O Ser Humano Programável?

Introduction

Calling a computer "programmable" is stating a fact. It receives instructions and follows them. Saying the same of a person sounds like an insult. After all, we have will, feelings and freedom of choice.

Yet there is an uncomfortable question, and it deserves a calm look. Much of what reaches us is picked by automatic systems: the news, the videos, other people's opinions. If that flow is organized by code, how far does it also influence what comes out of us? Our beliefs, our votes, our fears, our spending.

We like to believe we are the authors of every idea we have. Perhaps we are, in large part. But "in large part" is not "entirely." This essay looks at where the border lies, without panic and without naivety.

Historical Context

In the early twentieth century, a school of psychology called Behaviorism gained strength. Pavlov showed that dogs learned to salivate at a signal linked to food. Watson and, later, Skinner argued that behavior can be explained, to a good extent, by the stimuli and rewards of the environment. In Beyond Freedom and Dignity (1971), Skinner went as far as arguing that the idea of inner freedom gets in the way more than it helps.

Many thinkers disagreed. Cognitive psychology and humanist philosophy reminded us that people think, interpret and decide, and do not merely react. For decades, strict behaviorism lost ground.

But the idea that reward shapes habit never disappeared. Today it shows up in app design: alerts, likes, endless scrolling. This is not proof that we are lab animals. It is a sign that those who design these screens know well the power of a reward that arrives unannounced.

Scientific Foundations

What does science show, carefully speaking? One well-known study is by Michal Kosinski, David Stillwell and Thore Graepel, published in 2013 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Using data from more than 58,000 volunteers, they showed that Facebook "likes" could be used to estimate, with varying accuracy, personal traits such as personality and political and religious views. For some traits the prediction was good; for others, much weaker.

We also know, in general terms, that the brain adjusts to what we do often. This is called neuroplasticity. Repeated habits leave marks. How much this weighs in the case of social media is still debated by researchers, and studies disagree. What can honestly be said is this: the environment we live in influences how we think, and it is worth paying attention to it.

Philosophical Foundations

The historian Yuval Noah Harari argued, in 21 Lessons for the 21st Century (2018), that systems with lots of data and great computing power might one day understand our emotions better than we do. He uses the expression "hacking human beings." It is a hypothesis and a warning, not an established fact. Some think the risk is overstated.

The reasoning, however, deserves attention. Imagine that something outside knew your sensitive points. You would still feel that you choose freely. You might feel that you decided to buy that item, to be angered by that story, to join that idea. But part of the choice would have been prepared in advance, by an environment built to provoke that reaction.

Being programmable, in this sense, is not turning into a robot without feelings. It is having your own feelings used by something you cannot see. The honest question, then, is not "am I free or programmed?" It is: "when am I most influenced, and what can I do about it?"

Ethical Discussion

The thinker Shoshana Zuboff, in The Age of Surveillance Capitalism (2019), describes two stages. First, companies collect data about us to sell ads. Then they pursue what she calls "economies of action": acting on people's behavior to make outcomes more predictable.

The ethical question is serious. Can a society be free if the way people think is shaped, without their knowing, by a few companies running closed systems? Jaron Lanier, who worked inside the technology industry, asks a similar question in Ten Arguments for Deleting Your Social Media Accounts Right Now (2018). He invites each person to judge what social networks do with their attention.

Spiritual Reflection

Here a reading from faith comes in. Let us go slowly, in three steps: what the text says, what it means in its own context, and what it may change in life today.

What the text says. The apostle Paul wrote to the Christians in Rome: do not be shaped by the pattern of this world, but let yourselves be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so you can discern what is the good, pleasing and perfect will of God (Romans 12:2).

What it means, in its context. "World" there translates a Greek word that also means "age" or "era": the way of thinking and living that surrounded people at that time. Notice two details. First, the verb "be transformed" can be understood as "let yourselves be transformed": it is something that happens to a person, not only something they achieve. Second, chapter 12 begins with "therefore." In the earlier chapters Paul speaks of God's mercy; only then comes the invitation. Renewal is a reply to a gift, and it is addressed to a community, not to someone alone. Paul was not speaking of screens or algorithms.

What it may change in life today, said as an application. Here the essay builds a bridge, and it is good to say that it is our bridge, not the text's. Paul's principle is old: what surrounds us tends to shape what we think and want. If that holds in every age, it holds in ours too, with its notifications and recommendations. Anyone may ask, on an ordinary day: what has been shaping the way I think? Noticing is already a beginning.

Some people read this passage as a project of "taking back control of one's own will." The text is gentler than that: it speaks of making room for a change that comes from God, and not only from our own effort. Asking God for help is part of the way. And Paul soon adds that no one walks alone: the church is one body with many members who support each other (Romans 12:4–5). Noticing together is often lighter than noticing alone.

Conclusion

Part of the strength of any influence lies in not being noticed.

We are not machines. We have consciousness, and it has a power of its own: when we look carefully at what tries to steer us, that influence loses some of its grip. This is not a guarantee, but it is a beginning. Understanding that the digital environment was designed to hold our attention need not lead us to fear. It can lead us to more calm, more care about what we let in, and more conversation with those who walk with us.

And there is something greater than technique. For those who have faith, true freedom is not the isolation of someone who defends against everything. It is the life of someone who knows they are loved and accompanied.

---

The Forum: A Call to Reflection

The influences of the digital environment work quietly. Bringing them into the light takes honesty, with no hurry and no guilt. Let us talk with the Brotherhood below.

Reply in the comments and walk with your brothers:

1. The Suspicion: Is there a strong opinion, a wish to buy something, or an indignation you feel today that may have grown little by little from what you watch and read without much thought?
2. The Fine Line: How do you tell the difference between a desire that came from your own reflection and an impulse stirred up by the digital environment?
3. Unlearning: In light of Romans 12:2, what simple habits can we grow together to renew the mind in this age of screens and recommendations?

The forum is a place for listening. Read what others have written and let your voice be heard too.

---

Recommended Reading

• The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You, by Eli Pariser
• Ten Arguments for Deleting Your Social Media Accounts Right Now, by Jaron Lanier
• The Abolition of Man, by C. S. Lewis

References

• HARARI, Yuval Noah. 21 Lessons for the 21st Century. Spiegel & Grau, 2018.
• KOSINSKI, Michal; STILLWELL, David; GRAEPEL, Thore. Private traits and attributes are predictable from digital records of human behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, v. 110, n. 15, p. 5802-5805, 2013.
• LANIER, Jaron. Ten Arguments for Deleting Your Social Media Accounts Right Now. Henry Holt and Co., 2018.
• LEWIS, C. S. The Abolition of Man. 1943.
• PARISER, Eli. The Filter Bubble. Penguin Press, 2011.
• SKINNER, B. F. Beyond Freedom and Dignity. Alfred A. Knopf, 1971.
• ZUBOFF, Shoshana. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism. PublicAffairs, 2019.