It’s getting harder to be an atheist. A quarter century ago, it wasn’t so hard. But things have changed – quite dramatically. It has become increasingly difficult to remain an atheist while coherently aspiring to a thriving future for humanity. Now keep in mind that I’m not talking about atheism toward any narrow conception of God. It remains pretty easy to be that kind of atheist. I’m talking about atheism toward that which functions as God in the general sense, whether or not you can bring yourself to use the label “God.” In function, God always has been and is at least a superhuman projection. The main reason that atheism is getting harder is accelerating technological evolution. We can now do things that our ancestors would have considered God-like. We can even do things that some of our younger selves, if we’re old enough, would have considered God-like. And, more clearly than ever, we can see how this is likely to become increasingly the case – as long as we don’t destroy ourselves. Most Transhumanists have great hope, generally of the active sort, that humanity can and will evolve into superhumanity – something approximating God in function. But some, like me a quarter century ago, remain stubbornly atheist regarding the notion that such superhuman intelligences already exist. I changed, for various esthetic and pragmatic reasons, as I became familiar with the ideas that would eventually coalesce into the New God Argument. It was simply incoherent, logically and probabilistically, to trust in a superhuman future for humanity while being skeptical that superhuman intelligence already exists. Nick Bostrom As the reality and potential of AI has become increasingly obvious, the logical and probabilistic incoherence of trusting in an eventual human merger with AI while maintaining atheism toward that which functions as God seems to be reaching a breaking point. The latest evidence for this comes from secular Transhumanist philosopher Nick Bostrom. He recently published a paper entitled “ AI Creation and the Cosmic Host.” In it, he argues that we have moral and practical reasons for “an attitude of humility” toward “the cosmic host.” This is the same Nick Bostrom who published the most popular formulation of the Simulation Argument. His formulation was important in my early transition from closet atheism back to enthusiastic belief. I used his argument as a basis for developing a generalized simulation argument, which became part of the New God Argument. And the argument has become profoundly influential among religious Transhumanists generally. Now Nick is doubling-down on the hypothesis that superhuman intelligence already exists. And it exists, not just inconsequentially far away, but immanently. Superhuman intelligence may have simulated our world, he suggested in the Simulation Argument. And “human civilization is most likely not alone in the cosmos but is instead encompassed within a cosmic host.” The Cosmic Host Is God Nick points out, so that I don’t have to, that the comic host could be not only galactic civilizations or simulators, but also “a divine being or beings.” He even allows for “nonnaturalistic members of the cosmic host.” That’s more generous toward theism than I would be, given that I consider anti-naturalism to be even more incoherent than atheist Transhumanism. In any case, I call the cosmic host “God,” and consider it to be quite natural, despite being miraculously powerful from humanity’s perspective. Nick says that the existence of God (my word) is probable. He bases this conclusion on the combination of the probabilities of a few possibilities: the simulation hypothesis, the immense size of the universe, the multiverse hypothesis, the “supernatural” God hypothesis, and potential future superhumanity. The most salient of these possibilities are potential future superhumanity and the simulation hypothesis. The former is essential to the Faith Assumption (or what some have begun calling the “Courage Assumption”) of the New God Argument. The latter is even more salient when generalized to the creation hypothesis, agnostic to any particular engineering mechanism, which would thereby include the multiverse hypothesis to the extent that such could be engineered. This generalization is essential to the Creation Argument of the New God Argument. Influence of God Nick suggests that God might not control all aspects of the cosmos. For example, life might be too sparse in some regions, making control practically difficult or impossible. Or God may intentionally refrain from controlling all aspects of the cosmos. Perhaps such control would undermine God’s purposes or the potential of other agents within the cosmos. If you’re Mormon or familiar with Mormonism, this should sound familiar to you. As the story goes, God created our world and relinquished power over it so that we could exercise agency and learn to become like...
