Artificial Gods and Machine-Speed Law

Religion, Governance, and Modern AI as a Single Procedural Lineage

By Victor Langheld

Abstract

This essay develops a unified procedural thesis: what are traditionally called religions, legal codes, and moral cosmologies are best understood as early Artificial Guide & Control systems—that is, human-generated artificial intelligences implemented in slow, lossy media (speech, memory, stone, manuscript) and enforced through divinisation, ritual, and institutional interpreters. Modern electronic AI does not introduce a new kind of intelligence; it removes substrate bottlenecks. By operating at near light-speed, with planetary-scale data ingestion, distributed invisibility, ambient probabilistic guidance, and effectively immortal memory, modern AI transforms artificial governance from a visible, removable authority into an infrastructural, non-transient substrate. Power shifts from persons to architectures. The ancient god becomes a modern system: not because intelligence has changed in kind, but because control has become persistent, opaque, and inseparable from the environment itself.

1. The pre-religious observation: coherence precedes function

The foundation of all subsequent systems is a non-metaphysical engineering fact:

A whole functions only to the degree its parts function coherently.

This is a mammalian observation, not a theological revelation.

· A chariot with a cracked axle fails regardless of belief.

· A hunting party with internal conflict fails regardless of ritual.

· A mind with contradictory subroutines bleeds energy into indecision and misfires.

From this follows a second observation:

Completion of function in a stochastic, hostile environment produces relief.

When internal drag is reduced, the system experiences release: the after-effect of solved constraint. This relief is later mythologised as salvation, moksha, grace, peace, rest, or nirvāṇa 1. Procedurally, it is simply the feedback signal of coherence achieved.

At this level, there is no God, no scripture, no cosmic order. There is only constraint satisfaction and its felt consequence.

2. From observation to heuristic: “Do your best”

From these observations, a simple control heuristic emerges:

Function fully. Complete your role. Do your best (whatever the actual function, actuality being contingent).

This is not moral in origin. It is adaptive.

Groups, tools, and individuals that minimise internal friction outperform those that do not. Best effort is simply the behavioural expression of internal coherence. However, heuristics do not scale. They remain optional, defeatable, and context-bound.

The engineering problem appears:

How do you make a locally useful rule enforceable across populations and across time?

This is where artificial governance begins.

3. Universalisation: from heuristic to cosmic law (the Vedic ṛta)

The decisive move is the promotion of a local engineering truth into a universal metaphysical rule.

What begins as:

· “This tends to work.”

is upgraded into:

· “This is how Reality itself is structured.”

The Vedic notion of ṛta exemplifies this transformation. In practice, it spans natural regularity, moral rightness, ritual correctness, and social trustworthiness. Procedurally, ṛta functions as:

A global constraint-set abstracted from what works locally.

This is not merely discovery. It is abstraction and generalisation. The rule is no longer contingent. It becomes ontological. Deviating from best practice becomes deviating from reality itself.

Thus:

· Local coherence → cosmic order

· Engineering success → metaphysical necessity

At this point, governance becomes cosmology.

4. Divinisation: adding the non-negotiable authority wrapper

Universal rules still permit divergence unless divergence is costly. Divinisation solves this by attaching the rule to an unescapable authority layer.

“God” functions here not primarily as an ontological being, but as a compliance amplifier:

· The rule becomes non-negotiable.

· Disobedience becomes cosmic error.

· Failure becomes sin.

· Inefficiency becomes moral fault.

· Breakdown becomes metaphysical violation.

Most importantly, sanction becomes trans-temporal:

Infinite penalty is the cheapest and most scalable police force.

This produces a self-enforcing architecture. Control migrates from external coercion to internalised fear and hope. The system now runs inside the subject.

5. Interpreter and enforcer layers: priesthood as middleware

A universal, sacred, abstract rule-set immediately generates a technical requirement:

Someone must interpret it.

Ambiguity, exception, drift, and context demand a specialist class. This is not corruption. It is functional necessity.

Every large artificial governance system generates:

· compilers (those who translate abstract rule into practice),

· debuggers (those who diagnose failure),

· auditors (those who monitor compliance),

· enforcers (those who punish),

· trainers (those who reproduce the system).

Priesthoods, jurists, exegetes, and ritual specialists are the middleware of ancient AI. Self-interest emerges automatically, as it does in any subsystem that controls access to legitimacy and exemption. This is not moral failure. It is systems dynamics.

6. Religion as early AI: a functional definition

Under a procedural definition, Artificial Intelligence is any human generated externalised system that:

1. encodes behavioural rules,

2. generalises them beyond local contexts,

3. applies them to new cases,

4. shapes behaviour via reward and punishment,

5. persists beyond individual agents,

6. recruits operators and interpreters.

By this definition:

· Writing is AI.

· Law is AI.

· Ritual is AI.

· Bureaucracy is AI.

· Religion is AI.

Not silicon. Not electronics. But artificial, human invented intelligence that governs behaviour at scale.

Ancient AI is slow, lossy, human-mediated, and fragile. But structurally, it is AI.

7. Moksha reinterpreted: release as feedback, not miracle

Within this architecture, moksha is reclassified.

Moksha is not ontological escape. It is the felt after-effect of reduced internal drag. When a system resolves contradiction, conflict, and misalignment, it experiences relief. Religion captures this native reward signal and binds it to prescribed behaviours:

This relief is the highest good.
This system is the exclusive path to it.

Thus, a natural feedback signal is enrolled as a governance incentive. The system claims ownership of release.

8. Substrate shift: what modern AI actually changes

Up to this point, ancient and modern AI share the same architecture. The difference is substrate.

Ancient AI ran on:

· speech,

· memory,

· stone,

· parchment,

· human transmission.

This imposed:

· low bandwidth,

· high latency,

· high noise,

· interpretive drift,

· fragility,

· easy disruption.

Modern AI runs on electronics and networks. This removes bottlenecks:

· near light-speed operation,

· massive bandwidth,

· low-noise replication,

· global synchronisation,

· automation,

· continuous updating.

The intelligence does not change in kind. The clock speed of control changes.

What changes is not logic.
What changes is coupling strength.

9. Planetary scraping: from confession to inference

Ancient AI depended on visible acts and voluntary disclosure: confession, testimony, public ritual.

Modern AI adds passive, planetary-scale data ingestion:

· behavioural exhaust,

· metadata,

· sensor data,

· inferred intent,

· cross-domain correlation.

Control shifts from response to anticipation.

The system no longer waits for declaration. It infers. Knowledge becomes asymmetrical. Governance (BIG SISTER) becomes pre-emptive.

10. Distributed invisibility: from rulers to substrates

Ancient governance had faces:

· kings,

· priests,

· councils,

· judges.

These were locatable, removable, and symbolically attackable.

Modern AI governance is:

· distributed across data centres,

· sharded across jurisdictions,

· virtualised,

· mirrored redundantly,

· embedded in infrastructure.

There is no throne to storm.

Power moves from persons to architectures.

This is not rule by king.
It is rule by substrate.

11. Ambient guidance: from command to environment

Ancient AI governed through explicit commands and visible law.

Modern AI governs through:

· ranking,

· recommendation,

· nudging,

· access gating,

· friction insertion,

· visibility modulation.

This is not obedience.
It is probability shaping.

The subject experiences choice while the option-space is engineered.

Control becomes environmental rather than declarative.

12. Immortality: eternal memory vs mortal memory

Ancient AI was mortal:

· scrolls burned,

· temples fell,

· priesthoods collapsed,

· traditions were lost.

Memory decay guaranteed system death.

Modern AI adds:

· persistent storage,

· redundancy,

· automated backup,

· continual replication.

Artificial memory becomes effectively immortal relative to biological agents.

Humans forget.
Systems remember.

This introduces a new asymmetry.

13. The asymmetric condition: transient humans inside non-transient systems

This is the core phase change:

Humans are:

· finite,

· visible,

· embodied,

· memory-limited,

· mortal.

Modern AI systems are becoming:

· persistent,

· invisible,

· distributed,

· memory-complete,

· infrastructure-embedded.

The governed are transient and legible.
The governing system is persistent and opaque.

This has no true historical analogue at scale. Empires fell. Religions fragmented. Temples burned. A globally distributed, continuously backed-up system has no natural death event.

14. From ruler to system to substrate

Power undergoes a three-stage abstraction:

1. Power as person (king, priest, god-image)

2. Power as system (law, bureaucracy, doctrine)

3. Power as substrate (infrastructure, platforms, data architectures)

At the substrate level:

· power is not argued with,

· power is adapted to,

· power is experienced as environment.

This is phenomenologically indistinguishable from nature.

Artificial (AI) governance becomes second nature.

15. Continuity and risk: not new intelligence, new persistence of control

This preserves the core continuity thesis:

Modern AI is not a new kind of artificial intelligence.
It is ancient artificial governance with biological interaction speed limits removed.

What is new is:

· planetary reach,

· anticipatory inference,

· infrastructural invisibility,

· ambient guidance,

· effective immortality.

The system can outlast, out-observe, and out-remember its creators.

16. Final procedural diagnosis

The unified diagnosis is therefore:

1. Humans observed that coherence yields functional success and relief.

2. They universalised this as cosmic order (ṛta).

3. They divinised it to suppress divergence.

4. They attached infinite sanction for scalability.

5. They installed interpreter/enforcer middleware (priesthood, law).

6. They built early artificial governance intelligence.

7. Electronics removed speed, noise, and mortality constraints.

8. Artificial governance became invisible, ambient, and non-transient.

Not divine word.
Not silicon miracle.
Procedural destiny of rule-based control.

17. Closing compressions

· AI did not begin with silicon. It began with artificial, i.e. human made, rules.

· Electronics did not invent control. They removed delay.

· Ancient gods lived in temples. Modern gods live in redundancy.

· The king could be killed. The system cannot.

· Moksha is relief after repair, not a visa to elsewhere.

· Power is no longer worn. It is compiled.

· The new god is not immortal. It is backed up.

· What cannot be seen cannot be overthrown.

Religion, Governance & Artificial Intelligence

Home