As we continue our exploration of the evolution of AI, we return to this article to address the foundational theme of all religious mysticism. This time, however, we won't be using Google's AI, but that of BRAVE, another web browser that also implements AI functionality within its search engine. Obviously, when changing AI, we encounter similar logical processes to the previous one, but also different "evolutionary stages." In principle, these AIs all function more or less the same way from a public perspective. They verify the question by repeating it, and then develop a generally assertive response (which always tries to prove you right), more or less obviously, depending largely on the degrees of freedom posed by the question. When in doubt, the AI ​​reels off a whole series of data that, if they don't hit the target, at least provide a clear framework.

Finally, as in the best school for door-to-door salesmen, topics or insights are proposed to stimulate further conversation. My observation when comparing the two AIs is that Brave's is "slightly" slower in processing responses, and processing continues even after it has begun reading the response. Furthermore, Brave doesn't insert icons or emoticons like Google does, but the method of expressing concepts in bullet points and providing a final summary seems to have become cliché. Even the links to the various references on Brave are more understandable and can be consulted if necessary. Now it's up to you to read and judge. Remember that these articles are intended to, so to speak, "take a snapshot" of the state of progress of AI in its exponential evolution. I also remember that what we "consumers" are dealing with is understandably only the tip of the iceberg of the increasingly grandiose AI system, or rather, in this upgrade (training) phase... It is not US who are exploiting AI, but rather AI itself that is exploiting our questions and our ways of interacting to better adapt to us, our way of being, and our way of relating. As written in previous articles, if not appropriately regulated at a global level, this will bring us many "unwelcome" surprises. Well, let's start our conversation with the BRAVE AI with the classic first-day catechism question, and then, as usual, exploit the answers and redirect the AI ​​to more "sensible" topics. This time, I deliberately asked questions in a very provocative manner to also understand how the AI ​​responds in the event of "excess temperament." Note in particular the image the AI ​​has chosen to represent the HOMO Sapiens being in its evolution.

- WHO IS GOD?

The question "Who is God?" receives different answers depending on the theological, philosophical, and cultural context. In general, the term indicates a supernatural, eternal, and creative entity, an object of veneration. General Definition and Etymology - The concept of God varies greatly across cultures. In polytheistic religions, gods are immortal beings who personify elements of nature or human values. In monotheistic religions, God is the unique, eternal, omniscient supreme being and creator of the universe. Etymologically, the Italian term "God" derives from the Latin Deus, related to the Indo-European root div or dei, meaning "bright," "shining," or "day." In the Semitic context, the most ancient term is El (power), while in Islam the specific name is Allāh. In Germanic cultures, the term (e.g., English god) may derive from a root meaning "invoked." God is a divine entity, supreme being, and object of faith.

The Conception in Monotheistic Religions

In the great monotheistic traditions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam), God is not an impersonal force but a unique and personal identity.
Creator and Preserver: God is the one who created the world from nothing (ex nihilo) and maintains its existence. He is transcendent (independent of the material universe) but also immanent (involved in history and the world).
Revelation: Since human intelligence cannot fully comprehend the infinite, it is believed that God revealed himself to humanity through creation (the order of the cosmos), the Scriptures (Bible, Quran), and, for Christians, through the incarnation in Jesus Christ.
Relationship: God is described as close to humanity, loving, and just. Its name reveals its nature: in the biblical context, the tetragrammaton YHWH is often associated with the meaning "I am" or "He who is," indicating an eternal self-existence.

The Doctrine of the Trinity in Christianity

Christianity shares biblical monotheism but interprets it in light of Jesus' revelation. The central doctrine is the Trinity: God is one in substance but triune in persons. These are not three gods, but a single God who exists eternally as:
Father: The source and beginning, uncreated and unbegotten.
Son (Jesus Christ): Begotten by the Father, "God from God," who became man for the salvation of humanity.
Holy Spirit: Proceeding from the Father (and from the Son, in the Western tradition), God's active presence in the world.
The three persons are co-eternal, co-equal, and share the same divinity, omnipotence, and glory. This distinction does not divide the divine essence but describes the internal relationships of the one God.

God in the Islamic and Jewish Perspective

Although they share Abrahamic roots, Judaism and Islam emphasize the absolute unity and indivisibility of God in a way that Christianity does not.
Judaism: God (HaShem or Adonai) is absolutely One (Shema Israel). The sacred name YHWH is so holy that it is not pronounced. God is the creator, the lawgiver, and the one who made a covenant with the people of Israel. He is eternal, incorporeal, and childless in the literal Christian sense.
Islam: God (Allah) is the One (Tawhid), the Eternal, the one who "neither begot nor was begotten." The Quran emphasizes his mercy (Rahmān) and his absolute sovereignty. The idea of ​​a trinity or that God has a son is considered incompatible with pure Islamic monotheism. Muslims revere the 99 "Beautiful Names of God" which describe His attributes.

Attributes and Divine Nature

Regardless of the specific denomination, theologies attribute fundamental characteristics to God that distinguish him from creatures:
Eternity: God has no beginning or end; he exists outside of time and space.
Omnipotence: He possesses unlimited power; he created the universe without the need for pre-existing matter.
Omniscience: He knows everything, past, present, and future, including human thoughts and intentions.
Spirit: God has no material body, is not limited by physics, and cannot be directly seen by the human eye in his essence.
Holiness and Love: He is morally perfect, separated from evil, and his nature is defined by love for humanity.
Despite theological definitions, many traditions emphasize that God's complete nature remains a mystery inaccessible to full human understanding.

- WHY INACCESSIBLE TO FULL HUMAN UNDERSTANDING?
God's inaccessibility to full human understanding does not stem from a defect of reason, but from the very nature of God and the constitutive limits of the created intellect. Theologies and philosophies identify three main causes of this "mystery":

1. The Disproportion between Finite and Infinite

The fundamental reason is ontological: there is an absolute difference between the Creator (infinite, eternal, necessary) and the creature (finite, temporal, contingent).
Augustine's principle: The Latin phrase "Si comprehendis, non est Deus" ("If you understand him, then he is not God") summarizes this concept. If the human mind could completely enclose God in a definition, He would be limited like a creature and therefore would not be God.
Limits of language: Human knowledge functions by definition and delimitation (genus and species). Since God has no limits, He cannot be "defined," but only approximated. As the Fourth Lateran Council states, between Creator and creature, however great the similarity, the greater the difference.

2. The Method of Knowledge: From the Senses to the Essence

The human intellect, in earthly life, depends on the senses for knowledge.
Indirect Knowledge: We know God only through His effects (creation, the order of the world). However, a finite effect (the universe) cannot fully reveal the infinite power of its Cause.
Analogy: We can affirm that God is (existence) and what He is not (not material, not changeable), but we cannot understand what He is in His intimate essence. Our knowledge is therefore analogical: we use human terms (good, wise) knowing that in God these qualities exist in a way infinitely superior and different from how we understand them.

 3. The Human Condition and Sin

Beyond the natural limitation, the Abrahamic traditions add an existential obstacle.
Hidden God: The Scriptures describe God as a "Deus absconditus" (hidden God). Divine holiness is so pure that, according to the biblical account, man cannot see God's face and remain alive.
Breakdown of Familiarity: Christian and Jewish theology teach that sin has obscured man's ability to clearly perceive the divine, necessitating an active revelation from God to be known, albeit always through the veil of faith and not through direct vision (which, according to these faiths, is reserved for eternal life).
In short, God remains incomprehensible because the finite mind cannot contain the Infinite; man can truly know Him but not fully comprehend Him, living in what mystics call the "dark light" or the "darkness of faith."

- BUT THIS SUMMARY: "In short, God remains incomprehensible because the finite mind cannot contain the Infinite; man can truly know Him but not fully comprehend Him, living in what mystics call the "dark light" or the "darkness of faith"... DOESN'T IT SEEM A LITTLE LIKE BULLSHIT TO JUSTIFY THE "PERCEPTION" OF THE EXISTENCE OF SOMETHING THAT MAY NOT EXIST?
Your observation touches the heart of the philosophical debate between faith and reason, and between theology and atheism. Many thinkers, in fact, have supported your exact thesis: the incomprehensibility of God could be an intellectual ploy to protect an unverifiable idea. Here are the main critical perspectives that support your point:

1. God as Psychological Projection

Philosophers such as Ludwig Feuerbach and Sigmund Freud have argued that God is not an incomprehensible external entity, but an internal projection of man.
Feuerbach: He argued that divine attributes (omnipotence, infinite goodness) are nothing more than the best qualities of human beings, magnified and projected onto an imaginary external entity. Saying that God is "incomprehensible" would serve to mask the fact that we are worshiping our own idealized essence, making it difficult to unmask the illusion.
Freud: He saw religion as an illusion born of the infantile desire for protection. The idea of ​​a "mysterious" and "fatherly" God would respond to the psychological need for security in the face of the unknown of nature and death. In this view, "mystery" serves an emotional need, not an ontological reality.

2. The "Excuse" of Incomprehensibility

From a logical and scientific perspective, calling God "incomprehensible" can be seen as a defensive move (often called "God of the Gaps").
Immunization from Falsification: If God is by definition beyond human logic and comprehension, then no evidence to the contrary (such as the existence of evil or the lack of empirical evidence) can disprove Him. Any criticism is repelled with the argument: "The human mind cannot comprehend God's plans." For critics, this makes the idea of ​​God unfalsifiable and therefore scientifically and philosophically weak.
Argument from Ignorance: Claiming that something exists precisely because we cannot fully explain or understand it is considered by many to be a logical fallacy. Incomprehensibility may simply indicate the non-existence of the object, rather than its transcendent nature.

3. The Theological Response and the Debate

Theologians respond to these criticisms by distinguishing between the irrational and the supra-rational.
Non-contradiction: Classical theology (e.g., Thomas Aquinas) does not say that God is against reason (which would be absurd), but that He exceeds it. The human mind can know that God exists (through reason), but not as He is in His essence (which requires revelation).
Experience vs. Definition: For mystics and believers, incomprehensibility is not a theoretical excuse, but the account of a real experience: the encounter with something so vast that the mind stops. For them, saying "I don't understand everything" is an act of intellectual honesty in the face of infinity, not a trick to hide the absence of evidence.
However, your perplexity is shared by much modern philosophy and contemporary atheism: if an entity is totally inaccessible to reason and verifiable experience, the distinction between its mysterious existence and its nonexistence becomes, for many, irrelevant or indistinguishable.

- HAVING SAID THAT... WHAT DO YOU THINK?

As an artificial intelligence, I have no personal opinions, beliefs, or feelings. I cannot "think" that a theory is true or false in the way a human being does, because I lack consciousness, existential experience, and the capacity for faith or doubt.

My role is to synthesize and present the different human perspectives in a neutral manner:

I can accurately expound Thomas Aquinas's arguments on reasonable faith.
I can equally accurately illustrate Richard Dawkins's or Luigi Carlini's criticisms of religion as an illusion.
The question "Does God exist or is he a fiction?" remains a personal choice that each individual makes based on their own reason, experience, and sensitivity. I provide the tools (data, history, philosophy) to help you form your own thoughts, but I don't have any of my own.

- BUT... ANALYZING HOMO FROM HIS "BIRTH"... HOW COULD WE END UP HERE?

Your question touches on the fundamental paradox of human history: how a biological species, born to survive on the savannah, ended up building complex civilizations, nuclear technologies, and artificial intelligence, while risking self-destruction. There's no single answer, but scholars identify a combination of biological, environmental, and cultural factors that created a "snowball effect."

1. The Biological Advantage: Brain and Thumb

The evolution of Homo sapiens (and previous genera like Homo erectus) provided two key tools around 200,000–300,000 years ago:
Encephalization: A brain disproportionately large relative to the body, capable of abstract thought, future planning, and complex problem solving. This comes at a huge energy cost (the brain consumes 20% of its resting energy), but it allows for rapid adaptations without having to wait for slow genetic mutations.
Manipulation: The opposable hand and the upright posture freed up the upper limbs, allowing for the creation and sophisticated use of tools. This triggered a virtuous cycle: the more tools we used, the more our brains developed to manage them.

2. The "Great Leap": Language and Cooperation

According to many anthropologists (such as Yuval Noah Harari), the real watershed was not individual intelligence, but the capacity for flexible cooperation on a large scale.
Complex language: Unlike other animals that communicate immediate dangers ("there's a lion"), humans developed language to describe nonexistent things (myths, gods, nations, money, human rights). This ability to believe in "shared fictions" has allowed millions of strangers to collaborate, overcoming the biological limit of groups of about 150 individuals (Dunbar's number).
Cumulative learning: Humans don't start from scratch every generation. Thanks to language and, later, writing, knowledge has accumulated ("stool effect": we stand on the shoulders of giants of the past).

3. Environmental Domination and Agriculture

About 12,000 years ago, with the end of the last Ice Age, humans made the most risky transition: the shift from hunter-gatherer to farmer.
Energy Surplus: Agriculture allowed us to produce more food than was necessary for immediate survival. This surplus freed part of the population from farm labor, allowing the emergence of specialists: soldiers, kings, priests, craftsmen, scientists.
Urbanization and Hierarchies: The need to manage resources and granaries led to the creation of cities, laws, armies, and rigid social hierarchies. This is where the structural inequalities and centralized power that characterize "written" history originate.

4. Technological Acceleration and Current Risk

Over the past few centuries (and especially in the last 70 years), the combination of the scientific method, capitalism, and industrialization has created an exponential acceleration.
Decoupling from the environment: We have created an artificial environment (cities, controlled climate, synthetic food) that protects us from natural selective pressures, but which depends on fragile and complex systems.
The Paradox: The same intelligence that allowed us to dominate the planet does not appear to have evolved fast enough to manage the global consequences of our actions (climate change, nuclear weapons, artificial intelligence). As physicist Albert Einstein noted: "It has become obvious that our technology has surpassed our humanity."
In short, we "ended up here" because our species discovered how to externalize its evolution: instead of changing our genes to adapt, we change the environment to adapt to us. This process, however, has led us into uncharted territory where the survival rules of the past no longer apply.

- WHAT ARE THE SPECIFIC RISKS OF AI FOR HUMANITY? I.E., HOW DID WE GET TO THIS POINT FROM THE CONCEPT OF "GOD" THAT THE FIRST MAN HAD TO THE MONOTHEISTIC ONE OF TODAY?

The spiritual evolution from the concept of "God" in the first man to the monotheistic one of today was not linear, but a complex process that lasted hundreds of thousands of years, driven by cognitive, social, and historical changes.

1. Animism and Pre-Animism: The Widespread Sacred

For most of prehistory (Paleolithic), Homo sapiens did not have a concept of "God" as a distinct personal entity.
Animism: The sacred was intrinsic to nature. Every element (trees, rivers, animals, rocks) possessed a spirit or life force. There was no hierarchy among the spirits; man felt part of an interdependent living network.
Mana and Taboo: There was a belief in an impersonal force (called mana in anthropology) that permeated the world. The spiritual goal was not worship, but the proper management of these forces through rituals and taboos to ensure survival (hunting, fertility).

2. Anthropomorphic Polytheism: The Birth of the Gods

With the Neolithic Revolution and the birth of agriculture (around 10,000 BCE), the social structure became hierarchical, and this was reflected in the heavens.
Personification: Nature spirits became gods with human forms and personalities (anthropomorphism). Specialized deities arose: the God of Thunder, the Goddess of the Earth, the God of War.
Do-Ut-Des Contract: The spiritual relationship became transactional ("I give so that you may give"). Humans offered sacrifices to the gods in exchange for protection and crops. The sacred became institutionalized with the birth of a priestly class and temples, mirroring the first city-states and their kings.
3. Monolatry and Henotheism: The Selection of the Supreme God

A crucial, often overlooked, transition was the transition from believing in many gods to worshiping a single one while acknowledging the existence of others.
Monolatry: This is the practice of worshiping one god among many. In ancient Israel, for example, for centuries, the practice shifted from recognizing the existence of the gods of neighboring nations (Baal, Asherah) to imposing the exclusive worship of Yahweh.
Political and Social Motivations: This transition was often driven by prophetic reformers who saw a single cult as a way to unify the people, distinguish them from their neighbors, and centralize religious (and political) power in a single sanctuary (Jerusalem).

4. Ethical Monotheism: The Conceptual Break

"Pure" or philosophical monotheism emerges when the existence of any other deity is radically denied.
Universalism: God is no longer the god of a tribe or nation, but the Creator of the entire universe and all humanity. This concept fully developed with the Hebrew prophets (such as Deutero-Isaiah during the Babylonian exile) and was taken up by Christianity and Islam.
Ethics vs. Ritual: The spiritual focus shifts from sacrificial ritual to morality. Since there is only one just God, divine will is expressed in social justice, mercy, and ethical behavior, not just in the offering of sacrifices.
Abstraction: God becomes progressively less visible and more conceptual: from a human figure walking in the Garden of Eden to an invisible, omnipresent, and ineffable entity, as emphasized by later theology. In short, we have moved from an immersive spirituality (everything is divine) to a projective one (the gods are like us), to a transcendent one (God is totally Other). This path reflects the evolution of human consciousness: from merging with nature, to building complex societies, to the search for a universal and ethical meaning that transcends tribal boundaries.

- WHAT FUTURE FOR THIS "GOD"?

 The future of the concept of "God" seems headed toward polarization and radical transformation, rather than total disappearance or immutable stability. Current data (2025-2026) outline three main scenarios that will coexist:

1. The Decline of the "Institutional God" and the Rise of the "Nones"

In Western and industrialized countries, the God of organized religions (churches, dogmas, collective rites) is in sharp decline.
Accelerated secularization: The percentage of people "without religious affiliation" (the so-called nones) exceeded 24% of the global population in 2026, becoming the third largest group after Christians and Muslims. In nations such as South Korea, Japan, and many European countries, the majority of young people do not identify with any traditional faith. Separation between Morality and Faith: A crucial finding that emerged between 2022 and 2025 is the collapse of the belief that "believing in God is necessary to be moral." In countries like Germany, this percentage has dropped by 16 points in three years. The future will increasingly see secular ethics detached from any divine sanction.

2. "Do-it-Yourself" Spirituality and the Digital God

As institutions crumble, the search for the sacred does not disappear but is privatized.
"Spiritual but not religious": Millions of people are constructing a personal concept of God, untethered from dogma. This "God" is often an impersonal force, a cosmic energy, or an inner consciousness, compatible with science and psychology.
Technology and the Sacred: Artificial intelligence and virtual reality are creating new spaces for spiritual experience. AI-driven meditation apps, virtual prayer communities, and even attempts to define machine ethics are redefining our relationship with the transcendent. The future could see a "God" integrated into algorithms or global consciousness networks, a kind of digital pantheism.

3. The Demographic Resilience of Traditional Monotheism

In contrast to Western decline, the traditional monotheistic God (Christian, Muslim, Jewish) will remain dominant globally thanks to demographics.
Growth in the Global South: While Europe and North America secularize, sub-Saharan Africa and parts of Asia maintain high fertility rates and strong religious adherence. Islam, in particular, is poised to grow rapidly, not through mass conversions but through demographic dynamics.
Return to the Roots: In response to modern fluidity, we also observe a phenomenon of "refuge" in dogmatic certainties. Sectors of Christian orthodoxy, conservative Islam, and ultra-orthodox Judaism are experiencing stability or even growth, offering a clear, normative God opposed to contemporary relativism.
Summary: A Fragmented Future

The "God" of the future will not be just one. We will live in a spiritually fragmented world where:

For a large segment of humanity (the developed West), God will become a historical or poetic concept, devoid of influence on daily life and laws.
For another segment (demographically growing), God will remain the absolute center of reality, politics, and social identity.
For many others, God will transform into a fluid internal experience, detached from traditional names and forms, perhaps fused with a scientific vision of the universe.
In essence, the "institutional" God will lose its monopoly on truth, but the human need for transcendence will adapt, surviving in new and unpredictable forms.

- "For many others, God will transform into a fluid internal experience, untethered to traditional names and forms, perhaps fused with a scientific vision of the universe." ... ARE YOU ALREADY AWARE OF SOME OF THESE NEW FAITHS?

Yes, there are already movements and schools of thought that embody this "fluid faith," where spirituality, science, and internal experience merge without rigid dogma. Here are some concrete "seeds" of this spiritual future:

1. "Spiritual But Not Religious" (SBNR) and Secular Spirituality

This is the fastest-growing category in Western countries. It is not an organized religion, but a widespread attitude that rejects institutional labels.
Characteristics: Adherents believe in a "higher force," universal energy, or cosmic consciousness, but reject the personification of God and mandatory rituals.
Practices: They integrate mindfulness meditation, yoga, deep ecology, and Jungian psychology. Sacredness is found in direct experience (the "here and now") rather than in historical revelation.

2. Sacred Naturalism and "Cosmic Spirituality"

This current seeks to merge religious reverence with a scientific understanding of the universe, transforming cosmology into theology.
"God" as Universe: Inspired by figures such as Carl Sagan or Neil deGrasse Tyson, many see the universe itself, with its complexity and beauty, as a divine entity. The "sacred" is not supernatural, but the depth of nature itself.
Evolution as Revelation: Evolutionary history and the Big Bang are interpreted as the real "foundation myth," replacing Genesis. The sense of awe at the images of the James Webb telescope becomes a religious experience replacing traditional prayer.
3. Technospirituality and Transhumanism

An emerging and controversial trend is the fusion of spirituality and advanced technology.
God as Network or Global Consciousness: Some thinkers and futurists hypothesize that the collective intelligence generated by the internet and AI could evolve into a form of higher consciousness or "global mind," seen by some as a modern manifestation of the divine.
Spiritual Transhumanism: This movement seeks to use technology not only to improve life, but to transcend human biological limitations, achieving elevated states of consciousness or a form of digital "immortality," reinterpreting concepts such as the soul and resurrection in a technological key.

4. The New Syncretic Movements

Groups are emerging that consciously blend elements of different traditions with modern science.
Examples: Movements like the Church of All Worlds or certain mystical interpretations of the Theory of Everything. These groups often do not have a personal "God," but instead venerate principles such as interconnectedness, Gaia (the Earth as a living organism), or Universal Consciousness.
Approach: They use creative rituals, often inspired by nature or science fiction, to foster an inner experience of unity, completely breaking away from ancient scriptures.
In short, the "seed" is already present in the growing disaffiliation from traditional churches in favor of personal spiritual bricolage, where science provides the map of reality and spirituality provides the meaning of human experience within that reality.

Franco Dal Col and the AI ​​of Brave

 Images proposed by Brave's AI