The Era of the Omnipotent Individual
Modern civilization has now surged into a new phase where two phenomena, “Hyper-individualization” and “Automation,” have begun to spin simultaneously and at a terrifying velocity for the first time in human history. At this historical turning point, not only have all survival strategies once deemed correct been rendered invalid, but adherence to the old rules acts as the gravest risk, capable of bringing one’s life to an immediate terminus.
My proposal to the reader regarding this class of problem is to once and for all discard the emotional arguments and the opinions of others that one is so prone to falling into, and instead, thoroughly and coldly introspect to perceive and accept the changes of this era. Everything begins here. Above all, you must burn your bridges, accepting that there is no correct answer for you other than the one derived from this introspection. The opinions of others are irrelevant; the issue is how you will survive this turbulent era. The current reality is that those who flee, unable to perform this introspection, are desperately trying to obstruct those attempting to face themselves, dragging them down to the side of the culled. The key, as I practice it thoroughly, is “Total Disregard.”
In short, have you grasped this definitive paradigm shift down to your very marrow? That is the cruel bifurcation point determining who advances to the next world and who is weeded out. At this juncture, resorting to emotionalism or drifting with the opinions of others will be fatal. This trend is currently still gradual, but no one can imagine next year, and it is impossible to know what the state of affairs will be three years hence. That is precisely why this is a problem that must be pondered thoroughly right now. If you miss this opportunity, the chance to recover it will never circle back. As 2025 draws to a close, I pray that each reader utilizes this lingering quiet time to derive their own answer to this tide.
Now, the crux of introspecting on this problem lies in the word “formerly.” Until “formerly”—or rather, until a few years ago—humanity was largely permitted to be incomplete as individuals. It was possible to survive by connecting and coordinating with “external others”—others, teams, organizations, communities, and even governments—to supplement abilities one lacked; this relationship was structural. Viewing modern human history macroscopically, this mutual interdependence was indeed the optimal algorithm for increasing the survival probability of the species, and it achieved an explosive increase in human numbers. However, I assert this: The “era where individual incompleteness is permissible” has utterly ended. The greatest problem in the modern age is that, despite the rules of the game having been rewritten from the foundation up, the masses ignore the fact of this change, clutching moldy rulebooks while running on emotion, attempting to proceed into the future in that state. That place is not the future.
As a major premise, the sense of blockage and stagnation people harbor is not the fault of society, politics, or others. There is one singular truth running through the root of all these issues. It is that people have voluntarily abandoned the ability of “Resolve”—the capacity to “decide for oneself” that everyone possesses—delaying the timing of decisions or, in the worst case, continuing to outsource them externally, thereby falling into dysfunction. Yet, the individual likely vaguely senses that they are unable to withstand the social intensity accelerated by automation and are beginning to be identified as a specimen to be culled. In fact, in modern society, nothing is more of a bottleneck or a wasted effort than “coordination with others” in the pre-modern sense.
Here, the masses are making a fatal misunderstanding: the rise of AI is not for “AI to replace humanity and become omnipotent.” This is a completely erroneous line of thought. While it is understandable that the Western world, where the position of “God” remains deeply deployed in the foundation, might adopt this view, it cannot be universalized for humanity. As a Japanese individual, I view it from a completely different perspective. The rise of AI is not about AI replacing humanity to become omnipotent; rather, AI is demanding that humanity “be omnipotent as individuals.” This shift in thinking is fundamental.
“If you wish to survive, accomplish everything alone”—this is the true message lurking behind the rise of AI. Whether or not one understands this will serve as a metric for survival.
Therefore, discussions focused excessively on the point that the evolution of AI will steal people’s jobs remain misaligned with the essence, leading the masses who adhere to such arguments into a false future. That was valid criticism in a society based on pre-modern rules, but now it is a story of the past. It is akin to proudly claiming that humanity need not change a single thing, that “our policy is not to change,” which is utterly comical. The cold truth facing this attitude, which can only be seen as having lost sight of oneself, is that in this era, anyone holding AI and automation tools is no longer permitted to eat by means of a single skill alone.
“Formerly,” possessing “one specialty” was praised, and that specific skill secured a survival right (a seat in society) within the ecosystem of an organization, yielding a decent income; however, that right has already been revoked. Only the “Omnipotent Individual” who can single-handedly rotate the entire process—from design to implementation, marketing, legal judgment, and final decision-making, leading the AI from planning to execution and completion—can continue to walk this unmanned wilderness.
By “Omnipotent,” I do not, of course, mean “God” in the Western context, nor do I imply the realistic effort of one human becoming versed in everything. Rather, applying McLuhan-esque media theory, it means that by utilizing AI as an “external brain” and “infinite limbs” within the “self,” it has become possible for one human to “master the entire process of a project.” For example, I watch classic Japanese films daily; formerly, making a single film required a director, screenwriter, cameraman, lighting, sound, editing, actors, a huge budget, and coordinators—a vast array of specialized staff. However, currently, a single individual mastering AI can “command the entire process of the project,” completing everything from the script to video output and voice synthesis without moving a step from their home. Systems development is the same. The process from requirements definition to code writing, debugging, and deployment, which once required a team of dozens of engineers, is beginning to be accomplished by a single architect capable of conversing with AI, and the exclusivity of specialized professions is declining drastically due to no-code tools.
This signifies the arrival of the reintegration of “Vision” and “Execution,” which had long been severed by the separation known as division of labor. While invisible as long as one is entangled in the delusions of modernity, this is merely the extension of abilities humans originally possessed into the modern age. Society until now was completely divided into humans who conceived ideas and the multitude of humans who partially executed them. Although various workflows were experimented with and adopted in the details, the fundamental structure remained immovable until today.
However, from now on, those who can complete execution and materialization alone the instant they conceive an idea will hold hegemony. Conversely, those who function merely as parts—saying “I can only write code,” “I can only draw,” “I can only write articles”—will lose their existential value the moment AI becomes capable of generating that output, no matter how high the capability of that part itself may be.
This is because “high capability” in that context complies with pre-modern values and does not equate to the high capability demanded by the new era. What is sought is not the “Point” of a specialized skill, but the ability to create a “Plane” (though not merely 2D) that connects disparate elements to generate value. No matter how far technology progresses, AI is ultimately just a tool. This phrase, “AI is just a tool,” has been claimed frequently in the past, but what I wish to ask is whether you truly understand the meaning of this. This understanding is the invisible boundary line between those who advance and those who are culled.
In other words, we have entered an era where one competes not with the “something” attached to the individual “I,” but with the individual “I” itself. Therefore, any pre-modern decorations such as “I’m a writer,” “I’m a designer,” or “I’m a photographer” must be actively and immediately discarded by oneself. The questions directed at everyone by this shift are aggregated into the following. In the essence of these questions lies the existence that is technically impossible to replace in the truest sense.
“What kind of life have you led?”
“What do you think about as you live your days?”
Everyone is entering a phase where the abilities acquired in the first half of life must now be used under one’s own name. In this great transition period, clinging to others, companies, or systems is rightfully regarded as equivalent to voluntarily abandoning evolution.
At this time, do not mistake this for a “glorification of solitude.” Here, a fundamental redefinition of “connection” is required, but the critical matter is the overcoming of the “lonely heart” (the mind that seeks connection). The era demands the arrival of the individual as a completely autonomous entity. Therefore, “connection” is not to be grasped in the sense we currently believe; it will be formed in a completely different shape. To offer a suggestion: it is Spirituality.
Henceforth, the unit of value creation will rapidly shift from the level of rigid organizations and systems to fluid project bases. The image is like a quiet scene of raindrops striking a pond, where rings of water appear one after another and then vanish. It will become common for multiple “Omnipotent Individuals” adapted to the changes of the era to connect at the necessary moment, and once the objective is achieved, disperse without leaving a trace. However, this movement may be invisible to those left behind by the changes of the era. In other words, gathering and dispersing with molecular-level fluidity will become the standard, and everyone must strive to prepare for this. In this ultra-high-speed world, bringing in the latency of “former” emotions or “former” entanglements of human relationships must be absolutely avoided. To put it extremely: it boils down to, “Are you prepared to live alone?” People who cannot do this appear to be running on emotion currently, but cruelly, the times will not wait. Let us ignore the opinions of others who have lost sight of themselves and proceed forward. Fortunately, I live in Japan, which lacks the soil for English-speaking debate, and since I watch no news nor view any information from others, such noise does not enter my sphere. Thoroughly blocking information is the only way to let necessary information in.
Due to these circumstances, we face a phase where we must fundamentally review the definition of the instinct to seek a “herd” as biological beings. That is to say, is the instinctual “connection” of a living thing truly “connection” in the sense that modern people think of it? If one thinks coolly, one will realize that connection at the instinctual dimension—the act of forming a herd as a biological entity—is completely unrelated to the modern equation of “Connection = Lonely.” What this fact suggests is that unless one thoroughly erases the noise of “loneliness” from “connection,” one cannot possess true connection and cannot proceed forward.
Let us dig a little deeper into the transformation of “connection.” The connection of the coming era will not be a “puzzle of mutual reliance” (interdependence) where we fill each other’s voids, but rather like a constellation formed temporarily by independent, shining stars. A fixed puzzle piece loses its significance of existence if it does not fit the shape of the adjacent piece. Pushing this structure forward was the way of the previous era. However, stars are suns that emit light individually and can continue to exist in the universe alone. And stars do not feel lonely. Only when those stars are viewed from a certain perspective (project or purpose) are they recognized as a meaningful shape (constellation). This is the form of the next-generation community and the unknown possibility.
What is most shunned in this constellation-type cooperation is the gravity of dependence on others. If a star that cannot shine on its own mixes in, the brilliance of the entire constellation becomes turbid. Therefore, paradoxically, if you seek true connection, you must first stand thoroughly alone and polish the ability to complete things alone. Only when those who possess the resolute confidence that “I can live even alone” join hands is pure, explosive synergy born, free from dependence and exploitation.
Collusion to bury loneliness may bring temporary peace, but in the end, it only invites mutual downfall. In contrast, the high-dimensional connection that can be called spirituality presupposes perfection as an individual. As I will touch upon, just as the people who lived in the Jomon period of ancient Japan formed settlements in tribes while possessing high individual hunting abilities and survival skills, we too can only meet true companions beyond the point of aiming to be “Omnipotent as an Individual” in the digital wilderness. The well-worn phrase “Do not fear solitude” is nothing other than an encouragement to “Be High-minded.” Only a high-minded soul can resonate with a soul at the same height. And this tendency is currently rising at a tremendous speed. Because a world where people who were previously invisible can now be seen has opened up. In the future, the concept of “famous” in the conventional sense will undergo a complete transformation.
However, this itself is by no means a new concept. If we recall the ancient Jomon period in Japan, the Jomon people possessed highly completed survival abilities as individuals to begin with, and they never clung to the “collusive mutual interdependence wired by loneliness” like moderns do. Had they done so, they would have been culled immediately. This is because the “exterior” for them was “Nature” itself—far more merciless than AI.
Speaking from my experience investigating the Jomon period, living sensitively to the rules of nature, or rather, assimilating with nature itself, was the sole basis of survival. If one senses even a faint sign that the pulse emitted by the natural environment is changing, one must change oneself immediately to survive. Because it is too late once the rules of nature have changed. This is the essence of the Jomon people and other survivors of human history. In other words, detecting the signs of change and changing oneself before the change occurs. This is the teaching the Jomon people left to us.
And because modern humans have destroyed and disturbed this nature on a colossal scale, as everyone is already experiencing, the counterattack of nature against humanity has begun. Therefore, the most troublesome thing for us moderns is that there is no way to survive other than immediate adaptation to ancient nature, which holds the survival rules, and to the new trends of the era such as AI and automation. In addition to this, the massive problem of human numbers swelling past the critical point, and global instability due to the collapse of Western hegemony—vast risks are compressed simultaneously. In an era where everyone must survive based on these fundamentals, do you genuinely believe it is possible to continue “living by a single skill,” as was done in the peaceful former era? To me, the barrenness of AI-related discussions lies in everyone pretending to debate while premising on pre-modern values. Why do they not conduct discussions incorporating the values of the new era first and foremost?
On the other hand, the survival ability completed as a Jomon individual does not imply being cold toward others. Rather, if an era of individuals with thoroughly completed survival abilities is established, that mutual aid becomes one without dependence, holding the potential to realize true relationships on a global scale. This is the path humanity must aim for. If we continue with mutual interdependence, the host body, having surpassed 8 billion people—which is unsustainable no matter how one thinks about it—will be crushed, and the survival of humanity itself will be jeopardized.
According to the Jomon principle, the higher the dependence of modern people on others, organizations, and systems, the more extremely survival probability declines. Therefore, to adapt to the changes of the era as quickly as possible, one must decide and change immediately. Especially regarding AI, yesterday’s rules may not apply today. To understand these rules, there is no method other than touching it oneself every day. Listening to someone’s theory on AI amounts to nothing. And just as the Jomon people lived assimilated with nature, we need to review all workflows and establish a workflow close to AI.
Based on this overview, what I wish to transmit to the reader to survive the AI/Automation era is a concept honed to the extreme by Japanese predecessors for the sake of survival. That is “Isagiyosa” (Decisiveness/Purity).