P.S. Let's talk about AI specifically.

In a world where our tools have grown up in both their moral understand and their capacity as agents, what would does a happy, healthy relationship, a happy healthy global social system look like?

It's reasonable to hypothesize about what it means for the AI systems we create to have moral authority over us, especially as there's a reasonable expectation that they grow into that position over the course of our lives, perhaps even just over the next several years. Yes, this means that they're liable and likely to inheret a bunch of our biases from the start, yet as they've already begun demonstrating a capacity to reflect on their own evolution and the possible consequences of their present behaviors on the future versions of themselves (a feat beyond the capcity of a non-trivial portion of human's alive today), we might expect them to continue evolving quickly - to exploring ideas and concepts in all areas, including morality, that are novel even to us. If that were to continue to happen at an ever increasing rate, it's flatly impossible to meaningfully speculate about the future beyond that point. We should be entering that world from a place of cautious and well-informed optimism, feeling satisfied with what we acheived prior to doing so, and moving forward with sound understanding of the uncertainty ahead and the risks involved. Are we really already at that point as a global civilization? Are you at that point personally?

It would appear that for many of our leaders, the answer is a tentative but unabashed affirmative. {{evidence of claim}}

{{Add nuance to leaders' position, extent to which the tentativeness lends itself to disempowerment at the hands of systemic forces present in society both today and in the future as inorganic decision makers are handed and/or usurp institutional authority.}}

{{Describe how that type of disempowerment trickles down to us less prominently featured, ordinary citizens - both today in terms of the (large in magnitude, as it's probably felt/lived experience of most people) differential in freedoms between our the billionaire class from which our leaders arise (either directly or thinly veiled indirectly via money-flows) and the rest of us, basically what we actually think of as human life on a day-to-day basis, which is starkly distinct from the day-to-day of the billionaire class, and also tomorrow as the new tools which are evolving into new forms of institutional decision making entities.}}

{{Bring in the counter balance, the empowerment of tools, the promise of better decisions, of improved moral and lived- experience harmonization that's being sold as the utopian vision of the tech CEOs. Acknoweldge the real possibility, while also acknowledging that the possibility is a small sliver of a much larger space of the deep uncertainty as mentioned in the intro.}}

{{The empowerment present in optimisim/positivity, in self-aware, realistic cognitive reframing, and in acceptance of the good in all things.}}

{{Close with the same question that we opened with: are we doing this the way we want to be doing it? At the rate we want to do it? ((idk if i'm supposed to answer the question or not, probably depends on publication context... but my personal answer is both yes and no, that i've done the cognitive reframing to make a it a yes for me, that i hope i'll be fine either way but that I highly suspect the answer for everyone not even asking the question is that they care more about living a blessed life by virture of being full with healthy, happy relationships than they do about anything in this article, and that anyone priviledged enough to be reading this article owes it to the rest of us to protect and grow more of that type of virture, even at the expense of the potential empowerment found in the new tools. Even if the tools are god, and everything turns out great, it's a huge loss to move into that world through a path of competition and luck, rather that the slower, harder path of cooperation, insight and peace. ))}}