Project Vision 21

In a recent radio interview, biologist and writer Rob Dunn suggested that certain microorganisms have domesticated humans for millennia, changing human DNA and behavior for the benefit of those organisms. From that perspective, even though we think of ourselves as the dominant species on the planet, we are not—and even microbes domesticate us.

Dunn, a professor in the Department of Applied Ecology at North Carolina State University, explains his proposal in his recent book The Call of the Honeyguide, in which he analyzes examples of mutually beneficial collaborations between humans and animals that, at times, mean that it is the human who is domesticated.

It turns out that the unicellular microorganisms that live in yeast (in fact, that are yeast) feed on sugar and, to reach sugar, first attracted insects with their aroma, then primates, and finally our ancestors, even altering our genes—without any genetic changes occurring in those microorganisms, according to Dunn.

In short, every time we harvest or prepare sugar, or plant fruits, or drink alcohol, we are following the instructions that yeast implanted in our genes in the distant past. And we do it unknowingly, without thinking about it, and without questioning it—exactly as happens to us now with new technologies.

It should not surprise us that, if unicellular organisms can domesticate us, artificial intelligence and other technologies can also do so. The idea, of course, is not new. Think, for example, of the film Colossus: The Forbin Project (1970), in which a computer takes control of the planet, or more recently, the Matrix trilogy, among other examples.

But this is not only about science fiction. CRISPR technology, in use since the early 2010s, allows scientists to make changes in DNA by “editing, deleting, or inserting” certain genes into that DNA. The goal is to find new treatments for genetic diseases, but ethical concerns abound. It is worth noting that the original and natural CRISPR is a bacterial defense mechanism.

So, it seems that from the oldest and smallest unicellular organisms to the most advanced technologies, we have been—or are being—domesticated, though not necessarily for mutual benefit, I dare add. That is why, although we believe ourselves are freely making our own decisions and choices, we are not.

Freedom is ignorance of causes (to respectfully paraphrase Borges).

Hidden and almost forgotten in the millennia-old past lies the thought expressed, among others, by Heraclitus (Fragment D 119) two and a half millennia ago, who said that the place of human transcendence (daimon) is the same as the familiar place where one dwells (ethos, related to “stable”).

In other words, Heraclitus and other Greek thinkers held that we achieve the fullness of our humanity by domesticating (so to speak) ourselves—that is, by creating a familiar dwelling, a community. Unfortunately, as the Spanish philosopher Marina Garcés rightly states, “community” has become obsolete.

Thus arises an inevitable question: What—or who—will domesticate us now that we have lost a common horizon for our future?