Abstract: In this post, I discuss how an accidental insight while peeing helped me clarify the nature of societal structure, God, and a post-AGI economy.

People say epiphanies appear out of nowhere. I didn’t know they come while peeing. I mean it sent Archimedes racing across the street naked, so I guess I’m still in good company.¹

Allow me to explain. I was standing in the washroom about to relieve myself. Then I realized I was standing. I was supposed to sit down and pee. That’s what we are taught. Something inside me said, “Hey, God is watching.” And sure enough, after a grunt, I slid my pants down to do my business “the proper way.”

What happened here? Obviously, peeing while sitting is more hygienic and medically recommended². But then, why didn’t I do it in the first place? It’s because I am lazy. Sliding my pants down takes effort and time. Avoiding sitting is a form of short-term gratification.

Short-term gratification exists everywhere. It is the bane Scott Alexander talks about in “Meditations on Moloch.” He describes how systems can settle into suboptimal short-term equilibria.

Elders have already thought about this. Religious and social rules dictate how to do things the proper way. I broadly divide them into three levels of abstraction.

1. how to relate to oneself (inner peace, addressing anxiety, mental well-being),
2. how to behave with immediate others (family, friends, people around you), and
3. how to behave with unseen others (nation, governance, justice, ethics)

Their innovation was rather ingenious. God. An omnipotent being that watches over all. I mean, we don’t even have to label it as such. People change their behavior when they think they are being watched. It’s called the Hawthorne effect .

The Watcher

The idea of a watcher instills fear; it somehow instills introspection and the need to do the “right thing”. Does it now, Basil? You might say. Aren’t the religious clerics involved in sex scandals? Or aren’t frauds and cheats and dacoits all spiritual? Yes. To which I say, interpret my claims as statements about populations. Good people can do bad things. Bad people can do good things. Use random variables to model our society. That’s a more effective way.

And why care about doing the right thing? I should have clarified this assumption before. We all inherently care about humanity’s long-term survival. Societal stability is the axiomatic goal. Why? Why not just die? Who knows. I lack an answer to that yet. Maybe because this planet is beautiful and worth living for. See Emerson’s Nature and Beauty and William James’ essay .

But why can’t we just act normal? Why doesn’t natural selection favor actions that optimize for the collective good? For example, taking only as many resources as needed and not hoarding them. Why are politicians generally greedy? Why are entrepreneurs and corporate CEOs often involved in fraud?

If humans didn’t hit their neighbor and take over their land, we wouldn’t have the need for land laws. And other laws. In fact, the whole judicial system. Laws exist because people fall out of line. The best kinds of laws are those not created by man. Laws imbued with divine character (“ordained by God”) carry a fearsome effectiveness like none other.

An Argument for the Absolute Existence of God

Returning to the trillion-dollar question of God’s existence and nature. My approach is not to worry about this question at all. This is how intelligent people should approach the question pragmatically. It is impossible to settle this debate objectively through a scientific experiment. So, my question is, even if God doesn’t exist, how does it matter? Why can’t humans make sure not to rape or murder or pillage? Why not be nice to people? All religion asks of us is to be nice to people. Let’s make sure of that. By whatever means we find compelling.

Returning back to the Mortal

But again, why is human nature, at its core, selfish and destructive?

I believe our brains evolved historically to survive, not thrive. Our brains evolved in environments that resembled zero-sum games. For example, the ability to hunt and provide food for oneself meant taking it away from someone else’s plate.

Rape and murder helped us take up more resources and make more kids. It made sure the winner had a larger representation in the gene pool. If you could make people work for you, you could have wheat, grains, meat, and milk. Wheat didn’t grow on its own. One needed to till the land, sow the seeds, irrigate, and do all kinds of magical stuff that farmers do. The same goes for agriculture, weaving, and power generation. Thus, natural selection selected a self-centered, violent nature as humanity’s default prior.

This is the moment when I had my epiphany. You see, I have been thinking a lot, and I mean a lot, about how a post-AGI economy would structure itself. The fundamental reason why people exist is to work. People are paid different salaries and can afford different lifestyles because of how valuable they are to society. On average, I mean, and I don’t count quants, politicians, or consultants here, btw.

The utopic abundance of AGI?

Now, imagine the promise of AI—not the weak ones we have today, but real AGI. Imagine a world where prices do not hold value. All resources are available on-demand, infinitely in quantity and quality. There is no reason for you to pay a premium for a better quality of service. There is no reason to pay at all. You can ask for anything, and it will be provided.

Economic systems based on the differential utility of man would stop to exist. For what will man show their abilities on? Machines would have automated all agriculture and food production. Ditto for power, for governance decisions, for art and culture. They will not need man’s services to produce goods.

How much does such a reality weigh on man’s conscience? Millions of years of evolution now faced with an age of ultimate plenty? Man will not bother with what another man has, because everything will be infinitely available. All imaginable sources of power, food, entertainment, pleasure.

And exactly, that is my point. A truly post-AGI world of abundance will invite man to ponder on the nature of societal rules once again. And by extension, on the need for an omnipotent watcher that appeals to inner conscience. The conscience that ultimately makes man do the “right thing”.

Footnotes

1. I have started to use the Hemingway style of writing . I find it quite useful.
2. See here .