The most important technological revolution of the 21st century is the ability to hack human beings. To hack human beings means to understand them better than they understand themselves. If a government or a corporation understands us better than we understand ourselves, it can then predict our feelings and decisions, manipulate our feelings and decisions, and eventually make all the crucial decisions on our behalf.
In order to hack human beings, you need three things: a lot of biological knowledge, a lot of data, and a lot of computing power. Until today, nobody had all of these. Even the most totalitarian regimes did not have enough biological knowledge, enough data and enough computing power to systematically hack millions of people. So even in Nazi Germany or in the Soviet Union, the government could not really know and manipulate what every person was thinking and feeling.
But soon, some governments and corporations will have enough biological knowledge, enough data and enough computing power to monitor all the people all the time, and to know what each of us is thinking and feeling in every moment. They will know us better than we know ourselves.
What will happen then?
If the power to hack humans falls into the hands of a 21st-century Stalin, the result will be the worst totalitarian regime in history. It will be far worse than anything seen in the 20th century. And there are already several applicants for the job of 21st-century Stalin. But even if we avoid the establishment of such a digital dictatorship, the power to hack humans might still undermine human freedom in a myriad of ways.
As people rely on algorithms to make more and more individual and collective decisions, authority will gradually shift from humans to these algorithms. This shift is already under way: billions of people trust the Facebook algorithm to tell us what is new, the Google algorithm to tell us what is true, Google Maps to tell us where to go, Netflix to tell us what to watch, and the Amazon algorithm to tell us what to buy.
Life on tap: concept art for an Amazon electric vehicle
Humans are used to thinking about life as a drama of decision-making. Liberal democracy and free-market capitalism see the individual as an autonomous agent constantly making choices about the world. Works of art – be they Shakespeare plays, Tolstoy novels, or tacky Hollywood comedies – usually revolve around the hero having to make some particularly crucial decision: to be or not to be? To stay with Mr Karenin or run away with the dashing Count Vronsky? Christian and Muslim theology similarly focus on the drama of decision-making, arguing that everlasting salvation or damnation depends on making the right choice. What will happen once algorithms tell us what to do, and even refashion our bodies and brains?
If and when this happens, human life will cease to be a drama of decision-making. Democratic elections and free markets will make little sense. So will most religions and works of art. Imagine your favourite Shakespeare play with all the crucial decisions made by the Google algorithm. Hamlet will have a much more comfortable life, but what kind of life will it be? Do we have philosophical and spiritual models for making sense of such a life?
We are enjoying an unprecedented technological bonanza, but at the same time we are facing philosophical bankruptcy. The usual bargain between philosophers and politicians is that philosophers have a lot of fanciful ideas, and politicians explain that they cannot be implemented due to lack of means. Now, we are in the opposite situation. The new technologies are giving politicians the means to create heaven and hell, but the philosophers are having trouble conceptualising what the new heaven and hell will look like.
History won’t wait for us: Sapiens author, Yuval Noah Harari
History abhors a vacuum. And history won’t wait for us. If we fail to conceptualise the new heaven quickly enough, we might be easily misled by naïve utopias. And if we fail to conceptualise the new hell quickly enough, we might find ourselves trapped in it with no way out. So we need a map of the new heaven and hell, and we need it fast. We need a guidebook to the future.
Perhaps the best guidebook I know is an oldie: Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World. The book explores what happens when the government can hack humans, and can control society by manipulating the internal realities of our bodies instead of the external realities of the world. Huxley wrote his masterpiece in 1931, and he didn’t know anything about genetics, artificial intelligence or the internet. His technological vision of the future is therefore outdated. Readers will have to bear with that.
Yet despite its technological obsolescence, Brave New World is the most prophetic book of the 20th century, and one of the most profound discussions of technology in modern philosophy. Indeed, with each passing year Brave New World is becoming even more relevant.
When Huxley wrote Brave New World, Soviet Communism was ascending to new heights of brutality, fascism was entrenching in Italy, Nazism was about to take over Germany, militaristic Japan was embarking on its war of conquest in China, and the world was gripped by the Great Depression. Yet Huxley managed to see through all these dark clouds, and envision a future society without wars, famines and plagues, enjoying uninterrupted peace, abundance and health. It is a consumerist world, which gives completely free rein to sex, drugs and rock ’n’ roll, and whose supreme value is happiness.
Clear-sighted visionary: Aldous Huxley, pictured in 1930
The underlying assumption of the book is that humans are biochemical algorithms, that science can hack the human algorithm, and that technology can then be used to manipulate not just individuals but entire societies. In Huxley’s brave new world, the World Government uses advanced biotechnology and social engineering to make sure that everyone is always content, and no one has any reason to rebel. There is therefore no need of secret police, of concentration camps, or of an Orwellian Ministry of Love. Indeed, Huxley’s genius consists in showing that people can be controlled far more securely through love, pleasure and consumption than through violence, fear and austerity.
In Nineteen Eighty-Four, it is clear that Orwell is describing a frightening, nightmarish world, and the only question left is “How do we avoid reaching such a terrible state?” Reading Brave New World is a far more disconcerting and challenging experience, because you are hard-pressed to put your finger on what exactly makes it dystopian. The world is peaceful and prosperous, and everyone is supremely satisfied all the time. What could possibly be wrong with that?
When Brave New World was published in 1932, both Huxley and his readers knew perfectly well that he was describing a dangerous dystopia. Yet many present-day readers could easily mistake Brave New World for a utopia, and our consumerist society is actually geared to realising Huxley’s vision. Today, happiness is the supreme value, and we increasingly use biotechnology and social engineering to ensure maximum satisfaction to all citizen-customers.
You want to know what could be wrong with that? Read Brave New World. The climactic dialogue between Mustapha Mond and John the Savage is among the most profound discussions of technology, happiness and the meaning of life in modern Western philosophy.
Extracted from Brave New World by Aldous Huxley, published by Vintage Classics on February 24 with a new introduction by Yuval Noah Harari
