Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
The fact is that there is no single definition of religion. Therefore, a very wide range of social phenomena can be included under it. When someone says that they are fighting a religion, they are most likely fighting a very specific religion.
But the signs of a cult in the unrestrained belief in technological progress are clearly present.
Faith in a bright future is the foundation of any religion. But progressivism is still very much inferior to Christianity, Islam, Buddhism and others.
Several major technological breakthroughs over the past 200 years, with a periodicity of several decades, really caused poorly founded over-optimistic expectations, for example, in the 1950s and 1960s or 2000-2010. Here you will find the victory over diseases, the creation of artificial intelligence, and the victory over poverty. But time always puts things right.
Most people who are seriously interested in progress have a good understanding of the real prospects. The crowd of ordinary people, who are completely disoriented in the ongoing processes, is not able to create a scientific cult – all the achievements of scientific and technological progress turn into esoteric nonsense. But this is a real religion! 🙂
The same goes for propaganda. Progressives are able to distinguish it from information, and those who are susceptible to suggestion do not like science.
Yes, it certainly is. People's hope for high technologies ultimately comes down to the hope of someday gaining immortality with their help. Moreover, at least two conflicting decisions are already being considered on this main issue. Life extension can be achieved, first, through the development of conventional technologies. By replacing the organs with mechanical parts. More reliable and efficient. Secondly, the same can be achieved through the development of biotechnologies. By growing new replacement organs. Or through genetic modifications that increase the reliability and efficiency of organs.
Thus, three sides will participate in the religious wars of the future-traditionalists (united believers of all traditional religions), mechanists and shapers. The names of the last two are taken from cyberpunk. It's not just that. The fact is that it was within the framework of this genre that it was convincingly shown that these are two mutually exclusive paths of development. It is believed that this question has already successfully passed the so-called literary verification. In the exact sciences, it is customary to build mathematical models to predict the future, and in the humanities, the method of literary verification is used for this. The intended future is described in literary form, and if it turns out to be convincing and consistent, then verification is considered successful. Conversely, if it is not possible to describe a certain future normally, even in literary form, then it is considered that such a future option is excluded. So to write such a work in which mechanists would be friends with shapers, it does not work. The contradictions between them are so fundamental that they constantly turn into an extreme form of confrontation. Even between traditional religions, there are fewer contradictions.
In order to be a religion, this hope must have two religious attributes-dogma and dogmatism (I could add a third attribute – faith, but in reality it is not always inherent in religion, so in this case it can be omitted). I do not see these signs in the hope of humanity for high technologies. I see only various people who, based on scattered data that is not united by dogmatic church doctrine, cherish the hope of a technological singularity.�
Of course, this hope can be cultivated into a religion, for example, let's create our own SpaceQ church. Our creed will be the worship of the holy Mask-mission and Tesla-his prophet. And the dogma is that only Saint Musk, thanks to the bitcoin of grace, can open the way to the promised Mars. And now we have not yet turned out to be a religion, but already an ideology, and in order to turn it into a religion , we will add a little supernatural that Musk will fly there on a Tesla. And as soon as he sets foot on the red planet, so the life-giving spring will clog and the kingdom of nature will reign – where nothing needs to be done, but everything is there. Then there will already be a religion, although, here I am watching a live broadcast of the Tesla flight to Mars https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3niFzo5VLI And I am not so sure that the kingdom of nature will not reign, after all, the technological singularity is a cool thing and can give quite high hopes for the not so distant future.