1

ESSSAT News & Reviews 29 (4) December 2019

Novacene: The Coming Age of Hyperintelligence, by James Lovelock

– Book review by Marius Dorobantu –

James Lovelock – Novacene: The Coming Age of Hyperintelligence, Allen Lane (2019), 141 pp.,
ISBN 978-0241399361.

James Lovelock, now 100, is an independent scientist and futurist. With a PhD in medicine
from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (1948), he is best known for being
the first to detect Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) in the atmosphere, and for developing the Gaia
hypothesis. In 1974 he was elected as a Fellow of the Royal Society.

The Gaia hypothesis, in short, posits that the Earth is a self-regulating system, like a giant
organism. One of the main assertions of this hypothesis is that the emergence of life –
anaerobic, at first, and then aerobic – is part of our planet’s evolutionary strategy (not a
conscious one, to be sure) to keep cooler than it would have actually become due to the
increasing energy output of the Sun.

His latest book, Novacene, builds on his previous work on the Gaia hypothesis to postulate
that we are quickly approaching the end of the Anthropocene and the beginning of a new
geological age, the Novacene, characterized by the emergence of electronic life, with the
distinctive capability to directly transform energy into information.

The book is structured into three parts – “The Knowing Cosmos”, “The Age of Fire”, and “Into
the Novacene” – of which the first two set out the context, and the last one deals specifically
with speculations about the coming Novacene.

Lovelock’s argumentation departs from the assumption that the cosmos is, at its most
fundamental level, informational. For this reason, intelligence has been positively selected
throughout the cosmic evolutionary history – both biological and non-biological – leading to
the emergence of humans, the first “understanders” of the cosmos. This would neatly explain
the anthropic principle, or why the physical laws and the values of the physical constants
seem to be so finely tuned for the emergence of intelligent life. It would also mean that
humans are the first consciousness of the cosmos, or the universe awakening and becoming
self-aware, a beautiful idea also advanced by theologians such as Pierre Teilhard de Chardin
 2

or Karl Rahner. Humans and their hyper-intelligent cyborg descendants would thus be the
means through which the cosmos accomplishes its last evolutionary stage, that of
transforming all the matter and energy into information.

The Gaian super-organism is therefore a nursery for the cosmos’ self-awareness. This is
accomplished gradually, and the author identifies three key moments in the history of Gaia,
with each corresponding to the beginning of one distinct geological age. The first
revolutionary event was the evolution of organisms capable of photosynthesis, which meant
Gaia could capture sunlight and store its energy. By releasing oxygen, they set the stage for
the emergence of more complex life, culminating with humans. Through their technology
(with a defining moment being the invention and spreading of steam-engines) humans
triggered the second stage, the Anthropocene, marked by Gaia’s capability to transform the
stored solar energy from the fossil fuels into useful work. The third stage, the Novacene,
begins when humans invent machines that can learn and re-design themselves, with a
widespread ability to transform sunlight (and further the entire cosmos) into information.

It is worth noting that, in Lovelock’s story, the electronic life forms of the Novacene come in
perfect continuation with biological life, emerging through the same processes of Darwinian
selection. The only difference is that, instead of being natural, this selection will be
purposeful, with both cyborgs and humans quickly correcting the harmful mutations of
reproduction. The Novacene is, in fact, a necessary evolutionary strategy by Gaia. As the Sun
will become a Red Giant type of star in a few hundred million years, it will dramatically
increase its radiation output. Biological life won’t be able to keep the planet cool in such
conditions anymore, and it would normally become extinct, hence the need for hyper-
intelligent electronic life forms, with technologies powerful enough to tackle this challenge.

Lovelock then goes on to speculate on the future of life in the Novacene, an era which may
soon begin, if it hasn’t already. The evolution of cyborgs will be accelerated, an idea already
popularized by futurist Ray Kurzweil’s law of accelerating returns, in his book The Singularity
is Near (Penguin, 2005). One main differentiator between human and artificial intelligence
(AI) will be speed. While potentially 1 million times faster, cyborgs will probably think around
10.000 times faster than humans. This would be the same ratio as that between humans and
plants. The second big difference would come from cyborgs developing a different kind of
intelligence, one that is more intuitive. According to Lovelock, human intelligence has
developed speech as a necessary evil: it has been of tremendous evolutionary value, but it
has narrowed our thinking to the current linear, step-by-step logic. Cyborgs won’t have a
speech-driven intelligence. They will probably retain speech, to be able to communicate with
us, but they will communicate telepathically with each other.
 3

As for how these cyborgs will behave towards us, their parents, Lovelock manifests an
unbridled optimism. He sees no likely war or power struggle between biological and
electronic life. Cyborgs will be so far ahead of us that we could not be a match for them, just
as other animals are currently no match for us. However, they will be intelligent enough to
realize that the biggest threat for their (and Gaia’s) existence will come from the increasing
heat from the Sun. And the best strategy against that, at least for the time being, would be to
preserve biological life and allow it to continue cooling the planet, perhaps with help from
some cyborg-invented technologies, such as giant radiation-reflecting mirrors.

He is confident that our descendants will not bother to exterminate us, but they will rather
treat us like pets, an idea first proposed by Apple’s co-founder Steve Wozniak. Humans will
therefore enjoy a “peaceful retirement” (119). Since the highest value of our intelligence-
oriented cosmos is understanding, it would be no tragedy to eventually be replaced by
cyborgs, who will be far better equipped for the task. In Lovelock’s words, we will be satisfied
that “we have played our part” (130).

One positive of this book is that Lovelock paints an intriguing, though scientifically doubtful,
cosmology. His interpretation of evolutionary history – from the Big Bang to the Novacene –
is coherent with itself and with his previously developed Gaia hypothesis. Another take-away
of the book are the powerful visual images used to describe possible developments in the
Novacene: electronic animals grazing solar-powered plants; electronic trees connected
directly to the electricity grid; batteries that hang like fruits from inorganic trees; future
intelligent beings so small that they will be able to study quantum phenomena in the same
way that we can study Newtonian mechanics; finally, cyborgs thinking at such high speeds
that “the experience of watching your garden grow gives you some idea of how future AI
systems will feel when observing human life” (82).

On the other hand, the book is highly criticizable from scientific, ethical and theological
angles. From a scientific point of view, Lovelock is situated in a peculiar position: in possession
of a PhD degree, and an accomplished engineer with recognized inventions, but without a
regular academic career, and with ideas that can be characterized as eccentric.

From the very first chapter, entitled suggestively “We Are Alone”, he solves Fermi’s paradox
in a simplistic manner, concluding that because the universe is relatively young, the reason
why we have not yet found extra terrestrial intelligence (ETI) is simply because we are the
only ones. He expedites such a complex scientific and philosophical puzzle with an ease that
raises eyebrows and casts severe doubts over the rest of the book.
 4

Another difficult scientific and technological problem treated superficially is the emergence
of AI that possesses agency and/or consciousness. It is currently not at all clear if strong AI is
even possible, let alone how it could be built. However, disappointingly, Lovelock does not
even acknowledge such questions, taking for granted that it will eventually be done: “some
AI device will soon be invented that will finally and fully start the new age” (83).

Then there’s the obvious issue with his argument about cyborgs peacefully preserving human
life, because of their part in Gaia’s self-regulatory system, which is naïve, to say the least.
While the overheating from the Sun is a threat, it is not due to happen for a couple hundred
million years. Is it realistic to believe it would be so high on cyborg’s immediate agenda? Will
they not be able to invent technologies that would do a better job than biological life? Or,
better, could they not decide to keep all biological life except for humans, who have worked
against the temperature homeostasis throughout the Anthropocene? These are all logical and
intuitive questions that Lovelock does not engage with.

At a more fundamental level, his entire argumentation around the Gaia hypothesis is
scientifically dubious, since it is not built on conventional cause-and effect logic, according to
the author himself. Lovelock believes that logical explanations are unable to account for
complex, dynamical systems such as Gaia. Instead, he appeals to a more intuitive type of
knowledge, which he tries to define, but in a rather fuzzy and unconvincing matter. In the
end, the Gaia hypothesis came to him irrationally as a sort of revelation, which makes it
completely unfalsifiable, hence impossible to discuss scientifically. In his own words, “I cannot
give you a logical explanation of Gaia. Nevertheless, to me, the evidence for her existence is
very strong indeed” (14).

One keystone of his intellectual edifice is that the threat of Gaia overheating in the distant
future will force hyper-intelligent cyborgs to cooperate with biological life, which sounds
rather naïve. The other keystone is the principle that the universe is striving for awakening
and for conversion of matter and energy into information. As beautiful as this idea might
seem, it is scientifically unfounded (or at least he does not bring the arguments for it),
theologically wrong, and ethically dangerous.

The informatization of the cosmos strikes some resemblances with the spiritualization of the
created world, of which theological eschatology speaks about. In the Christian tradition,
humans are called to cooperate with God in spiritualizing the cosmos, by bringing it in a
perfect relationship of love with God through the gift of divine grace. Lovelock’s pseudo-
theological model replaces Spirit for information, with a rather unclear teleology.
 5

Finally, the doctrine that humanity plays only a midwife part in the larger narrative of the
cosmos evolving toward hyper-intelligence comes with heavy and rather indefensible ethical
implications. It largely means that everything should be measured according to the extent to
which it helps or hinders this evolution. What does this view imply for the value of the
individual person? Not much, presumably, as each of us is a mere cog in Gaia’s nursery of
hyper-intelligence.

The very notions of good and evil are at stake: is technological progress always good because
it brings the cosmic awakening closer? Lovelock does seem to think so. In opposition to the
environmental views expressed earlier in his life, he seems now to have come to terms with
the ecological catastrophe that comes along with the Anthropocene and the Novacene. As
late as 2008, he was very worried about human-caused climate change, and was irresponsibly
prophesizing that by 2040 billions of people from Southern Europe and South-East Asia “will
be fighting their way” into northern countries.1 Now he is of the opinion that humanity’s
ecological sins will be redeemed by technological progress: “Whatever harm we have done to
the Earth, we have, just in time, redeemed ourselves by acting simultaneously as parents and
midwives to the cyborgs” (86).

Lovelock’s idea is seductive and fascinating, and at the same time chilling and terrifying. He
tries to present it in a neutral and scientific way. However, its implications are anything but
neutral. Since he does not deal sufficiently with the moral, philosophical, and theological
consequences of his proposal, it is the job of scholars from these fields to engage with them.

1
Daily Mail, 22.03.2008, “We're all doomed! 40 years from global catastrophe - and there's NOTHING we can
do about it, says climate change expert.”
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-541748/Were-doomed-40-years-global-catastrophe--theres-
NOTHING-says-climate-change-expert.html (retrieved 15.12.2019)