Christian Transhumanism Archives

Finding Hope in a Sea of Skepticism over Facebook Algorithms

The previous blog summarized the first part of our discussion on Facebook algorithms and how they can become accountable to users. This blog summarizes the second part where we took a look at the potential and reasons for hope in this technology. While the temptation of algorithm misuse for profit maximization will always continue, can these technologies also work for the good? Here are some thoughts on this direction.

Elias: I never know where the discussion is going to go, but I’m loving this. I loved the question about tradition. Social media and Facebook are part of a new tradition that emerged out of Silicon Valley. But I would say that they are part of the broader tradition emerging out of cyberspace (Internet), which is now roughly 25 years old. I would also mention Transhumanism as one of the traditions influencing Big Tech titans and many of its leaders. The mix of all of them forms a type of Techno Capitalism that is slowly conquering the world.

Levi: This reminds me of a post on the Facebook group that Jennifer posted a few months ago. It was a fascinating video from a Toronto TV station where they looked 20 years back and showed an interview with a couple of men about the internet. They were talking with excitement about the internet. They then interviewed the same men today. Considering how many things have changed, he was very skeptical. There was so much optimism and then everything became a sort of capitalist money-grabbing goal. I used to teach business ethics for 6 years in the Bay area. One of the main things I taught my students about is the questions we need to ask when looking at a company. What is their mission, and values? What does the company say they uphold? These questions tell you a lot about what the company’s tradition is.

The second thing is what is the actual corporate culture? One of the projects I would have the students do is every week they would present some ethical problem in the news related to some business. It’s never hard to find topics, which is depressing. We found a lot of companies that have had really terrible corporate cultures. Some people were incentivized from the top to do unethical things. When that is your standard, meeting a certain monetary goal, everything else becomes subordinated to that.

Milton Friedman said 50 years ago that the social responsibility of a business is to increase its profit. According to Friedman, anything we do legally to obtain this is acceptable. If the goal is simply this then the legal aspect is subordinate to the goal then we can change that by changing laws in our favor. The challenge is that this focus has to come from the top. In a company like Facebook, Zuckerberg has the majority of shares, and then the board of directors are people he has hand-picked. So there is very little actual oversight.

Within the question about tradition, Facebook has made it very clear that their tradition is sharing. That means sharing your personal information with other people. We would want to do that to some extent, but he is also sharing your data with third-party companies that are buying the data to make money. If profit is the goal everything becomes subordinated to that. Whether the sharing is positive or negative is less of a question of is it being shared and if it’s making money.

Photo by Mae Dulay on Unsplash

Glimpses of Hope in a Sea of Skepticism

Elias: I would like to invite Micah, president of the Christian Transhumanist Association to share some thoughts on this topic. We have extensively identified the ethical challenges in this area. What does Christian Transhumanism has to say and are there any reasons for hope?

Micah: On the challenge of finding hope and optimism, I was thinking if we compare this to the Christian tradition and development of the creeds, you are seeing some people looking at this emergence and saying that it is a radical, hopeful, and optimistic option in a world of pessimism. If you think about ideas of resurrection and other topics like this, it is a radical optimism about what will happen to the created order.

The problem you run into (even in the New Testament) is a point of disappointed expectations. People are “where is he coming, where is the transformation, when will all this be made right?” So the apostles and the Christian community have to come in and explain the process of waiting, it will take a while but we can’t lose hope. So a good Christian tradition is to maintain optimism and hope in the face of disappointed expectations and failures as a community. In the midst of bad news, they stayed anchored on the future good news.

There is a lesson in this tradition of looking at the optimism of the early internet community and seeing how people maintain that over time. You have to have a long-term view that figures out a way to redemptively take into account the huge hurdles and downfalls you encounter along the way. This is what the Christian and theological perspectives have to offer. I’ve heard from influential people from Silicon Valley that you can’t maintain that kind of perspective from a secular angle, if you only see from a secular angle you will be sorely disappointed. Bringing the theological perspective allows you to understand that the ups and downs are a part of the process, so you have to engage redemptively to aim for something else on the other side.

Taken from Unsplash.com

Explainability and Global Differences

Micah: From a technical perspective, I want to raise the prospect of explainability AI and algorithms. I liked what Maggie pointed out about the ecosystems where the developers don’t actually understand what’s going on, that’s also been my experience. It’s what we’ve been baking into our algorithm, this lack of understanding of what is actually happening. I think a lot of people have the hope that we can make our algorithms self-explanatory, and I do definitely think we can make algorithms that explain themselves. But from a philosophical perspective, I think we can never trust those because even we can’t fully understand our mental processes. Yet, even if we could explain and we could trust them perfectly there are still unintended consequences.

I believe we need to move the focus of the criteria. Instead of seeking the perfect algorithm, focus on what are the inputs and outputs of this algorithm. It has to move to a place of intentionality where we are continually revisiting and criticizing our intentions. How are we measuring it (algorithm) and how are we feeding them information that shapes it? These are just some questions to shift the direction of our thinking

Yvonne: You have shared very interesting ideas. I’ve been having some different thoughts on what I’ve been reading. In terms of regulation and how companies would operate in one region versus the other. I have a running group with some Chinese women. They often talk to me about how the rules in China are very strict towards social media companies. Even Facebook isn’t allowed to operate fully there. They have their own Chinese versions of social network companies.

Leadership plays a crucial role in what unfolds in a company and any kind of environment. When I join a company or a group, I can tell the atmosphere based on how the leadership operates. A lot of big companies like Facebook, their leadership, and decision-makers have the same mindset and thoughts on profits. Unless regulation enforces morality and ethics most companies will get away with whatever they want to. That’s where we come in. I believe we, as Christians, can influence how things unfold and how things operate using our Christian perspective.

In the past year, we have all seen how useful technology can be. Even this group is a testimony of how even with different time zones we can have a meeting without having to take plane tickets, which would be more expensive. I think technology has its upsides when applied correctly. That defines whether it will be helpful or detrimental to society.

Brian: Responding to the first part of what Micah said when we think about technology and its role it can be easier if we think about two perspectives. One as a creative vector. Where we can create value and good things. But at every step, there is the possibility of bias to creep in. I mean bias very broadly, it can be discrimination or simple mistakes that multiply over time. So there has to be a “healing” vector where bias is corrected. Once the healing vector is incorporated, the creative vector can be a leading force again. I believe that the healing vector has to start outside ourselves. The central thought of the Christian faith is that we can’t save ourselves, we require God’s intervention and grace. This grace moves through people and communities so that we can actively participate in it.

Elias: I think this also comes from the concept of co-creation. The partnership between humanity and God, embracing both our limitation (what some call sin) but also our immense potential as divine image-bearers.

I look forward to our next discussion. Until then, blessings to all of you.

CTA Conference 2019: Engagement, Solidarity and Hope

I was looking forward to this conference for months. It was my only opportunity in the year to get together with friends that I interact online throughout the year. The line up of speakers was impressive. There were academics, activists, engineers, theologians, pastors and entrepreneurs which made it for a fairly unique event destined to spark engaging dialogue and stretch us into uncomfortable spaces.

In the opening, Micah Redding, Christian Transhumanist Association (CTA) president and founder mentioned that if the conference did no make you uncomfortable then it was not doing its job. This was not a place for cozy group think. In eyes of many, Christianity and Transhumanism make for strange bedfellows. Furthermore, mixing religion, science and technology is still a novel concept. As an emerging organization, CTA is still defining its own identity in an environment where many are too willing to dismiss it as an oxymoron. On the one hand, Science and Technology are weary of religious talk getting into their business. Religious people, on the other hand, get very uncomfortable with movements that exalt a changing humanity.

Entering a new world

Conference main speakers: Science Mike, Liz Parish, Cheryle Renee Moses and Jim Stump

The morning kicked off with Bio Logos VP, Jim Stump. He offered preliminary thoughts on how to engage Transhumanism from a Christian perspective. In his view, the jury was still out on the movement and its impact. With that said, instead of fearful rejection, he proposed active engagement. In other words, it was an opportunity to enter the conversation as disciples of Christ with humility, caution and openness.

This was a fitting introduction as the speakers that followed exemplified that engagement. They offered a Christian cultural critique that was not limited to Transhumanism but expanded into digital cultures, AI and the Internet. It is hard to summarize here all the great points made throughout these presentations. I hope that CTA posts the presentations so those interested can browse through them.

One speaker that stood out was Liz Parish. Liz was patient zero in genetic modification treatment. She underwent this unprecedented procedure in 2015 and since then has stayed involved in the longevity and human enhancement movement as an entrepreneur. Her company, BioViva, seeks to find safe ways to expand to make genetic intervention more affordable. Watching her presentation gave mixed feelings of awe, hope and fear. It reminded me that we were entering a new world, one full of possibilities but with no shortage of dangers. Messing with our genes is not something I am comfortable with. Yet, what if that is the way for the cure of many terminal diseases? Don’t we owe ourselves to at least try? Liz Parish’s life and work challenged us all to re-think our pre-conceived answers to these questions.

Learning Solidarity

Right before lunch, I received a text from Micah. I was scheduled to speak in the afternoon right before a panel on future and equity. My presentation explored how the movie Black Panther, as a prime example of Afro-Futurism, represented a hopeful, original and promising vision for the future. In the text, Micah informed me that Cheryle Renee Moses, an African-American activist and one of the key speakers in the event objected to the title of my presentation “Dreaming Alternative Futures with Black Panther.” The plan was to sit down at lunch to discuss her concerns.

In our conversation, Cheryle expressed that she had reservations with the fact that I, a Euro-Brazilian was speaking about a story that belonged to Africans. She was also offended at the word “dreaming” for it reminded her of how slave owners have used that word to keep slaves from asserting their humanity. To be more specific, she was referring to how Christianity was used to tell slaves to simply hope for a better future after death rather than fight for freedom. It reminded her, I write this with tears in my eyes, of how the gospel was used, and in some cases continues to be used for social control and racial subjugation.

There was no choice other than to pull the presentation from the program and to extend the following forum on future and equities. From a personal level this was a difficult decision. I had poured hours into that presentation and thought that it would actually connect a mostly white and male audience with a beautiful African vision of the future. Yet, there was something happening here much bigger than that. If we were to be serious about equitable futures, we could not ignore Cheryle’s concern. As an activist, she was speaking for the margins in a way that none of us could. Her voice at that moment was more important than anything I had to say.

Photo by Mike Morrell – Elias Kruger, Cheryle Renee Moses and Micah Redding

In the forum, Cheryle reminded us of the uncomfortable truths about racism and how this continues to impact even the conversations we were having about technology, faith and the future. She challenged the audience to expand their networks to ensure they were hearing perspectives from diverse voices. For a room full of white men, still the vast majority involved in the conversation, the awkwardness was palpable. It was an unplanned, uncomfortable, awkward moment that was sorely needed.

A few days later, after reflecting on this experience, it dawned on me that I never apologized or expressed sympathy for the hurtful reality that Cheryle was bringing forth. Thankfully, I was able to call her this week and express my heartfelt sorrow for this painful heritage that we often want to forget rather than make it right. Cheryle graciously accepted my apologies and thanked me for reaching out. I also asked her to review this text to ensure I was not working under short-sighted assumptions in my writing. Part of building equitable futures is learning to listen to diverse voices and feel their pain.

It is only in solidarity that we can move forward.

Fruitful Conversations

Like most conferences, great dialogue happens in the breakout sessions. In an age of on-demand streaming, one can watch great speakers at the tip of their fingers. What is rare and even more valuable is good old face-to-face conversations. We were a small but high caliber group. Among attendants there were scientists, theologians, college students, professors, pastors and a good share of technology enthusiasts. The conference offered two opportunities for break out conversations with a broad range of topics.

Photo by Seth Cartwright

In the first one, I attended a break out on “AI and the impact on the local church.” Not surprisingly the topic attracted its share of ministry-oriented folks. It did not take long, about 5 minutes to be precise, for our conversation to veer into sex-bots. That’s what happens when pastors discuss AI, we joked . Beyond that, we had fruitful discussions on the differences between narrow and general AI, applications for ministry and the technology impact on social inclusion. Some reported the church’s reluctance to embrace new technologies. Others discussed the benefits and perils of taking virtual communion or conducting virtual baptism. Welcome to doing ministry in the 21st century.

In the second breakout, I joined a stimulating conversation on the future of Christian Transhumanism (XH+). We discussed the baggage Transhumanism carries and why many Christians are reluctant to join or be identified with the movement. There is also resistance from secular Transhumanism in accepting the legitimacy of a religious voice. We explored which audiences had the most to benefit from XH+ and found that it would fit well within a faith at work movement. At its best, the XH+ could help Christians boldly connect their faith with their vocations. Yet, our discussion left many unanswered questions. What is XH+? How does it fit the church ecosystem? What does it believe? These are questions the CTA will be engaging for years to come.

Unexpected Ending

Science Mike closed the night with a stimulating and at times entertaining presentation on technology, faith and Transhumanism. He brought up many valuable points. For one, he questioned the narrative that AI is overtaking humanity and computers would surpass human intelligence. Showing recent trends in computer performance, Mike bluntly put: “Electrons are getting tired of our shit!” In short, we are now finding limits in Moore’s law challenging the projections for machine super intelligence. He also questioned the possibility of brain uploading, cryonics and even whether life prolongation was desirable.

At points, he delivered heart-felt reflections on how one could live out a Christian faith in the midst of so much technological change. He affirmed the bodily shape of our humanity asserting that mind uploading was simply confusing people with brains on a stick. He also encouraged us to re-think our relationship with technology as a separate entity from nature. As an example, he said we should look at Manhattan as an island filled with human nests. In making these points, he offered some provocative insights to help us move forward in a time of great confusion.

Unfortunately, his talk ended in a very pessimistic tone. Mike was weary of Silicon Valley and American Christianity, claiming that both were built on a foundation of white supremacy. Because of that, he lost faith in them and instead was looking for ways to live a Christian life that resisted these forces. Hence, he saw little hope on technology or the church in effecting positive change in the world.

While partially agreeing with his assessment, I was disappointed that he could not also see the potential and opportunity for Christianity and technology in our time. That is what attracted me the XH+ in the first place. I saw it as an alternative to the prevailing luddite narrative that focuses on the negative impact of technology in the world. While he left a grave reminder of our current reality, he overlooked the potentiality of technology and faith. These issues are not mutually exclusive, we can dismantle oppressive systems while building an alternative equitable-techno-natural-spiritual future. In fact, accomplishing the first is only possible by pursuing the second.

I would like to hear more about this hopeful vision in the 2020 CTA conference.

Road Trip: AI Theology Goes to Nashville

This week, I take a break from my recent blog series to report on my road trip to Nashville last week. This was a unique experience as I traveled in the middle of the work week to meet new friends and engage in meaningful conversations in the evening all while working from different offices in the day. One of the perks of working remotely for a company that is present in 40 states is that I can always find an office in most large and mid-size cities. So, while my work week started in Acworth, GA (Monday), it took me to Chattanooga, TN (Tuesday), Nashville (Wednesday and Thursday), returning home on Friday. I logged over 600 miles of driving, listened to hours of podcasts and attended three different events in my stay in Nashville.

Leaving the family behind for three days was a challenge that took some preparation. I am very grateful for my wife that held the fort with our three kids so I could go. She continues to be my rock and my safe refuge that I can return to. I am also grateful for my adopted grandma Carolyn who warmly received me in Nashville so I could be there for three days. Finally, I am thankful to both Scott Hawley and Micah Redding for re-arranging their schedule to accommodate my visit and greeting me with open arms. Though we had not met in person, I felt like I was visiting old friends.

Reflections on the Road

I hit the road on Tuesday at 7:30 am. The way to Tennessee is visually stunning. Early in the morning, I can still see the mist in the air as I drive through large open prairies. The sun is just starting to rise, the open road and inviting scenery can only be enhanced by listening to inspiring podcasts. My list includes an eclectic mixture of Economics (Freaknomics), Theology (Homebrewed Christianity), Data Science (Linear Digressions) to futuristic journalism (The Future of Everything) , Christian Transhumanism (CTA Podcast) and sermons from Trinity Anglican in Atlanta. For this trip, I added Richard Rohr’s “Another Name for Everything,” which is a series of interviews where he introduces chapters of his new book, The Universal Christ.

I am an auditory learner who can easily get lost into rich conversations and stories. Listening to podcasts in the road makes time pass faster allowing me to forget that I am driving. I will often go through a full podcast and then have 20 minutes of silence so I can react mentally to what I just heard. This is often the time where ideas, deep thoughts and life-giving insights come to me.

Recently, I have learned that the process is not just limited to thoughts but also includes feelings. At times, I will hear something that will cause an emotional reaction which I can’t immediately identify the cause of it. In this trip, this happened after listening to a sermon from Trinity, an evangelical Anglican church I attend on occasion. I could not pinpoint what triggered it but I noticed an acute discomfort while listening. When I started probing it, I realized this was a recurring feeling that emerged when I went there.

I have grown increasingly bothered by the evangelical tendency to reduce the gospel to individual piety. Everything becomes a moral lesson on how to become a better person, a plea to read my Bible more or to tell others about God. While those are all good things, they no longer captivate my imagination. I yearn for a bigger vision of God’s activity on earth, one that encompasses not just my individual life but also my community and the world.

Later in the trip, I heard Richard Rohr’s reflections on the Universal Christ and found hope that he may be onto something. Is this the cosmic vision I am yearning? Above all, is this the next station God is leading in my spiritual journey? The jury is still out but the traveling must continue.

Visiting Belmont University

My time in Belmont started with a lovely dinner with a group that included a physicist, a mathematician, a theologian (the visiting lecturer) and an engineering student. Our conversation touched on many topics, most notably, how deep specialization in academia has hindered the integration between humanities, science and technology. This is even more problematic in the US where PhD curriculums tend to be more narrow than in Europe. Thankfully, our dinner felt like a step in the right direction. If we could get more Mathematicians to talk to Theologians, maybe integration can start.

After dinner, we all headed to campus for the talk entitled “Remaining Human in a Technological Age.” Dr. Waters’ lecture was in essence a critical Christian response to Transhumanism (H+). In his view, H+ offers an attractive but flawed vision for the future of humanity. In its search for perfection, it threatens to erase the very traits that make us humans, namely, our imperfections. Instead, he believes Christianity offers a counter-message in encouraging us to find God in the mundane and by accepting rather than fighting the limitation brought on by death. All creatures have a beginning and an end, and therefore humans must accept that their lives on earth will eventually come to a conclusion.

Photo taken by Scott Hawley

In the next day, I sat beside Dr. Waters in Dr. Hawley’s class where we took turns answering pre-submitted questions from students. Interacting with the student’s questions was one of the highlights of the trip. The questions ranged from the impact of AI on humanity to what it means to be human. Dr. Waters offered insights majorly hinging upon the view he expressed in the night earlier. He called students to continue to attend to the mundane in a fast-changing world intoxicated by novelty.

Hoping to provide an alternative, though not necessarily opposing perspective, I challenged students to re-think about how they see technology. At times, I questioned the notion of artificial and natural, affirming that technology was part of nature. That is why, when asked whether one could be a cyborg and Christian, I answered with an unwavering yes.

Finally, one of them asked whether the development of AI would turn out to be good or bad for humanity. Instead on speculating on an answer, I turned to them and said: “I turn this question on you. You will decide how AI impact our future.” It is my hope they , and all of us, heed to this call to engage in the debates that are shaping the use of AI technologies in our times. We neglect this reality to our peril.

Christian Transhumanist Association Meetup

The meetup, the following evening, closed the trip in grand style. There I met fellow Christians seeking to engage Transhumanism from a more receptive stance. I shared a bit about my journey from feeling a call to the ministry to discovering it in Data Science. Sometimes, when you re-tell your story, you gain new insights. As I shared in the meetup, I realized that my journey was really about integration. Seeking to bring together profession with faith, technology with meaning, piety with concrete action, and hopefully people from different upbringing with each other.

While the initial topic was around AI, we ended up having a deeper discussion around what is means to be a Christian in our time. One issue was the role of Scripture in a world where knowledge is becoming more democratized. I confessed that the fundamentalist view of Scripture handed over to me by my upbringing was simply inadequate to navigate reality today. This perspective tried to build a virtual fortress around Scripture to protect from all questioning, fearing that any perceived error would collapse the whole edifice of faith. In doing so, it not only failed to address reality but also kept us from experiencing the true power of Scripture, namely its ability to point us to God in new situation. Change must be in order.

Photo by Micah Redding

Micah shared how Christianity has undergone major upheavals every 500 years where the primary question was the source of authority. At first, the question settled on the creeds, then on the figure of the Pope and finally on Scripture itself. Our 500 years is up, is it time for a new reformation? What would that look like? I would suggest that the path to that answer must pass through science and technology, even if it does not end there.

Coming Home

I often wonder how community can happen online. So far, my answer would be: only if accompanies, supports or facilitates actual encounters. This trip was an example of the online world paving the way to real world connections . It would not have happened have I not started blogging and met Dr. Hawley and Micah through the Christian Transhumanist Association Facebook group. Is this how a connected world work? Virtual friendships that culminate on dialogue over good burgers and beer? My trip to Nashville suggests that may be so.

Writing this blog was a journey of its own. I wasn’t sure what I would say but wanted to allow the writing to take me there. My intent here was to pull back the curtain on my internal musings so the reader may relate with aspects of my own personal experience. While I don’t think mine or anyone’s experience is normative, sharing them can open doors of meaning in others. That is my hope with this blog

Thanks for joining me on this ride and see you next week!

Christian Transhumanism: A Bridge Between Theology and AI

In the previous blog, I talked about how theology has much to offer to the AI conversation. With that said, one must recognize that the conversation between AI and Theology is rather awkward at the moment. While sharing common points of references, there are still significant divides in values, worldviews and language. At the root of this disconnect is the last century and half ongoing conflict between science and religion. As a consequence, the theologian is mostly disinterested if not intimidated by technology. The technologist finds Theology antiquated and inconsequential to the rise of new technologies. To delve more deeply on this rift would take more than a blog but for now suffice it to say that work must be done to bridge this divide if we are to have a productive and meaningful conversation.

In that front, I am encouraged by the emergence of Christian Transhumanism. This budding movement shows promise in creating the space where Theology and Technology can learn from each other. How? Well, first some definitions are in order.

What is Transhumanism?

According to Nick Bostrum, Transhumanism is an “international intellectual and cultural movement that affirms the possibility and desirability of fundamentally transforming the human condition by developing and making widely available technologies to eliminate aging and to greatly enhance human intellectual, physical, and psychological capacities.”

Transhumanism is an optimistic view of the future that sees technology as the conduit for a new and improved humanity. This can translate into efforts to extend lifespan, enhance human abilities and or re-think the social order in light of these new possibilities. It is a movement driven by imagination mostly found in Science Fiction. Many of us may enjoy the thrill of watching or reading a Science Fiction story. The Transhumanist goes a step further and asks: what if those things actually happen? How would we live in these new worlds? What possibilities, conflicts and hopes would we experience? For the purpose of this blog, Transhuamanists are at the forefront of reflecting on the ethical implications of emerging technologies. That makes them an important conversation partner in the dialogue between AI and Theology.

Can Transhumanism be Christian?

In view of the description above, what would Christian Transhumanism look like? First, it is important to point out that Transhumanism in its purest form is a thoroughly secular movement. Most of its members claim no religious affiliation. This makes it for an even more intriguing proposition to espouse a Christian version of it.

The Christian Transhumanist Association (CTA) is probably one for the first attempts to pursue exactly that. At a high level, the movement merges Christian theology with Transhumanism in three meaningful ways. Firstly, it translates Transhumanism search for human evolution into growth. This growth is not limited to spiritual but more akin to what I have been describing in this blog as human flourishing – a holistic view that encompasses spiritual, physical and social dimensions. Secondly, it calibrates Tranhumanist telos towards the renewal of the Earth. That it, the goal is not progress for progress sake but it is replaced by a Christian eschatological aim – the new heaven and the new earth. Thirdly, it sees the use of technology as a way to fulfill our call to Christian discipleship. In a creative move, the group actually sees the pursue of technological advance as part of spiritual formation.

In doing so, CTA embodies a robust theology of technology laying the ground work for a dialogue between AI and Theology. This is not a problem-free path, as inevitably any deep engagement with another philosophy can lead to unbalanced syncretism or shallow proselytizing. That is, on the one hand Christian Transhumanism can alter its Christian base enough to lose its essence. On the other hand, Christian Transhumanism can engage in forceful imposition of Christian ideals into the Transhumanist community without genuine engagement. Walking this thin line is part of the challenge for the next years to come.

Intrigued? I invite you to visit their website for more information

Where do We Go From Here?

Christian Transhumanism is in its infancy stages and so it is too early to assess its role in bridging the divide between AI and Theology. It is an important line of thinking but not the only one. An alternative view would be a bioconservative Christian movement emerging as a counter-point to Christian Transhumanism. Bioconservatives are those who would advocate limiting or rejecting the use of technology in extending life or enhancing human abilities. Yet, this position will become more precarious as some of these technological advances are all but inevitable. Just think about taking a stance against automobiles in the beginning of the 20th century. I guess the Amish are a witness to this position and their legacy will live on in other movements in the coming future.

At the moment, I am leaning towards the Christian Transhumanist side. Christian history is filled with examples where the church has resisted change rather than shaping it towards desirable aims. At its best, I see Christian Transhumanism doing the latter, welcoming technological change with enthusiasm while also holding a theologically lens to expose its dangers. My hope is that CTA can live out its mission as both a reforming voice in the church and a beacon of hope in a fast-changing world.

Tag: Christian Transhumanism