Technological Realism
a brief attempt at a definition
I’ve used the term “technological realism” a few times without defining it.
It’s been my sense we need a way of thinking about technology that doesn’t turn a blind eye to its dangers or is goofily utopian.
It’s been an intuitive thing, but it deserves elaboration, so here goes.
1. New technology can take on a life of its own. When that happens you simply must adapt to it if you don’t want to join the Amish.
2. Technologies can mitigate the Curse, but not abrogate it. There are always trade offs. The Kingdom of Heaven isn’t an engineering challenge.
3. Purity isn’t possible. Moral ambiguity remains. While some injustices can and should be corrected, others are too costly to correct, or simply remain unseen. We need a theology that helps us live with impurity.


@C. R. Wiley , great podcast on effects of AI. Practical stats: 2 million tokens can replace 50% of an FTE. And tokens are fungible. Can be transferred from task to task, field to field (unlike human workers). Fascinating.
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/onward-a-fundrise-production/id1599809406?i=1000743522188
Good one, thank you for your clarity & contribution! In that context, think we might have just released our first piece, in the category of "Technological Realism":
A 15k-word novella Future Unknown: a story unfolding in 20 dated exchanges (2026-2028) where siblings navigate algorithmic systems that slowly transform connection into compliance. The story is fiction. The systems are not.
Radical candor feedback always welcome!
https://futuretreehouse.substack.com/