Why Transhumanist Immortality is a Bad Idea
Eric Swedin, an associate professor of history at Weber State University, draws on his own near-death experience from a brain aneurysm to argue against transhumanist immortality on three grounds: power, innovation, and self. He contends that technological immortality would remain the preserve of the wealthy, stagnate scientific progress by eliminating the fresh perspectives of youth, and deprive humanity of essential growth experiences like raising children and confronting mortality. While acknowledging Latter-day Saint beliefs in God-given immortality, Swedin suggests that death serves as a necessary transition in our eternal journey, and that God has found ways around the pitfalls that human-engineered immortality would create.
Eric G. Swedin is an American historian, novelist, and professor whose work bridges the gap between the history of science, technology, and Latter-day Saint theology. A member of the faculty at Weber State University in Ogden, Utah, Swedin serves as a professor in the History Department, where he teaches courses on the history of science and technology, as well as classes in computer science and information systems. ¶ Swedin’s academic contributions are particularly relevant to the dialogue between faith and modernity. His 2003 book, Healing Souls: Psychotherapy in the Latter-day Saint Community, explores the historical tension and eventual integration between Mormon theology and secular psychology. In this work, Swedin documents how the LDS community navigated the rise of the mental health professions, ultimately melding theological doctrines with mainstream psychiatry—a historical precedent that mirrors contemporary discussions regarding transhumanism and the integration of emerging technologies with religious practice. ¶ Beyond his work on religious history, Swedin is a recognized voice in the history of computing. He co-authored Computers: The Life Story of a Technology (2005) and edited Science Fiction and Computing: Essays on Interlinked Domains (2011), investigating how speculative fiction has influenced the development of real-world technologies. ¶ Through his dual focus on the history of technology and the rigorous imagination of alternate history, Swedin offers a unique perspective on human progress, the fragility of civilization, and the enduring role of belief in a technological age.
Transcript
Speaker 1
Now hear from Eric Sweden: why transhumanist immortality is a bad idea. Eric is an associate professor in the history department at Weber State University. His doctorate is in the history of science and technology. He also teaches computer science and information systems classes. His publications include numerous articles Five history books, two science fiction novels, a historical mystery novel, and two other forthcoming science fiction novels. His When Angels Wept, a What If History of the Cuban Missile Crisis, earned the 2010 Sidewise Award in Alternate History. Eric lives with his family in a house built in 1881, and his website is sweden. org.
Eric Swedin
Okay, two years ago, I had a brain aneurysm, leading to a near-death experience. A four-hour operation a day later clamped off the bleeding. In short, I lost about 18 days of my life, no memories at all, and spent twenty-seven days in the hospital. I remember that I prayed while in the ambulance. I prayed to survive, but more so I prayed that my family would be okay without me. This had always been a deep concern of mine. I felt a warm feeling that my family would be okay. They would thrive without me. As a consequence, effectively, I was ready to die. I am the first to admit that my feeling in this matter could have been heavily influenced by the sedating effect of all that increased blood pressure bruising my brain, though I prefer the interpretation that this was my own personal revelation.
Eric Swedin
Immortality is a dream that people have often desired. We find the quest for this elusive attribute in ancient and modern religious myths. In fiction stories meant for both entertainment or education, and especially in science fiction. Like many in this group, I have been inspired by science fiction throughout my life. It has been my touchstone as much as my religious faith has. Immortality in a story often excites my sense of wonder when I read science fiction or fantasy and is a common still a common theme in my own science fiction novels. While I share the emotional appeal that immortality offers, as a practical matter, I think that immortality is the worst thing that could happen to a society.
Eric Swedin
The most obvious consideration that it would aggravate our overpopulation problems, I will set aside because the natural course of arguing over that consideration would be a rabbit hole that I don’t need to go down. Suffice to quote Murray Lindster in his famous science fiction short story, A Logic Named Joe. You got to make room for the kids to grow up. Of course, some transhumanists have offered up the solution of solving overpopulation by literally living virtual lives. My other objections to transhumanist immortality are threefold. Questions of power, questions of innovation and questions of self.
Eric Swedin
Let’s start with power. No technological innovation in history has been made readily available to all people, at least at first. Every innovation costs money to develop, and early customers must pay higher prices. Technological immortality would be available at first only to the rich. In all probability, the technologies will be so expensive that immortality will remain the preserve of the rich. Wealthy people, instead of seeking to preserve their fortunes for their children, will then seek to preserve their fortunes for themselves. The creative destruction that is the heart of capitalism would be constrained and controlled by the wealthy trying to preserve their positions and the sources of their wealth. In the end, our form of innovative society requires that wealth must be turned over and recycled, not concentrated and hoarded.
Eric Swedin
Now to questions of innovation. Immortality will not only socially stratify our culture, that same culture will stagnate from the lack of scientific and technological innovation. Most major scientific and technological innovations are developed by people in their twenties or thirties. The reason for this is that a person is old enough to have acquired the necessary prior knowledge but not so committed to that body of knowledge that they can still think outside of the box. There are exceptions, but they are so rare that they actually prove the rule. Some fields, like history and literature, often find that the best work is done by scholars in their later years. These fields, which are not about major new directions, reward years of wisdom and experience, unlike science and technology. In order to innovate, we need a continuous supply of fresh blood. One might argue that we don’t need innovations, that science and technology has gotten us into enough trouble already. That is not an attitude I expect to find among transhumanists. But the cold, hard truth is that we have a large population in an industrial civilization that can only continue to function by advancing, retreat or stagnation. And stagnation is sure defeat. We are constrained by Earth’s resources, and only science and technology will develop new resources and new ways to use old resources.
Eric Swedin
Finally, two questions of self. Latter-day Saints have specific ideas about which life experiences are most useful in order to fully develop as human beings. Not everyone. gets each of these experiences, but most do. One of those experiences is marriage, a crucible where we blend and live with another person, learning how love, tolerance, and selflessness. Being a parent is another such experience, where we again learn noble traits. A world full of immortals leaves no room for children. To not have the experience of raising children is to miss out on one of the greatest challenges of mortality. To not be aware of the cycle of life and the joy and tragedy implicit in that cycle is to be less than fully human.
Eric Swedin
We tend to stagnate in other ways also. Many people liked the music of their youth because that was what was imprinted on them, but declined to like the music from earlier times or the present. We all have a right to our individual tastes, but if those tastes do not evolve, then culture becomes frozen in time. Imagine a world in which we only had the music of the nineteen eighties Surely an awful wasteland.
Eric Swedin
To bring the conversation back to my own near-death experience The experience of death, both the death of others and our own personal potential death, and the mourning associated with that, brings us closer to God. Absent that experience, our need for faith suffers.
Eric Swedin
I’m afraid that this paper has come off as a sermon, and that was not my intent. Perhaps this intensity comes from how strongly I feel about these issues. Even so, I am eager to hear and learn about contrary points of view. Clearly, the God given immortality that we aspire to as Latter-day Saints will be different from the immortality offered by transhumanist technologies. I think that God has figured out ways around the pitfalls that I have described
Eric Swedin
As a conclusion, as Latter-day Saints, we should not fear death. Well, I don’t think that we should welcome it as enthusiastically as Brigham Young once proposed when he described how funerals should be moments of celebration. I do think that we should not fear death. Death is merely a necessary transition on our continuing journey as internal intelligences. Thank you.
Speaker 3
Oh, first a short comment. I disagree with nearly everything you said, but I think you said it very well. Thank you very much. As you imagine, I’ve had many observations, but I’ll just make one here. One thing that you said, which is very, very right, is that most creative advanced are usually done by young people. And you think that there would not be any young people in a society of immortal But as a matter of fact, what we mean by immortality is not living forever as a ninety five year old a person, it is living forever as twenty-five years old persons, which means that among the technology that we would like to see deployed in society are also technology to give back to all of us the mental plasticity that we had when we were twenty five years old. And that’s what, as a almost fifty five years old, I look forward very much to that.
Eric Swedin
I agree that we I agree that we want to live as young people and we want the vibrancy that comes from being a young person. But nature has already created a system for creating innovation and that’s killing us. and having new people come along. And while I personally like the idea of immortality, as I’ve said before, I’m more horrified what I see as the consequences of that.