-
The Human Genome Sequencing Project and the Objectification of the Human
When Did Humans First Become “Read” Beings?
For a long time, we have understood humans
through consciousness, emotion, narrative, faith, and philosophy.Humans were always “subjects who create meaning,”
not “objects to be analyzed.”But only a few decades ago,
humanity began, for the first time, to dismantle and read itself as strings.From 1990 to 2003, the Human Genome Project.
This project was not merely an event of biologically understanding the human being—
it was the first event that transformed the human into a data structure.
Humans Were Not Read in Laboratories, but in Computers
DNA is not a sentence opened like a book.
It is a mass of material coiled, folded, and tangled inside cells.Thus the human genome was not “read” by observation.
It was completely shattered and then reconstructed by computation.DNA is broken into hundreds of thousands of fragments.
The A, T, G, C sequences of each fragment are converted into numbers.
Supercomputers reassemble those fragments like a puzzle.At this moment, humans became
not bodies but bundles of text files,
not beings but strings,
and destiny became not a narrative but a probability distribution.
From This Moment On, Humans Became Not “Patients” but “Managed Objects”
This was not merely an advancement in life science.
It was the moment when humans first became “designable structures.”What became possible afterward:
Genetic disease prediction
Personalized medicine
Gene editing
Life patents
Probabilistic inheritance of traits
Biological stratification of humansFrom this point on, recovery became not care but patching,
treatment became not relationship but debugging,
and dignity became not essence but a default option.
When Did We Become Not “People” but “Programs”?
After this project,
humans began to be born not simply as beings,
but as structures that are “loaded.”Biological entities with defects to be fixed,
algorithms to be optimized,
gradable biological specifications.Even now, without being asked,
we are being calculated within countless systems:health scores, risk levels, genetic probabilities, trait predictions, mental health indices.
This world uses the language of care,
but in truth handles humans in the language of design.
This Is Now a Question Not of Technology, but of Dignity
The problem is not technology.
The problem is who designs the default values of the human.And more importantly,
when did we begin to ask more often
whether we are being “adjusted to systems”
than whether we are being “treated as people”?The Human Genome Project did not understand humans—
it produced the first official document that turned humans into objects.And we are still living
in the world that followed.
If you enjoyed this piece:
Explore the “Armchair Anatomy” collection
Discover more from the Abstract collection -
When Does Thought Become a Castle in the Air?
Why Do We Not Change Even After We “Understand”?
We often say things like this:
“I understand this.”
“I get the concept.”
“I know what it means.”And yet, strangely,
that understanding hardly changes our lives.
The world does not look different,
our judgments do not shift,
and the texture of our actions remains the same.We certainly studied it.
We certainly read it.
Yet something feels suspended in midair.This kind of understanding is not knowledge—
it is closer to a structure built in the air.
It has shape, but no weight.
Why Does Mathematics Always Demand Both Input and Output?
Mathematics has long said this:
memorizing definitions alone changes nothing.
Only by solving problems
does a definition finally become “your own.”Definitions are input.
Problem-solving is output.
The moment these are separated,
mathematics becomes a castle in the air.This structure is not merely a study method—
it is a principle that applies to thought itself.
Thought Has Output, Too
In thought, input is concept,
theory,
a single perspective.Then what is the output of thought?
Choosing the correct answer?
Summarizing well?No.
The output of thought is the trace of the world being seen again.If, after learning a concept,
your way of seeing the news changes,
your criteria for interpreting people shifts,
and your past memories begin to be reread—
that is output.Only then does thought truly operate.
The Moment Input and Output Occur Together
The moment input and output occur together in thought
is surprisingly simple.You only need to attach one question to every input:
“With this concept,
what structure of the world I am seeing now becomes visible again?”The moment this question is added,
a concept becomes not information, but a lens.
And the world
quietly begins to rearrange itself.From that moment on,
understanding becomes not memory, but structure.
So That Thought Does Not Become a Castle in the Air
To keep thought from collapsing,
we do not need to read more—
we need to write faster.Read one concept,
leave one interpretation immediately.
Receive one theory,
immediately attempt one reconstruction of the world.The more such traces accumulate,
the more thought stands not in the air,
but with its feet on reality.
Thought Is Not “Understanding,” but “Reconstruction”
Thought is not the act of storing things in the head.
Thought is the act of reweaving the world.That is why true thought
always involves input and output at the same time.The moment you understand,
the world is already being rewritten once.From then on,
thought becomes not a castle in the air,
but a structure.
If you enjoyed this piece:
Explore the “Noise Cancelling” collection
Discover more from the Abstract collection -
Why Tarot Cannot Enter the “Domain of Science”
Tarot Has No “External Variables”
Four Pillars and astrology share at least one assumption:
that the temporal coordinate of “when one is born” compresses a correlation structure between nature and humans.For that reason, Four Pillars and astrology—however weakly—
still allow room for external-world variables such as environment, seasons, and social conditions to intervene.Tarot has no such axis.
There is no birth moment, no natural cycle, no environmental coordinate.
Tarot possesses almost no objective variables connected to the external world.At this point, tarot diverges from the lineage of Four Pillars and astrology.
The Core of Tarot Is “Randomness”
Tarot always begins with shuffling and drawing.
There is no meaning here—
it is purely a probabilistic event.Yet this randomness serves a crucial function.
It forcibly interrupts habitual streams of thought,
breaking people out of their usual cognitive paths.Tarot is less a device of prophecy
than a trigger for restarting thought.
Symbols Make People Reflect Themselves
The images on tarot cards are ambiguous and polysemous.
They contain universal human experiences,
yet are designed to be read differently by each person.When people encounter ambiguous stimuli,
they automatically project their own experiences and emotions.This structure is nearly identical to the psychological Rorschach test.
Tarot is less about reading the cards
and more about people reading themselves.
Therefore, Tarot Is Not Prophecy but a “Self-Interpretation Device”
Tarot cannot be reproduced, verified, or statistically accumulated.
It satisfies almost none of the conditions of science.Yet people still feel that it “was accurate”
because of confirmation bias, selective memory, the Barnum effect,
and the human desire to construct self-narratives.Tarot is not a tool that tells the future.
It is a device that externalizes and organizes
thoughts that were already present in the mind.
Why Do We Still Draw Tarot?
What people truly want
is not to know the future.What am I afraid of?
What am I postponing?
Before which choice am I wavering?Tarot is the fastest tool for pulling these questions to the surface.
Tarot does not speak fate.
It clarifies questions.And when questions become clear,
a person finally begins to choose.
If you enjoyed this piece:
Explore the “Manual for Destiny” collection
Discover more from the Abstract collection