Brigid Delaney, author of five books including The Seeker and the Sage, argues that the collective numbness toward AI's potential to cause human extinction stems from a deeper nihilism, and the way out lies not in technology but in redefining human flourishing through direct relationships with nature, human connection, and critical thinking.
The Overwhelming Polycrisis
In a recent column, Delaney recounts a coffee meeting with an old friend, a father of 20 years, who confessed, "I wish I never had children." When asked why, he replied simply, "AI." The friend was referring to the news that week that AI could "kill all humans" within the next 10 years. Delaney notes that such conversations are increasingly common, yet they are met with a glazed indifference, as if the polycrisis—climate change, economic instability, and technological threats—has become ambient, like pollution, each particle carrying its own doomsday scenario.
This numbness, Delaney suggests, may be the result of nearly 20 years of smartphones and social media, which have shortened attention spans and diminished the capacity for collective action through individualized algorithms. It could also stem from the immense political power of tech companies, leaving governments and individuals feeling powerless or captured by big tech. Alternatively, the inevitability of technological progress, the "Last Invention," makes resistance seem futile, akin to the Luddites storming the factories.
Returning to First Principles
Delaney proposes two solutions. The first is to wake up. She draws a parallel: if someone broke into your house and tried to murder you, you would fight back. Yet, we greet the news of AI's potential to cause human extinction with indifference. She reminds readers that no one asked for AI, yet it is embedding itself in workplaces and emotional lives—GPT may be the largest provider of mental health services in the US—robbing us of critical thinking and threatening economic and social stability.
The second solution is to return to first principles and articulate the ingredients for human flourishing. Delaney defines flourishing as engaging in the pleasure and pain of working things out for yourself, not having a machine do your critical thinking. It is human-to-human relationships where we care for and nurture each other, not talking to a large language model for 18 hours a day about personal problems. It is having a direct relationship with the natural world, not through a screen, or the natural world destroyed to create more capacity for screen-based existence.
The Path Forward
Delaney concludes that these are all things worth fighting for. There is a place for technology in our world, but when we hear that it could destroy our world, we should wake up, shake off the numb feeling, and start fighting back. The article reflects a growing sentiment that the current trajectory of AI development, coupled with environmental and social crises, demands a proactive, human-centered response rather than passive acceptance.
