Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Tech, Tribalism, and the Erosion of Human Connection

What We’ve Lost Since the Enlightenment

Opinion

Tech, Tribalism, and the Erosion of Human Connection
Ai technology, Artificial Intelligence. man using technology smart robot AI, artificial intelligence by enter command prompt for generates something, Futuristic technology transformation.
Getty Images - stock photo

One of the great gifts of the Enlightenment age was the centrality of reason and empiricism as instruments to unleash the astonishing potential of human capacity. Great Enlightenment thinkers recognized that human beings have the capacity to observe the universe and rely on logical thinking to solve problems.

Moreover, these were not just lofty ideals; Benjamin Franklin and Denis Diderot demonstrated that building our collective constitution of knowledge could greatly enhance human prosperity not only for the aristocratic class but for all participants in the social contract. Franklin’s “Poor Richard’s Almanac” and Diderot and d’Alembert’s “Encyclopédie” served as the Enlightenment’s machines de guerre, effectively providing broad access to practical knowledge, empowering individuals to build their own unique brand of prosperity.


It is hard to overstate what a radical departure this was from the prior millennium, where the birth lottery largely circumscribed the determinants of one’s prosperity. Due to this striking reorientation, many historians view the Enlightenment as laying the bedrock for what we consider a modern society.

Further, one cannot deny the titanic impact of this reorientation. Consider that in 1790, human life expectancy was around 30 years, one in five children didn’t survive to age 5, and 4/5 of the world lived in extreme poverty. Today, life expectancy is over 70 years across the globe; over 99% of children survive past the age of 5; and only one-fifth of the world lives in the same extreme level of poverty. Arguably, we have unleashed more human prosperity in the last 200 years than in the prior 2000.

It is with this perspective that we must consider the gravity of our current condition. What are the consequences of having abandoned our Enlightenment ideals? Today, the era’s gifts are adrift in our bitterly polarized landscape, where the demonization of tribal politics obscures civic problem-solving. In such an environment, our ability to construct effective policy solutions becomes impossible. As vital, constructive discussions of public policy are crowded out, the unfettered interests of crony capitalism prevail. By yielding to the alignment of political and economic power over recent decades, we the people have permitted the monied classes to advance their own interests at the expense of those of the majority of the republic.

Where does this leave us? Our political discourse has devolved into a game of scoring points and laying blame for our predicaments, while the unbridled “free market” wreaks havoc on today’s working classes. As we continue to amass an immense debt burden, it deprives future generations of their own prospects.

The absurdities that emerge from our predicament become increasingly disquieting. Here are two particularly noteworthy examples:

The quest for artificial intelligence and its consequent effects on energy prices and the environment.

Unsatisfied with the intelligence with which we are naturally endowed, we have surrendered to a market-driven quest to discover and deploy a supposedly superior “artificial” intelligence. The immense anticipated demand for this AI will require significantly more computer processing power than we currently possess. Consequently, today we are building the requisite data centers, which will consume a staggering amount of incremental energy.

At the same time, our MAGA retrograde energy policy, priding itself on climate change denial, is funneling resources into the rebuilding and redeployment of coal, oil, and gas infrastructure and cancelling or furloughing green energy projects. However, due to the skyrocketing cost of revitalizing coal, this traditional energy source is now more costly than solar and wind energy. So as the NYT recently reported, in West Virginia, where the coal revitalization is centered, consumer energy prices are rising more than double the national average.

The replacement of genuine human interaction with its virtual counterpart.

As a species, we have seemingly determined that building authentic human relationships is too difficult (or painful). Fortunately, the proliferating opportunities to build digital relationships provide ample replacement. Vast chunks of our society, notably young people, are increasingly forsaking real human interaction and replacing it with its virtual cousin. As Scott Galloway reminds us: Who needs to go out on dates, when Only Fans is just a click away?

Of a bygone era are the noisy college dining halls where vivacious conversations reverberated from the rafters; today, each student eats individually with scant interaction with their neighboring diners, all glued to their screens, and many with earbuds.

Can we not tap into our better angels and return to an era of crafting solutions to pressing concerns? Unfortunately, trapped by our technologies and their supporting business models, we find it increasingly difficult to distance ourselves from the pressures of our self-chosen “mobs.” This leaves me with a meager opportunity to constructively resolve genuine policy differences. Our Enlightenment forbears welcomed technology and market competition as leveling devices for the public good. For the sake of the next generation, it might be in our best interest to follow their model.

Seth David Radwell is the author of “American Schism: How the Two Enlightenments Hold the Secret to Healing our Nation” winner of last year’s International Book Award for Best General Nonfiction. He is a frequent contributor as a political analyst, and speaker within both the business community and on college campuses both in the U.S. and abroad.


Read More

Illustration of a man and woman arguing

Arguments or debates, disputes or conflicts, verbal clashes. Angry men and women roar at each other

Getty Images

What If Polarization Is the Wrong Diagnosis?

I just listened to political scientist Lilliana Mason challenge one of the most familiar explanations of what is wrong with American politics.

We are constantly told that America suffers from polarization. Republicans and Democrats have moved too far apart. They distrust each other, increasingly regard one another as enemies, and have lost the ability to compromise. The prescribed remedies are familiar: more civility, more dialogue, less hostility, and a return to the political center.

Keep ReadingShow less
 Vintage Computer with AI Text on Screen and Neon Lighting, figures of people standing around it.

Calling AI “super” makes it sound omniscient. A faith leader coalition explains why the word “artificial” matters and what to do instead.

Royalty-free/Getty Images

Reject the Sand God. Call AI by Its True Name

President Trump recently signed an executive order telling federal agencies to replace the term "artificial intelligence" with "Super Intelligence." He said the word "artificial" makes the technology sound fake.

Many Americans already treat AI as a “super intelligence” that knows better and that they should confide in. Many already assign it the role of spiritual counsel, close confidante, or even romantic partner. In a Common Sense Media survey, one-third of teenagers claimed they had discussed serious personal matters with an AI instead of a person, and 31 percent said talking with an AI companion was as satisfying as talking with friends, or even more so. Bible Chat, an app that offers scripture-based advice and prayers, has been downloaded more than 30 million times.

Keep ReadingShow less
news video camera
black video camera
Photo by Matt C on Unsplash

When the Cameras Went Dark: What a Press Ban Reveals About American Journalism

When I came to the United States from India in 1982, I did not trust newspapers. Back home, everyone knew which party a paper favored before reading a line. American television felt different. My family watched Peter Jennings every evening, and later I found Larry King on CNN, who let his guests talk instead of telling viewers what to think. That habit of holding everyone to one standard has mostly faded.

On Sept. 18, President Trump announced he was banning CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House, saying their reporting was fake news. The next morning the Secret Service took reporters’ badges at the gate. The outlets sued on Monday, and Fox, ABC, NBC and CBS declined to take CNN’s turn in the television pool. On Sept. 24, Judge Timothy Kelly, whom Trump appointed, blocked the ban for 14 days. He found the outlets likely to win on due process, because reporters got no notice and no chance to respond, and he doubted the government’s national security explanation. Trump’s answer was to call the judge “totally disloyal.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Woman sitting and typing on laptop on her lap.

AI chatbots are always guessing, even when they sound sure. Experts and Claude itself explain the AI trust gap, bias and why to check sources.

Oscar Wong/Getty Images

AI’s Information Crisis: Why Trust Is Harder to Sustain Than Ever

In all the debates about human and machine intelligence, one thing has become clear: We humans love to talk about AI. We’ve speculated whether AI will create or eliminate jobs, revolutionize or destroy science, comfort or torment us, entertain us brilliantly or rot our brains, or some combination of all these things. But amid the noise, we may have paid too little attention to a subtler impact: how AI is disrupting our relationship to information and making it harder to know what to believe.

The problem isn’t just deepfakes, the malicious manipulation of images, video, and audio. Even benign, well-intentioned AI applications can be profoundly misleading. The nature of the large language models that power chatbots means that they are always guessing, however confident they seem. How can we use AI to produce reliable information that improves public discourse rather than distorting it?

Keep ReadingShow less