Responding to No Substitute

My thanks to Samuel Holmes for his response to the article written by members of the Mormon Transhumanist Association. I’m sorry the article disappointed this reader, but I am encouraged by the reasons given because they suggest ways in which we can improve communication of our message. As I understand Holmes’s letter, he dislikes the article for the following reasons:

1. The anonymity of the authors suggests less than admirable intentions.

2. Despite the authors’ pretense, their article presents nothing new.

3. Transhumanism advocates conquest of nature, which implies oppression of free will.

4. Transhumanism is not a substitute for the gospel of Christ.

Regarding #1: The authors expected neither anonymity nor attribution. When the Sunstone editors asked about attribution, we responded that we could provide a list of names but were satisfied with a general attribution. In the end, given that several persons contributed to the article in varying ways and to varying extents, anonymity was practical.

Regarding #2: The authors recognize that Transhumanism was not created from nothing. For example, as indicated in the article, Transhumanists generally trace their origins to secular humanism. But religious humanism (a description that suits some influential interpretations of Mormon theology) and other ideological influences should also be recognized. On the other hand, Transhumanism does provide some new extensions to ancient perspectives – or, Transhumanism was created through a reorganization of eternal element, so to speak.

Regarding #3: The authors agree that some interpretations of Transhumanism are oppressive. For example, a few Transhumanists think ethics can be enforced through technological means. However, that thought presents a serious problem: morality can be enforced, if at all, only within the context of the enforcer’s moral understanding, which may itself be immoral. For this and other reasons, most Transhumanists value diversity and liberty, as expressed in the Transhumanist Declaration and Mormon Transhumanist Affirmation. Technology can and will be used for both good and evil. With foresight, we can mitigate the evil.

Regarding #4: The authors heartily agree that Transhumanism is not a substitute for the gospel of Christ. As expressed in the article, Mormonism complements Transhumanism. The most important complement is Mormonism’s high esteem for charity. Power (whether understood in technological terms or otherwise) without charity is dangerous, at best. Our desire to influence Transhumanists toward charitable positions is among the reasons we established the Mormon Transhumanist Association.

This article originally appeared in Sunstone magazine.