# Richard Bushman on Joseph Smith, Science, and the Future | Pioneers Ep. 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Dh-hki7B3I *Recorded: 2026* What would Joseph Smith make of CRISPR? Of ChatGPT? Of the suggestion that the universe might be a simulation? It sounds like a parlor game, until you put the question to the historian who has spent more of his life with Joseph Smith than almost anyone alive. Richard Bushman is 95. He is Professor Emeritus of History at Columbia, a Bancroft Prize winner, and the author of Rough Stone Rolling, the landmark biography of Joseph Smith. For sixty years he has carried the faith into the academy and the academy’s standards of inquiry back into the faith, and he has earned the trust of both. Lincoln Cannon, co-founder of the Mormon Transhumanist Association, sat down with him to play the game in earnest: evolution, the Big Bang, genetic engineering, artificial intelligence, worlds without end. Then something unexpected happened. The historian started asking the questions. About the mystery of mathematics. About quantum observation. About what a scientist does with everything he learned once he gets to heaven. About whether the Association has ever been warned it was going too far. Along the way, Bushman sums up the gospel in a single word, explains why “what works is true,” and gives his answer on whether Joseph Smith would embrace technology as a means of resurrection. ## Transcript WEBVTT 00:00:00.160 --> 00:00:20.580 The idea of a material God who didn’t create the universe. The God creates earths out of preexistence matter. That has a lot of implications, one of which: this is a God within reach. This is a God we can know and touch. This is a God we can emulate. We can be like. 00:00:20.900 --> 00:00:23.380 That actually kind of sounds like his theology. 00:00:23.020 --> 00:00:37.720 Yeah, yeah, it is theology. Of course, every time you make a statement about God you get yourself entangled in: does that mean that God, making worlds after ours is made, might do a better job? 00:00:48.960 --> 00:01:20.159 What would Joseph Smith make of CRISPR, of ChatGPT, of the suggestion that the universe might be a simulation? It sounds like a parlor game until you put the question to the historian who has spent more of his life with Joseph Smith than almost anyone alive. Richard Bushman is 95. He is Professor Emeritus of History at Columbia, a Bancroft Prize winner, and the author of Rough Stone Rolling, the landmark biography of Joseph Smith. 00:01:20.420 --> 00:01:43.920 This year, the University of Illinois Press published a book about him titled Richard Lyman Bushman, a Mormon Ambassador, written by J. B. Haas. The title truly fits. For sixty years, Richard has carried the faith into the Academy and carried the Academy’s standards of inquiry back into the faith, and he has earned the trust of both. 00:01:44.320 --> 00:02:26.260 He has reached the rare stage where people write your legacy while you’re still here to argue with it. We cover trailblazers of all stripes on Pioneers, and some of them work on the frontier of the past. For much of the last century it was safer for a believing historian to leave parts of Joseph Smith’s story untold. Richard made the bet that the whole story could be told, and the prophet would still stand, and a generation of Latter day Saints learned from him that candor can be an act of faith. Lincoln Cannon, co founder of the Mormon Transhumanist Association, sat down with him to play the game in earnest. 00:02:25.820 --> 00:03:06.580 Evolution, the Big Bang, Genetic Engineering, Artificial Intelligence, Worlds Without End. Then, something I didn’t expect: the historian started asking the questions about mathematics, about quantum physics, about what a scientist does with everything he learned once he gets to heaven, about whether the association has ever been warned that it was going too far, and where this expansive strain of Mormon thought will be nurtured next. Along the way, he sums up the gospel in a single word, and I’ve been thinking about it ever since. Here’s Lincoln Cannon in conversation with Richard Bushman. 00:03:07.099 --> 00:03:13.340 Well, let’s start with maybe the obvious, and that is: who’s Richard Bushman? 00:03:13.340 --> 00:03:35.739 Well, that’s a good question. I’m a historian. I live in New York City. I’ve taught early American history. I’ve written books of various kinds on early American culture, published two books on Joseph Smith, one of them, a subtitled Rose Roughstone Rolling. 00:03:35.739 --> 00:03:37.500 Wildly successful. 00:03:37.620 --> 00:03:44.340 About to publish a new book in the fall on the Joseph Smith’s gold plates, 00:03:44.900 --> 00:03:45.300 which will 00:03:45.460 --> 00:03:53.240 be published at the 200th anniversary of the first side of the plates in 1823. 00:03:53.320 --> 00:03:55.720 Well, I’m looking forward to it and I didn’t even know I was. 00:03:55.720 --> 00:04:12.100 Yeah. I’ve been married, uh, since 1956. Or 55 rather, her first daughter was born in 56, and, uh, still married, have, uh, six children, 20 grandchildren. 00:04:12.100 --> 00:04:12.660 Wow. 00:04:12.660 --> 00:04:24.040 I’m a patriarch in the New York, New York Young Single Adult Stake. So that wraps up everything I know about myself. 00:04:24.040 --> 00:05:00.680 That’s impressive. Yeah, I like to hear how people describe themselves because they often bring out aspects of their lives that we don’t get if we just give the usual, you know, accolade description of a person. But I mean, most people watching this, at least those with Mormon backgrounds, are going to know who you are. Maybe those with transhumanist backgrounds won’t know who you are. And so I think it’s important for them to know that you’ve had a great deal of influence on contemporary understandings of Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon and early Mormon history. 00:05:00.680 --> 00:05:11.520 Maybe, and, and I, I’m not going to ask you to speculate on this, I’ll just speculate on it. Maybe, um, more influence than any other living scholars on those topics. Um, 00:05:11.680 --> 00:05:34.040 I know that I’ve personally, I, I’ve read your book, Rough Stone Rolling, and I’ve given it as a gift to family members and to friends with all kinds of reactions, as I’m sure you heard, some glowingly positive, others scratching their head trying to figure out how that fits in with their understanding of our religion. Um, how do you feel about that book at this point? 00:05:34.280 --> 00:05:50.120 I feel satisfied about it. The great thing about being an author, it’s people who love the book come up and tell you so. Those who didn’t, they remain in the shadows. Uh, so I feel like it’s, it’s helped a lot of people. 00:05:50.120 --> 00:06:09.620 And, um, what it did was, uh, was, uh, s, assert the fact that you could tell the whole story of Joseph Smith, and he came out, maybe not totally unscathed, but still honorable and in a way magnificent, because he did accomplish so much 00:06:09.720 --> 00:06:29.660 in terms of organization, but also revelatory power, opening up vistas. That he had one of the most, you know, powerful visions of what life was about in the most cosmic sense of anyone that I know of. 00:06:29.880 --> 00:06:42.720 So I think, uh, what I did was show that transparency was really possible and Joseph Smith could emerge as admirable and believable as, as ever. 00:06:42.720 --> 00:06:43.440 Yeah. 00:06:43.440 --> 00:07:01.060 Uh, on, you know, you say Joseph Smith talked about some of the most expansive views that you, you can imagine, that you’ve read about. What in particular comes to mind? What are some of your, your favorites? You know, what are his greatest hits in your opinion, theologically speaking? 00:07:02.500 --> 00:07:22.440 Well, having immense importance, but still not fully exploited, uh, is the idea of a material God who didn’t create the universe, that God creates earths out of pre-existence matter. 00:07:22.440 --> 00:07:31.880 That’s a different kind of God in entirely than, um, the one that classical Christian theologians work with. 00:07:31.880 --> 00:07:52.000 And I don’t think we’ve thoroughly explored it, although we do a lot with it. And that has a lot of implications, one of which: this is a God within reach. This is a God we can know and touch. This is a God we can emulate, we can be like. 00:07:52.000 --> 00:08:02.160 And I think it leads to open speculation about his origins and who we are in relations to God’s origins. 00:08:02.720 --> 00:08:20.199 And I think that, that whole range of possibilities has yet to be fully exploited, but is thrilling, especially to more intellectual people of the church, that is, people who speculate and w, worry about what the world’s doing. 00:08:20.680 --> 00:08:41.120 When you think about Joseph Smith’s theology and, and you’re as well acquainted with it as anyone, I would say, at this point, what do you imagine? Well, let me ask it this way: do you think that Joseph Smith had a developed concept of science, of what we would think of as science? 00:08:41.519 --> 00:09:04.500 Did he have a concept of science? I don’t think so. Yeah, you know, science is based really on observation, finding out what the material world tells you, and on mathematics. And he doesn’t really in engage himself in any of those things. 00:09:04.500 --> 00:09:24.000 I think he had a speculative mind and temperament about, you know, he has a cosmic sense, he’s lives in the Copernican universe, it’s not Ptolemaic. And so he’s, uh, in a way, up to date and the largest view of things in his time. 00:09:24.279 --> 00:09:42.700 But, uh, um, I think he trusted his own intuitions, and rightfully so from my point of view. And scientists begin with intuitions, but they always gotta nail it down. And, uh, his mind didn’t quite work that way. 00:09:42.700 --> 00:09:49.779 Yeah. Yeah, he, he seemed content to not worry about nailing it down, but for jumping to the next one, proceeding to the next one. 00:09:50.019 --> 00:09:54.980 Right, right. He had brilliant flashes of what the world was about. 00:09:55.500 --> 00:10:02.940 Yeah, I, I, I in particular am a fan of his last general conference sermon, which of course people call the King Follett sermon. 00:10:02.940 --> 00:10:03.819 Yeah. 00:10:03.819 --> 00:10:23.899 And, uh, the, it’s particularly in that sermon where we get, where, at least in my understanding, you know his writings better than I do, that we get, um, elaboration on a lot of his biggest ideas or his biggest understandings of, of theological ideas that he inherited in various measure from Christianity. 00:10:24.380 --> 00:10:25.740 Right. Right. 00:10:26.220 --> 00:10:57.480 With, when we, when we think of that in terms of what it says about Joseph Smith, and you said you don’t think he had a developed concept of science, what, what would you imagine he would say if he were resurrected today in our world where we have developed this concept of science that probably few people had in his day, let alone him? What do you think he would say with, about the ideas of modern science? 00:10:57.720 --> 00:11:11.500 For example, what, what do you think he might say? And this, I know, I know this is totally speculative, but that’s part of the fun, uh, of, uh, talking about, uh, Mormon theology, in my opinion, is the speculation. What do you think he might say if he were resurrected about, say, evolution theory? 00:11:11.720 --> 00:11:32.040 I don’t think you’d be afraid of it at all. I think the idea of growth and the material world having a vitality in it that could produce life, I think that would be, um, quite possible in his, uh, imagination. 00:11:32.040 --> 00:11:55.440 I don’t think he would worry about humans being degraded because they were, were linked to animals in the natural world. So I, I think, um, he would want to protect the glory of God and the intelligence of God against any kind of downplaying. 00:11:55.440 --> 00:12:02.720 But I don’t think he would see evolution. I think his tendency wanted BC to carry it further. 00:12:02.720 --> 00:12:19.440 So if, if things are evolving, you know, what next? He, he would go along with the sort of B. H. Roberts view of, you know, you can keep projecting evolution into affinity or into the deep, deep future. 00:12:19.440 --> 00:12:20.880 And where does that go? 00:12:21.040 --> 00:12:23.520 Where does that go? Yeah. 00:12:23.740 --> 00:12:41.000 What do you think about, uh, projecting maybe the other direction? How would he respond, again, speculatively, of course, to, uh, modern conceptions of, say, the Big Bang or various, various hypotheses about the origins of our time and space, of our universe? 00:12:41.000 --> 00:13:07.480 Yeah. I would think um he would be intrigued. He would love to know. I ‘m not sure he would know what to do with the Big Bang. Because the Big Bang invites speculation on some superintelligence. That from outside of time and space is sort of regulating things and brings about beginnings of some sort. 00:13:07.480 --> 00:13:33.980 His theology is within sort of our, our system, uh, within our, the world that science sees. I would be very curious to know if he would have anything. I’m very curious to know what current Mormon thought is about pre-Big Bang existence. It goes blank for me before the Big Bang. I don’t, I don’t know what to say about it. 00:13:34.320 --> 00:14:02.520 Yeah, I guess one thought that occurs to me is that, say, in, uh, Doctrine and Covenants, section 88, Joseph there writes about the idea that there’s no space where there’s no law, and there’s law in all space. And I guess I could, uh, could imagine that there, that he could think of our time and space as a space in which a certain law applies, and that there might be something outside of that in which another law could apply. 00:14:02.840 --> 00:14:03.920 Right. Right. 00:14:03.920 --> 00:14:07.680 I could imagine that. Do you think that that would be consistent with his thinking? 00:14:07.680 --> 00:14:23.960 I think it would be. I mean, otherwise, what, this implies multiple spaces, but, uh, you know, our pre-bang world is, um, really just one of those spaces because the laws seem to be hold. 00:14:23.960 --> 00:14:34.580 So they don’t, it, it doesn’t presuppose an alternate set of laws. So I think you, I think you’d be quite interested in that. 00:14:34.980 --> 00:14:48.760 Yeah, I, I, I have the impression too, you know, when I, when I speculate about Joseph, that he, he would have, would not have been hostile or afraid of the science of our day. 00:14:48.760 --> 00:15:12.420 I s I suspect he’d find it intriguing and that he would probably try to pick from it what would work and could be melded in, integrated in, or even welded, literally. That’s the that’s the uh metaphor he used for himself on one occasion that he was like somebody who welded together various elements into a something that worked better, and isn’t that worthy of praise? 00:15:12.660 --> 00:15:13.300 Yes. 00:15:13.700 --> 00:15:30.640 Well, one other component of Section 88 is this idea of an, of a light, against life and light and law to all things. I don’t know what the analogies are in science. I don’t know quite where to go with that. 00:15:30.640 --> 00:15:41.480 But that’s a very powerful sense of, of some power sort of animating all of existence in some way. 00:15:42.880 --> 00:16:05.800 I need to talk to you and other MTA types more about where that, yeah, that leads you, because it seems to imply that since Christ is in it and Spirit is in it, and Christ is the key to spirit, that somehow we can tap in to those great forces personally. 00:16:05.800 --> 00:16:06.120 Yeah. 00:16:06.120 --> 00:16:22.180 You know, to prayer or some to the sacrament or something or other. And that, you know, we, uh, are in touch, and our own intelligence can be enhanced by the powers of God radiating from wherever. 00:16:22.180 --> 00:16:26.500 Yeah, that reminds me of the beginning of the Gospel of John. In the beginning was the word. 00:16:26.500 --> 00:16:27.220 Yeah. 00:16:27.940 --> 00:16:57.380 And for software engineers, the, the idea that things begin with words is quite, it’s salient. It makes a lot of sense for software engineers because everything that we create starts with words. And if you can imagine those words creating systems, which they do in computers, it, it does sound a lot like these words emanating through a space and establishing laws for that software space within computer hardware. 00:16:57.380 --> 00:16:57.700 Yeah. 00:16:57.700 --> 00:17:05.540 It’s all very physical still, but it’s creating a system of laws, beginning with the word, and creating something. 00:17:06.159 --> 00:17:38.740 Be sure to check out our Transfigurist artwork series with posters, framed prints, puzzles, and apparel portraying inspiring glimpses of what future pioneers might achieve in a vibrant retro futurist style. Buy them on our website at transfigurism.org slash store. Every purchase helps us to make more of this kind of quality content. The other most important thing you can do to show your support is to like and subscribe and leave us a rating on Apple Podcasts. Now, back to the show. 00:17:41.020 --> 00:18:00.820 Well, what do you think about, um, the idea of the human soul or the human body as code? I mean, isn’t there a sense in which we are all code, and isn’t there conservation of information principle somewhere in existence? 00:18:00.820 --> 00:18:15.540 So, you know, you know, in my more, uh, bizarre moments, think about, uh, what if you f, after death, you found yourself on a server somewhere? A fate worse than death. 00:18:15.919 --> 00:18:27.720 But yeah, same as me, there’s, you know, w, there’s just an invitation in those little pieces of scripture to connect with science and go in all sorts of directions. 00:18:28.040 --> 00:18:32.120 Yeah, and, and very often technological ones, as we just did. 00:18:32.120 --> 00:18:32.920 Yeah. 00:18:32.920 --> 00:19:01.419 And, and that leads me, you know, to wonder, and I’m gonna ask you to do the speculation for me. So, Joseph Smith, he’s resurrected today, and we’ve talked a little bit about what he might think about science. What do you think about, what do you think he would say about the technology around us? Like, how would that fit into the worldview he would bring with him as this resurrected person looking around our world and, and our technology with the eyes that he brings from his time? 00:19:01.419 --> 00:19:09.180 Yeah. The thought that springs into my mind as you say those things is his view of New York City. 00:19:09.180 --> 00:19:10.140 Oh, yeah. 00:19:10.140 --> 00:19:26.539 How he admired the buildings. He thought the people were a little on the s, sorry side. But he, he loved the b, the glory of the big buildings, which, what, maybe four stories high, uh, in his day. 00:19:26.540 --> 00:19:44.120 But I think he’d be thrilled with, you know, our great towers and, and the marvels that, that w, we did, do. How they would spark his imagination, I don’t know. I mean, would that lead to him speculating as they do us? 00:19:44.120 --> 00:19:57.440 Yeah. Yeah, that’s, of course, hard to say. Yeah, well, I, I’m glad you mentioned that, that comment he made while going through New York City on one occasion. I vaguely remember the contours of that. Can you remember more of the details of that statement he made? 00:19:57.519 --> 00:20:07.919 Well, he’d g, gone to, uh, to New York to help buy goods to s, uh, stock the store, uh, in Kirtland. 00:20:07.919 --> 00:20:30.179 And, um, he wrote these letters home, and he just spoke of the, the beauties of the city, and, and he saw that as somehow linked to the glory of God, that is, that this is sort of a, a realization of human destiny to build beautiful things. So… 00:20:30.340 --> 00:20:32.740 We were emulating God in the process. 00:20:32.780 --> 00:20:38.700 Yeah. I, he wouldn’t say that, didn’t say that ex, precisely, but it was a godly activity. 00:20:38.700 --> 00:20:39.100 Okay. 00:20:39.100 --> 00:20:40.940 To do this sort of thing. 00:20:41.040 --> 00:21:08.400 What do you think he might think about our capacity for genetic engineering? We have the technology, for example, CRISPR today, where we can use it to go in and add and remove, you know, genes to, to our DNA. We don’t understand everything that that can do, but the ability to do it now is very, very precise, very advanced, and we’re still trying to figure out how to interpret all of the possibilities. 00:21:08.400 --> 00:21:08.960 Yeah. 00:21:08.960 --> 00:21:25.760 If, if he, you know, in a world where we can change our bodies in that manner, or, and change bodies around us, biological bodies around us, how do you think that might impinge on his view of the world? 00:21:26.080 --> 00:21:48.600 I’m trying to think of sites, um, in his history where he had to encounter some radical new technology. He certainly made the most of the printing press. He was interested in, uh, canals, you know, he wanted to develop Navu. 00:21:48.540 --> 00:21:52.940 Inhabited worlds. He believed in other planets. 00:21:53.260 --> 00:22:03.540 Many, many other planets, yes. And one would come and then you go out of existence and on and on. So, uh, he would certainly think, uh, that way. 00:22:03.540 --> 00:22:16.120 But CRISPR implies you can, not by moral means, not by spiritual means, but by physical means, enhance. Or… 00:22:16.280 --> 00:22:17.160 degrade. 00:22:17.320 --> 00:22:32.400 Enhancer, degrade. I mean, it’s a risk. But, uh, I don’t know, it’s, it’s kind of scary to me, a little bit, too. You know, it, it seems like it’s the power of God. Tell me what you think. I, Dan, get me going on this. 00:22:32.480 --> 00:22:46.920 Well, I, I think, you know, what you just voiced is a feeling that we should all have: a recognition of its power, and then, as a consequence, concern for ethical use. 00:22:46.920 --> 00:22:47.800 Yeah. 00:22:47.919 --> 00:23:12.460 You know, oftentimes with, with all technologies, but especially very powerful ones we’ve been developing in recent decades, people either become very celebratory, kind of mindlessly celebratory. It’s all exciting. It’s all pure opportunity. Imagine all the wonderful things we can do about it, and they forget the risks. 00:23:12.460 --> 00:23:28.500 Or on the other hand, some of us become, uh, very fearful and focus only on the negative potential applications, only on the ways it could be applied to abuse, um, each other or our, or our world. 00:23:28.500 --> 00:23:47.500 And so, you know, my initial thought on that is that technology is power, and power in all of its forms can be used for good or evil. And so, we need to give serious thought about how we might use power for good and mitigate the risk of its evil uses. 00:23:47.740 --> 00:24:11.980 It kind of makes me think of DNC 121, um, where, you know, in my mind, one of Joseph’s most sublime revelations. And how, in fact, it’s oddly, the first half of it speaks about the dispensation of the fullness of times when God will rain down knowledge on our heads in an, like an uns, unstoppable flowing force, like a river. 00:24:12.019 --> 00:24:45.179 And then the second half, of course, of that, which is kind of what came to mind initially, was where he talks about how power comes essentially through ethics, right? Through persuasion, through love, through kindness, through patience, and that authority or the priesthood has no power on its own, but generates power over time as it’s used in these way. And, and I, and I think that, um, in a real sense, that kind of ethical approach is important with all potential forms of power. 00:24:45.500 --> 00:24:54.880 I mean, that certainly fits into that, that pattern of, of power. I think he also had, uh, great r, respect for the body. 00:24:54.880 --> 00:24:55.760 Yes. 00:24:55.760 --> 00:25:08.720 The body was not something to be discarded as a sh, as a shell that confines, but a body is to be glorified, and, um, but a spirit, an enhanced body. 00:25:08.720 --> 00:25:30.980 So, um, I think he would be concerned about anything that would, uh, increase righteousness, that would, uh, make you more godlike, not godlike like a great machine or a, a monster with immense power, but… 00:25:31.620 --> 00:25:53.500 generous and concerned always for well-being. I mean, he was so, the whole idea of Zion that we could live together in peace and love. That, you know, that’s really what drives him as a, as a righteous, good society. That’s what he, you need in those, those cities he wanted to build. 00:25:53.500 --> 00:26:08.760 So, uh, he, I, I, I think he would keep a close eye on anything that threatened that or would lead to someone taking over and exercising unrighteous dominion. That would scare the, well, it wouldn’t scare him, but it might… 00:26:08.920 --> 00:26:30.800 Make him bad. Yeah, he definitely doesn’t seem to have been much of a pushover. Um and here ‘s another uh salient form of technology today, artificial intelligence. Everybody’s talking about it these days, right? uh chat GPT. What do you think he would make of that? 00:26:30.800 --> 00:26:50.560 The, the notion that humans may be in the process of creating a new form of intelligence, or maybe repeating something that maybe has been done before in other worlds? Or maybe not? What do you, what do you think he would think about this whole AI thing? 00:26:50.240 --> 00:27:08.880 I mean, there are two ways of thinking. It’s something that stands outside you try to manage but may get out of control. Or singularity where it joins your mind and enhances your mind and makes you something superior to what you could be. 00:27:09.840 --> 00:27:27.220 I think anything that would truly enhance human power, so long as there’s this sort of, this governing, good spirit managing things. You know, he was so eager for there to be peace among people. 00:27:27.220 --> 00:27:28.100 Yeah. 00:27:28.100 --> 00:27:57.540 And, uh, so I, I, I think he would step back. I think you would say, ‘Yeah, that’s fine. It’s sort of like a nifty little new thing you have. Go ahead and make what you can of it.’ But he would keep watching the, the larger picture. Are we living together in love? Are we kind to one another? Do we not oppress one another? Do we enhance our, our ability to do good things? 00:27:57.540 --> 00:28:25.680 You know, he really is a project man. He, he wants to see new worlds made and people come together and doing good things. I’m afraid I’m sort of getting into my own theology. You know, I’ve said one time, if you had to sum up what the gospel is about, I’d say it’s association. It’s learning to be together, sure, to be peaceful and loving, and to do wonderful things by being together, not just sitting around and playing chess, but, um… 00:28:26.519 --> 00:28:42.620 building an organization, or building a building, or a, a, a new world, or something. And I think, um, he was very much a, a projects man, and if you had this g, it would help you in your good projects, go do it. 00:28:43.100 --> 00:29:05.800 So, building a new world, there is, um, an idea that’s popular among futurists, uh, called the simulation hypothesis. The, the gist of it is that we may be living in a computed world without necessarily knowing it. And there’s, are actually arguments in favor of this hypothesis. One’s called the simulation argument. 00:29:05.800 --> 00:29:35.380 And the idea is that we’re developing a lot of interesting technologies today that help, that allow us to run simulations at increasing detail. And those are getting more and more sophisticated. And if in the future they merge with technologies that allow us to do like, something like full immersion virtual reality, or even create artificial intelligence that itself dem, exhibits consciousness… 00:29:35.540 --> 00:29:53.880 Then these simulated worlds we create would be indistinguishable from ours. And if we create a whole bunch of them, then statistically speaking, it’s, it’s more likely that we’re one of them than that we’re something different than these. What do, what do you think Joseph would make of the notion of the simulation hypothesis? 00:29:55.100 --> 00:29:57.740 You’re asking impossible questions. 00:29:57.740 --> 00:30:11.440 Yeah. Yeah, I, I, I, that’s a fair response. The reason why I’m asking you these impossible questions is they’re, they’re even more impossible for people who don’t know anything about Joseph Smith. And you know a lot. And I, and I know, of course, your own opinions are coloring this, everybody knows that, but… 00:30:11.679 --> 00:30:21.039 but if you would, um, speculate on what you, he, what you think he might say about it, or what might intrigue him about it, I’d love to hear it. 00:30:21.440 --> 00:30:51.240 Well, you know, when he’s just beginning, just after the church is organized, he comes up with Moses one, which is filled with this fabulous reconstruction of the universe, tells us so much about it. And there is God, whose whole existence is giving to making more worlds. So, that whole process, who knows how he does it? And is simulation invention, or is it a discovery? 00:30:51.240 --> 00:31:20.980 Is it just sort of finding out now how things are done? So, I’m, I’m sure the Joseph Smith I know would, would want to know about that and would think about it. I don’t think it, it would, it would be fearful to him. The fact that it, that this whole simulation process, who began in the sludge somewhere with the little cell and then leads on to these incredible heights, that would not trouble him a bit. 00:31:21.540 --> 00:31:23.620 That actually kind of sounds like his theology. 00:31:23.620 --> 00:31:43.139 Yeah, yeah. It is theology. It’s a theory of, of God and how he, how he functions. And it’s, you know, it’s a tradition you’re carrying on with the, uh, the Transhumanist Association, but it certainly is in B. H. Roberts, it’s in John Whitzo, those people thought that, that way. 00:31:43.139 --> 00:31:48.179 And I, I’m just not with those who feel like in any way that, that degrades us. 00:31:48.340 --> 00:32:02.240 Yeah, I agree. One of the comments that Joseph makes in, um, the King Follett sermon is that, He says, ‘You have got to learn how to become gods the same as all other gods have done before.’ 00:32:02.240 --> 00:32:36.460 And that suggests to me that we, collectively at least, ought to give some consideration to how God went about creating worlds, because that’s one of the greatest attributes that we attribute to God, you know, compassion, um, is a great attribute that we attribute to God, but creativity, the creation of worlds also. And so it seems to me that he’s suggesting that not only ought we to learn how to be compassionate as God is compassionate, we also ought to learn how to be creative as God is creative. 00:32:36.460 --> 00:33:05.820 And that to me suggests something about learning how God might have created our world, whether it’s through computational technologies or something else. That intrigues me. And I agree with what you said. I don’t think that Joseph Smith would have been afraid of that at all. In fact, I think he would have probably, I, I suspect he would have pontificated about it for an hour if you asked him the question about how he agreed or disagreed and why, and you would have left probably edified as a consequence. 00:33:06.140 --> 00:33:32.920 But let me ask you a question. You’re a scientist. You die, you go to heaven, you find that, um, there’s a lot going on there. Are you gonna have to go back to school and learn the true and higher science? Or will some of the science that you’ve learned somehow have a place in the science that is in the afterworld? 00:33:33.000 --> 00:33:55.740 The latter makes sense to me. I think it would have made sense to Joseph Smith. He makes the comment, I forget exactly which section of the DNC it is, where whatever we learn in this life will give us an advantage in the life to come. So, you know, learning, education, scientific learning and education, it seems to me that Joseph would have said that that’s a good start, in the very least. And, and that resonates with me. 00:33:55.740 --> 00:34:19.520 I imagine if, if I’m a scientist who is resurrected in the beautiful new world after this one, when the earth, when the earth receives its paradisical glory and the resurrection is in process, on that beautiful morning, I like to think that I will know some things that are still useful. I would like to think that. Maybe, maybe I’ll be wrong, but I’d like to think that, and that I can continue learning. 00:34:19.520 --> 00:34:49.840 I don’t remember if it was Wilfred Woodruff or Lorenzo Snow. As I recall, one of them said something along these lines, that God continues to progress in knowledge and power and will do so, worlds without end. And it is just so with us. That moves me, that idea, that God learns and progresses and grows and has done so, and that we’re following in that same path, emulating that same example. But is that a? 00:34:50.159 --> 00:35:09.060 Yes. Of course, every time you make a statement about God, you get yourself entangled in: Does that mean that God, making worlds after ours is made, might do a better job second time around? Is, is, is God learning, and that, that he gets better? 00:35:08.900 --> 00:35:25.440 I don’t know the answer to that question, but I have a hunch that the answer could be yes. And I know that that would seem frightening to some of us, but of course I don’t know. I, I like to imagine that God does progress in knowledge and power. 00:35:25.440 --> 00:35:45.300 And, and as I kind of think back through the many things I’ve read from church authorities over the last 150 years, and we have lots of artifacts of lots of opinions expressed, there’s definitely two sides to that question among leaders of our religion. 00:35:45.300 --> 00:36:06.340 You know, some have claimed and taught that that would undermine faith if God if we were to imagine that God can t continue to increase in knowledge and power. That somehow there’s something that God couldn’t do to save us. And then there were others like the ones I just quoted a moment ago that said the opposite. 00:36:06.220 --> 00:36:32.520 For me, it doesn’t frighten me because, well, f, for a lot, the same reason that it wouldn’t, it wouldn’t frighten, like, I am, I imagine if you told a, there’s, there might be better examples than this, but let’s say a toddler that their father could not do something that they don’t understand, would they trust their father less? I don’t think so. 00:36:32.100 --> 00:36:51.200 I think that they would, they would still love and trust their father with their very lives and wonder what it could possibly be that their father doesn’t know. And their father would still be equally capable to the task of nourishing and educating and loving this child. 00:36:51.200 --> 00:37:14.500 When I, when I think of my relationship, our relationship to God, I think that distance is even larger. And so I, I, I can’t imagine, I don’t suppose I could imagine for a moment what the limits of God’s knowledge and power might be right now. But I like to think that there’s not an end to eternal progression. 00:37:14.820 --> 00:37:34.340 Well, I think I’m with you on that. And I think a great, one of the great lessons in life we have to learn is to trust one another. You know, it’s like, s, when someone’s meet a bishop, you, n, someone’s lived in the ward, you’re, known ‘em, you know their problems, you know their, they’ve got a child who’s ran, rambunctious and, g, is in trouble. 00:37:34.340 --> 00:37:58.900 And yet, there they are, they’re the bishop. And you trust them. And they may make a mistake, but you don’t worry about that, because you need that, that trust. And if you do trust them, then you could do marvels as a ward. You work together, you build each other up. There’s rejuvenation and nourishment all around. So, 00:37:59.460 --> 00:38:17.200 that kind of learning and not giving up on each other, I think it certainly goes up through the authorities we meet with every day. I think it probably goes up to the head of the church. We have to trust him. He may make a mistake, but he is our prophet. We’re gonna stick with him. Come with me. 00:38:17.200 --> 00:38:31.360 And, I mean, it seems sacrilegious to talk that way about God, but in a sense, what he’s trying to do is say, ‘Have faith in me. I’m gonna do, I’m gonna help you. But you have to go along with that.’ 00:38:31.440 --> 00:38:48.460 Yeah. W, when you say that, I’m, I, my, my thoughts turn to my closest family and friends, none of whom are infallible. And they, and I know that painfully well, right? Because, you know, our interactions demonstrate to each other far too often that we’re both fallible. 00:38:48.460 --> 00:38:49.020 Yeah. 00:38:49.020 --> 00:39:14.100 And yet these are the people that I trust most, that I will go to in, you know, my hardest moments, not only in prayer to God, but as an expression of even my faith consequent to my prayer that God can help me through other fallible people. And so my my trust in them is not eradicated by their fallibility. 00:39:14.380 --> 00:39:31.619 And I think that’s true for most of us. And we all have trust issues of various sorts in life. I’m not saying that doesn’t exist, but we all also have some, most of us have some degree of trust in the fallible people around us that we love and work with on a pretty regular basis. 00:39:31.320 --> 00:39:46.279 It really is the b basis of a healthy life. I worked for a year with a psychologist named Eric Erickson who spoke of the stages of life, you know, when you’re one to three years old and then three to ten and so on. 00:39:46.279 --> 00:40:00.060 And the first stage of life he labeled basic trust, a young infant, the impressionable young infant, has to develop a sense that all will be well no matter what happens, 00:40:00.300 --> 00:40:21.500 and if they don’t develop that basic trust. They’re in for trouble. They’ll be schizophrenic before the y, you know it. And we have to start with that sense. Otherwise, you know, you get knocked down, you don’t get into medical school, you, you lose a daughter, you get sick, you would, you would just crumble into pieces. 00:40:21.500 --> 00:40:37.460 And so I think we need that at, you know, the most elemental level. But we also need it in the interpersonal level, you know, day by day. We have to trust the goodwill of people. And I think that goes right up to the very top. 00:40:37.460 --> 00:41:12.540 Yeah, that reminds me of another passage of scripture from Joseph where Joseph describes the power of God in terms of honor, which is a relational power. In fact, he says that, that Satan is at, uh, in the premortal life, attempted to steal, or maybe finagle, steel isn’t quite the right word, but kind of like manipulate God into giving up that power for Satan, that this power, that God’s power was honor, that God’s power is relationship based. 00:41:12.540 --> 00:41:35.060 And you know, that harkens back to DNC 121 again too, where, according to that kind of, that scripture, maybe there are kinds of power which are compulsion-based powers, but the kind of power that Joseph Smith seems to be advocating in his revelations is not compulsion-based. It’s love-based. It’s persuasion. 00:41:35.060 --> 00:41:44.500 Yeah. The basic trust is that goodwill, that I trust your goodwill. You’re, you’re not gonna try to hurt me. You’re gonna do all you can to help. 00:41:44.599 --> 00:42:12.520 Can I ask you a question, please, uh, in my speculations? When I, s, uh, began analytic geometry as a freshman, I remember that sitting on the board and someone drew a very elemental picture of how you could, you could map the course of a boat crossing a stream, and it’s rowing in this direction, the stream is going in this direction. 00:42:12.520 --> 00:42:40.620 So you turn these into vectors in the course of the boat. And for some reason, that struck me as arrogant. How in the world can you say that, you know, just drawing those lines and measuring them and measuring, will, how, can you do that? And that was the beginning of a, a long, uh, engagement with the mystery of mathematics. 00:42:40.620 --> 00:42:41.180 Yeah. 00:42:41.180 --> 00:42:56.820 As you know. You know, somebody dreams up some crazy scheme based on some set of nutty assumptions, develops his manica system, gets all complicated. It’s just sort of sitting there in his head, maybe on paper somewhere. 00:42:56.940 --> 00:43:18.040 And then some scientist over here runs into a problem. Someone puts the two together, the math and the science. And it not only is helpful, it’s incredibly accurate to impossible degrees. And to me, that says there’s something connected to your intelligence and the great physical world. 00:43:18.040 --> 00:43:18.920 Yeah. 00:43:18.920 --> 00:43:21.880 And I don’t know what to make of that. 00:43:21.880 --> 00:43:51.200 Well, one thing that comes to my mind again is the notion that God operates through law. And that we live in a world that’s describable, that’s, uh, accountable, that, you know, when we, when we, when we, in science, we, we use the word law to describe things that happen repeatedly. It’s not, not yet a theory. We can’t explain why it happens repeatedly, but it does. It just happens over and over and over again. And so we try to figure out why it happens over and over again. 00:43:50.960 --> 00:44:20.140 And over time, we have hypotheses that fail to explain it because this hypothesis says, here’s the reason why. And if this hypothesis, hypothesis is true, then we would expect this observation in the future. And so we wait and see what would, will happen in the future, and it’s either accurate or inaccurate. If it’s inaccurate, we know that our hypothesis, our explanation is wrong. If it’s accurate, we say, oh, well, this hypothesis is pretty good. 00:44:20.140 --> 00:44:46.800 And when the hypothesis works over and over again, we get more confidence, more trust in it. And then eventually we have so much trust in that explanation of the law that we call it a theory at that point. That’s our most confident level in science. And when we have that much trust in the, in the explanation, in the theory, we use it to launch explosives with people on their point to the moon and they get there safely. 00:44:47.200 --> 00:45:05.059 Like, mind bottled, with less computing power than the iPhone that’s in my pocket. Unreal, right? And, and so, yeah, I’m there with you. There, and, and countless philosophers and mathematicians are there with us trying to figure out why that’s the case. 00:45:05.059 --> 00:45:24.140 Why is our universe so beautifully mathematical, and why does it just seem to, why does it lend itself to, um, explanations in terms of information and intelligence and structure, you know? 00:45:24.140 --> 00:45:41.460 Is it just, you know, as some wonder and imagine, is it just some lucky consequence of a cosmic roll of the dice? Or is there some great superintelligence behind it all? 00:45:41.780 --> 00:46:02.640 You see, this is what, where I wonder where God comes into this. Because the God we had been talking for, about, is a God who is growing. You know, he’s learning, uh, manages a lot, does marvelous things, beautiful and, and generous. 00:46:02.640 --> 00:46:23.359 But this mathematical god, something abstract, you know, there’s no real personality in it. It’s more like the theological view of the ground of being, you know, something that is sort of, sits there, is just the way things are. 00:46:23.359 --> 00:46:23.599 Yeah. 00:46:23.760 --> 00:46:39.480 Then it’s not made. It just is. And then the God we had been talking for operates within that, that system, manages it and does very well with it. So I’m just wondering if there are sort of two kinds of gods. 00:46:39.480 --> 00:46:54.280 Yeah. And, and also, that, that brings to mind the question of what, what do, what do we intend, how does it position us towards these two ideas when we use the word God to describe them? 00:46:54.400 --> 00:47:17.100 I, I think that there are many theists, many people who have faith in God, who tend to orient themselves more towards this ground of being. Whereas in Joseph’s theology, it seems to me that he tries to orient us more toward this superintelligence that operates upon. 00:47:17.100 --> 00:47:17.900 Right. 00:47:18.020 --> 00:47:19.300 the ground of being. 00:47:19.300 --> 00:47:19.700 Yeah. 00:47:19.700 --> 00:47:49.080 There’s a, there’s a going back to the King Follett sermon again, one of my favorite little parts of that is when he says that God found himself in the midst of spirit and matter, if I remember this correctly, and set about instituting laws whereby others could progress to become like him. Or he found, finding himself more intelligent, set about instituting laws, whereby others could become like him. 00:47:49.080 --> 00:48:29.400 It’s almost like, and no, I wouldn’t even say almost, it seems to be even thoroughly like an existential theology where God, our creator, is in the midst of something, maybe the ground of being, and starts operating upon it for our mutual benefit. And it seems to me that Joseph would say, that’s what merits our trust, our love, is this agent who operates, and not so much this ground of being that can be used for good or evil. 00:48:29.640 --> 00:48:38.200 Yeah. Okay, so that doesn’t sound foreign, foreign to you. That’s, that’s sort of the way I’m inclined to think about it. May I ask you another question? 00:48:38.200 --> 00:48:39.079 Sure. 00:48:39.220 --> 00:48:57.460 I’m interested in the idea of observation, that is, the uncertainty of particle or wave, and then this moment of observation. I’m reading a really wonderful book by a man named Adam Becker called, ‘What is Real?’ And it’s sort of the history of quantum physics. 00:48:57.460 --> 00:48:57.860 Yeah. 00:48:57.860 --> 00:49:20.820 But it’s Oreo around this question of, of what happens. And at the end of the book, he doesn’t have an answer. He can’t get one out of physicists of what it really means to observe something. And this goes back to my question about, uh, intelligence and the capacity of mind to do things. 00:49:20.820 --> 00:49:44.720 And I keep m wondering or speculating, is intelligence sort of part or somehow built into this ground of being, or the situation where something like a human intelligence observes things and it has an effect on the physical world? 00:49:44.720 --> 00:49:45.200 Yeah. 00:49:45.440 --> 00:49:50.400 And so, how do those, all those pieces fit together? 00:49:50.400 --> 00:50:21.440 You know, I, I wish I had, I wish I had a better answer for you, too. I, I’m, the, the physicists and, um, mathematicians have a leg up on me on that, but I’ll say this. I, I have something of a, um, of a panpsychist inclination, and in large measure, that’s because of Joseph Smith. Joseph described, as you know, intelligence and spirit as being co-eternal with God, but yet organized by God. 00:50:21.440 --> 00:51:01.839 And therefore we were created, not in the ex nihilo sense, but in the organizational sense. And so, I like to think that our consciousness, our spirits, and the capacity for experience and the capacity for what humans experience as consciousness is kind of built into the system. And that, of course, rocks are not conscious like you and I are, but there might be some kind of proto-consciousness everywhere. One of the reasons I like this is just because of how it affects me personally. When I think of the world that way, it makes me act in more thoughtful ways toward the world. 00:51:01.839 --> 00:51:29.420 So there’s kind of a pragmatic reason for it for me. But it, but it also kind of gets me around worrying excessively about the question of, you know, the origins of consciousness. It just, maybe it’s everywhere to some extent, and that human consciousness was shaped out of it. Maybe our bodies are structured in a way that empowers more robustly this potential for consciousness, for spirit, for mind. 00:51:29.420 --> 00:51:44.540 And maybe in the future, we’ll have more robust bodies that are capable of far greater intelligence, far, and as a consequence, expanded consciousness. And I like to think that that’s what God’s experience. 00:51:44.859 --> 00:51:45.820 Yeah. 00:51:46.980 --> 00:52:09.120 Well, it leads, of course, immediately to the meaning of individuation, because it’s, you know, it’s, it’s a theme everywhere in religious meditation and, and, uh, speculation about, you know, a spirit that infuses all, which we can kind of go along with in, in many respects. 00:52:09.120 --> 00:52:23.680 But, um, I’m working now on an essay about individuations of culture and the creation of nations, you know, you begin with a lineage, a family. And then somewhere along the line, there are nations. 00:52:23.680 --> 00:52:24.080 Yeah. 00:52:24.320 --> 00:52:42.920 And then you have nations in 2 Nephi 29 creating records. So you have cultures. And one of the problems of bringing in a godly world order of peace and love is dealing with all the tensions that develop. 00:52:42.920 --> 00:52:43.320 Right. 00:52:43.640 --> 00:53:09.700 Among these various cultures. So, I somehow have the instinct that the individuation is righteous and joyous and for the good of all. It isn’t just having this great blob of truth and life, but it’s the creation of differences that then somehow link in their individual 00:53:10.020 --> 00:53:11.060 back toward each other. 00:53:11.060 --> 00:53:24.900 Back towards each other. That there’s somehow more energy or more joy or something that comes from us living together peacefully, but still individual. 00:53:25.140 --> 00:53:25.620 Yeah. 00:53:25.620 --> 00:53:51.580 You, you make me think of the progression of relationships that the scriptures generally and Joseph Smith in particular describe, where we kind of start out as maybe the creations of God, and then become maybe the servants of God, and then the children of God. And then in the Doctrine of Covenants, we read this point where he says, ‘You’re no longer my servants. You’re my friends.’ 00:53:52.300 --> 00:53:53.420 Yeah. 00:53:53.420 --> 00:54:19.540 And, and I can’t help but think, and who knows, a billion years from now, when we, assuming we’re still around, and we have something approaching what we imagine God’s intelligence to be. But I like to think that one of the most beautiful things that any of us can do now and and could ever do is develop new friendship, genuine ones. 00:54:19.540 --> 00:54:37.420 Not just ones where like it’s a robot that I created that is deterministically controlled by me. And so when it says, “I love you,” I know I just made it say that. No, what I want is something which I relinquished all power to. I don’t control it. 00:54:37.420 --> 00:54:53.420 And yet, through a relationship of kindness and courage, somehow managed to get it to tell me back, “I love you,” and that it wants to be my friend. 00:54:53.220 --> 00:55:04.980 That this person, this genuine, independent or interdependent person wants to be my friend, I would, I think that I would have succeeded in my creative goal. 00:55:05.140 --> 00:55:33.340 And, you know, I think of my own children. I don’t want them to be my servant. And I think healthy parents the world over don’t want their children to be their servants. They want their children to grow up to be wonderful, beautiful, strong, intelligent, interesting adults, and ideally their friends. I like to imagine that God wants the same of us, and that this creative process is aimed toward that. 00:55:33.340 --> 00:55:53.140 It could also explain a lot of the, of the, uh, problems that we experience in life. I think that if God simply wanted to make us happy in some kind of superficial way, just where we’re always happy and never suffering, that the world would be very different than it is, because there’s a lot of suffering in this world. 00:55:53.380 --> 00:56:32.820 But if God wants to develop some ones that can be genuine friends, that entails creating people who are genuinely empowered and who have learned certain qualities, notably compassion and creativity. And that a world like the one that we’re in, full of risk and opportunity, real risk and real opportunity with real suffering, and real joy and happiness, that seems like the kind of world that can cultivate divine friendships. 00:56:33.140 --> 00:56:47.800 And it may be hard for us to, uh, grasp the importance of what we’re doing, because we don’t really know what the alternative was. What was it when you were not in an, a free agent, 00:56:47.800 --> 00:56:48.360 Yeah, uh, 00:56:48.600 --> 00:56:58.700 living in the world. And we’ll probably see a better view of things after, too. But boy, when you’re going through it, can get you down. 00:56:58.780 --> 00:57:10.220 Oh, yeah. And, and, and sometimes what we go through, dep, depending on us individually, pales in comparison to what we read or hear about or even see others go through. 00:57:10.220 --> 00:57:11.660 Oh, yeah. 00:57:11.580 --> 00:57:30.780 Makes us, you know, there was a period of years in my young adult life when I was an atheist, primarily because of the problem of evil. The kind of the straw that broke the camel’s back was my father’s death from cancer, his third cancer. He had cancer the first time when I was about eight, second time when I was a teenager, and the third time killed him when I was a young adult. 00:57:30.720 --> 00:57:53.300 And I, I had already been kind of wrestling with a faith crisis for a period of time. And then that was like, why? How, how can this be God’s plan to see somebody suffer so much? Um, I, of course, view it very differently now, but, but that kind of suffering gives many of us serious pause. 00:57:53.300 --> 00:58:07.540 Yeah. Well, it’s, um, it’s an incentive to make another w, world, and the price seems so high, you keep wondering if it’s, if it’s, uh, worth it all. 00:58:07.540 --> 00:58:07.940 Yeah. 00:58:08.100 --> 00:58:32.880 You have to keep going at it. So, you think of a lot of questions and problems, speculate on lots of things. You can hear referred to the King Fallet discourse three or four times, and certain key scriptures that keep going back to. I feel this is a legacy that comes from Joseph Smith. 00:58:32.880 --> 00:58:33.760 Yeah. 00:58:33.920 --> 00:58:48.440 It is enhanced by Flip Pratts and Roberts and so on. I wonder where now this form of thought is being nurtured. 00:58:48.440 --> 00:59:11.839 I think we have a, a growing, increasingly competent intellectual class, people who love these kinds of thought. I’m not sure where it’s taught in sort of the ordinary course of a young Latter-day Saint’s life. You know, you don’t talk about in general conference this in the suitable flair. It’s not really in our manuals. 00:59:11.839 --> 00:59:12.160 Mm-hmm. 00:59:12.160 --> 00:59:26.860 There are sort of speculating corners where people like to poke around. Do you think there’s a danger that this kind of thought will be sort, sort of diluted, or not suppressed, but just allowed to disappear? 00:59:27.020 --> 00:59:51.940 That does concern me. And as, as you might imagine, that’s one of the inspirations behind why we organized the Mormon Transhumanist Association was to contribute to an effort to combat that risk, that this rich, speculative theological tradition that we’ve inherited, right? 00:59:51.940 --> 01:00:07.540 I mean, we’re not, none of this is new, right? We’re, we’re carrying on a, a tradition that’s as old as our church is, as our religion is, and, and of course, older in various influences that predate the church. So yeah, that, that concern is there. 01:00:07.700 --> 01:00:35.440 You know, I, I’m interested in the motivation for you asking the question. I, like, how afraid are you of that disappearing based on what you observe? You’ve been around the block, watching Mormon culture for a significant period of time now, deeply involved in it and deeply familiar with it, and you’ve influenced it deeply. And, and yet you ask this question. I’m wondering what you see. 01:00:36.240 --> 01:00:56.840 It’s not a, um, anxiety. I think, you know, the Lord leads the church, and we get in corners, but we get out of them, and things go along fine. I think the current emphasis on Christ and on covenants and on the temple is wholesome. 01:00:56.840 --> 01:00:57.560 Yeah. 01:00:57.560 --> 01:01:19.620 And, uh, I think puts us in a position to approach other religions in a lot less competitive way, us over them. We can join, and certainly with all Christian religions and hopefully others. So I think it’ll happen, but things happen because somebody does something about them. 01:01:19.620 --> 01:01:38.420 So I’m just curious of where this will develop and, uh, how it will be be fostered. And it’s true that your organization helps a lot. I’ve always thought of it as a very serious resource for church intellectual life. 01:01:38.420 --> 01:01:46.980 There are individuals who, you know, think this this way. Rosalind Welch said, you know, a recent article for Wayfarers… 01:01:47.460 --> 01:01:48.740 She’s a brilliant thinker. 01:01:48.740 --> 01:02:13.700 She is a brilliant thinker. Deep. So I don’t think it’ll go away, but I’m just looking for places where it can be fostered without seeming to compete with authority. We don’t want to say, ‘We know how to do it. You’re fumbling the balls.’ We, we want to go along with what they’re saying. So that’s why I’m just asking the question. 01:02:13.940 --> 01:02:40.940 Well, you know, uh, a key to that last point for me, and what I often encourage people to recognize, is that the primary mission of the church, rightly, is not the kind of theological speculation that we love to engage in in the MTA? And there need to be places for theological speculation like the MTA. That’s why we exist in large measure. There’s other reasons too, but that’s one of them, an important one. 01:02:41.060 --> 01:03:08.560 But the mission of the church, the church makes pretty plain. It’s to preach the gospel, redeem the dead, perfect the saints, and care for the poor and the needy, right? And by many measures, it’s very successful in all four of those areas. Now if someday it wants to add in a fifth area of cultivating theological speculation, well, that would make me happy, but I don’t know that that’s necessarily the best use of the resources of the church. 01:03:08.800 --> 01:03:25.359 But of course, the church is not everything. It’s not the end of all things. Nor does the, nor do the leaders of the church expect it to be. The 13th article of faith, right? We believe that there’s good things all over the place and we need to get, bring them all back in. 01:03:25.359 --> 01:03:25.520 We… 01:03:25.680 --> 01:03:49.800 We seek after those things. And, and that of course reflects the New Testament, Paul’s teachings. That reflects Joseph Smith’s actions. And so I, I like to remind people that what we’re doing can be very important without diminishing the importance of what the church is doing. And in, in my life, they’re highly complementary. And there’s no reason why that can’t be the case in any other life. 01:03:50.200 --> 01:03:56.040 What is the condition of your organization now? Do you have active members? 01:03:56.120 --> 01:04:16.380 Yeah. Yeah, we’ve got over 1,000 members in the association. We, we usually have a conference about once a year. We miss a year every once in a while, but usually once a year we have a big conference where everybody gets together. We usually have people for worldwide who attend that. This last conference, I think we had, and Carl could remind me, it was like 200 people in attendance, something like that. 01:04:16.380 --> 01:04:40.000 And then we also have, um, both online and in-person meetups. Um, the most regular of those, and the largest of those, is here in Provo at Carl’s home currently. When we do that once a month, and we invite people to speak who are from the association and people who are not from the association who are, who want to talk about ideas that are interesting to members. 01:04:40.000 --> 01:05:12.960 So the association is continuing to advocate these ideas, cultivate a forum of discussion for these ideas. And that’s, that’s its primary mission. It’s an advocacy organization. In a sense, I guess it’s, uh, it’s a missionary organization for the speculative thought tradition from Mormon culture. And the reason we care is that there’s, we feel like there’s real power in that to confront many of the challenges that people have today with modern culture in a faith-promoting way. 01:05:12.960 --> 01:05:28.320 For me personally, that, that was a, that was a really big deal in, in my re, in the restoration of my faith. Because there was, there was a period of time when there’s, no matter how much beauty I could see 01:05:28.960 --> 01:05:50.860 in the visions that Joseph Smith, um, and Christians before him that influenced him, notably Paul and Jesus. Their visions of the future inspired me deeply in many ways, but I just couldn’t believe in them for intellectual reasons. My brain would not let my heart go where it wanted to go. Just couldn’t believe. 01:05:50.860 --> 01:06:15.880 And for various reasons, but notably for the reasons that the Mormon Transhumanist Association stands for in advocacy, that eventually changed. I was able to bring my heart and brain back into alignment. And with my brain out of the way, my heart went back to where it wanted to be and was more empowered as a consequence. 01:06:16.839 --> 01:06:39.920 More confidence in my faith, less anxiety and internal turmoil in my relationship with the church and other members, more peace in my life because the intellectual friction was, if not entirely removed, greatly smoothed over. 01:06:40.880 --> 01:06:55.900 Um, so the ideas that the MTA stands for are in my life, and I know this is the case in many other lives, have been very powerful in their capacity to reignite or maintain a strong faith. 01:06:55.980 --> 01:06:58.940 Are you ever warned that you’re going too far? 01:06:59.240 --> 01:07:07.800 Not by, so some people have asked me if, along those lines, like, have any church authorities ever warned us? And the answer to that is no, never. 01:07:07.640 --> 01:07:27.700 Um, the only kinds of feedback that we’ve ever gotten from anybody in positions of authority in the church have been, ‘Oh, that sounds kind of cool,’ or ‘interesting.’ But there have been countless, um, times, I, when we’ve had, you know, some concerned person express disagreement with us. Of course, that, that happens. 01:07:28.180 --> 01:07:52.299 But the, the very most common reaction from other members of the church towards what we do is a cautious interest. Like, I think you, you made a comment on one occasion. I think it was at our conference that you spoke at in 2012, if I remember the year right. You said, ‘There’s something about the name of this association that almost forces you to think.’ I think that’s a direct quote from you. 01:07:52.240 --> 01:08:17.819 And that, that rang very true with me. And it reminded me how much effort we put into choosing the name, because we wanted something that did make people think. That would break them out of their normal train of thought just long enough to have some new idea or new hope or new question enter their mind. 01:08:17.980 --> 01:08:52.560 And so, and I, and I think that’s played out. I think that’s the most common response is kind of a cautious interest when people hear about Mormon transhumanism, even from non-Mormons. It’s like, ‘Huh.’ Like they’ve heard of Mormonism or the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and they’ve heard of various forms of futurism or transhumanism or singularitarianism, things like that. But almost nobody thinks of them going together until they encounter us. And when that happens, there’s like a moment of magic when minds, even involuntarily so… 01:08:52.560 --> 01:08:52.880 Yeah. 01:08:53.040 --> 01:08:53.600 Open up. 01:08:53.920 --> 01:09:08.180 It’s kind of interesting how many secular people are also surprised and sometimes even amused by our existence. It’s often the s, greater surprise comes from the non-members than the members, right? 01:09:08.180 --> 01:09:09.780 Right. Yeah. 01:09:10.020 --> 01:09:17.259 Christopher Smith, who was most attracted to the church in your version of it. You know Chris Smith. 01:09:17.259 --> 01:09:19.500 Yeah, I know Chris. He’s a great guy. 01:09:19.500 --> 01:09:23.259 Yeah. Does he ever turn up back? No, he’s moved away. He’s in Texas or something. 01:09:23.500 --> 01:09:41.699 I still interact with him on a somewhat regular basis. Yeah. He has, he, he’s always, he, he, he’s always not far from what we’re talking about. Let’s, let’s say it that way. It, it, we have a lot of common interests and, and actually, a, a lot of common views of the world, even though… 01:09:41.760 --> 01:10:05.159 And I don’t know, I don’t know the details of this, but I think he would describe himself as a little bit more on the agnostic side these days, um, whereas, of course, I’m, at this point in my life, about as confident a of a theist, a believer, as I’ve ever been, um, so we, we differ on that. But we have a lot of other things in common that are important for everything. 01:10:05.480 --> 01:10:29.659 A couple of weeks ago, I gave a talk to a group of young people in Connecticut, and, uh, we got to talking about the problems of being young, and, and some of them said, um, these are high school students, uh, said that they, a lot of their friends are atheistic or agnostic. So, how do you deal with that kind of person? 01:10:29.719 --> 01:10:41.059 So I’ve been one myself. So what I, the first thing I do is I, is I reassure them that I don’t think they’re evil or stupid or dishonest. That, I mean, that’s a real thing. 01:10:41.300 --> 01:10:58.900 It reflects real intellectual, genuinely salient, important concerns or apathies even. It’s like, why were, why worry about God in this world with so much suffering where religions do such horrible things? You know, that’s a common perspective. 01:10:59.140 --> 01:11:19.460 And then what I very often do after that, if they’re interested in why, you know, I tell them, ‘Hey, I have been there with you and I get it.’ If they’re still interested in talking at that point, I’ll share with them my story about what changed for me, what persuaded me to return to Faith. 01:11:19.840 --> 01:11:48.940 And the answer to that question, there’s various influences. A really important influence was a close reading of the Gospels of Paul. When I was an atheist, I wanted to read them with new eyes, just because of the influence they had had on the world. And I wanted to s, to understand them from the perspective of just pragmatism. One of the consequences of that is I became more Christian than I had ever been as a believer. 01:11:49.160 --> 01:12:17.520 Another big influence, and this is ironic for a lot of people, was Nietzsche, who of course most people think of as somebody who says that God is dead. But the God that Nietzsche declares dead is not the God that Joseph Smith talks about. Um, and then another big influence on my return to faith was transhumanism. It helped me bridge a lot of intellectual roadblocks where I just couldn’t imagine that the visions of the future that Joseph Smith shares with us were possible. 01:12:17.520 --> 01:12:46.239 And then I would kind of capstone those intellectual influences with a reminder that my heart and my feelings, my, you know, my soul wanted to go in certain directions, resonated with certain hopes and aspirations, and that it was kept from pursuing them wholeheartedly only because I couldn’t find answers to these difficult questions. 01:12:46.320 --> 01:13:20.040 But I found really good answers, really persuasive answers. And that just made me whole again. And it totally transformed my life in ways that I think just about every missionary of the church hopes to try and help people transform. It was that powerful for me. And in many cases, the, the influencers that ended up transforming me had no intention of restoring my faith that I had received from my Mormon heritage and my parents. But that’s exactly what they did. 01:13:20.040 --> 01:13:20.680 Yeah. 01:13:21.480 --> 01:13:54.000 Be sure to check out our Transfigurist Artwork series with posters, framed prints, puzzles, and apparel portraying inspiring glimpses of what future pioneers might achieve in a vibrant retrofuturist style. Buy them on our website at transfigurism.org slash store. Every purchase helps us to make more of this kind of quality content. The other most important thing you can do to show your support is to like and subscribe and leave us a rating on Apple Podcasts. Now, back to the show. 01:13:55.280 --> 01:14:34.320 I’ve been using the phrase recently, ‘the epistemology of goodness.’ You know, science is trying to s, tell you what exists, what’s out there, how does it work, and the theories come and go and you learn this and that. But there’s another question that science doesn’t really answer, and that is, how can you be the good person you truly want to be? This last question is with you always. You know, you can wake up in the morning, you don’t have to read what the scientists discovered 24 hours ago, but you do have to decide, how am I going to be good to my wife? How am I going to take care of my kids? 01:14:34.560 --> 01:15:00.040 And so you have to find some way to satisfy what f, for me, is a, you know, an incredible yearning and sort of frustration. How in the world can it be good? And you just have to find ways. And, pragmatically speaking, the things that work to make you good are true. I mean, that’s what works is, is true. 01:15:00.300 --> 01:15:13.179 When I was, um, shortly after I was, uh, hired at Claremont, uh, man named Manzel Min, who was a Catholic theologian there, asked me to lunch, and, uh… 01:15:13.980 --> 01:15:38.980 The, uh, f, we had finally got our orders and he says, ‘Richard, how in the world can you believe in Joseph Smith?’ Because, you know, he hired me, or the department hired me as a scholar, and I had this nutty. And I said very briefly to him, I says, ‘Well, you know, when I live the way the Mormons teach you to live, I’m the kind of man I want to be.’ 01:15:38.980 --> 01:15:39.540 Yeah. 01:15:39.540 --> 01:15:41.860 You know, that was just the simple truth. 01:15:41.860 --> 01:15:42.340 Yeah. 01:15:42.340 --> 01:15:49.159 And in that sense, I, I don’t use the word ‘I know’ very much. But I do know I’m a better person for being a Latter-day Saint. 01:15:49.320 --> 01:15:50.679 I feel very similarly. 01:15:50.679 --> 01:15:51.480 Yeah. 01:15:51.639 --> 01:16:16.140 And that falls in line with that comment I made to you a little bit earlier about becoming more Christian as an atheist than I had ever been when I realized the pragmatic power of the gospel of Jesus Christ, when I, when I, when I, when I just thought about the practical consequences in my life, in others’ lives that I observed, and the trajectory of that influence. 01:16:16.140 --> 01:16:39.040 That, that was a really pivotal moment in my life when I stopped worrying about the speculation so much, ironically, given all how much speculation we’re in enjoying right now, when I started thinking just about the practical consequence of choosing to live, um, in accordance with a few pretty simple principles that end up changing people. 01:16:39.120 --> 01:16:45.720 Yeah. No, I’ve, I’ve gotten to the point where I say Mormonism is a competent religion. 01:16:45.720 --> 01:16:46.200 Sure. 01:16:46.200 --> 01:16:49.640 It does its job very, very well. 01:16:49.640 --> 01:16:50.360 Yeah. 01:16:50.520 --> 01:16:53.500 Have you run into the name Lisa Miller? It… 01:16:53.660 --> 01:16:55.020 kind of rings a bell. 01:16:55.020 --> 01:17:02.780 I c, I haven’t really nailed her down, but I’ve seen things that says she teaches psychology at Columbia. 01:17:02.780 --> 01:17:03.260 Okay. 01:17:03.260 --> 01:17:14.040 But her line of research is to test the effects of spirituality on youthful health. 01:17:14.040 --> 01:17:14.840 Oh, okay. 01:17:14.840 --> 01:17:17.080 And she’s thinking a lot of mental health. 01:17:17.080 --> 01:17:17.880 Sure. 01:17:18.080 --> 01:17:47.460 And her results that are reported is that kids who have people attending to their spirit and who see themselves as having a spiritual life, you know, just outshine in terms of strength, functioning in school, getting head in the world, being at peace with themselves. You know, they’re, they’re fifty percent higher than kids who don’t have any kind of spiritual life. 01:17:47.940 --> 01:17:55.400 So it’s a, um, religion, by this measure, is a cognitive and longevity enhancement technology. 01:17:55.400 --> 01:18:07.820 Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It’s a kind of technology. Anyway, struck me as the kind of person you might have out to speak to your, s, it’s roughly, and you know, it’s applying scientific study anyway. 01:18:07.820 --> 01:18:10.060 Yeah, to the practical consequence of religion. 01:18:10.060 --> 01:18:12.520 Yeah. So yeah, religion is technology. 01:18:12.920 --> 01:18:19.800 I like to describe religion as the most powerful social technology. It’s been used for evil, it’s been used for good. It’s powerful. 01:18:19.800 --> 01:18:20.360 Yeah. 01:18:20.360 --> 01:18:22.520 Let’s use it as best we can for good. 01:18:22.520 --> 01:18:27.199 Yeah. That’s a good way to put it. Because, as you say, it is sometimes… 01:18:28.239 --> 01:18:28.880 It can be abused. 01:18:29.040 --> 01:18:30.800 Yeah, you’ve evil side. 01:18:30.800 --> 01:18:40.219 So, I, I’ve got one last kind of fun thing. Um, you know what Chat GPT is, I assume everybody, Chat GPT, that AI thing that everybody’s using. 01:18:40.219 --> 01:18:54.080 So, before we met today, I went to Chat GPT and I said, ‘Who is Richard Bushman?’ It gave me a good answer. I said, ‘Who is Lincoln Cannon?’ It spit out some pretty accurate description of me. 01:18:54.080 --> 01:19:26.380 I said, ‘Imagine that you are Richard Bushman having a conversation with me, Lincoln Cannon. And Lincoln asks Richard, what’s your opinion on whether God expects humanity to use technology to participate in God’s work, including the eventual resurrection of humanity? How would Richard respond to Lincoln?’ And I, I have, I have in my pocket the answer that it thinks you would give for that question. 01:19:26.380 --> 01:19:28.300 It knows more than I do. 01:19:28.300 --> 01:19:45.159 So I’m just wondering if you’d like to, like, w, what you, and, and I asked it, so it gave me actually a really long answer and then I asked it to summarize it down to one paragraph. So I have that one paragraph answer in my pocket that I’m, I’m going to read do you in a minute and get your feedback on. But before I do, um, what’s your thought on that question? 01:19:45.619 --> 01:20:09.360 Well, my thought is that Joseph Smith was both highly speculative, very extended in his vision of possibilities, but it’s also very practical. He, m, he works out a plan for how you build the city of Zion. He works out all sorts of schemes to make things work. They don’t all work, but he keeps trying. 01:20:09.360 --> 01:20:10.000 Right. 01:20:10.000 --> 01:20:17.680 So, I think he had actually a farmer’s mentality. Farmers are practical. 01:20:17.680 --> 01:20:18.160 Yeah. 01:20:18.160 --> 01:20:36.780 They have to make things work. You can’t just speculate like people sitting at a desk. It has to work in the ground. And he had that kind of practical view. So, engineering would, I think, come naturally to him. How can you work out something that will make this city work? 01:20:36.780 --> 01:20:36.940 Right. 01:20:37.099 --> 01:20:40.139 Help people to be better to one another. 01:20:40.139 --> 01:20:48.520 So, if I’m reading between the lines correctly, you think that he would be open to the idea that technology would play a role in the resurrection? 01:20:48.520 --> 01:21:11.100 Yeah, I think it’d be quite I mean, there are passages in our scripture that implies we resurrect each other or uh, you know, it’s it’s it’s an ordinance or it’s it’s part of our labor isn’t just a switch click somewhere and the powers go out, it’s it’s done So yeah, why not? I think you’d love the idea. 01:21:11.100 --> 01:21:13.980 Cool. I’ll read ChatGPT’s answer to you. 01:21:13.980 --> 01:21:14.380 Okay. 01:21:14.380 --> 01:21:29.340 Um, for, for the record before I read it, your answer’s better. But there’s, the answer that ChatGPT gave isn’t bad. You can tell me whether this sounds anything like Richard Bushman. So here’s, here’s Chat GPT’s answer, speaking for you. I asked it to imagine that it was you. 01:21:30.420 --> 01:22:23.560 Chat Richard says, ‘I would suggest that the question of whether God expects humans to use technology to participate in the work of resurrecting the dead is open to personal contemplation and spiritual guidance. While Mormon doctrine emphasizes faith, repentance, and obedience as the means to attain resurrection, it encourages the pursuit of knowledge and the responsible use of technology for the betterment of humanity. Individuals interested in this intersection should engage in personal introspection, study scripture, seek spiritual guidance, and foster discussion within the faith community to discern how technological advancements may align with their understanding of God’s plan and the ethical implications involved.’ 01:22:24.099 --> 01:22:27.219 Not bad. Chad, congratulations. 01:22:28.179 --> 01:22:59.580 I think it represented you reasonably well, although your answer was better. I love how you put it at the end that he’s, ‘Sure, why not?’ Yeah, that, that’s my impression too. I think that if Joseph saw an opportunity to use technology to further the work of God, whether it was building a temple or building a wagon, or, in a speculative future, to perform the ordinance of the resurrection for our friends, I think he’d embrace it as the grace of God. 01:22:59.580 --> 01:23:02.540 I do too, even if sometimes it didn’t work. 01:23:02.560 --> 01:23:03.199 Sure. 01:23:03.199 --> 01:23:10.880 He used the technology of a bank. He needed finances. It didn’t work, but he gave it a try. 01:23:10.880 --> 01:23:13.360 Last question: what’s your favorite scripture? 01:23:14.340 --> 01:23:35.100 My favorite scripture at this moment I can’t call up the re reference, but it’s in the Gospels, and it’s, um, Christ is asking the, the apostles, ‘Uh, all these have left me. Are you going to leave me?’ And Peter answers, ‘Where would we go?’