As a continuation of the ontological position on the three limits of human existence: the body, the mind, and the lineage.
The manipulability of consciousness has become the central trap of late modernity. Unlike the body, consciousness doesn’t scream or starve. It can be theorized, formatted, streamed — and it appears to comply. Or so it seemed. The rise in mental disorders is not merely a function of improved diagnostics. The mind has become a stage onto which any idea can be projected, with no concern for whether it coheres with the structure of being.
Where the body imposes hard boundaries — illness, fatigue, death — consciousness appears infinitely stretchable. Ideologies, identities, ethical models, theories of reality — all tested in sequence — have rendered the mind a laboratory stripped of ground. The commercial success of this elastic domain has only intensified the pressure.
The emergence of artificial intelligence is a symptom of nearing the limit. Once the mind’s capacity to construct meaning is exhausted, and postmodernity runs out of ways to deceive itself, a quasi-substitute enters the scene. AI is not merely a tool — it is the system’s reflex to its own depletion. We no longer believe that human consciousness can generate anything truly new without dismantling itself.
And that dismantling is already underway. The heirs of postmodernity — having long ignored the body, lineage, instinct, and being — now find their abstractions losing followers. These concepts, detached from the real, lead to degeneration: demographic, existential, civilizational. Where the body and lineage are erased, no next generation appears. The future withdraws.
Taking their place are those who never broke the continuity — those still grounded in land, blood, structure. Those who did not fracture their being into diagrams and projections. The restoration of the ontological continuum — from body to lineage, lineage to culture, culture to metaphysics — is no longer a matter of preference. It is necessity.
The question is no longer what to invent, but what to recover. Not in the name of archaism, but in the name of reality.
The body. The lineage. The limit.
There is no future in abstraction without ground.
The limit is not the enemy — it is the condition of form. ■