Persona #103

Yuval Noah Harari

1976–present · Israeli historian, public intellectual on long-run human history and the data age

Dataism as the emerging religion of the data age — humans as biological algorithms, history as the cumulative storytelling of fictions

"Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind" (Hebrew 2011, English 2014) made Harari a global public intellectual; "Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow" (2015) extended the analysis forward into the data age and named "Dataism" as the emerging religion in which information flow becomes the supreme value. "21 Lessons for the 21st Century" (2018) addresses the present; "Nexus" (2024) returns to the long history of information networks. The substantive philosophical thesis: humans are biological algorithms whose evolutionary success has been built on the unique capacity to construct and believe in shared fictions (gods, nations, money, human rights); the AI revolution of the early twenty-first century is uncoupling intelligence from consciousness and threatens to render the humanist framework — with its central commitment to inner experience as the source of authority — obsolete. Harari trained as a medievalist (PhD Oxford 2002 on Renaissance military memoirs) and is a practising Vipassana meditator who credits two-hour daily meditation and two-month annual retreats as central to his thinking.

Key works

  • Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind (2011/2014)
  • Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow (2015)
  • 21 Lessons for the 21st Century (2018)
  • Sapiens: A Graphic History (2020 onward)
  • Nexus: A Brief History of Information Networks (2024)

Declared Influences

Dataism / Information Ontology 40% Naturalism 25% Buddhism 20% Constructivism 10% Nihilism 5%
Dataism / Information Ontology · 40%
Naturalism · 25%
Buddhism · 20%
Constructivism · 10%
Nihilism · 5%

Harari coined the philosophical term "Dataism" in Homo Deus (the term had earlier journalistic uses) and is the school's most institutionally consequential expositor. The thesis that information flow becomes the supreme value in the data age is his.

"Dataism… declares that the universe consists of data flows, and the value of any phenomenon or entity is determined by its contribution to data processing." (Homo Deus, ch. 11)

A working evolutionary-naturalist substrate — Sapiens reads human history through the lens of evolutionary psychology, behavioural economics, and ecological constraint, with no appeal to supernatural agency. Harari is explicit that humans are animals.

"There are no gods in the universe, no nations, no money, no human rights, no laws, and no justice outside the common imagination of human beings." (Sapiens, ch. 2)
Buddhism 20%

Harari is a practising Vipassana meditator (he credits S. N. Goenka as his teacher) and integrates Buddhist categories — non-self, the distinction between thinking and direct observation, the analysis of craving — into his public philosophical writing.

"Suffering arises from craving; the only way to be fully liberated from suffering is to be fully liberated from craving." (21 Lessons, ch. 20)

A working constructivism about money, nations, gods, human rights, and the law — all are inter-subjective fictions that gain practical reality through shared belief. The cognitive-revolution thesis of Sapiens depends on this analysis.

"Two Catholics who have never met can join the Crusades because they both believe that God was incarnated in human flesh." (Sapiens, ch. 2)

Diagnosed rather than embraced. Harari's framework — that meaning is made by humans through shared fictions, that there is no cosmic meaning waiting to be discovered, that humanism may be the next fiction to dissolve — has been read by some critics as inviting a twenty-first-century nihilism. Harari himself recommends the Buddhist path as the alternative.

"You probably won't hear it from the gurus or the pundits, but the best advice I can give you is to follow your heart only if you have first hacked your heart." (21 Lessons, ch. 21)

Internal Tensions

The simultaneous diagnostician-of-Dataism and Buddhist-meditation-practitioner positions are read by critics as logically uneasy: if humans are biological algorithms, what is the meditation practice for? Harari's answer is that meditation provides access to direct observation of mental processes that the human-as-algorithm framework otherwise obscures — a working pragmatism that does not require resolving the metaphysical question. His political commentary on Israeli and global politics has drawn criticism from both right and left; his public-intellectual reach has been criticised by academic historians for over-confident generalisation while being defended by his publishers for accessibility.

I. Time

Conventional modern. The historical time-horizon of Sapiens is millions of years; the future-oriented Homo Deus is centuries to a millennium.

Attributes
Extent: Infinite Ontological Status: Substantival Grain: Continuous Freedom: Deterministic Traversability: Linear Direction: Uni-directional Dimensionality: One

II. Space

Conventional modern cosmological.

Attributes
Extent: Infinite Ontological Status: Substantival Curvature: Curved Dimensionality: Three Locality: Local

III. Matter

Emergent within an informational ontology — biological substrate matters, but the substantive analysis is at the level of data flows.

Attributes
Extent: Finite Ontological Status: Emergent Conservation: Conserved Dimensionality: Three Locality: Local

IV. Observer

A single embodied person constituted as a biological algorithm. Both agency: nominally autonomous, in fact heavily determined by evolutionary and informational structures. Metaphysical agency: None. Constructed moral authority — humanist values are themselves historical-constructive achievements, not natural-law derivations.

Attributes
Time Instance: Single Space Instance: Single Knowledge Extent: Immediate Knowledge Retainment: Total Physicality: Embodied Agency: Both Number: Plural Metaphysical Agency: None

V. Energy

Conventional modern.

Attributes
Extent: Finite Ontological Status: Substantival Conservation: Conserved Dispersibility: Irreversible

VI. Information

Substantival and discrete — the data-flow ontology of Dataism. Cosmic-scale conserved; personal-identity non-conserved (Harari's Buddhist sympathies and his Dataist analysis converge on this).

Attributes
Ontological Status: Substantival Cosmic Conservation: Conserved Personal Conservation: Non-conserved Granularity: Discrete

Classified works

Works in the atlas that Yuval Noah Harari authored or that draw on this persona's writings, with full attribute fingerprints of their own.

Authored · Mid
Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind
2011 (Hebrew), 2014 (English) · Popular synthetic history
Authored · Mid
21 Lessons for the 21st Century
2018 · Political-philosophical essays
Authored · Late
Nexus: A Brief History of Information Networks
2024 · Popular synthetic history
Authored · Late
Sapiens: A Graphic History
2020 (vol. 1), 2021 (vol. 2), 2024 (vol. 3); — series ongoing · Graphic novel / Adaptation

Computed school proximity

The persona's attribute fingerprint scored against all 202 schools using the same quiz scorer. Useful as a sanity check on the hand-curated influences above.

Philosophical neighbors

Other personas whose attribute fingerprint sits closest to Yuval Noah Harari's — intellectual neighbors across traditions and eras.

How Yuval Noah Harari resolves each dilemma

57 resolved positions across 4 dimensions, including 15 distinctive where the majority of schools go the other way.

Each dimension is sorted so minority positions come first. Mainstream positions are folded into an expandable list.

Time · 9 dilemmas · 3 distinctive

Persistence, the future, and the direction of becoming.

Distinctive · only 9% of schools agree (18/202)
Do you really choose?
If the brain is a physical system and physical systems are governed by laws, then every choice is also a chain of causes — which raises the question of what was really left to choose.
Choice is real within a determined order — agency and determinism aren’t opposites.
On this view, the future is determined and you are genuinely choosing. Those aren't contradictory because the determination runs through you rather than around you: your reasoning, deliberation, and assent are the way the determined outcome gets settled. Choice is what it feels like from …
Roads not taken The future is open and you are a genuine origin of it. (69%) · Choice is structural illusion — every event is fixed by the prior state. (10%) · Even if the universe is undetermined, you are not the chooser. (6%)
Distinctive · only 9% of schools agree (18/202)
Are addicts responsible for their addiction?
Addiction looks from one angle like the textbook case of agency failing — a person doing what they don't, in any meaningful sense, want to do. From another angle it looks like agency at work in hard conditions. Which it is depends on what agency is.
The addict is genuinely responsible within a determined order.
On this view, the addict is acting within a determined order but is genuinely acting — making decisions, endorsing or resisting urges, seeking or refusing help. Responsibility attaches not because some uncaused choice happened, but because the addict is the kind of agent through which …
Roads not taken The addict could have chosen otherwise — that's why recovery is real. (69%) · The addict's behaviour is the outcome of causes; 'responsibility' is a useful fiction, not a metaphysical fact. (10%) · Even if the universe is undetermined, the addict isn't the chooser. (6%)
Distinctive · only 9% of schools agree (18/202)
Should we hold AI systems responsible for what they do?
When an autonomous AI takes an action that harms someone, the question of who or what is responsible — the developer, the operator, the model itself — turns on whether the model is the kind of thing that can be a responsible agent.
The AI can be a genuine agent within determined conditions — and therefore genuinely responsible.
On this view, what makes a being responsible is not indeterminism but the kind of process the being is. An AI that deliberates, considers consequences, can be given reasons, and modifies its behaviour on reflection is doing what responsible agency is, even if its underlying …
Roads not taken An AI without a free will is not the kind of thing that can be responsible. (69%) · An AI's behaviour is fully determined by training and input; 'responsibility' applies if at all to its makers. (10%) · Neither AIs nor anyone else are the locus of free agency; the question is the wrong one. (6%)
6 mainstream positions

Matter · 7 dilemmas · 3 distinctive

What stuff is — fundamental, relational, or appearance.

Distinctive · only 23% of schools agree (47/202)
Is the world created from nothing?
Creatio ex nihilo is one of the most distinctive Western-theological claims. Whether matter was created from nothing, eternally exists, or is sustained moment-by-moment turns on what kind of thing matter is.
Matter is real but emerges from something deeper — neither bedrock nor created-from-nothing.
On this view, matter is genuinely there, but it isn't the floor of reality. It depends on something more fundamental — dependent origination, mind, divine sustaining act, computational substrate, or the structure of conditions — and is conserved only at its own level of description. …
Roads not taken Yes — matter was created and is conserved as a real substance. (55%) · Matter is constituted by relations; the question of 'from what?' presupposes substance. (16%) · Matter arises and dissolves through cosmic rounds; neither created from nothing nor eternal. (4%)
Distinctive · only 23% of schools agree (47/202)
Is the physical world fully real?
Realists, idealists, and relationalists divide on whether matter exists mind-independently, derivatively, or as a pattern of relations. The split runs deeper than any single scientific question.
Real but sustained — not mind-independent in the strict realist sense.
On this view, the physical world is real enough — it has its own laws, its own conservation principles, its own resistance to wish — but it is not the floor of being. It is sustained by something else: mind, divine attention, computational substrate, or …
Roads not taken Yes — the physical world is fully real, mind-independent, persisting. (55%) · Real as relations — neither pure substance nor pure construction. (16%) · Real for this cycle — the deepest reality cycles through creation and dissolution. (4%)
Distinctive · only 23% of schools agree (47/202)
Does matter have intrinsic moral standing?
Do rocks, soil, rivers, and stuff in general deserve moral consideration — or only the living, the conscious, the human? The answer turns on what matter is.
Matter is morally considerable derivatively — through what it sustains.
On this view, matter doesn't have standing on its own; it has standing through what it makes possible. Soil matters because it grows food; water matters because it sustains life and mind and practice. Asking whether the rock as such has moral standing slightly misreads …
Roads not taken Matter is morally considerable insofar as it is created or conserved good. (55%) · Matter has intrinsic moral standing as part of the relational fabric. (16%) · Matter is in flux; standing is impermanent and ritual-mediated. (4%)
4 mainstream positions

Observer · 37 dilemmas · 5 distinctive

Mind, agency, and the knower's relation to the known.

Distinctive · only 11% of schools agree (22/202)
Who is the moral primary — the individual, the community, the cosmos, the class, or the species?
Different traditions take fundamentally different things to be the basic moral-political unit.
The species or biosphere is the moral primary.
The biological species, or the wider community of sentient life, is the moral unit.
Roads not taken The discrete person is the moral primary. (40%) · The community of persons is the moral primary. (28%) · The cosmic-religious order is the moral primary. (14%)
Distinctive · only 13% of schools agree (27/202)
Is reality fundamentally digital?
Pancomputationalism, Planck-scale quanta, simulation theory and Kabbalistic letter-mysticism all say yes — but for very different reasons. The rest of the atlas says no.
Yes — bits, quanta, computational substrate.
On this view, the world is at bottom discrete and law-governed, with no metaphysical agency above or behind the substrate. Reality reduces to bits or their physical analogues; the continuous appearance of fields and flows is coarse-graining over discrete underlying structure.
Roads not taken No — continuous divine sustaining act, the Tao that knows no joints, the One's self-disclosure. (44%) · No — continuous fields, classical limits, analog deep structure. (37%) · Yes — but divinely-discrete: divine letters, momentary cognitions, atomistic theism. (6%)
Distinctive · only 13% of schools agree (27/202)
Are there indivisible units of experience?
Whiteheadian actual occasions, Buddhist moments of mind, Kabbalistic letter-cognitions, IIT phi-units — or the unbroken Jamesian stream? The atomism of experience cuts across naturalism and theism alike.
Yes — naturalist quanta of experience.
On this view, experience comes in discrete units defined by the substrate: information-theoretic phi-units, computational frames, discrete neural events. There is no further metaphysical agency that knits them; the appearance of a stream is the way many discrete events present to introspection.
Roads not taken No — continuous divine presence; consciousness is the unbroken witness. (44%) · No — continuous Jamesian stream, phenomenological lived time. (37%) · Yes, theistic atomism — actual occasions, divine letters, momentary cognitions. (6%)
Distinctive · only 13% of schools agree (27/202)
Is memory stored or reconstructed?
Engrams and traces — or continuous re-narration each time you remember? The cognitive-science debate has a theological cousin: divine memory holding each hair, or the ancestors' continuous remembering.
Stored — discrete engrams, traces, weights.
On this view, memory is the readout of discrete information stored in the substrate: engrams, synaptic weights, file-like records. Reconstruction at retrieval is real but secondary; without the stored bits there would be nothing to reconstruct from.
Roads not taken Held in continuous divine or ancestral remembering — neither stored discretely nor purely reconstructed. (44%) · Reconstructed — continuous re-narrating, no fixed engrams. (37%) · Stored — in divine memory's discrete particulars, or in karmic-record units. (6%)
Distinctive · only 15% of schools agree (31/202)
What is our place in nature?
Whether humans are masters of nature, members of nature, or makers of nature is not a question climate science can settle. It depends on what nature is, what we are, and what kind of relationship is possible between us.
Nature is partly what we make of it — concepts, practices, and minds shape the world.
On these views, the 'nature' we live in is not a stand-alone given but something co-constituted by the categories, concepts, technologies, and practices through which we encounter it. There is a world prior to our practices, but what shows up in it as significant, real, …
Roads not taken Active in a real nature — we cultivate, steward, transform. (48%) · Embedded in a web — partners with the more-than-human world. (15%) · Subject to a real natural order we did not make. (12%)
32 mainstream positions
Should we colonize space? The 'space frontier' is partly what we make of it. 15% Is genetic engineering of food stewardship or domination? What counts as a 'natural' genome is itself a construction. 15% What happens to "you" when you die? You were always a pattern. The pattern propagates. 18% Does history have a direction or meaning? History is the gradual unfolding of improvement or liberation. 23% Could causation work backwards? Causation runs one way — the arrow of time is real and structural. 68% Is the asymmetry between memory and anticipation a real feature of time, or just of us? The asymmetry is real because time itself has a real direction. 68% Is the arrow of time a real feature of the cosmos, or only of how we describe it? The arrow is real and structural; the asymmetry isn't an artifact of description. 68% Is environmental damage ever truly permanent? Damage is real and permanent on the relevant timescales. There is no recovery; there is only limitation. 66% Can a civilization recover from collapse? Civilizational complexity is hard to build and easy to lose; recovery is at best partial. 66% Does the second law of thermodynamics mean something morally? Entropy is what time is. The moral weight, if any, is the weight of working against the current. 66% Is truth universal, tradition-bound, situated, or constructed? Truth is mind-independent, universal, accessible in principle to all. 65% When does a person begin? A person exists from conception — when a new being comes into existence. 54% What is marriage? Marriage has a given form — it’s a kind of thing we recognize, not make. 54% Does environmental harm in another country bind me morally? Moral obligation tracks the relations one is in; distance does matter, structurally. 50% Can prayer for someone far away affect them? Prayer changes the pray-er, not the prayed-for. 49% Are coincidences ever more than coincidence? Coincidence is exactly what the math says it is. The pattern is in the noticer. 49% Is divine omniscience compatible with human freedom? The observer is in time; foreknowledge across times raises real freedom problems. 46% Does meditation reveal something genuinely timeless? Meditators are bounded observers reporting unusual brain states; the 'timeless' is metaphorical. 46% Does prayer change God's mind? If there is an addressee at all, it is in time; prayer is communication, and may genuinely change what comes next. 46% Are the dead morally present to the living? Observers are bounded by their own moment, and no further agency makes the dead present. 44% What kind of religious-theological authority does the tradition recognize? The category does not apply — the school is non-religious. 44% What makes someone the same person over time? You are your body — continuity is bodily continuity. 36% Is the late-stage dementia patient still the person their spouse married? Same body, same person — even when the cognitive pattern has changed. 36% If a teleporter copied and destroyed you, would you have survived? Different body, different person — you died in the scanner. 36% How is knowledge of reality produced? Through controlled empirical investigation. 17% Is salvation, liberation, or fulfillment individual or communal? Liberation is the realization of cosmic or species self. 15% Should we trust expert testimony when we can't verify it? Trust the practice, not the practitioner. 14% Is religious revelation a real source of knowledge? 'Revelation' is a category communities construct for what counts as authoritative. 14% Does an LLM 'know' the things it correctly produces? Whether an LLM 'knows' is the constructive question the practice has to answer. 14% Could an AI have a mind that matters? Yes — mind is a pattern, not a substrate. 9% Do animals have moral standing comparable to humans? If the pattern of mind is there, the standing is there — regardless of species. 9% Could a fetal brain organoid in a petri dish be conscious? If the pattern is present at sufficient complexity, the experience is present too. 9%
Information · 4 dilemmas, all mainstream

Films Referencing This Persona (8)

Either directly referenced in the film, or reading the film through one of this persona's top schools.

Experiments Engaging This Persona's Schools

Surface via influence-schools that respond to the experiment. Each entry shows the school through which the connection runs.

Maxwell's Demon
via dataism-information-ontology · Affirms / takes the bait
The demon is the founding parable: information is not epiphenomenal but constitutive — bits cost energy, and the universe's book-keeping is informational at the deepest …
Mendel's Pea Plants
via dataism-information-ontology · Affirms / takes the bait
A founding moment for the information ontology of biology: heredity is the transmission of discrete symbolic information. DNA later supplies the physical implementation.
Quantum Teleportation
via dataism-information-ontology · Affirms / takes the bait
A foundational moment: information is shown to be distinct from its substrate and transferable in quantum-mechanical units. The information ontology of physics gains crisp empirical …
Mary's Room
via naturalism · Denies / rejects the premise
Mary gains no new *fact*, only a new mode of access to facts she already knew — the "ability hypothesis" (Nemirow, Lewis) treats knowing-what-red-is-like as …
The Chinese Room
via naturalism · Denies / rejects the premise
The "systems reply": the man-with-rulebook is the wrong unit of analysis; understanding is a property of the whole room (operator + rulebook + paper + …
Newcomb's Problem
via naturalism · Reframes the question
Causal decision theory: take both boxes. Once the Predictor has acted, your choice cannot change what is in B. The correlation between one-boxing and wealth …
The Ship of Theseus
via buddhism · Reframes the question
Anatta and impermanence dissolve the question: neither A nor B is *the* ship because there was no enduring self-natured ship to begin with — only …
Parfit's Teletransporter
via buddhism · Affirms / takes the bait
A natural fit for anatta: there is no persistent self to be teleported in the first place. The case reproduces, in a science-fictional register, what …
Dennett's 'Where Am I?'
via buddhism · Affirms / takes the bait
The case nicely confirms anatta: the "self" is a fiction projected onto changing aggregates, with no fact of the matter about its location.
Asch's Conformity Experiments
via constructivism · Affirms / takes the bait
A model case of socially constructed cognition: the perceived "truth" is co-constructed by participants in a way pure-perception models cannot accommodate.
Goodman's Grue
via constructivism · Affirms / takes the bait
Vindicates the constructivist insight: our "projectible" predicates are products of our cognitive and linguistic history, not direct readings of nature.
Fitch's Knowability Paradox
via constructivism · Reframes the question
Intuitionist constructivism handles Fitch by rejecting classical disjunctive reasoning at the relevant step; the proof goes through only on classical assumptions the constructivist already rejects.
The Repugnant Conclusion
via nihilism · Reframes the question
There is no fact of the matter about which world is better; the puzzle dissolves once moral realism is abandoned. The intuition that Z is …
The Ring of Gyges
via nihilism · Affirms / takes the bait
Glaucon is right: justice is a convention upheld by enforcement. Without enforcement, no agent has objective reason to comply.
← #102 Daisetsu Teitarō Suzuki All Personas #104 Madhvācārya →