<p>This paper argues that human beings have relied on historical modes of world-disclosure to render vulnerability, contingency, and finitude intelligible and livable. In religious worlds, ritual and symbol did not merely express belief but enacted frameworks in which misfortune and death could be interpreted within moral narratives and communal forms of obligation. After Nietzsche’s diagnosis of the “death of God,” the existential functions once carried by religious meaning, explanation, legitimation, reassurance, and orientation toward transcendence—do not disappear but are increasingly relocated into scientific rationality and technological power. This genealogy does not claim a linear replacement of religion by technology; it argues instead for a modern situation in which sacred and technological horizons coexist, hybridize, and contest authority, while technological rationality increasingly governs the conditions of intelligibility and action. This paper contributes to contemporary philosophy of technology by showing how technological rationality inherits and reorganizes ritual functions of meaning-making and reassurance, thereby transforming finitude into an optimizable deficit. Drawing on Heidegger, this paper analyzes modern technology as enframing (Gestell): a mode of revealing in which beings, including human beings, tend to appear as standing-reserve (Bestand), measurable, manageable, and open to intervention. This paper’s central claim is that technology does not replace religion but inherits and reorganizes certain ritual functions into interface-mediated practices (monitoring, forecasting, scoring, and checking), thereby shifting finitude from meaningful limit toward optimizable deficit. It concludes by asking whether practices of gratitude, wonder, restraint, and non-instrumental meaning can remain intelligible within a world increasingly governed by technological rationality.</p>