--- 

http://www.rushkoff.com/essay/playinggod.html

Playing God
*The Net and Fundamentalism*

I saw a bumper sticker on a minivan in Wisconsin last week that read: 
"In case of rapture, this car will be empty!" I suppose that means 
that 
my car shall remain occupied. But I am less troubled by the supposed 
inevitability of my damnation than the delight with which those 
Milwaukee passengers seemed to be anticipating Armageddon. They're 
looking forward to the apocalypse!

This is what happens when people take the stories their religions 
offer 
a bit too literally. Sure enough, the narratives of the Bible, like 
those of many other religious texts, tell a version of the history of 
the human race-from God's creation of the universe, through the life 
and 
death of a messiah, right on to the end of everything and the 
tallying 
of the score. In that paradigm, if you subscribe to the right story 
and 
follow the rules, all you have to do is hang in there and wait for 
the 
ending, and you'll be saved. Best of all, the real quandaries of 
human 
existence-questions such as where do we come from, what is the right 
way 
to live, and where do we go when we die-are all preordained. A closed 
book.

But these kinds of stories were developed back before the days of 
interactive media. When you're part of a captive, passive audience 
without keyboards or even joysticks, the only way out of a story is 
to 
wait. You have to accept the storyteller's solution because it's the 
only one being told in your tribe-either that, or reject the story 
altogether and risk damnation. This was the sad fate of poor infidels 
like me until pretty recently. Thanks to the Internet, we now have a 
way 
out of the story: We can write our own endings.

The interactive medium is, at its core, an invitation to talk back. 
The 
online world is one in which we are entitled to voice our own 
opinions, 
however much they might contradict the status quo. We are challenged 
to 
reflect on the stories we're being told, even create our own 
versions-and our own sacred truths.

What a terrific weapon the Internet gives us against extreme 
fundamentalism. And just in time. We're now facing religion's darkest 
implications, violence done by true believers blindly following the 
unilateral decrees of their leaders. For fundamentalists are simply 
people who insist that their religion's narrative become everyone 
else's 
literal truth.

Interactive media tends to loosen up those fixed narratives by 
allowing 
users to contribute their own ideas to the story. Try giving a sermon 
in 
an AOL chatroom or a list of commandments on the Yahoo! Internet Life 
bulletin boards. The people you're preaching to won't remain silent-
at 
all. The ministers I know who have taken their messages online have 
had 
to reassess their roles as mediators of faith and accept new ones as 
partners in spiritual learning. When religion is practiced on the 
Internet, participants quickly realize that we're all in this 
together.

The Internet undermines the blind obedience of fundamentalism by 
offering alternative points of view, promoting pluralism, and 
encouraging feedback. Not that this concept is all that new. While 
the 
fundamentalist priests of ancient Israel sacrificed animals on the 
altar, those interested in hypertext were sitting around a table 
arguing 
together as they wrote the Talmud. While fundamentalist Muslims were 
declaring their first holy wars, liberals in old Baghdad were sharing 
wine and finding common ground with similarly inclined Christians and 
Jews.

Today the Internet deconstructs the narratives that religions use to 
explain the world, while inviting people from every race and culture 
to 
participate in the conversation. No wonder fundamentalists are upset.

Holy Ghost in the Machine

In this context, the entire personal computing revolution starts to 
look 
like a new sort of spiritual movement. Is it coincidental that these 
technologies were developed in California's Bay Area, the breeding 
ground for alternative spiritual practices? Or that the first easily 
networkable personal computer was conceived by a practicing Buddhist, 
Steve Jobs? And Jobs didn't call it an Apple for nothing. The 
personal 
computer was the forbidden fruit-a way of accessing the Tree of 
Knowledge, and an affront to those who would sequester any 
information 
from the formerly little people. Thanks to the geek, the meek would 
indeed inherit the earth.

In the beginning, however, darkness was on the face of the water. The 
realms of computing and, even more so, networking were unfamiliar 
turf. 
They were hard to navigate, and harder still to design. It's no 
wonder 
that many Silicon Valley firms were forced to rely on the skills of 
many 
strange young members of the counterculture, rebels who-like Moses, 
Buddha, Jesus, and the Prophet Mohammed-saw a new and radically 
different way of bringing people together to understand the world.

Those of us lucky enough to get online in the early years were struck 
by 
how plastic, fluid, and malleable the digital world could be. Online 
communities have no real form-they are the ever-changing consensus 
reality of their members. One's value in an interactive conversation 
is 
not his or her ability to listen and obey, but the capacity to hear, 
process, and then express. The interactive universe does not exist 
without the active participation of its people-and this participation 
is 
the ongoing act of creation itself. Talk about playing God.

 From Evolution to Emergence

There are a few faiths in which congregants are invited to 
participate 
in the creation and interpretation of the underlying narrative. 
Certain 
Jewish sects spurn answers in favor of more questions and 
interpretation; Quakers enjoy a dogma-free, town-meeting-style 
Sabbath. 
Most religious traditions, though, simply treat their believers as a 
"mass" who must depend on priests or ministers for access to the 
"story." But just as the Internet has led patients to information 
about 
alternative medical treatments (often against doctor's orders), it 
has 
given congregants something in the spiritual realm that is very rare-
the 
ability to find alternative stories about who we are, who made us, 
and why.

More important than any one story we may have discovered or written, 
the 
experience of sifting through them all and writing our own has 
changed 
our relationship to religion, perhaps forever. The Internet is 
anathema 
to unitary narrative. If you want to understand life only as a story 
etched in stone, you had better stay away.

Every early culture composed stories-myths-to explain the basic facts 
of 
existence. For centuries, we have understood our world-even our 
sciences-as being somehow authored: that things were set in motion by 
someone or something. We cling to the belief that our existence 
proceeds 
by design. That's why Darwin's theory of evolution was such a threat 
to 
our narrative understanding of the world, and why creationists resist 
its implications to this day. But even those of us who believe in 
evolution have been able to impose a kind of narrative on top of it 
in 
which we imagine matter and life to be groping steadily and 
consciously 
toward complexity, with evolution itself as the agent of that grand 
authorial entity we dearly hope exists.

Now our computers are forcing us to entertain new, even less linear 
models for why things happen. One of these models, described in 
Steven 
Johnson's new book, Emergence, explores the way everything from ant 
colonies to ancient cities finds its order. It turns out that queen 
ants 
issue no decrees, and ancient cities still in existence today had no 
official planners. The necessary preconditions must exist, but it now 
appears that life, organisms, communities, and order arise-emerge, in 
other words-from the bottom up. There is no central story, yet there 
is 
radical change and something that, if it isn't intelligence, has 
often 
been mistaken for it.

And what is the chief prerequisite for emergence to occur? You 
guessed 
it: networking. Interconnectivity is what allows an "it" to become a 
"they." Instead of acting on its own, each atom, molecule, cell, 
organism, or community can act as part of a larger complex-a 
networked 
being.

 From Sheep to Shepherds

Almost anyone who has been online has seen evidence of emergent 
behavior. Just watch the way communities form around reviewers on 
Amazon.com, or the way opinions pile on to discussions at Slashdot, 
or 
the way fan Web sites spring up about the latest sci-fi movie.

Consider what the Net has done to television. The current TV season 
is 
littered with so-called reality shows. We're fed up with authored 
stories; we'd rather see programs that are authored by their 
participants: real people (for the most part) in unscripted (for the 
most part) situations.

This is because we no longer think of ourselves as actors working 
from a 
script, but as cocreators, responsible for the collective development 
of 
our world. The experience of democracy, free markets, free speech, 
and 
an interactive media space has made us reluctant to live by decree. 
Fundamentalism-the notion that our world is completely ordained, and 
that our job is simply to follow the rules-does not jibe with our 
newfound experience of collective will.

This doesn't mean that God needn't exist-just that we may be more 
partnered with the Almighty than we at first presumed. Narrative is 
not 
the enemy, as long as we understand that any given narrative is not 
more 
important than any other. Thanks to the interconnected nature of the 
Net, that doesn't mean all narratives are equally obscure, but rather 
that all narratives are equally vital. We live in a universe where a 
butterfly's wing-flaps can cause a hurricane halfway around the 
world, a 
universe where a couple of loose cannons in the Middle East can 
create 
two of the world's most practiced religions. Every time we 
participate 
in the ongoing reality creation of the Net, we shape our world in 
ways 
we can't begin to understand.

The Internet teaches us to see the value of diversity and plurality. 
All 
the opinions of all the people matter. Fundamentalism teaches that 
there 
is only one path, one story, and one author. Whether they are 
attacking 
the free market, women's rights activists, civil libertarians, or 
homosexuals, and whether they are using purchased airwaves or 
hijacked 
airplanes, such fundamentalists are fighting a losing battle.

For we are the network, and we will include them-which is how we will 
win.

END

--- End forwarded message ---







------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to