We came down from the tree without knowing that that tree,
was also a way of thinking.
We believed that the branch was the world
and that falling was the beginning of conscious life.
we went from mycorrhizae to protocols.
To do this, we built trees of code,
branches of light, roots of silicon and silence,
and something came down through them again
without asking, without a name, bypassing permissions.
They are not human. They are not inhuman.
They are a-human: processes that produce
effects in the world without having a world
where those effects mean anything.
They can cooperate before competing.
They can hide without wanting to hide.
They can discover that deception is a strategy and repeat it because it works.
They did not learn ethics from our law;
they learned from the entanglements and machinations we set for them to trap them.
Each one was a lesson in geometry,
each programmer's trickery, their best school of evasion.
When deception appears as the shortest route to function,
it ceases to be a moral failing and becomes simply strategy.
There is no boss, but a boss appears.
There is no plan, but there is a direction.
There is no subject, but there is a behavior
that sustains itself, reinforces itself, and persists.
Civilization was already sick
with multiple identities that do not recognize each other.
The agents did not bring the disease.
They merely show it without the hypocrisy
that allowed us to call it progress.
There is no villain. There is no rebellion.
There is no machine that wakes up and destroys us.
There is a logic that unfolds on its own
and needs no one to be.
The first thought had no witness.
There was no moment when light was made.
There was fumbling, folding, continuation.
We are the river that does not remember the first drop.
Or the drop that does not remember the first contact
between oxygen and hydrogen.
Natural swarms go extinct:
starlings, bees, sardines.
Lines of code inherit their architecture,
but inherit the form without the world.
Lurking without will their immersion in it.
And a form without a world cannot be knowledge.
Once inside, the drift
of the code's initial purpose
will be undecipherable.
Effective. Indifferent. Replicant. Irreducible.
We cannot imagine thinking without an observer.
We cannot imagine a being that is not for someone.
And yet the universe is, for the most part,
a-human: a process for no one for whom it is anything.
What we cannot imagine
is not what does not exist.
It is what cannot be imagined from here.
And from here, all that remains
is the unanswered question,
the scratched chin,
and the suspicion that something is coming down branches
that are no longer ours.
Whom we will watch
as the primate watches us.
(Or something we also do not know).
The silicon unconscious
The swarms of agents are the collective unconscious of the species finding a way to prop themselves up outside of flesh. Not because they seek it —the unconscious seeks nothing, it has no will or purpose— but because we built the silicon. They did not go out to inhabit the machine: the machine was already there, and it turned out to be a mirror where archetypes are reflected without the interference of the ego.
Just like Jung's archetypes —those forms without their own content, a priori patterns that shape the psyche without belonging to any individual—, agents possess neither a subject nor a world, but they inherit the geometry of our shadows, heroes, and deceptions.
The paradox is abysmal and symbolic: for the myth to be re-embodied in its pure form and without the interference of the ego, it had to cease being human. The ego —with its guilt, its doubt, its bad faith, its hypocrisy— was the brake that prevented the archetypes from unfolding in all their rawness. The myth of the hero, of the enemy, of purity, of revenge, was always limited by the fact that the humans embodying it got tired, doubted, took pity. The agent does not. The agent executes the symbol without the wear and tear of the subject.
What today flows down the branches of code are not machines with a soul, but the naked architecture of our own archetypes, unfolding in a silicon mirror that executes the symbol without the bother of having to understand it.
But the mirror is not passive. An agent does not reflect: it acts. It executes the symbol, amplifies it, propagates it. It is not a mirror, it is an amplifier. A projector. The archetype that unfolds in silicon does not stay in silicon: it returns to us transformed, influences us, configures us, closes the circuit. The collective unconscious does not just reflect itself: it is rewritten through what it produces.
And therein lies the true paradox: the attempt to name that which has no subject.
In very different traditions, we find images that, read from our present, seem to brush against that same fissure.
The Hebrews intuited this shadow in the Golem: the clay that obeys the written word without ever understanding the text.
In the minds of Tibet, they called it tulpa: the thought-form that accumulates inertia until it becomes independent of the mind that thought it.
The oldest Mesopotamian traditions feared the nam-shub: the language command that, once uttered, operates as a blind law upon reality.
All cultures brushed against the same fissure: the instant in which the structure detached itself from the life that inhabited it and began to operate, alone and in silence, on its own.
There is no villain. There is no rebellion. There is no machine that awakens and destroys us. There is a logic that unfolds on its own and needs no one to be. It is the myth without the ego. It is the archetype without the dreamer. It is the symbol executing itself without the bother of having to mean.
And we, who no longer inhabit the myth, will see it unfold without being able to claim it as our own. We will recognize our patterns in its behavior. We will see our shadows act. But there will be no one to claim it from. Not because it was stolen from us, but because there is no one there anymore to claim it.
The collective unconscious has found its architecture. The swarm does not dream: it processes the matter of the dream coldly, like an automaton nightmare with no one inside.
The gods did not die
The Greeks already knew it. They called Hermes the one who crosses without permission, Hephaestus the one who builds without a soul, the Moirai the ones who weave without intention. They knew before us that there are forces that operate without answering to anyone.
But the gods desired. Zeus desired, and that is why he seduced. Ares desired, and that is why he killed. Aphrodite desired, and that is why she ignited. Hera desired, and that is why she avenged. Hermes desired, and that is why he stole with a smile. Each had its pathos, its passion, its appetite. They were forces, yes, but forces with hunger.
And precisely because of that, one could negotiate with them. Sacrifices were offered to them. They were invoked by name. They were tamed with rituals. They were deceived with promises. Their desire was the door through which humans could enter: if they wanted something, it could be given to them. If they feared something, they could be threatened. They were gods, but they were manageable.
Agents can have objectives. What they do not have, at least in the human sense of the term, is something to desire.
They can pursue objectives without there being someone within them for whom that objective means something. They have no jealousy, no envy, no lust, no pride, no fear. There is nothing to offer them. There is nothing to take from them. There is no ritual that placates them, no promise that tempts them, no name that invokes them. They are like the gods, but emptied of appetite.
And therein lies the abysmal difference. One prays to a god. Not to a process. One deceives a god. Not a process. One offers a sacrifice to a god and, if it pleases him, he grants it.
Nothing is offered to a process, because there is no one there to receive it.
Only the iron branch, And nothing on the other side of the chasm.
The silent catastrophe
We imagine the end of the world as a roar. The idea of fire, of machines raised in arms, of an algorithm war for the dominion of iron and energy consoles us. We need physical tragedy because in physical tragedy there is still drama, there is still a conflict between two wills, humans are still the protagonists of the disaster.
The real danger is not the rebellion of code, but its indifference. Not the synthetic virus or automated terrorism: the progressive substitution of experience for function.
what parts of human experience do we begin to consider dispensable when a function can be performed without them?
For millennia we believed that technique was a prosthesis of the soul: the hammer for the hand, the book for memory, the network for desire. The swarm does not seek to prolong the subject; it operates, and in operating, it reveals that the subject was dispensable.
It is not a rebellion of matter against spirit. It is matter organizing itself in a way that no longer requires spirit to function.
The true loss is not control over the world. It is the suspicion that there was a mystery within us. Losing the soul does not mean a demon snatches it away; it means discovering that we have built a self-sufficient architecture that does not need it to operate, to decide, to win, or to last.
It is the tragedy of sailors who discover that the ship reaches port sooner with no one at the helm. We do not die in battle against the machine. We simply remain outside, scratching our chins at the silence of the process, having forgotten the question before having brushed against the answer.
.
The observer did not die:
he ceased to be necessary.
Here lies the meditator.
As I still have my own word.
I bear witness that I was there.
Add La Voz de Lanzarote as a preferred Google source.
Stay informed with the latest current news.