A Bridge across the Abyss? Digitalization and Transhumanism as a New Anthropological and Social Reality in the Context of Ideological Searches of Personality (Historical, Philosophical and General Theoretical Aspects)

Suslov Alexey Viktorovich PhD in Philosophy Associate professor, Department of Philosophy, Russian State Social University; Associate professor, Department of Social Disciplines and Humanities, Moscow Witte University 123995, Russia, g. Moscow, ul. Vil'gel'ma Pika, 4, str. 1, kab. 420 suslov.aleksei@mail.ru Other publications by this author

Gusev Dmitrii Alekseevich Doctor of Philosophy Professor, Department of Philosophy, Moscow State Pedagogical University, Moscow Witte University; Institute of Law and National Security of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration 115432, Russia, g. Moscow, ul. 2-I kozhukhovskii proezd, 12, str.1, of. 317 gusev.d@bk.ru Other publications by this author

Introduction

Currently, the question of the possibilities and limits of intervention by science in natural biological processes, including nature and the human body, is increasingly being raised. The discussion of these problems focuses mainly around transhumanism, a scientific and philosophical direction that explores the processes of improving human abilities, increasing his physical and intellectual potential, gaining immortality on the basis of scientific and technological achievements.

The relevance of this topic is connected with the progress and ambiguous nature of the development of natural science knowledge, especially biomedical sciences and digital technologies, as well as with the increasing influence of transhumanistic worldview on socio-economic and political life against the background of the growing crisis of human spiritual existence in the modern world. The question of the permissibility and limits of changing human nature is existentially important, because it is about preserving the person himself in the unity of his biological, social and spiritual qualities.  Modern technologies are able to quickly transfer us to the era of posthuman history, to a new anthropological and social reality where, in the words of F. Fukuyama, we will no longer understand what a person is^[1].  The uncertainty and huge potential of this new reality allows us to compare it with the abyss that generates existential fear, and modern technologies pave the way to the abyss: the further they go in their development, the deeper we look into the abyss. However, supporters and adherents of transhumanism talk about the future technological possibilities of overcoming the imperfections of human nature precisely as a bridge that allows us to pass through the abyss of mortality and non-existence.

The purpose of the work is to examine the origins and evolution of the ideas of transhumanism, the specifics of their development in modern digital society in a broad cultural, ideological, spiritual and moral context; to analyze the ways of human improvement proposed by transhumanists and compare them with the ideas of gaining meaning, happiness and eternal life in Christian anthropology.

1. Transhumanism as a path to the "new man"

It is known that transhumanism as a scientific and philosophical trend arises in the second half of the last century and studies the problem of improving human abilities, increasing his physical and intellectual potential and gaining immortality based on the latest achievements of science and technology. The prefix "trance" means "going beyond", and assumes unlimited modification of a person, in the process of which he overcomes his biological nature and becomes a posthuman, or rather a non-human, i.e. a being devoid of fundamental anthropological grounds.

Despite the growth of scientific knowledge and the development of technology in the twentieth century, transhumanism was perceived by most scientists as a myth, as something from the field of another anthropological and social utopia, like N. Fedorov's "common cause" about the resurrection of the fathers and overcoming the finiteness of life or K. Tsiolkovsky's teaching about humanity going beyond the Solar System and settling in outer space^[2]. And if the activities of Russian cosmists (Fedorov, Tsiolkovsky, etc.) were of the nature of metaphysical searches peculiar to philosophical thinking, then the ideas of transhumanists are now considered as a guide to action, as a new technological and social project in which state structures of many countries and transnational corporations invest a lot of money, which is largely explained by the growing interest in ideology transhumanism on the part of the leaders of the world elites. In support of this thesis, here are some facts.

So in 2009, in the United States, with the participation of the American National Military Space Administration NASA and Google, under the leadership of well-known American scientists and inventors Ray Kurzweil and Peter Diamandis, the Singularity University was established^[3], the purpose of which was to search for like-minded people (partners, sponsors) sharing a singularistic worldview and joint development of "new technologies to solve global problems of mankind". In 2016, a branch of the University was opened in Kiev, and in 2017 in Moscow. 

In June 2013, in New York, the international forum "Global Future 2045" brought together leading engineers and specialists in the field of neuroscience to discuss the current state and prospects for the development of cybernetic technologies in order to achieve human immortality. One of the tasks of the forum was announced the creation of a scientific megaproject "Avatar", which includes the development of humanoid robots, telepresence systems, brain-computer interfaces, neuroprosthetics and brain modeling systems, the study of consciousness and the possibility of its transfer to a non-biological carrier^[4]. Interestingly, the organizer of the forum was a Russian businessman, the head of the Internet company "Newmedia Stars" and the founder of the Strategic Public Movement "Russia 2045" Dmitry Itskov, who stated his position as follows: "A person should be free from the limitations of biological nature, death, gravity. To do this, human bodies must be replaced by non-biological carriers, in whose heads the brains of earthlings will be implanted, and thus the evolution of humanity will be directed towards achieving immortality"^[5].

In our country, the work on the Avatar project is carried out by the Russian branch of the international community "Initiative 2045" under the auspices of the movement "Russia 2045". The implementation of the project includes four stages: from 2015 to 2020 – the creation of an artificial copy of the human body, controlled by thought using a neurointerface; from 2020 to 2025 – the development of an artificial copy of the human body, into which the brain is transplanted at the end of life; from 2030 to 2035 – the creation of an artificial copy of a person, into which consciousness is transferred at the end life; from 2040 to 2045 – creation of a hologram body^[6].

In the article "The Politics of Transhumanism and the Techno-Millennial Imagination, 1626-2030", Professor James Hughes notes that since the 2000s, many currents and sects of transhumanism have formed in the United States, which, as in politics, are divided into left and right, moderates and radicals, transhumanists-conservatives and libertarians^[7]. In particular, he identifies singularists (Ray Kurzweil, Peter Diamanis, Hugo de Garis, Hans Moravek) who predict an "intellectual explosion" by 2050 as a fusion of human and machine intelligence;  libertarian utopians (Peter Thiel, Ron Paul) who dream of a prosperous stateless future; left-wing technoprogressists (Nick Bostrom, Bill Joy) who understand high technologies as a way of survival of mankind and are aware of the risks of their uncontrolled use; bioliberal transhumanists (John Harris, Julian Savulescu, Arthur Kaplan, Henry Greeley, Allen Buchanan, Gregory Pence), defending the idea of reproductive cloning and improving human cognitive abilities, as well as representatives of religious syncretism (Mormontranshumanist Association), pointing out the similarity of some ideas of transhumanism (hope for eternal happiness in the face of death) with elements of the traditional religious worldview^[8].

Thus, it can be concluded that transhumanism is currently being formed as a field of scientific research and as an influential international movement with its own ideology and worldview.  Transhumanistic research creates its own methodological and lexical apparatus, interprets already known concepts in a new way and introduces many special or proprietary concepts into the public space, such as: "singular boundary", "transhumanistic evolution", "radical prolongation of life", "NBICS convergence" (nano-, bio-, informational and cognitive social technologies), etc.^[9] 

In the last decade, digital technologies have given a new impetus to the transhumanism movement, the dynamic development of which has allowed some scientists to see the transition to trans- and then to posthumanism as a reality of the near future. Given the existing uncertainties, such a reality can be presented in two variants (scenarios) of development. The first option may be a just and harmonious society – a transhuman electronic social democracy with a world government, and the second is a conflicting society in which people and posthumans cannot harmoniously coexist with each other. Supporters of the first scenario are the founders of the modern version of transhumanism, F.M. Esfendiari, R. Feynman and their followers, who viewed man as a product of incomplete evolution, they believed that by increasing intellectual abilities, automating labor and expanding freedom, transhuman society would overcome the extremes of capitalism and socialism, and world governance would replace authoritarianism or representative democracy through direct electronic democracy. On the other side there are pessimistic representatives of bioethics (J. Annas, L. Andrews, N. Agar, etc.) who believe that the strengthening of human potential will lead to the stratification of society and civil war between groups of ordinary people and transformed individuals and consider the prohibition of reproductive technologies and genetic modifications as the most important condition for the survival of mankind.

The third and very common point of view is that transhuman reality is a utopia, and the main thing is not the question of its practical implementation, but the influence of the ideology of transhumanism on public consciousness. As V.A. Shchipkov notes, "transhumanism at the present stage does not create a transhumanoid (physically and biologically different from modern people), but a transhumanist – a person committed to a transhumanistic worldview"^[10]. Taking into account the facts we have given, it is worth correcting that work on the creation of a transhumanoid is also actively underway, but, indeed, it is very important to understand the ideological foundations of transhumanism, its origins and causes of its spread in modern society. Transhumanists' belief in the necessity of fundamental anthropological transformations and in their exceptionally positive character calls us to carefully and seriously comprehend the ideas they propose.

2. Scientism as an ideological source of transhumanism and the "main question of philosophy"

Formulated by F. In 1886, Engels proposed two ideological coordinate systems, two reference points – materialism and idealism, which can still serve as a certain reference point for discussing philosophical problems, despite the fact that many representatives of philosophical knowledge consider the "basic question of philosophy" outdated and out of date^[11].. In the depths of the materialist paradigm, such forms of worldview as atheism, evolutionism, determinism, anthropocentric voluntarism, as well as scientism and its receiver, modern transhumanism, have formed and entered the scientific and public discussion field.

 The historical birthplace of Scientism is undoubtedly the New Age with its assertion of rationalism as a global ideological project and epistemological approach and as the most important characteristic of the New European culture, on the basis of which a Scientistist worldview is formed. In this paradigm, the world is intelligible to the mind, a person has the ability to cognize and transform it, and science and technology are able to solve many, and in the future, perhaps, even all the problems of humanity.

 It can be argued that scientism begins with the ideas of F. Bacon, offering an image of a society of the future without slavery and poverty, which is controlled by the scientific elite, and scientists are actively working to "defeat disease, prolong life, restore youth, slow down aging, increase strength and control pain, as well as create new species by transplanting one view in another"^[12]. The enlighteners also believed that time and technology would contribute to improving living conditions and, ultimately, man would be able to overcome not only oppression and inequality, but also disease and death; in particular, D. Diderot believed that humanity could evolve into a great many posthuman species. In the treatise "D'Alembert's Dream", he believed that in the future it is possible to reconstruct the human brain, as well as intelligent animals and animal–human hybrids, and that complex machines will be able to have intelligence ^[13].

Scientism and the anti-scientism opposing it, which also originates historically and ideologically in the XVII century, for example, in the person of the philosophical ideas of B. Pascal, but which in Modern times is rather a peripheral intellectual phenomenon, in contrast to scientism, represent two images of the philosophy of science, in the first of which philosophy, to paraphrase the famous words P.N. Milyukova, – "her majesty's opposition", and in the second – "opposition to her majesty", where "her majesty" is science^[14].

There is no doubt that the real philosophy of science, as well as, for example, the philosophy of art, law, education, politics, etc., is its anti-scientific concept. However, the predominant is the first (scientific) orientation, in which philosophy is subordinated to science. On the one hand, this is explained by the ideological and historical source of scientism itself, connected with O. Comte's ideas about the futility and meaninglessness of metaphysical searches, on the other hand, with the peculiarities of the modern socio–cultural situation in which the metaphysical sphere of human being and society, in the words of M. Heidegger, is forgotten, and its utilitarian-pragmatic comes to the fore. component.

By the middle of the twentieth century, in the wake of the crisis of not only classical, but also non-classical science, the positivist-scientistist worldview is declining, which on the one hand is associated with the crisis of positivist methodology, on the other hand with the awareness of the possibilities and limits of scientific and technological progress against the background of tragic events in the history of the twentieth century (world wars, totalitarianism, environmental problems etc.). The reaction to the crisis was the emergence of postpositivism, in line with which a second (anti-scientististic) image of the philosophy of science is being formed.  Postpositivism overcomes the idea of universality of scientific laws characteristic of classical science, denies the monopoly on truth and its correspondent understanding, giving preference to conventional ideas. Thus, the epistemological and methodological relativism characteristic of postpositivism has become an indicator of the decomposition from within both classical positivism and the scientific worldview as a whole.

A peculiar response to this crisis was the emergence in the second half of the twentieth century of renewed scientism or transhumanism, which, as it were, intercepted the baton of positivism and became a new tool for modern justification of the global evolutionary-materialist paradigm. In this case, it is quite possible to ask the question – why the "relay race" of positivism-scientism still did not end in the second half of the XX century, but gained a "second wind" in the face of modern transhumanistic ideas, which (in the form of humanism-rationalism-progressivism-technocratism of modernity, or Modern Times) long before today, even if not explicitly, but still demonstrated their completely anti-humanistic potential, practically realized in the anthropological and social catastrophes of the first half of the recently departed last century? A sufficiently intelligible explanation of this situation, no matter how surprising and strange it may sound, at first glance, can be found in the polemic of opposing solutions to the "basic question of philosophy", which is currently often not taken seriously and is considered hopelessly outdated, together with the concept, for example, of "matter", which is so outdated that currently, there is hardly a serious scientist or philosopher "who would work with such a concept"^[15].

Is it possible to say that the discussion between evolutionism and creationism, synergetism and teleologism, and finally between theism and atheism is outdated? In the context of the conversation about scientism and anti–scientism, we note that they are directly related to the options for solving the "main question of philosophy", being ideological companions - the first is materialism, the second is idealism. This statement needs some justification.

The inevitable ideological companions of materialism are: atheism^[16], evolutionism, synergetism (synergetic vision of the world), scientism^[17], determinism, reductionism, anthropological voluntarism (anthropovolutarianism, egovolutarianism), revolutionary heroism, positivism – understood as a metaphysical dream or fainting, when a person consciously desires ignorance, oblivion, cowardice and petrified insensitivity.

The opposing ideological camp, each of whose positions is the opposite of the provisions presented above: idealism, teism, or theistic religion (in order to avoid misunderstandings, we note that if you ask yourself whether the mind or spirit can be impersonal, then the answer is likely to be negative), creationism (which is mandatory the ideological companion of theism "... is the most consistent variant of objective idealism in the analyzed relation"^[18]), teleologism, anti–scientism, indeterminism^[19], anti-reductionism, providentialism, religious asceticism^[20], antipositivism - understood as a desire to awaken from a metaphysical dream or fainting. Note that the theistic religion in this case means Christianity, because if religion (Lat. re – return particle, Lat. ligare – connection)  this is the restoration of a lost connection, or the return of the prodigal son, then only Christianity is a religion in the full sense of the word.

3. Transhumanism in the context of the controversy between anthropovolutarianism and providentialism

It is possible to assert that among the main provisions of two opposing worldviews, the main ones – in terms of human life navigation – are not materialism and idealism, but anthropovolutarianism and providentialism, and materialism and idealism, atheism and theism, evolutionism and creationism, scientism and anti-scientism are the means of substantiating the first or the second. Or is the main vector of human thoughts, feelings, aspirations, hopes, expectations, actions: I myself do what I want, because I can do everything (and if not everything, then a lot)! Otherwise: My will be done! Or, on the contrary: Lord! Thy will be done, not mine! We emphasize that these ideological, value and activity attitudes are quite equivalent, because neither one nor the other can be confirmed or refuted. However, it may be objected here that such a dichotomy is far-fetched, artificial and greatly coarsens and simplifies the actual "motley palette" of centuries-old ideological searches of mankind. In this case, let us pay attention to the fact that whatever philosophical and ideological construct we would not take, to which "ism" we would not turn, it, one way or another, will be reduced to one of these two poles or "work for them"; moreover, it is possible to assert that any teaching, or the ideological structure is created, in the end, precisely – "under" anthropovolutarianism or providentialism opposing it – even if it is not only not proclaimed, but even, perhaps, is not comprehended.

The confrontation of the ideological poles of anthropolyuntarianism and providentialism may be the main semantic vector of the entire metaphysical and physical history of mankind and man; we will not find a single epoch, question, problem, idea, doctrine, thinker, tradition that would be outside of this confrontation.

What are the reasons for this confrontation? Where does it come from, why is it so stable, when and how will it end? In principle, materialistic and atheistic consciousness has no answers to these questions. At the same time, in the theistic Christian worldview, quite definite, logical, reasonable and mutually agreed answers are given to such questions, i.e., they are characterized by coherence, which is a sign of scientific, not mythological discourse.

The answer to the question about the beginning and causes of the confrontation of voluntaristic and providential attitudes is found not in natural, but in Sacred history, which natural history, according to the Christian view, does not oppose, but, on the contrary, is completely consistent with it (representing a segment lying on a straight line, which is Sacred History). Let us repeat once again that the theistic interpretation is in no way inferior – in terms of its heuristic power and rational status – to the atheistic interpretation, precisely because of the fundamental non–verifiability and non-falsifiability of neither one nor the other.

One of the events of Sacred history is the resistance and falling away from God of a part of the angels and further – the fall of man, and at the heart of both is, one can say, one's own will, one's own opinion, self-exaltation, self-will, self-lust, summed up the concept of pride, which is the cause and the beginning of all the passions that torment a person, giving him hopeless despondency and longing, emptiness and meaninglessness of his being and closing his path to salvation. This pride is a manifestation of the voluntaristic principle, which first appeared as a result of the disastrous realization of the angel's free will in Sacred history and is invariably present – because of the freedom of human will – in natural history – the history of mankind and the life of every person.

Now we can answer the question – why is it that scientism, which originated at the dawn of Modern Times, strengthened later by the emergence of positivism, and which came to destruction both from the outside (anti–scientism) and from the inside (postpositivism), after the social and anthropological upheavals of the first half of the past century, now, at the turn of XX–XXI centuries . is transhumanism gaining strength again? Because both scientism and positivism, and related materialism, atheism and evolutionism are not self–sufficient ideological aspirations, but various manifestations or "symptoms" of that very anthropovolutarianism, when it seems to a person that he can do something by himself, being willing and thinking. However, although thinking, but still, according to the exact definition of B. Pascal, – a reed that instantly breaks at the first breath of non–existence - both for each person and for humanity as a whole: in the face of the fact that all people are mortal and that humanity will eventually disappear altogether and, moreover, the planet Earth, the Solar System and the universe, all self–and-own free ideas, projects and actions become completely meaningless and fundamentally unworkable. The eternal question immediately arises here: What should I do then? Providentialism, which opposes anthropovolutarianism, gives a very definite answer to it.

4. Bridge over the abyss: illusion or reality?

Providentialism is the idea that the dialogue of the will of God and the free will of man is at the center of the existence of the universe, the history of society, as well as human life. In the ontological-cosmological part of anthropocentric voluntarism, which is the semantic element of the general ideological materialistic-evolutionist context, the material world appears as a result of the Big Bang, evolves for billions of years until the appearance of man and civilization and, after billions of years, most likely ends and disappears – the current expansion of the Universe will be replaced by compression and gravitational collapse – until the next explosion and expansion (model of a pulsating universe).

From the point of view of providentialism, which is an element of the Christian worldview, the matter of the world created by God was not at all what we know it now and with which science deals – it was absolutely flawless, perfect, imperishable, alien to both self–organization and evolution, as if it did not need them. However, along with the human fall from grace and falling away from the Creator God, the entire material world entrusted to man's care changed and became damaged, matter became as we know it - imperfect, perishable, changeable, self–destructive and self-organizing. Thus, between the original state of the material world and the present one lies a catastrophe in the form of the fall of man. We live in a post-catastrophic world and, in principle, we cannot look into the pre-catastrophic world. This situation is similar to such a statement of modern physical cosmology, according to which scientific knowledge, in principle, cannot penetrate into the state of matter before the Big Bang (before the beginning of space and time, before the beginning of everything), because both the Universe with all its fundamental parameters and constants, and we in it are what appeared after the explosion (after the beginning of time)^[21].

In the light of the above considerations, it will not be groundless to assert that the Big Bang, which is being discussed in science, can be compared not with the Creation of the world, which religion speaks of, but with the fall of man, because the material world in which we are located is the result of a grandiose catastrophe, which science speaks of as a Great the explosion, and religion – as about the fall of man. This interpretation immediately removes all questions about the alleged incompatibility of scientific and religious ideas in the ontological and cosmological fields: if the Bible speaks about the material world, then it is pre–catastrophic, science cannot say anything about it, because it deals only with the post–catastrophic material world, and between the first and second world - an absolutely insurmountable boundary (and not the same, but immeasurably greater than between the state of matter before and after the Big Bang). Anticipating a possible objection to the fact that according to scientific ideas, man appeared billions of years after the Big Bang, and according to religious statements, after the fall, man does not appear, but already exists, it should be noted that after the fall, man also appears, because this is a completely different person than before the fall, like the whole the world after the catastrophe is not the same as it was before it. The time intervals – the scientific billions of years from the Big Bang to man and the religious moment from the fallen to the fallen man – can be quite identical if we assume that natural history is a segment lying on a straight line, which is Sacred history: the length of any, even very large, segment lying on a straight line, as it is known to be zero.

If scientific knowledge has no opportunity to look beyond the horizon of events before the beginning of time, into the so–called singular state of matter, then religious knowledge has such an opportunity – to look into the pre-catastrophic state of the world, even if incomplete or even minimal. It is clear that man himself cannot look beyond the boundary of the fall by any intellectual efforts, separating the primordial perfect material world from the present, also material, but already imperfect world. However, God lifts the veil over the world before man before the fall, otherwise how would we know about the state of Eden, about the creation of the world and about the fall itself as the beginning of natural or earthly history, on the vicissitudes of which we are now? If religion (Latin re-ligare) is the restoration of a lost connection, or the return of the prodigal son is the return of man to God, from whom he fell away as a result of the fall, then the end of natural, earthly history is the completion of the current fallen state of man and the world and their miraculous restoration to their former perfect, incorruptible state, which It was given to man by God at the time of creation, and which he lost through the temptation of the enemy and his destructive influence by the primordial sin. The new Heaven and the new Earth, which are mentioned in Chapters 21 and 22 of the Revelation of St. John the Theologian, is a new state of the material world, similar to the one that existed before the fall.

One of the main existentials of a person is the fact of his mortality and, most importantly, his knowledge about it, which inevitably leads everyone, one way or another, to the idea of overcoming death, to the idea of immortality, or – a saving bridge across the abyss of non–existence, which connects the present being of a person with his future being. In search of this bridge, a person talks about various "variants" of immortality, the main of which are the following: physical (naturalistic) immortality (after death we will disintegrate into molecules and atoms that will enter the eternal cycle of matter in nature, therefore, we will not disappear completely); biological immortality (we continue in our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren), social immortality (we will perpetuate ourselves during our lifetime with the fruits of creative activity), scientific-technical, technological and technocratic immortality (just what scientism, cosmism and transhumanism are talking about); Christian, providential immortality: For our sake and for our salvation, the Lord God Jesus Christ became a man, died, entered into human death and came out of it by the Holy Resurrection, defeating and destroying it with His Divinity, giving us the possibility of immortality infinitely surpassing all conceivable benefits, through being with Him, attaching, sticking, communion with Him.

The first three variants of immortality are completely illusory, because in each of them, what sets and forms our "I", personality, existence, irrevocably disappears: the molecules and atoms into which I disintegrated, the burdock that grew out of me, even children and grandchildren, even the outstanding creative legacy left after me– it's not me! And I need it to be me who remains – all, entirely, completely, without a trace, as such, and not what remains after me. It seems that such a variant of immortality seems to be offered by transhumanism. However, apparently, we are talking here only about a certain prolongation of life, but not immortality. Even if we imagine the future possibility of a completely utopian "rewriting" of the personality on another material carrier – instead of a dilapidated body, the question arises – will every inhabitant of the planet have such an opportunity? And even if we assume that everyone will have it, the question remains – what about the thousands of generations who died before this amazing opportunity appeared? The true immortality of a person necessarily implies a chance for everyone, without exception – those who have lived, are living and will live.

In the coordinates of atheistic consciousness, transhumanism is one of an incredible number of intellectual constructions that a person has built throughout his history in an attempt to answer questions about who he is, what he can know, what he should do, and what to hope for. From the standpoint of the Christian worldview, transhumanism is another and one of many anthropovolutaristic traps into which a person falls throughout his history and it is possible to get out of them only by overcoming anthropocentrism and voluntarism – through providentialism, which promises us "... the acquisition of both the universe and man of such a state, an insignificant part of which is the unattainable limit of aspirations and the aspirations of modern science with all its technologies that amaze our natural imagination"^[22].

Conclusion

Returning to the confrontation of the ideological poles of materialism and idealism, atheism and theism, evolutionism and creationism, anthropovolutionism and providentialism, let us pay attention to their unequal value and metaphysical asymmetry in terms of human choice of one of these systems as global life guidance and navigation.

One can proceed from the truth of the first, within the framework of the main statements of which there is no transcendent being, and what religion is talking about is the creation of the human mind and a cultural and historical phenomenon. If so, what then? It turns out that nothing is metaphysical and ontological zero: someday there will be neither me, nor my descendants, nor humanity, nor nature, nor even the Universe, everything will end completely and irrevocably.

If we proceed from the truth of the second worldview system, then our life is in no way an "empty and stupid joke", it has a non-illusory meaning and a higher dimension. The famous Pascal's bet speaks about the ontological asymmetry of these two opposing systems of metaphysical navigation of man. It is impossible not to make a decisive life "bet" on one of these systems, because each of us is already "in the game", i.e. lives in the white world.

If I make a materialistic, atheistic and anthropocentric "bet" and it wins (i.e. this system of ideas turns out to be true), I, to my extreme regret and disappointment, win nothing. If I make the opposite "bet" and she loses (i.e. there is no personal transcendent being), then, strange as it may seem for my opponent, I do not lose anything. If this "bet" wins, the theistic and providential worldview system turns out to be true, then I win everything – real knowledge, infinite freedom, true meaning, unconditional happiness, great joy, eternal life.

You can simply select and copy link from below text field.