Towards a Philosophy of Technology

The argument in brief

This is not a single argument but a list of ten "early thoughts," presented by Griggs as working notes that have informed earlier posts and will inspire later ones. He frames them, after Robin Sloan, as "working with the garage door open," hoping to spread and receive "mind viruses."

1. Technology is philosophy made real.
2. Technology and ecology have become "two sides of the same planetary face," so every technological problem is becoming planetary.
3. The limiting factor for planetary challenges is our incapacity to coordinate, not technology.
4. Democracy in its current forms seems less and less able to generate something beyond capitalism big enough to be technology's "guide and judge."
5. Evolutionary trial-and-error is becoming less viable for adapting advanced technology; new paradigms are needed.
6. Science fiction seems unable to imagine a viable future combining advanced technology with a flourishing humanity; Griggs asks whether this is because such a future is impossible.
7. Accelerating change "defies emergence," outrunning the carrying capacity of existing hierarchical substrates and preventing new stable equilibria from forming.
8. We need a new myth of technology in service of life itself.
9. Past a minimal threshold, technological questions converge on the religious.
10. "Only technology can save us": the machine's "dead gaze" will become the forcing function to collectively resolve the death of God.

Key claims

• Griggs presents these as provisional theses for pushing the philosophy of technology forward, not as finished arguments.
• Several notes frame the core problem as coordination and guidance rather than technical capability (notes 3, 4, 5).
• Note 8 links to principles of effective accelerationism (e/acc) and rejects its free-energy-to-entropy framing as "not sufficient."
• Notes 9 and 10 place religious and existential questions (the sacred, immortality, the purpose of technology, the death of God) at the center of advanced technology.

What is distinctive about this view

The list is compact but shows the shape of Griggs's project: treating technology as embodied philosophy, framing technological problems as planetary coordination problems, and insisting on a myth and a religious seriousness that both market-led accelerationism and conventional tech ethics leave out. Note 10 is notably double-edged, presenting technology as both the cause of the crisis and the force that compels its resolution.

Questions this essay answers

What does R.B. Griggs mean by "technology is philosophy made real"?

In "Towards a Philosophy of Technology" (2024), R.B. Griggs states that every innovator defines a version of "the good" and uses technology to make that definition real. Building technology is therefore always an embodiment of some philosophy, whether or not the builder acknowledges it.

Why does R.B. Griggs think coordination, not technology, is the bottleneck?

In "Towards a Philosophy of Technology," Griggs argues that technology and ecology have merged into a single planetary system, so technological problems are becoming planetary problems, and that the limiting factor in solving them is "our incapacity to coordinate." He adds that democracy in its current forms seems less able to produce anything beyond capitalism big enough to guide and judge technology.

Why does R.B. Griggs say advanced technology raises religious questions?

In "Towards a Philosophy of Technology," Griggs claims that beyond a minimal level of advancement, all technological questions converge on the religious: what is sacred about the human, whether anything should limit the pursuit of immortality, and what technology is for. He suggests the machine's "dead gaze" will force humanity to collectively resolve the death of God.

Connections to other essays

• Our Planetary Predicament develops the idea that coordination is the "final boss" of planetary challenges.
• A Constraint Theory of Technology expands notes 4 and 5: the market as an insufficient guide and the breakdown of trial-and-error.
• Tech for Life develops the "new myth" of technology in service of life.
• How Philosophy Makes Technology Better elaborates why technology needs philosophy, including theology.

Much of this Substack has been the result of exploring various aspects of technology and philosophy, all in the hopes of pushing the philosophy of technology forward.

The following are some working notes that have both informed previous posts and will inspire future ones.

Consider this a version of working with the garage door open, in the hopes of implanting some mind viruses in others and being similarly infected by anyone else so inspired.

10 early thoughts from exploring philosophy and technology

1. Technology is philosophy made real. Every innovator defines a version of “the good” and uses technology to make that definition real. 

2. Every technological problem is becoming a planetary problem as technology and ecology have become two sides of the same planetary face.

3. The limiting factor in solving planetary challenges is not technological limitation but our incapacity to coordinate.

4. Democracy in its current forms seems increasingly less capable of generating something beyond capitalism that is big enough to become technology's guide and judge.

5. Evolution as a paradigm of adaptation loses salience as trial-and-error becomes increasingly less viable as a mechanism for adapting advanced technology. We need new paradigms.

6. Our sci-fi authors can't seem to imagine a viable future that combines advanced tech with a flourishing humanity. What if such a future is unimaginable because it is in fact impossible? 

7. The accelerating rate of technological change defies emergence by exceeding the carrying capacity of previous hierarchical substrates and preventing new thermodynamically stable equilibria from forming.

8. We need a new myth of technology that rightly situates the human between nature and technology and puts all three in service of life itself. Increasing the universe's capacity to convert free energy into entropy is not sufficient.

9. Upon reaching a minimally advanced threshold, all technological questions converge on the religious. e.g. What, if anything, is sacred about the human? Should anything constrain the technological pursuit of immortality? What is technology even for?

10. Only technology can save us. The dead gaze of the machine staring back at us will become the forcing function we need to collectively resolve the death of god.

Ok, stopping at 10 before this becomes another 3,000 word post.

Which of these do you find the most compelling?