Aquinas and Augustine were compatabilists, so in their system they worshipped a god who set the stage such that most of humanity ends their destiny in hell forever. That is not a loving system or god, but many many Catholics believe in it. Calvinism is even worse. I'm not saying computer worship is good. I just feel like something bad is replacing a previous evil. Better to worship a rock if you must worship something, or a jaguar. At least they are natural

Kurzweil claims that computers have the power to confer eternal life on people like himself while Beane claims computers are capable of creating an entire universe — JerseyFlight

Weird tax avoidance "strategy" .. man created the computer and so is the true creator of whatever it "creates". Be like if I made a "spin art" machine and said it made me .. there's not even anything deep to ponder it's just inaccurate lol.

As far as AI goes it wouldn't be you in the simulation. Period. Even if it was programmed to interact on the basis of your memories and persona- you'd still be you- here. You'd know this as fact if you were kept alive. Which is why in such a scenario you probably wouldn't be. It'd be more of a show for other people than anything you yourself would ever experience.

Seems to me the other way around: it's more likely 're-ligare' (i.e. ritual "death denial" idealism of everyday life (Becker)) is the oldest 'technology' à la Mumford's megamachine (e.g. Göbekli Tepe - perhaps (the) source of the "Babel" meta-myth). "New religion" seems an oxymoron in this sense. Or is what's really meant 'a new idolatry' (i.e. tech Idols more fetishized today than ghost/spirit Icons e.g. "We (The Beatles) are more popular than Jesus now")?

Neat topic. I don't think its a new religion, just people "nerding out" about the possible future. People did it in the industrial age, when computers first came out, the internet, and now. If we are to achieve immortality, it will likely be due to AI.

Can computers think? Here's a cool video where they train a robot arm to be able to write the word "Hi" without ever actually teaching the robot arm how to do it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chukkEeGrLM

In the future it is not unreasonable that they will be able to think at a much higher level. As for when they will reach the "human" level of thought, that still may be quite a ways off. Also, I don't think everyone believes tools dehumanize people. Many people praise the wonders of humanity because of our tools as well. Tools often times make certain skill sets obsolete for jobs, which can be seen as hurting human kind. I see this as short sighted thinking however. We will always invent new jobs for people to do. And if not? God forbid we get robots to do things for us to the point we can use our time for our own pursuits instead of the drudgery of "making a living".

As for a new "religion", there will always be those who find causes they obsess over and "worship". It could be science, sports, philosophy, or some other passion in their life they believe gives them meaning, purpose, or fulfillment. I would say religion slowly loses steam in open and educated societies because people have alternatives. In ignorant societies, religion may be the only avenue they've heard towards fulfillment and the value of the self. It may be the first time they've heard about working towards something greater than yourself, your village, or your government.

I believe religion fulfills a human emotional need that provides a rationality the secular world often cannot. If the secular world can produce alternative rationalities that fulfill the human need that religion fills, then it presents an alternative that people can choose.

the reason traditional religions are dying is because mankind has ... technology. — JerseyFlight

Science and the internet have definitely helped.

To religious fanatics I sing with John Lennon "you claim to be majority, well you know that it's a lie, you're really a minority"

As for a new "religion", there will always be those who find causes they obsess over and "worship". — Philosophim

I don't see it happening this way. Christianity, for example, was not aware of itself as we see it today looking back over the epochs of history. But now we can call it a "world religion." What's that? A new category. Further, we can view it far more objectively now that our species has gained some distance from it. Surely it must be the same way with technology. I don't think of it in terms of a self-conscious religious movement, that would be quite absurd, I think of it in terms of subconscious commitments, here we derive the idea of religion from mankind's practice of technology, his operational use of the medium, how it causes him to act and how he acts toward it. Do people worship technology, for example? There is a great deal of time spent with technology, and people have a very high reverence for the objects of technology, far more than they have ever had for traditional religious objects.

What happens if the average person must go without their phone, without the internet, without television, even for the space of one week? What happens to their emotional life? Religion gave mankind a sense of safety and wonder, technology does the same thing, but I would argue that it does it far more effectively.

I would like to see some of the thinkers on here comment on technology within the context of symbolism, specifically contrasting it with religious symbolism. Symbols play an emotional role in our lives and every religion has a symbolic structure. I think technology even transcends this medium in some sense because it's so interactive, further the symbols of technology are more like entities as opposed to symbols, which makes the analysis most interesting. I would argue that as a society we don't even think about technology we simply make use of it. In times past the writer of a so-called "holy book," could say he created an Epistle that came directly from God, this was a masterful form of rhetoric that worked on the human psyche for a very long time, tragically, it still does. But with technology the Epistle that comes from God comes from those who create technology: the new Epistle writer is the creator of technology. Technology, though unconsciously, has become the new revelatory medium. The traditional Epistle would go out into the world and interact with society, it had an impact, technology does the same thing though not necessarily in an ideological way, but it has a social impact, like the Epistle, it transforms society because it transforms the individual. In order to analyze technology in terms of religion one must understand religion in sociological terms, one must strive to view technology through this same sociological lens.

I don't think of it in terms of a self-conscious religious movement...(Instead) how it causes him to act and how he acts toward it. Do people worship technology, for example? — JerseyFlight

I see. If what we're trying to discover here is whether people's implicit use and regard towards technology trends to a religion, I don't think it quite hits the mark. First, we would need to define what a religion is. Feel free to add or amend to this, but I'll start that a simple definition of religion is a group of people who believe in something besides themselves has the knowledge and power to guide them towards a life with purpose. This could be a cult like figure, or a God for example.

When AI arrives in the future, there might very well be a religion because an AI would be an entity that could provide an "answer". Technology as it is right now might have hints of this depending on what specific technology is being used, but I think it still trends more towards a "tool".

A tool is an object that we use to accomplish a specific purpose. A pen, a book, and a word document are all tools we can use to communicate ideas with other people. But the pen, the book, nor the word document itself provide an answer to life. People who write on the word document may be someone a religion sprouts out of, but no one worships the mighty Microsoft Word to give us the answers to life.

What happens if the average person must go without their phone, without the internet, without television, even for the space of one week? — JerseyFlight

They become bored. Technology has been a fantastic way to gain human connections, business, and entertainment. It is not the tools themselves that we are enamored with, it the tools ability to provide us access to these things that we crave that we appreciate. But at the end of the day, we don't look to the tool itself for answers to life's questions, but the people we connect with.

I would like to see some of the thinkers on here comment on technology within the context of symbolism, specifically contrasting it with religious symbolism. — JerseyFlight

Did you have a symbol in mind yourself to discuss? If not, I suppose the closest we could get to symbols with technology off the top of my mind is the Apple symbol. I don't know about now, but at one time it meant a name brand of originality, creativity, and quality. But I'm not sure that's isolated to technology. Name brand imagery and symbolism is supposed to excite you to buy the product, not look to it for life's deeper answers on how to live.

Alright, I've added enough for now. Is my line of reasoning going where you expected, or did you want to go somewhere else with it?

The tool of cell phones and computers have shades of HD color and perspective that deeply affects the human psychy. This is especially true when seeing the other sex in HD. Pornography in black and white has a different affect than POV stuff they have now. I think if Freud was around he would be astonished in how is theories are proving true in such novel ways. Much fasnication with technology has to do with sexuality

First, we would need to define what a religion is. — Philosophim

I have purposely bypassed this approach. This leads to a dead end.

They become bored. — Philosophim

Same as religion, it provided a constant narrative of excitement, good and evil, spirits, heaven, hell, through which life was framed and carried along in a kind of daze. Remove these from the psyche and many people struggle to cope. Freud's explanation is still the best one on religion, Becker expanded it.

Did you have a symbol in mind yourself to discuss? — Philosophim

No, I am not suggesting that technology is religious in the sense of literal symbols. I am literally talking about the gadgets themselves, this is why I said they are more like 'entities.' But we have to analyze them from the basis of a symbolic structure, I believe they fall into this category. And even if they don't, it would still be utterly fascinating to analyze them from this basis.

The hardest part here is the ability to think outside the context of technology and to analyze it from a sociological perspective. One must pretend they are looking back on the age of technology to observe 1) what it did to man and 2) how man embraced it.

I wanted to add that the glare of computers and cell phones inherently draws in the attention of humans. We don't see people worshipping cars

Much fasnication with technology has to do with sexuality — Gregory

Friend, like I have already said, your contribution to this Forum is totally original. Technology and sexuality is another interesting topic. I think it could be a separate thread.

Ok

We don't see people worshipping cars — Gregory

I would argue we most certainly do, but here "worship" has changed from the older, organized, religious ritual, to one that we would not consciously call "worship." It has to do with man's reverence and love for the object. There are people, if you scratch their (metal object) car they will kill you.

First, we would need to define what a religion is.
— Philosophim

I have purposely bypassed this approach. — JerseyFlight

Without defining what a religion is, I'm not sure we can come to any meaningful discussion comparing it to technology. Each of us would just use our own subjective interpretations at that point, and we would each be in our own opinionated world. If that is the type of topic you would like this to be, I will bow out and let others continue.

Yes but we have to connect the computer symbols with the screen technology. They go hand in hand. People are drawn to TV and when you add symbols you do end up with a kind of worship. I don't know near enough about symbolic logic and the like to say anything more. There must be guys and gals out there who can though

The

Certain human acts are no more than a form of worship. I won't go into detail, but when something or someone is the sole of your reality, that is worship

Without defining what a religion is, I'm not sure we can come to any meaningful discussion comparing it to technology. — Philosophim

Religion is already operating and functioning in the world and has been for thousands of years. The formal definition is not needed. My approach to this question is to view it through the operational lens. The last thing I said is the most important: The hardest part here is the ability to think outside the context of technology and to analyze it from a sociological perspective. One must pretend they are looking back on the age of technology to observe 1) what it did to man and 2) how man embraced it.

What I have learned, having had many exchanges, is that the act of formally defining things is often the mark of a novice dialectician. (Imagine a young person reading Plato for the first time and then just asking for a definition of every word, this is insecure). I have learned that it's often a good way not to get anywhere in the domain of knowledge. My goal is to cover ground as swiftly as possible. I'm not saying this should never be done, sometimes it's forced by the context.

Yes but we have to connect the computer symbols with the screen technology. — Gregory

This is true, and I think, a good point. Literal symbolism is hyperized by technology, but instead of giving allegiance to a solitary symbolic structure, in technology the gadget gives one a kind of mastery or liberalism over symbolic structures in general. This would make technology a vastly superior religion to any religion that came before it.

This would make technology a vastly superior religion to any religion that came before it. — JerseyFlight

I think 180 had the more appropriate word, idolatry. I guess you might be wanting to discuss whether the worship of idols qualifies as a religion? Or would you dispute that the worship of technology qualifies as idolatry? If the latter, consider that technology is artificial.

I think Jerseyflight would agree with me that all worship is idolatry because nothing is the summation of all good. He can correct me if I'm wrong

What does the summation of all good have to do with idolatry?

I guess you might be wanting to discuss whether the worship of idols qualifies as a religion? — Metaphysician Undercover

Not this.

Or would you dispute that the worship of technology qualifies as idolatry? — Metaphysician Undercover

Not this as well.

What I'm getting at is man's embrace of technology, not in the sense that we formally consider it religion, this would not even occur to us. I'm referring to technology as a religion through a kind of historical, sociological analysis, only we are trying to preempt the history in our analysis. What makes it a religion? The answer is nothing conscious on our part, it is our practical embrace and use of technology, the role it has come to play in our lives.

all worship is idolatry because nothing is the summation of all good. — Gregory

Well, I never thought about this before. But I think my position would come something close to this. Can worship ever be a good thing? (Interesting question). Is worship the kind of thing that always implies an unconscious negativity? I'm not sure. Would the worship of thought be problematic? Is there anything we could worship that would increase our quality as humans?

I don't see what you're getting at. If something becomes an indispensable part of a person's life, say a car, or a phone, why would you call that thing a religion, unless the person was worshipping it as an idol?

As the OP details, it is an official religion in America

I don't see what you're getting at. If something becomes an indispensable part of a person's life, say a car, or a phone, why would you call that thing a religion, unless the person was worshipping it as an idol? — Metaphysician Undercover

For me the qualifier here is not idol worship, but the irrational role it comes to dominate in one's life. The above quote by Modrow is interesting because he points this out in a swift way: "Computers are an absolutely awesome creation. One would think the mere fact that humans could create such wonderful machines would be cause to celebrate the excellence of the human mind. But do we ever hear this? No, instead, the mere existence of computers is used to belittle the human mind."

When I speak of religion it's very important to keep in mind that it's from a sociological analysis. This perspective begins from the premise that religions are culturally formed belief systems. Maybe is correct and we have no choice but begin with a formal definition, however, in order to cover ground we must not get stuck here. I do think this topic is of value because our culture is immersed in technology. Further, religious people are more attached to technology than they are their own religions. This is most fascinating. Technology from the sociological perspective is not just technology, it has a cultural and psychological element to it.

Oral sex from a female to a male is a form of worship. Anilingus on a female is such as well. Now to take the subject away from sex, non-organic objects can be worshipped as well, and this entails regarding it as one's ultimate good. I've worshipped rocks before and I don't find it unhealthy if it is a passing phase. It has more to do with the passions than with the mind. There is an unhealthy way of being idolatrous that perhaps is creeping into the culture through technology. I too would like to know more about the psychological reaction of humans to these new forms of "art" (if that is the right word)

No, instead, the mere existence of computers is used to belittle the human mind — JerseyFlight

I maybe completely off the mark on this one but I get the distinct feeling that parents love it when their kids are smart and simply go bonkers when they're smarter.