Part 8: Naturalism And The Tower Of Babel
One way or another, nature puts brakes on wrong technology
Read also earlier posts »Intro: About Naturalism »Part 1: A New Faith, Born Of Lockdown »Part 2: The Need For Naturalism »Part 3: The Equivalence Of God And Nature »Part 4: The Special Role Of Science In Naturalism »Part 5: Right And Wrong Technology »Part 6: Smartphones And Covid Vaccines »Part 7: Irredeemable Tech
In Parts 6 and 7, I applied my “four questions” to genetic engineering, then explained how it can be judged as an irredeemably wrong technology. I outlined how genetic engineering causes fundamental changes to nature, and therefore is an immoral attempt at becoming like God. I described the developers of such tech as creative but reckless “children”, altering nature rather than learning from its example.
The enabling factor of such wrong tech is that humanity lacks an ethical system to thwart technological over-reach. No one is telling the developers of bad tech that they ought to stop, and the developers themselves aren’t questioning their own activities.
The four questions that I introduced in Part 5 are a rough starting tool to assess the rightness of any technology, but since they were contrived in 2022 by an unknown such as myself, they might lack enough legitimacy in the eyes of many readers.
To enhance the legitimacy of my critique of tech, I’d like now to point out links between Naturalism and various warnings about technology from cultural and literary traditions, such as from Bible stories, ancient myths, and classical literature. These traditions form an ethical underpinning for the idea that technology should have brakes attached. The value of these traditions is not only that they resonate in popular consciousness, but also that they are fascinatingly rich with insight. Studying them can lead us to a better understanding of both Naturalism and modern problems.
First, let’s look at a Bible story, the account in the book of Genesis of the Tower of Babel.
The people of the city of Babel (which derives from a Babylonian term meaning “gate of God”) wish to build a tower to heaven. They invent a new construction technology—fired brick instead of stone—and commence to building. In the story, God sees limitless potential in the unified actions of the people. God is concerned that, under current circumstance, people will be able to do whatever they set their minds to. In response, instead of destroying the tower, God causes people to speak different languages and scatters them over the world. The construction project is abandoned. In the later book of Deuteronomy, it is also explained that, as a result of the attempted tower, God ends a special relationship with humans, other than with Jacob. Apparently, God felt betrayed by the fact that humans would try to build such a tower, that they would actually try to put themselves on the same level as God.
Now, let’s view this same story through the lens of Naturalism. Because naturalism assumes nature is God, one way to interpret this story is to re-read it by substituting the word “God” with the word “nature”, and perhaps also the term “heaven” with the concept of “a level appearing equal with nature”. This may seem awkward at first, but it can also stimulate very thoughtful interpretation.
The first insight that I get from a Naturalist interpretation is that the Babel story speaks directly to the modern over-reach of technology.
Imagine that the people of Babel are today’s genetic engineers. Using new technology, and behaving out of brash egoism, they aim to have a status equal to nature’s. They forge ahead full speed, not expecting any pushback from nature. Eventually, that natural pushback happens, their system breaks down, and their efforts are scattered.
The Tower of Babel story warns us against becoming so ego-involved in technological pursuits that we even forget our correct place as simply part of nature, not the equal of it. We can only expect bad results from unchecked egoism.
One point needs to be clarified in the Naturalist interpretation: fired brick in the real world is not a “wrong technology.” However, in the context of the Babel story, it was clearly a new technology that could be employed for the outsized aspirations of its human makers. No fired brick in the real world would be capable of building a tower so incredibly high, so the meaning of “fired brick” in the story is obviously metaphorical. The story suggests that new technology and the new aspirations of people to “reach to heaven” are linked. When speaking of physical nature, it seems you can’t have new aspirations without new technology, and vice versa. Technology isn’t something that is separate from humans and amoral. It is a human construct that is tied to the intentions of humans.
In 2022, I’d say we are somewhere in the middle of an ongoing Babel story. We are only beginning to experience the natural pushback from our use of genetic engineering. This may take decades or even centuries to play out. Just as God ended his relationship with most humans after Babel, so we can expect to lose the good graces of nature if we maintain our pursuit of genetic engineering. On the other hand, just as God chose Jacob to carry the light forward, nature is currently cultivating respect in many modern humans. Increasingly, I believe humans will see that pursuing wrong technology is ultimately a form of self-harm.
The Tower of Babel story has a second wonderful insight for Naturalists. It refutes a specific argument in favor of genetic engineering. Proponents of genetic engineering say that this tech is simply taking nature to its next level by manipulating the DNA of organisms. This argument claims that humans are just an active part of the next step of evolution, a sort of “Creation 2.0” with lab directors playing the part of God. The supporters of such an argument are giddy about the potential of designer organisms and transhumanism.
However, the Naturalist interpretation of the Babel story clearly predicts that nature will inevitably “get back” at us for manipulating it. Who, really, could doubt this if they stop to think? Although we can monkey with nature, it’s at our own risk because nature is much bigger, more powerful, and more complex than we can even imagine.
A third insight that I get from a Naturalist interpretation of Babel is that ancient texts are simply applying a pre-modern understanding to God. In traditional religion, God is talked about as a consciousness. God has intentions and feelings, and acts on these like a human might. For example, God punishes the people of Babel. Anthropomorphizing God in this way was probably necessary for pre-modern people to understand a higher power. In modern Naturalism, it is not important whether God-as-nature is conscious, unconscious, or even super-conscious. It’s perhaps even silly to dwell on these possibilities, because even if nature is unconscious, the plot of the story remains the same. The Naturalist interpretation of the Babel story still indicates that there are natural brakes on human tech and human egoism, whether or not nature is “aware” of these brakes. Reading the Babel story in this manner makes it especially enlightening. It points to a natural check-and-balance system for the universe. If humans cross certain boundaries of behavior, they can only expect bad consequences from nature. These consequences could be viewed as a conscious punishment from God, but they also could be viewed as natural consequences of improper behavior with regard to nature. To avoid such “natural punishment,” we should humbly avoid assuming that we are the equals of nature, that we have any right to alter its components.
When you look through the lens of Naturalism, the Babel story becomes viewable not simply as a warning for humans to behave humbly, but also as a description of how nature balances out human over-reach. Let me introduce some examples. First, in world history, vast empires are initially built by great resolve, but inevitably logistics fail and egos clash, and the empire breaks apart. Second, in any great project, a group of people makes great advances for a time, and there seems to be no stopping them, but eventually opinions in the group differ, there is a “mission drift,” support wanes, and the glory does not continue. Think of examples like the US Apollo Program or the great builders of ancient Rome.
However, the worst consequence of human over-reach is reserved for when people assume powers to play God with nature. Fast forward to my final example, the double-fiasco of the coronavirus and the vaccines for it. Both virus and vaccines were products of genetic engineering. The mRNA vaccines even converted people’s own bodies into genetic engineering factories for the spike protein. What could possibly go wrong was “everything.” Society has certainly received an ongoing natural punishment for these misguided technological pursuits. First, the lockdowns, when people were “scattered” by distancing policies, and real in-person communication was made difficult (seems a lot like Babel). Next, the millions of people killed, many by the engineered virus, but most by the engineered vaccines themselves, which continue to injure and kill even now. It’s especially fitting that the educated leading classes of our technocratic society—the biggest supporters of the vaccines—have been the people most likely to suffer from the vaccine. This is a very direct example showing that wrong technology is ultimately a form of self-harm.
When we assume the privilege to alter nature, then we are bound to suffer a bad “feedback loop” caused by our own meddling with it. As a humble cast-member of nature, we are not qualified to be running the show.
On the bright side, the technological over-reaches of the corona era have given rise to more and more people questioning such technology. It’s literally natural for people to do so. Our proper place is simply to let nature work through us. Just as God worked through the house of Jacob, nature works through us. The sensible brakes that technology needs will ultimately be applied by our own realizations and actions, one way or another.
In the next part, I’ll look at the story of Eden with regard to technological over-reach.