After generating quite a few articles in this project, I thought I would make a few personal comments.
How did you get the idea for this project?
In February, following the inaugration of Trump, I found myself asking AI for imagined future perspectives on our time and current events, and that led to this project. It often helps to imagine stepping outside of our culture and time to get a different perspective. In this case, it has helped me process the Trump debacle.
What led you to it in a more real sense?
There are several parts to this answer:
(a) I have always loved stories set in the future. In childhood, I loved stories by Jules Verne, Ray Bradbury, Isaak Azimov and others, and I later found Kim Stanley Robinson, Starhawk, Ursula Le Guin etc.
(b) In middle school, my teacher recommended The Turning Point by Fritjof Capra, and it resonated deeply with me and changed my life. It put me on a course to explore these topics more in-depth – domination and partnership cultures, sustainability, systems theories, new worldviews, and so on.
(c) I love perspective shifts and find them helpful and illuminating, including seeing ourselves through the eyes of (imagined) future generations who live in a different civilization. Setting the writings in the far future, in a regenerative civilization, sheds an outsider’s light on our civilization today.
(d) Critiques of our civilization often seem fragmented, superficial, and not very comprehensive. This project goes more to the essence, as I see it, and is more comprehensive. It’s the kind of project I would like to read but haven’t found, so I decided to create it. It may even be a small seed for similar projects created by others.
(e) I am curious of how it would be to live in a regenerative civilization. This is a way to explore and imagine myself into that world and allow it to inform my life here and now.
Are the topics of this project new for you?
Not at all. As I mentioned, I was introduced to this big-picture systems view when I was fifteen and The Turning Point by Fritjof Capra resonated deeply. I have explored, been aware of, and noticed these topics since then, and have sometimes talked and written about them as well. I have written about many of these topics in earlier blog posts, at least briefly.
What’s the point of the project?
The point is to…. Explore the outlines of a possible future civilization. Look back at human history, including our time, from that (imagined) perspective. Inspire. Invite to further explorations. And find ways to live all of this in my own life now. This is primarily for myself, and if others find something of benefit too, that’s icing on the cake.
I consider this AI version of this project a rough draft, a way to generate and explore aspects of this future civilization. In time, and if my health allows, I may make it into a human-created set of articles.
How does this project resonate with your own life?
I grew up in Norway, which does have more of a partnership orientation although it operates within a global culture which leans more towards domination. A lot of the orientations described in the Age of Regeneration are familiar to me from living in Norway, although they are taken a bit further.
I love much from the US West coast, and many of the subcultures I was involved in there (and also, to some extent, in Madison, Wisconson), have inspired the descriptions of this imagined future civilization.
In terms of my own life, I live on Finca Milagros in the Andes where we work on regeneration and developing a food forest. We are collecting rainwater, have a flush composting toilet, will set up solar panels for energy, and so on. This place has an international community where several are focused on regeneration and developing and living a more partnership-oriented life and community.
My experiences there also inspire and inform much when it comes to imagining this future regenerative civilization.
Isn’t it naive to assume we’ll develop a regenerative civilization?
That’s an interesting question.
No, it’s not naive…
(a) In one sense, the question reflects our current culture where more partnership-oriented orientations are often viewed as naive, unrealistic, and with suspicion. Of course, it can be done naively and there is no lack of examples from the last half century. They did it naively because they didn’t have much experience or many examples and models.
(b) This project assumes collapse and loss of most of humanity, which is not really naive.
(c) A regenerative civilization is the only one that’s not inherently ecocidal and suicidal, at least with a moderate to high population size and technological development, so in that sense it’s not naive.
(d) This project doesn’t assume it will happen, it’s an exploration of that possibility.
Yes, it’s probably naive in several ways…
(a) The collapse will likely be terrible for just about all of us.
(b) There is absolutely no guarantee that future Earth, some decades or a century in the future, will be fit for human life. It will reach tipping points and what’s on the other side may not be conducive for mammals.
(c) Even if we make it through, there is no guarantee that we collectively will develop an ecologically sound and sane culture and civilization. It may well be that many if not most will continue as before, or devolve into an even more tribal, zero-sum, and either/or orientation.
Where are we in terms of the ages outlined in the project?
We are in the Age of Separation, and specifically the late Age of Separation. The Age of Separation started with the agricultural revolution roughly ten thousand years ago, and the late Age of Separation is roughtly between the industrial and digital revolutions.
We are also in the early phase of the Great Unraveling, which likely will continue for centuries.
What’s the timeline for the Age of Regeneration?
That’s a good question. In terms of this project, I am thinking of it as “the far future”, several generations into the future. Maybe 150-300 years or more. In my mind, it’s 200-300 years into the future.
In terms of reality, it may never happen. We may create a planet that’s uninhabitable by creatures such as us. We may be decimated, leaving just a few percent of us, and the ones remaining may not have learned the lesson. We may be decimated, leaving just some of us, and we collectively learn from it and create a regenerative civilization. Then we may, of course, forget and make the same or similar mistakes again.
Why don’t you focus more on technology?
Because technology is not what will save us, and it’s impossible to imagine technology several centuries into the future, especially when collapse is between now and then.
Where did you get the names of the ages?
Sitting here now, I am actually not sure. They make sense, and I know that others use similar types of names for certain ages of humanity.
-> I looked it up just now, and it seems that people like Charles Eisenstein, Joanna Macy, David Korten and others – whom I am familiar with – unsurprisingly use the Age of Separation and the Great Unraveling.
What’s next with the project?
Here are some mini-projections: (a) Reorganize the index for the articles. (b) Prune and place some articles – the ones that duplicate a topic or are more peripheral – in the appendix. (c) Write articles on new topics. I have a long list of ideas for articles I haven’t worked on yet, and an equally long list of finished articles I have not published. (d) Revisiting and redo earlier articles, which is very much needed. (e) Possibly translate some or all into Spanish.
Why do you use AI?
I would love to write all of this myself, but it’s not realistic. I have CFS and brain fog so it’s difficult for me to read or write longer articles, especially when they need to be somewhat based in scholarship.
Using AI as an assistant, as I would work with a human assistant, makes this project possible.
It’s also fascinating to see what comes out of the AI on different topics.
How do you use AI?
I use ChatGPT 4o. Usually, I asked for an outline for an article on a topic and mention points and angles I would like to see included. I may ask for refinements, then ask for the full article, and then refine that.
What’s the process in more detail?
I use AI as an assistant.
The idea for the project comes from me. The idea for each article comes from me. The content of each article largely comes from me.
Just about all the topics of the articles come from articles I have written about in my blog over the last twenty years. This is just a repackaging of what I have written about in the past, and been interested in since my mid-teens when I first read The Turning Point by Fritjof Capra and then many related books.
When I ask for an article, I give the AI the topic, it already knows the context and the content and format of the other articles in the project. If it’s the rare article about the project itself, I leave the prompt open and general to see what comes out of the AI.
If it’s a regular article, I typically give instructions for the content and organization. I also give feedback on the drafts and ask for changes, often in several iterations. How thorough this process is varies from article to article.
Sometimes, I ask for specific wording and I edit parts of the text to be more clear and aligned with how I see something.
Who wrote the articles?
It’s difficult to answer. Conventional answers don’t really apply.
In a sense, AI wrote the articles. Most of the actual words came from the AI.
At the same time, the ideas and specific instructions come from me. Some of the phrasings do too.
We wrote it in partnership. I used the AI as an assistant, as you would work with a human assistant. That’s more accurate.
We can also say, and this is also true, that the collective humanity wrote the articles. The AI is trained on a large collection of texts from many times and cultures so what comes out comes – in a sense – from humanity as a whole.
Is the idea of ownership important?
It depends, and maybe not so much in this context.
In daily life, I don’t care much where something comes from. If it’s interesting, useful, insightful, poetic, beautiful, true, and so on, then I don’t care who it comes from. (Apart from in a practical sense since, if I know the author, I can find more from the same source.)
Unknown people without any credentials, including children, can come up with very insightful, beautiful, wise, and true words. Highly esteemed people often say stupid things, or – at least – they often have a very limited perspective. And even people I generally admire sometimes say or do things that seem pretty stupid.
The source doesn’t really matter.
What do you notice about the AI-generated text?
It is impressively knowledgable and able to construct a coherent text. It is, in many ways, a good assistant.
I also see shortcomings in most of these articles, both in content and tone.
Anyone familiar with the topic will notice where it falls short and is slightly off. In most paragraphs, there is something I don’t agree with or would have said differently. The point is not to create something that’s 100% accurate in a scholarly sense, and I consider these articles a rough sketch.
The tone is similarly not what I prefer and I usually settle for “good enough”. Also, the tone tends to be similar for all the texts. I would prefer a more diverse set of tones and voices, reflecting the different authors and topics.
I may eventually rework some or all of the articles, either with improved AI or by writing them myself.
Will you rewrite the articles with your own words?
I would like to. It’s a big project although, I imagine, a rewarding one. It would require more reading and referencing, and it also depends on my health – my energy levels and clarity of mind.
Is it meant as a prediction?
No, that would be boring – and impossible. As I mentioned above, they are meant to inspire and invite to further explorations… for myself and whomever else happens to read it.
Where will the project go?
I don’t know. I will refine some of the articles, reorganize the index, and create a few more articles. Then we’ll see where it goes from there.
How can these kinds of projects be made inviting to people?
Mostly, by making it authentic and sincere. It’s what I wish to see, so I imagine it’s similar for (some) others as well.
Also, by writing about these topics from different perspectives and angles, and focus on different topics. Some resonate with some topics, others resonate with other topics.
Making it all human-made is also important. This one is not there yet, obviously. And it would be good if it includes poetry, songs, visual art, and so on.
It’s important to meet people where they are, and acknowledge the validity in their current values, orientation, life, and so on. Nobody likes to hear that their values, orientation, and life is wrong. In general, the AI seems to be a little blunt and one-sided when it writes about a topic, even if I ask it to be nuanced. I would prefer the text to be more inviting and balanced to be more inviting to a broader range of readers.
What’s your dream for this project?
My dream is that it serves as a seed and inspiration for similar projects, hand-made, collaborative with contributors from different cultures, and using many different forms of media and expressions.
I hope that these kinds of projects will be far more common in the future.