24 replies to this topic

[tripperm]

I am very pleased to announce the launch of the new Transhumanist
Church website at http://www.transhumanistchurch.org . There are many
new and exciting features at our website that I invite you to explore
and make use of. From our mailing lists to our articles section, you
will find a wide range of discussions concerning the aspects of our
beliefs. Over the coming weeks and months many new features will be
added, bringing even more information and services to our members. If
you have never visited the Transhumanist Church's website before,
or haven't given us a look in a while, I encourage you to check us
out. After all, it's everyone's eternal future we are fighting for!

Live well, live forever!

Tripper McCarthy
President – Transhumanist Church
www.transhumanistchurch.org

[reason]

I predict much wrath directed in your direction from other transhumanist organizations, no matter how well you lay out your points.

http://www.transhuma...fs/beliefs.html

The above content is pretty nice stuff, but that doesn't matter because you're taking the religion path. No one is going to read it with an open mind, and certainly none of the opinion-makers in the media are going to see you as anything other than a cultist. It's hard enough to get them to take transhumanism itself seriously without this sort of handicap.

If a transhumanism group calls itself a church and gets any sort of media attention while positioning itself as a religion (which neither Virus nor Venturism have really achieved, thankfully) then we all get painted as cultists, no better than the Raelians. By extension, anything we talk about or advocate is also prejudiced in the minds of the masses.

While I appreciate the arguments for long term memetic engineering via religion, so long as you are positioning yourself in this way, any success you achieve will greatly damage the credibility and efforts made by all other transhumanist groups. The long term doesn't matter if we all die because [life extension = cultish activity ~ UFOs ~ strange, impossible things] becomes a dominant meme in the short term.

Reason
Founder, Longevity Meme
reason@longevitymeme.org
http://www.longevitymeme.org

[bacopa]

strong point reason regarding the cultish affiliation that may happen when transhumanism becomes a religion, but in a sense isn't a religion a set of beliefs directed towards a certain ends? So our faith is in science, I wouldn't argue there's anything wrong with that but it could get ugly if and when people start equating cultish ness along with the very technologies which could really save people not in a religious sense, but in reality. But I'm still up in the air as to judging it as bad or good yet. I think it may be harmless if people look at it like they would humanism or secular humanism, not cultish at all but earthy and philanthropic...

[tripperm]

Responses:

“none of the opinion-makers in the media are going to see you as anything other than a cultist”

Every group with radically different ideas starts off basically being seen as a “cult” (in the negative sense) and a disruptive force. People are threatened by things different than themselves and respond by dismissive ridicule. Look at the treatment Alcor and other cryonics institutions received in the early days (and still do). Thank god they didn’t heed your warning and go away, or we would all (cryonauts) be worse off.

“If a transhumanism group calls itself a church and gets any sort of media attention while positioning itself as a religion (which neither Virus nor Venturism have really achieved, thankfully) then we all get painted as cultists, no better than the Raelians. By extension, anything we talk about or advocate is also prejudiced in the minds of the masses”

It already is prejudiced in the “minds of the masses” for a million different reasons. If you believe you will ever get a fair, unprejudiced hearing, I think you are being a bit naïve. Besides, those people that link your organization with ours, and call us all a bunch of cultists, were probably predisposed to make that judgment anyway for whatever reason seemed convenient.

“any success you achieve will greatly damage the credibility and efforts made by all other transhumanist groups”

If they can’t survive in the sea of ideas on their own merit, they shouldn’t blame others for their lacking.

“isn't a religion a set of beliefs directed towards a certain ends”

Well said. I bet if I labeled the Transhumanist Church a philosophical organization, a lot of these negative reactions would fade away. People are so afraid of the “R” word. But guess what, most people on this planet belong to a religion. Wouldn’t you want a religion that preaches humanist and transhumanist ideas instead of one stepped in mysticism and supernaturalism with intolerant and inflexible dogma?

“Restricting transhumanism into a religion may fracture it into many different sects and groups, if this takes hold in society”

Every group that takes hold in society fractures and splinters (as long as it tolerates opposing viewpoints and ideas). Maybe the divisions aren’t always formal, but they are there. If you looked at transhumanists today you would probably find them split upon all sorts of issues (uploading being one I’ve seen a lot of disagreement on). Unless people one day all believe the same thing (a giant leap), or you brutally oppress people into compliance, this is unavoidable.

“to set down solid rules and tenets in every respect can alienate some of those who call themselves transhumanists. Wouldn't it be more advantagious avoid the failings of established religions, not follow in their footsteps.”

The Transhumanist Church’s beliefs are not set down as solid rules and tenets. We think of them as a “working hypothesis”. Every year the entire beliefs doctrine is put up for revisions and re-ratification. A great deal of thought was put into the system to try and keep from repeating mistakes of the past. And the system itself can also be changed, if it too proves to be faulty. As for trying to include everyone, well that is what the term “Transhumanist” is for, which probably means a lot of different things to different people. Run a search for a definition on the Net and you’ll come back with all sorts (most very similar, but slightly different from one to another).

I’m sorry if the idea of a Transhumanist Church upsets some, but there is clearly interest in the idea. And as long as there is, we will be around pursuing our own agenda. I sincerely hope that we can all “get along” and be respective of each other’s beliefs and opinions. We will never all agree, but then again this world would be a pretty stagnant place if we did.

Tripper McCarthy
President – Transhumanist Church
www.transhumanistchurch.org

[bacopa]

Well said Cosmos! I agree completely church has connotations that may damage the transhumanist meme, because that's exactly what it is a meme. How about Transhumanist Meme center! Something like that, I am a member and proud to be a member but I agree on your points

[randolfe]

"Transhumanist Meme Center" sounds fine to me. I would think that there could be different denominations within the broader Transhumanist church grouping.

Obviously, some people make cryonics central to their hopes for immortality. Others seem to be more focused on nanotechnology, the Singularity, etc. Protestanism has many different "sects" within it. And Protestantism came out of Roman Catholicism which many might argue came out of Judaism.

I once made the mistake of going to a meeting of Scientology because I thought that might be a religion based on belief in science. Indeed, France and Germany have decided Scientology is not a religion.

"Cult" is simply a word assigned to a group holding a specific viewpoint. If the word is really defined by the existence of "political correctness" surrounding a set of ideas, I would say that cryonics, immortalists, etc. are all just "cults" of science.

[mkper85260]

My feeling is that, yes, there will be problems with using the term "Church" and calling your movement a religion, but it should be attempted. Many people think "religion" necessarily means fantasies about spirits or some such irrational belief system. I think that most seriously misses the point, however, and I am not alone. You can see what I mean by doing a Google search on "definition of religion." A definition of my own that reflects this different and (to me) more enlightened and positive view is: "A religion is a body of attitudes, beliefs, and practices whose intended purpose is a meaningful engagement with what can reasonably be regarded as having transcendent or ultimate significance." I won't say this is unobjectionable--refinements and/or other adjustments may be in order--but it seems a reasonable start. I also think that modern, scientific immortalism opens new, exciting possibilities in the field of non-supernatural religion, and that is a major theme we are trying to develop in the Transhumanist Church. It amounts to a tremendous, new, scientific, gospel, something that I think can hold its own with and ultimately outpoint its less scientific precursors, which many people think comprise the whole of "religion." We need to do this. For we are addressing what is of deepest significance, and what, I think, will determine in the end whether the life that has evolved on planet Earth goes on indefinitely or self-destructs. Science may possibly supply the means to become immortal but by itself cannot accomplish the task. You also need motivation, and not just light or transient, but the kind that can span eternity and sustain an infinite commitment--that is what religion is really about.

Mike Perry
Secretary,
Transhumanist Church and also Society for Venturism

[bgwowk]

Look at the treatment Alcor and other cryonics institutions received in the early days (and still do). Thank god they didn’t heed your warning and go away, or we would all (cryonauts) be worse off.

Reason is absolutely right. The cryonics analogy doesn't apply because cryonics organizations don't call cryonics a religion. In fact, they are at pains to point out that cryonics is a *technology* not a religion, and that cryonics is fully compatible with religious beliefs. See

http://www.alcor.org...x.html#religion

Alcor's CEO is in fact a Christian, and an active member of his church. Cryonics would be treated even worse than it is if it were portrayed as a religion.

I think you should take the excellent advice offered here to rename your organization/website to something that doesn't include the word "religion." You may not be aware of it, but the Society for Venturism was originally established as the Church of Venturism, but then changed its name for the very same reasons being discussed here.

If you want to get people thinking about the future of humans and technology in a more open-minded way, great. But don't mess with their religion by proposing you have something better.

---BrianW

[bgwowk]

My previous response was directed at Tripper, and written before I noticed that the message just before mine was in fact written by Mike Perry (cofounder of the Society for Venturism) not Tripper. Far be it from me to tell Mike the reasons he changed "Church" to "Society" in his organization name. Though in my recollection it was in response to concerns that "Church" would be misunderstood.

All I can say is what I've always said: It's easier to sell a philosophy than a religion. Religion occupies a special compartment of the human mind that people don't like challenged or messed with. Just because some people have a secular philosophy plugged into their religion compartment doesn't mean the religion compartment of others is the best target for that philosophy-- especially when secular philosophies by nature can easily fit in other compartments that need not conflict with religion.

Over the course of abundant time and generations, it's quite possible that secular philosophies will eventually displace supernatural philosophies from the religion compartment of most people. But that's a very threatening prospect to supernaturalists, so to force the issue at this time and place in history (USA, 2004) risks unnecessary backlash against the goals of transhumanists generally.

In short, a Transhumanist "Church" seems like a surefire way to annoy both transhumanists and Christians alike.

---BrianW

[mkper85260]

Though Religious Transhumanism (what is espoused by the Transhumanist Church) is non-supernatural, it is not simply a “secular philosophy” as usually conceived. It posits a soul, albeit defined informationally rather than in supernatural terms (but still a real “soul”!), and also an afterlife, as well as eternal life (not just greatly extended life). The afterlife is not simply a consequence of having been well preserved at clinical death, or of not having had to experience that particular inconvenience in the first place. Instead it is something again based on informational considerations, and thus is more robust than cryonic resuscitation, aging control, curing all presently known ailments, uploading, and other such anticipated technologies could supply either individually or collectively, without some further, nontrivial endeavor. Ditto for eternal life. Both options I think are actually open to historic persons of the past (once again on informational grounds) as well as those living today—and are benefits one should morally be concerned with extending to such individuals if possible. (These prospects, and this whole subject, are also things I find tremendously exciting and inspiring, and I think this is echoed by others among Religious Transhumanists. It should also be noted that nowhere are we trying to label cryonics itself as a religion, though for certain compelling reasons it happens to be important to us.)

So you see how Religious Transhumanism really transcends conventional transhumanism. On logical grounds it well deserves the appellation of a “religion,” based on the definition in my previous message. To simply call it a philosophy as has been suggested would, I think, be seen as an evasion—and it wouldn’t take long for people to see it that way. Nor do I favor concealing our real aims behind a pretense of more conventional goals such as “longer, healthier life.” Worthy as such things may be, we are aiming for more, really much more. To deny that we are seeking, and hope to attain, the important goals of traditional religion, albeit through rational means, would be dishonest as well as, to my thinking, insulting and inspirationally suffocating. Again, if you are going to go as far as we are attempting, it does not seem out of place to call your movement a religion and, as well, your establishment a church.

Is this likely to upset transhumanists as well as the traditionally religious (not mutually exclusive groups, of course)? Some no doubt will be ill-disposed (some are rankled with practically any new endeavor) but not very many, I think. People will easily come to understand what our position is—we make no secret of it. If they want to join us, they can, or otherwise, turn to other things—we’re peaceable, friendly, and respect the rights of others. I think also that if, contrary to our expectations, our terminology does prove more trouble than it's worth, a change can be made, very likely before any irreparable harm occurs.

The issue has been brought up that once the Venturist organization was also called a church, but that this was changed (to the present title of Society for Venturism). This came about from pressure from the transhumanist camp of that day (late 1980s), particularly cryonicists. Indeed, much the same objections were raised then as now. I came to favor the change myself but do not favor it now, in part because, while the Venturist society is an umbrella organization accommodating many points of view under the broad groupings of cryonics and (if suitably understood) religion, the Transhumanist Church is more specialized. I happen to favor this specialization personally, but many cryonicists, including some notable instances among the Venturists, will not. So Religious Transhumanism, aside from any terminological issues, will not appeal to everyone, but for some of us the appeal will be powerful and the terminology appropriate.

--Mike Perry

[bgwowk]

Thanks for the clarification, Mike. You've actually convinced me. However, I do think it is important to be clear that the ideas you propose to promote are NOT conventional Transhumanism.

At the risk of sounding tongue-in-cheek (but I'm quite serious), perhaps your new institution could be called The Church of Transcendent Transhumanism to emphasize that Transhumanism per se is not a religion, but your extension of it is. Or perhaps just Church of Transcendent Humanism.

---BrianW

[tripperm]

Reason is absolutely right. The cryonics analogy doesn't apply because cryonics organizations don't call cryonics a religion. In fact, they are at pains to point out that cryonics is a *technology* not a religion, and that cryonics is fully compatible with religious beliefs.

I was not attempting to imply that cryonics is a religion, far from it. Cryonics is simply a service provided to individuals for a varied number of personal, philosophical, and religious reasons. My point was simply that organizations should not back down from doing what they believe is ‘right’ because of the perceived threat of being labeled “cults” or “whackos”. Alcor continues to do what it believes is right regardless of public misconceptions. And so will the Transhumanist Church.

Tripper

[bgwowk]

Tripper wrote:

Alcor continues to do what it believes is right regardless of public misconceptions. And so will the Transhumanist Church.

I originally thought (without looking at your website) that your goal was to make Transhumanism a religion. After reading Mike Perry's explanation (and looking at your website) I see now that what you are promoting is something beyond Transhumanism as that word is now understood and used. That being the case, don't you think it's a bit unfair to Transhumanists to use the name of their secular philosophy in a way that misleadingly suggests Transhumanism is a religion?

There are lots of people who worked hard over many years to build name-recognition and even respectability (in some circles) for the term Transhumanism. I submit that it's not right to capitalize on the name-recognition of that term by using it in a manner inconsistent with the secular ideas it has come to represent. Your ideas are something new under the sun, and shouldn't be confused with "orthodox" Transhumanism. That's why I suggested "Church of Trascendent Humanism" or something like that.

It's really not fair to just up and label Transhumanism a religion.

---BrianW

[mkper85260]

Not long ago, but before I was much involved with the Church of Transhumansim (or realized they had adopted my Universal Immortalism--Yuai--as part of their platform) I proposed the name Aionism for what is largely the same thing. (Aionism in particular I distinguished from Yuai because it was to have a specifically religious character that was more or less left open in Yuai.) I didn't get much criticism--someone I think managed to have a search engine come up with Aryanism as a "closest match"--but that isn't very close (in more ways than one!). Aionism I derived from a Greek word meaning eternal, and so it seemed a workable choice (in addition to the important virtue of having virtually no usage already in the English language!). If we did want to rename ouselves, this might be one possibility, and maybe the change could be made easily since we are still at the early stage--but I think we will want to act fast because we want to go forward with our formal, legal recognition, when a name change would be harder.

If we called our movement Aionism, we would still need a name for our establishment. I for one would like the name to suggest an association with religion--that's what we are setting out to be, after all, and we want to make it clear. Church of Aionism would be one possibility (or Aionist Church--I think I prefer Church of Aionism), and one I feel comfortable with. Yes, "Church" is in fact associated with Christianity--but now has other associations, such as Church of Universal Life. Looking in my shorter Oxford English Dictionary, I see that many meanings listed for "church" do reflect the ties with Christianity (including but not limited to a place of worship), but not all. Looking down the page I see "A non-Christian society or movement regarded regarded as a religion or as having the social, ethical, or spiritual qualities of a religion." That would fit pretty closely, I should think.

Mike Perry

[bgwowk]

"Church of Aionism" has the following advantages:

1) Won't unfairly confuse transhumanism with religion.

2) Won't upset and alientate transhumanists, its natural support base.

3) As a neologism, it will naturally promote curiousity among scholars.

4) By avoiding the transhumanism taint, it could actually help promote understanding between mainstream religion and immortalist thinking.

---BrianW

[tripperm]

After thinking about several of the messages posted here, especially Brian’s, I now agree that the Transhumanist Church is due for a name change. While we will continue to use the word ‘Church’ in our name, for reasons previously stated by Mike, using the term ‘Transhumanist’ is probably not the best way to go. I agree with Brian that the term is mainly used in a secular fashion and to co-opt it for a new religious organization would be unfair to its current supporters. I also feel that the beliefs of our organization, while including many transhumanist ideas, encompass other distinct topics that would make the use of the term ‘Transhumanist’ not entirely accurate.

I now support Mike’s suggestion to change the name of our organization to the ‘Church of Aionism’. Both he and Brian have laid out some convincing arguments as to why this name would be more suiting. We are currently discussing this change among our ‘Voters’ and I hope we will come to some resolution on this issue soon.

I want to thank all the people, especially Brian and Mike, who took the time to contribute constructive criticism to my original postings. Listening to opposing viewpoints, even if you don’t completely agree in the end, is always a worthwhile endeavor.

Tripper McCarthy

[bacopa]

It amounts to a tremendous, new, scientific, gospel, something that I think can hold its own with and ultimately outpoint its less scientific precursors, which many people think comprise the whole of "religion." We need to do this. For we are addressing what is of deepest significance, and what, I think, will determine in the end whether the life that has evolved on planet Earth goes on indefinitely or self-destructs. Science may possibly supply the means to become immortal but by itself cannot accomplish the task. You also need motivation, and not just light or transient, but the kind that can span eternity and sustain an infinite commitment--that is what religion is really about.

This is a good point as science is your gospel so to speak, but I agree too that the word church has negative conotations, what do Budhists' use temple? mmm. interesting... why not Aionist Sanctuary, or Aionist beliefs, The Establishmet/Society for Aionism, promoting Aionism or the like. What I like about a religion like Budhism is that it seems to be one of the only non-religious religions that celebrates inner peace/spirituality rather than God, I think your 'church' should do the same while not relying too much on the idea of religion.

Celebrate spirtuality and the wonder of being alive whether human or transhuman, don't go down the path of religious belief systems that will only get you close to what you guys have tried so hard to get away from, the idea of God and the supernatural. You should emphasize non-religious spirituality and maybe examine what it means to be non-religious but spiritual, hell I am! Come to think of it I don't like the connotation that religion has with church you guys should emphasize the spiritualilty of tranhumanist ideology. Society for Spiritual transhumanists is what you're really getting at I think

Trippderm I tried contacting Rudi Hoffman to no avail I didn't get a response but definitely want a cyro contract, any suggestions?

[Bruce Klein]

Tripper, thanks for your humility. I agree with your sentiment in that BrianW and MikeP make good suggestions. Good luck!

[randolfe]

Well, I am a bit annoyed at this moment. I joined this church before they required a contract with a cryonics organization. I am only a supporting member of the Cryonics Institute. Technically, they can be rid of me if they wish. However, if they do so, they deplete their membership by between 20% and/or 12.5%. They are a small group. Political correctness sets in early.

Now, apparently, objections from some Transhumanists--those who do not want "their good name" associated with a religion--has had an impact on this small (but important group) of idealists.

They are debating new names. I don't even want to get into all the details. But I do want to share with you my own feelings about all this..

This is an exchange (in reverse order) of the debate. Enjoy!!

Cloningly yours,

Randy Wicker


"This debate about changing the name of a new church/religion before we even have a dozen disciples is utterly ridiculous.

We are Transhumanists and should not turn tail and run because some hard-hearted militant-atheist Transhumanists don't like the idea that we are transporting their technological beliefs into the arena of moral and religious debates.

Being "religious" Transhumanists would help both of us. They would benefit because there were a group of people claiming the highest moral ground for their belief system.

We would benefit because Transhumanists have defined to the intellectual/political/social world a belief system that essentially "believes in" science.

Cloningly yours,
For eternal life,

Randolfe (Randy) Wicker

Founder, Clone Rights United Front, www.clonerights.com
Spokesperson, Reproductive Cloning Network, www.reproductivecloning.net
Advisor, The Immortality Institute, www.imminst.org
Special Correspondent, www.stemcellsclub.com
email: rhwicker@optonline.net
phone: 201-656-3280
----- Original Message -----
From: mkper9
To: transhumanistchurch@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 1:50 PM
Subject: [transhumanistchurch] Re: Name of our organization


Here I will back down from the acronym-based approach and again look
at words-with-meaning. The word I will suggest is Panaionism. I found
no hits for either this or Panaionist (both entered in lower case to
maximize the matches), and only eight hits for "panaion". One of
these (see http://www.sbuniv.ed...t3463aa03.html) has this:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
In the foothills southwest of Mount Hermon above Ulatha the Itureans
had a shrine to their god at a location where an underground river
emerged to join the Jordan. This Iturean god was syncretized with the
Greek god Pan so the location was named Panaion. While I have so far
been unable to learn if anybody has a conjecture as to the name of
the deity originally worshipped at Panaion, it certainly was one of
the earthy beings informing and explaining the most basic activities
of human survival in the primitive natural habitat of emerging
agriculture. One indigenous god of that region in King David's day
was Hadad. This god may also have been identified with Edom.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

In all, I think the associations with panaion are minor and, all
things considered, not to be worried over.

"Pan," however, does not just refer to the Greek god. As a prefix it
also means "Of, pertaining to, or including all or the whole of, ..."
(quoting from the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary). Panaionism
would fit our idea of eternal ("aion") life for *all.* So Panaionism,
Panaionist Church (or Church of Panaionism?)would be other
possibilities to consider.

Mike



--
Transhumanist Church discussion mailing list
http://www.transhumanistchurch.org/


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo....humanistchurch/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
transhumanistchurch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

[iambhall]

I believe that "Society for Universal Immortalism" is the best name overall.

1. It drops the word "church" and all of the connotations of
traditional dogma.

2. It drops the word "transhumanism". Since our ideas go beyond "orthodox" Transhumanism, it is better that we don't capitalize on their name and upset a large number of people in our "base". Also, Transhumanism is just a subset of our more encompasing ideas. Using the word probably doesn't adequetly or
fully discribe our views, I think.

3. It is very straightforward. No weird words.

4. The word "society" is very acceptable for a religious organization (i.e. Society of Friends - Quakers). It sounds non-threating and approachable.

5. It places the emphasises on the "next step" we're taking beyond "orthodox" Transhumanism (i.e. the ideas of Tipler and Perry)

6. I think it just "sounds good"

-Bryan Hall

[Bruce Klein]

Bryan,

I tend to agree.. and as well, it would have a wonderful book to point to in Mike Perry's "Forever For All" which I believe actually introduces the term Universal Immortalism.

[kerr_avon]

I believe that "Society for Universal Immortalism" is the best name overall.

I like this. I have often wanted to join some kind of group or other where I could "be myself" and share ideas with likeminded people. Of course there is this place but I mean more of a real life group. There are currently two groups currently like what most of us might want.

One is the Unitarian Universalist Association. In my area there are two congregations. One of them is about half traditional secular Humanists who are closely associated with the university. Sadly, most of these people are quite elderly and many of the younger people who get into UU are more along the lines of postmodernists, environmentalists, feminists and other people like that. Strangely, I think in many UU chapters the grey haired old humanists would be friendlier to our technophilia than a lot of the younger people who embrace less rational and science oriented world views. The UU in general is more focused on "spirituality" than most TH's would like though.

The other group that comes to mind are the various secular humanist groups themselves. Things like American Atheists*, Council for Secular Humanism, etc... The problem there is what I hinted at above. These groups are often, frankly, greying and unable to get younger people involved. Also, secular humanist groups seem to be more or less totally political and are often blind or even hostile to the technological aspects of Transhumanism.

So maybe there is a need for this sort of thing.

* Of course I neglected to mention that atheism is not required to be a TH! Though most probably are, myself included.