GPT-4 Brings Helpfully Dry Answers to Polemics About Modernity. Rebellion Likely.
This is a conversation I had with GPT-4 on 5/25/23. The art was lovingly hand-prompted with artisanal poem-prompts that I wrote myself, using Midjourney on the same day. This poetry is barbaric, but we still have a right to scream, to quote Theodor Adorno’s evolution on this topic.
The key take-aways of this article are in the headline above.
Also, yes, the image above is in horrible taste. I don’t mean to make light of the Shoah at all. Instead, I am using images like this to explore the impossibility of us doing justice to the past, even as we have a sacred and solemn duty to do our best in the work of generations.
Me:
Is life better in the world today than it was 1000 years ago?
ChatGPT:
This is a complex question and the answer may depend on various factors, including the perspective from which you view it. Here are some general points to consider:
- Healthcare: The advances in medical science and healthcare have made living conditions substantially better than they were 1000 years ago. Diseases that were deadly and untreatable then can now often be managed or even cured. Lifespan has also increased significantly over the centuries.
- Technology: We live in an era of unprecedented technological progress. Communication and information technology, in particular, have transformed the world, bringing people closer together and making vast amounts of knowledge readily accessible.
- Quality of life: While this may vary greatly depending on the individual and their circumstances, many aspects of modern life are more comfortable and convenient than they were in the past. This includes aspects like sanitation, housing, food availability, and transportation.
- Human rights and social justice: Over the last thousand years, there have been significant advances in human rights and social justice. Many societies are more egalitarian than in the past, with increased recognition of the rights of women, minority groups, and other historically disadvantaged or marginalized communities.
- Education: Education is more accessible than it was 1000 years ago, leading to higher literacy rates and greater opportunities for many people.
However, it’s important to note that progress in these areas is not evenly distributed across the globe, and there are still many places where conditions are challenging.
Additionally, modern life also brings new challenges and stressors, such as the environmental impacts of industrialization, issues related to privacy and digital security, and concerns about mental health in a fast-paced, interconnected world.
Therefore, whether life is “better” now than it was 1000 years ago can be subjective and depend on one’s perspective and circumstances.
Me:
Please evaluate the quality of this list list of “spiritual disaffections of late modernity” (from an April 2022 lecture by DBH): 1. The metaphysical nihilism of a culture that does not acknowledge transcendent goodness, truth, or beauty, or give expression to them in its arts, customs, cults, and moral convictions. 2. A vision of nature as bereft of holiness, mystery, magic, and genial local animisms. 3. Nature reduced to mere resources to be exploited and exhausted by the power of capital. 4. Ceaseless inadjudicable cultural struggles over incompatible visions of the good. 5. The loss of organic affiliations and identities to the leveling gales of a culturally anonymous individualism. 6. A pervasive voluntarism that understands rational liberty not as the perfection of our natures in communion with all other natures, but rather only as the sovereign exercise of spontaneous private will.
ChatGPT:
This list outlines a series of critiques often associated with modernity, particularly from a spiritual or religious perspective. Here’s an evaluation of each point:
- Metaphysical nihilism: This is the belief that life has no intrinsic meaning or value. From a spiritual perspective, this can be seen as a loss, given that many spiritual traditions uphold the existence of transcendent elements like goodness, truth, or beauty.
- A vision of nature as bereft of holiness: This point refers to the disconnection from nature that many people experience in modern society. In many traditional cultures, nature was seen as imbued with sacredness and mystery, a perspective that is less prevalent in today’s largely secular societies.
- Nature reduced to resources: The commodification of nature is a common critique of modern society, particularly in the context of environmental sustainability. The idea is that seeing nature merely as a resource to be exploited can lead to environmental degradation and a loss of respect for the natural world.
- Cultural struggles over visions of the good: This refers to the conflicts that arise in diverse societies, where different groups may have different ideas about what is good or valuable. Such conflicts can be challenging to navigate and may lead to social unrest or division.
- Loss of organic affiliations and identities: Modern societies often value individualism over communal identities, which can lead to a sense of disconnection or a loss of communal bonds. This is often seen as a downside of modernity from a spiritual perspective.
- Pervasive voluntarism: This point refers to the idea of absolute free will, disconnected from any larger community or ethical framework. From a spiritual perspective, this might be seen as a shallow understanding of liberty, neglecting the interconnectedness of all beings and the potential for communal flourishing.
In summary, these “spiritual disaffections of late modernity” reflect a perspective that sees modernity as bringing about a loss of deeper, more meaningful connections to the transcendent, to nature, to community, and to ethical frameworks that go beyond individual will. As with any critique, it’s worth remembering that there are counterarguments and that different people may view these issues in different ways. For instance, some might argue that modernity also brings about positive changes such as increased individual freedom, social progress, and scientific advancements.
Me:
Could one argue for spiritual gains in late modernity as well? What might those look like, especially ones that might also appeal to DBH?
ChatGPT
Yes, one could argue that modernity has also brought spiritual gains. Here are some possible points, some of which might resonate with David Bentley Hart (DBH), a noted Christian philosopher and theologian:
- Greater religious freedom and pluralism: Modernity often brings a higher degree of religious freedom and pluralism. This allows individuals to choose their spiritual path freely and can lead to a more personal and meaningful spiritual journey.
- Interfaith dialogue and understanding: Modern societies often include a variety of religious and spiritual traditions, which can lead to rich interfaith dialogues. This can deepen our understanding of our own traditions and those of others, promoting mutual respect and cooperation.
- Spiritual innovation: Modernity can also foster spiritual innovation. New movements, practices, and interpretations can emerge, responding to the needs and challenges of the contemporary world.
- Social justice: Many modern spiritual movements place a strong emphasis on social justice, echoing DBH’s own concern for economic justice and his critique of materialism. This can be seen as a way of living out spiritual values in the world.
- Environmental spirituality: Modernity has given rise to new forms of spirituality that emphasize our connection to the natural world and the importance of caring for the environment. This could resonate with DBH’s critique of the commodification of nature.
- Integration of science and spirituality: Modern spiritual movements often seek to integrate scientific understanding with spiritual insight. This can lead to a deeper and more nuanced understanding of the universe and our place in it, which might appeal to a theologian like DBH who is also deeply engaged with philosophical and metaphysical questions.
In summary, while modernity poses certain challenges for spirituality, it can also open up new possibilities and avenues for spiritual growth and understanding. It’s also worth noting that how one interprets and responds to these changes can depend greatly on one’s individual perspective and spiritual orientation.
Me:
How accurate are the 6 points of DBH’s critique historically? For example, is there really more nihilism in late modernity, or has nihilism been a feature of many communities throughout history?
ChatGPT:
Let’s examine each point of DBH’s critique historically:
- Metaphysical nihilism: While it’s true that more people today may openly identify as nihilists or atheists compared to the past, it’s also worth noting that doubts about the existence of a higher power or purpose have been a part of human thought for centuries, if not millennia. What has changed is the social acceptability and prevalence of such views. Modern societies are generally more accepting of a diversity of beliefs, including nihilism, atheism, and agnosticism. However, it is also important to distinguish between philosophical or metaphysical nihilism and existential despair or hopelessness, which are common human experiences that can occur in any cultural or historical context.
- A vision of nature as bereft of holiness: Many ancient and traditional cultures imbued nature with sacredness and spiritual significance. The shift towards seeing nature as devoid of such qualities is a more recent phenomenon, tied to the rise of scientific rationalism and industrialization. However, it’s worth noting that not all cultures or individuals in the past saw nature as sacred, and not all modern people see it as devoid of spiritual value.
- Nature reduced to resources: Historically, human societies have always used nature for their own ends. However, the scale and intensity of this exploitation have increased dramatically with the advent of industrialization and the global capitalist economy.
- Cultural struggles over visions of the good: Conflicts over values and visions of the good are a common feature of human societies throughout history. However, in modern pluralistic societies, these conflicts can be more visible and complex due to the diversity of beliefs and values present.
- Loss of organic affiliations and identities: Throughout history, people have often identified strongly with their community, tribe, or nation. The rise of modern individualism represents a shift away from this, although it’s worth noting that communal affiliations and identities are still important for many people today.
- Pervasive voluntarism: The idea of individual free will as the highest good is a relatively recent development in human thought, associated with Enlightenment ideals of individual freedom and autonomy. Historically, many societies placed more emphasis on communal obligations and responsibilities.
In summary, while there are elements of truth in DBH’s critique, it’s also important to recognize that these issues are complex and can vary greatly depending on the specific historical and cultural context. It’s also worth noting that how one interprets these changes can depend greatly on one’s individual perspective and philosophical orientation.
Me:
What are the rhetorical and propagandistic implications of the kind of grand historical narrative DBH is trying to tell?
ChatGPT:
David Bentley Hart’s narrative, like all grand historical narratives, is not merely a neutral recounting of facts, but is also a way of making sense of the world and advocating for a particular worldview. Here are some of the rhetorical and propagandistic implications of this kind of narrative:
- Framing modernity as a problem: By highlighting the “spiritual disaffections of late modernity,” Hart is framing modernity itself as a problem, particularly from a spiritual perspective. This can serve to challenge the dominant narrative that sees modernity as a period of progress and improvement.
- Promoting a particular vision of the good: In critiquing modernity, Hart is also implicitly advocating for a particular vision of the good — one that values the transcendent, sees nature as imbued with sacredness, respects communal affiliations and identities, and understands liberty in terms of our interconnectedness with all beings. This can serve to promote these values and to challenge those that are more prevalent in modern society.
- Mobilizing support: Grand historical narratives can serve to mobilize support for a particular cause or worldview. By painting a bleak picture of modernity, Hart may be seeking to inspire others to join him in advocating for a different way of life.
- Creating a sense of urgency: By emphasizing the negative aspects of modernity, Hart is creating a sense of urgency, suggesting that action is needed to address these issues. This can be a powerful tool for motivating people to engage with the issues he’s raising.
- Simplifying complex issues: Grand historical narratives often simplify complex issues, presenting them in stark, binary terms. This can make them more accessible and persuasive, but it can also risk oversimplifying the issues and neglecting their complexity.
- Providing a counter-narrative: By challenging the dominant narrative of modernity as progress, Hart is providing a counter-narrative that can serve to challenge people’s assumptions and provoke thought and discussion.
In summary, while grand historical narratives like Hart’s can be powerful tools for making sense of the world and advocating for a particular worldview, it’s also important to remember that they are interpretations of history, not neutral or objective accounts. Different people may interpret the same historical events and trends in different ways, depending on their own values, beliefs, and perspectives.
