EVERYONE IS A THEIST

by botchtowersociety 23 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • botchtowersociety
    botchtowersociety
    When you first arrived on the forum I reckon you believed in God BTS. And now I don't think you do any more, is that right?

    I still do.

    What's this "dying" business anyway? I thought you were a transhumanist.

    Belief in God and transhumanism aren't mutually exclusionary. In my mind, they are interlinked.

    One of the earliest transhumanists was a Jesuit priest.

    Teilhard de Chardin and Transhumanism

    Abstract

    Pierre Teilhard de Chardin was among the first to give serious consideration to the future of human evolution. His work advocates both biotechnologies (e.g., genetic engineering) and intelligence technologies. He discusses the emergence of a global computation-communication system (and is said by some to have been the first to have envisioned the Internet). He advocates the development of a global society. Teilhard is almost surely the first to discuss the acceleration of technological progress to a Singularity in which human intelligence will become super-intelligence. He discusses the spread of human intelligence into the universe and its amplification into a cosmic intelligence. More recently, his work has been taken up by Barrow and Tipler; Tipler; Moravec; and Kurzweil. Of course, Teilhard’s Omega Point Theory is deeply Christian, which may be difficult for secular transhumanists. But transhumanism cannot avoid a fateful engagement with Christianity. Christian institutions may support or oppose transhumanism. Since Christianity is an extremely powerful cultural force in the West, it is imperative for transhumanism to engage it carefully. A serious study of Teilhard can help that engagement and will thus be rewarding to both communities.

    1. Introduction

    Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (1881-1955) was a Jesuit paleontologist. He combined his scientific study of the fossil record with his Christian faith to produce a general theory of evolution. Teilhard’s body of work has much to offer transhumanists, who advocate the use of technology to enhance human capacities and see current human beings as in transition to posthuman forms. There are several specific reasons for transhumanists to study Teilhard’s work.

    The first reason is that Teilhard was one of the first to articulate transhumanist themes. Transhumanists advocate the ethical use of technology for human enhancement. Teilhard's writing likewise argues for the ethical application of technology in order to advance humanity beyond the limitations of natural biology. Teilhard explicitly argues for the use of both bio-technologies (e.g., genetic engineering) and intelligence technologies, and develops several other themes often found in transhumanist writings. He discusses the emergence of a global computation-communication system, and is said by some to have been the first to have envisioned the Internet (Kreisberg, 1995). He advocates the development of an egalitarian global society. He was almost certainly the first to discuss the acceleration of technological progress to a kind of Singularity in which human intelligence will become super-intelligence. He discusses the spread of human intelligence into the universe and its amplification into a cosmic-intelligence.

    The second reason for transhumanists to study Teilhard is that his thought has influenced transhumanism itself. In particular, Teilhard develops an Omega Point Theory. An Omega Point Theory (OPT) claims that the universe is evolving towards a godlike final state. Teilhard’s OPT was later refined and developed by Barrow and Tipler (1986) and by Tipler alone (1988; 1995). Ideas from the Barrow-Tipler OPT were, in turn, taken up by many transhumanists (see, for example, Moravec (1988; 2000) and Dewdney (1998)). Kurzweil also articulates a somewhat weaker OPT. He says: “evolution moves inexorably toward our conception of God, albeit never reaching this ideal” (2005: 476; see also 375, 389-390). Many transhumanists work within the conceptual architecture of Teilhard’s OPT without being aware of its origins. Indeed, Teilhard is mostly ignored in the histories of transhumanism; e.g., he is mentioned once and only in passing in Bostrom’s (2005) detailed history of the transhumanist movement.

    The third reason for transhumanists to study Teilhard is that he develops his transhumanist ideas within a Christian context. Teilhard shows how one might develop a Christian transhumanism. Although some secular transhumanists may be inclined to react negatively to any mention of Christianity, such hostility may prove politically costly. Transhumanism and Christianity are not essentially enemies. They share some common themes (Hopkins, 2005). Of course, it is understandable that many transhumanists reject the superstitious aspects of Christian doctrine and the authoritarian aspects of Christian institutions. Likewise, Teilhard wants to abandon those aspects of Christianity. He argues that Christ is at work in evolution, that Christ is at work in technology, and that the work of Christ ultimately aims at the perfection of human biology. Christianity is a complex network of doctrines and institutions. A study of Teilhard can help transhumanists to locate and carefully cultivate friends in that network and to locate, and carefully defend against, opponents.

    The fourth reason for transhumanists to study Teilhard is that they are likely to need to defend themselves against conservative forms of Christianity. The dominant forms of Christianity today (at least in the USA) are conservative. As the cultural visibility of transhumanism grows, conservative Christians will increasingly pay it their attention. They may feel increasingly threatened by transhumanism and come to see it as a heresy (Bainbridge, 2005). Various conservative Christians have already opposed transhumanism (Wiker, 2003; Hook, 2004; Daly, 2004; Hart, 2005). Since Christianity is an extremely powerful cultural force in the West, it is imperative for transhumanism to engage it carefully. Conservative Christian forces have already opposed various biotechnologies (such as embryonic stem cell research and cloning) and may oppose all the enhancement techniques that transhumanists advocate. Conservative Christianity currently has the political power to effectively shut transhumanism down in the West. Teilhard was attacked by conservative Catholics, and transhumanists may have to fight similar battles over similar issues. And yet Teilhard gained a surprisingly large following both within and beyond the church. A study of his work can help transhumanists develop nuanced strategies for defending against attacks from conservative Christians.

    The fifth reason for transhumanists to study Teilhard is that they may want to build bridges to liberal and progressive forms of Christianity. Teilhard believed that science and technology have positive roles to play in building the City of God in this world. A study of Teilhard’s work may help transhumanists to explore the ways that transhumanism can obtain support from Christian millenarianism (see Bozeman, 1997; Noble, 1999); from Irenaean and neo-Irenaean theodicies (see Hick, 1977; Walker, Undated); from liberal Protestantism (see Arnow, 1950); and from process theology (see Cobb and Griffin, 1976). Teilhard believed that everyone has a right to enter the kingdom of heaven – it isn’t reserved for any special sexual, racial, or economic elite. A study of Teilhard’s writings can help transhumanism embrace a deep conception of social justice and expand its conception of social concern (see Garner, 2005). A study of Teilhard can help transhumanists make beneficial conceptual, and even political, connections to progressive Christian institutions.

    My goal in this paper is to present the thought of Teilhard de Chardin in a way that is defensible and accessible to transhumanists. Teilhard was working in the early twentieth century, at a time when biology was primitive and computer science non-existent. Many of his ideas are presented in a nineteenth-century vocabulary that is now conceptually obsolete. My method is to present these ideas in a charitable way using a contemporary conceptual vocabulary, and to show how they have been refined by transhumanists such as Tipler, Moravec, and Kurzweil. One might say this paper offers a transhumanist reading of Teilhard or even a Teilhardian transhumanism. Since I make extensive use of computational ideas, I am offering a computational model of Teilhard’s thought. I thereby hope to make his ideas accessible and to encourage further study of Teilhard among transhumanists. Teilhard produced an extensive body of work that may be of interest to them; there is also an enormous secondary literature on Teilhard, much of which may be of great interest to transhumanists.

    You can read it all here:

    http://jetpress.org/v20/steinhart.htm

  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat

    Do you believe this generation will elude old age? Do you believe in the singularity? If so why do you talk about dying all the time?

    I do detect nevertheless that your belief in God is not what it once was.

  • botchtowersociety
    botchtowersociety
    Do you believe this generation will elude old age? Do you believe in the singularity?

    I believe it is possible, as is the Singularity.

    If so why do you talk about dying all the time?

    I don't actually., You seem to be taking a spoof too far. However, even defeating the disease of aging doesn't prevent death from accidental causes or as-yet-uncurable pathogenic disease.

    BTS

  • mindseye
    mindseye

    botchtowersociety wrote: Since everything comes from God, it's the starting point for each of our journeys even if many move away from it.

    Since everyone is always discussing God, and whether or not to believe in him/her/it, it would be interesting to define exactly what God is. Most westerners define God as Yahweh of the Old Testament, a sort of craftsmen who constructed the universe. Even as the deists among the founding fathers in America dismissed the supernatural excesses of the Bible, they held on to the idea of a cosmic watchmaker.

    But as we learn more about the complexity of the universe, this model seems simplistic. The best modern definition I've heard of God is from theologian Paul Tillich, who said that God is the "ground of being." In other words, God is the what it is to BE, to exist, in opposition to non-being. In this sense, I agree with you, God is the starting point for each of our journeys.

  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat

    You don't want to upload (or whatever you call it) a copy of your brain? Or get your head frozen if you die too soon?

    I believe it is possible, as is the Singularity.

    All things are possible. How likely do you think it is?

  • botchtowersociety
    botchtowersociety
    You don't want to upload (or whatever you call it) a copy of your brain? Or get your head frozen if you die too soon?

    I haven't given it much thought. My interest is more about how to render this unnecessary. Somehow, creating a copy and destroying the original seems the same as ordinary death to me. Perhaps a way to ensure continuity will be designed.

    All things are possible. How likely do you think it is?

    I believe we have already discovered the basic mechanisms of aging as well as the basic technologies to extend life expectancies for decades beyond what they typically are now. It will take time, however, to overcome psychological resistance and to make the use of these technologies widespread. While we don't know if current scientific knowledge is enough to ensure indefinite survival, I think it will buy enough time until we have it. I think the middle of this century will probably be the demarcation point. It will shake all of our institutions, social, political, economic, and religious. Everything is premised on death.

  • botchtowersociety
    botchtowersociety
    Since everyone is always discussing God, and whether or not to believe in him/her/it, it would be interesting to define exactly what God is. Most westerners define God as Yahweh of the Old Testament, a sort of craftsmen who constructed the universe. Even as the deists among the founding fathers in America dismissed the supernatural excesses of the Bible, they held on to the idea of a cosmic watchmaker.
    But as we learn more about the complexity of the universe, this model seems simplistic. The best modern definition I've heard of God is from theologian Paul Tillich, who said that God is the "ground of being." In other words, God is the what it is to BE, to exist, in opposition to non-being. In this sense, I agree with you, God is the starting point for each of our journeys.

    Fascinating post, mindeye.

  • mindseye
    mindseye

    Thanks, your post on Pierre Teilhard de Chardin was also fascinating. I don't know much about the guy. I'm going to look up more on him when I get some time. It's unfortunate that religion and science are always seen in opposition, when there have been many religious scientists and religious figures supportive of science (Gregor Mendel, the Jesuits, to name a few).

  • ZeusRocks
    ZeusRocks

    Since everything comes from God

    You either have to prove this to be true or you are only having a conversation with yourself.

    When a baby is born it has no beliefs, so it is impossible for it to be theist.

  • botchtowersociety
    botchtowersociety
    Thanks, your post on Pierre Teilhard de Chardin was also fascinating.

    I recommend his book "Phenomenon of Man." He describes the evolution of the cosmos from the Big Bang to ourselves. I have it here, but it might be online for free.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit