This Blog considers assisted suicide/euthanasia, bioethics, human cloning, biotechnology, radical environmentalism, and the dangers of animal rights/liberation. My views expressed here, as in my books and other writings, reflect my understanding that the philosophy of human exceptionalism is the bedrock of universal human rights. Or, to put it another way: human life matters. (The opinions expressed here are my own and not necessarily those of any organization with which I am affiliated.)
In the current edition of Brave New Bioethics, I discuss the new religion of transhumanism, which fervently believes in a post human eschatology of human immortality and redesign.
posted by Wesley J. Smith @ 7:37 PM
18 Comments
I am a Senior Fellow in Human Rights and Bioethics at the Discovery Institute and the author of 12 books, including A Rat Is A Pig Is A Dog Is A Boy, which is relevant to the issues considered by this blog.
Subscribe to
Comments [Atom]
18 Comments:
Excellent conclusion, and full of good points, such as "Transhumanism is not benign." It isn't just the actual use of the technology we need to wrry about, because already the transhumanist mindset is harming people as it takes hold.
Thanks. Also, and I didn't get into this deeply in the podcast, how it skews our views toward our children.
Say, I don't know if you'll find this something you want to talk about or not, but on some blogs, there is a lot of interest in Mitt Romney's Mormonism and what it means, and whether or not it is OK to talk about a candidates religion or not. I came across something in the Wikipedia entry on Transhumanism that I think IS an important question regarding Romney and, if not Mormonism itself, at least some of the beliefs of some Mormons: I want to know if Mitt Romney is a
Mormon Transhumanist.
According to the "learn more" pdf on that site, many beliefs of Mormonism "complement" and "parallel" transhumanism. I am not familiar with the Mormon teachings they compare with transhumanism, but it is interesting to read nonetheless. I think it is interesting that there are no other religions mentioned in the Wikipedia entry on Transhumanism as having "merged their beliefs" with transhumanism. I'm not saying this means that if we are against Transhumanism we should be against Mormonism, but that maybe we should find out Mitt Romney's views on Transhumanist issues specifically, and maybe help those Mormons that have merged their religion "unmerge" it. I'm sure the LDS Church doesn't condone this "merger".
We have consulted the rules manual here at Secondhand Smoke: We will not speak of a specific candidate's religion. We can talk about how a religion's tenets may mirror transhumanist thinking, with specifics only, and presented in a non pejorative manner--good taste required.
This is a tentative ruling that is subject to change.
Thanks.
Well, for that, you can't get much better than "Parallels and Complements between Mormonism and Transhumanism" authored by Members of the Mormon Transhumanist Association. "Learn more" on their home page. It's very well put together and detailed, frankly too long for me to read. Here's the conclusion:
They are parallel in their perspectives on the following: the present progress in knowledge; an imminent fundamental change in our nature and that of our world; and the possibility of dramatically transcending our current limitations. The Dispensation of the Fullness of Times parallels the Fourth Epoch. The Millennium and immortality parallel the Singularity and transhumans. Heavens and Gods parallel simulations and posthumans.
The Transhumanist view complements the Mormon view by providing a rational basis for belief, promoting a more active faith, and encouraging an optimistic expectation for the near future. The Mormon view complements the Transhumanist view by providing a spiritual justification for desire, encouraging respect for tradition, and positing a moral imperative for universal salvation.
Not too damning, and by "complement", they mean that Mormonism improves upon Transhumanism in some important ways.
I just think it is interesting that as we are speaking of Transhumanism as a religion, there is one religion that seems to agree.
Now, I still want to know every candidate's feelings about Transhumanism. I suspect we'd be surprised by which ones were open to genetic engineering and which ones weren't. Seems to me to be a rather important question, so I do hope we are able to wrangle it out of them somehow.
I don't know much of anything about Mormon theology. But it is theistic. Transhumanism, on the other hand, is not theistic and longs for developing in the corporeal what religions promise in the incorporeal.
Some transhumanists also claim to be Buddhists. I know a little more about Buddhism than Mormonism. As I understand it, Buddhism denies the reality of the corporeal, seeing the material as "an illusion." In contrast, transhumanists embrace the material, and indeed perceive it to be all that there is.
I also think candidates should be asked about such matters, both as to the technological and the ideological.
I also think candidates should be asked about such matters, both as to the technological and the ideological.
Thanks Wesley! Will you help - or more than help - spearhead - the project to do this? It doesn't have to be done today, but perhaps we should begin today to let the candiates know that they will have to be ready to talk about these issues, so they better start reading up and thinking about these issues.
Transhumanists who call themselves Buddhists want to appear spiritual without having to bend knee to a deity since Buddhism doesn't require belief in an all-powerful deity as a creator. They ignore the true tenants of Buddhism that stress non-attachment. If you live your life attached to material things, you doom yourself to unhappy repeat performances here on earth, aka reincarnation. The goal is to become non-attached - living in the moment and enjoying life but not clinging to life - so that you can reach enlightenment and no longer reincarnate.
Far cry from Transhumanism.
As for Mormonism, I've worked with several members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints and they always professed a deep spiritualism, looking away from the worldly toward the heavenly. Transhumanism is so wrapped up in earthly matters that it looks away from the visionary aspect of LDS. I mean, the LDS Church is the only one I know of that has a deep and abiding love of NDE research and has volumes on NDEs, past and present, which it takes very seriously. The state of the soul is more important to them than tinkering with human life.
Transhumanists who claim a religion, in my humble opinion, are either clinging to vestages of religion for comfort, or they're trying to appear spiritual to the outside world.
Nicely summarized, Tabs.
Or, Tabs, the religion itself instills beliefs that lead adherents to embrace transhumanism. That is the thesis of the MTA's paper, apparently Mormonism is rather unique in its prophesies and duties while here on earth, which doesn't make it material or less spiritual or heavenly than Catholicism, say. But certainly Catholicism instills beliefs in adherents that cause them to reject transhumanism. Although I think the Pope makes very secular arguments against it, but I suspect they must be influenced by his Catholic beliefs a little bit.
John:
The Pope makes a secular argument agaist it because he can, but he also makes a very strong spiritual argument against it, though most people don't read the Papal Bulls concerning transhumanism. His more secular declarations are the ones that are easily accessable, so that non-Catholics can also see where he's coming from.
The problem is that people overlook the very spiritual nature of the Holy Father's teachings and focus on the more secular comments made. For example, John Paul II commented that evolution was more than just a theory (which we Catholics all embrace), but everyone overlooked the statement he made saying that nothing in science takes away from our firm belief in the divine creation of the world, and that evolution is a part of God's plan.
See, this is what I feel is happening with transhumanists claiming to be LDS. Some aspects of the LDS teachings are open enough to let transhumanists feel they can incorporate the religious beleifs into the secular, and make everybody happy and everything come out even.
But that's really not the case. You're right, John, transhumanism is its own religion, and you can't serve two masters. I have a deep respect for the Buddhist teachings of non-violence, compassion, and non-attachment, but I can't claim to be both a Buddhist and a Catholic. Ultimately, something has to take precedence. That's why I'm a Catholic, not a Buddhist.
Likewise, transhumanists who claim to be of a particular religion have to decide which is more important, the alteration and general downplaying of human exceptionalism that allows them to tinker where they will, or the exceptionalism that almost all religions preach.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Tabs, did you look at that .pdf? It was written by Mormons who got into transhumanism, who find that transhumanism enhances their Mormonism, and that paper is their argument that they are NOT serving two masters, but fulfilling the Mormon prophesies and duties by embracing transhumanism.
They aren't trying to bring humans down to the levels of animals or the material, rather, these guys recognize materialism is a problem of transhumanism, at least as practiced by most transhumanists. That's why they say that Mormonism 'complements' transhumanism by giving it a spiritual purpose. (in their words, "by providing a spiritual justification for desire, encouraging respect for tradition, and positing a moral imperative for universal salvation.") And they imply that it does that in a unique way that other relgions don't, because other religions don't have prophesies about humans becoming gods and creating heavens and so forth. Apparently, these are tenets of Mormonism, so all Mormons would feel a duty to fulfil them, and transhumanism apparently fits right in neatly. There is no "Buddhist Transhumanist Association" or "Christian Scientist Transhumanist Association", as far as I know, because those aren't compatible.
These guys are evangelizing Mormonism among transhumanists, and transhumanism among Mormons, suggesting that both groups will find their beliefs strengthened by embracing the other.
John:
I did read most of it but some I admit went a little over my head. The theology isn't at all what I'm used to so I'd actually have to talk to some of my LDS friends for clarification. I'm puzzled by the over-exposure to the line, "I have said ye all are gods," because they totally read that differently from what I'm used to.
All I can say is that there are branches of all major denominations, and this branch is nothing like what I've been exposed to. The LDS church here in Houston that I've visited was very intent on spiritual matters, and becoming gods, as you put it, required strong spiritual character and not doing anything artificial to the body. Most of the LDS members I know won't even drink hot chocolate becuase "caffeine has an unnatural affect on the body."
I can't reconcile these two versions of the LDS church - on the one hand the folk that I know, who are against manipulation of the flesh in deference to strenghtening the soul, and on the other hand this, I guess I would say radical, view of transhumanism.
I'd be more inclined to think that Seventh Day Adventests or Jehova's Witnesses would get into transhumanism, not LDS, since LDS is heavily spiritual, and both Seventh Days and Witnesses don't believe in a separate soul, life after death, etc. (Note - I get that information from tracts that folks from both religions have given me, so if I'm in error, then let me know, but I think I'm on steady ground here.)
I don't know. The whole thing weirds me out. It's nothing like what I'm used to and it makes no sens in the context I'm familiar with.
Hmm, I have some JDub friends (disfellowshipped) I'll ask about that. I guess it just proves that whatever someone's religion is, they might or might not be inclined to support transhumanism. We already knew we'd have to ask each candidate directly.
Here are my predictions:
All for Transhumanism:
Romney
McCain
Edwards
Kucinich
for limiting conception to a man and a woman:
H. Clinton
Gore
Edwards
Brownback
Obama
Edwards is in there twice but that's his problem.
John:
"I guess it just proves that whatever someone's religion is, they might or might not be inclined to support transhumanism. "
That's an unsettling thought. People can be lured into any kind of thinking by someone they feel is in authority (Branch Dividian leaps into mind). Someone claiming reconciliation between religion and transhumanism... that could lead to a lot of problems.
Mormonism is not a monolithic ideology. Even within the LDS Church (which is by far the largest Mormon denomination, and of which I am a member), Mormons have varying understandings of scripture and views of the future.
There are general doctrinal matters on which most Mormons, and particularly most LDS Mormons, will agree. For example, most will agree that our salvation, individually and communally, depends on faith in Christ. Most of us will begin describing faith in Christ in terms of hope, charity, repentence, atonement, and ordinances such as baptism. Most will also describe faith in Christ as leading to a better world, and ultimately to immortality and eternal life. Furthermore, for many Mormons it is important that we actively participate in the work of making a better world, and in the pursuit of immortality and eternal life. This active participation and pursuit takes the form of welfare and missionary efforts, for which Mormons are well known -- and sometimes derided.
However, even with much in common among many Mormons, there remain significant differences with practical consequences. Whereas many Mormons may feel that it is our duty to use science and technology as tools in our welfare and missionary efforts, there will be disagreements regarding the extent. Some of us, such as those represented by the Mormon Transhumanist Association, feel that we should go so far as to use science and technology to pursue the fulfillment of prophecies of transfiguration and resurrection to immortality. Others would not like to be associated with such an idea.
In any case, Mormon theology provides a rich framework for theistic Transhumanists. For example, according to Mormon theology, all spirit is matter (http://scriptures.lds.org/en/dc/131/7#7), god has a physical body (http://scriptures.lds.org/en/dc/130/22#22), and humans may become gods (http://scriptures.lds.org/en/dc/76/58-59#58). So, as you can see, this situates Mormon salvation in the physical world, relative to which science and technology have proven useful.
All of that aside, I think it is worth noting that Transhumanism also encompasses a broad set of perspectives. I have been following Wesley's blog, often finding him insightful, but sometimes being disappointed by his generalizations regarding Transhumanists. We don't all seem to be so oppressive as he would apparently have me believe.
I have a note, too, for John. I saw your questions and comments regarding Mitt Romney on another board. Although I don't know Mitt personally, I doubt he knows much about Transhumanism explicitly -- most Mormons do not. However, as many Mormons, he may believe that humans can become immortal physical beings with greater power and intelligence, and (more importantly) greater charity, than we now possess. Whether he would agree that our technology can or will play a role in this, I have no idea.
Finally, I am sure you each have legitimate concerns with Transhumanism -- and perhaps particularly with the crazier theistic variety. Discussion of these concerns is important, and I like that you are passionately engaged in it. The exchange, even in disagreement, manifests our care for each other. The apathetic simply are not engaged.
Yet another member of the Mormon Transhumanists Association desiring to add my two bits to the great comments already made.
Wesley J. Smith mentioned that “[Transhumanism] longs for developing in the corporeal what religions promise in the incorporeal.”
Personally, I currently favor the theory that says at least some matter has phenomenal or “spiritual” properties, which our brain utilizes to represent our conscious knowledge. Included in this knowledge is our “spirit” which is our awareness of ourselves in this world. All this fits in well with Lincoln’s comment about Mormon theology in which “all spirit is matter”. Hence I consider myself a very “spiritual” person, though it is in a very physical way. But all this is simply what appears to me to be, based on all the evidence I know, the most likely to be true theory. A scientific discovery or expeirence tomorrow could drastically change my POV.
Regardless of whether the corporeal or incorporeal (or some combination?) turns out to be more fundamental the important thing to me is that our knowledge about all this (and in consequence our ability to grow) will continually progress. Whichever one becomes more important is what we will all end up seeking after and getting closer to at ever increasing rates. To me, the bottom line is – whatever works is whatever I seek after. And I have faith that we are all getting closer to this, whatever it is, at ever increasing and more exciting, faithful, and hopeful rates. And none of us will ever give up until we all get there – wherever that may be – right?
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home