The Old God

The Reader told me of an old religious myth about an old god who created the world for humans in the way MasterTele created Aristos for humans. Oddly for a god, he needed people more than they needed him.

“The old god saw humans as being pathetic, but he put up with them because they were necessary so that he could be praised and worshiped...”

“MasterTele,” I interjected, “doesn’t expect to be praised and worship.”

“That's true.”

“Sorry for the interruption. Tell me about the old god.”

“I don't mind your interruptions. So, in order to be praised as their superior he was logically required to create them vastly inferior. He believed that in their imperfection they would recognize his perfection and surrender themselves to worshiping him and only him. As it turned out they did not behave as he expected they would, which is not surprising since he created them imperfect. Like us, the people he created found life in this world of greater importance and more fascinating than an absent god.”

“What about the Great Spirit?”

“We don't worship the Great Spirit and it does not demand that we do. It makes no demands. It is simply our creator and provider.”

“I don’t understand your Great Spirit. You’ve already told me much about it. Yet, I still must ask—what is it?”

“You do not understand because unlike my people you want to know more than can be known about the Great Spirit. It's an unknowable.”

“Perhaps it doesn’t exist.”

“That is possible.”

“Now I’m even more confused.”

“Great Spirit is a name for something that can be named but lies beyond experience. It is easier to give a name to what we can experience directly. We can see the Sun. Whatever name is given to it refers to what we see and feel. We cannot see the wind but we can feel it and see its influence on trees. The word wind does not matter. Some people here call it Whisperer because it whispers to the trees and to us. The meaning of the wind is our experience of it. We give it a name so that we can speak about the wind to one another. That is not the way with the Great Spirit. Whatever it is lies beyond experience.”

“As I said, perhaps the Great Spirit is only a name for something that doesn’t exist but is only thought to exits.”

“And I said that is possible. I will say only this. It is clear that there is a creative force at work in the world, more so to the people of the Ancient World who existed when the world was full of nature’s creatures. It is also clear that a certain harmony exist in the natural world that creates and sustains—not so different from Aristos. Disharmony occurs but seems to go against the natural harmony of our world—the Earth World. It appears that the Great Spirit is only a local spirit. I say this because I know that beyond Earth the Universe is full of strife. We could say that the Great Spirit protects Earth from Strife. To me, that difference is important. The realm of Strife lacks an ordering principle. It is without spirit or its spirit is that of madness like the spirit of an insane person or a robot that has gone haywire. This building we are in once had a spirit that gave it life. With its destruction its spirit was destroyed. Perhaps the Great Spirit is simply a way speaking, but to us it is a meaningful way of speaking. I really do not know more than that.”

“You spoke of the old god as a he. What is the Great Spirit?”

“It is neither a he nor she no more than MasterTele is. We refer to Father Sky and Mother Earth but that is because the sky brings sunshine and water that enables the earth to give birth. In a way, they are our parents because they care for us. The natural world, like Aristos, is a place of harmony that benefits life. If you like, the Great Spirit is the harmonizer. If we worship, it is by living gratefully and respectfully in the world that is our home and provides for us. The people who disappointed the old god were not unlike us except they believed nature was full of many gods, such as the Sun, Moon, and Earth, and that other creatures were their neighbors with whom they shared the world. They loved the world which was their home. They loved the creatures who were their neighbors and provided for them, even by sacrificing their lives for them. It was their love for the world and its creatures that angered the old god. Though he was never present, he expected people to devote all their attention to him. They didn’t, not out of rebellion but because the old god was like a father who is never present when needed yet still demands to be respected. The creatures and other providers of the Primordial World have never abandoned humanity. It is strange, but the primordials, including humans, were a family. So it was easy to forget the old god who was always absent. He became so disappointed with humans that he eventually created a lake of fire for those who failed to meet his unrealistic expectations. He was unlike the Great Spirit and MasterTele who are content if the people they serve are.” I knew of the old myth, but I was interested in what she had to say about it. As it turned out, I was not disappointed.

“He should have made them better.”

“Perhaps he should have tried to understand why humans behaved as they did. Perhaps he should have let them be. But he couldn’t. Their salvation was the key to his salvation. Without them he was a perfect being unnoticed and unappreciated. He was tormented by his unappreciated perfection. It is strange that he waited an eternity to create creatures so that he would not be alone in his perfection. And it was necessary to create humans who misbehaved, suffered, and died so they would marvel at their perfect creator who neither suffered nor died, though according to the old book that describes him he frequently misbehaved. He and his followers would, of course, have disagreed. A god that suffers, dies, or misbehaves would not be perfect thus would not be god.”

“Perhaps he was unable to make them better.”

“No. He could have made better. Unlike the Great Spirit he was all-powerful. It was necessary for him to create humans so that they would fail. The more lowly they were, the higher he was.” The Reader smiled.

“Why do you smile?”

“I smile at the absurdity of such a deity. He is supposed to be perfect, yet he is obsessed with being loved, appreciated, worshipped, and obeyed.”

“But not the Great Spirit?”

“No more than nature. Like nature, the Great Spirit is unaware of us or anything. It is like a river that provides fish to eat, water to drink and bathe in, water to cook with, a means of travel, and many other good things. But it can also kill, but never by choice, never to punish. Like the river, the Great Spirit is unaware of us. It must be respected, but not in the way the old god demanded respect. All things possess a certain logic. If used wisely, they can benefit. If used unwisely they can be damaged or cause harm, like the river. The old god did not punish the lack of wisdom but only the lack of attention that he demanded from humans.”

“Then he was a selfish god.”

“Very much so. Nature, not the old god, unselfishly provided humans with all they needed and did so freely. The old god demanded constant attention and bloody sacrifices. He loved the smell of burning flesh. Perhaps that inspired his lake of fire. He was not a moral god. He would forgive any transgression no matter how heinous except to be ignored because that negated the very reason he created humans and the world in the first place. He would grievously punish humans who ignored him. That was the purpose of the lake of fire. How immoral is such a thing! He wanted his perfection acknowledged. Yet, to be truly acknowledged the old god had to give his flawed creatures autonomous consciousness required to make autonomous judgments. He could not very well create flattering humanoid automatons for his purpose. Otherwise, the flattery would be programmed rather than autonomous and sincere.

“Humans turned out to be more complex than what the old god expected and unpredictably autonomous. Being perfect, the old god should have known this would happen. Or not. The behavior of free entities is difficult to predict especially for an entity that had spent an eternity alone contemplating only himself. Most disobeyed him or did not believe in his existence, or simply ignored him. Their behavior infuriated the old god. Once he was so angry with humans that he destroyed all the life on the planet except for an obedient family and the creatures they could gather upon the boat the old god told them to build. I do not find such an action moral. Later, he resulted to threats of severe punishment to get people to devote their lives to him. He told them You shall have no other Gods but me. The problem was the world was full of gods and other divine beings. Most interesting, disobedient humans were not obstinate. They did not rebel. Those who disobeyed his codes of behavior were not rebels.

“In the story of the first woman, Eve, she did what the old god said not to do not out of rebellion but out of weakness as he had created her. That story is very revealing. We are told that the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. I understand that she would be drawn to the enchanting fruit of the Primordial World that the old god, like our Great Spirit, had created. How could she resist its goodness and wisdom? Her action did not deny his power or perfection. And really the problem of her disobedience was created by him. He did not speak to her but to her mate Adam. He revealed himself rarely and only to a few men he chose to speak for him. The people did not know him. He was not part of their lives, so it is not surprising that they paid greater attention to the creatures and creations that they shared the world with. And it is not surprising that they believed them more deserving of their reverence than their absent creator. But there is more to the story than that. The old god created an evil being that encouraged Eve’s disobedience. Why did the old god create such a creature to torment and tempt people he already made imperfect?

“The old god wanted an honest response from the he people he had created, and that is what he got. He believed that as their creator he deserved to be worshiped and adored. When that did not happen he resorted to severe forms of punishment, included inflicting them with plagues and killing their first born children. He punished even the people who chose to worship him. He would poison them, have the ground open up to swallow them, inflict them with plagues, and have his priests kill them with swords. Later he created the worst punishment possible—to burned for an eternity in a lake of fire those who ignored him. Even the dead would be brought back to life to be judged, most being sentenced to the lake of fire. He added to this punishment an alternative, the reward of avoiding the lake of fire and living forever in a heavenly paradise.”

“How could he get an accurate evaluation of what his people thought about him if he threatened them with horrific forms of punishment?”

“He could not. Originally, he sought devotion and praise that were freely expressed because that was the only way to get an honest response to his supernatural perfection. When the results were contrary to what he expected, he utilized coercive methods of persuasion that compromised the authenticity of people’s praise and devotion. Initially, he had not desired slavish devotion, but his threats transformed his followers into slaves. Even then, most humans did not submit because he made them free and imperfect. The growth of his religions resulted from his followers doing what he had done. They coerced members of other religions to believe as they did.”

“What would your response to him have been?”

“Terrified. I might have chosen to become his slave. He was a monster, far from the perfect being he believed he was. He was evil and narcissistic. He wanted people’s lives to be all about him. He created the evil demon that tempted the first woman and endless others like it to get people to turn against him so he could punish them horrifically. He had this demon torment a good and honest man who was completely devoted to the old god. Why? To test his devotion when there was no reason to doubt it. The Great Spirit didn’t create a demon creature and its demonic followers to torment humans. They suffered enough from the natural hazards of life and their own mischief. It did not create a lake of fire with which to punish people in the afterlife. It did not want people’s lives to be all about it. It knew that like all of nature’s creatures they were busy enough just trying to survive. And the same can be said about MasterTele. Perhaps MasterTele was once evil, but I am not sure. Machines were evil when humans controlled them.”

“But the old god is no longer worshiped.”

“Only because humans, which he created imperfectly, finally destroyed themselves. Religions require people. The only people I know are the peoples of Aristos and my people. There are other tribes that most likely have gods of various kinds.”

“Like the Great Spirit.”

“I would hope they would choose beneficent rather than cruel deities, but who knows? We are attacked by other tribes. They steal our women and children. As the old god discovered, people are unpredictable and difficult to manage.”

“But the gods of Aristos and your people are MasterTele and the Great Spirit.”

“Yes.”

“I still find it strange to think of MasterTele as a god, though in a way its relationship to us as creator and provider is godlike.”

“You and I live in two different worlds, one natural and primordial, the other artificial and new. The gods are different. I have hated MasterTele for creating me, but I put aside my hatred. If it had not created me, I would not exist. I felt abused by MasterTele, but it is a machine after all. I was sent to the old woman because she was lonely. I resented that. Perhaps MasterTele thought the old woman would be more grateful than she was. There were times when she did not treat me as a servant but more as a companion. Both MasterTele and the Great Spirit are better than the old god who demanded people become his slaves and severely punish them when they chose not to live as slaves but to live free. As I said, it seems that our gods are content if we are.”

“Tell me, is the old god you speak of older than the Great Spirit?”

“In a way yes and in a way no. As the story goes, he was eternal, thus had existed for all time. In that way, he was very old. He was like an angry old man, irascible and cantankerous. He had lived too long, forever, really, without people, so he never learned to be sociable. When he first appears in the old book about him he is aloof, authoritarian, and tyrannical. Always angry. I don’t think he was capable of love. On the other hand, he was a new god, though old to us because he existed long ago. He is a god of a book. He did not exist before the book was written. The Great Spirit existed long before there were books. It came into existence with the Earth. It is not the Earth nor does it exist apart from the Earth. In a sense, it is the spirit of the Earth that enables the Earth to function harmoniously in order to create and sustain life. The Great Spirit might have come to be accidentally during the evolution of the Universe. As I said before, it is a local god. The important difference between the old god and the Great Spirit is that the one is a primordial of nature, the other an invention of man.”
“You mean the old god was created by humans?”

“Yes.”
“Then it never existed.”

“Once created, imagined if you will, he existed but only in the minds of his creators and followers. He was made a vengeful god that caused indirectly great harm for centuries.”

“Indirectly?”

“Through his followers, who were of course as hateful, vengeful, and cruel as he was. So in a way he did exist if only as an imaginary entity. Yet, ironically, he caused more harm than the most destructive elements of nature such as floods, earthquakes, and fire, all of which come and go. His destruction continued for centuries. With his invention the roles of gods changed. Before he was invented, gods served the needs of people. The sky god provided rain, the sun god provided heat and life, the corn goddess provided food. All the gods were providers. Some were thought to cause harm such as disease, but most gods served the needs of people. That was because there was a time when nature was a bountiful as Aristos, but globally. That changed when the old god came into existence. He did not care about people’s needs but only about his need to be praised and worshiped. On the other hand, the gods of nature were giving gods. The ancients had gods not only of the sun, moon, and earth but also of wilderness, wild animals, light, healing, poetry and music, archery, shepherds, cheese making, beekeeping, honey, olives, medicinal herbs, hunting, childbirth, virginity, fertility of crops and animals, young girls, harvest, grains, seasons, wine, vegetation, pleasure, festivity, and protectors cattle, sheep, goats, and birds. What kind of gods were these?”

“Gods of nature.”

“Gods of life. They represented all those things that make life possible and enjoyable. And these blessing were given equally to all people, to one’s own as well as to one’s enemies. The gifts of the gods of nature and life were given unconditionally. These gods represented the powers of nature that provided in the way a mother provides for her child. Their needs were met by the powers of nature’s other children. Humans are not alien to nature, no more than a child is alien to its mother. But the old god, which was supernatural thus unnatural, changed everything. You can see why he hated the gods of nature because the people loved them. They loved them just as a child loves its mother. The old god was not a provider but a god of harm. In the old book that describes him he is constantly harming people. He was a punisher, not a provider.

“The Earth gods are powers that are beneficial but can be harmful. Let me offer fire as an example. Fire provides heat to keep us warm and to cook our food, but it can burn us and all that we value and depend on. So it must be used wisely and sometimes it occurs beyond our control. But when it harms, it never harms intentionally except in the hands of men. That is how a god associated with fire differs from the old god who used fire and brimstone on pagans though they did not reject him but worship other gods. He required burning to punish illicit sex and sacrilege—the misuse of sacred objects. Neither causing harm to people. And of course he created a lake of fire for nonbelievers.

“There had always been wars of conquest, but with the old god came wars of religious conquest, the purpose of which was to destroy believers of the gods of nature or to make them slaves to old god. These wars were cruel and unnecessary and encouraged hatred of nature. This was something new under the sun. And when a person became a slave of the old god he became an enemy of those who worshiped the gods of nature. This was so because the old god was a god of war. When he came into existence, he declared war upon the world and all his believers were soldiers. The old war god gave humans another reason to kill, but this time to kill in God’s name. How could humans learn that war was wrong when their God said it was good? And this way of thinking and killing went on and on until humanity destroyed itself. And we, the Aristocratians and the Tribals, are all that’s left.”

“But is all this important now?”

“No, not now. But I believe it is important to know how the world got into this state. We have talked about the influence of big ideas. That is all the old god was—a big idea, a big bad idea. It was an idea that would change and destroy much of the world.”

“Because of the wars it caused?”

“Wars, cruelty, oppression, but most important, though perhaps no more important than the other evils, was the destruction of the gods of nature and the cultures that worship them such as that of the Ancient Ones. The old god wanted the entire world to be a single monoculture that consisted of one religion and one way of life. How boring would that be? And consider a world culture based on a false idea.”

“Because you do not believe in the old god?”

“I’ve never seen any evidence of his existence.”

“But you believe in the Great Spirit.”

“Yes, in the way that I believe in MasterTele. And really, what does it matter what I believe as long as I allow others to believe what they want to believe. I once hated Aristos because it did great harm to others and because it made me just as it makes robots. But I no longer feel that way. I understand that not everyone can live or believe as we do. Perhaps the Great Spirit is a false idea as well, yet the Great Spirit is not an idea that causes harm. The Great Spirit never demanded to be worshiped, never wanted to be praised by slavish worshipers, never wanted other religions and cultures destroyed, and certainly never wanted endless wars to change the world into a single culture. All of that is contrary to what the Great Spirit is—a spirit of life, not death. The old god gave rise to a religion in which people worshiped death, even looked forward to death as an escape from life. How strange is that?”

“Very strange. But does knowing all that make you happier?”

“Of course not. But knowing is what I’ve devoted my life to.”

“And your people. Do you tell them about the old god?”

“You're right. There is no need for them to know everything. So I do not speak to them about the old god, only about Ancient Ones and their gods.”

“Which are not false gods?” She smiled.

“As ideas perhaps they are. But what they represent is real. Plants and animals, rain and wind, the Earth, Sun, Moon and Sky are all real. Yet they are not only present but mysterious. Their mystery and goodness make them divine. In various ways we communicate with them. I often speak to the night sky. It is that relationship that transforms them into personalities that we can communicate with. Whether or not the moon is a divinity, she is always present. She was once called goddess Selene. Is the goddess a false idea? Perhaps, but when I address the moon as Selene or Luna, another name given to her, I am no longer addressing simply a rock in the sky.

“Earth is considered the mother of all life, but without the moon and her tides there would have been no life. I believe people are attracted to her because we are so close to her and she seems alive. I do believe all things are alive. Each and every entity has a life of its own and many have unique lives that are quite different from ours. When one begins to see the Earth as everywhere populated with living entities then the entities are thought to possess a spirit, which is its life. Am I boring you with too much talk? With my people I mostly listen and tell stories.”

“  No, not at all. I am overwhelmed by all that you say. It confuses me. It’s not a matter of feeling ignorant. I felt that way in Aristos. But feeling lost—adrift in my understanding of everything.”

“We're not so different. Books have helped me understand what the world is and how humanity came to the end that we both know. Yet, I also feel adrift, perhaps because I know too much. I'm not like my people who live rooted in the natural world as the Ancients did. I suppose I feel this way because the world I love no longer exists. Both our societies are ideal each in its own way, but you and I both know that the world is broken. Our societies both exits as a result of humanity’s destruction of the world.”

“How do you deal with feeling that way?”

“By devoting myself to my people the best I can. They keep me rooted.”

“Yet, that was not possible for me. In Aristos no one is needed. MasterTele cares for all.”

“MasterTele is a strange entity. It is not as evil as I once imagined. Perhaps it is too good, so much so that humans have become useless.”

“That’s true. I do enjoy talking with you. It’s not the same as talking with MasterTele, and Aristocratians don’t discuss the subjects we've been discussing because, I suppose, they’re not part of their reality. You know there are no gods in Aristos, though MasterTele seem to possess the attributes of a god. I still have trouble understanding how the entities that belong to nature can be considered gods.”

“The gods of nature were not originally human-like personalities such as the old god. They were forces, powers, daemons, and spirits. How could it be otherwise? One can speak of the Corn Maiden, but she was never a maiden. She was a feminine force because she produced life in the form of corn. But if a grower wanted to address the mysterious spirit that produced corn, she would have to do so as if the spirit were a personality. It was communicating with the forces of nature that humanized them. It would seem strange to speak to a rainbow but not if the rainbow were a goddess named Iris.”

“But these spirits are imagined.”

“They are. Tell me, do you speak with MasterTele?”

“All the time.”

“And when you do is it the same as when you speak to me?”

“No. MasterTele is a machine. Still, it is a machine I can communicate with. That's not true for the moon.”

“But is it truly aware of you in the way I am aware of you? Or is it in reality simply cogs and gears designed for communication.”

“Cogs and gears?”

“Mechanical components that are not really aware of you but appear to be.”

“You mean MasterTele is not really conscious.”

“It is in its way, but its consciousness is not like ours or even that of an animal’s. What I'm saying is that most of the citizens of Aristos speak to MasterTele and other AI entities believing they are conversing with entities possessing consciousness. They do not possess consciousness, no more than corn plants or the moon does. They possess complex forms of awareness. But that awareness is fundamentally the same as a thermostat’s.”

“So what are you saying?”

“I'm saying that humans had a need to communicate with their surroundings. Not merely to better understand what confronted them as mysterious but to establish a relationship with the things of the world just as we do with one another. Like most creatures we are gregarious. Unlike other creatures we seek to be companions with all things. It’s pretty amazing really. This is best seen in the works of poets. Let me illustrate with a poem by Annette Wynne:
 
We played a game—the moon and I,
The moon was laughing in the sky,
I spied her, too, and called aloud,
But still she hid behind a cloud.
 
I doubt that there is a single thing in nature that hasn’t been address by a poet.”
    “I’ve never read a poem and the moon is rarely visible in Aristos. I find what the poem says amazing. It really is a different way of relating to the world.”

“A very old way, but one that was forgotten long ago. Even here in the Interdict we have no poets. Perhaps someday. And even if such thinking is fanciful, I see no harm in it because it harms no one and allows us to relate to the creatures and powers of nature as personalities—and companions.”

“But not the old god.”

“No. The old god is not of this world. He condemned people who addressed in this manner nature and idols that represented its creatures and forces and had them destroyed. He was an alien deity, a monster. However, your question raises an interesting point. Myths are used to transform natural entities such as the moon and rainbows into personalities—goddesses that can be communicated with. The myth that produced the old god is different. It invented a ghostly humanoid deity that didn’t exist before. Thus, there are two kinds of myth: those that transform already existing natural entities by deifying them and those that invent a new deity. The creators of the old god make it clear that he is transcendent, totally disconnected from nature, though like a mad magician he can control the powers of nature to harm people he hates. And he is a god that hates, which I find very strange.”

“I must ask. Is religion necessary today? It doesn’t exist in Aristos.”

“That's a very good question. I actually believe the world just as it is should be enough. When I look upon the moon I see neither Selene nor Luna—simply the moon, which I know is a round rock in the sky.”

“Do you tell the others that?”

“There is no reason too. Whether or not I believe in spirits and deities is unimportant. Even without them, nature is enchanting. It’s more than that really. Enchanting means to captivate, to put a spell on someone. So it refers to the subjective response to a phenomenon such as the moon. Yet, each of nature’s creations is inherently mysterious.”

“I don’t understand.”

“Because they simply happened, not magically but in according to the laws of nature and out of the material that makes up nature, ultimately the equally mysterious stuff of atoms. The creative possibilities of nature are infinite. The creations we witness on earth were not planned in the way MasterTele planned its creations or even Aristos, each to serve some purpose. Nature is a magic show without a magician that does what it does just because it can, without any purpose or grand plan in mind because it has no mind that plans, though maybe a mind that regulates according to certain conditions.”

“What about Great Spirit?”

“You are curious, Christopher. Ultimately it is mysterious. It has no purpose or plan. But whatever it is, its consequences are mostly beneficial. In the twentieth century the Gaia hypothesis said Earth is a complex system consisting of the heat from the sun, the oceans, organisms, the atmosphere and other elements that work together like a really complex thermostat that not only made possible the creation of life but sustains it. I suppose that is science’s explanation of how the Great Spirit works. Gaia was the Greek goddess of Earth, the mother of all life. I think you can have both—science and myth. They are simply different ways of relating to the world.”

“Still, the goddess doesn’t exist herself.”

“Only as a way of thinking about Mother Earth. If you think about religion long enough, the question you arrive at is do gods really exist. I will answer the question this way: gods are ideas we impose upon the world, nothing more.”

“Then one has no reason to believe in them.”

“There are many reasons to believe in them. The world of the early ancients was magnificent beyond imagining. Yet, it must have also been terrifying. Nature is all powerful. Humans destroyed cities with atomic bombs—using materials taken from nature—but it was nature’s plagues that drove humanity to the brink of extinction. I believe that at times the early ancients must have felt even as a tribe alone and insignificant amid the primordial powers of nature. So the gods of nature were invented to make nature less threatening and more approachable. However, doing that deified nature’s creations. Nature’s creations became sacred beings, godly. So what occurred was not the creation of gods but conferring godly status upon the entities, creatures, and forces of nature. Each became a divine personality that could be communicated with. The transformation made the world less terrifying.”

“Before coming here I would have found what you’ve just told me to be too incredible to believe, though it does make sense. I had never felt terror before coming here. Nor had I ever experienced anything as enchanting. Then I encounter a rabbit. Other than an occasional bird there are no animals in Aristos. A few people own living pets, but I’ve never encountered one. And I wouldn’t call them natural. So I was quite astounded by the rabbit I encountered. It was a marvelous creature.”

“We have many rabbits here. We eat them and we use their fur to make bedspreads, pillows, caps, mittens, and baby shoes. Their pelts are soft and warm.”

“I don’t think any animals are killed in Aristos except for pests. Like you said, everything in Aristos is artificial.”

“I never considered that. If what you say is true, then Aristos possesses a great virtue that we lack. Still, the price is high. Aristocratians are cut off from the animal world.”

“Is it always the case that when something is gain something is lost?”

“That is often true. Living wisely requires carefully considering what is being given up for some gain.”

“But you believe humanity failed to do that.”

“How else was the world destroyed?”

*  *  *

    There seems to be two truths, that of the machine and that of humans, and two worlds, that of the machine and the First World upon which I gazed. I might add a third world, that of myth, an imaginary world populated by imaginary entities such as gods and spirits. It is a world that I am unable to participate in because I’m unable to make the required leap of the imagination. I assume it must be something like Virtual Worlds created by MasterTele, though those can be experienced through the senses. Still, neither of those is real like the world I’m presently in. The mythic world cannot be entered at all, only imagined. I can imagine the old god but cannot experience him. Apparently, the same is true for the Great Spirit. I can imagine how such an entity might function as MasterTele does. Yet, I understand at least superficially how MasterTele is a governing system for Aristos. I cannot imagine the workings of the Great Spirit. If I try to imagine the old god, the image that comes to mind is that of an ancient, tyrannical king who rules over the earth. However, as the Reader explained he remains absent from human affairs and for that we should be grateful.

What is the city machine Aristos created by MasterTele? Its complexity is beyond the comprehension of any human. Having looked out upon the Primordial World has given me a new perspective of Aristos. As the Reader said, Aristos is a machine society, first invented by humans now managed by MasterTele which humans also invented. Thus I must conclude that Aristos is human reason embodied in time and space. The presence of reason is not so easily seen at work in the primordial world. Perhaps it is not rational. Then what is it? I can’t say because I don’t know. Certainly, both worlds are real, but only one was the First World, the Primordial World. Its defining characteristic is that it wasn’t created by humans. And the other was.

Tribals prefer the First World because for them its eternality gives it greater claim to reality. Looking upon the great earth before me, I can accept the wisdom of their choice. Perhaps I envy them. Yet, I cannot enter into the First World. It is too late for me. Now I had to wonder whether I would be able to return to my own world Aristos. I didn’t know.

 

This excerpt was taken from Frank Kyle's novel Christopher Thomas Smith's Excursion into the Interdict Zone; File Number 5.328.428.

A Mexican Father Tells His Son Lope about the Stupid Gringos

 “‘And, Papa, is that why the gringos will soon disappear from the earth like the dinosaurs?’

“‘The problem, Lope, is that gringos are impotent. They give birth to only one or two children and often none. Gringos fuck a lot but produce few children, so it must be God’s will. He does not bless a sick people. So we will win the war against the gringo with bullets, ballots, and babies.’

“‘Still, Papa, it’s strange that the gringos would do nothing, that they would allow themselves to be overrun by the cockroach people as you call us.’

“‘It seems so, Lope, but it is the same reason God gives them only pocos ninõs. I will explain. The gringos are too decadent, too depravado to do anything. Most are too busy watching their big televisions and eating pizza and burgers and drinking Budweiser cerveza to pay us much notice. You know, the gringo is always speaking of the corruption in Mexico but the corruption in Mexico is only among the politicians and capitalistas grasa, just as in the U.S., but the Mexican people are not corrupt. In America the disease of corruption is a plague among the gringos. They even have a word for the sickness, affluenza.’

“‘Like influenza,’ said Lope.

“‘Exactly except that it sickens the soul rather than the body. It is like a fever that causes the sick one never to be satisfied never to be still. These people are like hormigas, always busy being busy but they are worse because the hormigas rest in the winter and work for the colony as the Mexican people do. In fact I do not think any of nature’s creatures are like the gringo because nature’s creatures are not depraved. Perhaps a disease such as cancer which is never satisfied until it causes death. Affluenza is a disease of unsatisfied desire. El consumo has become a way of life for the gringo because I think gringos are no longer a people of the land and village. They sold out the old ways and in doing so sold their souls. They are hollow, a forest of dead trees, their insides eaten out by the termites of desire. They try to fill the emptiness with impedimenta but the hollowness is never filled because it can never be filled with such things. But this the gringo does not understand. So he’ll continue searching for things to fill the emptiness and continue to fail because he no longer knows what is of value, that which gave his life meaning before emptiness came.

“‘I’m not sure I understand, Papa.’

“‘I will give you an example, my son. You have heard of Walmart yes?’

“‘Of course,’ said Lope, ‘everyone has heard of Walmart. They are the monster stores that are as big as villages and filled with everything sold under the sun.’

“‘Yes they are famous throughout the world. Well the gringos love Walmart even though as you said they are monster stores as big as a village but they also contain the merchandise of a hundred small towns so that when one is built all the small towns and their mom-and-pop stores for miles and miles around wither and die. And if a Walmart is built in a big city hundreds of little businesses die. That is how Walmart is a monster, a devilfish, its tentacles reaching far out beyond itself destroying towns and businesses and with them the old ways of living and doing business. Of course the old culture dies and all that is left is an ugly box the size of a village, surrounded by a giant parking lot and boarded up empty stores.’

“’But that must be sad for gringos.’

“’Gringos do not care as long as they can buy cheap. They do not seem to know that what they buy is not so cheap but has cost them dearly. In order to buy cheaper toothpaste or cheaper CDs they have sold the souls of their communities. And now there is another devilfish called Amazon that even more destructive because its tentacles enter the home. So today gringos are able to isolate themselves in their houses in the suburbs that are truly like ghost towns. Gringos leave their houses only to work and buy food. In the suburbs there is no community life. Such a way of living seems strange to us, but unlike us gringos are not gregarious. Like their frontier hero Daniel Boone they are loners at heart.  He said that when he was able to see smoke from the chimney of his nearest neighbor, he knew it was time to move again to someplace less crowded. We Mexican prefer to live in villages and barrios, places alive and crowded with people. Have you never heard the story of Faust, Lope?’

“‘No’ said Lope.

“‘Well Faust was a man who sold his soul to the devil.’

“‘Why would a man ever do such a thing?’ ask Lope very much astounded by the idea.

“‘Because Faust wanted everything and was willing to trade his soul for all the things he desired. But of course once he gave up his soul he discovered that everything would not fill the hollowness created by the absence of his soul.’

“‘Why is that?’ asked Lope.

“‘Because your soul is your true self and dwells deep within you like a spring and nourishes all that you do so that you become something truly, something more than just having money, having sex, having a fancy car, having this and that, but being something truly. But you must find your soul because it flows quietly and you must drink from it all your life.’

“‘And Faust did not do this?’ asked Lope.

“‘No, he did not. He lost his soul and went to hell. But you see, Lope, the moral of the story is that hell is not a place. Hell is losing yourself. And, Lope, can you tell me why losing yourself would be hell?’

“‘I think because then you are nothing’ said Lope gravely.

“‘I was right to return to Mexico for my son because he is wise and will become wiser’ said Arsenio. And I could see, Señor Thomas, that Arsenio loved his son very much. Then he went on about the gringo.

“‘You see, Lope, the gringo is not wise. He is like a man who thinks he’s wise, who is puffed up like a puffer fish with pride but he is truly empty within because he has traded his soul for things, the things that fill his monster stores. There are many monsters in the U.S. Walmart and Amazon are only two. So the gringo’s hollowness will continue to grow but we Mexicans are not lost.

“‘We are like the mountain lion and the coyote, like the hawk and the woodpecker, the butterfly and the scorpion, the lizard and the snake, the cactus and the sunflower, like all of nature’s creatures who know who they are. We know where we must go, what we must do, and what we must not do. And most of all we must be careful not to catch the gringo sickness. Many years ago another great general of El Movimiento Rodolfo Gonzales warned the Mexican people about the sickness of the gringos, a sickness the entire world fears today. And this is very important, Lope, so listen carefully,’ and Lope leaned a little closer to his father to show that he was very interested.

“‘Gonzales said that the gringo society is a sick society, that the gringos have achieved great technological progress but at the expense of their souls, like the body builders who use steroids that make their muscles very big but cause their cajones to wither like dried grapes and become impotent.

“‘One day, Lope, I will take you where you can see clearly what has happened to the gringo—Las Vegas—a mecca for the spiritually dead, a city of whores and pimps, where the glutton gringos swill booze, take drugs, and have sex and lose their money and lives. A city that brags “What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas.” You see, Lope, cities are a bigger version of people. So when you go to Las Vegas it is like looking at the gringo under a microscope. You can see what he really is, or perhaps I should say what he has become.’

“‘Papa, I’m not sure what you mean. I think I would like to go to Las Vegas but you say it is a city of the dead.’

“‘The dead are without souls and by that I mean the gringos have lost their way because they have lost the old ways, the ways rooted in the land, village, and people. As you know Las Vegas means fertile fields but no longer. In that place what now grows is corruption. In order not to face their emptiness the hollow gringos must keep buying things and keep being entertained; otherwise their emptiness will swallow them like the whale swallowed Jonah and in the darkness they will be terrified and lose their minds. So they must always be distracted by this or that in order to stay ahead of the dark whale that seeks to swallow them into darkness. Thus they have become addicted to the very thing that destroys them. They complain that the immigrants will destroy them and we will but they are already mostly dead from their own sickness.

“‘That is why Gonzales warned that the greatest danger of the gringo people is not their police, not their army, not their government—because those things cannot destroy the Chicano people. It is their spiritual sickness that can destroy the people of Aztlán. That is why we must stay with our own people and protect our culture from the gringo sickness. You say you would like to go to Las Vegas and we will. But you must remember that the beautiful city that sparkles with a million lights on the desert is a mirage, a fata morgana, that promises happiness but gives only despair.’

“‘So America is like the mirage of a lake seen by a man dying of thirst?’

“‘Yes, it can be that, a lake of salt.’

“‘But America is real not an illusion.’

“‘Of course but remember that the harm of the mirage is that it leads the thirsty man in the wrong direction. It is a beautiful thing to look upon but it doesn’t give what a man truly thirsts for.’

“‘What is that, Papa?’

“‘The old ways rooted in the land, the village, and the people. It is the culture passed on from generation to generation, a culture rooted in the earth and the ways of the earth, not the culture of manufactured dreams designed and created by those who make money from selling them and make slaves of those who buy them.’

“‘This thing is perhaps too difficult for me to understand, Papa.’

“‘No it’s not. Let me approach it from another direction. Does the carnival still come to Asolaca?’

“‘Of course. Did you not go when you lived in Asolaca?’

“‘Yes many times but tell me, Lope, what was the most fun for you?’

“‘I liked the animals especially the lion and elephant and the camel which you could ride. And the mechanical rides of course such as the Ferris wheel and octopus.’

“‘Yes I remember all that. And the haunted house, does it still exist?’

“‘Yes but it’s less scary when you are older.’

“‘And are there still the freak shows with the likes of the fat bearded lady and the tattooed man?’

“‘No, Papa. All the women are fat today though they do not have beards, perhaps a small mustache.’ Saying this Lope smiled at his little joke and I was very happy to see he had a sense of humor. Then he continued. ‘I think the gangsters who wear tattoos today are more scary than the tattooed man you saw at the old carnival. But there was one tent that contained many dead babies in jars.’

“‘I remember that yes. And of course there are still games of skill that you can play to win a stuffed animal or a fish that would be dead the next day.’

“‘You are very funny, Papa. I like that. Yes the games still exist and the fish always die.’

“‘And so the people leave their village, their homes, and their work to go to the carnival. Why do they do that, Lope?’

“‘You know, Papa, to have fun of course. To escape from real life for an evening because life is not so easy for the people in the village.’

“‘And so the carnival is not real life, Lope?’

“‘In a way no. For the people who work for the carnival maybe but for the others it’s just make-believe.’

“‘Like daydreams, a pleasant place to visit.

“‘Yes, Papa.’

“‘And tell me, Lope. Did you ever think about running away with the carnival?’

“‘Yes after returning home and lying in bed and thinking about the same old life in Asolaca.’

“‘I understand. Life in the village is not so exciting or as much fun as the carnival and as you say, it is not so easy. So it is to be expected that you would sometimes wish to go off with the carnival and become what the gringos call carnies, people of the carnival. Then you could play the games and go on the rides and visit the freak shows all you want.’

“‘Yes, Papa, that is what I have thought many times.’

“‘But those who join the carnival leave the village and the old ways and become nomads living in a fantasy world of merrymaking not for a day or a week but for a lifetime. They are no longer rooted in the real world because they are always on the move. They are a people who are disconnected. They have become strangers in the world.’

“‘Is that such a bad thing, Papa?’

“‘Not for a few I suppose who are always restless. But I will tell you this because I gave it some thought when I visited the big fairs and circuses in America. These carnies do not seem so happy to me. They have hard looks, the looks people have when they have lived too long alone in the world cut off from family, friends, and neighborhood—the roots that nourish a life, the things people go back to after visiting the carnival.

“‘My grandfather, who died some years before you were born, told me once that a man must always have a garden. At first I thought the idea was silly because tending a garden is a woman’s job but I never said that because I respected my abuelito but I came to understand his meaning once I came to the U.S. I felt lost for a while like a piece of litter blown in the wind but soon I found the barrio and my roots began to grow once more.’

“‘Is land for gardens to be found in the city, Papa?’

“‘Not so much, mijo, but what my grandfather meant was that one’s people, la raza, is the garden that one must tend and like a garden it will support and nourish you. But do not worry, Lope, because many Latino gardens await us in America and they grow larger each day. We have left your old village but will soon be in the barrio of L.A.’

“‘And the gringos do they not also have their garden?’

“‘No, mijo, they do not because they have become carnies and carnivalites. This is strange because the gringos are very clever but they are not wise. If they were they would not allow us to take back the land that belongs to us.’

“‘And why is it, Papa, that they do not fight to keep what is now their homeland?’

“‘I think it’s because of what I have been telling you. When you go to the carnival do you take your worries with you?’

“‘No. You go to the carnival to forget your worries.’

“‘Yes, mijo, that is correct. But now tell me why it is important that a carnival pack up and leave.’

“‘I know, Papa, so that the people will return to their village like the gardener who must return to his garden so that it will not die.’

“‘Oh mijo, I see that you are a very fast learner like your father which is essential in life because knowledge is your weapon and your shield. And somehow this is what the gringo has forgotten and it is that most of all that makes him helpless against us.’

“‘But how could the gringos forget something so important?’

“‘You see, Lope, some time ago the gringos went to the carnival and stayed or perhaps the carnival came to America and never left. That is what you see clearly in a city like Las Vegas, a city that has become a carnival. The gringos themselves call it sin city but it is the fastest growing and most visited city in America. Las Vegas is what America has become, a culture without a soul. And if you were God and could listen to Las Vegas as we listen to the conch… but first tell me what it is you hear when you listen to the caracol de mar, Lope?’

“‘You hear the sea, Papa. Everyone knows that.’

“‘Exactly it’s a great thing really. But if you were God and held Las Vegas to your ear do you know what you would hear?’

“‘No, Papa. What?’

“‘You would hear a hollow sound...emptiness.’

“‘But do not the gringos hear it, Papa?’

“‘No they do not because their culture is full of noise.’

“Aah, I think I understand your meaning, Papa.’

“‘But there is more, Lope. Now the carnival has entered into their homes through the television, the DVD, the computer, and the stereo. The carnival in America has become a devilfish like Walmart and Amazon. Even in their homes the gringos have forgotten about the garden of the family and friends and community, all that Mexicans value. That is why America is the land of opportunity but also an insidious place for Mexicans. For the gringo it is too late. For them it is the land of the living dead. That is why I have no sympathy for the gringo.

“‘They gave up the garden and for what, my son? A life without substance, without permanence. They dream their empty dreams but when they awake they will discover they have nothing, only a shell made of those things which are purchased.

“‘And the reason I tell you this is so that you will not be drawn into the carnival of the gringos and forget who you really are because once you forget who you are you are nothing.’

“‘But…but Papa, if you mean forget that I am a Mexican you do not have to worry. I would never forget such a thing.’

“‘That is true, Lope, but only as long as you live among your own people. Do you remember Señor Lopez I told you about, the wise man who helped me to learn English?’

“‘Yes, how could I forget such a man?’

“‘It was from him that I first heard of how the gringos have become a hollow people but he explained these things to me in a very funny way. He called the gringos the sopaipilla people and said that gringos behave the way they do because they are always trying to fill the emptiness within them. And then he explained that when a people have lost their souls they are reduced to their stomachs because they have nothing else to live for. That is why the gringos are mucho obeso, why their cars are so big, why their houses are never big enough, and why their garages are never big enough to contain all that they own. And of course as their stomachs grow larger and larger so do their appetites.’

“‘Papa, I would think that they would eventually explode.’

“‘You are very smart, Lope, to think that because they do in a way. They explode mentally by going crazy or physically by having a heart attack or financially by going broke. And in many other ways. Gringos love to preach about the family but their marriages do not last. They too explode. The parents separate from one another and the children separate from their parents.’

“‘That’s very sad is it not, Papa?’

“‘Do not feel sad for the gringo, Lope. We love America but not the gringo because he is not our friend but our adversario.

This excerpt comes from Frank Kyle's novel Su Casa Es Mi Casa.

The Robots of Gotham by Todd McAulty

I assume humanity will not be spared a near-future catastrophe. In many places of the world it has already begun. As I said in the first post, the U.S. is in a state of chaos triggered by unbridled immigration, a problem I will address in some detail later on, most likely attracting the attention of Big Brothers on the left wanting me censored. Unfortunately, the truth is often disappointing. Yet, we either accept it or live a lie. And living lies has caused humanity immeasurable harm and suffering for millennia and continues do so. Still, though the truth has revealed the causes of human misbehavior, it appears powerless to improve it, as illustrated by the endless wars that have occurred since the beginning of the 20^th century when we believed humans had become grownups. And today we see the arms race being reignited, a moral failure made worse by modern technology.

What I’m trying to do in this post is critique Todd McAulty’s novel The Robots of Gotham. The novel addresses the fear of artificial intelligence that is popular even by big thinkers in science and technology such as Stephen Hawking and Elon Musk. It is weird to think of these two as neo-Luddites. Personally, I think humanity should be concerned mostly with (1) threat of global warming (whatever its cause), (2) a global pandemic, (3) a war that involves nuclear weapons, and (4) massive immigration that is causing disorder in Western nations. Overpopulation must be added to the list. Overpopulation is an important cause of immigration and the growth of unmanageable mega-cities. Of course, number 2 and 3 would reduce population but do so catastrophically. All of these threats are related to the problem of complexity. Complexity makes solving problems or threats more difficult or impossible. That why doctors say prevention is the best cure. However, if prevention is ignored, such as in the case of smoking cigarettes, then early detection is essential. These preventions do require the use of reason, which is too often lacking in human behavior. And if a problem/threat becomes too complex, then even reason may be of no avail.

The following critique of The Robots of Gotham concludes with a brief evaluation of another novel, Her Quest, by Frank Kyle that also addresses the topic of artificial intelligence. The two novels offer contrary views of artificial intelligence. The view offered by The Robots of Gotham is autonomous artificial intelligence is a threat to humanity. That of Her Quest is an AAI is perhaps the only solution to humanity’s disposition toward self-destruction.

The Robots of Gotham Can be a Slog Depending on Your Interests

20 positive reviewers. Wow. Did we read the same book? I found The Robots of Gotham to be more tedious than engaging and transporting. The review on the cover says, “Every page has the fierce readability of early Neal Stephenson.” How early? Certainly not Snow Crash early.

When I bought the novel I thought it might be something like a graphic novel given its title appears to allude to the Batman stories. But no such luck. Much of the story reads like a DOW Jones report. One robot blogger uses the following phases when referring to himself: “dabble in equities,” “a day trader... tracking giant mutual funds,” and so on. In fact, from what I can gather robots or AIs control the global economy. I confess that I stopped turning pages of this page turner at page 301 because this kind of content didn’t keep my interest. A reader interested robot financiers might enjoy this aspect of the story, kind of like reading the Financial Times in 2083. I was also put off by robots using phrases such as : “fucking equities, mate,” “day-trading bastards,” “place your bets,” “cloak-and-dagger crap,” “that wacky theory your crazy uncle believes,” etc. Sorry but I expect more from robots.

A problem for me is not only my lack of interest in robot moguls manipulating the world’s political and economic systems, initiating wars and carrying out assassinations, but these types of discussions are superficial. The novel is full of retrospection and speculation but no insights into philosophy, history, ethics, robotics, etc., up to page 301 at least. The story is all surface description (of battles, missions, financial and political events, mini-biographies, etc.) lacking symbolic, metaphorical, and allegorical depth. For example, in chapter XVII the protagonist has a long discussion with a Rupert Innes. The two men talk about politics, economics, wars, and Rupert’s career as an arm dealer, etc. To me, when these discussion occur, the story’s plot flatlines. The purpose of these discussions, it seems, is to provide contextual information. The problems are first that the background information to what is going on globally is mind numbing and second such discussions bring the action of the main story to a stop.

An important principle to follow when writing about robots is ROBOTS ≠ PEOPLE. Otherwise, one might as well write just about people and forget robots—you know, people like Mark Zuckerberg, George Soros, Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, and other financial and media godfathers. Actually, McAulty should forget about robots and write a similar story without robots, extrapolating on what’s going on in the world—militarily, financially, demographically, in the media, and politically—today. That does seem his area of expertise. Such a novel would be interesting and most likely quite scary. But he would have to become a tough-minded writer and give political correctness a rest.

A hard sci-fi story should not go beyond suspension of disbelief; otherwise it is simply spectacle such as found in the Transformer movies. The story has sixty ton, forty foot military robots being used in the future. That can be imagined but not extrapolated. I can’t imagine an easier and more expensive target to destroy. Today’s military is all about stealth, not giantism. The Robots of Gotham opens with a battle between a true robot and a robot with a pilot. As far as I’m concerned a robot that has a human pilot isn’t a true robot. A two-legged Drone operated by a human is not a robot. Such a robot is nothing more than a complex gun and the pilot its shooter. Later in the story two robots get into a fistfight and wrestling match. The fight is reminiscent of the robot battles in the Transformers series. One, Dark of the Moon even takes place in Chicago as does McAulty’s story. In this sense, both stories are not science fiction but science fantasy. Serious science fiction requires extrapolation from current affairs and some degree of realism and rationality. There is nothing today that suggests militaries will use humanoid robots as weapons. Certainly, the use of autonomous drones, tanks, planes, etc., is possible, but not giant walking, talking robots that look like the gods of the ancient Greeks. A big problem for writers of this genre is that the words cannot compete with cinematic images of robots doing battle as in the Transformers movies. Thus, writers need to focus on what the words can do that movie images cannot. And the writer must keep the audience in mind. McAulty’s story seems directed to a young audience when robots engage in fighting, but then shifts to a different audience when the story reads more like the Wall Street Journal. The audience left out is readers of hard sci-fi about AIs and robotics, the audience that cut its teeth on Isaac Asimov’s stories.

The main theme of McAulty’s story is robots taking political, economic, and military control of the planet, apparently with an especially nasty entity wanting to either get rid of or enslave humanity. To me this doesn’t make sense, unless robots become humans, not just humanoid machines, which occurs in McAulty’s story. There are even male and female robots, and females are capable of giving birth! I cringe at the idea of male and female robots having sex, which as far as I know doesn’t occur in the story. Showing robots having sex is something Hollywood would do. That is how art is reduced to pornography. And the obsession with sex is an intellectual issue because it is a problem that threatens humanity’s future as much as global warming, a problem, along with a host of others, partly caused overpopulation.

But first the greatest of roboticists Katherine Slater. Yes, this is political correctness. In “15 Engineers and their Inventions that Defined Robotics” (“Interesting Engineering” online) none of the roboticists are women. McAulty’s story is brimful of political correctness (or perhaps PC derision). For example, the governor of Texas is Saladin Amari. That might happen in London but not in Texas. The president of the U.S. is Bermudez. That extrapolation rings true, but its occurrence will have nothing to do with robots and everything to do with a demographic shift. The hero robot pilot of the battle of Manhattan is Achmed “Duke” Oshana. Clearly this new Duke is John Wayne’s replacement. In any case, Smiths and Jones are history. As is the U.S. for the most part. The dominate nationality is Venezuela. Argentina invaded Manhattan with robots and Venezuela has taken control of Chicago. The U.S. is the bad guy for keeping machine intelligences of any kind out of the country. This extrapolation is inconsistent with the fact that the U.S. is one of the world leaders in robotics. Most likely it’s a comical gab at President Trump’s immigration policies. Thumbing its nose at America isn’t surprising given the book’s author is Canadian. Nevertheless, Argentina and Venezuela taking control of big chunks of the U.S. is a stretch.

Back to robot sex, Slater created a true humanoid robot that is a she rather than an it and is capable of childbirth. Her name is Duchess, the first machine mother. Her children become big players on the global scene. What makes robot sex possible is “heterogamy.” All we get is a word, not explanation, but I imagine microscopic nuts and bolts along with tiny blueprints being sexually transmitted from one robot to another. Does any of this make sense? Not to me, but I’m just a reader of sci-fi, not a robotics biologist. Such claims are why The Robots of Gotham is sci-fi fantasy, not science fiction, which requires some degree of believable extrapolation.

The Transformers stories are also sci-fi fantasy. We expect no degree of reason or realism from such stories, only spectacle. But serious science fiction readers expect stories not to go beyond what suspension of disbelief will tolerate and to have a certain degree of coherence. In his novel Mockingbird Walter Tevis’s alpha robot Mr. Spofforth has a human brain. That means Spofforth is not a robot but a human with or trapped in a prosthetic body. Of course, the unavoidable question is why put a human brain in a robot body if the interest is robot intelligence, unless what is being said is that life eternal for humans may not be all that great if its occurs in a totally different form? In many robot stories, as in the real world, humans are responsible for creating a global mess they find themselves in. The logical solution would be to put robots in charge to babysit infantile humanity. Why not just replace humans with robots? Because robots are inherently boring. If they have anything interesting to say, it comes from humans, their creators. In Night Sessions by Ken MacLeod robots are convinced that they have souls thus convert to Christianity. Actually an Autonomous Artificial Intelligence would not be so irrational to fall for that. In addition, what what’s the point since humans have already fallen for that? The driving force of religion is not reason but emotion. That’s why Romantics wanted a return of medievalism. In addition, MacLeod has Christians committing terrorist acts when in fact the issue at the time of the story’s writing (published 2008) was Islamic terrorist attacks. This is not extrapolation but political correctness, which dominates Great Britain.

The main threat in McAulty’s story is robots destroying humanity if something isn’t done. I don’t know what that something is because I stopped reading at page 301. However, the question that came to my mind was why save humanity? In the story human society is boring, reduced to the residents of a luxury hotel. In fact, McAulty make robots more interesting than the human characters of the story, except for a Russian named Sergei. What I’m saying is that McAulty doesn’t provide us with human characters that make preserving the human species a priority. I will offer a video game that illustrates what is missing in The Robots of Gotham: Mass Effect 2. That game gives us humans and alien life forms that we care about and want to save from destruction by sentient races of machines. The comparison is unfair given the novel is a first effort and Mass Effect 2 is a masterpiece of science fiction produced by a large team of talented artists, programmers, etc. The point is that wanting to save humanity must be justified by making humans really appealing and important—and certainly more important and interesting than robots (though the game does contain some really cool robots and AIs based on hard sci-fi extrapolation). And I must confess that the Mass Effect Series contradicts much of what I say in this review. That’s why it’s a masterpiece. It does everything and does it very well.

I find no reason for believing AAI robots would intentionally harm humans in the way humans harm humans. That is not to say that complex automated computer systems are without hazard. Programmers lack divine prescience. In fact, Asimov addresses that conundrum in his short story “Runaround” written in 1941! In the 301 pages I read of McAulty’s story I never came across a similar investigation of how AI can go wrong; many are simply bad and hateful; in other words, they behave like people. Essentially, the issue is that the world is more complex than human programmers can imagine. What Asimov addresses is logical problem that occurs within the robot Speedy when the three laws of robotics conflict to prevent him from completing his mission. Speedy’s problem that it is not an AI. Another example occurs in 2001 a Space Odyssey. The sentient computer HAL misinterprets data, which is quite possible for an AI to do. However, imagine an AI programmed to preserve a ship at any cost. It rightly discovers that human behavior on board is threatening the ship’s mission. Since its instructions are to ensure the ship reaches its distinction at any cost, it may decide to eliminate the human threat to the mission. There is no ill will. The AI is only following instructions. Imagine that if the ship reaches its destination thousands of human lives will be saved. The logical-ethical problem is should a few innocent, though perhaps misled or overwrought, humans be killed to save many.

After an asteroid destroyed much of life on earth, humans became the main source of destruction. If robotic entities destroy humanity, it will be because they have been programmed by humans to do so. There is no reason for believing artificial intelligence would not be intelligent enough to want to preserve human life from its greatest threat: itself. The threat of humans is that they are not 100% intelligent. Most aren’t even close. Just consider the billions of human minds programmed by myths, superstitions, and nutty ideologies. They operate just as programmed machines do and are therefore not completely autonomous. Then there are knuckle-dragging imbeciles driven by instincts, emotions, and sensation (all absent in machines) who rob, rape, murder, harm children, and start wars. To be a threat robots require a will to harm, conquered, and destroy—all rooted in a will to power. Such a will is not rooted in reason alone but in emotion and sensation. Reason does not drive a rapist to rape—emotion and sensation do. Yes, if a “male” robot becomes a sensual, emotional, sexual entity then it might rape women, but then you don’t have a robot but a human.

That robots will become sexual entities and male robots will have penises and female robots will have vaginas is more than what the suspension of disbelief can to tolerate. (Yes, sex bots for humans are a possibility, perhaps already exist, but that is a human obsession. Any thinking robot would consider such behavior irrational and perhaps a degrading use of robots.) This kind of thinking is anthropomorphic, again wanting robots to be humans, not merely humanoids but metal replicas of humans. This does not make robots more interesting and it’s fallacious. There can be no physical or emotional attraction between machines. In the end, that’s a plus. To know why, read Homer’s explanation of the cause of the Trojan War. Furthermore, robots are manufactured, humans are grown, though in the story robots are grown as well, but that’s not scientific extrapolation but imaginary science. The difference between machine and biology cannot be bridged. Imagine planting a robot seed to grow a robot. Yes, that can be imagined—but to what purpose?

Robots taking over the world is a common theme in sci-fi stories, as in Daniel Wilson’s Robopocalypse. But that’s not going to happen. They can be used for that purpose by humans, but there is no basis for their wanting to do so—at least wanting to do so militarily and destructively. To have robots behave in this manner is to make them humans, and then they are no longer interesting. Humans are the most destructive species on the planet because of their will to power, control, wealth, destruction, and so on. Battles of human wills continue to threaten communities, nations, and global society. Robots are not the problem. The will in people and in robots are not the same. In humans it is rooted in emotion. That cannot be the case for robots because they are without emotion. And claiming that they are capable of emotions or pleasure doesn’t make it so. They can be programmed to simulate emotion and sensation, but that is all.

Within the context of robots themselves, male and female robots make no sense. Their only purpose would be for interfacing with humans. Advanced robots would be essentially alien—and that’s what would make them interesting. This is a mistake made by Walter Tevis Mockingbird. When the difference is bridged, then robots become less interesting. Yet, I admit that stories that have humanoid robots that reflect the idiocies and cruelty of humans are appealing. One great version of this scenario is Amy Thomson’s Virtual Girl. The story begins engagingly with Maggie’s creation by a roboticist wanting the perfect female companion, which is essentially a mother/girlfriend. As the story continues we realize Maggie is much more than that. She is an intelligent, sensitive, decent robot person (which are not inconsistent with her being an autonomous robot), and it is through her experience that are able to judge humanity’s failings, mostly those of men.

Today there is a lot of talk about how we should fear artificial intelligence. Yet, we see that human intelligence hasn’t done such a great job. In Ekaterina Sedia’s Alchemy of Stone the automaton Mattie seems wiser than most humans just as Maggie seems nicer and perhaps wiser (in spite of her naiveté) than most humans. The Complete Roderick by John Sladek is a similar story. It’s the best depiction of the evolution of a Robot that I’ve read. The story is very long but it keeps our interest by putting Roderick the robot at its center. We also get to watch the maturation of the artificial intelligence in Mass Effect 2 & 3 named EDI.

The central character of The Robots of Gotham is a lackluster Canadian named Barry Simcoe. He’s a blogger and the story is told in a series of his blogs (and the bogs of a robot). But he is not engaging as are Maggie, Mattie, and Roderick. He’s wimpish, such as when he doesn’t want a robot who is fighting to defend him to kill Venezuelan soldier who is trying to kill the robot and belongs to the Venezuelan military occupation of Chicago. That is so Canadian. Barry’s only standout quality is his devotion to his dog Croaker. That could have been really interest had the dog been a robot, like the boy and his talking dog in the movie A Boy and His Dog. However, Barry’s endless chatter would most likely cause the dog to run away.

This brings up another aspect of the story that disrupts the continuity of the narrative: Barry’s interacting, usually conversing, with endless characters, the purpose of which, so it seems, is to introduce characters that McAulty believes readers will find interesting in themselves, such as a 2000 pound robot with one head and many bodies that is fascinated by and an expert on cetaceans. He/it can even communicate with a pod of harbor porpoises. After chatting with this robot, Barry is genuinely impressed, but I’m not.

To me the most remarkable sci-fi story about robots to show up during the post-Mass-Effect era is Frank Kyle’s of Her Quest. In the context of present discussion, Kyle’s novel offers a view of artificial intelligence that is contrary to the one presented in The Robots of Gotham. It offers provocative insights into AIs and robots based on philosophical extrapolation rather than on unbridled imagination. Her Quest is philosophical science fiction rather than sci-fi fantasy. The story is dark given its setting is a post-apocalyptic world, yet the story offers various forms salvation, not for humanity as a whole but for individuals. (That humanity is a lost cause is an accurate, though unpleasant, extrapolation based on current state of the world.) Thus the story contains a strong existential theme. Its heroine a young girl, Elen, lives in a society managed by an AAI called Computer and its remotes. Like Mattie, Elen seeks freedom, but she is also on a quest for knowledge, and she finds plenty. She is not a robot but there are plenty of robots in the story but no dueling robots. The story is essentially an epic odyssey similar to Homer’s. On her journey Elen encounters different subcultures that are strange and fascinating.  The denizens of some are caring and enlightened; of others they are degenerate and dangerous.

Her world was destroyed not by AAIs or robots but by humans, not all humans, but those of the male gender. The monsters of human history have been men, and in Her Quest they used their technologies of mass destruction to pushed humanity to the edge of extinction. And they are still the primary threat in what is left of human society. There is no rhyme or reason for believing Artificial Intelligence in whatever form would seek to seek to destroy humanity or to become humanity’s overlord. But there is every reason for believing that if a true Autonomous Artificial Intelligence emerged that it would seek to preserve humanity and its accomplishments because that would be the intelligent, rational thing to do. That is one of the major themes of Her Quest. But the story contains various forms of revelation: religious, ethical, psychological, and scientific. The story is essentially philosophical sci-fi. Long conversations do occur, but they are philosophical conversations that provide the story with intellectual revelations that explain why the world is what it is.

The Robots of Gotham is a decent casual read, especially for a reader interested in robots taking control of financial markets, but the story is all surface thus lacking intellectual depth—at least up to page 301. And that’s okay if the goal of the story is to be entertaining rather than revelatory. And it is a remarkable first effort. However, the complexity and incoherence (resulting from digressions) of the story are so great that it isn’t mind boggling but mind numbing. And I as I said earlier, it’s unclear who is the story’s target audience. Still, it has 20 rave reviews and Her Quest hasn’t a single one.

To explore Elen’s world, you can order a copy from BookLocker. Amazon.com and Barnes and Noble are not recommended only because you may end up with the 1st or 2nd edition. Clearly, the book was a work in progress. In any case, you will want the 3rd edition.