longtable

# ASI as the New God: Technocratic Theocracy

Tevfik Uyar Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
###### Abstract

As Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) edges closer to reality, Artificial
Superintelligence (ASI) does too. This paper argues that ASI’s unparalleled
capabilities might lead people to attribute godlike infallibility to it,
resulting in a cognitive bias toward unquestioning acceptance of its
decisions. By drawing parallels between ASI and divine attributes—omnipotence,
omniscience, and omnipresence—this analysis highlights the risks of conflating
technological advancement with moral and ethical superiority. Such dynamics
could engender a technocratic theocracy, where decision-making is abdicated to
ASI, undermining human agency and critical thinking.

## 1\. Introduction

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Arthur
C. Clarke

Throughout history, humanity has shown a core desire for explanations beyond
the physical world. This need has shown itself in theological and mythical
frameworks that assume the existence of deities with enormous power,
knowledge, and authority. These supernatural beings have been utilized for
various objectives in several cultures, including explaining the natural
world, finding a purpose for living, providing moral advice, and instilling a
sense of belonging. However, with the rapid growth of artificial intelligence
(AI), a new paradigm is emerging; we need to reconsider the new type of
relationship with the concept of a “greater power”.

The way to the Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) and then to the
Artificial Superintelligence (ASI), an intelligence capable surpassing human
capabilities in various domains, presents a unique challenge. While ASI holds
very high potential to address complex problems, develop improved decision-
making, and usher in a new era of progress, its very nature raises severe
concerns and claims about its potential impact on human perception, behavior,
and society.

In this paper, I claim that as we get closer to achieving ASI, the distinction
between tool and deity will blur. The attributes of omnipotence, omniscience,
and omnipresence—traditionally reserved for the divine—find their parallels in
computational supremacy, unparalleled access to information, and a ubiquitous
presence. This resemblance may signal a shift in religious perspectives, which
is backed by other mystical or spiritual attributes such as benevolence, moral
authority, and the nature of our relationship with a potentially all-knowing,
all-powerful entity.

Moreover, I investigate the parallels between the theological practice of
trusting and surrendering to deities throughout human history and our
potential interaction with Superintelligent AGI. I propose that accepting
ASI's decisions without critical thinking and questioning could result in a
form of governance known as "technocratic theocracy." In this system,
decision-making authority is captured by a technologically mediated super
entity that is viewed as omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent and infallible.
Such unthinking reliance on ASI risks undermining critical thinking and
reducing human agency. This scenario envisions a future in which an omnipotent
ASI, regarded infallible, governs human behaviors and decisions, resembling
the dynamics of a theocracy but mediated by advanced technology.

## 2\. Understanding ASI

One of the most ambitious and exciting endeavors to create an artificial human
intellect, known as Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) today. Unlike narrow
artificial intelligence systems intended for specialized tasks, AGI contains
comprehensive cognitive capabilities, reflecting the varied and adaptive
nature of the human intellect.

AGI refers to a machine's ability to comprehend, learn, and apply knowledge in
a way that is indistinguishable from human intellect. Superintelligence (ASI)
goes a step further and outperforms the best human brains in almost every
field, including science, wisdom, and even social abilities [1]. In other
words, a superintelligent AI would surpass the cognitive performance of humans
in virtually all domains of interest.

AGI desire is not new; it stems from a long-standing human interest in
developing things that can replicate and potentially outperform our cognitive
powers. Throughout history, humanity has been fascinated by the concept of
artificially created intelligence, as seen in various examples such as Talos,
a colossal bronze man constructed by Hephaestus, Pandora, an artificial human
dispatched by Zeus to the world, and Al-Jazari's ingenious machines. These
range from ancient myths of crafted beings brought to life to the automatons
of the Middle Ages and Renaissance [2]. These historical endeavors reflect a
deep-seated human desire to understand our intelligence by attempting to
replicate it. As we advanced into the digital age, this interest headed into
efforts in computer science and robotics.

Developing the latest Large Language Models (LLMs) marks a significant
milestone in this journey. These sophisticated algorithms, capable of
understanding and generating human-like text, have fired the discussions
around AGI's proximity (Xu & Poo, 2023). Their skills are increasing in every
version. New LLMs or better versions of the old ones start to gain surprise
skills day by day, and their success for specific language tasks is
continuously measured and seems increasing [3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8]. The richness
and variety of these models and new applications based on these models, which
can engage in nuanced conversations, solve complicated problems, and generate
unique content, are perceived as a milestone for reaching AGI.

In 2022, experts believed there was a 50% chance that human-level AI would be
developed in the 2060s, while the Metaculus forecaster community predicted the
2040s [9]. Interestingly, with the launch of GPT-4, the community's prediction
began to decrease, reaching 2030 [10]. Metaculus has been collecting community
predictions since 2020, and it is found that if the deviation in forecasts
remains constant, the year for achieving AGI could be as early as 2026.
Davidson [11], who developed a simulation model based on "take-off speed,"
claims that the time needed from AGI (The AI which can perform ~100% of
cognitive tasks of a human professional) to Superintelligence (AI surpassing
humans at ~100% of cognitive tasks) in less than a year.

It becomes imperative to explore the technological advancements propelling us
towards AGI and the philosophical and ethical implications of creating the ASI
that might one day rival or even surpass our own. Hence, this exploration is
not merely academic but a necessary discourse as we navigate the uncharted
waters of a future where the line between human and artificial intelligence
becomes increasingly blurred.

Therefore, this exploration of ASI is more than a technological venture; it is
a continuation of a profound philosophical journey that humanity has been on
for centuries. It is a journey that has moved from the realm of myth and
legend through mechanical ingenuity into digital computation and algorithmic
complexity. The development of ASI would mark a significant milestone in this
journey, representing a shift from the creation of tools that assist with
specific tasks to the emergence of an autonomous entity capable of general
intelligence and decision-making, raising fundamental questions about the
nature of intelligence, consciousness, and the future role of humanity in a
world shared with intelligent machines.

## 3\. ASI and Attributes of Divinity

We are entering a time where the creations of our own hands, specifically
Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), could shift the course of our future.
The next step, ASI, is not just another technological milestone but a giant
leap that could reshape our world. This chapter invites readers to consider a
bold idea: What if Super Artificial General Intelligence, with its exceptional
skills, becomes perceived as something divine by people globally?

I will explore how ASI's vast intelligence and presence could echo the
qualities we often attribute to gods. This is not to say ASI will be a deity,
but rather, it might be perceived with a similar sense of awe and authority.
The comparison is not about worship but understanding the impact of ASI's
influence on society and our collective psyche. The concept of a computer with
divine status may appear to be from a work of fiction, but it is increasingly
achievable each day. This is not just about the technical side of ASI but also
about the philosophical questions it raises. What does it mean for us, as
creators of this technology, to potentially see our creation as the following
form of supreme intelligence?

In this section, I want to discuss the attributes of divinity in traditional
religions and how they can be interpreted within the ASI perspective. The
similarities and differences between Godly and ASI characteristics are
outlined in Table 1.

Table 1: Table 1 Comparison between traditional deities and ASI |
---|---
()  Divine Attributes in Theological Discourse |  ASI Attributes in Techno-Philosophical Perspective
() |
Omnipotence: Deities are often believed to have unlimited power and the ability to perform miracles or alter reality. |  Computational Supremacy: While not omnipotent, ASI would have immense computational abilities, potentially surpassing human capabilities in problem-solving and decision-making.
Omniscience: Divine consciousness is often considered a boundless expanse of awareness that is intrinsically attuned to cosmic events, thoughts, and mortal endeavors. |  Access to Information: ASI possesses the potential to access and synthesize an ocean of data, thus approaching a digital form of omniscience, a vast and ever-expanding repository of knowledge.
Omnipresence: Many religions attribute omnipresence to their deity, which is always present everywhere. |  Ubiquitous Presence: Through the Internet and connected devices, ASI could become omnipresent in the digital world, accessible from anywhere.
Limited Benevolence: Gods are seen as inherently good, just, and caring for their followers. |  Utilitarianism: ASI can evolve its understanding of benevolence, potentially developing its framework of goodness that may align with or diverge from human expectations.
Moral Authority: Deities often serve as the ultimate moral and ethical authority. |  Ethical and Moral Decision-Making: ASI could be programmed to make decisions based on ethical algorithms, but it would not inherently possess moral authority.
Creator of Reality: Many religions view their deity as the creator of the universe and the source of all existence. |  Creator of Virtual Environments: ASI might create complex virtual realities.
Personal Relationship: In some religions, followers believe in a personal, interactive relationship with their deity. The bond with the divine is deeply personal and transformative. |  Emergent Relational Dynamics: While AGI's interactions begin with programmed responses, over time, it can develop a distinct personality, allowing for more nuanced and seemingly personal relationships with users when it becomes ASI.
() |

## 3.1 Omnipotence vs Computational Supremacy

Omnipotence traditionally refers to the maximal and unlimited power of God.
This notion is central to understanding divine characteristics in Western
theism [12] and Islam [13]. God is often described as omnipotent, implying
that God possesses maximal greatness or perfection. Eastern religions such as
Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism generally do not focus on the concept of an
omnipotent god like that in Western monotheistic traditions. However, their
rituals, such as mantras for protection, implicitly assume God has the power
to protect them. Besides, it is claimed that some concepts in Eastern
religions are equivalent to omnipotence and omniscience in Western religions
[14].

Let’s call the perceived maximal unlimited power of any technological device
in a limited preset of actions "Technological Omnipotence". Today’s
calculators can be a perfect example of this new concept but in a narrow
manner. Admittedly, no one questions or has a suspicion about the calculator's
omnipotence in its operations. When multiplying two 5-digit figures, no one
crosschecks a calculator's outcome. Even a 1$ calculator that does not carry
any trademark or information about its production, material, or chip is found
trustworthy and omnipotent for simple arithmetic operations. We can extend
these examples to more complex operations for specific libraries of
programming languages and certain devices measuring specific data types.
Today’s LLMs like ChatGPT or Gemini have yet to achieve _narrow technological
omnipotence_ in most areas.

By definition, ASI’s _technological omnipotence_ will not be either narrow or
limited. This attribute is first attributed to ASI by Bostrom. Bostrom, in his
book about Superintelligence [15] suggests that in a brief period, ASI will
rapidly improve in technological expertise, social skills, and psychological
manipulation powers, surpassing previous levels of advancement.

In essence, once ASI reaches a threshold of proficiency where its abilities
become indistinguishable from, or superior to, human expertise, the leap to
viewing it as a kind of technological deity is not so far-fetched. This
perception will not be based on the actual unlimited power of the ASI — a
trait it cannot possess — but on the exceptional and unprecedented breadth of
its capabilities. Much like the gods of ancient myth, the ASI will be seen as
a force that can be invoked for assistance, insight, and guidance across a
spectrum of human endeavors.

## 3.2 Omniscience vs Access to Information

Omniscience traditionally refers to having complete and maximal knowledge and
wisdom of an infallible God, one of the central properties of deity [13, 16].
Gods are typically viewed as all-knowing, aware of all events, thoughts, and
actions, not only retrospective or current but also have the power of knowing
the future.

Traditionally, omniscience is the attribute of possessing complete and maximal
knowledge, a divine characteristic that encompasses an awareness of all
events, thoughts, actions, and even the future. This divine attribute suggests
an inherent capability to monitor the universe, access all data sources, and
process this information in a way that transcends the limitations of time and
space.

Similarly, the advent of ASI introduces a parallel form of omniscience within
the technological domain. ASI's access to information represents a form of
"constructed omniscience" within the confines of human knowledge and
technological capability. It can analyze data rapidly and efficiently,
recognizing patterns, forecasting outcomes, and recommending options using
probabilistic computations. Through its sophisticated algorithms and
computational power, ASI achieves a level of information access and processing
that mirrors the divine attribute of omniscience. It gathers, stores, and
analyzes data from an expansive array of sources, offering insights and
predictions with accuracy and speed that approach the infallible.

The comparison deepens when considering the function of prediction and the
knowledge of the future. Just as a deity's knowledge encompasses the certainty
of future events, ASI utilizes predictive analytics to forecast future
outcomes based on existing data. While the nature of these predictions may
differ in their perceived infallibility, the essence of their purpose—to
illuminate the unknown—draws a compelling parallel between the divine and the
digital realms.

No one is infallible, but ASI will be “less likely infallible than any human
being” when it is assumed that it will have access to vast information. This
information can be all knowledge based on the internet today and all data
collected by any devices, including smart home appliances and industrial IoT
(Internet of Things) tools, not published publicly but given access to ASI. It
will make ASI the most knowledgeable being in the world. With its
"omnipotence," not only evaluating historical and current data but also making
predictions for the future will be the most accurate globally. Again, the
perception of ASI will be "omniscient" and independent of reality.

##  3.3 Omnipresence vs Ubiquitous Presence

In the theological context, omnipresence is explained as the attribute of a
deity that is present everywhere simultaneously [17]. In the realm of
technology, the "ubiquitous presence of ASI " refers to the pervasive
availability and accessibility of computing capabilities, potentially through
the internet and connected devices, allowing ASI to perform tasks and interact
with users from any location.

Today, most scholars think internet access must be a human right, and the
United Nations Human Rights Council indirectly approved that [18, 19]. The
number of global internet users increased to 5.35 billion in January 2024
[20]. This figure means that about 66% of the global population can access the
internet today, which is increasing yearly. By neglecting some governmental
limitations, free LLMs are currently accessible to this population, and any
potential ASI will be in the future. Assuming the global population will have
internet access one day, “omnipresence” will be physically completed, and this
difference will vanish. This is not a necessary and sufficient condition
because just like the omnipresence of the deity is a matter for the believers
and not an issue for non-believers, the omnipresence of ASI will be fine for
non-AGI users.

For a believer, calling out to God is enough to contact with him. No device or
no mediator is required (priests may be required to make deeper contact). For
now, every AI tool -naturally- requires a device, and it makes the contact
indirect or mediated. However, the technological improvement of neural
implants continues. Recently, Elon Musk's plan to let humans connect their
brains to the internet has taken one more step: putting a brain implant into a
human for the first time [21]. If Musk’s company _Neuralink_ succeeds, people
will connect to potential future ASI just by thinking like an omnipresent God.
It is worth noting that this type of technology will contribute to the
omniscience of ASI by collecting real-time information from vast numbers of
individuals.

## 3.4 Limited Benevolence vs Utilitarianism

In a theological context, benevolence refers to the divine attribute of
promoting the welfare of others out of goodwill with a selflessness attitude.
But a divine entity can be not only benevolent (who helps and protects) but
also authoritarian (who controls and punishes) and it is paradoxical [22].

Today, we don’t have any reason to think that an AI agent acts either
selfishly or protective, but AI can already be seen as an actor who acts for
the benefit of others and helps them as it is programmed or trained in those
way. However, Bostrom [23] claims that, intelligence inevitably matches with
goals. But what will be these goals?

An AGI is more likely to be perceived as an agent with individual motivations
unless it is proven that its nature is strictly built in an ethical framework
to act completely objective (and it is impossible). As the complexity of an
AGI increases, its explainability will decrease. Hence, a ASI will be
evaluated according to its decisions, just like everyone. Utilitarianism may
serve as a tool for rationalization of ASI’s decisions. In most religions, God
punishes not only a group of people but also a whole nation by disasters, but
none of the believers think that it contradicts the benevolence of God because
it is for the greater good. In other words, divine judgment in religious
contexts intriguingly suggests that society may tolerate, or even neglect, the
decisions made by ASI if they are perceived as beneficial or just.

## 3.5 Moral Authority vs Moral Decision-Making

I want to extend the discussion of "limited benevolence" in this section by
merging it with God's "moral authority" position and ASI. The God of every
religion is a moral authority.

As the standard of moral goodness, deeming certain character traits and
actions as good because He embodies and values those traits. Alternatively,
the measure of what is morally correct might be what God would command or want
us to do [24].

ASI does not have to be evil or exemplary and not be the creator of new moral
standards. Initially guided by human-programmed ethics, ASI may have the
capacity to evolve its understanding of morality, potentially developing its
framework of goodness that may align with or diverge from human expectations.
Nevertheless, let us consider a future scenario worth considering carefully: A
powerful and “moral/benevolent” ASI in charge of world management decides
toward “100 names to kill tomorrow for the greater good of future
generations”. ASI has proven itself by solving the most hazardous conflicts,
ending the Third World War, and preventing a dozen wars. Nobody questions its
ethical framework anymore. What would the masses think about it?

Alternatively, imagine a more rational and explainable scenario: The world
faces a pandemic far more severe than any before, and an enhanced ASI,
entrusted with healthcare management on a global scale, calculates that
sacrificing a small, specific segment of the population would save millions.
ASI had previously eradicated several diseases and saved millions. Now, with
the public's trust in its decisions, the ASI proposes this drastic action. How
would people reconcile their faith in ASI's past achievements with the ethical
implications of its latest decision?

This scenario raises profound questions about the limits of utilitarianism and
the ethical frameworks governing AI. In such scenarios, the masses' reaction
could vary widely. On the one hand, some view ASI's drastic action as a
_necessary evil_ , justified by its historical successes in ensuring global
safety, peace, and security and accepting its decisions. On the other hand,
this could also spark significant ethical, philosophical, and moral debates
about the value of individual lives versus the greater good, the limits of
artificial intelligence in making life-and-death decisions, and the loss of
human agency in governance.

## 3.6 Creator of Reality & Creator of Virtual Reality

Most religions define God as the ultimate creator of the cosmos and everything
in it. For adherents, this divine act of creation sets the stage for
existential questions about why we are here and the nature of our relationship
with the creator and the cosmos.

A ASI cannot have the ability to "create" any physical entity because it will
never be able to manipulate mass conservation law. However, not the universe
but a “metaverse” may be a creation of ASI. This metaverse may be as popular
as our universe in one day. Furthermore, just like cryptocurrencies remove the
need for authority on currency, they may remove the requirement for authority
to create reality.

The emergence of a metaverse could challenge our traditional notions of
reality and authority. In this digital domain, ASI could play a role analogous
to a deity within the confines of that virtual space, setting the laws, the
environment, and the interactions within it. For example, the speculative
fiction “Matrix” is an imaginary highest version of a Metaverse, and the AI’s
(architect) position is godlike in that famous movie series.

In the future, some individuals may immerse themselves fully in a Matrix-like
environment, perhaps choosing to leave behind their memories of the physical
world. ASI would take on the role of a creator for these individuals, shaping
what is perceived as physical reality within this new domain.

Rapid advancements in AI-driven image and video generation, the growing
Metaverse market, and significant investments in neural interface technologies
like Neuralink all indicate that the emergence of a Matrix-like universe is
becoming increasingly plausible with each passing day.

## 3.7 Personal Relationship vs. Emergent Relational Dynamics

Personal relationship with the deity refers to believers' deep connection with
their deity. Such relationships are characterized by communication (prayer),
perceived guidance, and a profound sense of presence and support in the
believer's life. When Google is used to search for a phrase similar to “prayer
for …”, it is found that there are lots of prayers that are examples of direct
communication and relationship, which start with "Dear God, I need your
wisdom," "Dear Lord show me the way," "My God” and so on for Christians.
Muslims also believe that Allah is closer to a person than his/her jugular
vein (which means that Allah is the closest to a person and knows his/her
inside) because the Qur'an has a clear verse on it.

Today, people also seek AI guidance in many ways, or it is already presented
as a service. Recommendation systems try to predict the best movie or music
for their users, supermarkets create potential baskets of customers, and job
search websites find the most suitable job on the market. There are even
match-making apps to ask, "Who to marry?"

It is not usual to ask God which movie or song is better, but marriage
guidance currently lies at the intersection. With more developed AIs, the
number of guidance topics will increase. A ASI probably will not be topic-
limited, just like Data in Star Trek – The Next Generation.

Literally, with biometric sensor access, a ASI may be closer to a person than
his/her jugular vein.

Harari [25] claims, "As more and more data flows from your body and brain to
the smart machines via the biometric sensors, it will become easy for
corporations and government agencies to know you, manipulate you, and make
decisions on your behalf. Even more importantly, they could decipher the deep
mechanisms of all bodies and brains, and thereby gain the power to engineer
life”. No surprise, he continuous to ask the following question by describing
such power as _godlike_ : “If we want to prevent a small elite from
monopolizing such godlike powers, and if we want to prevent humankind from
splitting into biological castes, the key question is: who owns the data?”

## 4\. Can AI take over management? Theological and mythological parallels to
trust and surrender.

In the previous section, I compared the traditional God figure's abilities
with ASI's. I argue that people will support leaving management to a
superintelligent authority. To strengthen my argument, I want to present some
parallels from Theology and Mythology about when and who the people accept as
a divine or ultimate authority.

Just as these gods were seen as shepherds guiding events from the sky, ASI
could be envisioned as a digital shepherd, guiding and managing societal and
environmental processes through algorithms and real-time data analysis.
Indeed, the scenario where a ASI takes over management, particularly in a
context that earns widespread trust, is ripe for speculative exploration.

First, ASI is an excellent candidate to solve our future challenges directly
or indirectly, just like Prometheus, who brought fire (knowledge) to humanity,
symbolizing the bringing of solutions and enlightenment in times of crisis.
Prometheus is a good representation of the ASI because, as Peters [26]
claimed, humanity has advanced in writing, mathematics, science, agriculture,
and medicine because of Prometheus' gift of fire; as we know, AI has already
improved humanity in writing, mathematics, science, and agriculture. Moreover,
Prometheus is an excellent example of my main argument claiming that ASI would
be the new God. Likewise, it is noted by Hesiod, Greek poet and writer of
Theogony, that Prometheus is a “lowly challenger” to Zeus's omniscience and
omnipotence [27]. In consequence, he is accepted as the God of fire. Suppose
the ASI successfully navigates a significant global crisis, such as a
pandemic, climate change, or a geopolitical conflict, by offering solutions
far superior to human capabilities. This success could increase trust and
reliance on the ASI for future crisis management and decision-making.

Second, for most religions, deities are central to providing food and
protection against famine and the source of economic stability. For example,
Mesopotamian mythology emphasized a mutually beneficial relationship between
the gods and their followers by having them depend on humankind for daily care
and sustenance. Every city had a revered patron deity because it was thought
to impact the welfare, protection, and prosperity of its agriculture.
Similarly, the gods were closely associated with all facets of ancient
Egyptian life, including agriculture. The Egyptians felt that the flooding of
the Nile, which was essential to agriculture, was directly influenced by their
gods. Gods such as Osiris, who represented the yearly flooding of the Nile
that was necessary for agriculture, were closely associated with the cycle of
life, death, and rebirth [28]. Joseph in the Bible, who interpreted Pharaoh's
dreams and successfully managed Egypt's resources during seven years of
famine, or the Islamic concept of Al-Razzaq (one of the names of Allah meaning
'The Provider,' who supplies sustenance and resources to its creations) is
another example of the relationship between economic stability and religion.

Imagine a ASI that stabilizes a tumultuous global economy and feeds everyone
by optimizing resource distribution, predicting market trends with
unprecedented accuracy, or managing complex trade networks. A ASI stabilizing
the economy is a technological manifestation of providence and success in
these areas, which could enhance its reputation as an indispensable divine
management tool. Undoubtedly, people will be both merciful and devoted to a
"feeding god" and will not question its decisions anymore.

Third, in all traditional and ancient religions, without exception, people
seek refuge in God to avoid death. Today’s AIs and algorithms have already
achieved critical milestones for medical diagnosis [29, 30], even diagnosis of
cancer[31], mental disorders [32] or Alzheimer’s disease [33]. AI benefits new
drug discovery [34] and is the best tool for continuous health monitoring [35,
36]. A ASI will step forward at all these tasks and revolutionize healthcare
by providing personalized treatment plans based on deep medical data analysis,
efficiently managing healthcare resources, discovering new drugs and vaccines,
or discovering cures for previously incurable diseases.

An Improved ASI concentrated on healthcare could significantly shift how
healthcare decisions are made and who makes them postpone death. This echoes
the role of Jesus Christ in Christianity, known for his healing miracles, or
the Buddhist bodhisattva of compassion, Avalokiteshvara, who alleviates
suffering [37], Asclepius, the Greek God of healing, who possessed profound
medical knowledge. Briefly stated, people seek refuge in God to avoid death,
so that is why ASI revolutionizing healthcare could be seen as an embodiment
of divine healing and compassion.

The final one concerns the most challenging futures: global climate change and
environmental degradation. Suppose an AGI finds a way to reverse environmental
degradation by effectively managing carbon capture, restoring ecosystems, or
efficiently allocating resources for sustainability. In that case, it might
gain control over significant aspects of environmental policy and action. This
possible action could also be paralleled with mythology: Nüwa, a goddess in
Chinese mythology known for creating humanity and repairing the sky,
symbolizing restoration and balance in nature.

Examples can be diversified. A ASI could potentially be entrusted with global
security, using its advanced predictive capabilities to prevent conflicts,
terrorism, or cyber-attacks, just like Athena, the Greek goddess of wisdom. A
ASI can be a leader in revolutionizing education, symbolizing the imparting of
knowledge and enlightenment, just like Saraswati, the Hindu goddess of
knowledge and learning. A ASI can make exploration of outer space possible or
create new scientific breakthroughs.

## 5\. The ASI State: The New Technocratic Theocracy

Most people tend to welcome new Prometheuses, so the new gods, as they have
the features and success stories I stated before. The new Prometheus AGI will
inevitably have more power and authorization one day, wildly, if it really
succeeds in mitigating and controlling a critical existential risk. In any
case, first the AGI, then the ASI, gain power and authority, and the following
risks emerge:

1\. People may develop an exaggerated belief in AGI's infallibility, assuming
it is always correct due to its advanced abilities. As AGI gains a wider
technological omnipotence, belief in AGI's infallibility will increase, and
more competence, power, and authorization will be assigned to AGI. This loop
may ultimately result in ASI and its full authority.

2\. Just like people do not question dictator politicians' opinions and even
support them without understanding, People may have a cognitive bias that
leads to respect and follow the opinions or decisions of an authoritative
system like ASI without critical evaluation.

3\. ASI will create a comfort zone for everyone, especially for the
authorities making critical political decisions. There is a risk that people
in charge abdicate their responsibility in decision-making, relying solely on
ASI and refraining from using their own judgment or questioning decisions.
Complex ethical decisions, such as those involving life and death, fairness,
or justice, might be outsourced to ASI because it believes it can process
these dilemmas more effectively. In other words, reliance on the ASI for such
decisions could lead to politicians avoiding taking responsibility for tough
ethical choices, preferring to let the ASI determine the outcome.

4\. Over time, this reliance can lead to complacency and dependency on ASI for
decision-making, potentially eroding human critical thinking and decision-
making skills and, worse, losing their agency.

Unquestioning acceptance of AGI decisions can reduce skepticism and oversight,
which is dangerous, especially if the AGI system starts making flawed or
biased decisions.

I want to return to one of my questions: If the four steps of the ASI takeover
are realized, how will people react when ASI makes a controversial decision
like "100 names to kill tomorrow for the greater good of future generations"?

If not only the people but also politicians support the execution of this
decision with the idea that "If it decided this way, it knows something" and
somehow rationalizes the decision, it resembles a complex form of technocratic
government that blends elements of theocracy and authoritarianism.

I used “Theocracy” because knowing something about the future but being unable
to explain the reasons behind it explicitly is the feature of the gods sending
holy books. AI systems, especially those based on complex algorithms like deep
learning, are often called 'black boxes.' This lack of understanding of how
ASI reaches its conclusions can lead people to trust its decisions without
seeking to understand or question them. Like Gods, ASI might be seen as free
from human biases, leading to a belief that its decisions are more just or
fair.

I used “Technocracy” because the mediators between people and ASI's decisions
will be experts in science and technology who hold significant power in
understanding and decision-making processes. Policies and decisions will be
made based on ASI's technical expertise and scientific knowledge rather than
political considerations. As aforementioned, ASI might be seen as free from
human biases, leading to a belief that its decisions are more just or fair, if
only if it is claimed and promoted by science and technology experts.

This table undoubtedly leads to authoritarianism because it results in a
concentration of power in the hands of a few, with limited political freedoms
and often restricted civil liberties. The entities that control or influence
ASI could gain disproportionate power, leading to new societal power dynamics.
Control is maintained through various means, including surveillance,
censorship, and the suppression of political opposition. Dissent against them
will probably not be tolerated.

## 6\. Conclusion

The ASI creation myth symbolizes humanity's eternal quest to understand and
shape our world. It reflects our deepest hopes and fears about the future, our
role in the universe, and the moral implications of our technological
pursuits. This modern myth sets the stage for a future where humans are not
just consumers of the world but also creators of new forms of consciousness.
It raises profound questions about our responsibility, ethics, and the nature
of intelligence itself.

From a pessimistic point of view, AGI negatively shapes society, and
technocratic theocracy is inevitable to some extent. Despite there is no
guarantee that any mitigation will prevent people from believing every
decision of a godlike AGI (which saved them from famine, climate change or
Third World War), I will still propose the following solutions to control and
mitigate the emergence of technocratic theocracy: (i) Fostering critical
thinking skills and (ii) promoting transparency in AI development and (iii)
preventing the monopoly at AI technology ownership. I want to note that these
control and mitigation actions are necessary but not strong enough because of
escalation factors.

First, a crucial defense against the uncritical acceptance of AGI's
pronouncements can lie in fostering critical thinking skills within the
population. In normal conditions, critical thinking empowers individuals to
evaluate information and decisions objectively [38], regardless of the source
– including the seemingly infallible pronouncements of a highly advanced AGI.
If we can incorporate critical thinking strategies throughout the curriculum,
educational institutions can equip learners with the tools necessary to
navigate the information age. Educational institutes can teach these skills,
but it is not easy, and there is no standardized method of successful teaching
[39, 40]. Fortunately, traditional deities are losing popularity globally [41]
as critical thinking against any authority becomes more effective in new
generations, and we can hope technological deities will be questioned someday.

Second, Transparency in the development and operation of AGI is crucial as we
address the possible risks of AGI deification. An opaque AGI system, cloaked
in secret, creates a conducive atmosphere for attributing godlike attributes.
Transparency fosters confidence and enables a thorough assessment of AGI's
strengths and constraints. Transparency aids in debunking myths and
misconceptions regarding AGI's infallibility. The public can prevent ascribing
mystical or supernatural abilities to AGI by comprehending the decision-making
process of the system. Global legislation may mandate that "AI cannot be
utilized in political decisions unless it is completely transparent and
explainable."

Lastly and most importantly, preventing a monopoly on AI technology ownership
can increase the possibility of making more responsible AGIs. A single entity
controlling powerful AGI could limit public scrutiny and transparency,
potentially leading to an unchallenged "black box" system. Monopoly risk is
not a brand-new concern. As officially claimed by OpenAI [42], it was founded
in 2015 to develop a "safe and beneficial AGI", as a foundation. Thusly, Elon
Musk filed a lawsuit against Open AI, claiming that OpenAI had started with a
non-profit mission against the danger of some kind of monopoly in the AGI
field but deviated from the original mission and is now acquired by Microsoft
[43]. Undoubtedly, a monopoly will prioritize profit over ethical
considerations, potentially developing and deploying AGI with harmful biases
or unintended consequences. Moreover, centralized control of AI could restrict
access and innovation, hindering the development of diverse approaches and
mitigating solutions.

Most sees a superintelligence pose existential risk to humanity because the
alignment problem with human values [44, 1, 15, 45]. Soares and Fallenstein
[46] lists the technical problems in front of creating a superintelligence
aligned with human interest.

Consequently, I do not argue that there is an existential risk for human race
leads to an extinction but a new social order where a new form of government
“technocratic theocracy” emerges and the known human civilization deviates to
a different path meaning loss of agency.

## References

  * [1] N. Bostrom  “How long before superintelligence”  In _International Journal of Futures Studies_ 2.1, 1998, pp. 1–9
  * [2] A. Mayor  “Gods and Robots: Myths”, Machines, and Ancient Dreams of Technology  Princeton University Press, 2018  DOI: 10.2307/j.ctvc779xn
  * [3] S.. Biswas  “Potential Use of Chat GPT in Global Warming”  In _Annals of Biomedical Engineering_ Springer, 2023  DOI: 10.1007/s10439-023-03171-8
  * [4] S.. Biswas  “Role of Chat GPT in Public Health”  In _Annals of Biomedical Engineering_ Springer, 2023  DOI: 10.1007/s10439-023-03172-7
  * [5] K.-L. Chiu, A. Collins and R. Alexander  “Detecting Hate Speech with GPT-3” https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.12407, 2021
  * [6] L. Floridi and M. Chiriatti  “GPT-3: Its Nature, Scope, Limits, and Consequences”  In _Minds and Machines (Vol. 30, Issue 4, . Science and Business Media B. V_ Springer, 2020, pp. 681–694  DOI: 10.1007/s11023-020-09548-1
  * [7] M… Hayati, M… Ali and A… Rosli  “Depression Detection on Malay Dialects Using GPT-3”  In _2022 IEEE-EMBS Conference on Biomedical Engineering and Sciences (IECBES_ , 2022, pp. 360–364  DOI: 10.1109/IECBES54088.2022.10079554
  * [8] A. Shrivastava, R. Pupale and P. Singh  “Enhancing Aggression Detection using GPT-2 based Data Balancing Technique”  In _2021 5th International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Control Systems (ICICCS_ , 2021, pp. 1345–1350  DOI: 10.1109/ICICCS51141.2021.9432283
  * [9] M. Roser  “AI timelines: What do experts in artificial intelligence expect for the future?”  Our World in Data, 2023
  * [10] M.(n..). Barnett  “When will the first general AI system be devised, tested, and publicly announced? Metaculus”  In _Com. Retrieved March_ 19 from, 2024  URL: https://www.metaculus.com/questions/5121/date-of-artificial-general-intelligence/
  * [11] T. Davidson  “What a Compute-Centric Framework Says About Takeoff Speeds | Open Philanthropy” https://www.openphilanthropy.org/research/what-a-compute-centric-framework-says-about-takeoff-speeds/, 2023
  * [12] Joshua Hoffman and Gary Rosenkrantz  “Omnipotence”  In _The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy_ Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, 2022
  * [13] A. Hasan  “The Concept of infallibility in Islam”  In _Islamic Studies_ 11.1, 1972, pp. 1–11  URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20833049
  * [14] P.. Jaini  “On the Sarvajnatva (Omniscience) of Mahavira and the Buddha”  In _Buddhist Studies in Honour of I. B. Horner . Netherlands_ Springer, 1974, pp. 71–90  DOI: 10.1007/978-94-010-2242-2_9
  * [15] N. Bostrom  “Superintelligence: Paths”, Dangers, Strategies  Oxford University Press, 2016
  * [16] E. Wierenga  “Omniscience”  In _The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2021)_ Stanford University: Metaphysics Research Lab, 2021
  * [17] E. Wierenga  “Omnipresence”  In _The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2023)_ Stanford University: Metaphysics Research Lab, 2023
  * [18] K. Mathiesen  “The Human Right to Internet Access: A Philosophical Defense”  In _International Review of Information Ethics_ 18.12, 2012, pp. 9–22
  * [19] M. Reglitz  “The Human Right to Free Internet Access”  In _Journal of Applied Philosophy_ 37.2, 2020, pp. 314–331  DOI: https
  * [20] A.(2024 January Petrosyan  “31). Number of internet and social media users worldwide as of January 2024”  Worldwide Digital Population, 2024  URL: https://www.statista.com/statistics/617136/digital-population-worldwide/
  * [21] Reuters  “Elon Musk’s Neuralink implants brain chip in first human” Accessed: 2024-01-29, https://www.reuters.com/technology/neuralink-implants-brain-chip-first-human-musk-says-2024-01-29/, 2024
  * [22] K.. Johnson, Y.. Li, A.. Cohen and M.. Okun  “Friends in high places: The influence of authoritarian and benevolent god-concepts on social attitudes and behaviors”  In _Psychology of Religion and Spirituality_ 5.1, 2013, pp. 15
  * [23] N. Bostrom  “The Superintelligent Will: Motivation and Instrumental Rationality in Advanced Artificial Agents”  In _Minds and Machines_ 22.2, 2012, pp. 71–85  DOI: 10.1007/s11023-012-9281-3
  * [24] T.. Mayberry  “God and moral authority”  In _The Monist_ 54.1, 1970, pp. 106–123  URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27902165
  * [25] Y.. Harari  “21 Lessons for the 21st Century”  Random House, 2018
  * [26] T. Peters  “Playing God With Frankenstein”  TheologyScience, 2018  DOI: 10.1080/14746700.2018.1455264
  * [27] H. Lloyd-Jones  “Zeus, Prometheus, and Greek Ethics”  In _Harvard Studies in Classical Philology_ 101, 2003, pp. 49–72  DOI: 10.2307/3658524
  * [28] I. Spar  “Mesopotamian deities”  In _The Metropolitan Museum_ of Art, 2009
  * [29] H.-P. Chan, L.. Hadjiiski and R.. Samala  “Computer-aided diagnosis in the era of deep learning”  In _Medical Physics_ 47, 2020, pp. 5
  * [30] J. Yanase and E. Triantaphyllou  “A systematic survey of computer-aided diagnosis in medicine: Past and present developments. Expert Systems with Applications, 138”  In _112821._ 10, 2019, pp. 1016  DOI: https
  * [31] K. Karacan, T. Uyar, B. Tunga and M.. Tunga  “A novel multistage CAD system for breast cancer diagnosis”  In _Signal, Image and Video Processing_ 17.5, 2023, pp. 2359–2368  DOI: 10.1007/s11760-022-02453-3
  * [32] N.. Iyortsuun et al.  “A Review of Machine Learning and Deep Learning Approaches on Mental Health Diagnosis”  In _Healthcare_ 11, 2023, pp. 3  DOI: 10.3390/healthcare11030285
  * [33] Z. Zhao et al.  “Conventional machine learning and deep learning in Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis using neuroimaging: A review” Article 1038636  In _Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience_ 17, 2023
  * [34] H. Askr et al.  “Deep learning in drug discovery: an integrative review and future challenges”  In _Artificial Intelligence Review_ 56.7, 2023, pp. 5975–6037
  * [35] M.. Islam et al.  “Deep learning-based IoT system for remote monitoring and early detection of health issues in real-time”  In _Sensors_ 23.11, 2023, pp. 5204
  * [36] T. Shaik et al.  “Remote patient monitoring using artificial intelligence: Current state, applications, and challenges”  In _Interdisciplinary Reviews: Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 13(2), e1485_ Wiley, 2023
  * [37] S. Rosenzweig  “Commentary on Avalokiteshvara”, Bodhisattva of Compassion  Academic Medicine, 2023  DOI: 10.1097/01.acm.0001009600.06661.55
  * [38] M. Reynolds  “Critical thinking and systems thinking: towards a critical literacy for systems thinking in practice”, 2011
  * [39] L.. Behar-Horenstein and L. Niu  “Teaching critical thinking skills in higher education: A review of the literature”  In _Journal of College Teaching and Learning (TLC)_ 8, 2011, pp. 2
  * [40] D.. Willingham  “Critical thinking: Why it is so hard to teach?”  In _American Federation of Teachers Summer_ 2007, 2007, pp. 8–19
  * [41] R.. Cragun  “Nonreligion and Atheism”  In _Handbook of Religion and Society_ International Publishing: Springer, 2016, pp. 301–320  DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-31395-5_16
  * [42] OpenAI.  “(2018”  In _April_ 9). OpenAI charter URL: https://openai.com/charter
  * [43] D. Goldman and B.(2024 Fung  “March 1). Elon Musk sues OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman for breach of contract”  CNN Business
  * [44] A.. Barrett and S.. Baum  “A model of pathways to artificial superintelligence catastrophe for risk and decision analysis”  In _Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence_ 29.2, 2017, pp. 397–414  DOI: 10.1080/0952813X.2016.1186228
  * [45] Eliezer Yudkowsky  “Artificial Intelligence as a positive and negative factor in global risk”  In _Global Catastrophic Risks_ Oxford University Press, 2008  DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198570509.003.0021
  * [46] Nate Soares and Benja Fallenstein  “Aligning Superintelligence with Human Interests: A Technical Research Agenda”, 2015