Lincoln Cannon

By: Lincoln Cannon
Listen for free

  • Summary

  • Lincoln Cannon is a technologist and philosopher, and leading voice of Mormon Transhumanism.
    2024 Lincoln Cannon
    Show more Show less
Spirituality
Show more Show less
activate_Holiday_promo_in_buybox_DT_T2
Episodes
  • From Atheism to Religious Transhumanism

    From Atheism to Religious Transhumanism
    Oct 24 2024
    As popularly understood, Transhumanism is deeply entangled with narratives of atheism. While secular Transhumanists champion radical transformation, they tend to lack the rich esthetic grounding that many inherit or receive from religion. Religious Transhumanism, and particularly Mormon Transhumanism, provides a compelling alternative, syncretizing contemporary science and emerging technological trends with traditional theology and liturgy. In a recently published paper, “ From Atheism to Transhumanism,” Jarosław Jagiełło takes a critical look at secular Transhumanism. He argues that atheism facilitated the rise of Transhumanism. And he compares Transhumanism to historic Fascism and Communism. His perspective includes four major criticisms: Lack of Metaphysical Grounding: Jarosław considers Transhumanism, without God, to have a relatively weak metaphysical foundation, resulting in an “anthropological tragicism” of existential uncertainty. Risk of Totalitarian Control: Jarosław is concerned that Transhumanism may conceal impulses to use technology, without sufficient concern for ethics, to facilitate totalitarian control. Disregard for Human Imperfection: Jarosław perceives Transhumanism to have disdain for human imperfection, assessing aspects in our nature as flaws rather than features of our evolution. Dualistic Opposition of Body and Spirit: Jarosław thinks Transhumanism promotes a dualistic opposition of body and spirit, cultivating an imbalance away from holistic human wellness. Despite Jarosław’s careless general comparisons of Transhumanism to bogeyman ideologies, his specific criticisms have some merit. Some Transhumanists lack metaphysical grounding. Some, intentionally or unintentionally, do indeed advocate or engage in authoritarian applications of technology. And some have distorted views of human nature, denigrating our bodies or embracing incoherent aspirations of disembodiment. That said, it would be a gross over-generalization to say these criticisms apply to all or essentially all Transhumanists. Many Transhumanists actually propose and exemplify solutions to these problems. That includes some secular Transhumanists. And that includes pretty much all religious Transhumanists, particularly Mormon Transhumanists, who collectively embody a thorough rebuttal to Jarosław’s criticisms. Mormon Transhumanists strive to live and act according to an immersive faith in God. With Jesus, we would trust in, change toward, and fully immerse our bodies and minds in the role of Christ. And we would do this here and now, in this world, leveraging all the means, technological and otherwise, that the grace of God perpetually extends to us. I dare to contend that we have the strongest metaphysical foundation on Earth. Mormon Transhumanists reject any supposed “God” that would raise itself above all others, declaring itself “God.” As invited and exemplified by Jesus, we would become Gods and saviours with and for each other. Our fundamental ethical impulse is to console, heal, and raise each other together as joint heirs in the eternally decentralizing glory of God. We are the antithesis of totalitarianism. Mormon Transhumanists consider our bodies to be gifts from God, biological machines that empower our minds – our spirits. On the one hand, we revere the limitations of our bodies as educational opportunities, cultivating the virtues of courage, compassion, and creativity. On the other hand, we suppose the dissolution of our bodies in death would entail bondage from which resurrection would eventually free us. Our esteem for bodies, and their potential in holistic association with minds, is essentially as boundless as our theology. Whatever one may think of Transhumanism generally or secular Transhumanism particularly, and however much one may wish to ignore religious Transhumanism, Mormon Transhumanism stands as a luminous testament to the power of syncretizing technology with theology. This power transcends false dichotomies. It substantiates and expands. It transforms. And this power is not merely a curious possibility. This power is a necessity. Our time, racing toward existential threats and superintelligent enigmas, demands nothing less than everything from us – our whole minds, our full bodies, our entire souls. And no ideology that demands anything less will survive. Beyond presecular religiosity, beyond secular atheism, religious Transhumanism is the future. Mormon Transhumanism is coming into its time.
    Show more Show less
    Less than 1 minute
  • 38 Thoughts on October 2024 General Conference

    38 Thoughts on October 2024 General Conference
    Oct 6 2024
    Yesterday and today, members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the largest Mormon denomination, gathered for our General Conference. General Conference is a long-standing tradition, generally held two times per year since 1830. My understanding is that there have only been two or three exceptions, depending on how we count. There were no conferences in 1846 due to complexities associated with leaving Nauvoo. And there was only one of two conferences in 1957 because of a pandemic. For the last couple decades, it has also been a tradition for some Church members to share our thoughts and interact with each other during the conference via social media, particularly X (formerly Twitter). I have often participated in that. My participation has slowed down a bit, due in part to decreasing popularity of X. But, at least for now, I’m back with more. Thoughts on Conference Below is an edited list of the thoughts that I shared on X about the first day (Saturday) of October 2024 General Conference – more below about the absence of the second day. They include thoughtful affirmations and elaborations, as well as constructive criticisms. As always, my intent is to promote serious engagement with the ideas and experiences that Church leaders share during the conference. And I welcome your feedback and questions in the comments. The Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square is singing one of my favorite hymns, “ Press Forward Saints.” Elder Andersen encourages hope, reminding me of a favorite passage from the Book of Mormon: “whoso believeth in God might with surety hope for a better world” ( Ether 12:4 ). This idea is particularly salient, if you understand the New God Argument. President Freeman claims that Church ordinances enable us to draw on the power of God. The non-religious will be skeptical. But they should reconsider. Science has repeatedly demonstrated that authority mediates placebo, which is quite real – and can be quite sublime. Elder Hirst emphasizes the love of Christ, that we should have for each other, a “love that has divinity in it.” This isn’t just the love of passive acceptance, but rather the love of our shared potential in Godhood. Elder Renlund seems to suggest that cultural syncretization between Christianity and other ideologies has been merely weakening. However, there’s good reason to suppose the value of syncretization has been more complex. Elder Homer advocates submission to the will to God. This can be problematic, too often interpreted in oppressive ways. If it’s interpreted as anything other than something like conforming to the image of Christ, run away. With Christ in you, submission is to your greater self. Elder Casillas asserts that God created you so that you may “realize your full potential.” This facilitates ethical interpretation of admonition toward submission. We must understand the will of God to be our full potential. Otherwise, submission is merely oppression. President Oaks rightly points out that constraints are essential to progress. Where there are no constraints, “progress” is incoherent. President Oaks cites from the Book of Mormon the “ doctrine of Christ ” – essentially, faith, repentance, and baptism. Notably, Jesus claims that anything more or less than this is not his doctrine. How often do we construe much more than this as doctrine? President Oaks encourages us to avoid contention, again citing Jesus from the Book of Mormon. Of course, he doesn’t mean that we need to avoid disagreement. Oaks regularly exemplifies non-contentious disagreement (sometimes even when I disagree with him). I’m enjoying the children’s choir, singing a song that I’ve never heard before. Beautiful and invigorating. Elder Christofferson says “I did it God’s way” is better than “I did it my way.” Obedience, as conforming to the image of Christ, has a practical place in the Gospel. But to love is better than to know is better than to obey. Elder Teixeira talks about the scriptural comparison of Church members to salt. It reminds me of this passage, which encourages us to become Christ with Jesus: “For they were set to be a light unto the world, and to be the saviors of men; And inasmuch as they are not the saviors of men, they are as salt that has lost its savor, and is thenceforth good for nothing but to be cast out and trodden under foot of men” ( D&C 103:9-10 ). Elder Villar advocates eternal perspective – eternal vision. I second that. No religion provokes a grander eternal perspective and vision than Mormonism. Elder Kearon welcomes members to “the church of joy.” This echoes Joseph Smith’s claim, “ happiness is the object of existence,” and the Book of Mormon’s claim, “ men are, that they might have joy.” This rightly positions the fundamental value proposition of Mormonism in esthetics. Elder Kearon encourages us to “praise and adore our God in a way that transforms us.” Transformation ...
    Show more Show less
    Less than 1 minute
  • Miracle Optimization

    Miracle Optimization
    Sep 14 2024
    After reading my recent article on “ The Technological Conception,” a friend suggested to me that I might be leaving some value on the table, so to speak. His concern was, essentially, that my preference for simplicity might have led me to an insufficient explanation for real possibilities with greater overall practical value. In other words, God might occasionally have solid practical reason for miraculous conception rather than simple conception – still natural, but perhaps more technological than biological. My friend was right. There’s more to say about miracles, especially from a practical perspective. So let’s explore. What is a miracle? Some consider miracles to be interruptions of natural law by divine intervention – antinaturalism. But the Mormon Transhumanist perspective is steadfastly naturalist, richer and more nuanced, situating miracles as part of an expansive view of natural law and human potential. From this perspective, why might God perform or enable miracles? How and why might God optimize the frequency and magnitude of miracles? And how should we, in turn, optimize our perspectives on miracles? Defining Miracles Miracles can be literal – real physical events that defy our present ability to understand scientifically or replicate technologically. But they can also be figurative, representing spiritual or psychological transformation. Literal miracles might include actually healing the sick or really walking on water. Figurative miracles might include calming a storm as a metaphor for finding peace amidst suffering, or raising the dead as a metaphor for experiencing hope in times of despair. While it may be tempting to marginalize the value of figurative miracles, they have substantial power. For example, someone may find unexpected strength to forgive an enemy after contemplating the scriptural story of Jesus healing a man who was sent to arrest him. Such change provides psychological benefits, as well as social benefits when repeated at scale – many people experiencing similar change while contemplating the story. The capacity for forgiveness can mend relationships and create a ripple effect, promoting greater social cohesion. On the other hand, although it may be hard for some of us, we can esteem literal miracles as real natural events. Some secular persons have exemplified this. Notable among them is science fiction author Arthur C. Clarke, who observed, “ Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” Just substitute “miracle” for “magic.” Mormon authorities have also exemplified the naturalistic approach to literal miracles. James Talmage claimed, “Miracles cannot be in contravention of natural law, but are wrought through the operation of laws not universally or commonly recognized.” Speaking of modern medicine, travel, and communications, Gordon B. Hinckley observed, “It is a miracle. The fruits of science have been manifest everywhere.” What about the historical Jesus of Nazareth? In the New Testament, even Jesus hints at what we might reasonably interpret as encouragement toward a mechanistic, and thereby naturalistic, approach to literal miracles. On one occasion, he applies mud and prescribes washing to heal blindness. And on another occasion, he comments regarding a particularly persistent demonic possession, “This kind can come out only by prayer.” Practical Consequences of Miracles What’s the point? When we hear about miracles, or experience what we esteem to be miraculous, why do we care? Why do scriptural stories about miracles attract so much attention, both fascination and derision? Are there potential detriments in addition to benefits? Of course, those who experience a miracle label the experience as “miracle” because we esteem the experience to be good, at least on the whole. We generally don’t use “miracle” to describe bad experience. We associate a greater purpose or perhaps superintelligent intention with an experience that is otherwise more difficult or less satisfying for us to explain, thereby reinforcing the experience with something of an enduring psychological boost. A potential downside to this is that it can cultivate an explanatory laziness, leading to antinaturalism. The scriptures use miracles, at least in part, to illustrate divine intervention and signify the presence of God in the world. Miracles communicate God’s concern and love for creation, moving theology away from a passive deism. Divine acts can motivate believers to follow the example of God, engaging actively in the world. But, as with direct experience of miracles, stories about miracles can lead some toward a passive antinaturalism that expects God to do everything and pacifies us against real action. Optimal Frequency and Magnitude Given the possibility space of practical consequence for us, miracles would also have practical consequence for God – for any superintelligence that may care about the future ...
    Show more Show less
    Less than 1 minute

What listeners say about Lincoln Cannon

Average customer ratings

Reviews - Please select the tabs below to change the source of reviews.

Audible.com reviews

Amazon reviews
No Reviews are Available