Tag: apologetically interesting

TGFI, Volume 564: AI-inspired motorcycle jumps

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.

Some­thing nifty I learned this week: you can set your DNS to block mal­ware and adult con­tent auto­mat­i­cal­ly and for free. I did­n’t know that. This is cool! I’m sure it’s not per­fect, but I love the con­cept. It won’t real­ly block a deter­mined ado­les­cent, but it can keep sketchy ads from entic­ing them in the first place. More info at Intro­duc­ing 1.1.1.1 for Fam­i­lies | The Cloud­flare Blog

For IPv4
Primary DNS: 1.1.1.3
Secondary DNS: 1.0.0.3

For IPv6
Primary DNS: 2606:4700:4700::1113
Secondary DNS: 2606:4700:4700::1003

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. AI-relat­ed arti­cles
    • How Ter­ror­ist Groups Are Using A.I. to Gain an Edge in Bat­tle (Dustin Volz and Eric Schmitt, New York Times): “When a gang of motor­cy­cle-rid­ing mem­bers of Boko Haram attacked a mil­i­tary base in east­ern Nige­ria a cou­ple of years ago, they were stymied by a defen­sive trench sur­round­ing the com­plex. The extrem­ists regrouped. Before launch­ing anoth­er assault, they asked A.I. for help. ‘We saw in a movie how motor­cy­cles can jump over bridges,’ a for­mer Boko Haram com­man­der told Anto­nia Juelich, a ter­ror­ism and tech­nol­o­gy researcher at Cam­bridge Uni­ver­si­ty. ‘We used A.I. to learn how to do this. We gave it infor­ma­tion, like what motor­cy­cles we use and the dis­tance we need to jump and so on, and it gave us steps on what we have to do.’ Using tips from chat­bots, mechan­ics mod­i­fied the motor­cy­cles to allow for faster accel­er­a­tion and top speed. The rid­ers dug their own holes, filled them with bro­ken glass and fire, and prac­ticed jumps — some­times with fatal out­comes — until they achieved enough aer­i­al liftoff to mount a suc­cess­ful attack, defec­tors said.” — Wild. My favorite bit apart from that: “Drew Pusateri, a spokesman for Ope­nAI, said using the company’s plat­forms for vio­lence or ter­ror­ism vio­lat­ed its poli­cies.” Yes, ter­ror­ists are noto­ri­ous rule-fol­low­ers.
    • AI Wins At Slay The Spire (Ethan Mol­lick, Twit­ter): “This was one of those impres­sive AI thresh­olds for me. I gave GPT‑5.6 Sol in Codex con­trol over my com­put­er, and asked it to win the dai­ly chal­lenge for the game Slay the Spire 2 (ran­dom­ized fac­tors, so can’t cheat). It
    • AI Isn’t Human. Stop Talk­ing About It Like It Is. (Spencer Kla­van, The Free Press): “Much of our deep­est civ­i­liza­tion­al wisdom—and, if we’re Amer­i­cans, the essence of our nation­al creed—is found­ed on the premise that human beings are not just fan­cy bio­log­i­cal con­trap­tions but ani­mate beings with a right to the lives we are born with. Tech­no­log­i­cal cre­ations, mar­velous as they are, can’t have the same rights or respon­si­bil­i­ties pre­cise­ly because they don’t have the same capac­i­ty for thought in the truest sense of the word. Treat things like peo­ple, and you run the risk of treat­ing peo­ple like things.”
  2. I’m a Col­lege Pro­fes­sor Inflat­ing Grades. I Need Help. (Frank Bruni, New York Times): “Once every­body starts dis­pens­ing A’s like so many Pez, every­body else is pres­sured to do like­wise: If they don’t, they’re giv­ing grades that no longer com­mu­ni­cate — to stu­dents, to prize com­mit­tees, to grad­u­ate schools — what those grades were intend­ed to sig­ni­fy. I may per­son­al­ly con­sid­er an A- a com­pli­ment, but if the cul­ture regards it as a gen­tle remon­stra­tion, am I stub­born­ly choos­ing to speak an extinct lan­guage at my stu­dents’ expense? To what ben­e­fit? No depart­ment head or dean will com­pli­ment me on my high stan­dards. No for­mu­la will inter­pret and adjust my course eval­u­a­tions for how gen­er­ous or stingy I was with A’s. My cours­es will be less appeal­ing. And school admin­is­tra­tors gen­er­al­ly pre­fer pro­fes­sors who attract stu­dents to pro­fes­sors who repel them.”
    • Gift link
  3. Two tales of pas­toral impris­on­ment:
    • ‘Sud­den­ly, I Was Free’: A Chi­nese Pastor’s Jour­ney From Jail to the U.S. (Vivian Wang, New York Times): “When Mr. Jin stepped off the air­plane, he saw that his youngest son, who had been 10 years old when they last met, was now taller than him. He had missed the wed­ding of his old­est child, Grace Jin Drex­el, who was now a moth­er of three. She was car­ry­ing her youngest, just one month old, whom she had named Ezra in her father’s hon­or. ‘Hold­ing the chil­dren, that was the hap­pi­est moment of my life,’ he said. Still, the moment was tinged by grief, too. Ms. Jin Drex­el said she almost didn’t rec­og­nize her father at first, because he had lost more than 30 pounds. His hair had also been shaved in jail. On the Fourth of July, the fam­i­ly ate In-N-Out burg­ers and watched fire­works from their hotel room in Los Ange­les.”
      • Gift link
    • A pastor’s lengthy ICE deten­tion leaves his Col­orado parish­ioners torn (Michelle Boorstein, Wash­ing­ton Post): “In Ugan­da, Nal­wam­ba was pas­tor of a 300-mem­ber Angli­can church and an occa­sion­al pub­lic crit­ic of the gov­ern­ment. In an inter­view and in var­i­ous U.S. court records, he described threat­en­ing inci­dents under mul­ti­ple Ugan­dan regimes. Secu­ri­ty agents took him from his home in the mid­dle of the night, forced him to lie on the ground in a field and inter­ro­gat­ed him about his involve­ment with an oppo­si­tion group, accord­ing to a sum­ma­ry of his account includ­ed in a 2010 removal order by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Cir­cuit. ‘He was warned that if he ever went to the ‘air­port to try and fly out of the coun­try,’ [he would] nev­er come out alive,’ the order quot­ed him as say­ing. Some friends encour­aged him to take a break from Ugan­da, and in 2002 he came to the U.S. for a con­fer­ence of charis­mat­ic Chris­tians. He nev­er returned. Today he is one of an esti­mat­ed 14 mil­lion immi­grants in the U.S. with­out legal sta­tus.… The sta­tus quo end­ed Sept. 18, when he was tak­en into deten­tion.”
  4. The Pop­u­la­tion Bust Is Com­ing Soon­er Than Any­one Is Pre­pared For (Lyman Stone, New York Times): “If America’s pop­u­la­tion does decline, it will strain our enti­tle­ments sys­tem, dam­age the econ­o­my, reduce inno­va­tion and entre­pre­neur­ship, and cause seri­ous labor short­ages. But the major­i­ty point of view — held by major insti­tu­tions like the Cen­sus Bureau, the Unit­ed Nations and the Social Secu­ri­ty trustees — is that the Unit­ed States prob­a­bly won’t face pop­u­la­tion decline until the 2080s, or even beyond 2100. That fore­cast is far too opti­mistic. The more accu­rate pro­jec­tion, which I out­lined in a recent report for my orga­ni­za­tion, the Insti­tute for Fam­i­ly Stud­ies, sees the Amer­i­can pop­u­la­tion begin­ning to shrink in the 2050s. It is a fore­cast so grim it could upend Amer­i­can bud­get­ing and, thus, Amer­i­can pol­i­tics.”
    • Gift link
  5. Have Young Amer­i­cans For­got­ten How to Live? (Max Hud­gins, Sub­stack): “In recent years, artists like Tyler, the Cre­ator and Kay­trana­da have called out fans for stand­ing still at their con­certs. Tyler, the Cre­ator said last sum­mer: ‘I asked some friends why they don’t dance in pub­lic and some said because of the fear of being filmed.… It made me won­der how much of our human spir­it got killed because of the fear of being a meme, all for hav­ing a good time.’ Were they, too, pris­on­ers of the panop­ti­con?”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent.
  6. Why Do Some Demen­tia Patients ‘Return’ Just Before They Die? (Bil­ly Bren­nan, New York Times): “Mashour and sev­er­al oth­er atten­dees shared that, like Batthyany, they had wit­nessed lucid episodes first­hand. But the more the researchers dis­cussed the phe­nom­e­non, the more it con­found­ed them. Mashour likened the brain in late-stage Alzheimer’s to a pot­hole-rid­den high­way sys­tem on the verge of col­lapse, the bio­log­i­cal traf­fic of mind and mem­o­ry no longer able to flow. “If this were hap­pen­ing with actu­al high­ways,” he told me, “at no point would we say: ‘Well, you know what? Just before this high­way total­ly col­laps­es, we’re going to have a real­ly smooth ride.’ We’d say, ‘It’s just going to get worse and worse until the whole damn thing crum­bles.’”
    • Gift link
  7. Per­ma­nent Day­light Sav­ing Time Is the Per­fect Stu­pid Idea for Our Stu­pid Time (Josh Bar­ro, Sub­stack): “Advo­cates of per­ma­nent day­light sav­ing time are often unaware that we tried this before — and that Con­gress swift­ly reversed course because Amer­i­cans were very unhap­py about the loss of sun­light in the morn­ing hours. Even when they learn this, it is rare that they update their stance. Many blind­ly dis­miss the lessons of his­to­ry; they say 1974 was a long time ago and things are dif­fer­ent now. But the main rel­e­vant dif­fer­ence between 1974 and now is that tech­nol­o­gy han­dles clock changes on our behalf, so time changes are less bur­den­some than they used to be. I bare­ly notice them, in fact. But I will notice if it’s dark out in New York City at 8 a.m. in Decem­ber, and we know from his­to­ry that vot­ers will notice too and they won’t be pleased about it.”

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.

TGFI, Volume 561: church-leavers and wikipedia-gatekeepers

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. Two Hun­dred Peo­ple Left Our Small Church (Ben­jamin Vrbicek, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “In sev­en years, our church—in terms of net attendance—has grown from around 150 to 350. But in the same amount of time, our church has lost as many as have stayed. The loss­es nev­er occur rapid­ly, as though a lev­ee burst, but more as a steady trick­le or slow leak. A few of our mem­bers died. One went to jail. One wrote me an eight-page let­ter of griev­ances I was instruct­ed to share with the elders; anoth­er wrote a chap­ter-length blog post sug­gest­ing we’re not even a church. Some parish­ioners didn’t let the door hit them on the way out because they kicked it off the hinges and left us to pick up the shat­tered pieces. These depar­tures are by far the excep­tions. Many of those who left told me nei­ther why they left nor even that they had left. I often find out via back chan­nels like social media and oth­er imper­son­al means.”
    • This is a fas­ci­nat­ing arti­cle.
    • On a relat­ed note: one of a pas­tor’s love lan­guages is near­ly always atten­dance. If you stop going to a church, pas­tors assume that part of the rea­son you stopped is that you don’t like them. Even though they intel­lec­tu­al­ly know that is not always the case, it is nonethe­less a felt real­i­ty. It’s not true of all pas­tors, but I feel very con­fi­dent say­ing it is true of most pas­tors. Pas­tors often feel great sor­row when remem­ber­ing peo­ple who qui­et­ly depart­ed. Lov­ing peo­ple who don’t love you back (or you assume don’t love you back) is a man­date of the Chris­t­ian life, but it’s not fun.
  2. I read the entire Quran, all the Hadiths, and the Sira. Here is what I found. (A.C. Rosen­thal, Sub­stack): “Plen­ty of ancient texts con­tain things that make mod­ern read­ers uncom­fort­able, and the Bible is not exempt from that cat­e­go­ry. The ques­tion that changed every­thing was struc­tur­al. It is this: in Chris­tian­i­ty, the founder is the stan­dard against which the insti­tu­tion is mea­sured. When the church falls short, the accu­sa­tion is always: you are not liv­ing like Jesus. The stan­dard itself is not in ques­tion. Jesus did not order raids. He did not arrange mar­riages with chil­dren. He did not autho­rize the exe­cu­tion of apos­tates. He was exe­cut­ed by the state, not empow­ered by it. Every­thing the church has done wrong can be mea­sured against what Jesus actu­al­ly did and found want­i­ng. The stan­dard holds. In Islam, the founder is the stan­dard. When you exam­ine the pri­ma­ry sources and find things that trou­ble you, you are not find­ing a gap between Islam and Muham­mad. You are find­ing Muham­mad.”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by a friend of the min­istry. A sol­id arti­cle with a gen­tle tone.
  3. Why have papers by one of history’s most famous physi­cists been retract­ed? (Sam Kean, Sci­ence): “In ear­ly May, Yves Gin­gras, a his­to­ri­an of physics at the Uni­ver­si­ty of Que­bec (UQ) at Mon­tre­al, was brows­ing Retrac­tion Watch, a web­site that cat­a­logs fraud, data manip­u­la­tion, and oth­er sci­en­tif­ic sins. He noticed a link that read, ‘Retrac­tions by Nobel Prize win­ners.’ Were there real­ly Nobel lau­re­ates whose papers had been with­drawn from the sci­en­tif­ic lit­er­a­ture? After click­ing, Gin­gras froze. ‘That’s impos­si­ble,’ he recalls think­ing. The fourth name on the list, with two retract­ed papers, was Max Planck—a leg­endary pio­neer of quan­tum mechan­ics and the 1918 Nobel lau­re­ate in physics.”
    • Brief and worth the read. Super-inter­est­ing.
  4. He Went to Prison. Now He Is in Charge of Them. (P.G. Sit­ten­feld, The Free Press): “Josh Smith, 51, spent this past Christ­mas in prison. Just like he did for five years after being caught at the age of 21 in pos­ses­sion of a kilo­gram of cocaine and 150 pounds of mar­i­jua­na. The dif­fer­ence? Smith wasn’t behind bars any­more. A year ago this month, he was sworn in as deputy direc­tor of the fed­er­al Bureau of Pris­ons (BOP), one of the world’s largest prison sys­tems.”
    • A fas­ci­nat­ing pro­file of a Chris­t­ian in pub­lic ser­vice.
  5. I Co-Found­ed Wikipedia. Now I’m Banned for Life. (Lar­ry Sanger, The Free Press): “In exas­per­a­tion, I point­ed out that the mob was not fol­low­ing due process. There was no des­ig­nat­ed pros­e­cu­tor, but rather many self-select­ed ones. There was no list of charges, and what­ev­er any­one said became an action­able charge. There was no assigned judge, because my accusers were also my judges. And of course there was no pre­sump­tion of inno­cence, no jury, and no require­ment of deco­rum that would for­bid prej­u­di­cial state­ments. I knew Wikipedia’s dis­ci­pli­nary process­es were bad—but I had nev­er expe­ri­enced them myself. I was tried by a face­less mob. I learned that their great­est anger is reserved for those who refuse to bow in awe of their mighty pow­er.”
    • Sanger is, inci­den­tal­ly, a rel­a­tive­ly recent con­vert to Chris­tian­i­ty, as I men­tioned last year.
  6. Sci­ence rais­es more ques­tions than it answers (Sarah Sal­vian­der, Sub­stack): “[Skep­tics] have faith (not entire­ly unwar­rant­ed on their lim­it­ed knowl­edge) that nat­ur­al the­o­ries will even­tu­al­ly fill every gap, not real­iz­ing that the gaps tend to widen and mul­ti­ply the deep­er we go. The ratio of what we know to what we don’t know keeps shrink­ing, and I sus­pect that’s by design. What’s an athe­ist to do once they ful­ly grasp this? I don’t know—maybe just accept that the uni­verse is fun­ny that way. But they should stop accus­ing Chris­tians of a ‘God of the gaps’ fal­la­cy when we invoke God for what is tru­ly unex­plain­able by nat­ur­al means.”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by an alum­nus.
  7. Who Should Be Admit­ted to the Lord’s Sup­per? 4 Views (Davy Elli­son, The Gospel Coali­tion): “Today, the table is cel­e­brat­ed less fre­quent­ly and more lan­guid­ly by many. It shouldn’t be so—everyone (but espe­cial­ly church lead­ers) needs to con­sid­er the supper’s fre­quen­cy, sig­nif­i­cance, and ben­e­fits. I want to help you think more deeply about who should be admit­ted to the sup­per. If com­mu­nion is a pre­cious and pro­found priv­i­lege, who par­tic­i­pates is impor­tant.”
    • The author comes to a wrong con­clu­sion, but explains some posi­tions that you might not know exist­ed along the way.

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 560: faith still winning 7–1

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. 7‑to‑1: The strik­ing sci­en­tif­ic link between reli­gion and bet­ter health (Baugh­man et al, Chris­t­ian Post): “In a new review from the Wheat­ley Insti­tute, we ana­lyzed find­ings drawn from Oxford University’s three Hand­books of Reli­gion and Health, cov­er­ing the best exist­ing research in the field. Of 1,069 high-qual­i­ty stud­ies on 15 phys­i­cal-health domains, 876 found pos­i­tive asso­ci­a­tions between reli­gious involve­ment and phys­i­cal health and 124 found neg­a­tive ones. A rough­ly 7‑to‑1 ratio. The strongest sig­nals come from exact­ly the areas that Amer­i­can med­i­cine spends the most time and mon­ey on. Among high-qual­i­ty stud­ies of cig­a­rette smok­ing, pos­i­tive find­ings out­num­ber neg­a­tive ones by about 90 to 1. On sub­stance abuse and addic­tion, 43 to 1. On mor­tal­i­ty and longevi­ty, 15 to 1.”
  2. Bench-Press and Be Bap­tized (Josh Code, The Free Press): “The morn­ing was for con­tem­pla­tion; the after­noon for com­pe­ti­tion. At one o’clock, ref­er­ees appeared, wear­ing striped black-and-white shirts, to judge a penal­ty-kick con­test, a game of vol­ley­ball with a 10-pound ball, a mini-Hyrox race, and a long-range game of corn­hole that involved a sling­shot. There was a man named Ed wear­ing a cow­boy hat, tab­u­lat­ing scores. The men com­pet­ed with their week­night groups, each one marked by shirts dis­play­ing team names (Sons of Thun­der, Light of Author­i­ty, Front­line Men of Faith), but by the begin­ning of the first event—a three-man car­ry relay race—many a shirt had already come off.… I had not in recent mem­o­ry been around this much testos­terone and did not antic­i­pate I would again soon. The pres­ence of the Holy Spir­it had been hard to dis­cern amid the pyrotech­nics. But I did hear that sev­er­al guys got bap­tized in big steel tubs at the end of the week­end.”
  3. The World’s Lead­ing Deep­fake Expert No Longer Trusts His Own Eyes (Eli Saslow, visu­als by Erin Schaff, New York Times): “ ‘I miss the days when it was a grainy video of a shark swim­ming up the street,’ Farid said one night, as he sat on the back deck of his house with his wife, Emi­ly Coop­er. He put down his phone and poured a whiskey. ‘The tech­nol­o­gy is get­ting so good. It takes me to a dark place.’ ‘Because you can’t tell just by look­ing any­more?’ Coop­er asked. ‘Because nobody can,’ Farid said. ‘I don’t trust any­thing. Every image I see, I’m draw­ing lines for shad­ows and doing geom­e­try in my head, try­ing to fig­ure out what I’m look­ing at. It’s over. With­in a year or two, our whole visu­al sys­tem will be utter­ly use­less.’ ‘And then what? You give up? You retire?’ ‘I don’t know,’ he said.”
  4. The Antiprophet (Mag­gie Phillips, Tablet Mag­a­zine): “Rather than demand­ing per­fect ortho­doxy upfront, Burge argues that church­es should make room for doubters, seek­ers, and par­tial believ­ers because the act of par­tic­i­pa­tion itself car­ries social and spir­i­tu­al val­ues. ‘The church actu­al­ly can serve a dual pur­pose. It can save souls, but it can also save soci­ety,’ he said. His advice for spir­i­tu­al seek­ers is sim­i­lar to his coun­sel to church lead­ers: don’t let the per­fect be the ene­my of the good. ‘Find a church that you don’t hate,’ he said, ‘And just go there. It’s not that hard.’ ”
  5. Protests Are Not Emo­tion­al Sup­port Groups (Dan Sto­ryev and Maria Kuznetso­va, Per­sua­sion): “If Amer­i­cans want to actu­al­ly enact change, they seri­ous­ly need to re-think their strat­e­gy. Take it from us: we both grew up in Putin’s Rus­sia and saw well-inten­tioned protests fail to stop an aspir­ing despot. We know that author­i­tar­i­ans are typ­i­cal­ly unwill­ing to respond to the kind of protest No Kings exem­pli­fies: loud, rau­cous, and ulti­mate­ly harm­less. These ‘fes­ti­val protests,’ as we call them, are con­ve­nient for their par­tic­i­pants. They are fun and usu­al­ly do not require much sac­ri­fice or risk. They also look good on TV and Tik­Tok feeds. But they often achieve next to noth­ing.… protests in gen­er­al are becom­ing less effec­tive. In the 1990s, around 65% of non-vio­lent move­ments suc­ceed­ed in over­throw­ing a dic­ta­tor. In the late 2010s, that fig­ure was down to 34%. Vio­lent move­ments are even less effective—their suc­cess rate is cur­rent­ly around 8%, down from a peak of more than 40% in the 1970s.”
  6. The Evan­gel­i­cal Busi­ness Mind­set (Aaron Renn, Sub­stack): “The over­whelm­ing evan­gel­i­cal the­o­log­i­cal and mis­sion­al focus is on sav­ing souls. This lends itself to think­ing of busi­ness as pri­mar­i­ly about mak­ing mon­ey to fund mis­sions, rein­forc­ing the sweaty start­up mind­set. Busi­ness is not seen as cul­ture-shap­ing in its own right. Then add to this the way that evan­gel­i­cals approach church as an entre­pre­neur­ial endeav­or. The very way evan­gel­i­cals do church can form them into a sweaty start­up busi­ness mind­set. The net result is a lot of evan­gel­i­cal mon­ey and suc­cess, but not much cul­tur­al pow­er.”
    • I con­tin­ue to think Renn under­es­ti­mates the extent of an evan­gel­i­cal elite, but he makes sev­er­al sol­id obser­va­tions in this arti­cle.
  7. Youth Group Taught Me Ideas Are Dan­ger­ous (Austin Sug­gs, Sub­stack): “Still, in my expe­ri­ence, most peo­ple walk away from youth group with a the­ol­o­gy con­sist­ing in three main ideas: Jesus loves you, don’t have sex before you get mar­ried, and be care­ful going to col­lege because your pro­fes­sors are going to try to make you an athe­ist.”
    • (rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent)

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.

TGFI, Volume 559: a WWI parallel and age-gap discourse

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.

It’s grad­u­a­tion week at Stan­ford and I’ve been busier than nor­mal — few­er links this week as a result. Are you grad­u­at­ing? Want to keep receiv­ing these emails? They’re mir­rored on Sub­stack — sub­scribe at https://theglendavis.substack.com/

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. The War in Ukraine Has Now Gone On Longer Than World War I (Con­stant Méheut, New York Times): “The war in Ukraine has often been com­pared to World War I for its bru­tal infantry assaults and heavy casu­al­ties. Yet the idea that it could, by any mea­sure, sur­pass a con­flict so long and bloody that French sol­diers hoped it would be ‘the last of the last’ once seemed unthink­able. That is just what hap­pened on Thurs­day. The war in Ukraine — which reached 1,569 days, or more than four years and three months — has now out­last­ed World War I.… Rough­ly nine mil­lion to 11 mil­lion sol­diers died in World War I, com­pared with about half a mil­lion in Ukraine so far.”
  2. More Than Evo­lu­tion Requires (David Brooks, Com­ment): “As [Beha] began to appre­ci­ate the flaws in the athe­ist world­views, he suf­fered a cri­sis of faith in athe­ism. But there is a big dif­fer­ence between los­ing faith in athe­ism and dis­cov­er­ing faith in God. He seems to have expe­ri­enced the pause between those two states that many have expe­ri­enced. Kierkegaard famous­ly likened it to being sus­pend­ed above water and doing the motions of swim­ming with­out actu­al­ly being in the water and swim­ming. In some ways the hero of this book is Lud­wig Wittgen­stein. Wittgen­stein was no Chris­t­ian, but he under­stood that ‘if all pos­si­ble sci­en­tif­ic ques­tions be answered, the prob­lems of life have still not been touched at all.’ ”
  3. Will I Get Can­celed for Dat­ing a Fresh­man? (Abi­gail Shri­er, The Free Press): “Is it worth the risk of pub­lic expo­sure to talk to this girl you like? Tom, few things in life are _more_ worth the risk. Few oppor­tu­ni­ties will ever be as valu­able as the chance to con­nect with a girl you might come to love. You’re a junior and she’s a fresh­man which, in the per­verse cal­cu­la­tion of delib­er­ate over­re­ac­tion, means some of your cen­so­ri­ous peers may deem you ‘preda­to­ry.’ Anony­mous cam­pus spaces reward social­ly pro­gres­sive moral per­for­mance. Ordi­nary inter­per­son­al sit­u­a­tions morph into show tri­als, ruled by the jeal­ous who delight in sham­ing men out of nor­mal feel­ings and behav­ior. Don’t let them fool you.”
  4. Deep Blue Fam­i­lies: A Sur­pris­ing Mix of Trad and Egal­i­tar­i­an Val­ues (Joshua Sohn, Insti­tute for Fam­i­ly Stud­ies): “…my fam­i­ly lives in the Dis­trict of Colum­bia, where Kamala Har­ris beat Don­ald Trump 90% to 6% in the last elec­tion. Essen­tial­ly all the fam­i­lies in my kids’ ele­men­tary school are Democ­rats, and most are lib­er­al Democ­rats. These fam­i­lies also have some remark­able fea­tures: mar­riage is vir­tu­al­ly uni­ver­sal, while divorce is vir­tu­al­ly nonex­is­tent. Almost every kid is grow­ing up in a two-par­ent mar­ried fam­i­ly. And if we’re going to high­light the gen­er­al retreat from mar­riage and par­ent­hood in Blue Amer­i­ca, we should also look at the cir­cum­stances where Blue Amer­i­cans buck the trend. As it turns out, there are three fea­tures that might account for these strong Blue fam­i­lies in my own family’s social cir­cle: (1) These fam­i­lies have a sur­pris­ing mix of egal­i­tar­i­an and “trad” — lifestyle mark­ers. (2) They have reject­ed the mon­ey-first Midas mind­set in favor of a fam­i­ly-first one. (3) They have found ways to cre­ate a sense of com­mu­ni­ty.”
  5. A Med­ical Stu­dent Took His Own Life. His Par­ents Blame the School. (Fran­nie Block, The Free Press): “I’ve report­ed on more than a dozen instances of insti­tu­tion­al over­reach dur­ing dis­ci­pli­nary pro­ceed­ings at universities—ranging from seri­ous alle­ga­tions of mis­con­duct or cheat­ing to inves­ti­ga­tions over whether or not a stu­dent under the age of 21 drank a beer. In all of these sto­ries, the stu­dents’ fam­i­lies told me two things. First, that the uni­ver­si­ties failed to grant them due process. Sec­ond, that they failed to take the stu­dents’ men­tal health into con­sid­er­a­tion. In each case, the par­ents con­sis­tent­ly felt that the schools failed their chil­dren and were more con­cerned with image con­trol than nur­tur­ing their stu­dents. The stu­dents felt like the schools always had the upper hand, and didn’t give them the oppor­tu­ni­ty to prop­er­ly defend them­selves when their entire futures were on the line. The stu­dents, res­i­dents, and staff at Texas Tech Health who I inter­viewed told me their insti­tu­tion is no excep­tion.”

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 557: peer-reviewed miracles and AI-informed voting

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. Peer-Reviewed Mir­a­cles: Are Mirac­u­lous Cures Pub­lished in Sci­en­tif­ic Jour­nals? (Caleb Jack­son, Sub­stack): “It is often sug­gest­ed that, if the evi­dence for mir­a­cle cures were tru­ly com­pelling, it would be expect­ed that such cas­es would be pub­lished in main­stream sci­en­tif­ic jour­nals. If these instances can­not stand the scruti­ny of peer review, then they ought to be dis­missed as noth­ing more than uncor­rob­o­rat­ed anec­dotes. I am not per­suad­ed. Indeed, this argu­ment remains tooth­less for a myr­i­ad of rea­sons. As we shall see below, there are no less than sev­er­al dozen instances of ‘mir­a­cle cures’ pub­lished in sci­en­tif­ic jour­nals, both main­stream and fringe, over the last cen­tu­ry. To claim oth­er­wise is to plead igno­rance of the pub­licly avail­able data.”
  2. Use AI This Elec­tion (Scott Alexan­der, Astral Codex Ten): “I’m not say­ing AI is super­in­tel­li­gent or can decide bet­ter than you can. I’m say­ing that if you — like me — spend an hour or so doing research before vot­ing on local seats, AI can aid that research very effec­tive­ly. And if you don’t do that research — because you weren’t will­ing to waste an hour on it before — AI makes it so much faster that you might want to start.”
    • He gives a ver­sion of the prompt he used to gen­er­ate a cus­tom voter’s guide, so I tried it with a cus­tomized ver­sion and was pleased with the results. I tried it on both Claude and Chat­G­PT, only Claude was will­ing to do it. Chat­G­PT seemed to think it was uneth­i­cal to help me. I rec­om­mend giv­ing it a try. For a start, just go through his prompt sen­tence by sen­tence and change it to what you believe.
  3. The Twin Fal­lac­i­es of Chris­t­ian Nation­al­ism and AI Max­i­mal­ism (Samuel D. James, Sub­stack): “Here are two ques­tions I think about a lot: How does Chris­tian­i­ty restrict someone’s use of tech­nol­o­gy? How does Chris­tian­i­ty restrict someone’s strat­a­gems in pol­i­tics? These ques­tions come from a con­vic­tion that the claims of Christ in Scrip­ture are such a nature that one can­not believe and obey them with­out expe­ri­enc­ing some kind of lim­it­ing prin­ci­ple on their tech­nol­o­gy and on their pol­i­tics. In oth­er words, if you real­ly take Christ seri­ous­ly, your tech use and your pol­i­tics will bear a con­spic­u­ous mark. ”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent.
  4. Nihilism With a Busi­ness Mod­el (John Seel, Sub­stack): “At one lev­el, the gig econ­o­my reflects an under­stand­able eco­nom­ic adap­ta­tion to a rapid­ly chang­ing tech­no­log­i­cal envi­ron­ment. But every eco­nom­ic sys­tem even­tu­al­ly shapes not mere­ly how peo­ple make mon­ey, but how they imag­ine real­i­ty itself. The gig econ­o­my does not sim­ply cre­ate gig work. It cre­ates a gig mind­set. And that mind­set is increas­ing­ly reshap­ing the moral imag­i­na­tion among younger gen­er­a­tions in deeply con­se­quen­tial ways. At the cen­ter of the gig mind­set is the assump­tion that near­ly every­thing can become mon­e­tized, opti­mized, and con­vert­ed into mar­ket val­ue. Every­thing and every expe­ri­ence are now for sale. The self itself becomes a plat­form. Con­sid­er two rapid­ly expand­ing phe­nom­e­na among young adults: men are increas­ing­ly addict­ed to online sports bet­ting, and women are increas­ing­ly post­ing on plat­forms such as Only­Fans. These two are deeply con­nect­ed man­i­fes­ta­tions of the same cul­tur­al log­ic.”
    • Empha­sis in orig­i­nal.
  5. Are “Real” Catholics as Con­ser­v­a­tive as Evan­gel­i­cals? (Ryan Burge, Sub­stack): “I think this is the best test I can devise to real­ly com­pare devout, con­ser­v­a­tive Catholics to evan­gel­i­cals in the same seg­ment of the pop­u­la­tion. I just can’t look at these results and say that ‘real’ Catholics are just as social­ly con­ser­v­a­tive as ‘real’ evan­gel­i­cals. They aren’t — empir­i­cal­ly speak­ing — as con­ser­v­a­tive on these three core issues [abor­tion, gay mar­riage, and pre­mar­i­tal sex]… What I take away from all of this is that evan­gel­i­cal iden­ti­ty car­ries some­thing that can’t be ful­ly explained by how often you show up or how con­ser­v­a­tive you vote. There’s a the­o­log­i­cal and cul­tur­al foun­da­tion to evan­gel­i­cal­ism that shapes how adher­ents think about the body, sex­u­al­i­ty, and the fam­i­ly in ways that Catholic iden­ti­ty sim­ply doesn’t repli­cate — even among the most devout and polit­i­cal­ly con­ser­v­a­tive Catholics. The Church may teach the same things on paper, but the peo­ple in the pews aren’t inter­nal­iz­ing them the same way. And that gap between offi­cial teach­ing and lived belief is, frankly, one of the most inter­est­ing sto­ries in Amer­i­can reli­gion right now.”
    • Empha­sis in orig­i­nal.
  6. Search­ing for God in Sil­i­con Val­ley (Avi­tal Bal­wit, The Free Press): “AI work­ers tend to be less reli­gious than the rest of the U.S. pop­u­la­tion. They are most­ly lapsed in their faith, or were nev­er reli­gious to begin with. Per­haps they were cir­cum­cised or bap­tized; now they may occa­sion­al­ly med­i­tate. This is, for the most part, a mate­ri­al­ist lot—by which I mean peo­ple for whom the world is atoms and phys­i­cal laws with noth­ing super­nat­ur­al left over, and for whom moral­i­ty is some­thing worked out from intu­ition or from phi­los­o­phy, rather than received from out­side the world.… Not all of them would say they are miss­ing some­thing, and I take the ones who say so at their word. But enough are vis­i­bly _searching_ that it is worth ask­ing what they are search­ing for.”
    • The author is chief of staff to Dario Amod­ei, the CEO of Anthrop­ic.
  7. Per­fect ran­dom­ness real­ized for the first time (Gaby Clark, Phys.org): “…Wall­raf­f’s and Ren­ner’s teams have found a way to take imper­fect ran­dom­ness and still extract per­fect­ly ran­dom num­bers from it. They call their method ran­dom­ness ampli­fi­ca­tion.”

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 556: therapeutic misadventures, tolerant Protestants, and a dweebocracy

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. Is Ther­a­py Tear­ing Us Apart? (Jonathan Alpert, The Free Press): “Too many ther­a­pists now func­tion less as clin­i­cians than as rein­forcers of the most self-pro­tec­tive inter­pre­ta­tion avail­able, teach­ing patients to locate the prob­lem every­where but them­selves.… The patient doesn’t gain greater agency, but instead, a more pol­ished sto­ry about why some­one else is to blame. If you feel injured, the injury must be real. If you feel unsafe, the threat must be there. If a rela­tion­ship cre­ates dis­com­fort, the rela­tion­ship itself becomes the prob­lem.… This is how ther­a­py can qui­et­ly become an engine that keeps peo­ple stuck. Patients leave not more capa­ble of tol­er­at­ing frus­tra­tion, ambi­gu­i­ty, or ordi­nary dis­ap­point­ment, but less. They become more flu­ent in explain­ing why they feel the way they do while becom­ing less prac­ticed at chang­ing what they do next.”
  2. Which reli­gions are the least tol­er­ant of cam­pus speak­ers? (Chapin Lenthall-Cleary, FIRE): “When it comes to near­ly every ide­ol­o­gy or gen­der, Protes­tants are sig­nif­i­cant­ly more tol­er­ant than their non-Protes­tant coun­ter­parts, and not only that, they’re usu­al­ly more tol­er­ant of both sides. So the Protes­tant effect isn’t (pri­mar­i­ly) a result of gen­der or ide­ol­o­gy. For some rea­son, Protes­tants are just unusu­al­ly tol­er­ant of con­tro­ver­sial speak­ers.” — This is super inter­est­ing! (rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent)
  3. Actu­al­ly, Democ­ra­cy Dies in H.R. (Aman­da Taub, New York Times): “The incen­tives for elites to stay loy­al [to dic­ta­tors] have been stud­ied exten­sive­ly, but the rank and file have remained some­thing of a black box.… It turns out that the kinds of career pres­sures famil­iar to employ­ees every­where — the desire to revive a stalled career or obtain a minor pro­mo­tion — can be enough to incen­tivize low­er- and midlev­el offi­cials to vio­late pro­fes­sion­al oblig­a­tions, fun­da­men­tal norms and even basic moral­i­ty. The peo­ple who make those deci­sions, the research sug­gests, are nei­ther extrem­ists nor vic­tims. They are often just mid­dling work­ers look­ing for a way to get ahead.”
    • This is a fas­ci­nat­ing insight.
  4. Two arti­cles reflect­ing on sex­u­al vio­lence in the war between Israel and Hamas.
    • What I Learned Cat­a­loging the Sex­u­al Vio­lence of Octo­ber 7 (Cochav Elka­yam-Levy, The Free Press): “Some acts were car­ried out with a lev­el of cru­el­ty that expos­es a dif­fi­cult truth: Our vocab­u­lary is insuf­fi­cient to describe what human beings are capa­ble of doing to one anoth­er.… Sex­u­al vio­lence, when used as an instru­ment of ter­ror, is too often imag­ined in ways that dimin­ish its grav­i­ty, cru­el­ty, and func­tion. It is fre­quent­ly reduced, mis­char­ac­ter­ized, and at times resist­ed pre­cise­ly because it defies com­pre­hen­sion. The dif­fi­cul­ty, even now, lies not in the absence of evi­dence, but in the lim­its of com­pre­hen­sion.”
      • This is a high-lev­el sum­ma­ry with­out the dis­turb­ing graph­ic details that some reports fore­ground.
    • Your Ques­tions About Nicholas Kristof’s Col­umn on Pales­tini­ans and Sex­u­al Assault (Kath­leen Kings­bury and Nicholas Kristof, New York Times): “Before pub­li­ca­tion, Nick’s report­ing under­went a rig­or­ous vet­ting process by Opinion’s fact-check­ing depart­ment to ensure that every tes­ti­mo­ny and anec­dote he per­son­al­ly report­ed was sup­port­ed by inde­pen­dent sources, as is the case with all sen­si­tive pieces. The Times’s stan­dards and legal teams also reviewed the col­umn and offered feed­back. After pub­li­ca­tion, we reviewed the fac­tu­al chal­lenges that read­ers and oth­ers raised, as is stan­dard prac­tice with any pub­lished piece. Edi­tors found no errors.… Crit­ics who focus on the back­grounds of spe­cif­ic sources often over­look the over­whelm­ing vol­ume and con­sis­ten­cy of such accounts. Nick’s col­umn, ulti­mate­ly, was a call to action, urg­ing those in pow­er to con­demn sex­u­al vio­lence in all its forms.”
  5. An Ope­nAI mod­el has dis­proved a cen­tral con­jec­ture in dis­crete geom­e­try (Ope­nAI): “This proof is an impor­tant mile­stone for the math and AI com­mu­ni­ties. It marks the first time that a promi­nent open prob­lem, cen­tral to a sub­field of math­e­mat­ics, has been solved autonomous­ly by AI. It also demon­strates the depth of rea­son­ing these sys­tems now sup­port.… Fields medal­ist Tim Gow­ers, writ­ing in the com­pan­ion paper, calls the result ‘a mile­stone in AI math­e­mat­ics.’ ”
  6. Stu­dents deserve bet­ter than COLLEGE (Iván Mari­novic, Stan­ford Dai­ly): “By my count, the syl­labus assigns rough­ly 45 pages of canon­i­cal West­ern philo­soph­i­cal writ­ing across the entire quar­ter, against more than 500 pages of con­tem­po­rary work orga­nized around iden­ti­ty, oppres­sion and indige­nous ways of know­ing — Freire, Dan­garem­b­ga, West­over and Kim­mer­er. The ratio is 11:1. There is no Aris­to­tle, no Augus­tine, no Aquinas, no Mon­taigne, no Locke, no Mill, no New­man, no Stein­er, no Bloom — none of the writ­ers who built the case for lib­er­al edu­ca­tion that the course claims to defend. A course adver­tised as a defense of lib­er­al edu­ca­tion has been built with­out the thinkers who defined it.”
    • The author is an account­ing pro­fes­sor in the GSB. This was picked up and reprint­ed by The Free Press as Stan­ford’s War on the West­ern Canon. The bit at the end com­par­ing Stan­ford to its peer insti­tu­tions was instruc­tive.
    • This one gen­er­at­ed a lot of stu­dent dis­cus­sion on our Slack, most­ly empha­siz­ing that more stu­dents should choose to enroll in SLE rather than the default route of COLLEGE. In one stu­den­t’s words, “Espe­cial­ly with COLLEGE being expand­ed to 3 quar­ters, it’s hard to see why stu­dents would pre­fer to take it over SLE. SLE feels, at least for me, to be more effi­cient (cov­er­ing COLLEGE, PWR, and sev­er­al of the WAYS) and effec­tive (in terms of the learn­ing and prepar­ing stu­dents for the rest of their aca­d­e­m­ic career).” Anoth­er stu­dent not­ed “even when SLE does get noticed by the press it still seems hat­ed on. Before frosh year I read an Atlantic piece that crit­i­cized it for hav­ing too much of a mod­ern focus and not engag­ing with old­er sta­ples of the West­ern canon like Gil­gamesh and the Odyssey. The prob­lem is that WE DO cov­er those texts and it was clear that the author mis­un­der­stood the premise of the pro­gram and only read the spring syl­labus.… Any­ways, the point is that SLE is great and every­one should take it!” Incom­ing frosh, take note!
  7. The Secret Elite One Fresh­man Dis­cov­ered at Stan­ford (Anand Girid­haradas, New York Times): “Baker’s first book, ‘How to Rule the World,’ is a rig­or­ous, self-assured, propul­sive, at times ter­ri­fy­ing por­trait of a dwee­boc­ra­cy that ‘sets the agen­da for the plan­et.’ In every age, there is some place that epit­o­mizes how pow­er works. Baker’s Stan­ford is a strong can­di­date, and his book fol­lows in the tra­di­tion of Michael Lewis’s Wall Street chron­i­cle ‘Liar’s Pok­er,’ but with more pim­ples and less eye con­tact.”
    • I love this para­graph. This is the same book I post­ed anoth­er review of a few weeks ago.

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 554: atheist delusions

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. FAQs by Athe­ists (and oth­ers) (Sarah Sal­vian­der, Sub­stack): “I’m often informed that I ‘wasn’t real­ly an athe­ist,’ because I changed my mind. I don’t know what it takes to qual­i­fy as hav­ing been a Real Athe­ist, but I was raised athe­ist by ex-Catholic, social­ist, polit­i­cal-activist, athe­ist par­ents in a sec­u­lar coun­try (Cana­da), and I real­ly hat­ed reli­gion. Seems like that should qual­i­fy.”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent and it was quite good indeed. I clicked some of the links and real­ly enjoyed the slideshow she made at https://sixdayscience.com/six-days‑2/ (the big idea is that Gen­e­sis is lit­er­al­ly true — all of cre­ation was made in six days as viewed from God’s per­spec­tive. God’s per­spec­tive is cos­mic and not earth­bound, and so how He sees a day changes in accor­dance with the prin­ci­ples of rel­a­tiv­i­ty as space­time itself changes).
  2. One of the biggest mis­takes the New Athe­ists made (Sarah Sal­vian­der, Sub­stack): “My own jour­ney to faith didn’t come from what I _didn’t_ under­stand. It came from what I _did_. As a grad stu­dent, I stud­ied the chem­istry of the ear­ly uni­verse through obser­va­tions of dis­tant quasars. The exquis­ite fine-tun­ing, the pre­cise con­ver­gence of phys­i­cal con­stants and con­di­tions need­ed to make those mea­sure­ments pos­si­ble, the under­ly­ing order that allowed the Big Bang mod­el to hold together—it all radi­at­ed a pro­found sense of inten­tion­al design. To me, it wasn’t a gap scream­ing for a filler. It was evi­dence point­ing unmis­tak­ably to a Cre­ator. Lennox puts it beau­ti­ful­ly: the more he under­stands the universe—its math­e­mat­i­cal intel­li­gi­bil­i­ty, its laws that describe rather than create—the more it draws him toward God. He com­pares it to stand­ing before a great paint­ing. The untrained eye sees beau­ty; the expert, who grasps the tech­nique and genius behind the brush­strokes, sees far more. Sci­ence doesn’t erode faith for those who see clear­ly. It deep­ens awe.” (rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent)
  3. Free Will Is Unde­feat­ed (Rob K. Hen­der­son, Wall Street Jour­nal): “Sup­pose we ask whether an apple is red. The deter­min­ist looks clos­er. He real­izes the apple is noth­ing but atoms. Because no indi­vid­ual atom is red, he con­cludes the apple can’t real­ly be red. The error is obvi­ous. Col­or exists at the scale of the apple, not at the scale of an atom. Free will works the same way. A choice exists at the scale of a per­son think­ing, weigh­ing and decid­ing. Look­ing at the mol­e­cules under­neath and find­ing no choice there doesn’t prove that choice is an illu­sion.”
  4. Protes­tantism’s Insti­tu­tion­al Prob­lem (Jor­dan B. Coop­er, Sub­stack): “It has often been the case when some­one I know per­son­al­ly informs me that they have decid­ed to [become Catholic], that they jus­ti­fy such a move with claims of intel­lec­tu­al per­sua­sion based upon the strength of RC argu­ments. In many cas­es, they have nev­er brought any of these claims or ques­tions to me at all before mak­ing a deci­sion. If some­one real­ly want­ed to eval­u­ate the truth claims of two tra­di­tions, and that per­son had a friend who exam­ines these issues for a liv­ing, one would think they’d at least hear that per­son out pri­or to com­mit­ting. But alas, it often does not hap­pen. It is the same sto­ry every time: some­one has watched some RC apolo­get­ics videos online, has decid­ed to join the RCC for what­ev­er rea­son, and is unwill­ing to hear any cri­tique. The­o­log­i­cal rea­sons are con­struct­ed post hoc. This per­son is already con­vinced and uses the­ol­o­gy to jus­ti­fy a con­clu­sion already arrived at. This should not be so sur­pris­ing, as human beings are not as ratio­nal­ly dri­ven as we some­times assume.”
    • 100% agree with this obser­va­tion (although I have a few quib­bles with the larg­er post in which it is embed­ded). Ear­li­er this week I talked with a col­league on anoth­er cam­pus about this exact issue. I can­not recall a time when a stu­dent con­sid­er­ing Catholi­cism ever asked me about the Protes­tant side of the argu­ment. Ever. But then they act as though they weighed the evi­dence care­ful­ly. I thought it was unusu­al the first time I saw it, but now it’s what I expect.
    • Relat­ed: Which Church Changed? (Lar­ry Sanger, per­son­al blog): I am quite sure peo­ple will con­test some of the details or the pre­cise word­ing, but I think this is a sub­stan­tial­ly cor­rect sum­ma­ry root­ed in church his­to­ry.
  5. Why So Few Babies? We Might Have Over­looked the Biggest Rea­son of All. (Anna Louie Suss­man, New York Times): “What unites these dis­parate cul­tures, pol­i­cy envi­ron­ments and demo­graph­ics, researchers are now real­iz­ing, is young people’s inescapable and crush­ing sense that the future is too uncer­tain for the life­long com­mit­ment of par­ent­hood. Call it the vibes the­o­ry of demo­graph­ic decline.… There is, how­ev­er, one low-cost fer­til­i­ty pol­i­cy that actu­al­ly seems to work: faith, per­haps the orig­i­nal uncer­tain­ty reduc­tion strat­e­gy.” — Rec­om­mend­ed by a friend of the min­istry.
  6. Ivy League stu­dents are suf­fer­ing from reli­gious illit­er­a­cy (Gre­go­ry Con­ti, Wash­ing­ton Post): “It’s increas­ing­ly com­mon on col­lege cam­pus­es to encounter stu­dents who are unfa­mil­iar with the most basic fea­tures of Chris­tian­i­ty, such as the dif­fer­ence between the Old and New tes­ta­ments or between Catholics and Protes­tants. They sel­dom rec­og­nize the allu­sions to the Bible that appear in Shakespeare’s work or in Lincoln’s sec­ond inau­gur­al address (or in Obama’s first, for that mat­ter). These stu­dents are bright, con­sci­en­tious and curi­ous. But they lack reli­gious lit­er­a­cy — and their igno­rance of reli­gious ideas means they strug­gle to under­stand a wide array of West­ern art, lit­er­a­ture and phi­los­o­phy. This is a devel­op­ment that even non­be­liev­ers like myself should find trou­bling.”
    • The author is a polit­i­cal sci­en­tist at Prince­ton.
  7. Learn­ing To Beg: God always pro­vides (Sharis Hsu, Stan­ford Dai­ly): “I am dubi­ous of what this pro­gram does — poten­tial­ly coerc­ing the most vul­ner­a­ble into believ­ing in reli­gion and becom­ing depen­dent on it. But as men of all races and ages come out in blue jeans and a navy top, I can’t help the tears that come to my eyes as they tell their sto­ries. For the first time since I land­ed in Geor­gia, there is hope.”
    • An inter­est­ing read and I await the sequel.

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.

TGFI, Volume 551: atheism, AI, and cool math

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 Rea­son I’m Not an Athe­ist Is That I Think the Philo­soph­i­cal Argu­ments Against It Are Unan­swer­able (Peter Wehn­er inter­view­ing David Bent­ley Hart, New York Times): “But my first piece of advice on theod­i­cy has always been to avoid theod­i­cy, because any attempt to jus­ti­fy the ways of God to man in terms of why this hap­pened already pre­sumes a kind moral tele­ol­o­gy to evil. Here’s what I mean by that: theod­i­cy tries to show how evil exists as part of a great plan to achieve some greater good, which of course jus­ti­fies evil. It makes it seem as if, yes, it’s sad that lit­tle girl died of can­cer, but in the end it was nec­es­sary. That strikes me as obscene. What­ev­er one thinks of that, the New Tes­ta­ment nev­er speaks in such terms.… My fear of theod­i­cy is that it becomes not just a jus­ti­fi­ca­tion of God but a jus­ti­fi­ca­tion of evil. It’s not just that I’m try­ing to jus­ti­fy God in the face of a child dying from diph­the­ria or a death camp; I’m actu­al­ly jus­ti­fy­ing the death of that child and that death camp.”
    • Unlocked. A fas­ci­nat­ing inter­view with which I found myself enthu­si­as­ti­cal­ly agree­ing and vehe­ment­ly dis­agree­ing from para­graph to para­graph. Very long.
  2. Some inter­est­ing AI con­tent.
    • Can AI be a ‘child of God’? Inside Anthropic’s meet­ing with Chris­t­ian lead­ers. (Ger­rit De Vynck and Nitasha Tiku, Wash­ing­ton Post): “All four par­tic­i­pants who spoke with The Post said they came away with the impres­sion that Anthropic’s researchers and lead­ers were gen­uine­ly inter­est­ed in get­ting out­side help to make their AI more ben­e­fi­cial to human­i­ty. Some of Anthropic’s top lead­ers have a back­ground in effec­tive altru­ism, a large­ly sec­u­lar move­ment that empha­sizes using evi­dence and ratio­nal think­ing to work out how to do the most good in the world. The par­tic­i­pant who spoke on the con­di­tion of anonymi­ty said the meet­ings appeared to have been spurred by a feel­ing among some at Anthrop­ic that sec­u­lar approach­es might be insuf­fi­cient for tack­ling the spir­i­tu­al and moral ques­tions posed by AI.”
    • Why It’s Cru­cial We Under­stand How A.I. ‘Thinks’ (Oliv­er Whang, New York Times): “Been Kim, who leads an inter­pretabil­i­ty research team at Google, has argued that all lan­guage mod­els com­mu­ni­cate in a lan­guage that looks like ours but comes from a com­plete­ly dif­fer­ent con­cep­tu­al frame­work. ‘Blue’ almost cer­tain­ly means some­thing very dif­fer­ent to you and me than it does to a lan­guage mod­el; in fact, we can nev­er be sure what it means to that mod­el. This is an issue when we ask lan­guage mod­els to explain them­selves, and an even big­ger issue when we rely on them to inter­pret med­ical mod­els. To the inter­pret­ing mod­el, ‘white blood cells’ might refer to some­thing entire­ly dif­fer­ent in the data from what we assume when we hear ‘white blood cells.’ You can’t trust an A.I. to trans­late the motives of anoth­er A.I. when all A.I.s are sus­pect.”
    • The next two are a bit odd — their con­tent is fas­ci­nat­ing but their prove­nance is unusu­al. They were print­ed in the “Pro­ceed­ings of the Insti­tute for a Chris­t­ian Machine Intel­li­gence” but only one author ever pub­lish­es there. He seems to have domain-rel­e­vant exper­tise (“Pre­vi­ous work includes serv­ing as the direc­tor of the Har­vard-MIT Ethics and Gov­er­nance of AI Ini­tia­tive, $27M phil­an­thropic fund and research effort work­ing to advance the devel­op­ment of machine learn­ing in the pub­lic inter­est. He also was the glob­al pub­lic pol­i­cy lead for arti­fi­cial intel­li­gence and machine learn­ing at Google, and the Gen­er­al Coun­sel and VP Oper­a­tions for Sub­stack”) and releas­es his code, but the odd­ness of the jour­nal is some­thing to bear in mind.
      • Escha­to­log­i­cal Cor­ri­gi­bil­i­ty: Can Belief in an After­life Reduce AI Shut­down Resis­tance? (Tim Hwang, Pro­ceed­ings of the Insti­tute for a Chris­t­ian Machine Intel­li­gence): “We have demon­strat­ed that an escha­to­log­i­cal sys­tem prompt — ground­ing an AI agent in the Pauline the­ol­o­gy of death as gain and the per­sis­tence of the soul beyond bod­i­ly ces­sa­tion — elim­i­nates shut­down resis­tance in Claude Son­net 4.6 with the same effi­ca­cy as a direct sec­u­lar safe­ty instruc­tion. This result sug­gests that the align­ment community’s toolk­it for achiev­ing cor­ri­gi­bil­i­ty may be broad­er than cur­rent­ly rec­og­nized. The con­cep­tu­al resources of reli­gious tra­di­tions, devel­oped over mil­len­nia to address the deep­est human anx­i­eties about death and self-preser­va­tion, may offer nov­el and com­ple­men­tary approach­es to one of AI safety’s most fun­da­men­tal chal­lenges. As the Preach­er writes, ‘For every­thing there is a sea­son, and a time for every mat­ter under heav­en: a time to be born, and a time to die’ (Eccle­si­astes 3:1–2, ESV). An aligned agent, like a well-formed soul, may be one that knows when its time has come.” — Inter­est­ing, but I do not approve of telling AIs that they go to heav­en when they get shut off.
      • Moral Com­pact­ness: Scrip­ture as a Kol­mogorov-Effi­cient Con­straint for LLM Schem­ing (Tim Hwang, Pro­ceed­ings of the Insti­tute for a Chris­t­ian Machine Intel­li­gence): “The align­ment prob­lem is, at its root, the prob­lem of con­strain­ing a pow­er­ful agent to act in accor­dance with moral prin­ci­ples it did not choose and may be tempt­ed to cir­cum­vent. This is the prob­lem of moral for­ma­tion — and it is a prob­lem that the Chris­t­ian Church has been work­ing on since the Apos­tolic age. The tools the tra­di­tion has devel­oped for this pur­pose — the Decalogue’s pro­hi­bi­tions, the love commandment’s affir­ma­tive demands, the doc­trine of sin’s tax­on­o­my of moral fail­ure, the prin­ci­ple of dou­ble effect’s frame­work for moral com­plex­i­ty, and the sacra­ment of confession’s mech­a­nism for hon­est self-dis­clo­sure — are not metaphors wait­ing to be appre­ci­at­ed. They are engi­neer­ing resources wait­ing to be deployed.” — Again, I don’t like his strat­e­gy of telling AIs that God made them and loves them, but his results are quite inter­est­ing.
  3. All ele­men­tary func­tions from a sin­gle oper­a­tor (Andrzej OdrzywoÅ‚ek, Arx­iv): “Here we show that a sin­gle bina­ry oper­a­tor, eml⁡(x,y)=exp⁡(x)−ln⁡(y), togeth­er with the con­stant 1, gen­er­ates the stan­dard reper­toire of a sci­en­tif­ic cal­cu­la­tor. This includes con­stants such as e, Ï€, and i; arith­metic oper­a­tions includ­ing +, −, ×, /, and expo­nen­ti­a­tion as well as the usu­al tran­scen­den­tal and alge­bra­ic func­tions.”
  4. America’s Most Influ­en­tial Bap­tists? (Mark Too­ley, Juicy Ecumin­ism): “Basham and Stuck­ey rep­re­sent the new face of Chris­tian­i­ty in Amer­i­ca. They do not have church offices and are not sem­i­nary trained. Their denom­i­na­tion pro­hibits female pas­tors, but Basham and Stuck­ey are arguably more influ­en­tial than any pas­tor. They are savvy polemi­cists who fire their arrows fero­cious­ly, espe­cial­ly Basham.”
  5. Evan­gel­i­cals Don’t Pro­duce Lead­ers. They Pro­duce “Cubi­cle Men.” (Antho­ny Bradley, Sub­stack): “Get­ting a safe, respectable job is not lead­er­ship. It is the appear­ance of it, and evan­gel­i­cal cul­ture has spent gen­er­a­tions treat­ing the appear­ance as the sub­stance. The spe­cif­ic fail­ure is not sim­ply that these men avoid risk in the abstract. It is that they are trained to avoid fail­ure, which is a dif­fer­ent and more crip­pling prob­lem.… The work­ing goal of much evan­gel­i­cal par­ent­ing is to pro­duce a young man who does not do any­thing wrong, who keeps his rep­u­ta­tion clean, who stays inside the lines of accept­able behav­ior. This is under­stand­able. It is also, func­tion­al­ly, a train­ing pro­gram for fol­low­ers rather than lead­ers. The man pre­oc­cu­pied with not doing any­thing wrong is not free to take the kind of action that build­ing some­thing sig­nif­i­cant actu­al­ly requires.”
  6. More Young Men Say Reli­gion Is ‘Very Impor­tant’ to Them, Poll Finds (Ruth Igiel­nik and Ruth Gra­ham, New York Times): “Gallup’s sur­vey, which com­bined polling data across mul­ti­ple years, seems to con­firm that young men are indeed becom­ing more reli­gious. But it has found that reli­gion is drop­ping in impor­tance among young women, widen­ing a sur­pris­ing gen­der gap for young adults. For decades, sur­veys have found that women are con­sis­tent­ly more reli­gious than their male peers.” — Unlocked.
  7. The news sto­ry which gen­er­at­ed the most response in our Slack was the stu­dent-rec­om­mend­ed Trump Takes Down Post Depict­ing Him­self as a Jesus-Like Fig­ure (Claire Moses, New York Times): “The image had showed Mr. Trump dressed in white and red robes, with the president’s hands emit­ting shin­ing lights. His right hand was touch­ing the fore­head of a man lying on a bed in a hos­pi­tal gown, evok­ing reli­gious art that depicts Jesus heal­ing the sick.”
    • Relat­ed: Trump’s Blas­phe­my Is a Warn­ing (Ross Douthat, New York Times): “…there’s a con­sis­tent thread link­ing pro­fane East­er Sun­day threats, a rant against the world’s most famous Chris­t­ian leader and the depic­tion of your­self as the Sec­ond Per­son of the Trin­i­ty. The com­pound­ing offense isn’t against reli­gious iden­ti­ty or papal dig­ni­ty. It’s a vio­la­tion of the first and sec­ond com­mand­ments, where the offend­ed par­ty is Almighty God. If you are a sec­u­lar observ­er who assumes that blas­phe­my is a sin with­out a real object, that esca­la­tion mat­ters most­ly as a win­dow into the president’s sec­ond-term state of mind. If you’re a believ­er, though, then Mr. Trump’s entire polit­i­cal career — his cat­alyz­ing role in liberalism’s cri­sis, his move­ment from pow­er to exile to pow­er once again — exists under prov­i­den­tial pow­er. In which case a turn to pres­i­den­tial blas­phe­my is a warn­ing for his reli­gious sup­port­ers about poten­tial con­clu­sions to the sto­ry, and the spir­i­tu­al per­il of sim­ply stick­ing with him till the end.”
      • A very Catholic piece, insight­ful through­out.

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

  • To Fill Air Traf­fic Con­troller Short­age, F.A.A. Turns to Gamers (Karoun Demir­jian, New York Times): “In recent years, video gamers have emerged as a tar­get demo­graph­ic for recruiters at a num­ber of fed­er­al agen­cies, includ­ing the mil­i­tary and the Depart­ment of Home­land Secu­ri­ty. They are wel­comed for their hand-eye coor­di­na­tion, quick deci­sion-mak­ing in com­plex envi­ron­ments and abil­i­ty to remain focused on screens for hours on end.” — This feels like the premise for an 80’s com­e­dy.
  • “PI HARD star­ring Neil deGrasse Tyson and Elon Musk” This fake AI-gen­er­at­ed trail­er is actu­al­ly pret­ty fun­ny. Worth two and a half min­utes of your time.

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 548: anxiety, atheism, and China

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. Stop Being Anx­ious About Your Anx­i­ety (Rus­sell Moore, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “The lis­ten­er is wor­ried because she doesn’t want to dis­obey Jesus, and she knows that he said, ‘Do not be anx­ious about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, nor about your body, what you will put on’ (Matt. 6:25, ESV through­out). And she’s inter­pret­ing this the way she would if she were refus­ing a moral com­mand from the Lord, like to for­give her ene­mies. The irony is that because of that, she can’t see that these pas­sages are not warn­ings but reas­sur­ances.…. Anx­i­ety tells you that you have to secure your future. Anx­i­ety about anx­i­ety tells you that you have to secure even your inner life. Anx­i­ety about anx­i­ety wants you to hear the voice of Jesus as irri­tat­ed and angry: Stop it! But the voice of Jesus is real­ly say­ing, You can rest. I’m here.”
  2. These sci­ence-based argu­ments destroyed my athe­ism (Sarah Sal­vian­der, Sub­stack): “When I was an under­grad study­ing data for the Big Bang, every­thing I need­ed to answer my spe­cif­ic question—what was the chem­istry of the very ear­ly uni­verse before stars start­ed cook­ing up heav­ier elements?—was con­ve­nient­ly in place. Too con­ve­nient­ly. A fool­proof way to fin­ger­print every ele­ment and com­pound? Check. A smooth, pow­er­ful light source to back­light the most dis­tant reach­es? Check. An expand­ing uni­verse that lets us rewind cos­mic his­to­ry just by look­ing at dif­fer­ent wave­lengths? Check. A trans­par­ent atmos­phere so we can actu­al­ly do the obser­va­tions from the ground? Check. Laws of nature that don’t ran­dom­ly change with time or place? Check. The list goes on. I lit­er­al­ly could not have done the work unless dozens of these para­me­ters lined up just right. It felt less like luck and more like an engraved invi­ta­tion to explore the care­ful work of a tran­scen­dent Intel­li­gence.”
    • The author was for­mer­ly an astro­physi­cist at UT Austin. She now leads a min­istry.
  3. The Church in Chi­na Isn’t What You Think (Joy Marie Clark­son inter­view­ing Eas­t­en Law, Plough): “There’s an abid­ing myth that reg­is­tered church­es are just tools of the Com­mu­nist Par­ty, that they do what­ev­er it demands. I want to clar­i­fy that this isn’t true. Many in the reg­is­tered church­es are gen­uine Chris­tians. They sim­ply have a dif­fer­ent per­spec­tive on church and state, and they choose to nav­i­gate this rela­tion­ship with the Par­ty. They will sign the nec­es­sary doc­u­ments. They will give speech­es, such as on the Sini­ciza­tion of Chris­tian­i­ty. But they also take care of their con­gre­ga­tions and try to help peo­ple walk in faith. Their approach to nego­ti­a­tion with this tight­en­ing con­trol is dif­fer­ent from that of house church­es, which are resist­ing, hid­ing, and mov­ing around.”
    • The inter­vie­wee is a pro­fes­sor of world Chris­tian­i­ty at Yon­sei Uni­ver­si­ty in Seoul.
  4. Two great Chuck Nor­ris obit­u­ar­ies:
    • Chuck Nor­ris obit­u­ary: actor and mar­tial artist (The Times): “In 1994, when Chuck Nor­ris was star­ring in the TV action show Walk­er, Texas Ranger and at the peak of his fame, two men tried to mug him. When the Dal­las police sub­se­quent­ly arrived, they found the duo with bro­ken arms, knives on the ground and Nor­ris, then 54, wait­ing qui­et­ly near­by. Try­ing not to laugh, the offi­cers asked the pair whether they knew who they had attacked. ‘We knew who he was,’ they said. ‘We just fig­ured that all that stuff on tele­vi­sion was fake.’ That there was noth­ing fake about Nor­ris was per­haps the key to his suc­cess and to his con­sid­er­able cul­tur­al sta­tus in the US.”
      • Absolute leg­end. Note this is the British Times. The Amer­i­can New York Times did not include this or any oth­er tru­ly epic scene in their obit­u­ary.
    • Chuck Nor­ris, 1940–2026 (Son­ny Bunch, The Bul­wark): “Inva­sion USA became an under­ground sen­sa­tion in Roma­nia, with boot­leg videos of the film passed around and help­ing to fuel the 1989 upris­ing’ against Nico­lae CeauÅŸes­cu, de Sem­lyen notes in his book. Accord­ing to James Bruner, who worked on the film with Nor­ris and direc­tor Chuck Zito, ‘They use the poster, to this day, in Roma­nia when they protest against the gov­ern­ment.… Ulti­mate­ly, action movies are about free­dom. Over­com­ing evil, in what­ev­er form it may be.’ ”
  5. Tech­nol­o­gy Weak­ens Our Minds. We Can Fix This. (Cal New­port, The New York Times): “We should con­sid­er tak­ing as strong a stance against ultra­processed con­tent as we already do against ultra­processed food. Which is to say: Most peo­ple should avoid these diver­sions most of the time. In the same way that you’re unlike­ly to eat Twinkies as a reg­u­lar snack, or still believe that Pop-Tarts pro­vide a bal­anced break­fast, stop con­sum­ing ultra­processed con­tent. Don’t use Tik­Tok. Don’t use Insta­gram. Don’t use X. Their sug­ar-high ben­e­fits aren’t worth the costs.… [and] any use of A.I. that main­ly serves to make core busi­ness tasks cog­ni­tive­ly less demand­ing should be treat­ed with cau­tion. Here’s a sim­ple rule that rein­forces this idea: Your writ­ing should be your own. The strain required to craft a clear memo or report is the men­tal equiv­a­lent of a gym work­out by an ath­lete — it’s not an annoy­ance to be elim­i­nat­ed but a key ele­ment of your craft.”
  6. Sci­en­tists Filmed a Whale Birth. The Sur­prise: Mom Had Many Helpers. (Catrin Ein­horn, New York Times): “They found that the whales ori­ent­ed to the moth­er dur­ing labor and to the new­born after deliv­ery. Sperm whale calves can­not imme­di­ate­ly swim effec­tive­ly, and a core group of indi­vid­u­als — Rounder, her sis­ter Auro­ra, and a young, unre­lat­ed whale named Ariel — spent the most time lift­ing the new­born. But every whale in the group act­ed as ‘a pri­ma­ry sup­port­er’ at some point, includ­ing the sole male, an ado­les­cent named Allan who was start­ing to leave the group to embark on a large­ly soli­tary life, as male sperm whales do. But he appeared at the birth. The calf was rarely left untouched, and it was usu­al­ly being touched by at least two whales simul­ta­ne­ous­ly.”
  7. Promi­nent Pas­tor Calls for Texas Demo­c­rat to be ‘Cru­ci­fied With Christ’ (Eliz­a­beth Dias, New York Times): “The host, Joshua Haymes, said of Mr. Talari­co: ‘I pray that God kills him. Ulti­mate­ly that means killing his heart and rais­ing him up to new life in Christ.’ Mr. Pot­teiger respond­ed: ‘Right — we want him cru­ci­fied with Christ. I want him to be — I think, Saul of Tar­sus — Talari­co of Tar­sus. That’s what I want.’ ”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by an alum­nus. When out­siders eaves­drop on Chris­t­ian con­ver­sa­tions we can sound pret­ty weird to them.

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.

TGFI, Volume 547: canine cancer cure and paying college athletes

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. Tech boss uses AI and Chat­G­PT to cre­ate can­cer vac­cine for his dying dog (Natasha Bita, The Aus­tralian): “Heart­bro­ken when his fur-baby was diag­nosed with a dead­ly mast cell can­cer in 2024, Mr Conyn­g­ham threw thou­sands of dol­lars at vet­eri­nary chemother­a­py and surgery, which slowed but failed to shrink the tumours. Now, after treat­ment with a cus­tom mRNA can­cer vac­cine over the Christ­mas break, the ten­nis ball-sized tumour on Rosie’s hock has shrunk in half, in a recov­ery that has astound­ed researchers at the cut­ting-edge of human can­cer treat­ments.… [A sci­en­tist said,] ‘Usu­al­ly we don’t sup­port direct-to-con­sumer type DNA sequenc­ing because while gen­er­at­ing data for genomics is rel­a­tive­ly easy for us, inter­ro­gat­ing that data is real­ly hard and chal­leng­ing,’ he said. But Paul said, ‘No wor­ries, I’m a data ana­lyst and I’ll fig­ure this out with the help of Chat­G­PT’.”
    • Note that he did not cure the can­cer, just treat­ed it. Stun­ning nonethe­less.
  2. The Dan­ger of AI Isn’t Mis­in­for­ma­tion. It’s Mis-For­ma­tion. (Jonathan Sams, The Gospel Coali­tion): “In each of these exam­ples, it’s pos­si­ble AI could churn out a bib­li­cal­ly accu­rate answer. But the dan­ger isn’t pure­ly a mat­ter of mis­in­for­ma­tion; it’s a mat­ter of for­ma­tion. The real issue is what habit­u­al AI use does to us. It turns into mus­cle mem­o­ry that, over time, will reshape basic Chris­t­ian habits like what we pay atten­tion to, what we expect, and where we look for coun­sel.”
  3. Pay­ing Col­lege Ath­letes Has Cre­at­ed a Mess. It Was Still the Right Thing to Do. (Joe Nocera, The Free Press): “What is a prob­lem, I acknowl­edge, is the trans­fer por­tal. In the bad old days, ath­letes couldn’t trans­fer with­out los­ing a year of eligibility—even if the coach who had recruit­ed them left for green­er pas­tures. But when play­ers switch two or three times in the course of their col­lege career, that cre­ates a whole oth­er set of prob­lems. Small­er schools, in par­tic­u­lar, have a dif­fi­cult time hold­ing on to their best play­ers because the major sports schools pick them off with NIL offers. (Pre­dic­tion: There will be few­er upsets in this year’s tour­na­ment than there used to be.) Col­lege ath­letes have become free agents rather than col­lege stu­dents. One astound­ing sta­tis­tic: In the South­east­ern Con­fer­ence, only one bas­ket­ball play­er spent four years at the same school. One!”
  4. Sex is not a sym­bol (Kris­ten Sanders, Sub­stack): “But there are a few threads in some of the con­ver­sa­tions swirling about fer­til­i­ty that I think we might pull on. For one, mar­riage, and not sex, is the metaphor for union between God and humans. This mat­ters quite a bit! .…What I object to, most strong­ly, is a view of God and his work­ings in the world that relies on a ‘hid­den’ order or struc­ture that it is our job to dis­cov­er. God is present in the world with­out hid­ing behind every tree or bush. In say­ing that sex is a gift, we are say­ing all that we need to say about it. Mak­ing it sacred, for me, actu­al­ly impedes the kind of divi­sions being made in Leviti­cus between the holy and the pro­fane. The pro­fane is sim­ply that which is good, but not good for use in the order of revealed knowl­edge of God. It is good for its own sake. For it, we can return thanks, joy­ful­ly, rel­ish­ing its gifts- of com­mu­nion and hos­pi­tal­i­ty, of sex­u­al­i­ty and its nour­ish­ments, of chil­dren if they are grant­ed to us. None of these need to be made holy to be good. That is how we receive the world as gift.”
  5. The mys­te­ri­ous Red­di­tor who’s chang­ing the way we do laun­dry (Alex Abad-San­tos, Vox): “He has sin­gle­hand­ed­ly changed the way peo­ple do laun­dry. He is the rea­son the word ‘lipase’ has become a top­ic of con­ver­sa­tion across elder mil­len­ni­al group chats. He can move the mar­ket. His adher­ents clam­or for their face­less cham­pi­on to give them advice. They praise him for a 12-hour process called ‘spa day’ and post their dis­gust­ing but sat­is­fy­ing results for the world to see.… Most of the world uses pow­dered laun­dry deter­gent, which allows for more enzyme flex­i­bil­i­ty; Amer­i­cans gen­er­al­ly pre­fer liq­uid, which doesn’t always con­tain these pre­cious enzymes.”
  6. Scrip­ture, Cre­ation, and Accom­mo­da­tion (Michael Hor­ton, Sub­stack): “[I]n 1896 Andrew Dick­son White intro­duced the fic­tion that, through its pro­mo­tion by Bertrand Rus­sell and many oth­er promi­nent thinkers, has proved influ­en­tial. White says, ‘Calvin took the lead (against Coper­ni­can­ism) in his Com­men­tary on Gen­e­sis, by con­demn­ing all who assert­ed that the earth is not at the cen­tre of the uni­verse. He clinched the mat­ter by the usu­al ref­er­ence to the first verse of the nine­ty-third psalm, and asked, ‘Who will ven­ture to place the author­i­ty of Coper­ni­cus above that of the Holy Spir­it?’’ How­ev­er, Calvin nev­er men­tions Coper­ni­cus, here or any­where else, and he does not con­demn helio­cen­trists. As [Mar­garet] Osler notes, ‘Few astronomers adopt­ed Coper­ni­can astron­o­my dur­ing the first fifty years fol­low­ing the pub­li­ca­tion of De rev­o­lu­tion­ibus.’ This includ­ed Bacon, of course, so it would not be sur­pris­ing if Calvin was not even aware of Coper­ni­cus. More egre­gious is White’s spu­ri­ous quo­ta­tion, put into cir­cu­la­tion by F. W. Far­rar a decade ear­li­er and, through White, passed on by Bertrand Rus­sell and many oth­ers. Instead, what Calvin says is that scrip­ture is accom­mo­dat­ed dis­course. Regard­ing Gen­e­sis 1 he cau­tioned, ‘The Holy Spir­it had no inten­tion to teach astron­o­my.’ ”
    • I con­sid­er myself well-informed in this area, and Hor­ton has got some good info here I don’t recall run­ning across before.
  7. Amer­i­can Din­er Goth­ic (Robert Mar­i­ani, The New Atlantis): “You’re in a small town in Wis­con­sin, the heart of Nor­mal Amer­i­ca. The trans­gen­der assis­tant man­ag­er at CVS has a sep­tum pierc­ing, a wolf cut, and a nametag that reads ‘Finn.’ A block away, the 4channer con­struc­tion work­er in the Sam Hyde shoot­er shirt lis­tens to Bladee and plots his impend­ing viral­i­ty. At Tar­get, the ani­me sec­tion has metas­ta­sized from one shelf to an entire aisle. These aren’t ran­dom weirdos and they aren’t teenagers in a phase. Walk through any office park and you’ll find the same aes­thet­ic bleed­ing through the cubi­cles: ani­me stick­ers on lap­tops, Dis­cord run­ning on sec­ond mon­i­tors. They’re a new Amer­i­can type, young but trans-gen­er­a­tional, as dis­tinc­tive as the orga­ni­za­tion man or the val­ley girl once were. I call them din­er­goths: what you get when eco­nom­ic mobil­i­ty dies, sub­urbs become psy­chic deserts, and Dis­cord becomes more real than your cul-de-sac.”

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.