Chapter 1: The Debate on "Playing God"

It’s not uncommon to encounter someone who tries to undermine your positive proposals by claiming, “We shouldn’t pursue that, no matter how beneficial it appears, because it feels like we’re ‘playing god.’” This kind of remark often halts meaningful discussion. However, let’s delve deeper into this concept and consider whether it is indeed wrong to “play god.” Perhaps, we ought to embrace this role.

Consider the current state of our existence. Do you genuinely believe that our universe or multiverse is in an acceptable condition? Most likely not. Just take a moment to reflect on the countless atrocities occurring every minute on our planet. Moreover, it’s reasonable to assume that similar suffering exists on countless other Earth-like planets scattered throughout the universe.

If a conscious, all-knowing, and all-powerful entity truly exists but has allowed such a catastrophe to unfold, then it could be viewed as either profoundly indifferent or unimaginably cruel. Even if we accept the premise of this being’s existence, shouldn’t we feel a moral obligation to intervene and ameliorate this dire situation?

If this malevolent or apathetic entity does indeed exist, it would be morally reprehensible to leave the fate of the world solely in their hands, wouldn’t it? Shouldn’t we take control and strive to improve our surroundings for the better?

Power is essential for morality. It is impossible to enact positive change without it. One must possess power and overcome adversities; otherwise, the ramifications can be devastating. It is crucial for morally upright individuals to recognize this necessity and seek as much power as possible to effect positive change. The alternative is simply too dreadful to contemplate.

The worst-case scenario is that malevolent forces could wreak havoc, turning existence into a nightmarish experience when we could potentially create a “near utopia” in the future. Isn’t it conceivable that within a few thousand years, humanity could develop advanced technologies that could safely and easily provide all sentient beings with basic necessities while allowing them to experience only consensual sensations?

Imagine a future where humans could create sophisticated technology capable of safely altering brain chemistry to produce any desired sensation with a simple push of a button. There are already strides being made in this area with techniques like Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation.

Furthermore, even a carnivorous diet could be ethically sourced with advanced technology. We could witness the rise of lab-grown meat, where animals are only consumed after living out their natural lifespans. While it may not seem economically viable at this moment, the universe is filled with resources, making this scenario plausible in the future.

We should adopt a mindset focused on creativity and problem-solving rather than turning our circumstances into a “misfortune contest,” as some might prefer. Why belittle others for their struggles when we could unite our efforts to address all issues as swiftly as possible?

Why should we shy away from realizing our full moral capacity simply because it might resemble “playing god”? If such a being exists, their capability to govern is clearly questionable, and we have a moral duty to take charge and improve the situation, don’t we?

The first video, "Radiolab Podcast - Playing God," explores the ethical implications of humanity's role in shaping existence and the responsibilities that come with power.

The second video, "Why Your Brain Didn't Like Playing The Last of Us 2 | Screen Therapy," discusses the psychological impact of narrative choices and the moral dilemmas faced by individuals in interactive storytelling.