Post-Human Religion

When Technology Frees Us from Death, What Do We Pray For?

Image generated by Gemini 3

Sometimes I tell myself, “I’m okay because I’m being protected by something greater than myself.” I do this when I’m feeling anxious or worried, but even beyond that, when I can no longer find a sense of purpose or meaning in my existence, I try to remind myself that “I am also protected from meaninglessness.” It’s something like a “two-sided spirit of prayer,” so to speak.

The other day, I read an article by IsaacWave titled Robot’s Philosophy Lesson 3 (Wave 1674) and an article by Toni de GomeS titled ANGELUS. In the former, the question “Why does a robot without a soul need religion?” was raised. The latter depicted a scene in which an angel visits “humans” living on an exoplanet as a result of a dehumanization process.

[embed]*Robot’s Philosophy Lesson 3 (Wave 1674) *The proposition that “logic ultimately reaches the unknown” is proven by Kurt Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorems and Alan Turing’s Halting… medium.com

[embed]*ANGELUS *A Perceptual Shift Fiction Experience medium.com

The Faith of Future “Humans”

This led me to ponder what religion and faith might mean for “humans” whose lifespans have been vastly extended through technologies like robotics and genetic engineering, enabling them to live on other planets.

Unlike us, such beings would likely have significantly less anxiety about illness, injury, or death. However, I believe the questions regarding the purpose of their existence and the meaning of life will probably never disappear. Therefore, their faith would likely shift from what might be called “prayers for survival” to “prayers for meaning.”

A Sense of Brotherhood Among “Post-Humans”

However, artificially adapting themselves to various planets also means branching off into different species. Could these various “post-humans,” having diverged in this way, still maintain a sense of brotherhood as “humanity”? If the various planets they have migrated to were to build a structure—which could be called an “interstellar ecosystem,” so to speak—by exchanging resources and energy, there is a possibility that a sense of religious unity might emerge in a certain sense. Especially since there are numerous uncertain factors in space, and given that there is likely to be a high need for mutual aid in emergencies as well as to alleviate that anxiety, it seems likely that religious perspectives will be emphasized.

If religion (or faith) in such a world were to take the form of a “spiritual operating system (OS)” designed to maintain this vast “interstellar ecosystem,” it would provide individuals within that ecosystem with an answer to the “question of meaning”—“Why do I exist?”

The Enduring Issue of “Harmony Between the Whole and the Individual”

However, there is still a problem here. It is the issue of “harmony between the whole and the individual.” The question is how to strike that balance—avoiding both totalitarianism and excessive individualism. Realistically, I believe it is highly likely that a spiritual “operating system” like faith alone is insufficient to sustain the rational, mutually supportive behavior required to maintain such a massive system. Factors preventing individuals from viewing the whole from a bird’s-eye perspective reportedly include survival instincts—such as primitive fight-or-flight responses—and cognitive biases that view the self and the world as dualistic entities. Since these are genetically embedded through the process of evolution, they are unlikely to be easily overcome by ideology or spiritual philosophy alone. Therefore, in the world of an interstellar ecosystem, it may become standard practice to use genetic engineering to mitigate these survival instincts and cognitive biases in order to maintain the “interstellar ecosystem” as a spiritual operating system. When that genetic modification goes beyond a certain degree of “moderation,” doesn’t that signify the extinction of an individual’s “free will”?

Implications for Modern Society

In fact, the idea mentioned above—using genetic engineering to alter human nature to suit the environment—is not a distant future scenario like “post-humanism”; it is considered highly likely to be implemented in the “near future” (a span of several decades) that lies right before our eyes.

In 2012, a paper titled “Human Engineering and Climate Change,” published by philosopher Matthew Liao and others, sparked significant debate worldwide. This paper proposes that:

If it is difficult to scientifically reshape the Earth’s environment (a process known as “terra-engineering,” the Earth-specific version of terraforming), then “we should simply modify humans to adapt to the environment.”

Furthermore, genetic modification—once thought to be a technology of the distant future—has already become a reality of the present day thanks to technological innovations such as “CRISPR-Cas9.”

“Transhumanism”

At the heart of the ideology underlying this debate—the idea of “intentionally evolving and modifying humans through technology”—lies “transhumanism.” This refers to the philosophy and movement that advocates “actively using science and technology to break through human physical and mental limitations and evolve into ‘post-humans’ that transcend Homo sapiens.” This philosophy lies in the lineage of the “human-centered” thinking of the Renaissance and the “Enlightenment” ideology, which sought to improve human society through science.

The Issue of “Transscience”

Personally, I believe that at this point in time, “transhumanism” is viewed as an extreme way of thinking and is not accepted by society. However, if contemporary problems such as climate change and shortages of food and energy become more severe, it is unclear how societal norms might change. I have a feeling that our next generation—or perhaps the one after that—may be forced to make such a critical decision. This is a so-called “trans-science” issue that pertains to our ethics and values—one that cannot be resolved by scientific knowledge and information alone. Shouldn’t we leave behind the discussions and ideas surrounding this as a legacy for future generations?

Special thanks to IsaacWave , Toni de GomeS for the inspiration.

This text was translated from Japanese to English using DeepL.