A friend (Jeremy Owen Turner) called my attention to an article published today in the Telegraph, which asks, "Are we living in a designer universe?" There are strong similarities between the ideas expressed in this article and those I expressed in my blog post a few days ago, "Before the Big Bang: Posthuman Computers in Black Holes?". The author, John Gribbon, discusses designer universes created in black holes, and recognizes the similarity between such a possibility and some theistic perspectives (although he rightly points out that the possibility is also quite different from other theistic perspectives). He also alludes to the probability that if we ever create many designer universes then we are almost certainly already living in a designer universe (see the New God Argument). He doesn't say much about the relation between designer universes and computing power, except to point out that extremely advanced civilizations might be capable of designing universes in high detail. Overall, I liked the article, with the only exception being the odd comment that "it would not be possible . . . for the designers to interfere with the baby universes once they had formed" -- I see no reason to agree with this.

Recently, a friend wrote me a letter requesting my thoughts on some of the challenges, particularly historical and political, facing the LDS Church and how they affect him personally. With his permission, I'm responding on my blog because I expect these thoughts will interest and may benefit others.


I am a supportive member of the LDS Church, but I am probably not an apologist. By that, I mean that I value the church, but I'm not interested in persuading anyone to idealize it. As a few simple Google searches would illustrate, there is much in its history and politics that is not praiseworthy. There is also much in church history and politics, and more particularly in its theology and everyday practice by its members, that inspires me. This tension in my perspective regarding the church is essential to understanding the thoughts I'm going to share.


As a sort of warm-up to the expression of his general concern, my friend mentioned several specific issues. I'll quote them along with my brief reactions, addressed to my friend. There is some risk in doing this because each of the issues merits more than brief response, but I'll proceed, asking and hoping for some charity from you, the reader.

Friend: "if only Joseph Smith had behaved himself around women . . . and did not marry gals who were already married"

Me: I share your concern with Joseph's courting tactics. Maybe that's what moved him to claim, on occasion as recorded in Mormon scripture, that he needed to repent? If so, I'd agree with him.

Friend: "if only polygamy had never been practiced"

Me: I don't share your concern with this, except to the extent that the polygamist relationships were promiscuous or oppressive -- some were. I favor lawful consensual committed relationships, whether monogamist or polygamist.

Friend: "if only the Book of Mormon never was (due to the lack of physical evidence for it and also the plagiarism from the KJV of the Bible)"

Me: Although there is not sufficient objective evidence to confirm that the Book of Mormon is a historical record of ancient inhabitants of the American continent, I have found and continue to find much inspiration in the Book of Mormon. The inclusion of text from the KJV Bible contributes to the inspiration I find in the Book of Mormon -- I love Isaiah.

Friend: "if only the Pearl of Great Price never was (or else the translation by Joseph Smith of the ancient Egyptian writings included in the book would be proven accurate and not a fraud)"

Me: My perspective on the Pearl of Great Price is similar to that I've expressed regarding the Book of Mormon. Although questions about its historicity interest me, I don't value the book for historical reasons. I value it because of how it inspires me.

Friend: "if only Brigham Young had never taught the Adam-God theory"

Me: I enjoy Brigham Young's ideas on the divinity of Adam, particularly if we interpret Adam to represent humanity.

Friend: "if only temple rituals remained the same, but the Masonic-style penalties never existed"

Me: Why should our rituals remain static? Changing rituals reflect our changing understanding of and relationship with God.

Friend: "if only all prophecies of Joseph Smith had come true"

Me: Perhaps you and I can contribute toward realizing the prophecies that matter most: transfiguration, immortality, resurrection, renewal of this world, and the discovery and creation of worlds without end.

Friend: "if only the Church had not prohibited African-Americans from being ordained to the priesthood"

Me: We should do better.

Friend: "if only the Danites had not been a force of Church hitmen to get back at enemies"

Me: Admit it. You kind of like this one. ;-)

Friend: "if only the Bible did not condemn the concept of eternal marriage in Heaven"

Me: The Bible condemns lots of things, some of which we interpret differently than did the authors, and some of which we disregard due to changing circumstance or spiritual maturity -- further light and knowledge.

Friend: "[if only] homosexuals will ever be allowed to marry in the temple"

Me: Please see my thoughts on the issue of the LDS Church and homosexuality, shared previously.

Friend: "[if only the church would not] tell singles they cannot even masturbate to relieve sexual tension"

Me: Conservative cultures have evaluated masturbation superstitiously, hypocritically and abusively. As mentioned previously, I favor lawful consensual committed relationships. To the extent masturbation hinders such relationships, let's constructively encourage redirected attention. To the extent masturbation helps such relationships, let's recognize it as a healthy aspect of human sexuality.

My friend proceeded to explain his wishful concern, which I'll paraphrase: if only the LDS Church were not so controversial then proselyting efforts would be more successful, members would participate more actively, antagonists would have greater difficulty, and he would have an easier time believing. He shared the example of an LDS leader whose spirituality and kindness inspire him deeply, and he expressed a longing to be such a person.


To my friend and others with similar concerns and longings, I say honestly that I share in your experience. Like you, I've suffered the loneliness and despair (not a melodramatic exaggeration) that follows disillusionment from idealized religion. I've felt the tension between newfound knowledge and love for my community, and even that between deeply moving spiritual experience and frightening betrayal of trust. With you, I've sometimes yearned for return to the simple innocence of youthful consent and aspiration. But here we are, kicked out of the garden into a lone and dreary world.


I want to share with you an excerpt from my journal. I wrote this about fifteen years ago, while I was serving as a missionary for the LDS Church in southern France:

"The deepest of my fears (or one of the deepest, since it seems like there's always something deeper) is that happiness and truth are not one. If this were the case, then I would be torn to pieces. I honestly desire to follow the spirit because it brings me happiness, peace, joy, everything promised by the scriptures. I know this! I live it. The spirit comes and brings the promised gift. My sin is pride. Arrogance. Love of darkness.

"I can't reconcile the theories of man with the word of God. My pride wants to hold on to such teachings as evolution and reconcile them with my religious beliefs. It does not work and it cannot work. The two don't go together.

"I just went through a crisis during the last hour. It's painful when pride gets pressed up against the wall. Old feelings of guilt came rushing back for sins from my past. Things that maybe should have been confessed, but due to pride, doubts, unbelief, etc they were kept inside and continued. I'm not guilty of tremendous sins. I have not committed murder or adultery, but I had changes to make in my life. I've changed some things, and I'm glad for that. It brings me peace. I love peace. In fact, I think  I've changed the most important things (the biggest problems I had), but time will tell if I've really overcome them. I'm so damn prideful . . . so prideful.

"Here's where the fear comes in. This is where my darkness lives. I think this part of me exists because of raw, bloody, dark-black pride. But the fear is that . . . it's almost unspeakable. My heart doesn't even want it to be written because it doesn't bring the spirit. It brings pain. Are truth and happiness one and the same?

"I love the phrase I made up a while back: good is, was,  and must be true. It can be expanded . . . but I guess I won't get into that. My mind catches there. The gospel as taught by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the most beautiful and happiness-promoting, unity-promoting, love-promoting thing with which I am acquainted. Living this gospel brings the spirit, and the spirit brings happiness. I know these things! I have experienced them, and they are accepted as truth for me.

"This brings me to another subject. Relativism and subjectivity disturb me. Miracles leave me wondering. Let me make myself more clear. The theories of relativism and subjectivity disturb me. Stories of miracles leave me wondering. There is a connection between miracles and relativism/subjectivity. The savage will call a light bulb a miracle, while the scientist will say that "miracles don't exist, but everything can be explained by the scientific method" (or something to that effect). Are there things, is there one thing that is a miracle without any explanation? That's a stupid question. Is it a stupid question?

"I want to recognize the fact that all of these questions are getting me nowhere fast. Is truth equivalent to happiness? Or is ignorance bliss? Or what? This is beginning to degenerate.

"The spirit necessarily will testify that the truth is what brings the most happiness. Now the evil questions come to mind. I used to spend a lot of time thinking of the evil questions, and I didn't get anywhere but unhappy. That sucks. Nothing matters when you're unhappy. For me, I'd rather be wrong and happy than right and miserable. The darkness and ironic part of this is that I . . . I'm afraid to write this . . . I will lie to be happy. I've spent much of my life lying and I did it in search of happiness. Lying is so much a part of me. Half-lies and full-lies, but mainly the first. But half-lies are the worst of the two because they aren't even true lies. They are lying lies.

"Here's a confession for you: I spent . . . I feel restrained (whether it's my pride or something else, I cannot decide or don't want to decide; I'll just assume it's pride). Maybe I'm lying to myself . . . maybe I don't exist (Satan tilts his head back and laughs while his angels rejoice). Maybe I don't exist (hell opens its jaws and . . .). This all leads to unhappiness. I'm living a lie. I'm living a paradox.

"My only consolation is that I honestly (I hope honestly) desire the good. I desire to love people, and I desire to help people. I don't want to hurt anyone. I would live to bring smiles to people's faces, and I'd love to dry their tears.

"I'm afraid . . . well, I guess I shouldn't be comparing myself to others. Myself: I'm a creature of darkness. A history of tears, pain, lust, and carnal desires. This wondrous guilt complex, this marvelous doctrine of guilt, is so Christian. And, in a sense, it's so beautiful. The conflict will bring glory. There is so much conflict. I have wars and storms going on in my heart and mind; but that probably means the glory will come in the end. I'm either destined for godhood or its opposite. Or maybe . . .

"Well, this journal entry has been a decent record of some soul-searching. I believe we all have to go through this. I'm a sinner, and I need forgiveness. The spirit testifies of this. I hope to return to the presence of my father in heaven, and the spirit testifies that it's possible. I necessarily have to accept the testimony of the spirit, otherwise I invite the pain and confusion I've so often tasted during my life, and I invite the fear of committing the unpardonable sin: denying the holy ghost.

"I'm afraid of myself. My lust for glory and my tactics seem to be so similar to Satan's. My pride is so incredibly strong. I fear that I only want people to be almost as good as me. I fear that I want to be first in everything. I fear that my good intentions are limited by my pride. I fear that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

"Darkness, darkness, darkness. The teachings of lying spirits. I want out. I want light. I want love. I desire the spirit. I don't like thinking of myself as an evil creature. But I'm sick of lies. I'm sick of partial truth. But I want to be happy. I feel like I need to go read the scriptures. I need more light. This world is darkness."

I have mixed feelings about this excerpt from my journal. On the one hand, it illustrates the dark side of religion: excessive self-debasing, debilitating guilt, lack of commitment to shared truth, idealism at the expense of pragmatism, hedonistic superstition, escapism, even nihilism. On the other hand, the expression was sincere, revealing of the tensions that inform religious perspectives, and a needed step in my life.


The journal excerpt does not recount a unique experience. That's why I share it here. It is a common experience, even if we severally articulate it in different words, through different mediums or only within the privacy of our hearts. WE are together in such experience. Our religions, our politics, our communities and worlds, are no longer what we imagined them to be. They are no longer what we were told they were. We are disillusioned.


That, however, is not the end of the story. It's not the end of my story. It's not the end of yours, even if you're in a moment that would suggest otherwise. Although the passive enchantment is disillusioned, an active enchantment beckons. A world of meaning is still possible. We can still discover something together. We can still create. The prophecies have become warnings and forthtellings. God has become a dialectic. The Church of Christ yet lives in us, its body, if we would practice atonement. Why not risk such a world?

A Wired article recently explained "Human Evolution Recapped in Kids' Brain Growth". Basically, the idea is that 25 million years' of human brain evolution are repeated at relatively high speed in the developing brains of contemporary human children. I've sometimes wondered whether something similar might not be true of posthuman evolution?

Below is a transcript of my presentation at Sunstone 2010 yesterday at the Sheraton Hotel in Salt Lake City. I invite your feedback.




Science and Religion?

How often have we heard the question: are science and religion compatible? And yet, how many of us are still waiting for the answer? What are we waiting for? Do we expect someone will discover or reveal the answer? Could it be discovered or revealed without begging the question? For example, can we use science to answer a question about science, without already assuming its axioms and methods? Likewise, for religion, can we use it to answer a question about itself, without starting from faith?

Technology and Spirituality?

What about technology and spirituality? Who decided that hope, healing and heaven must be supernatural? How were so many of us persuaded that we can experience the spiritual but not measure it, and that we can promote such experience but not manage it with greater precision? When did we convince ourselves that machines must be cold metal and hollow plastic, forever in contrast to the warmth and beauty of the human soul?

Agenda

I contend that Mormons can and should affirm the compatibility of religion, science, spirituality and technology. I'll present a brief interpretation of Mormon scripture and tradition, particularly their descriptions of how the universe and our bodies work, in terms of contemporary science and technological trends. Of course, further research will prove my interpretation to be inaccurate to some extent, but that's okay. The purpose of the interpretation is only to illustrate the possibility of technological interpretations generally, as context for my more serious interest, which is to identify some practical and moral reasons for which we all should adopt technological interpretations of our religion.

Interpreting Mormon Physics

Mormon physics, as expounded in scripture and by prominent authorities, lends itself to interpretations compatible with the methods and axioms of science. Here's a brief example.

Mormon physics posits objectivity through materialism and empiricism. Everything is matter. Coarse matter is element. Fine matter is spirit, primal intelligence, or the light of truth in and through all things. All matter is eternal, uncreated and indestructible, but malleable. God, a material being, either emerged from or was organized out of chaotic matter, and then continued to organize this matter, first spirit then element, iteratively. All matter, including spirit, is discernible. Experience leads to knowledge, and knowledge leads to truth, which is contextual and dynamic. If we will seek, nothing will be withheld.

Mormon physics also posits consistency, causality and uniformity. Innumerable systems exist in space and time, and all have laws. Laws may differ from one system to another, and some systems may govern others. Recurrently without definite beginning, God instituted laws within the context of previous laws and according to knowledge of those laws. Likewise, we will attain no greater heaven than that we make according to law. Faith without knowledge and works will not save us. Blessings are predicated by law. Even miracles, although marvelous in our eyes, do not contravene law. If we will seek, we can understand all mysteries.


Interpreting Mormon Physiology

Similarly, Mormon physiology lends itself to interpretations compatible with technological trends projected into hypothetical futures, when new processes may change the composition of our bodies into new configurations. Again, I'll provide a brief example, noting that some of the ideas are speculative and merit more explanation than I can provide now.

Mormonism posits intelligence, spirits and souls as physiological components and describes them in a manner consistent with existence in a computational substrate. Intelligence, or the light of truth, existed without beginning. It can be organized into spirits, increased for advantage, or decreased according to desire. Spirits can become souls when organized into bodies of element. These structures of light and element may be constantly computing and broadcasting truth about themselves as their contribution to an aggregated reality. Perhaps they exhibit their primitive intelligence in quantum uncertainty. We may be learning to create them when we write simple computer programs. Maybe even God computes us.

Mormonism also posits physiological processes of transfiguration and resurrection, describing them in ways that align with hypotheses of radical life extension and detailed computer emulation. During the millennium, mortals will be changed and the dead raised to immortality. The ordinance of transfiguration will be revealed in the last times, and the ordinance of resurrection will be administered by immortals. Accordingly, if biotechnology manages to prevent or repair aging, we may enjoy indefinitely long and healthy life spans. Subsequently, given enough computing power, we may even be able to emulate in full detail all persons who have ever lived.

Finally, Mormonism posits immortality and glories as physiological configurations and describes them as we might describe mind and body enhancements. The inhabitants of innumerable worlds vary in glory, knowledge and power, according to their desires. Telestial beings, like us, differ in glory as do the stars. Terrestrial beings exceed the telestial. Celestial beings attain the creative capacity of gods, and learn of yet higher glories. Accordingly, we see technology becoming increasingly intimate. Surgeries, drugs and prosthetics repair and enhance our capacities. Computers that once filled warehouses are now embedded in our bodies. Perhaps the day will come when biological and information systems merge, and thoughts create worlds like our own.

Practical and Moral Drivers

So what? Why should we care that technological interpretations of Mormonism are possible? To answer this question, I've identified some practical and moral reasons that I hope will persuade you, if you're not already persuaded, to adopt a technological interpretation.

Our Best Bet

Can works save you? Christians debate whether good works are necessary for salvation, with responses ranging from the extremes of Calvinism (salvation does not depend on our efforts) to the extremes of Pelagianism (salvation depends almost entirely on our efforts). Most Christians situate themselves somewhere between the extremes, but where should we situate ourselves? Here's a wager: bet on better works. In any choice between ideologies, choose the one that you think will affect you to evidence better works. To the extent Calvinism is accurate, your choice won't matter. To the extent Pelagianism is accurate, your better works will save you.

Even for broad understandings of "salvation" and "good works", the wager stands. For example, should we trust that benevolent power will make us happy? From a pseudo-Calvinist perspective, it wouldn't matter because something beyond our benevolent power will determine our happiness. So, to the extent pseudo-Calvinism is accurate, it can't hurt to bet on benevolent power. As another example, should we trust that ethical technology will increase our utility? From a pseudo-Pelagianist perspective, our utility depends on our ethical technology. So, to the extent pseudo-Pelagianism is accurate, ethical technology is a good bet.

The relation between good works and salvation must be one of the following:

1) They don't have a causal relation.
2) They have a negative causal relation.
3) They have a positive causal relation.

#1 is of no practical consequence, by definition. Practice is limited to works, even if broadly understood as power or technology. If good works are no more likely to cause salvation than are evil works then it doesn't matter whether we reject #1, even if we're wrong. Common sense rejects #2 as it should, again based on definitions. We don't hear anyone argue seriously that good works cause damnation because it's internally contradictory. That leaves us with #3. We should trust that good works cause salvation.

Bet on better works. In any choice between ideologies, choose the one that you think will affect you to evidence better works. If there's anything you can do to achieve salvation, you will have done it. As expressed by President Dieter Uchtdorf, “When our wagon gets stuck in the mud, God is much more likely to assist the man who gets out to push than the man who merely raises his voice in prayer—no matter how eloquent the oration.”

Integrative Benefits

Human ideologies are information systems. Like computer information systems, which help us act sensibly within an environment of networked computers, ideologies help us act sensibly in our complex world. Although far richer than computer information systems, ideologies are still systems of inter-related symbols, codes, laws, words, and so forth. Also like information systems, which rely on integration programs to share data between them, ideologies are often unable to exchange ideas without assistance from an integrating or syncretizing ideology.

In addition to its distinct strengths, Mormonism can serve as an integration between two powerful ideologies: Judeo-Christian religion and Enlightenment philosophy that gave rise to modern science. A technological interpretation of Mormonism can readily map symbols from each of these ideologies into symbols in the other. For example, the God of Judeo-Christian religion may map into Enlightenment philosophy as a creative and benevolent posthuman; and Enlightenment philosophy's expected future of dramatic increases in human knowledge and power may map into Judeo-Christian religion as the millennium.

Integrations can be complex and messy. Sometimes data in one symbol system doesn't map well into the other system. Sometimes integrators make poor implementation decisions. Always, an integration can be improved as the integrators become increasingly familiar with the systems they're integrating. This is also true of technological interpretations of Mormonism, whose mappings between the Judeo-Christian religion and Enlightenment philosophy present various limitations and opportunities for improvement.

Yet, beyond limitations, the integrated ideologies enable us to leverage the strengths of each with less difficulty. Mormons that embrace technological interpretations of their religion will find it easier to embrace science while maintaining a fulfilling relationship with their spiritual education and religious community. Moreover, by embracing technological interpretations, we're doing a better job of living our religion, as expressed by Joseph Smith: "One of the grand fundamental principles of 'Mormonism' is to receive truth, let it come from whence it may." Mormonism is, on principle, an integrating ideology.

Our Christian Duty

Mormons almost universally acknowledge that we have an obligation and capacity to participate in the work of God, to bring about the immortality and eternal life of humanity. This acknowledgement focuses primarily on the advance of spiritual salvation, particularly through missionary and temple work. Such a focus is important, but it does not, in itself, satisfy the full extent of our obligation, which also includes the advance of physical salvation. Both the LDS Church and individual Mormons regularly demonstrate real concern and concerted effort to advance physical salvation, through means ranging from neighborhood service projects to large scale welfare and humanitarian programs. Yet we can and should do more.

Each day, around 150,000 persons die. Many of them die of painful and debilitating diseases. Most of them die from something that is not commonly considered a disease, although it is altogether as painful and debilitating. It emaciates our muscles and bones, makes our hair fall out, blurs our vision, and stifles our hearing. Finally, if it doesn't kill us by clogging our hearts or setting off runaway cellular growth, it steals our memories. We've become accustomed to this inexorable degradation, which we call "aging".

In the Book of Mormon, we read of Jesus asking twelve Nephite disciples what they desire. Nine tell him that they desire to teach the gospel for the remainder of their lives and then quickly ascend to heaven. Jesus tells them that they are blessed for this desire. The remaining three are hesitant to express their desire, but Jesus discerns that they would like to go on teaching the gospel without ever dying. He then tells them that they are more blessed for this desire. Here, Jesus affirms that God is a God of life, and that death, with hell, is indeed an awful monster, as described by Nephi. More blessed than those who would die for Christ are those who would, if possible, live for Christ.

The message of this Book of Mormon passage is particularly pertinent today, while we are learning, through modern science and technology, to extend and enhance life. There are some who argue that it's immoral to extend human life indefinitely. There are others who see such power as an endowment from God, and as means of deliverance from Nephi’s awful monster. Will we, like the Three Nephites, be more blessed by making use of the means provided? Or will we sit still, supposing that God will deliver us despite our apathy? Perhaps desire for life, expressed in our actions, will bring for us the prophesied day of transfiguration when mortal lives will be as the age of a tree, there is no death, and we are changed in the twinkling of an eye.


Science and Religion

Science and religion are compatible, not necessarily because of any discovery or revelation, although those may abound in our perspectives. Rather, science and religion are compatible because we can and should make them compatible. It's primarily a matter of choice. It may require some humility and willingness to acknowledge that we don't already have the best understandings of one or the other, but it's in our interest, both practically and morally.

Technology and Spirituality

God willing, we'll enjoy some things that are even better when mixed together.