Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 50

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom.

1. What are the most-cit­ed pub­li­ca­tions in the social sci­ences (accord­ing to Google Schol­ar)? (Elliot Green, Lon­don School of Eco­nom­ics Impact Blog): I am famil­iar with many of them, but some I have nev­er even heard of. Appar­ent­ly I am less well-read than I thought.
2. The False Promise of DNA Test­ing (Matthew Shaer, The Atlantic): DNA test­ing exon­er­ates some but false­ly impli­cates oth­ers.
3. Good Cit­i­zen­ship as Barack Oba­ma and Clarence Thomas See It (Conor Frieder­s­dorf, The Atlantic): “There are real diver­gences in the ways that Oba­ma and Thomas view cit­i­zen­ship, but their approach­es are more com­ple­men­tary than con­tra­dic­to­ry. Tak­en togeth­er, their advice encom­pass­es the per­son­al and the polit­i­cal, afford­ing a bet­ter por­trait of the whole cit­i­zen than either offers in iso­la­tion.”
4. The cul­ture wars play out in the most fas­ci­nat­ing ways:
   • Media Want To Make Sure You Nev­er Hear About The Lit­tle Sis­ters of the Poor (Mol­lie Hem­ing­way, The Fed­er­al­ist): “A case of “Lit­tle Sis­ters of the Poor” vs. “Pow­er­ful Men in Gov­ern­ment” is a gift from the edi­to­r­i­al gods…. If any Repub­li­can pres­i­dent went to war against a group called Lit­tle Sis­ters of the Poor, that edi­to­r­i­al gift would be unwrapped on every front page of every news­pa­per in the land.” (addi­tion­al com­men­tary at GetRe­li­gion)
   • Relat­ed: Pro­fes­sor Michael McConnell on Zubik v. Bur­well (Michael McConnell, Volokh Con­spir­a­cy): “the deci­sion was basi­cal­ly a qui­et, face-sav­ing, non-prece­dent-set­ting defeat for the gov­ern­ment.”
   • How The Fight Over Trans­gen­der Kids Got A Lead­ing Sex Researcher Fired (Jesse Sin­gal, NY Mag): this is a very long piece which I found utter­ly fas­ci­nat­ing. It shows that for some peo­ple 90% agree­ment is not enough: “And if you look close­ly at what real­ly hap­pened — if you read the review (which CAMH has now pulled off of its web­site), speak with the activists who effec­tive­ly wrote large swaths of it, exam­ine the sci­en­tif­ic evi­dence, and talk to for­mer GIC clin­i­cians and the par­ents of patients they worked with, it’s hard not to come to an uncom­fort­able, polit­i­cal­ly incor­rect con­clu­sion: Zucker’s defend­ers are right. This was a show tri­al.”
   • Yes, my sex­u­al­i­ty is a choice: Why I reject the “born this way” nar­ra­tive (Mar­cie Bian­co, Salon):  “The pro­gres­sive move away from iden­ti­ty cat­e­gories negates the need for the nor­ma­tive, ‘born this way’ nar­ra­tive that has been used to social­ly val­i­date them…. if sex­u­al­i­ty is social­ly con­struct­ed and expressed through cul­ture, then there is no norm, nor is there deviance.”
   • State-Man­dat­ed Mourn­ing for Abort­ed Fetus­es (Emma Green, The Atlantic): I am some­what baf­fled that this sto­ry doesn’t men­tion the Cen­ter for Med­ical Progress videos from last year. There is clear­ly a rela­tion­ship.
5. Quick Links:
   • Polar­ized: Mak­ing Sense Of A Divid­ed Amer­i­ca (Tyler Cowen, Mar­gin­al Rev­o­lu­tion)
   • Insights From The Spir­i­tu­al Auto­bi­og­ra­phy of Khloe Kar­dashi­an (Ruth Gra­ham, Slate): real­ly.
   • This is actu­al­ly pret­ty cool: Blue Feed, Red Feed — an approx­i­ma­tion of the “Face­book echo cham­ber.” See what con­tent lib­er­als and con­ser­v­a­tives are like­ly to be pre­sent­ed with.
   • A woman is hilar­i­ous­ly hap­py

Why Do You Send This Email?

In the time of King David, the tribe of Issachar pro­duced shrewd war­riors “who under­stood the times and knew what Israel should do” (1 Chron 12:32). In a sim­i­lar way, we need to become wise peo­ple whose faith inter­acts with the world. I pray this email gives you greater insight, so that you may con­tin­ue the tra­di­tion of Issachar.

Disclaimer

Chi Alpha is not a par­ti­san orga­ni­za­tion. To para­phrase anoth­er min­is­ter: we are not about the donkey’s agen­da and we are not about the elephant’s agen­da — we are about the Lamb’s agen­da. Hav­ing said that, I read wide­ly (in part because I believe we should aspire to pass the ide­o­log­i­cal Tur­ing test and in part because I do not believe I can fair­ly say “I agree” or “I dis­agree” until I can say “I under­stand”) and may at times share arti­cles that have a strong par­ti­san bias sim­ply because I find the arti­cle stim­u­lat­ing. The upshot: you should not assume I agree with every­thing an author says in an arti­cle I men­tion, much less things the author has said in oth­er arti­cles (although if I strong­ly dis­agree with some­thing in the arti­cle I’ll usu­al­ly men­tion it).

Also, remem­ber that I’m not report­ing news — I’m giv­ing you a selec­tion of things I found inter­est­ing. There’s a lot hap­pen­ing in the world that’s not mak­ing an appear­ance here because I haven’t found stim­u­lat­ing arti­cles writ­ten about it.