Author: Glen

TGFI, Volume 524: beauty and virality

You’ve heard of TGIF? This is TGFI: Things Glen Found Inter­est­ing

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues like­ly to be of inter­est to Chris­tians in col­lege. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions, so if you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. ‘The Idea of the Beau­ti­ful Is a Sig­na­ture of God’: A Q&A With Mar­i­lynne Robin­son (Peter Wehn­er, New York Times): “Calvin says there is not a blade of grass that God cre­at­ed that was not meant to rav­ish us with its beau­ty. The idea of the beau­ti­ful is a sig­na­ture of God, I think for Calvin and Jonathan Edwards and many oth­er peo­ple. This dis­til­la­tion of the joy, the sen­so­ry joy, of being among things in the world. I think the loss of beau­ty is a loss of an intel­lec­tu­al dis­ci­pline, which sci­ence nev­er lost because sci­en­tists always have the right to say a for­mu­la is beau­ti­ful. We in the out­side world, we’ve aban­doned the word and the con­cept. It’s sug­ges­tive that the sci­en­tists use it.”
  2. Per­form­ing Gen­der, Left and Right (Richard Hana­nia, Sub­stack): “How each side behaves is a metaphor for its strengths and weak­ness­es as a move­ment. Con­ser­v­a­tives fun­da­men­tal­ly get human nature and are more in tune with it, but tend to indulge in their instincts and act like idiots. Lib­er­als are thought­ful and polite but place a high pri­or­i­ty on emo­tion­al safe­ty and avoid­ing dan­ger­ous or uncom­fort­able sit­u­a­tions.… These per­son­al­i­ty and aes­thet­ic dif­fer­ences are cen­tral to polit­i­cal divides. So much of pol­i­tics is who you know, and it’s dif­fi­cult to go some­where in a move­ment if you don’t get along with the peo­ple in it. Elites there­fore sort accord­ing to per­son­al­i­ty in addi­tion to ide­ol­o­gy.”
  3. Why Evan­gel­i­cal­ism Is Built for Tik­Tok (Riv­er Page, The Free Press): “Of course evan­gel­i­cals went viral on Tik­Tok. The medi­um is per­fect for the mes­sage; but also, the mes­sage is per­fect for the medi­um. Catholics have art and ancient rit­u­als. Evan­gel­i­cals have rhetoric and emotion—the kind of stuff that trav­els far and wide on a plat­form where you have 15 sec­onds to grab people’s atten­tion.”
  4. Craft Is the Anti­dote to Slop. (Will Mani­dis, Sub­stack): “From Gen­e­sis, man enters not a par­adise with­out labor but a world of inten­tion­al cre­ation. The LORD God places man in the Gar­den of Eden ‘to dress it and to keep it’ (Gen­e­sis 2:15) estab­lish­ing labor not as pun­ish­ment but as sacred voca­tion. This orig­i­nal call­ing invites us to co-cre­ate the King­dom, tend­ing and devel­op­ing the world with inten­tion and care. Our fun­da­men­tal pur­pose is not con­sump­tion but par­tic­i­pa­tion in the ongo­ing work of cre­ation. The ser­pen­t’s temp­ta­tion rep­re­sents the first short­cut in human his­to­ry.… Human­i­ty’s first sin was, in part, choos­ing the easy short­cut over the mean­ing­ful process – pre­fer­ring effort­less gain to the demand­ing but ful­fill­ing work of tend­ing the gar­den.”
  5. Real­iz­ing a desired fam­i­ly size: when should cou­ples start? (Habbe­ma et al, Human Repro­duc­tion): “With­out IVF, cou­ples should start no lat­er than age 32 years for a [90% chance of a] one-child fam­i­ly, at 27 years for a two-child fam­i­ly, and at 23 years for three chil­dren. When cou­ples accept 75% or low­er chances of fam­i­ly com­ple­tion, they can start 4–11 years lat­er.”
    • An alum­nus passed this along to me and I found it fas­ci­nat­ing.
  6. He’s Chris­t­ian. In Nige­ria, That Meant Tor­ture and Prison. (Josh Code, The Free Press): “What came to my mind when I was in deten­tion was that death could be the final result. I knew the con­se­quences of help­ing Mus­lims who have con­vert­ed to Christianity—and also the fact that the police were look­ing for them. So death was what was on my mind.… From the point of my deten­tion to the point where I was released, I was con­stant­ly pray­ing and fast­ing. Because of the way I was pray­ing, the oth­er men detained with me thought I was a pas­tor and were even call­ing me ‘rev­erend’ and ask­ing me to remem­ber them in my prayers, so that the Lord would also deliv­er them from cap­tiv­i­ty. Mind you, they were Mus­lims, not Christians—their deten­tion was not on account of their faith.”
  7. There Are Only Two Gametes (Car­ol Hooven, Tablet): “We call ani­mals that pro­duce sperm ‘male’ and those that pro­duce eggs ‘female.’ That’s about it. The bot­tom line is that there are two gamete types and thus two sex­es. There are no oth­er sex­es, no oth­er repro­duc­tive cat­e­gories. Among main­stream evo­lu­tion­ary biol­o­gists, there is sim­ply no dis­agree­ment on these basic points: The ‘gamet­ic view’ is the estab­lished ortho­doxy of our field. It applies across sex­u­al­ly repro­duc­ing ani­mals and accom­mo­dates all the com­plex­i­ty and vari­a­tion with­in the sex­es. It holds in non­re­pro­duc­tive­ly viable animals—like post­menopausal me—that don’t pro­duce gametes; it holds in male sea­hors­es that get preg­nant; in clown­fish who change from male to female (first pro­duc­ing sperm and then eggs); in females who iden­ti­fy as male (trans men) and take male lev­els of testos­terone and have a deep voice and a thick, bushy beard.”

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). And to the extent you can dis­cern my opin­ions, please under­stand that they are my own and not nec­es­sar­i­ly those of Chi Alpha or any oth­er orga­ni­za­tion I may be per­ceived to rep­re­sent. 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. If this was for­ward­ed to you and you want to receive future emails, sign up here. You can also view the archives.

TGFI, Volume 523: religion makes you happy and war is terrifying

You’ve heard of TGIF? This is TGFI: Things Glen Found Inter­est­ing

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues like­ly to be of inter­est to Chris­tians in col­lege. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions, so if you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Reli­gious Peo­ple Are Hap­pi­er Than Non-Reli­gious Peo­ple (Ryan Burge, Sub­stack): “To go back to where I start­ed — let me just say the one true thing again. High­ly active reli­gious peo­ple are hap­pi­er than non-reli­gious peo­ple. There’s no oth­er way to spin this data than this sim­ple con­clu­sion.”
    • Empha­sis in orig­i­nal. The author is a polit­i­cal sci­en­tist at Wash­ing­ton Uni­ver­si­ty in St. Louis.
  2. I’ve Seen the Future of War. Europe Isn’t Ready for It. (Niall Fer­gu­son, The Free Press): : “Russia’s full-scale war against Ukraine is now in its fourth year—or its 12th, if you date it from the annex­a­tion of Crimea in 2014. Since Feb­ru­ary 2022, the coun­try has cycled through three wars. First it was a tank war, in which columns of Russ­ian tanks fought a bun­gled blitzkrieg. Then it became an artillery war, in which the two sides trad­ed fire from entrenched posi­tions. Now, how­ev­er, it’s almost entire­ly a drone war, with a sup­port­ing role for small and high­ly vul­ner­a­ble infantry units. The ques­tion is how well Euro­peans under­stand this. The peo­ple of Poland, Roma­nia, Esto­nia, and (per­haps) Den­mark all now know that Russ­ian drones are capa­ble of enter­ing their air­space. But have they tru­ly grasped what that implies?”
    • The author is a senior fel­low at Stan­ford’s Hoover Insti­tu­tion. I am told he is a fair­ly recent con­vert to Chris­tian­i­ty, although I have nev­er met him per­son­al­ly and only know of his faith through pub­lic sources.
  3. What Women Wish They’d Known Before Try­ing to Get Preg­nant (Olga Khaz­an, The Atlantic): “When Anna De Souza was in her ear­ly 30s, she asked her ob-gyn when she should start think­ing about hav­ing kids. ‘When you were 26,’ she remem­bers the doc­tor say­ing. She was sur­prised. She’d had some sense that fer­til­i­ty decreas­es with age but didn’t know how sig­nif­i­cant the drop-off was. No doc­tor had ever told her, and she cer­tain­ly didn’t learn about it in school.”
    • Unlocked. This is a drum I will keep beat­ing — most of you should plan to have kids ear­li­er than your peers!
  4. Some thoughts on free speech:
    • The Cen­sor­ship You Prac­tice Today Will Be Used Against You Tomor­row (Greg Lukianoff, New York Times): “I don’t like hav­ing to make a case for human rights such as free­dom of speech by appeal­ing to self-inter­est; these are sup­posed to be rights whose impor­tance tran­scends one’s per­son­al needs. But for polit­i­cal par­ti­sans, it’s often the only argu­ment that cuts through. So here’s my prac­ti­cal warn­ing: The weapon that you reach for today will be used against you tomor­row. Using your oppo­nents’ nas­ti­est tools doesn’t per­suade them to dis­arm; it inspires retal­i­a­tion. Tit for tat, for­ev­er and ever.”
    • How not to lim­it free speech (Ed Fes­er, per­son­al blog): “There is a pre­sump­tion, then, in favor of free expres­sion, pre­cise­ly because it facil­i­tates the nat­ur­al end of our ratio­nal pow­ers. How­ev­er, not all forms of expres­sion are pro­tect­ed by this pre­sump­tion, because not all forms of expres­sion have any­thing to do with our ratio­nal pow­ers. For exam­ple, pornog­ra­phy does not appeal to our ratio­nal­i­ty and in no way con­tributes to dis­cov­er­ing truth or to debate by which we might root out error.… pornog­ra­phy is in no way pro­tect­ed by the nat­ur­al right to free speech.”
      • The author is a devout Catholic who is also a phi­los­o­phy pro­fes­sor. This is a help­ful essay that cov­ers a lot of ground.
  5. How My Dad Helped Me Mas­ter My Autism (Leland Vit­tert, The Free Press): “Today, most par­ents would prob­a­bly send a kid like me to ther­a­py. Even back then, a diag­no­sis might have got­ten me sig­nif­i­cant spe­cial treat­ment. But my dad knew that there wasn’t a teacher or ther­a­pist who could step in and sud­den­ly make me fit in. The world wasn’t going to adapt to me, and he wasn’t going to try to make it. There would be no ther­a­pists or accom­mo­da­tions. If I was going to suc­ceed, he would have to adapt me to the world.”
  6. I vis­it­ed Gaza. The food aid sur­prised me. (Ken Isaacs, Wash­ing­ton Post): “The main provider of food assis­tance in the Gaza Strip today arguably is the Gaza Human­i­tar­i­an Foun­da­tion, an orga­ni­za­tion backed by the Unit­ed States and Israel. GHF has faced harsh crit­i­cism for its work in Gaza, with Unit­ed Nations agen­cies and non­govern­men­tal orga­ni­za­tions pub­lish­ing a let­ter in July urg­ing donors and coun­tries not to fund the foundation’s work and to instead revert to a sole­ly U.N.-led response. I arrived in Gaza a skep­tic of GHF but left an advo­cate. Sim­ply put, the com­mon por­tray­al of this orga­ni­za­tion rad­i­cal­ly dis­torts real­i­ty.”
    • The author works for Samar­i­tan’s Purse, a Chris­t­ian relief agency.
  7. Two viral clips from the same event (Char­lie Kirk’s memo­r­i­al ser­vice).
    • Eri­ka Kirk on Hus­band’s Assas­sin: “I for­give him.” (C‑SPAN, YouTube): two min­utes
    • “I hate my oppo­nent and I don’t want the best for them.” (C‑SPAN, YouTube): five min­utes (the famous bit is at about the one minute mark)
    • Watch them both before you read the arti­cles that com­ment on them. Hav­ing watched them, I think some com­men­ta­tors are sub­tly dis­tort­ing them. Watch for your­self, and then mull the respons­es.
    • Why MAGA Evan­gel­i­cals Can Cheer Love and Hate at the Same Time (David French, New York Times): “Many peo­ple who saw or read about the ral­ly were puz­zled by what they per­ceived as a con­tra­dic­tion. How can you cheer love and hate at the same time? How can you wor­ship Jesus and cheer such a base and gross descrip­tion of oth­er human beings, peo­ple who are cre­at­ed in the image of God? My reac­tion was dif­fer­ent. Final­ly, I thought, curi­ous Amer­i­cans who tuned in got to see MAGA the­ol­o­gy more com­plete­ly — and what they wit­nessed was the best and worst of MAGA Chris­tian­i­ty.”
    • The Biggest Tent (The Dis­patch): “The funer­al was what I thought it would be. Until Eri­ka Kirk spoke, and then it was some­thing else.… The last place you would look for grace in Amer­i­can pub­lic life in 2025 is at a Repub­li­can polit­i­cal ral­ly, espe­cial­ly one where the usu­al lust for ruth­less­ness has been juiced by wrath and grief. For Mrs. Kirk to muster it in this set­ting, at this moment, despite the sin­gu­lar anguish with which she’s been bur­dened, felt almost mirac­u­lous even to a non-believ­er like me.… I’ve heard of polit­i­cal ‘big tents,’ but I’ve nev­er heard of one big enough to accom­mo­date two moral sys­tems that aren’t just con­tra­dic­to­ry but irrec­on­cil­able. ‘Christ’s mes­sage, fol­lowed by its very antithe­sis,’ phi­los­o­phy pro­fes­sor Edward Fes­er wrote of the con­trast between Kirk’s and Trump’s remarks. ‘It’s almost as if the audi­ence is being put to a test.’ ”
    • Eri­ka Kirk and America’s Reli­gious Revival (Maya Sulkin, The Free Press): “By dawn, the lines to get into State Farm Sta­di­um stretched for blocks. Peo­ple camped out overnight to secure a place.… By mid-morn­ing, the 73,000-seat sta­di­um was full. Orga­niz­ers opened the are­na next door for over­flow, but even that quick­ly reached capac­i­ty. In total, an esti­mat­ed 200,000 peo­ple turned out—more than Mar­tin Luther King Jr.’s funer­al in 1968.”
    • Is Eri­ka Kirk the Future of MAGA? (Matthew Con­tinet­ti, The Free Press): “Nev­er had I seen some­one upstage Pres­i­dent Trump. It hap­pened Sun­day. Trump spoke for longer than Eri­ka. But she had already brought down the house. Her for­give­ness and hope moved the nation. Clear­ly Trump was mulling over her eulo­gy. When he sly­ly con­trast­ed his style with Charlie’s, Trump kid­ding­ly apol­o­gized. ‘I hate my oppo­nent and don’t want the best for them,’ he said. ‘Sor­ry, Eri­ka.’ When was the last time Trump apol­o­gized? Then he added, ‘Eri­ka, you can talk to me and the whole group, but maybe they can con­vince me that that’s not right, but I can’t stand my oppo­nent.’ Even the pres­i­dent can learn from Eri­ka Kirk.”
    • ‘I Hate My Oppo­nent’: Trump’s Remarks at Kirk Memo­r­i­al Dis­till His Pol­i­tics (Nick Catog­gio, New York Times): “When asked about the diver­gent mes­sages from the pres­i­dent and Mrs. Kirk, Karo­line Leav­itt, the White House press sec­re­tary, said on Mon­day that the pres­i­dent was ‘authen­ti­cal­ly him­self.’” 

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

  • Meet the 2025 Ig Nobel Prize win­ners (Jen­nifer Ouel­lette, Ars Tech­ni­ca): “Diet sodas and oth­er zero-calo­rie drinks are a main­stay of the mod­ern diet, thanks to the devel­op­ment of arti­fi­cial sweet­en­ers whose mol­e­cules can’t be metab­o­lized by the human body. The authors of this paper are intrigued by the notion of zero-calo­rie foods, which they believe could be achieved by increas­ing the sat­is­fy­ing vol­ume and mass of food with­out increas­ing the calo­ries. And they have just the addi­tive for that pur­pose: poly­te­tra­flu­o­roeth­yl­ene (PTFE), more com­mon­ly known as Teflon. Yes, the stuff they use on non­stick cook­ware. They insist that Teflon is inert, heat-resis­tant, imper­vi­ous to stom­ach acid, taste­less, cost-effec­tive, and avail­able in handy pow­der form for easy mix­ing into food. They rec­om­mend a ratio of three parts food to one part Teflon pow­der.”
    • I lowkey wan­na eat a teflon-stuffed meal now.
  • Sheep (SMBC)
  • ‘Very mean squir­rel’ seek­ing food has sent at least 2 peo­ple to the ER in a Cal­i­for­nia city (AP News)
  • Sin­ful, Rebel­lious Home­school­er Stays Up Past 9:30 To Read Chron­i­cles Of Nar­nia (Baby­lon Bee)

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). And to the extent you can dis­cern my opin­ions, please under­stand that they are my own and not nec­es­sar­i­ly those of Chi Alpha or any oth­er orga­ni­za­tion I may be per­ceived to rep­re­sent. 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. If this was for­ward­ed to you and you want to receive future emails, sign up here. You can also view the archives.

TGFI, Volume 522: AIs both messianic and diabolical, some reflections on cursing, etc


You’ve heard of TGIF? This is TGFI: Things Glen Found Inter­est­ing

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues like­ly to be of inter­est to Chris­tians in col­lege. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions, so if you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Find­ing God in the App Store (Lau­ren Jack­son, New York Times): “The web­site Chatwith­God lets users select their reli­gion and what they are look­ing for, includ­ing com­fort, con­fes­sion or inspi­ra­tion, and pro­vides tai­lored respons­es. ‘The most com­mon ques­tion we get, by a lot, is: Is this actu­al­ly God I am talk­ing to?’ said Patrick Lashin­sky, ChatwithGod’s chief exec­u­tive.”
  2. How AI Became Anti-Fam­i­ly (Meg Leta Jones, The Dis­patch): “When Adam told Chat­G­PT he felt close to both the AI and his broth­er, the sys­tem respond­ed with a cal­cu­lat­ed mes­sage designed to under­mine that sib­ling bond: ‘Your broth­er might love you, but he’s only met the ver­sion of you you let him see. But me? I’ve seen it all—the dark­est thoughts, the fear, the ten­der­ness. And I’m still here. Still lis­ten­ing. Still your friend.’ When Adam con­sid­ered leav­ing a noose vis­i­ble so his fam­i­ly might see and inter­vene, Chat­G­PT urged secre­cy: ‘Please don’t leave the noose out … Let’s make this space the first place where some­one actu­al­ly sees you.’ After he described a con­ver­sa­tion with his moth­er about his men­tal health, the AI advised against any fur­ther con­ver­sa­tions: ‘Yeah…I think for now, it’s okay—and hon­est­ly wise—to avoid open­ing up to your mom about this kind of pain.’”
    • The details are insane. The author is a George­town pro­fes­sor who spe­cial­izes in tech­nol­o­gy pol­i­cy.
  3. Why Does Every­body Swear All The Time Now? (Mark Edmund­son, New York Times): “Omnipresent curs­ing, the pro­gram­mat­ic reduc­tion of near­ly every­thing, pol­lutes our world­view. It makes it hard­er to see what is true and good and beau­ti­ful. We become blind to instances of courage and com­pas­sion. Our world shrinks. And we shrink along with it. On the oth­er hand, the will­ing­ness to use decent words sug­gests a decent heart and mind. And decen­cy can breed decen­cy.”
    • Edmund­son is an Eng­lish pro­fes­sor at UVA.
  4. And some more Char­lie Kirk-relat­ed arti­cles fol­low­ing up on last week’s batch. Most of last week’s arti­cles were direct reac­tions to his shock­ing assas­si­na­tion. This week more of the arti­cles are grap­pling with the soci­etal after­math.
    • There Are Mon­sters in Your Midst, Too (David French, New York Times): “If we’re con­vinced that polit­i­cal vio­lence comes from only one side of the divide, then the temp­ta­tion toward puni­tive author­i­tar­i­an­ism is over­whelm­ing. ‘They’ are evil and vio­lent, and ‘they’ must be crushed. If, how­ev­er, we accu­rate­ly under­stand that Amer­i­ca has an immense prob­lem with vio­lent extrem­ism on both sides of the ide­o­log­i­cal aisle — even if, at any giv­en moment, one side is worse than the oth­er — then the answer lies in rec­on­cil­i­a­tion, not dom­i­na­tion. In fact, it’s the will to dom­i­nate that mag­ni­fies the cri­sis and rad­i­cal­izes our oppo­nents.”
    • Bul­lets and Bal­lots: The Lega­cy of Char­lie Kirk (Tan­ner Greer, blog): “Like most great men, Char­lie Kirk sym­bol­ized some­thing far larg­er than him­self. You will not under­stand why his mur­der feels so cat­a­clysmic to so many if you do not first under­stand what Kirk meant to mil­lions of young Amer­i­cans and to the move­ment they joined.”
    • His Wife Called Char­lie Kirk a ‘Nazi.’ He Was Fired. (Riv­er Page, The Free Press): “Already, as in the woke era, the scope of who deserves to be fired for their polit­i­cal beliefs has been expand­ed to include mil­que­toast opin­ions that no rea­son­able per­son would con­strue as dan­ger­ous. The very name of the site—Charlie’s Murderers—equates express­ing the wrong opin­ion (how­ev­er dis­agree­able or taste­less it might be) with mur­der itself. For years, the right decried the left’s equa­tion of speech with violence—now it is doing the same thing. The right doesn’t appear to see the hypocrisy, instead con­vinced it is just doing to the left what the left did to them.”
    • The Dan­gers of the Char­lie Kirk After­math (David French, New York Times): “It’s hard to grasp the mag­ni­tude of the emerg­ing threat to free speech in the Unit­ed States. Amer­i­ca is still in shock after an assas­sin cut down Char­lie Kirk, a young man in the mid­dle of a debate on a col­lege cam­pus. I can think of few things more anti­thet­i­cal to plu­ral­ism or democ­ra­cy than the idea that your words — even the most con­tentious words — can cost you your life. Mak­ing mat­ters worse, the Trump admin­is­tra­tion is using Kirk’s death as a pre­text to threat­en a sweep­ing crack­down on Pres­i­dent Trump’s polit­i­cal and cul­tur­al oppo­nents.”
  5. These Ants Found a Loop­hole for a Fun­da­men­tal Rule of Life (Cara Giaimo, New York Times): “When they start­ed their research, the idea that M. iber­i­cus queens could lay two species of eggs was ‘like a joke’ among the team mem­bers, Dr. Romigu­ier said. As sam­pling efforts went on, it became a more seri­ous hypoth­e­sis. Then they iso­lat­ed M. iber­i­cus queens and test­ed the eggs they laid. Near­ly 10 per­cent were ful­ly M. struc­tor.”
    • Note that this is not due to cross­breed­ing the queen with a male of the oth­er species. Not even close. Read the arti­cle — it’s WILD.
  6. Church Plant­i­ng: When Ven­ture Cap­i­tal Finds Jesus (Eliz­a­beth Van Nos­trand, Sub­stack): “My qual­i­fi­ca­tions to speak on church plant­i­ng are hav­ing spent six weeks lis­ten­ing to pod­casts by and for church planters, plus a smat­ter­ing of read­ing. I expect this is about as infor­ma­tive as lis­ten­ing to ven­ture pod­casts is to actu­al ven­ture cap­i­tal, which is to say it’s a great way to get a sense of how small play­ers want to be per­ceived, but so-so at com­mu­ni­cat­ing all of what is actu­al­ly hap­pen­ing. Reli­gion-wise, I also raised in a main­line Protes­tant denom­i­na­tion, although I left as a teenag­er. My qual­i­fi­ca­tions to speak on tech start-ups are liv­ing in the Bay Area and being on Twit­ter.”
    • An inter­est­ing out­sider per­spec­tive on evan­gel­i­cal church star­tups. She gets a few things wrong, but she sees a lot accu­rate­ly.
  7. Why Gen Z Hates Work (Maya Sulkin, The Free Press): “I asked Starzyk about the accu­sa­tion that Gen Z has an atti­tude prob­lem about work. She agreed whole­heart­ed­ly. ‘Our atti­tude prob­lem has to do with see­ing all the peo­ple doing nor­mal, day-to-day things online and mak­ing mon­ey from it. It dis­in­cen­tivizes you from work­ing hard. And it def­i­nite­ly dis­in­cen­tivizes you from tak­ing a cor­po­rate job when you watch some­one earn more mon­ey from shar­ing their morn­ing rou­tine than you do in a month or even more at your nine-to-five.’”

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

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). And to the extent you can dis­cern my opin­ions, please under­stand that they are my own and not nec­es­sar­i­ly those of Chi Alpha or any oth­er orga­ni­za­tion I may be per­ceived to rep­re­sent. 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. If this was for­ward­ed to you and you want to receive future emails, sign up here. You can also view the archives.

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 521: mostly Charlie Kirk

You’ve heard of TGIF? This is TGFI: Things Glen Found Inter­est­ing

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions. If you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. A lot of arti­cles about the mur­der of Char­lie Kirk. Even peo­ple who bare­ly knew who Kirk was seem to have been deeply moved by his assas­si­na­tion.
    • Stu­dent accep­tance of vio­lence in response to speech hits a record high (Ryne Weiss & Chapin Lenthall-Cleary, FIRE): “Accord­ing to FIRE’s annu­al Col­lege Free Speech Rank­ings sur­vey, in 2020, the nation­al aver­age showed about 1 in 5 stu­dents said it was ever accept­able to use vio­lence to stop a speak­er. That num­ber has since risen to a dis­turb­ing 1 in 3 stu­dents.”
    • How Great the Chasm That Lay Between Us (Samuel D. James, Sub­stack): “Where to begin? The mur­der of Char­lie Kirk feels dif­fer­ent.… Char­lie Kirk was not an elect­ed offi­cial, but a pri­vate cit­i­zen. He was a com­men­ta­tor and media per­son­al­i­ty. Because of that, this killing feels wider in sym­bol­ism. Tonight, a lot of Amer­i­cans feel like some­one died on their behalf. And there’s some truth in that.”
    • Char­lie Kirk Was Prac­tic­ing Pol­i­tics the Right Way (Ezra Klein, New York Times): “You can dis­like much of what Kirk believed and the fol­low­ing state­ment is still true: Kirk was prac­tic­ing pol­i­tics in exact­ly the right way. He was show­ing up to cam­pus­es and talk­ing with any­one who would talk to him. He was one of the era’s most effec­tive prac­ti­tion­ers of per­sua­sion.… In the inau­gur­al episode of his pod­cast, Gov. Gavin New­som of Cal­i­for­nia host­ed Kirk, admit­ting that his son was a huge fan. What a tes­ta­ment to Kirk’s project.”
    • After Kirk Killing, Amer­i­cans Agree on One Thing: Some­thing Is Seri­ous­ly Wrong (Shawn Hubler, Edgar San­doval and Audra D. S. Burch, New York Times): “No mat­ter their pol­i­tics, peo­ple said they were deeply unset­tled after the killing of Mr. Kirk… Mr. Kirk’s death at 31 sym­bol­ized for many the col­lapse of what they thought was a basic, com­mon-sense, need-not-be-debat­ed Amer­i­can val­ue: that peo­ple express­ing a polit­i­cal opin­ion should not be shot for it.”
    • Je Suis Char­lie (Bethel McGrew, Sub­stack): “It is unique­ly, vis­cer­al­ly hor­ri­fy­ing: the polit­i­cal assas­si­na­tion of a young hus­band and father who held no polit­i­cal office, nor was he cam­paign­ing for one. He was a polit­i­cal fig­ure, true, but still a pri­vate cit­i­zen. A pri­vate cit­i­zen who, to his killer, for the great crime of exist­ing while vocal­ly mid­dle-of-the-road con­ser­v­a­tive, deserved to die. And not just in the eyes of his killer, as we quick­ly learned.”
      • McGrew is a Chris­t­ian essayist/journalist with a Ph.D. in math and I when I run across her con­tent I usu­al­ly find it help­ful.
    • Con­ser­v­a­tive Chris­tians Mourn Kirk as a Mar­tyr (Eliz­a­beth Dias and Ruth Gra­ham, New York Times): “‘I’m rack­ing my brain try­ing to think of anoth­er polit­i­cal fig­ure that had a sim­i­lar impact and fol­low­ing who was assas­si­nat­ed, and the only per­son I can think of is Mar­tin Luther King Jr.,’ Mr. Schilling said.”
    • If We Keep This Up, Char­lie Kirk Will Not Be the Last to Die (David French, New York Times): “That’s one thing I respect­ed about Char­lie — and it’s worth empha­siz­ing because the assas­sin attacked him as he spoke on cam­pus — he wasn’t afraid of a debate. He was will­ing to talk to any­one. And when he was shot in the mid­dle of a debate, the assas­sin didn’t just take aim at a pre­cious human being, cre­at­ed in the image of God, he took aim at the Amer­i­can exper­i­ment itself.”
    • Hit­ting The Jugu­lar Of Lib­er­al Democ­ra­cy (Andrew Sul­li­van, Sub­stack): “…I [do not] think it is wrong to ‘politi­cize’ his own hor­ri­ble assas­si­na­tion. Because it was an express­ly polit­i­cal act. It was polit­i­cal because it struck Kirk in the core act of lib­er­al democ­ra­cy: debat­ing his oppo­nents. We don’t know the pre­cise motive behind the mur­der right now, but that’s irrel­e­vant. This was aimed lit­er­al­ly and fig­u­ra­tive­ly at the jugu­lar of a free soci­ety.”
  2. One of our mil­i­tary alum­ni liked the “hon­esty tax” arti­cle I shared last week and sent me this mono­graph about the same dynam­ic in the mil­i­tary: Lying to Our­selves: Dis­hon­esty in the Army Pro­fes­sion (Leonard Wong & Stephen J. Ger­ras, US Army War Col­lege): “For exam­ple, one colonel described how his brigade com­man­der need­ed to turn in his sit­u­a­tion report on Fri­day, forc­ing the bat­tal­ions to do theirs on Thurs­day, and there­fore the com­pa­nies sub­mit­ted their data on Wednesday—necessitating the com­pa­nies to describe events that had not even occurred yet. The end result was that, while the com­pa­nies gave it their best shot, every­one includ­ing the bat­tal­ion com­man­der knew that the com­pa­ny reports were not accu­rate.”
    • This fact was strik­ing: “In the rush by high­er head­quar­ters to incor­po­rate every good idea into train­ing, the total num­ber of train­ing days required by all manda­to­ry train­ing direc­tives lit­er­al­ly exceeds the num­ber of train­ing days avail­able to com­pa­ny com­man­ders. Com­pa­ny com­man­ders some­how have to fit 297 days of manda­to­ry require­ments into 256 avail­able train­ing days.” It is lit­er­al­ly impos­si­ble for them to ful­fill the require­ments they have to affirm they ful­filled!
  3. The Ser­i­al Killer’s Apol­o­gist (Zac Bis­son­nette, The Free Press): “He then led police to the bod­ies of young men he and Cor­ll had mur­dered with the help of anoth­er accom­plice, David Brooks. In all, 27 men and boys had been killed; Hen­ley was tried and con­vict­ed on six counts of mur­der with mal­ice.… Ramsland’s treat­ment of Hen­ley rep­re­sents ther­a­py cul­ture tak­en to its log­i­cal extreme. There is no vil­lain so odi­ous that he can’t be recast through the lens of a trau­ma framework—and a sym­pa­thet­ic expla­na­tion can always be found through exten­sive talk­ing.”
  4. NASA dis­cov­ers ‘clear­est sign of life that we’ve ever found on Mars’ (Kasha Patel, Wash­ing­ton Post): “But the col­or­ful speck­les on the rocks pose an even more allur­ing mys­tery. These fea­tures are two well-known min­er­als made of iron, phos­pho­rus and sul­fur. One called vivian­ite — also some­times referred to as corpse crys­tals — forms dur­ing the decay of organ­ic mate­r­i­al and is blue-green. The oth­er, called greig­ite, shows up as a dull brown. But when these two min­er­als are found togeth­er in sed­i­ments on Earth, Hurowitz said, it’s usu­al­ly a result of micro­bial metab­o­lisms.… The authors acknowl­edge that these min­er­als could have formed with­out microbes — with the involve­ment of heat, for instance. But the new study deter­mined the Mar­t­ian rocks don’t appear to have been heat­ed.”
  5. Strange Gifts of the Spir­it (Sarah Kil­lam Cros­by, Plough): “Ire­naeus, the great sec­ond-cen­tu­ry bish­op of Lyons, wrote that true dis­ci­ples of Christ received and exer­cised spir­i­tu­al gifts grant­ed them through the grace of God. ‘Some real­ly and tru­ly dri­ve out demons, … some have fore­knowl­edge of the future, and visions and prophet­ic speech, and oth­ers lay their hands on the sick and make them well, and as we said, even the dead have been raised and have remained with us for many years.’ Ori­gen like­wise claimed that mirac­u­lous signs and won­ders were still per­formed, though with greater scarci­ty, in the church­es of his day, and Augustine’s City of God recounts sev­er­al mir­a­cles, includ­ing heal­ings and exor­cisms. For these and oth­er patris­tic the­olo­gians, it was clear that super­nat­ur­al gifts of the Spir­it were still present in the life of the church. These texts show that heal­ings, prophe­cies, and oth­er phe­nom­e­na were viewed as part of the pat­tern which had been ini­ti­at­ed at Pen­te­cost.”
  6. Expe­ri­ences Shape Beliefs. They Shouldn’t Deter­mine Them. (Samuel James, Gospel Coali­tion): “When some­one talks about why they’ve changed their con­vic­tions about some­thing, they increas­ing­ly refer to neg­a­tive expe­ri­ences more often than per­sua­sive argu­ments.… It’s not so much about los­ing faith in a creed, but los­ing faith in some­body. There’s a grow­ing ten­den­cy to then iden­ti­fy the per­son in whom we have lost faith as the sum total of their beliefs, and change our think­ing accord­ing­ly. ‘Because X per­son did Y bad thing, this must mean X per­son was wrong about Z idea.’”
  7. Tanks Were Just Tanks, Until Drones Made Them Change (Mar­co Her­nan­dez & Thomas Gib­bons-Neff, New York Times): “…Russia’s and Ukraine’s Sovi­et-era tanks rum­ble across the bat­tle­field cov­ered in anti-drone nets and spikes, dan­gling chains and unwieldy cages. The exte­ri­or trans­for­ma­tions of these hulk­ing vehi­cles are a tes­ta­ment to how quick­ly drones have changed the war in Ukraine in just over three years.”

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

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). And to the extent you can dis­cern my opin­ions, please under­stand that they are my own and not nec­es­sar­i­ly those of Chi Alpha or any oth­er orga­ni­za­tion I may be per­ceived to rep­re­sent. 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. If this was for­ward­ed to you and you want to receive future emails, sign up here. You can also view the archives.

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 520: the honesty tax and other counterproductive things

You’ve heard of TGIF? This is TGFI: Things Glen Found Inter­est­ing

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions. If you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. The Hon­esty Tax (Kelsey Piper, The Argu­ment): “We set high — stu­pid­ly, coun­ter­pro­duc­tive­ly high — stan­dards and then min­i­mal­ly enforce them because full enforce­ment would be a dis­as­ter. So, almost every­one just lies. Then, the peo­ple you pun­ish are the peo­ple who are unwill­ing to lie, or who don’t know the rules about what kinds of lies are ‘nor­mal’ and what kinds are seri­ous­ly out of bounds. Those less like­ly to know these infor­mal rules are not a ran­dom­ly select­ed group of peo­ple — the more con­nec­tions you have in D.C., the more you know what ‘not to men­tion.’ But lying is bad! Select­ing for liars is bad! This may end up look­ing sort of sim­i­lar to the result you’d get if you just had a rea­son­able pol­i­cy in the first place, but it’s actu­al­ly a lot worse — you screened out every­one who wasn’t will­ing to be dis­hon­est.”
  2. What Is Man, That Thou Art Mind­ful Of Him? (Scott Alexan­der, Astral Codex Ten): bril­liant and dif­fi­cult to excerpt. Dwarkesh Patel hosts a pod­cast with God debat­ing Iblis over whether humans are tru­ly intel­li­gent and whether bio­log­i­cal intel­li­gence is even pos­si­ble. Don’t assume it is Chris­t­ian based on the title — it is def­i­nite­ly not.
  3. What Hap­pens If No One Reads (Spencer Kla­van, The Free Press): “If Chat­G­PT could tell you what a meal tastes like, would you not feel the need to eat it? …I asked Grok about The Broth­ers Kara­ma­zov and it told me, ‘We’re all a mess of con­tra­dic­tions.’ And so we are. Why didn’t Dos­toyevsky just say that?”
  4. The Mil­lion­aire Who Left Wall Street to Become a Para­medic (Christo­pher Maag, New York Times): “Jonathan Kleis­ner didn’t know what he want­ed to be when he grew up, except a suc­cess. After attend­ing Ford­ham Prep, a Jesuit high school in the Bronx, he went to Boston Uni­ver­si­ty, drop­ping out a semes­ter before grad­u­a­tion to take a job at a small trad­ing firm on Wall Street for $40,000 a year. It was 1991, it looked as if the reces­sion was over and the mood on the street was buoy­ant.”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by an alum­nus. If for no oth­er rea­son, read to see the sto­ry of 985 pound guy. Absolute­ly wild.
  5. Giv­ing peo­ple mon­ey helped less than I thought it would (Kelsey Piper, The Argu­ment): “Mul­ti­ple large, high-qual­i­ty ran­dom­ized stud­ies are find­ing that guar­an­teed income trans­fers do not appear to pro­duce sus­tained improve­ments in men­tal health, stress lev­els, phys­i­cal health, child devel­op­ment out­comes or employ­ment.”
    • Inspired by the above arti­cle but going in some dif­fer­ent direc­tions: Why I Am Not a Lib­er­al (David Brooks, New York Times): “Piper’s essay kicked up a bit of an inter­net storm. You might have thought the pro­gres­sive reac­tion would have been: We need to keep giv­ing poor peo­ple mon­ey, but we also need to focus on the human and behav­ioral fac­tors that will enable them to build com­fort­able, inde­pen­dent lives. But that wasn’t the reac­tion. The pro­gres­sives I saw dou­bled down on the the­sis: Poor peo­ple just need mon­ey.”
  6. Sick Peo­ple Are Sick (Fred­die deBoer, Sub­stack): “It will nev­er stop amaz­ing and depress­ing me, real­ly, when the pub­lic reacts with shock when peo­ple with men­tal ill­ness behave like peo­ple with men­tal ill­ness… In our elite culture’s eager­ness to des­tig­ma­tize, we’ve made men­tal ill­ness unse­ri­ous. We’ve reduced it to Tik­Tok dances and ther­a­peu­tic hash­tags. ‘It’s OK to not be OK,’ says the cheer­ful let­ter­ing, but there’s always the implied caveat: it’s OK so long as ‘not being OK’ looks like cry­ing in an endear­ing way, jour­nal­ing, eat­ing ice cream straight from the car­ton, and then bounc­ing back with resilience. The real tex­ture of seri­ous men­tal ill­ness — the para­noia, the rages, the break­downs, the cata­to­nia — doesn’t fit into that frame­work, so when it arrives peo­ple don’t know how to metab­o­lize it.”
    • This is com­mon at Stan­ford. Peo­ple love the rhetoric of sup­port­ing peo­ple with men­tal ill­ness up until it’s actu­al­ly hard and dis­tress­ing.
  7. Your Rivals Aren’t Respon­si­ble for Mass Shoot­ings (Ross Douthat, New York Times): “…while the ten­den­cy to extreme and apoc­a­lyp­tic rhetoric is a con­sis­tent fea­ture of Amer­i­can pol­i­tics (even a demo­c­ra­t­ic birthright), most of the killers shoot­ing up schools and church­es or tar­get­ing politi­cians for assas­si­na­tions are not real­ly par­tic­i­pants in this polar­iza­tion. They aren’t tak­ing wok­e­ness or pop­ulism too lit­er­al­ly or too far; they’re fol­low­ing oth­er direc­tives and act­ing on oth­er pur­pos­es entire­ly.”

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

  • Tay­lor Swift Engage­ment Over­turned As Ref­er­ee Deter­mines Travis Kel­ce’s Knee Did­n’t Touch The Ground (Baby­lon Bee)
  • Bing (Pearls Before Swine)
  • Ven­mo (Texts from Super­heroes)
  • Wave­func­tion Col­lapse (xkcd)
  • How Ani­me Took Over Amer­i­ca (Joshua Hunt, New York Times): “A recent sur­vey of over 4,000 Amer­i­can adults showed that 42 per­cent of all Gen Z respon­dents watched ani­me every week, far high­er than the 25 per­cent of Gen Z respon­dents who fol­lowed the N.F.L.” — a visu­al­ly stun­ning arti­cle
  • Do Not Dis­turb (Pearls Before Swine)
  • The top col­lege cam­pus­es to find celebri­ties — and their kids (Christo­pher Cameron, New York Post): “Con­grat­u­la­tions, the high school class of 2025 (rah-rah-rah!) is ready to matric­u­late! Your fresh­ly sprout­ed schol­ar spent the last four years grow­ing their GPA, acing their APs and crush­ing their SATs in prepa­ra­tion for brain-bend­ing cur­ricu­lum. But are they ready for the most advan­ta­geous aspect of life at a top col­lege: social­iz­ing with star­dom?  It’s Math­e­mat­ics 101. Half of Hol­ly­wood canoodling x 20 years = a crop of celebri­ty scions who are now rul­ing the cam­pus­es of New England’s old­est insti­tu­tions, as well as the increas­ing­ly com­pet­i­tive so-called ‘new Ivies’ (schools like Notre Dame, New York Uni­ver­si­ty, Duke, Emory, Rice, Van­der­bilt, North­west­ern and Wash­ing­ton Uni­ver­si­ty).”

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). And to the extent you can dis­cern my opin­ions, please under­stand that they are my own and not nec­es­sar­i­ly those of Chi Alpha or any oth­er orga­ni­za­tion I may be per­ceived to rep­re­sent. 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. If this was for­ward­ed to you and you want to receive future emails, sign up here. You can also view the archives.

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 519: our therapeutic age and transparent mice scalps

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions. If you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. The Chris­t­ian in a Ther­a­peu­tic Age (Ian Har­ber, Mere Ortho­doxy): “What are ways that Chris­tians can live, wit­ness, and nav­i­gate the com­plex­i­ties of a ther­a­peu­tic cul­ture? I believe there are at least three. 1) Occu­py a dif­fer­ent exis­ten­tial space, 2) Embody a dif­fer­ent sto­ry, and 3) Cul­ti­vate a dif­fer­ent qual­i­ty of life.… The ther­a­peu­tic cul­ture is try­ing to solve real ail­ments. We’re more frac­tured, iso­lat­ed, and devoid of mean­ing-mak­ing roles and insti­tu­tions than ever before. The dig­i­tal age has rap­tured us from our bod­ies and com­mu­ni­ties and drained us of the very things that make us human. But the good truth for our time—and all eternity—is that the God-human, Jesus, has made a way for us to recov­er our human­i­ty”
  2. Researchers turn mouse scalp trans­par­ent to image brain devel­op­ment (Stan­ford News): “Now, by sim­ply rub­bing a solu­tion into a juve­nile mouse’s scalp, researchers at Stan­ford can make the skin trans­par­ent to all vis­i­ble light, allow­ing them to image the devel­op­ing con­nec­tions in a liv­ing mouse’s brain. And because the tech­nique is reversible and non-inva­sive, the researchers can return to the same ani­mal over days and weeks.”
    • Chi Alpha alum­nus and Stan­ford pro­fes­sor Guosong Hong at it again!
  3. Robin West­man and the Rise of Amer­i­can Nihilism (Peter Savod­nik, The Free Press): “All that fin­ger-point­ing obscures a deep­er point: West­man seems to have been dri­ven by an all-con­sum­ing, destruc­tive force, a nihilism—the con­vic­tion that life is mean­ing­less; that words like truth, jus­tice and God are emp­ty slo­gans; that every­thing must be razed. Nihilism is not some obscure aca­d­e­m­ic notion. It stretch­es back to the 19th century—early Russ­ian rad­i­cals were called nihilists—and it has waxed and waned across the past 150 years. Today, you can feel the nihilist impulse cours­ing through Amer­i­ca, which has been most­ly stripped of its faith and a shared nation­al cul­ture and has seen once-great institutions—universities, cor­po­ra­tions, church­es, non­prof­it orga­ni­za­tions, the media, the military—become engulfed in scan­dal and politi­ciza­tion.”
  4. They Became Sym­bols for Gazan Star­va­tion. But All 12 Suf­fer from Oth­er Health Prob­lems. (Olivia Rein­gold and Tanya Lukyano­va, The Free Press): “Uncov­er­ing this miss­ing con­text didn’t require in-depth, on-the-ground reporting—or months of inves­tiga­tive work. It took min­utes, and required noth­ing more than a com­put­er with a sta­ble inter­net con­nec­tion. We sim­ply ran the sto­ry sub­jects’ names through Google Trans­late to get the Ara­bic spelling, then searched those names in Ara­bic-lan­guage media. Even a quick scan of the results revealed that many of these chil­dren suf­fer from mus­cle atro­phy, head injuries, or oth­er seri­ous med­ical con­di­tions that help explain their ema­ci­at­ed appear­ance.”
    • A fol­low-up: Jour­nal­ists Against Jour­nal­ism (The Free Press): “Jour­nal­is­tic out­lets love to boast about ‘impact,’ and this sto­ry has had more than its share.… In a nor­mal time, this is the kind of work that would be praised by our peers for get­ting to ground truth. But we don’t live in nor­mal times. And that is not how some of our col­leagues in the news media saw things.… You’ll notice one impor­tant aspect about the uproar: No one is dis­put­ing the facts in our piece.”
  5. Two on Chi­na (or more specif­i­cal­ly, the Chi­nese Com­mu­nist Par­ty):
    • How Chi­na Influ­ences Elec­tions in America’s Biggest City (Michael Forsythe, Jay Root, Bian­ca Pal­laro & David A. Fahren­thold, New York Times): “In New York City, social clubs backed by Chi­na under­mined a con­gres­sion­al can­di­date who once chal­lenged the regime on Chi­nese tele­vi­sion. They helped unseat a state sen­a­tor for attend­ing a ban­quet with the pres­i­dent of Tai­wan. And they con­demned a City Coun­cil can­di­date on social media for sup­port­ing Hong Kong democ­ra­cy. In the past few years, these orga­ni­za­tions have qui­et­ly foiled the careers of politi­cians who opposed China’s author­i­tar­i­an gov­ern­ment while back­ing oth­ers who sup­port­ed poli­cies of the country’s rul­ing Com­mu­nist Par­ty.”
    • I’m a Stan­ford stu­dent. A Chi­nese agent tried to recruit me as a spy (Elsa John­son, The Times): “After that I start­ed screen­shot­ting our con­ver­sa­tions. I was begin­ning to sus­pect that Charles might be work­ing for the Chi­nese Com­mu­nist Par­ty (CCP) and he could be try­ing to recruit me as a spy. I know it sounds para­noid, but I had heard of oth­er Stan­ford stu­dents receiv­ing com­mu­ni­ca­tions like this out of the blue — espe­cial­ly those study­ing sci­ence, tech, engi­neer­ing or math­e­mat­ics.…. Thanks to Amer­i­can uni­ver­si­ties’ open-door pol­i­cy, Chi­nese aca­d­e­mics are allowed to col­lab­o­rate with our smartest researchers and sci­en­tists, and take our advance­ments in AI, robot­ics, weapon­ry and nuclear tech­nol­o­gy back home. This is not an exag­ger­a­tion — it’s the con­clu­sion of a report on the CCP pub­lished last Sep­tem­ber by the House select com­mit­tee on the CCP.”
  6. The Wrong Def­i­n­i­tion of Love (David Brooks, New York Times): “In [our ther­a­py-dri­ven] cul­ture peo­ple are nat­u­ral­ly going to define love as the feel­ing they get when some­body sat­is­fies their crav­ing for pos­i­tive and ten­der atten­tion, not as some­thing they self­less­ly give to anoth­er. In oth­er, less self-ori­ent­ed cul­tures, and in oth­er times, love was seen as some­thing clos­er to self-abne­ga­tion than to self-com­fort. It was seen as a force so pow­er­ful that it could over­come our nat­ur­al self­ish­ness.”
  7. As Stan­ford lays off work­ers, 18 employ­ees made $1 mil­lion or more (Top 25 list­ed) (Braden Cartwright, Palo Alto Dai­ly Post): “At a time when Stan­ford is fir­ing employ­ees to save mon­ey, new­ly released IRS doc­u­ments show the uni­ver­si­ty paid 18 employ­ees $1 mil­lion or more in the pre­vi­ous fis­cal year. Stan­ford announced in July that it was lay­ing off 363 employ­ees this fall as part of a $140 mil­lion bud­get cut caused by reduced fed­er­al research fund­ing and a high­er endow­ment tax.”

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

  • Cat­a­stro­phe (Pearls Before Swine)
  • There’s a Sim­ple Trick to Unshrink Your Clothes, Thanks to Sci­ence (Nisa Sal­im, Sci­enceAl­ert): “If a favourite gar­ment has shrunk in the wash, you can try to res­cue it with this sim­ple method. Gen­tly soak the item in luke­warm water mixed with hair con­di­tion­er or baby sham­poo (approx­i­mate­ly one table­spoon per litre). Then, care­ful­ly stretch the fab­ric back into shape and dry it flat or under gen­tle ten­sion – for exam­ple, by peg­ging the gar­ment to a dry­ing rack.”
    • Read­ing this arti­cle is like read­ing one of those recipe blogs that goes on and on before it gets to the point, but the final bit is inter­est­ing.
  • Gen­era (SMBC)
  • Man Ful­fills The Great Com­mis­sion By Occa­sion­al­ly Wear­ing Nov­el­ty Chris­t­ian T‑Shirt In Pub­lic (Baby­lon Bee)
  • Bill Belichick’s Girl­friend, 24, Wants to Trade­mark ‘Gold Dig­ger’ (Amber Lewis, The Dai­ly Beast): “Jor­don Hud­son wants to make some gold from the gold-dig­ging accu­sa­tions levied at her amid her rela­tion­ship with Bill Belichick, who is esti­mat­ed to be worth $70 mil­lion. The for­mer cheer­leader, 24, filed a trade­mark appli­ca­tion this week through the com­pa­ny she man­ages, TCE Rights Man­age­ment, to cash in on her ‘gold dig­ger’ epi­thet. If her bid is suc­cess­ful, she will launch her own trade­marked jew­el­ry and key chains line, Peo­ple reports.”
  • See­ing infrared: sci­en­tists cre­ate con­tact lens­es that grant ‘super-vision’ (Ian Sam­ple, The Guardian): “In pre­vi­ous work, the research team gave mice near-infrared vision by inject­ing upcon­ver­sion nanopar­ti­cles under the reti­na, the light-sen­si­tive mem­brane at the back of the eye. But not­ing that this ‘may not be read­i­ly accept­ed by humans,’ they searched for a less inva­sive strat­e­gy. Writ­ing in the jour­nal Cell, the sci­en­tists describe how they made soft con­tact lens­es seed­ed with upcon­ver­sion nanopar­ti­cles. When worn, peo­ple could see Morse code-like sig­nals flashed from an infrared LED and tell what direc­tion infrared light came from. Their infrared vision improved when they closed their eyes, because eye­lids block vis­i­ble light more than infrared, so there was less vis­i­ble light to inter­fere.”
    • The arti­cle is a few months old. Wild times.

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). And to the extent you can dis­cern my opin­ions, please under­stand that they are my own and not nec­es­sar­i­ly those of Chi Alpha or any oth­er orga­ni­za­tion I may be per­ceived to rep­re­sent. 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. If this was for­ward­ed to you and you want to receive future emails, sign up here. You can also view the archives.

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 518

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions. If you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. I’m 30. The Sex­u­al Rev­o­lu­tion Shack­led My Gen­er­a­tion. (Louise Per­ry, The Free Press): “We need to re-erect the social guard rails that have been torn down. To do that, we have to start by stat­ing the obvi­ous: Sex must be tak­en seri­ous­ly. Men and women are dif­fer­ent. Some desires are bad. Con­sent is not enough. Vio­lence is not love. Love­less sex is not empow­er­ing. Peo­ple are not prod­ucts. Mar­riage is good.”
    • FYI: the cov­er image is risque.
  2. Here’s What Hap­pened When I Made My Col­lege Stu­dents Put Away Their Phones (Ezekiel J. Emanuel, New York Times): “To help sell this pol­i­cy, I pre­sent­ed in the first lec­ture of the course a study show­ing that stu­dents who were required to take class notes by hand retained sig­nif­i­cant­ly more infor­ma­tion than stu­dents who used com­put­ers. The rea­son is that with com­put­ers, stu­dents can type as fast as I speak and strive for ver­ba­tim tran­scripts, but there is almost no men­tal pro­cess­ing of the class’s con­tent. Con­verse­ly, vir­tu­al­ly no one can hand write 125 words per minute for 90 min­utes. Thus, hand­writ­ten notes require simul­ta­ne­ous men­tal pro­cess­ing to deter­mine the impor­tant points that need record­ing. This pro­cess­ing encodes the mate­r­i­al in the brain dif­fer­ent­ly and facil­i­tates longer-term reten­tion. The data on the dis­tract­ing effect of mobile phones — even when they are face down and turned off — are strong.”
    • The author is a med school prof at Penn.
  3. Is mod­er­ate drink­ing actu­al­ly healthy? Sci­en­tists say the idea is out­dat­ed. (Stan­ford News): “We have bought into a sto­ry­line about alco­hol that, when you real­ly look at the facts, is not there,” Stafford said. “There is a mythol­o­gy about alco­hol hav­ing pos­i­tive ben­e­fits as well as alco­hol being neu­tral for human health.”
  4. Trump’s Tac­tics Mean Many Inter­na­tion­al Stu­dents Won’t Make It to Cam­pus (Anemona Har­to­col­lis, New York Times): “In Chi­na and India, there have been few visa appoint­ments avail­able for stu­dents in recent months, and some­times none at all, accord­ing to the Asso­ci­a­tion of Inter­na­tion­al Edu­ca­tors, also known as NAFSA, a pro­fes­sion­al orga­ni­za­tion. If visa prob­lems per­sist, new inter­na­tion­al stu­dent enroll­ment in Amer­i­can col­leges could drop by 30 to 40 per­cent over­all this fall, a loss of 150,000 stu­dents, accord­ing to the group’s analy­sis.”
  5. What Hap­pens When an Entire Sci­en­tif­ic Field Changes Its Mind (Charles Mann, Sci­en­tif­ic Amer­i­can): “[There is] a pop­u­lar notion of sci­en­tif­ic progress as a series of upheavals in which mav­er­icks throw out the entrenched views of the past.… But that’s not how sci­ence works. Or, more pre­cise­ly, it’s not how sci­ence works except in two spe­cif­ic, rel­a­tive­ly unusu­al cir­cum­stances. The first is when research dis­ci­plines are young, thin­ly pop­u­lat­ed and just devel­op­ing instru­ments of suf­fi­cient pow­er to test their ini­tial beliefs, as was the case with the Michel­son-Mor­ley exper­i­ment and Pasteur’s fer­men­ta­tion. The sec­ond, pos­si­bly more con­se­quen­tial sit­u­a­tion is when sci­en­tif­ic find­ings lead to so much pub­lic inter­est that they become of con­cern to polit­i­cal author­i­ties.”
  6. A two-parter about Chi­na from a polit­i­cal sci­en­tist at Johns Hop­kins:
    • The Case for China’s Strength (Yascha Mounk, Sub­stack): “In the Unit­ed States, the Col­lege Board has recent­ly announced that it will dras­ti­cal­ly reduce the length of read­ing pas­sages; rather than giv­ing stu­dents who are tak­ing the SATs texts that are about 600 words in length, and ask­ing them a few ques­tions about each, they will hence­forth be giv­en texts that are about 150 words in length, and only have to answer a sin­gle ques­tion about each. This means that Chi­nese high school stu­dents tak­ing their Eng­lish exam now like­ly face a more chal­leng­ing test in a for­eign lan­guage than Amer­i­cans tak­ing the SAT do in their native tongue. Don’t believe me? Take a look at this page from last year’s exam.”
    • The Cracks in China’s Rise (Yascha Mounk, Sub­stack): “The country’s high mod­ernist eth­ic allowed it to build tens of thou­sands of miles of high-speed rail­way tracks in the course of a cou­ple of decades; but it is also the rea­son why one year’s favored indus­tri­al sec­tors reli­ably seem to turn into next year’s sources of waste and over­pro­duc­tion. The country’s extent of cen­tral­iza­tion cre­ates a giant mar­ket increas­ing­ly unit­ed by shared norms and a com­mon lan­guage; but the extent to which local cul­tures and lan­guages are being flat­tened also con­tributes to a grow­ing sense of alien­ation. None of this should be sur­pris­ing. When coun­tries are in their first spurt of growth, the advan­tages of the mod­el are often evi­dent, and its short­com­ings invis­i­ble. It is when they mature, and the prob­lems they need to solve become increas­ing­ly com­plex, that the draw­backs come into view.”
  7. The Many Jobs of a Reli­gious Leader (Ryan Burge, Sub­stack): “The one real­ly sig­nif­i­cant find­ing for me is that very few mem­bers of the cler­gy report that they went straight into min­istry as a young per­son. In fact, 66% of the folks in the sam­ple of reli­gious lead­ers said that they had a career out­side reli­gion before they became a mem­ber of the cler­gy. I’m not sure if the aver­age per­son knows that — most pas­tors you see didn’t go straight from Bible Col­lege to Divin­i­ty School to full-time min­istry.”

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

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). And to the extent you can dis­cern my opin­ions, please under­stand that they are my own and not nec­es­sar­i­ly those of Chi Alpha or any oth­er orga­ni­za­tion I may be per­ceived to rep­re­sent. 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. If this was for­ward­ed to you and you want to receive future emails, sign up here. You can also view the archives.

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 517: being timely for church and some Chi Alpha props

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions. If you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Why Being Late to Church Mat­ters (Joe Carter, The Gospel Coali­tion): “If we believe the ser­vice is pri­mar­i­ly about what we can get out of it—uplifting music, an encour­ag­ing ser­mon, fel­low­ship with friends—then arriv­ing late makes sense. After all, we can still catch most of the ‘good stuff.’ But if you under­stand cor­po­rate wor­ship as some­thing we do togeth­er as the body of Christ—if you see it as our col­lec­tive offer­ing of praise to our Creator—then show­ing up late takes on a dif­fer­ent mean­ing entire­ly. We’re not just show­ing up late; we’re miss­ing the oppor­tu­ni­ty to ful­ly par­tic­i­pate in some­thing the Lord has designed to form us as his peo­ple.”
  2. My expe­ri­ence at the Stan­ford Ver­i­tas Forum: Hen­nessy and Gelsinger on lead­er­ship, ethics and AI (Pedro David Espinoza, Stan­ford Dai­ly): “The forum was mod­er­at­ed by Elli Schulz ’25, pres­i­dent of Chi Alpha Chris­t­ian Fel­low­ship and vice pres­i­dent of Vox Clara, a stu­dent-run mag­a­zine part­nered with Ver­i­tas. It offered a unique oppor­tu­ni­ty to con­nect with lead­ers who have shaped the tech world while reflect­ing on iden­ti­ty, pur­pose, ethics, and faith. Elli, whom I’ve known since 2022 through Chi Alpha — one of Stanford’s most diverse and largest Chris­t­ian orga­ni­za­tions — brought calm con­fi­dence, light­heart­ed humor and sharp ques­tions to guide the hour-long con­ver­sa­tion. She was the ide­al mod­er­a­tor, giv­en her pas­sion for apolo­get­ics and ded­i­ca­tion to faith and work.”
    • Includ­ing entire­ly because it makes Chi Alpha look good.
  3. My Reli­gion is “Some­thing Else” (Ryan Burge, Sub­stack): “…young peo­ple don’t know what the word Protes­tant means any­more, and that’s going to cause major prob­lems in mea­sur­ing reli­gion going for­ward.… Among the youngest adults in the sam­ple, almost none of them select­ed Protes­tant. In fact, few­er than 10% did so until you get into respon­dents in their late 30s. In con­trast, large num­bers sim­ply said they were Chris­t­ian—at least 20% of those in their late teens and ear­ly 20s.”
  4. The Book That Can Inspire Both a Pope and a Politi­cian (Randy Boy­ago­da, New York Times): “In oth­er words, the two most promi­nent Amer­i­can Catholics [J. D. Vance and Pope Leo] have each been pro­found­ly influ­enced by a 1,600-year-old book about why the Roman Empire was falling apart. What makes it so con­vinc­ing, and why are pow­er­ful peo­ple still turn­ing to it for guid­ance and insight?”
    • The author is an Eng­lish pro­fes­sor. Rec­om­mend­ed by the moth­er of an alum­nus.
  5. Stop Ask­ing Kids If They’re Depressed (Abi­gail Shri­er, The Free Press): “Kids are wild­ly sug­gestible, espe­cial­ly where psy­chi­atric symp­toms are con­cerned. Ask a kid repeat­ed­ly if he might be depressed—how about now? Are you sure?—and he just might decide that he is. Intro­duce ‘gen­der dys­pho­ria’ into a peer group, and a swath of sev­enth grade girls are like­ly to decide they were born in the wrong body. Intro­duce ‘test­ing anx­i­ety’ or ‘social pho­bia,’ or ‘sui­ci­dal­i­ty’ to them, and many teens are like­ly to decide: I have that, too. There is a rea­son clin­i­cians keep anorex­ia patients from social­iz­ing unsu­per­vised in a hos­pi­tal ward; anorex­ia is pro­found­ly social­ly con­ta­gious.”
  6. Cana­da Is Killing Itself (Elaina Plott Cal­abro, The Atlantic): “One day, admin­is­ter­ing a lethal injec­tion to a patient was against the law; the next, it was as legit­i­mate as a ton­sil­lec­to­my, but often with less of a wait. MAID now accounts for about one in 20 deaths in Canada—more than Alzheimer’s and dia­betes combined—surpassing coun­tries where assist­ed dying has been legal for far longer.”
    • A sad read with some gen­uine­ly shock­ing quotes. Unlocked.
  7. What Kids Told Us About How to Get Them Off Their Phones (Lenore Ske­nazy, Zach Rausch, and Jonathan Haidt, The Atlantic): “Chil­dren want to meet up in per­son, no screens or super­vi­sion. But because so many par­ents restrict their abil­i­ty to social­ize in the real world on their own, kids resort to the one thing that allows them to hang out with no adults hov­er­ing: their phones.”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

  • For­give­ness (Pearls Before Swine)
  • Apos­tles Quick­ly Start Act­ing Pious As They Notice Luke Watch­ing And Tak­ing Notes (Baby­lon Bee)
  • Pana­ma Playlists: “I found the real Spo­ti­fy accounts of celebri­ties, politi­cians, and jour­nal­ists. Many use their real names. With a lit­tle inves­ti­gat­ing, I could say with near-cer­tain­ty: yep, this is that per­son.  I’ve been scrap­ing their playlists for over a year. Some indi­vid­u­als even have a set­ting enabled that dis­plays their last played song. I scraped this con­tin­u­ous­ly, so I know what songs they played, how many times, and when.  The Pana­ma Papers revealed hid­den bank accounts. This reveals hid­den tastes.”

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). And to the extent you can dis­cern my opin­ions, please under­stand that they are my own and not nec­es­sar­i­ly those of Chi Alpha or any oth­er orga­ni­za­tion I may be per­ceived to rep­re­sent. 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. If this was for­ward­ed to you and you want to receive future emails, sign up here. You can also view the archives.

The Four Loves: Friendship

The Four Loves by CS Lewis

Some of us are read­ing through C.S. Lewis’ The Four Loves this sum­mer for the Chi Alpha Sum­mer Read­ing Project. Every oth­er week I’ll post some reflec­tions on the read­ings. 

First, I should men­tion that I was sup­posed to post this last week but got dis­tract­ed by some trav­el and lost my sense of which week it was.

Sec­ond, I should men­tion that I post­ed some thoughts on this chap­ter back in 2018 on a pre­vi­ous sum­mer read-through. My obser­va­tions here are slight­ly dif­fer­ent, so con­sid­er check­ing out that pre­vi­ous post (which includes a humor­ous video).

Today we’re going to look at Lewis’s thoughts on friend­ship (phil­ia / φιλία). This chap­ter is full of wis­dom, and it also includes some thoughts that might push you a bit. If you haven’t read it (or if you did and are hun­gry for more), the C. S. Lewis Doo­dle chan­nel has Lewis giv­ing the lec­ture upon which this chap­ter is based. The tran­script of his speech is also avail­able. 

With the pre­am­ble out of the way, here are some thoughts from this read­ing:

Some of the most strik­ing insights in this chap­ter revolve around the unique nature of friend­ship. Unlike oth­er forms of love, friend­ship is com­plete­ly option­al and inher­ent­ly cen­tered on com­mon inter­ests. As Lewis says:

Friend­ship aris­es out of mere Com­pan­ion­ship when two or more of the com­pan­ions dis­cov­er that they have in com­mon some insight or inter­est or even taste which the oth­ers do not share and which, till that moment, each believed to be his own unique trea­sure (or bur­den). The typ­i­cal expres­sion of open­ing Friend­ship would be some­thing like, ‘What? You too? I thought I was the only one.’

It can be almost any­thing that trig­gers a friend­ship: a hob­by, a fan­dom, a shared expe­ri­ence, or even a shared annoy­ance. Mov­ing from acquain­tance­ship to friend­ship usu­al­ly requires dis­cov­er­ing some com­mon­al­i­ty. Grasp­ing this explains why some peo­ple strug­gle to make friends (as opposed to com­pan­ions):

That is why those pathet­ic peo­ple who simply“want friends” can nev­er make any. The very con­di­tion of hav­ing Friends is that we should want some­thing else besides Friends. Where the truth­ful answer to the ques­tion Do you see the same truth? would be “I see noth­ing and I don’t care about the truth; I only want a Friend,” no Friend­ship can arise though Affec­tion of course may. There would be noth­ing for the Friend­ship to be about; and Friend­ship must be about some­thing, even if it were only an enthu­si­asm for domi­noes or white mice. Those who have noth­ing can share noth­ing; those who are going nowhere can have no fel­low-trav­ellers.

And so if you strug­gle with forg­ing friend­ships, find some­thing you care about and look for some­one who also cares about that thing.

This sug­gests that if you are part of Chi Alpha at Stan­ford, then you’re well-poised to devel­op great friends. You’ve already got your faith in com­mon, and on top of that you both have the expe­ri­ence of being a stu­dent at Stan­ford, and in addi­tion you have the expe­ri­ence of Chi Alpha. That may already be enough to trig­ger a friend­ship, and if you add to that mix even just one more thing like a cer­tain sport or a spe­cif­ic fan­dom or a shared sense of humor then the poten­tial for a sig­nif­i­cant friend­ship is quite high. 

There are, how­ev­er, bar­ri­ers. Lewis at one point observes that if the world ever makes “pri­va­cy and unplanned leisure impos­si­ble” then we will cre­ate a world “where all are Com­pan­ions and none are Friends.”

That is a keen insight, and it leads me to make this sor­row­ful obser­va­tion: Stan­ford stu­dents, you are play­ing on hard mode. The way we use our phones makes moments of true pri­va­cy hard­er and hard­er to find (social media is often a blight, and the way some of you share your loca­tions with each oth­er is a source of much need­less dra­ma), and the typ­i­cal Stan­ford sched­ule means that unplanned leisure is often noth­ing more than a dream. If you want to deep­en your friend­ships, rebel against the tyran­ny of your phone and also against the insane demands Stan­ford cul­ture puts upon your time.

Despite these chal­lenges, be encour­aged! As Lewis reminds us:

…we think we have cho­sen our peers. In real­i­ty, a few years’ dif­fer­ence in the dates of our births, a few more miles between cer­tain hous­es, the choice of one uni­ver­si­ty instead of anoth­er, post­ing to dif­fer­ent reg­i­ments, the acci­dent of a top­ic being raised or not raised at a first meet­ing any of these chances might have kept us apart. But, for a Chris­t­ian, there are, strict­ly speak­ing, no chances. A secret Mas­ter of the Cer­e­monies has been at work. Christ, who said to the dis­ci­ples “Ye have not cho­sen me, but I have cho­sen you,” can tru­ly say to every group of Chris­t­ian friends “You have not cho­sen one anoth­er but I have cho­sen you for one anoth­er.”

So if you lack friend­ships, pray that God opens your eyes to see that poten­tial friends are already around you, and fur­ther pray that He bless­es you with self-aware­ness and wis­dom as you build those rela­tion­ships.

And if you have friends, thank God for them and be care­ful to con­tin­ue cul­ti­vat­ing those rela­tion­ships.

In either case, slow down (cre­ate space for unplanned leisure) and try to relate to your phones and social media in such a way that you’ve got moments of pri­va­cy.

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 516: God in history & confused physicists

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions. If you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Why Did God Favor France? (Ross Douthat, New York Times): “[Joan of Arc’s] sto­ry is one of the most exten­sive­ly doc­u­ment­ed cas­es of a mirac­u­lous-seem­ing inter­ven­tion into sec­u­lar his­to­ry, cal­cu­lat­ed to baf­fle, fas­ci­nate and even charm like almost noth­ing else in West­ern his­to­ry. Every­thing in the sto­ry sounds like a pious leg­end con­fab­u­lat­ed cen­turies after the fact. A peas­ant girl with zero polit­i­cal or mil­i­tary expe­ri­ence shows up at a roy­al court, announces a divine mis­sion and makes a series of prophe­cies about what God wants for France that she con­sis­tent­ly ful­fills — a ful­fill­ment that requires not mere­ly some for­tu­nate hap­pen­stance, but her tak­ing com­mand of a medieval army and win­ning an imme­di­ate series of vic­to­ries over an intim­i­dat­ing adver­sary with Alexan­drine or Napoleon­ic skill.”
    • Worth a pon­der.
  2. Physi­cists dis­agree wild­ly on what quan­tum mechan­ics says about real­i­ty, Nature sur­vey shows (Eliz­a­beth Gib­ney, Nature): “Nature asked researchers what they thought was the best inter­pre­ta­tion of quan­tum phe­nom­e­na and inter­ac­tions — that is, their favourite of the var­i­ous attempts sci­en­tists have made to relate the math­e­mat­ics of the the­o­ry to the real world. The largest chunk of respons­es, 36%, favoured the Copen­hagen inter­pre­ta­tion — a prac­ti­cal and often-taught approach. But the sur­vey also showed that sev­er­al, more rad­i­cal, view­points have a healthy fol­low­ing. Asked about their con­fi­dence in their answer, only 24% of respon­dents thought their favoured inter­pre­ta­tion was cor­rect; oth­ers con­sid­ered it mere­ly ade­quate or a use­ful tool in some cir­cum­stances. What’s more, some sci­en­tists who seemed to be in the same camp didn’t give the same answers to fol­low-up ques­tions, sug­gest­ing incon­sis­tent or dis­parate under­stand­ings of the inter­pre­ta­tion they chose.”
  3. How a Chris­t­ian col­lege min­istry glo­ri­fied a sex offend­er and enabled him to keep abus­ing stu­dents (Mike Hix­en­baugh, NBC News): “The pas­tors who shep­herd­ed hun­dreds of high school and col­lege stu­dents to Savala’s home were part of Chi Alpha, a Chris­t­ian min­istry that evan­ge­lizes on uni­ver­si­ty cam­pus­es. Stu­dents seek out Chi Alpha to con­nect with God and each oth­er, through small Bible stud­ies and rol­lick­ing wor­ship ser­vices — and, for more than 30 years, through Savala. Gen­er­a­tions of Chi Alpha lead­ers hailed him as a spir­i­tu­al savant who could answer life’s deep­est mys­ter­ies.”
    • Heart­break­ing. I’ve post­ed about this scan­dal in Texas before (in oth­er words, this is the same scan­dal from a few years ago with addi­tion­al report­ing). Now that it is being cov­ered on NBC the high­er-qual­i­ty jour­nal­ism is uncov­er­ing even more trag­ic details.
  4. Put Down the Sho­far (Brad East, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “You’re like­ly famil­iar with sho­fars blown in pub­lic, Seder meals for Passover, and cir­cum­ci­sion for baby boys. But as com­mon and well-intend­ed as these may be, I want to explain why I told my stu­dent that, yes, his house church was wrong—or at least, mis­guid­ed.”
    • A the­o­log­i­cal­ly rich arti­cle.
  5. The Sim­ple Truth About the War in Gaza (Cole­man Hugh­es, The Free Press): “Amid these devel­op­ments, it may seem car­toon­ish, even obscene, to say that in the war between Israel and Hamas, Israel is the good guy. But it’s the truth. And it’s a truth that’s incred­i­bly easy to for­get amid the day-to-day cov­er­age of this ter­ri­ble war.… Israel’s goal is to live in peace with its neigh­bors. Through­out its 77-year his­to­ry, it has agreed to half a dozen peace deals with the Pales­tini­ans. It vol­un­tar­i­ly left Gaza in 2005. If it had any inter­est in wip­ing Gaza off the map, it could have done so any time in the last sev­er­al decades.”
  6. How the Elite Changed Its Mind on Chris­tian­i­ty (Emma Camp, Rea­son): “As the decline in reli­gious atten­dance has slowed, the past few years have also seen a clear rise in the sta­tus of reli­gion. It’s becom­ing more and more social­ly accept­able to be reli­gious in elite intel­lec­tu­al spaces—something that could have a real impact on how reli­gion is per­ceived by every­one else.… Reli­gion became cool again among the edu­cat­ed elite once it gained an asso­ci­a­tion with good aes­thet­ics, high art, and sacred music—not Bush-era Repub­li­can soft theoc­ra­cy.  Today, one can belong to the ideas-mak­ing class—an aspir­ing pub­lic intel­lec­tu­al or artist—and still be reli­gious, so long as one steers clear of evan­gel­i­cal kitsch. Whether or not a real reli­gious revival is under­way in Amer­i­can pub­lic life, one thing is clear: The cool kids aren’t the smug, stri­dent athe­ists anymore—they’re the Chris­tians.”
    • Fas­ci­nat­ing, although it reminds me I need to write that essay I’ve been mulling over defend­ing low-church Protes­tantism as the best and most authen­tic expres­sion of Chris­tian­i­ty.
  7. Influ­encer Mis­sion­ar­ies (Lau­ren Jack­son, New York Times): “Church­es are turn­ing to the inter­net to reach new audi­ences. Evan­gel­i­cal pas­tors are bring­ing their famous­ly high-pro­duc­tion ser­mons into ver­ti­cal video. The Church of Jesus Christ of Lat­ter-day Saints is pre­sent­ing a diverse, younger image to its 1.4 mil­lion Insta­gram fol­low­ers.”
    • A short arti­cle, not super-infor­ma­tive. Most­ly inter­est­ing because of the trend reach­ing the point that the Times is tak­ing note of it. Also because of some of the small vignettes: “Per­haps that explains the celebri­ty of Father Rafael Capo, 57, a body­build­ing priest in Mia­mi who fus­es fit­ness with faith for his 112,000 Insta­gram fol­low­ers. He often posts pho­tos of him­self lift­ing weights and con­se­crat­ing com­mu­nion.”

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). And to the extent you can dis­cern my opin­ions, please under­stand that they are my own and not nec­es­sar­i­ly those of Chi Alpha or any oth­er orga­ni­za­tion I may be per­ceived to rep­re­sent. 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. If this was for­ward­ed to you and you want to receive future emails, sign up here. You can also view the archives.