks order,
while science seeks power, making them natural allies. Currently, this alliance
manifests in the linking of science and humanism. This contract, however, is
unlikely to endure approaching scientific advances. To use our
ever-increasing scientific knowledge effectively and ethically, we must first
decide what our moral goals are. Not all religious facts can be confirmed
by the sciences.
Harrari considers modernity as the deal that
humans exchange for power.[18] The modern pursuit of
power is grounded on an alliance between science and economic growth. For him,
throughout history, evolution has “accustomed humans to see the world as a
static pie”.[19]
While individuals could become richer, they could only do so by taking wealth
from others. Giving one person a larger slice of pie would necessarily make all
the other slices smaller. This view of wealth became embedded in faith
traditions; religions like Christianity and Islam promoted sharing. But today’s
religion is economic growth. By characterizing growth as a religion, the author
demonstrates that it has effects beyond economics. Harrari states that all
modern societies are obsessed with growth to the point where it could be
considered a religion.[20] Like other religions, the
pursuit of growth does imply ethical choices, notably that growth is more
important than family ties, social equality, or ecological stability. We will
eventually have the ability to build growth’s ethical implications directly
into the objective reality. Through humanism, we managed to have meaning
without God. Harrari terms humanism as the belief that meaning can be derived
from the inner experiences and feelings of human beings, without needing an
external source. According to Harrari, humanism can be divided into three
primary ideologies; liberalism, socialism, and evolutionary humanism.[21] Liberalism maximizes
individual freedom and leads people to a better life, it faces the problem of
addressing the conflicting problems of freedom. Socialism focuses on the
feelings and wellbeing of others, rather than ourselves. Evolutionary Humanism
speaks of the ever-continuing evolution and the strongest human race survives.
It can be called as a justification for genocide and eugenics. Harrari also
points out, religious ideologies like Radical Islam will remain relevant and it
would not be able to provide an answer to the problems emerged with the
scientific advancement.[22] Humanism risks being
similarly irrelevant. Just as scientific knowledge has eliminated the need for
an all-powerful deity, it will eventually destroy the illusion that humanity
itself is sacrosanct. Harrari argues what we need today is to create a new source
of meaning.
Homo Sapiens
loses control
The third part of the book is named Homo Sapiens loses control and it is
divided into the time bomb in the laboratory, the great decoupling, the ocean
of consciousness, and data religion. The ideas of free will and individualism
are deconstructed by Harrari. Liberalism brands factual claims not supported by
evinces the same as religions. But he considers humans as individuals with free
will. By free will what he intends is the capacity of a human being to have free
responses to the chemical reactions in the brain. We react to our desires but
we do not have any control over it and it gives only the illusion of free
will. He also speaks of transcranial stimulators that demonstrate the
ability to anticipate our decisions before we become aware of it. Harari
contrasts the narrating and experiencing selves to show that humanity is not
individuals and has no single, true self.[23] The experiencing self subsists
in moment-to-moment consciousness, while the narrating-self constructs a
meaningful narrative of our experience by averaging its peaks and valleys. In
doing so, he criticizes the narrating self as irrational, arguing that it leads
us to support wars and suffering the name of some grand fantasy. Given this, an
ideal technological advancement might be one that infuses more logic into our
decisions. While humans are dominated by the fantasy-producing narrating self,
an artificial algorithm could evaluate situations purely based on costs and benefits.
Harari notes the importance of shared narratives in ordering human society.[24] Nothing humans have
achieved would be possible without the cohesion provided by shared myths.
Eliminating or marginalizing the narrating self, therefore, could undermine this
cohesion. While nationalism and various other ideologies have caused
considerable suffering, human society would not exist without them.[25] Though Harari does not
explicitly advocate for relinquishing these ideas in favor of artificial
intelligence, his tone in this passage suggests that he believes serious
improvements could be made. The more costly these experiences become, the more
we cling to the narratives we create. Ultimately, Harari argues, we understand
that free will and individuality do not exist and can accept this cognitive
dissonance.[26]
Eventually, however, we will develop technologies that disregard free will
entirely and force us to confront this reality. Harrari also terms three ways to
undermine liberalism concerning democracy and liberal marketing economics.[27] He believed that all institutions rely on the
concept that all humans are unique and have intrinsic value. But the
technological developments have Firstly, as robotics and computer science
advance, humans could lose their economic and military usefulness. Secondly,
humans may willfully cede our decision-making prerogative to algorithms. Finally,
technological advancements may allow a small group of people to become superhuman,
leaving the rest as increasingly irrelevant.[28] Any of these
developments, Harari suggests, could disprove the view that every human has
individual value and agency, simultaneously delegitimizing liberalism.[29] By having a quick embrace
of artificial intelligence, we fail to consider its drawbacks. We should
carefully evaluate the role shared myths play in our lives, but that does not
imply that they should be hurriedly discarded in favor of pure rationality.
Harrari debates that liberalism is going
to be replaced by two techno religions like techno-humanism[30] and dataism[31]. Techno-humanism is
a dramatic transition that accepts the fact that human sapiens are under
evolutionary course. Here we try to upgrade species into Homo Deus. Harrari
calls it a second cognitive revolution. Market forces will invest in this
revolution. Harrari tells that it will also reshape the competencies of the
human mind; our brains will eventually preference checking Facebook repeatedly
over a strong sense of smell. Harari’s description of “WEIRD”[32] consciousness demonstrates
how our current experiences can limit future outcomes. WEIRD refers to
psychology’s limited understanding of mental states beyond those of Western,
educated elites. “Attention helmets”[33] and similar technologies
may actually downgrade us in particular situations to be more effective at a
specific task. Even though it makes a lot of changes, it will still consider the
inner self as the ultimate source of meaning. But, when the conflicting ideas
emerge, to which inner voice we should give an ear also is a question. Dataism
holds that “the universe consists of data flows and the value of any phenomenon
or entity is determined by its contribution to data processing”.[34] It combines biology and
computer science in viewing animals as organic algorithms. It can be outperformed by artificial ones.
Accordingly, human societies are nothing more than massive data processing
networks.[35]
All of history can be viewed as increasing the ability to process data; first
humans evolved better brains then they became more interconnected in larger
communities. The modern data flow, however, is too large for humans to process.
The supreme value of data is “freedom of information.”[36] In this view, data should
flow as freely as possible and create the “Internet of All Things”[37] in which everything is interconnected. Like
nationalism, freedom of information is an arbitrary value created by humans.
There is no objective reality that dictates that information must move as
freely as possible. Nonetheless, freedom of information, like nationalism,
encourages concrete actions to better our data processing abilities. This has a
clear risk, however. Artificial algorithms already perform better than humans
on most tasks.[38]
If we are serious about freedom of information, Dataism dictates that computers
should replace humans as the center of our experience. We should not,
therefore, blindly embrace the freedom of information and the other shared myths we
have created for ourselves. For centuries, the risks of these ideologies were
limited to individuals or groups of individuals. Now, the entire human species
could be rendered obsolete by a societal value that most already share. Humans
are mere tools in this process. While we were once the best data processors
available, this is no longer true, significantly reducing our value.
Eventually, we could decide that, because algorithms are superior, we should
listen to them rather than our inner experiences and feelings. We would replace
humans with artificial algorithms, just as humans have replaced God. Harari concluded by telling that the rise of
Techno-Humanism and Data are merely possibilities, rather than prophecies.[39] In determining our future,
three major questions remain: Are organisms merely algorithms? Is intelligence
or consciousness more valuable? What will happen to society when artificial
algorithms understand us better than we understand ourselves?[40] Many questions are kept
unanswered by Harrari throughout the book.
Conclusion
Homo Deus is very intelligent work, full
of sharp insights and mordant wit. Homo
Deus illustrates the history of the human race from how we came to be the
dominant species over what narratives are shaping our lives today all the way
to which obstacles we must overcome next to continue to thrive. Homo Deus makes it feel as if we are
standing at the edge of a cliff after a long and arduous journey. The journey
doesn’t seem so important anymore. We are about to step into thin air. Homo Deus marks good on Harrari’s
thought to enlighten how our unparalleled ability to control the world around us
is spinning us into something new. I think, for Harrari Homo Deus is an “end of history” book not in the crude sense that
he believes things have come to a stop. His era of Homo Deus means a time of technology to overlap all. It is nothing
but the status of the superhuman upgrade, a cathedral of algorithms,
techno-humanism, and dataism. Even though he makes a lot of predictions of the
possible world, he is not sure of it. Whatever be Homo Deus is a good fantasy to be dreamt in our sleep now. Let us all
hope a day of Homo Deus. We often
forget that our world was created by an accidental chain of events and that
history shaped not only our technology, politics, and society, but also our
thoughts, fears, and dreams. Homo Deus
wakes us up to this fact and charges us with an obsessive curiosity over how
it is we live our lives, and where this might lead us. Therefore, it is a
deeply engaging book with lots of stimulating ideas and not a lot of jargon and
it makes us think about the future, which is another way of saying it makes us
think about the present.
Prepared by Shebin Joseph Cheeramvelil
[1] YUVAL NOAH HARARI, Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow,
(London: Vintage,2017), 46
[2] Ibid., 43.
[3] Ibid., 46.
[4] Ibid., 60.
[5] Ibid., 78.
[6] Ibid., 90.
[7] Ibid., 97.
[8] Ibid., 105.
[9] Ibid., 108.
[10] Ibid., 115.
[11] Ibid., 134.
[12] Ibid., 165.
[13] Ibid.,184.
[14] Ibid.,190.
[15] Ibid., 203.
[16] Ibid., 221.
[17] Ibid., 228.
[18] Ibid., 242.
[19] Ibid., 245.
[20] Ibid., 248.
[21] Ibid., 259.
[22] Ibid., 320.
[23] Ibid., 341.
[24] Ibid., 347.
[26] Ibid., 373.
[27] Ibid., 405.
[28] Ibid., 406.
[29] Ibid., 407.
[30] Ibid., 408.
[31] Ibid., 413.
[32] Ibid., 422.
[33] Ibid., 425.
[34] Ibid., 430.
[35] Ibid., 444.
[36] Ibid., 451.
[37] Ibid., 454.
[38] Ibid., 455.
[39] Ibid., 458.
[40] Ibid., 460.
Comments
Post a Comment