THE usefuls of the world have revived an old concept of their own, that of the adversary.
The man-made weave of datastreams and gizmo-links that extends beyond our planet, forms a nebulous and growing manifestation of our existence, and to outsiders this could seem like an ‘entity.’
Beyond what these hypothetical aliens* might think of our ‘entity’, the possibility of other entities arises. How would we recognise another entity? If it was not like our entity, and projected no intelligible action, how could we recognise it from the natural chaos beyond ourselves? Could there not be an entity of such disparity with our own, that we could not distinguish if we were interacting with it or natural forces. Or are we merely conjuring explanations for unknowns?
Some go further, suggesting that we have already encountered another entity and we hear from them every time a remote orbiter has a ‘mysterious loss of power.’
The mistake I fear is in the naming of it. Surely such pigeonholing will ensure that when an entity is encountered, our reaction to it will be predisposed towards aggression.
Still, as we periodically go through waves of externalizing and internalizing the ‘adversary’, it may be merely a useful evolutionary phobia to keep us on our toes. But perhaps if we called adversaries ‘challenges’ we would be more effective when put to the test. Am I now acceding to the power of words?
* To be clear, beings that did not originate from Earth, its colonies, or any descendents of Earth or its colonies.
Comments