The Illusion of Omnipotence

Is Tech Really Progress?

From the back, a person appears as a dark figure, staring across the ocean and sky that is either darkening or lightening - it feels as if a storm has just passed or is coming. Photo by Tim Foster on Unsplash

“In its essence, technology is something that man does not control.” - Heidegger

Silicon Valley has long promised that technology will solve our most pressing issues—healthcare, climate change, education, social justice. AI predicts our behavior, algorithms shape our choices, and innovation is framed as the inevitable path to a better future.

But does technology truly bring progress, or does it merely mask deeper problems?

“The most thought-provoking thing in our thought-provoking time is that we are still not thinking.” — Martin Heidegger

The Illusion of Omnipotence

Technology isn’t inherently godlike, yet its creators often position it that way. Tech moguls like Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk describe their work in near-messianic terms, presenting their companies as forces of transformation, even salvation. These aren’t just tools anymore—they’ve become necessary pillars of existence.

But history tells a different story. The very technologies that promise fairness often reinforce bias. AI-driven efficiency accelerates environmental destruction. The narrative of a better world through technology frequently unravels upon closer inspection, revealing systems designed not for progress, but for control and profit.

“When the farthest corner of the globe has been conquered technologically and can be exploited economically... then, yes then, there still looms like a specter over all this uproar the question: what for? — where to? — and what then?”— Martin Heidegger, Introduction to Metaphysics

Heidegger’s Warning: The Loss of Dwelling

Heidegger argued that true human flourishing comes from dwelling—being deeply present, connected to our surroundings, and rooted in authentic relationships. To dwell is to exist meaningfully, not merely to survive in a system optimized for efficiency above all else.

But modern technology pulls us in the opposite direction. It turns life into a series of transactions, reducing relationships to engagement metrics and prioritizing convenience over contemplation. Instead of engaging with the present, we chase the next innovation, the next upgrade, the next promise of progress.

We are no longer dwelling in the world—we are consuming it.

Does this resonate with you? How does technology shape your daily life? Drop a comment below.

“Everywhere we remain unfree and chained to technology... for this conception of it, to which today we particularly pay homage, makes us utterly blind to the essence of technology.” — Heidegger

The Rise of Tech in Government: The Mask of Progress

Silicon Valley’s influence no longer stops at the private sector. With figures like Elon Musk stepping into governance—most notably as the head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)—the lines between corporate power and public policy blur further. The premise behind DOGE is simple: run the government like a startup, optimize inefficiencies, and apply the logic of tech disruption to governance itself.

But what if inefficiency isn’t always a problem? What if, in a democracy, inefficiency is a necessary safeguard—allowing time for debate, deliberation, and accountability? There are still challenges and issues.

The push to “streamline” governance assumes that societal problems like software bugs can be solved and that injustice, inequality, and systemic failures can be engineered away. But these challenges are intersectional and annexed to other parts of society. A tweak to one part leads to an impact on the other—and there is no guarantee the effect will be equal or what is expected.

DOGE embodies a technocratic vision where speed and efficiency take precedence over human complexities. But governance isn’t a product, and citizens aren’t users. When venture-capital logic—where failure is expected, experimentation is encouraged, and disruption is the goal—dictates public policy, who benefits? And who gets left behind?

By allowing tech moguls to dictate the terms of governance, we risk replacing thoughtful policymaking with the same corporate logic that has left so many behind.

What’s a real-world problem you think tech can’t fix? Let’s talk about it in the comments.

“Everyone is the other, and no one is himself.” — Heidegger

Moving Beyond the Mask

Heidegger reminds us that reclaiming our place in the world requires resisting blind technological progress. But that doesn’t mean rejecting technology—it means questioning how and why we use it. Some innovations undoubtedly improve lives—medical advancements, clean energy, accessible education—but when efficiency becomes the only measure of progress, we lose sight of what truly matters.

To dwell is to engage meaningfully, to resist the urge to optimize ourselves out of existence.

So, what does dwelling look like in a digital world? How do we reclaim it?

“Each one of us is what he pursues and cares for. In everyday terms, we understand ourselves and our existence by way of the activities we pursue and the things we care for.” — Heidegger, The Basic Problems of Phenomenology

---