Â鶹ÒùÔº

In the 20th century, politicians' views of human nature shaped societies. But now, increasingly . Their view of human nature may shape the 21st century. We must know what technologists see in humanity's heart.

The economist proposed two visions of human nature. The sees people as naturally good. The world corrupts us, but the wise can perfect us.

The tragic vision sees us as inherently flawed. Our sickness is selfishness. We cannot be trusted with power over others. There are no perfect solutions, only imperfect trade-offs.

Science . So does history. The , and revolutions were utopian visions. They paved their paths to paradise with 50 million dead.

The U.S."s founding fathers held the tragic vision. They to constrain political leaders' worst impulses.

Technologists' visions

Yet when Americans founded online social networks, the tragic vision was forgotten. Founders were trusted to juggle their self-interest and the public interest when designing these networks and gaining vast data troves.

Users, and were trusted not to abuse their new social-networked power. Mobs were . This led to and .

, social networks have adopted . Facebook is needed to get the best from .

Tech billionaire Elon Musk dabbles in both the tragic and utopian visions. He thinks "." But he supports , wants competition to , and .

Musk's tragic vision in case short-sighted selfishness destroys Earth. Yet his utopian vision assumes people on Mars could be entrusted that America's . His utopian vision also assumes giving us tools to won't simply enhance our Machiavellianism.

Bill Gates leans to the tragic and tries to create a better world within humanity's constraints. Gates and supports market-based rewards to help us behave better. Yet he believes "creative capitalism" can tie self-interest to our inbuilt desire to help others, benefiting all.

A different tragic vision lies in the writings of Peter Thiel. This billionaire tech investor philosophers and Carl Schmitt. Both believed evil, in the form of a , is part of our nature.

Thiel dismisses the "." Instead, he approvingly cites the view that humans are "."

The consequences of seeing evil

The German philosopher that those who fight monsters must beware of becoming monsters themselves. He was right.

People who believe in evil are more likely to wrongdoers. They are more likely to support violence and another's transgression. They feel that can eradicate evil and save the world. Americans who believe in evil are torture, killing terrorists and America's possession of nuclear weapons.

Technologists who see evil risk creating coercive solutions. Those who believe in evil are about why people act as they do. They are also how situations influence people's actions.

Two years after 9/11, Peter Thiel founded . This company creates software to analyze big data sets, helping businesses fight fraud and the US government combat crime.

Thiel is a Republican-supporting libertarian. Yet, he appointed a Democrat-supporting , Alex Karp, as Palantir's CEO. Beneath their differences lies a shared belief in the inherent dangerousness of humans. Karp's Ph.D. thesis argued that we have a fundamental aggressive drive towards .

Just as believing in evil is associated with supporting pre-emptive aggression, Palantir doesn't just wait for people to commit crimes. It a "crime risk forecasting system" to predict crimes and has . This has .

Karp's tragic vision acknowledges that Palantir needs constraints. He stresses the judiciary must put "" of Palantir's technology. He says the use of Palantir's software should be "," rather than by Silicon Valley engineers.

Yet, Thiel cites philosopher Leo Strauss' suggestion that America "to her occasional deviation" from principles of freedom and justice. Strauss such deviations under a veil.

Thiel only "the secret coordination of the world's intelligence services" can support a US-led international peace. This recalls Colonel Jessop in the film, , who felt he should deal with dangerous truths in darkness.

Seeing evil after 9/11 led technologists and governments to overreach in their surveillance. This used by the US National Security Agency to colllect people's internet data, which is . The American people rejected this approach and increased oversight and limited surveillance.

Facing the abyss

Tragic visions pose risks. Freedom may be unnecessarily and coercively limited. External roots of violence, like and , may be overlooked. Yet if it will address many external causes of conflict.

Utopian visions ignore the dangers within. Technology that only changes the world is insufficient to save us from our selfishness and, as I argue in a forthcoming book, .

Technology must change the world working within the constraints of human nature. Crucially, , democratic institutions, not technologists, must ultimately decide society's shape. Technology's outputs must be democracy's inputs.

This may involve us acknowledging hard truths about our nature. But what if society does not wish to face these? Those who cannot handle truth make others fear to speak it.

Straussian technologists, who believe but dare not speak dangerous truths, may feel compelled to protect society in undemocratic darkness. They overstep, yet are encouraged to by those who see more harm in speech than its suppression.

The ancient Greeks had a name for someone with - the parrhesiast. But the parrhesiast needed a listener who promised to not to react with anger. This allowed dangerous truth-telling.

We have shredded this contract. We must renew it. Armed with the truth, the Greeks felt they could . Armed with both truth and technology we can move closer to fulfilling this promise.

This article is republished from under a Creative Commons license. Read the .