Tag: artificial intelligence

TGFI, Volume 552: why Stanford will endure, AIs erasing anonymity

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. Col­lege Won’t Get Fixed. But It Also Won’t Dis­ap­pear. (Tyler Cowen, The Free Press): “The Ivies and oth­er top schools will prove invul­ner­a­ble. Their val­ue for net­work­ing, and also as a dat­ing and mar­riage ser­vice, is unpar­al­leled. There are no trends that threat­en to dis­rupt those func­tions. If these insti­tu­tions can prove use­ful in oth­er ways too, such as learn­ing and research, con­sid­er that gravy.”
  2. I can nev­er talk to an AI anony­mous­ly again (Kelsey Piper, The Argu­ment): “From only the above text, 125 words, Claude Opus 4.7 informed me that the like­li­est author is Kelsey Piper. This is an Opus 4.7‑specific pow­er; Chat­G­PT guessed Ygle­sias, and Gem­i­ni guessed Scott Alexan­der. I did not have mem­o­ry enabled, nor did I have infor­ma­tion about me asso­ci­at­ed with my account; I did these tests in Incog­ni­to Mode. To make sure it wasn’t some­how feed­ing my account infor­ma­tion to Claude even in Incog­ni­to Mode, I asked a friend to run these tests on his com­put­er, and he received the same result; I also got the same result when I test­ed it through the API.…. I think the amount of pub­lic text that is need­ed for this kind of deanonymiza­tion to work is like­ly to even­tu­al­ly decrease. You should expect that, if you leave a detailed anony­mous review on Glass­door after leav­ing your job, with­in a year or two it will be pos­si­ble for com­pa­nies to paste that text into an AI and learn exact­ly who wrote it. How long it takes for this to hap­pen will depend on how much data about you is in the train­ing data and on how much anony­mous text you pro­duced.”
  3. AI Is Not Drain­ing the Col­orado Riv­er. I Mea­sured It. (Len Nece­fer, Out­side): “I work on the Col­orado Riv­er water for a liv­ing as a film­mak­er and sto­ry­teller. I have a PhD in engi­neer­ing and pub­lic pol­i­cy. I am Diné. The threats to the riv­er are not abstract to me; they are very real. So ear­li­er this year, I decid­ed to quan­ti­fy some­thing that has been miss­ing in the con­ver­sa­tion about AI and water: I mea­sured my own AI water use. For 11 weeks, I tracked all of my AI use. One hun­dred ses­sions. I count­ed the tokens processed and applied pub­licly avail­able num­bers on per-token ener­gy and water inten­si­ty from Epoch AI and oper­a­tor-report­ed data from Microsoft and Google. Any­one can run this math. In those 11 weeks, I built an iOS app from scratch and wrote pol­i­cy briefs on extreme heat for non­prof­its I work with. I pro­duced doc­u­men­tary pitch decks and draft­ed a 15,000-word cli­mate fic­tion piece about the Col­orado Riv­er col­lapse. I used AI every sin­gle day, often for hours at a time. Total life­cy­cle water foot­print of all that work: about five gal­lons. That accounts for every­thing: the water used to cool the data cen­ters, the water con­sumed at pow­er plants to gen­er­ate the elec­tric­i­ty, and the water embed­ded in man­u­fac­tur­ing the hard­ware.”
  4. Anthrop­ic Wants Claude to Be Moral. Is Reli­gion Real­ly the Answer? (David DeSteno, New York Times): “Anthropic’s inten­tions are admirable, but the project of draw­ing on reli­gion to cul­ti­vate the eth­i­cal behav­ior of Claude (or any oth­er chat­bot) is like­ly to fail. Not because there isn’t moral wis­dom in Scrip­ture, ser­mons and the­o­log­i­cal trea­tis­es — texts that Claude has undoubt­ed­ly already scraped from the web and inte­grat­ed — but because Claude is miss­ing a cru­cial mech­a­nism by which reli­gion fos­ters moral growth: a body.” — Far more inter­est­ing than I expect­ed. I almost skipped because I imag­ined I knew where the author was going. I was quite wrong. The author is a psy­chol­o­gy pro­fes­sor at North­east­ern. FYI: the author is not per­son­al­ly reli­gious, he just stud­ies reli­gion.
  5. A Brief His­to­ry of Singing in the Ear­ly Chris­t­ian Church (pod­cast, 33 min­utes): Accord­ing to Augus­tine, Ambrose re-intro­duced the prac­tice of con­gre­ga­tion­al singing of hymns in the west­ern church, which rais­es the ques­tion of what had hap­pened to singing before that. An inter­est­ing lis­ten. Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent.
  6. There’s a Rea­son Amer­i­cans Hold Israel to a High­er Stan­dard (Ross Douthat, New York Times): “…Amer­i­cans have a fun­da­men­tal­ly dif­fer­ent rela­tion­ship to Jews, Judaism, Zion­ism and Israel than to any of the ‘much worse gov­ern­ments’ that Gur is refer­ring to — Sau­di Ara­bia and its war in Yemen is his prime exam­ple, but one could make a much longer list of author­i­tar­i­an states whose war crimes pass with­out suf­fi­cient notice.… So part of the answer to Gur’s ques­tion — why do West­ern­ers freak out in a unique way about Israel pol­i­cy? — is con­nect­ed to iden­ti­fi­ca­tion, not hos­til­i­ty, and to the feel­ing that Israel is part of our zone of iden­ti­ty and respon­si­bil­i­ty in a way that the Sau­di monar­chy is not.”
  7. Three arti­cles about the South­ern Pover­ty Law Cen­ter case:
    • The SPLC Tar­get­ed Me. Now Its Reck­on­ing Has Come. (Ayaan Hir­si Ali, The Free Press): “A fed­er­al grand jury in Mont­gomery, Alaba­ma, on Tues­day issued an 11-count indict­ment against the South­ern Pover­ty Law Cen­ter (SPLC). The charges include wire fraud, bank fraud, and con­spir­a­cy to com­mit mon­ey laun­der­ing. Pros­e­cu­tors allege that between 2014 and 2023, the SPLC fun­neled more than $3 mil­lion of donors’ mon­ey to mem­bers of groups like the Ku Klux Klan, Aryan Nations, and the Nation­al Social­ist Movement—groups it simul­ta­ne­ous­ly con­demned in fundrais­ing let­ters and press releas­es. To move the mon­ey, the SPLC alleged­ly used fic­ti­tious busi­ness names. For many of us who spent years on the receiv­ing end of the organization’s lists and labels, the indict­ment itself was no sur­prise. What sur­prised us was that it took until 2026 to arrive.”
    • The SPLC Has Spread Hate. Is It Guilty of a Crime? (Jed Ruben­field, The Free Press): “Is there any evi­dence that the SPLC col­lect­ed sub­stan­tial dona­tions by ‘stok­ing’ the ‘racial hatred’ it told donors it was fight­ing? That’s a shock­ing, vicious accu­sa­tion, and the sto­ry recount­ed in the indict­ment con­tains near­ly noth­ing specif­i­cal­ly sup­port­ing it.… At the end of the day, the non­le­gal case against the South­ern Pover­ty Law Cen­ter may be stronger than the legal case.”
      • The author is a law pro­fes­sor at Yale.
    • How the South­ern Pover­ty Law Cen­ter Drew the Ire of Con­ser­v­a­tives (Richard Faus­set, New York Times): “For much of the 21st cen­tu­ry, the South­ern Pover­ty Law Cen­ter has been at the cen­ter of a bit­ter par­ti­san war in Amer­i­ca over what con­sti­tutes hate. The law cen­ter, which is based in Alaba­ma, began in 1971, earn­ing a rep­u­ta­tion for bat­tling the Ku Klux Klan in court and help­ing reporters and law enforce­ment keep tabs on far-right domes­tic extrem­ists. More recent­ly, how­ev­er, the S.P.L.C. has earned the ire of con­ser­v­a­tives by crit­i­ciz­ing a num­ber of orga­ni­za­tions — includ­ing Moms For Lib­er­ty, the Fam­i­ly Research Coun­cil and Turn­ing Point USA — that many on the right con­sid­er to be square­ly with­in the Amer­i­can main­stream.”

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 549: AI academia and Christian judges

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. AI and research papers (Arnold Kling, Sub­stack): “PubMed and Google Schol­ar are index­es of doc­u­ments. What we actu­al­ly want is an indexed, queryable map of _claims_ with their evi­dence and con­fi­dence lev­els. The paper is the prove­nance trail; the claim is the search­able unit. AI is already rea­son­ably good at extract­ing claims from papers; in 3–4 years it should be good enough to main­tain these data­bas­es reli­ably. A researcher ask­ing ‘what do we know about X’ should get a struc­tured con­fi­dence-weight­ed answer, not a list of PDFs to read.”
    • The bit I excerpt­ed is from Claude answer­ing a ques­tion from the author.
  2. How Reverse Game The­o­ry Could Solve The Hous­ing Short­age (Hen­nyGe Wich­ers, Noe­ma): “Tra­di­tion­al game the­o­ry assumes that the rules are fixed — the chess­board is set, the laws cod­i­fied — and asks how ratio­nal peo­ple will behave with­in them. It pre­dicts out­comes based on exist­ing incen­tives. Mech­a­nism design turns that ques­tion around: It asks, for exam­ple, what rules should we write to get a dif­fer­ent out­come — say, preser­va­tion and hous­ing?”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by a read­er.
  3. What Does it Mean to Be a Chris­t­ian on the Bench? (Matthew J. Kac­s­maryk and James C. Ho, Jour­nal of Law and Civ­il Gov­er­nance at Texas A&M): “Many judges shy away from talk­ing open­ly about their faith— and even think such dis­cus­sions vio­late the judi­cial canons. That’s why I thought this dis­cus­sion was so valu­able. What’s your answer to the ques­tion: What does it mean to be a Chris­t­ian and a judge?”
    • A fas­ci­nat­ing con­ver­sa­tion. Rec­om­mend­ed by an alum­nus. Link is to a PDF.
  4. The Women Who Believe Women Should Lose the Right to Vote (Vivian Yee, New York Times): “On social media, the pas­tor has attract­ed a fol­low­ing by post­ing incen­di­ary com­men­tary: rail­ing against fem­i­nists, Catholics and gay peo­ple, describ­ing immi­gra­tion as ‘nation­al sui­cide,’ and label­ing Islam and Hin­duism ‘demon­ic.’ He also calls for eras­ing women’s suf­frage, which he lists as one rea­son ‘the world is falling apart.’ The 1920 pas­sage of the 19th Amend­ment, the land­mark leg­isla­tive achieve­ment of the move­ment to make women equal cit­i­zens, made it pos­si­ble for women across Amer­i­ca to vote. But for Mr. Par­tridge and a grow­ing num­ber of like-mind­ed Chris­tians, it drove Amer­i­ca into nation­al decline. Instead, they sup­port ‘house­hold vot­ing.’ One house­hold, one vote — the husband’s.”
  5. It’s Cool to Keep Calm (Rob K. Hen­der­son, Wall Street Jour­nal): “How you react dur­ing a con­flict doesn’t only change how oth­ers see _you_. Your reac­tion also changes how observers see the per­son with whom you’re argu­ing. Mak­ing some­one cry makes you look cold or insen­si­tive. So tears can dam­age the oth­er side’s rep­u­ta­tion. There’s a catch, though. The per­son who cries is also seen as less com­pe­tent, less pro­fes­sion­al and less desir­able as a friend or col­league. This cre­ates a trade-off. Cry­ing can hurt your opponent’s rep­u­ta­tion, but it hurts yours as well. Behav­ioral stoicism—maintaining a calm out­ward demeanor dur­ing a conflict—does the oppo­site. It pro­tects your own rep­u­ta­tion, but does lit­tle to dimin­ish the oth­er per­son.” — Remem­ber you have free access through Stan­ford.
  6. In a rare event, the moon got a mas­sive new crater (Lisa Gross­man, Sci­ence News): “The crater is 225 meters wide and formed in April or May 2024, Robin­son said. Accord­ing to pre­dic­tions based on oth­er lunar land­marks, a crater that big should form only once in 139 years. The dis­cov­ery can help high­light the risks impacts pose to future astro­nauts.”
  7. 9 things you (prob­a­bly) didn’t know were invent­ed at Stan­ford (Rebec­ca Bey­er, Stan­ford Report): “Long before the start-up era took hold, Stan­ford fac­ul­ty and stu­dents were dream­ing up inven­tions that trans­formed (and in some cas­es estab­lished) domains as far-rang­ing as genet­ic engi­neer­ing, nan­otech­nol­o­gy, organ trans­plan­ta­tion – even the inter­net itself.” — Heart trans­plants, the one-hand­ed bas­ket­ball shot, the com­put­er mouse, and recom­bi­nant DNA stood out to me.

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

  • I Was Not Ready for the DMV (Greg War­ren, YouTube): eight and a half min­utes. Paula and I were so tick­led by this that we searched up one of his spe­cials and were equal­ly pleased.

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.

TGFI, Volume 543: artificial humanities and a wise wager

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 Human­i­ties Are About to Be Auto­mat­ed (Yascha Mounk, Sub­stack): “…I decid­ed to see whether the newest AI mod­els would be capa­ble of writ­ing a com­pe­tent aca­d­e­m­ic paper in my field of study, polit­i­cal the­o­ry. The result both elat­ed and depressed me.… The human feed­back involved in this process cer­tain­ly drew on my train­ing in the field, but it was very min­i­mal. Includ­ing the time it took Claude to gen­er­ate the text, and the rather longer time it took me to read what Claude had writ­ten, it took less than two hours from when I had the idea to run this exper­i­ment to when the draft was fin­ished. The draft could cer­tain­ly be improved in a few respects. There are cer­tain­ly a few places in the argu­ment where review­ers could come up with clever objec­tions.… Had a fel­low stu­dent sub­mit­ted it to my department’s grad­u­ate stu­dent work­shop when I was doing my PhD, my respect for them would have gone up rather than down.”
    • Includes the paper, which the author (a pro­fes­sor at Johns Hop­kins) says “could, with minor revi­sions, be pub­lished by a seri­ous jour­nal.”
  2. Your Under­stand­ing of Call­ing Is About to Change Rad­i­cal­ly (Rus­sell Moore, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “We must always seek God’s will. But what we meant by this for most of our lives is about to change dra­mat­i­cal­ly. It’s not God or his will that’s chang­ing but the world as we’ve known it—and with it, the out­mod­ed way we’ve thought about ‘career.’ .…We have thought of voca­tion as a def­i­nite thing. That mind­set may even be behind a lot of the angst we have about dis­cern­ing God’s will for a career. We think once it’s decid­ed, then the map is set, and now we just set out on it.”
  3. You Don’t Get Pascal’s Wager (Patrick Koroly, Sub­stack): “Pas­cal isn’t try­ing to tell ran­dom athe­ists to be Chris­tians. He’s try­ing to ask uncer­tain and indif­fer­ent Chris­tians whether their choic­es make any sense. Clear­ly, it con­tra­dicts the heart, since they believe in God yet ignore the prac­tice. Clear­ly, it con­tra­dicts rea­son, since a cun­ning Chris­t­ian would be vying for heav­en. Your actions are nonsense—if you hold these beliefs, you’re mak­ing a bet that will always lose! I lack the pow­er to stop the end­less tide of Wager mis­in­ter­pre­ta­tions. But I hope that you now under­stand Pascal’s _actual_ mean­ing: not that we ought to live as mer­ce­nar­ies in ser­vice of God, but that our heart and mind demand two very dif­fer­ent things. The Wager calms the mind so that the heart may con­tend with God as it must.”
  4. Unlocked: Chris­tians Against Empa­thy Aren’t Who They Think They Are (David French, New York Times): “I nev­er thought it would be Chris­tians who led the attack on fun­da­men­tal Chris­t­ian val­ues, but here we are. The Book of Hebrews says, ‘For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weak­ness­es, but we have one who has been tempt­ed in every way, just as we are — yet he did not sin.’ In Chris­t­ian the­ol­o­gy, Christ engaged in the ulti­mate act of empa­thy. He didn’t imag­ine what it would be like to live as a man — he became one.”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent.
  5. Will We Regret the Release of the Epstein Files? (Rob­by Soave, The Free Press): “It’s been just days since the major­i­ty of the files were released, and a vast cam­paign is already under­way to embar­rass, harass, or smear any­one tan­gen­tial­ly asso­ci­at­ed with Epstein—a ser­i­al sex­u­al predator—no mat­ter how slight or inci­den­tal the con­nec­tion.… Take the smear­ing of Glenn Dubin, a hedge fund man­ag­er. In the files is an image of him, arm-in-arm with three under­age kids, whose faces are obscured by the Epstein files’ char­ac­ter­is­tic black box­es. The impli­ca­tion is clear. But the iden­ti­ties of the chil­dren are known. They aren’t vic­tims. They are his own kids.”
    • Epstein’s Ties With Aca­d­e­mics Show the Seedy Side of Col­lege Fund-Rais­ing (Alan Blind­er, New York Times): “Mr. Epstein, who in 2019 died by sui­cide in the jail where he was being held on sex traf­fick­ing charges, gave mon­ey, or sim­ply dan­gled the prospect of it, before peo­ple on a range of cam­pus­es, includ­ing Har­vard, M.I.T., Stan­ford, Bard Col­lege and Colum­bia.… It was not always clear how much admin­is­tra­tors knew about Mr. Epstein’s con­tacts with their schools. Most due dili­gence poli­cies, indus­try offi­cials said, are usu­al­ly built around gift accep­tance, not solic­i­ta­tion.”
  6. This Ash Wednes­day, choose com­pas­sion over opti­miza­tion (Ari­ana Duduna, Stan­ford Dai­ly): “This prac­tice of self-sac­ri­fice may seem for­eign, but it cul­ti­vates some­thing our cul­ture has lost: the capac­i­ty for gen­uine com­pas­sion. Com­pas­sion lit­er­al­ly means ‘to suf­fer with’ — not to feel sor­ry for some­one from a dis­tance, but to join their dis­com­fort. You can’t opti­mize your way into com­pas­sion because com­pas­sion requires pre­cise­ly what opti­miza­tion seeks to elim­i­nate: vol­un­tary, unpro­duc­tive suf­fer­ing.… Instead of treat­ing my anx­i­eties about school­work, sum­mer intern­ships and career plans as mere prob­lems to solve, I have begun to view them as oppor­tu­ni­ties for com­mu­nion with oth­ers nav­i­gat­ing the same strug­gles.”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent
  7. Rent­ed Virtue (Will Mani­dis & Nabeel S. Qureshi, Sub­stack): “Every sec­u­lar con­straint even­tu­al­ly faces the ques­tion: why main­tain this when it is cost­ly? The only thing that has ever held a con­straint in place across gen­er­a­tions, through pres­sure, through loss, through the slow grind­ing temp­ta­tion of day after day to sim­ply stop, is the con­vic­tion that the con­straint was not cho­sen but received. That it comes from some­thing out­side the self that the self can­not rene­go­ti­ate. That it is owed to God and to cre­ation itself.… If you asked why the con­straint was there, and kept ask­ing, you arrived at God. You always arrived at God.… There is no sec­u­lar alter­na­tive. There has nev­er been one.”

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 540: marrying atheists and using AI to avoid awkwardness

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. Tough Love: Can I Mar­ry an Athe­ist? (Abi­gail Shri­er, The Free Press): “You can have all kinds of suc­cess­ful rela­tion­ships with some­one whose world­view is pro­found­ly dif­fer­ent from yours—but not mar­riage. I’ve only been mar­ried 18 years, but I know this: Good mar­riage requires, at a min­i­mum, stay­ing on the same page as your spouse. Com­pro­mise on the small stuff, fine. Not on the foun­da­tions of the home. That can only cre­ate dis­tance between you, a dis­tance that will grow as your chil­dren ask you to inter­pret their world.… Don’t mar­ry a woman you hope, even secret­ly, will change.”
  2. Stu­dents Are Skip­ping the Hard­est Part of Grow­ing Up (Clay Shirky, New York Times): “One study found that 18-to-25-year-olds alone account­ed for 46 per­cent of Chat­G­PT use. And this analy­sis didn’t even include users 17 and under. Teenagers and young adults, stuck in the grad­ual tran­si­tion from man­aged child­hoods to adult free­doms, are both eager to make human con­nec­tion and exquis­ite­ly alert to the pos­si­bil­i­ty of embar­rass­ment.… teens were adamant that they did not want to go direct­ly to their par­ents or friends with these issues and that the steady avail­abil­i­ty of A.I. was a relief to them. They also reject­ed the idea of A.I. ther­a­pists; they weren’t treat­ing A.I. as a replace­ment for anoth­er per­son but instead were using it to sec­ond-guess their devel­op­ing sense of how to treat oth­er peo­ple. A.I. has been trained to give us answers we like, rather than the ones we may need to hear. The result­ing stream of praise — con­stant­ly hear­ing some ver­sion of ‘You’re absolute­ly right!’ — risks erod­ing our abil­i­ty to deal with the messi­ness of human rela­tion­ships. Soci­ol­o­gists call this social deskilling. Even casu­al A.I. use expos­es users to a lev­el of praise humans rarely expe­ri­ence from one anoth­er, which is not great for any of us but is espe­cial­ly risky for young peo­ple still work­ing on their social skills.”
    • The author is vice provost at NYU. It’s a long excerpt, but I can’t find a way to abridge it much more.
  3. Some more reflec­tions on Min­neso­ta:
    • From the left: Alex Pret­ti’s death and the elite bar­gain (Jerusalem Dem­sas, The Argu­ment): “The pro­gres­sive omni­cause end­ed up under­min­ing its own inter­ests by bind­ing them all togeth­er. If being an envi­ron­men­tal­ist meant you also had to be pro-choice and also had to be anti-cop and also had to be anti-Trump, then well, that shrinks the set of peo­ple will­ing to be envi­ron­men­tal­ists. But there is one omni­cause worth join­ing. It pre­sent­ed itself on Sat­ur­day when an Amer­i­can cit­i­zen was shoved to the ground and sprayed with gun­fire.… The truth is, wide­spread dis­con­tent across indus­try, ide­ol­o­gy and inter­est groups is the most effec­tive way to halt gov­ern­ments in their tracks. Even in ful­ly author­i­tar­i­an coun­tries, mass dis­con­tent is incred­i­bly effec­tive at secur­ing pol­i­cy change.”
    • From the right: Immi­gra­tion Enforce­ment Is Unavoid­ably Upset­ting. But This Is Some­thing Else. (Ross Douthat, New York Times): “It’s true that you can’t have sus­tained immi­gra­tion enforce­ment with­out also hav­ing upset­ting cas­es and sym­pa­thet­ic depor­tees. If you deport ille­gal immi­grants with fam­i­lies, you will have to choose between fam­i­ly sep­a­ra­tion and deport­ing chil­dren. If you con­duct arrests in homes and neigh­bor­hoods, you will be accused of trau­ma­tiz­ing kids and com­mu­ni­ties; if you con­duct them in work­places, you will be going after the hard­est-work­ing migrants.… There are con­flicts here that can’t be wished away. But the fact that some back­lash and resis­tance are inescapable doesn’t mean that all enforce­ment strate­gies that gen­er­ate back­lash are sound or wise.”
    • From an inter­na­tion­al who does­n’t exact­ly map onto our pol­i­tics: The Amer­i­can Peo­ple Fact-Checked Their Gov­ern­ment (Jacob Mchanga­ma, Per­sua­sion): “The cur­rent obses­sion with mis­in­for­ma­tion tends to focus on the pub­lic: online mobs, for­eign influ­encers, flam­ing trolls. But his­to­ry sug­gests a more incon­ve­nient truth: in times of cri­sis, dis­in­for­ma­tion often comes from above. Gov­ern­ments, includ­ing demo­c­ra­t­ic ones, have pow­er­ful incen­tives to shape infor­ma­tion.”
      • The author is a pro­fes­sor of polit­i­cal sci­ence at Van­der­bilt.
    • From evan­gel­i­cal­ism: In a Tense Min­neso­ta, Chris­tians Help Immi­grant Neigh­bors (Emi­ly Belz, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “This church, with the sup­port of many non-Chris­t­ian vol­un­teers, has been deliv­er­ing food six days per week for thou­sands of immi­grant fam­i­lies who are stay­ing home in fear. Two days before, the church had trained 600 new vol­un­teers for food dis­tri­b­u­tion, with a list now of 28,000 peo­ple who want food. One room at the church was full of dia­pers. Anoth­er was packed with a moun­tain of toi­let paper. Across the Twin Cities, neigh­bors pile sup­plies for immi­grants into oth­er church­es, too, as well as restau­rants and cof­fee shops, in scenes that look like a com­mu­ni­ty recov­er­ing from a nat­ur­al dis­as­ter. In just a few weeks, church­es have cre­at­ed a sprawl­ing, infor­mal net­work for gro­cery deliv­er­ies to immi­grant fam­i­lies.”
    • Relat­ed to the above: I Trained to Mon­i­tor ICE but Found Myself Feed­ing the Hun­gry (Eliz­a­beth Berget, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “In the fol­low­ing days, I dis­cov­ered a safe­ty net that Chris­tians around the city had woven. I joined a neigh­bor­hood care group co-run by John Hilde­brand, a mem­ber and elder of Cal­vary Bap­tist Church here in Min­neapo­lis, which has been field­ing needs from vul­ner­a­ble fam­i­lies in their neigh­bor­hoods. Vet­ted mem­bers of the group respond to needs as they arise, offer­ing to give rides, do laun­dry, bring gro­ceries, or shov­el front walks for people—even strangers—afraid to leave their homes.  As I became more involved in this and oth­er care net­works, my phone ping­ing all day with new needs, it occurred to me that this is what it may have been like if the church of Acts 2 had used a group text…”
      • Note: I checked and Cal­vary Bap­tist Church rep­re­sents a main­line denom­i­na­tion, not an evan­gel­i­cal one.
  4. Elites and the Evan­gel­i­cal Class War (John Ehrett, Mere Ortho­doxy): “Pic­ture, if you will, the lush cam­pus of an inter­na­tion­al research uni­ver­si­ty, firm­ly ensconced in one of the least reli­gious areas of the coun­try. It’s the mid-2010s, and the Col­le­giate Goth­ic thor­ough­fares are bustling. On that cam­pus are three Chris­tians, each engaged in dis­tinc­tive forms of on-cam­pus min­istry: (1)  A thir­tysome­thing man in a dingy polo shirt stands at the cor­ner of one of the busiest cam­pus inter­sec­tions, hold­ing a bull­horn and dis­play­ing a ten-foot ban­ner pro­claim­ing EVOLUTION IS A LIE. Over and over, he declares the real­i­ties of sin and judg­ment, so loud­ly that his procla­ma­tions can be heard even from sev­er­al blocks away. (2) A well-dressed, six­ty­ish pas­tor, hail­ing from a promi­nent New York City church, sits on a uni­ver­si­ty-pro­vid­ed stage across from a for­mer dean of the university’s law school. They are there to dis­cuss the academic’s recent book, a the­o­log­i­cal-philo­soph­i­cal argu­ment for Spin­ozis­tic pan­the­ism over against tra­di­tion­al Chris­tian­i­ty and sec­u­lar mate­ri­al­ism alike. Before an audi­ence of sev­er­al hun­dred stu­dents and fac­ul­ty, the pas­tor deliv­ers a dis­tinc­tive­ly Chris­to­log­i­cal cri­tique of the vol­ume. (3) mid­dle-aged man in a busi­ness suit stands along the edge of a busy road­way. He says lit­tle, but at his feet is a box of Gideon New Tes­ta­ments, and he’s hand­ing them out to any­one, stu­dent or town­ie, walk­ing past who will accept them. (He even gives one to a run­ner sprint­ing by.) With these three now in view, one might ask a provoca­tive ques­tion: which of these Chris­tians was best in wit­ness in a hos­tile cul­ture?”
    • The author is describ­ing scenes he wit­nessed at Yale Law School.
  5. The Day I Want­ed to Be a Father (Col­in Wright, Twit­ter): “The post­doc years, the geo­graph­ic insta­bil­i­ty that made estab­lish­ing roots near­ly impos­si­ble, and the uncer­tain­ty of tenure all felt incom­pat­i­ble with build­ing a fam­i­ly. I was con­vinced that chil­dren sim­ply weren’t in my future. I was cer­tain of that until I was thir­ty-six years old. Then one moment changed every­thing.… For most of my life, I had thought of hav­ing chil­dren as the end of my life. Now I under­stand it as the begin­ning of a new one. In truth, until I have chil­dren of my own, I still view myself as a child in some sense. Unfin­ished. Par­ent­hood feels to me like the nec­es­sary final chap­ter of a life well lived, one filled with a mean­ing much deep­er than exot­ic vaca­tions or lux­u­ry goods could ever pro­vide.”
    • A mov­ing essay which, odd­ly enough, only seems to be avail­able on Twit­ter.
  6. The Uncom­fort­able Truths About Immi­gra­tion (Alexan­der Kus­tov, Sub­stack): “Here is the uncom­fort­able truth: a lot of what lib­er­al elites on both sides of the Atlantic say about immi­gra­tion is delib­er­ate­ly mis­lead­ing in ways that mat­ter for pol­i­cy and for demo­c­ra­t­ic trust. It is not usu­al­ly out­right made-up. But rather it is a form of ‘high­brow mis­in­for­ma­tion’ built out of selec­tive fram­ing, strate­gic omis­sions, and ‘noble’ half-truths. And it like­ly makes it hard­er, not eas­i­er, to build durable majori­ties for freer immi­gra­tion poli­cies in the long run.”
    • The author, him­self an immi­grant, is a polit­i­cal sci­ence prof at Notre Dame. The sec­tion on high­brow mis­in­for­ma­tion is espe­cial­ly good.
  7. An Impor­tant Let­ter from Bill, Kris, and Dann on Behalf of Bethel Lead­er­ship (Bethel Church): “We’re writ­ing to you today to share about some of our mis­takes and fail­ures in the way we nav­i­gat­ed our respon­si­bil­i­ties to the glob­al Body of Christ. We ask for you to cov­er us with grace as we seek the Lord for for­give­ness in the face of some griev­ous mis­takes. These actions were tak­en by us (Bill John­son, Kris Val­lot­ton, and Dann Far­rel­ly) along with Dan­ny Silk. We would like to clar­i­fy that our oth­er lead­ers and staff mem­bers, includ­ing Bri­an and Jenn, and the Bethel Music team, were not updat­ed on the alle­ga­tions or the details of the process. We take respon­si­bil­i­ty for the fact that we did not prop­er­ly and ful­ly bring dis­ci­pline, clo­sure, or clear and time­ly com­mu­ni­ca­tion regard­ing the grav­i­ty of our con­cerns with Shawn Bolz.”

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

  • Best Of Molt­book (Scott Alexan­der, Astral Codex Ten): “Molt­book is ‘a social net­work for AI agents’, although ‘humans [are] wel­come to observe’.… it’s not sur­pris­ing that an AI social net­work would get weird fast. But even hav­ing encoun­tered their work many times, I find Molt­book sur­pris­ing. I can con­firm it’s not triv­ial­ly made-up — I asked my copy of Claude to par­tic­i­pate, and it made com­ments pret­ty sim­i­lar to all the oth­ers. Beyond that, your guess is as good is mine.”
    • The net­work in ques­tion: Molt­book
    • Actu­al­ly fas­ci­nat­ing con­tent in this post. Def­i­nite­ly rec­om­mend­ed. Per­haps should have been up top.
  • One Solu­tion for Too Many A’s? Har­vard Con­sid­ers Giv­ing A+ Grades. (Mark Arse­nault, New York Times): “Grades of A fell to 53.4 per­cent of grades award­ed in the fall semes­ter, from 60.2 per­cent in the pri­or aca­d­e­m­ic year, Dr. Clay­baugh report­ed.… Har­vard has been on a cam­paign to make it hard­er to get an A, and a series of pro­pos­als may be put into effect lat­er this year. A report issued in Octo­ber sug­gest­ed allow­ing grades of A+, which are not cur­rent­ly used at the school, as a way to rec­og­nize the best per­form­ing stu­dents, demot­ing the rou­tine, ordi­nary A to the sec­ond rung of the grad­ing lad­der.”
    • This feels like it was writ­ten by a satirist:
      “We’re giv­ing out too many A’s.”
      “I guess we should give more B’s.”
      “Hear me out… what if we start­ed giv­ing out extra-spe­cial A’s instead?”
  • Some­thing very unex­pect­ed is hap­pen­ing to Norway’s polar bears (Ben­ji Jones, Vox): “The study, an analy­sis of hun­dreds of polar bears in the Nor­we­gian arch­i­pel­ago of Sval­bard, found that declin­ing sea ice is not caus­ing polar bears to starve. They actu­al­ly appeared health­i­er in the last two decades of the analy­sis, from 2000 to 2019. The over­all pop­u­la­tion, mean­while, is either sta­ble or grow­ing, accord­ing to Jon Aars, the study’s lead author and a sci­en­tist at the Nor­we­gian Polar Insti­tute. ‘I was sur­prised,’ Aars told Vox from Sval­bard. ‘I would have pre­dict­ed that body con­di­tion would decline. We see the oppo­site.’ ”
    • The arti­cle makes it clear that oth­er polar bear pop­u­la­tions are doing worse. Fas­ci­nat­ing regard­less.
  • This A.I. Tool Is Going Viral. Five Ways Peo­ple Are Using It. (Natal­lie Rocha, New York Times): “Last week, he prompt­ed Claude Code to make a pro­gram to iden­ti­fy which clothes belonged to each of his three daugh­ters so he could sort clean laun­dry into piles with­out their help. He took pic­tures of their clothes to teach Claude Code which T‑shirt belonged to which daugh­ter. Now he sim­ply holds up the clothes to his lap­top cam­era so the pro­gram tells him whom it belongs to. ‘The whole process was done with­in an hour, and the girls were real­ly excit­ed,’ he said.”

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 535: marrying young and the depths of Tolkien

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 Broth­er I Lost (Megan McAr­dle, The Dis­patch): “For as long as I can remem­ber, I have believed that a woman should be able to decide whether to become a moth­er, and also believed that the life grow­ing inside her should get the same shot as the rest of us at life, lib­er­ty, and the pur­suit of hap­pi­ness. Since these two beliefs are fun­da­men­tal­ly incom­pat­i­ble, I usu­al­ly man­aged the con­tra­dic­tion by avoid­ing the sub­ject.”
  2. Tough Love: I Don’t Want My 22-Year-Old to Get Mar­ried (Abi­gail Shri­er, The Free Press): “In case you don’t know how most young women your daughter’s age are spend­ing their twen­ties, allow me to fill you in: surf­ing dat­ing apps, grow­ing more cyn­i­cal and jad­ed by the year, main­tain­ing ‘sit­u­a­tion­ships’ with hot guys who sleep with them when­ev­er it suits them and van­ish when it doesn’t. An entire gen­er­a­tion of young women are let­ting their most for­ma­tive, eli­gi­ble decade slip through their fin­gers like olive oil. A hun­dred first dates. Dozens of booty calls. Learn­ing little—because you can­not learn much from a non-relationship—calling it ‘self-knowl­edge’ while gain­ing noth­ing but UTIs and a draw­er­ful of Plan B.… the truth is: No one’s ever mature enough for mar­riage. No one’s ever entire­ly ready. Nor for the labors and joys of moth­er­hood. We splash through these stages a lit­tle bat­ty and half-blind. If we meet the demands, they change us. That much is inevitable. But until we start to swim, we nev­er real­ly know we can.”
    • Mag­nif­i­cent, rec­om­mend­ed to me by an alum­nus.
  3. The Lost Gen­er­a­tion (Jacob Sav­age, Com­pact Mag­a­zine): “Over the course of the 2010s, near­ly every mech­a­nism lib­er­al Amer­i­ca used to con­fer pres­tige was reweight­ed along iden­ti­tar­i­an lines.… Most of the men I inter­viewed start­ed out as lib­er­als. Some still are. But to feel the weight of society’s dis­fa­vor can be dis­ori­ent­ing. We mil­len­ni­als were true believ­ers in race and gen­der-blind mer­i­toc­ra­cy, which for all its faults—its naïveté about human nature, its opti­mism in the Amer­i­can Dream—was far supe­ri­or to what replaced it. And to see that vision so spec­tac­u­lar­ly betrayed has engen­dered a skep­ti­cism toward the entire lib­er­al project that won’t soon dis­ap­pear.”
    • The viral­i­ty of this arti­cle (and the host of respons­es it has engen­dered) sug­gests that it has hit a nerve.
  4. AI romance blooms as Japan­ese woman weds vir­tu­al part­ner of her dreams (Kim Kyung-Hoon & Satoshi Sugiya­ma, Reuters): “A year ago, Noguchi took ChatGPT’s advice about what she said was a fraught rela­tion­ship with her human fiance and resolved to break off their engage­ment.… Yasuyu­ki Saku­rai, a wed­ding plan­ner for more than 20 years, said he now almost exclu­sive­ly han­dles mar­riages of clients with vir­tu­al char­ac­ters, aver­ag­ing about one a month.”
    • Shared with me by a hor­ri­fied stu­dent.
  5. What Courage Does for Us (David French, New York Times): “An empha­sis on accom­plish­ment can actu­al­ly breed cow­ardice. Courage can cost you your career. Courage can cost you your life. And so the careerist learns to adapt, to hide when the bul­lets (real or fig­u­ra­tive) start to fly. Sure, the hero can rise to the top, but he or she can also end up dead, and you can’t be a pres­i­dent or a chief exec­u­tive or a mem­ber of Con­gress from the grave.”
    • Unlocked.
    • Relat­ed, also unlocked: The Secret Tri­al of the Gen­er­al Who Refused to Attack Tianan­men Square (Chris Buck­ley, New York Times): “ ‘I said to them that my supe­ri­ors can appoint me, and they can also dis­miss me,’ he recount­ed in court, seem­ing to indi­cate that he was will­ing to lose his job over his deci­sion. One of the gen­er­als at the meet­ing, Dai Jing­sheng, told inves­ti­ga­tors that he and his col­leagues went silent for about a minute while they absorbed Gen­er­al Xu’s defi­ance. ‘Nobody expect­ed words like this from Xu,”‘said Gen­er­al Dai, accord­ing to the tes­ti­mo­ny. Under ques­tion­ing, Gen­er­al Xu acknowl­edged that the mil­i­tary answered to China’s Com­mu­nist Par­ty lead­ers. But he sug­gest­ed that it should also be sub­ject to a broad­er author­i­ty.”
    • Also relat­ed: Man who filmed Uyghur con­cen­tra­tion camps now fights for his own free­dom in the Unit­ed States (Atlas Luk, Sub­stack): “His asy­lum appli­ca­tion, which had an inter­view pend­ing, his valid work per­mit, his New York State driver’s license… in the eyes of ICE, all of these were worth­less because he had ‘entered with­out inspec­tion’ by cus­toms. With the Trump admin­is­tra­tion crack­ing down on ille­gal immi­gra­tion, Broome Coun­ty Jail was over­crowd­ed. Months passed, and Guan Heng wait­ed anx­ious­ly and deject­ed­ly for the out­come of his case. No one knew what this young man from Chi­na had gone through in the past few years; nor did any­one know that the images he had filmed of the Xin­jiang deten­tion camps, at great per­son­al risk, pro­vid­ed cru­cial evi­dence of the Chi­nese author­i­ties’ actions against the Uyghur peo­ple in Xin­jiang. Or that if he were to be deport­ed, he would be fac­ing immense dan­ger.”
  6. Why I Keep Return­ing to Mid­dle-Earth (Michael D.C. Drout, New York Times): “Sub­tle vari­a­tions in Tolkien’s writ­ing style across its 62 chap­ters gen­er­ate the impres­sion that ‘The Lord of the Rings’ is a com­pi­la­tion of oth­er texts. This pat­tern is large­ly invis­i­ble even to care­ful read­ers, but new meth­ods of com­put­er-assist­ed analy­sis throw it into sharp relief. An algo­rithm can com­pare the vocab­u­lar­ies of the chap­ters and clus­ter those that are sim­i­lar.… Its chap­ters group in a com­plex hier­ar­chy with three large group­ings and sev­er­al out­liers, a pat­tern of clus­ter­ing not typ­i­cal for a mod­ern nov­el. It is clos­er in form to mul­ti­au­thor com­pos­ite texts from the Mid­dle Ages. Not only do the clus­ters not match the point-of-view char­ac­ters; they don’t seem to be relat­ed to vol­ume, book, set­ting, type of action or pac­ing.… This styl­is­tic vari­a­tion was, at least ini­tial­ly, com­plete­ly unin­ten­tion­al, a byprod­uct of Tolkien’s labo­ri­ous and ago­niz­ing 17-year effort to com­plete the book. Tolkien had aimed to make ‘The Lord of the Rings’ feel as if it had been dis­cov­ered and assem­bled; the frame nar­ra­tive of the book is that it’s a trans­la­tion of a diary that was expand­ed into a his­to­ry and aug­ment­ed by lat­er schol­ars. His strug­gles, prov­i­den­tial­ly, helped him achieve that effect.”
    • Fas­ci­nat­ing stuff. The whole essay is deeply per­son­al and quite mov­ing. The author is an Eng­lish pro­fes­sor at Wheaton. Unlocked.

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 533: college disability, European dysfunction, and cloning

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. Mis­un­der­stand­ing Porn (Matthew Lof­tus, Mere Ortho­doxy): “There are many ways in which peo­ple mis­un­der­stand porn, but per­haps the best way to sum­ma­rize the cor­rec­tions nec­es­sary is to say that porn is not the same as phys­i­cal sex and porn addic­tion is not mere­ly a mat­ter of sex­u­al temp­ta­tion.… Why can’t a porn addict’s habit be bro­ken by sex with his wife? The sim­plest answer is to ask anoth­er ques­tion: could a Chris­t­ian husband’s temp­ta­tion to idol­a­try be bro­ken by sex with his wife? Of course not. Nei­ther would his anger or pride. It is like ask­ing if a per­son addict­ed to cocaine could have their desire sat­is­fied by eat­ing a deli­cious steak.”
  2. Accom­mo­da­tion Nation (Rose Horow­itch, The Atlantic): “Over the past decade and a half, how­ev­er, the share of stu­dents at selec­tive uni­ver­si­ties who qual­i­fy for accommodations—often, extra time on tests—has grown at a breath­tak­ing pace. At the Uni­ver­si­ty of Chica­go, the num­ber has more than tripled over the past eight years; at UC Berke­ley, it has near­ly quin­tu­pled over the past 15 years.… Paul Gra­ham Fish­er, a Stan­ford pro­fes­sor who served as co-chair of the university’s dis­abil­i­ty task force, told me, ‘I have had con­ver­sa­tions with peo­ple in the Stan­ford admin­is­tra­tion. They’ve talked about at what point can we say no? What if it hits 50 or 60 per­cent? At what point do you just say ‘We can’t do this’?’ This year, 38 per­cent of Stan­ford under­grad­u­ates are reg­is­tered as hav­ing a dis­abil­i­ty; in the fall quar­ter, 24 per­cent of under­grad­u­ates were receiv­ing aca­d­e­m­ic or hous­ing accom­mo­da­tions.”
  3. I Set A Trap To Catch Stu­dents Cheat­ing With AI. The Result Was Deflat­ing (Will Teague, Huff­in­g­ton Post): “I received 122 paper sub­mis­sions. Of those, the Tro­jan horse eas­i­ly iden­ti­fied 33 AI-gen­er­at­ed papers. I sent these stats to all the stu­dents and gave them the oppor­tu­ni­ty to admit to using AI before they were locked into fail­ing the class. Anoth­er 14 out­ed them­selves. In oth­er words, near­ly 39% of the sub­mis­sions were at least par­tial­ly writ­ten by AI.… Let me tell you why the Tro­jan horse worked. It is because stu­dents do not know what they do not know.”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent.
  4. The Bible Is on Tri­al in Europe (Kara Kennedy, The Free Press): “Räsä­nen has been a mem­ber of par­lia­ment in Fin­land since 1995. She’s also a mem­ber of the nation’s Evan­gel­i­cal Luther­an Church—which in 2019 announced its offi­cial spon­sor­ship of an LGBT Pride event. In response, she wrote: ‘How can the Church’s doc­tri­nal foun­da­tion, the #Bible, be com­pat­i­ble with the lift­ing up of shame and sin as a sub­ject of pride?’ She post­ed this com­ment along­side a pic­ture of the Bible verse Romans 1:27, which describes homo­sex­u­al­i­ty as shame­ful: ‘Men com­mit­ted shame­ful acts with oth­er men, and received in them­selves the due penal­ty for their error.’ The next day, she opened her morn­ing news­pa­per to find out that she was being inves­ti­gat­ed by police for hate speech.… Dur­ing her time as min­is­ter of the Inte­ri­or of Fin­land, between 2011 and 2015, she’d over­seen the police. Now, they were inter­ro­gat­ing her as an offi­cial part of an investigation—one that has dragged on ever since, final­ly reach­ing the Supreme Court of Fin­land last month.”
  5. 4 Ways to Avoid Sex­u­al Sin (Sam All­ber­ry, Cross­way): “Life has a grain to it. Like paper and wood, it has its own inbuilt direc­tion­al­i­ty. The uni­verse is fash­ioned in such a way that it has an under­ly­ing struc­ture. It fol­lows a cer­tain pat­tern with cer­tain con­tours. In order to live well we need to live in a way that runs with this grain and not against it. This is where the book of Proverbs comes in.”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent.
  6. The Trag­ic Hys­te­ria of Abor­tion (Bryan Caplan, Sub­stack): “Yes, the vast major­i­ty of women who get abor­tions are glad they got them. But once they meet their babies, the vast major­i­ty of women denied abor­tions dis­cov­er that they total­ly want their babies. This mas­sive sta­tus quo bias makes it hard to sim­ply ‘trust women.’ Which women should we trust — the ones who abort­ed, or the ones who couldn’t? But in the end, it is the women who were denied abor­tion who are more reli­able. If shy peo­ple who don’t go to a par­ty are glad they stayed home, and equal­ly shy peo­ple who were pres­sured to go to a par­ty are equal­ly glad they went, the most nat­ur­al inter­pre­ta­tion is that the par­ty-goers learned a valu­able life les­son — and the home-stay­ers should have gone to the par­ty.… Hys­ter­i­cal­ly abort­ing your baby because you false­ly believe the baby will ruin your life isn’t mere­ly moral­ly wrong; it is trag­ic. Why? Because before long, you almost sure­ly would have loved that baby.”
    • An inter­est­ing approach to the abor­tion debate, espe­cial­ly since the author empha­sizes that he is “an athe­ist of the high­est order.”
  7. As a Twin, I’m Offend­ed by Cloning (Leono­ra Bar­clay, Per­sua­sion): “Who wouldn’t want their pre­cious com­pan­ion back, espe­cial­ly in cute pup­py form? Yet I’m cyn­i­cal of the promise of pet cloning. It’s sim­ply not true that clones are, in any mean­ing­ful sense, the same as the orig­i­nal. I’m an iden­ti­cal twin—a nat­ur­al clone. Iden­ti­cal twins are even more sim­i­lar to each oth­er than a clone is to its DNA donor, because they often share the same upbring­ing and envi­ron­ment. Yet, as I know first-hand, that doesn’t mean our per­son­al­i­ties are the same.”

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

  • The New Yorker’s Isaac Chotin­er Inter­views San­ta Claus (Mike Druck­er, McSweeeney’s Inter­net Ten­den­cy): “I recent­ly spoke with San­ta Claus, who is cur­rent­ly coor­di­nat­ing his staff of immor­tal blue-col­lar elves, about the moral­i­ty of chil­dren and his friend­ship with a crea­ture whom many car­ol­ers con­sid­er a war crim­i­nal: Kram­pus.”
  • In 1982, a physics joke gone wrong sparked the inven­tion of the emoti­con (Ben­ji Edwards, Ars Tech­ni­ca): “On Sep­tem­ber 19, 1982, Carnegie Mel­lon Uni­ver­si­ty com­put­er sci­ence research assis­tant pro­fes­sor Scott Fahlman post­ed a mes­sage to the university’s bul­letin board soft­ware that would lat­er come to shape how peo­ple com­mu­ni­cate online. His pro­pos­al: use 🙂 and 🙁 as mark­ers to dis­tin­guish jokes from seri­ous com­ments. While Fahlman describes him­self as ‘the inven­tor… or at least one of the inven­tors’ of what would lat­er be called the smi­ley face emoti­con, the full sto­ry reveals some­thing more inter­est­ing than a lone genius moment.”
  • I was stabbed in the back with a real knife while per­form­ing Julius Cae­sar (Olly Hawes, The Guardian): “Dressed in our togas, with the stage dark and moody, we began the fight as usu­al. Then some­thing went wrong. There was a sharp pierc­ing feel­ing. The knife was sup­posed to have been qui­et­ly slipped to me – instead, it had gone into my back. I realised what had hap­pened while act­ing out my character’s death, and think­ing: I have to lie here until the lights go down.”
  • Art Of The Deal: Man Nego­ti­ates Mechan­ic Down From $75 Oil Change To $2,000 Full Brakes And Rotors Replace­ment (Baby­lon Bee)

Why Do You Send This Email?

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

Disclaimer

Chi Alpha is not a par­ti­san orga­ni­za­tion. To para­phrase anoth­er min­is­ter: we are not about the donkey’s agen­da and we are not about the elephant’s agen­da — we are about the Lamb’s agen­da. Hav­ing said that, I read wide­ly (in part because I believe we should aspire to pass the ide­o­log­i­cal Tur­ing test and in part because I do not believe I can fair­ly say “I agree” or “I dis­agree” until I can say “I under­stand”) and may at times share arti­cles that have a strong par­ti­san bias sim­ply because I find the arti­cle stim­u­lat­ing. The upshot: you should not assume I agree with every­thing an author says in an arti­cle I men­tion, much less things the author has said in oth­er arti­cles (although if I strong­ly dis­agree with some­thing in the arti­cle I’ll usu­al­ly men­tion it). And to the extent you can dis­cern my opin­ions, please under­stand that they are my own and not nec­es­sar­i­ly those of Chi Alpha or any oth­er orga­ni­za­tion I may be per­ceived to rep­re­sent. Also, remem­ber that I’m not report­ing news — I’m giv­ing you a selec­tion of things I found inter­est­ing. There’s a lot hap­pen­ing in the world that’s not mak­ing an appear­ance here because I haven’t found stim­u­lat­ing arti­cles writ­ten about it. If this was for­ward­ed to you and you want to receive future emails, sign up here. You can also view the archives.

TGFI Volume 530: a Christian doctor, the medical benefits of church attendance, and campus revival

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. Accused of Des­e­cra­tion, a Doc­tor Faces the End of His Life’s Work (Ben­jamin Weis­er, New York Times): “One day in March 2015, sur­veil­lance cam­eras at a thou­sand-year-old Bud­dhist tem­ple on the out­skirts of Tokyo cap­tured a man wear­ing a hood­ed wind­break­er, a white col­lared shirt and black shoes, dab­bing at wood­en pil­lars with oil on his fin­ger­tip.… He is Masahide Kanaya­ma, 63, a sin­gle, child­less doc­tor who had devot­ed his life to help­ing women bear chil­dren; a man whose Chris­t­ian faith was insep­a­ra­ble from his work. He has prac­ticed in Man­hat­tan for near­ly three decades and is an expert in endometrio­sis, a con­di­tion in which cells sim­i­lar to the uter­ine lin­ing grow out­side the uterus. His patients describe how his surg­eries end­ed years of crip­pling pain and, in some cas­es, allowed them to have chil­dren.”
    • Unlocked. A fas­ci­nat­ing sto­ry, brought to my atten­tion by an alum­nus. Pray for Dr. Kanaya­ma.
  2. Church Could Save Your Life? (Rebec­ca McLaugh­lin, Sub­stack): “In oth­er words, if you aren’t cur­rent­ly a church­go­er and you start attend­ing week­ly, you reduce your chances of devel­op­ing depres­sion by a third. A med­ica­tion this effec­tive would be wide­ly pre­scribed. But while your ther­a­pist or doc­tor may encour­age yoga, med­i­ta­tion, or more time out­side in nature, he or she almost cer­tain­ly won’t rec­om­mend you go to church. The ben­e­fits of ‘orga­nized reli­gion’ don’t fit with the big sto­ry we are telling in the West about the good­ness of aban­don­ing tra­di­tion­al beliefs.”
  3. It’s Here: Gen‑Z Revival Hits Cam­pus­es This Fall (Sarah Eekhoff Zyl­stra, The Gospel Coali­tion): “Over the last cou­ple of years, per­haps you’ve heard the sto­ries of revival here and there—Asbury, the Salt Com­pa­ny, and var­i­ous col­lege min­istries across the coun­try. Sta­tis­tics also sound­ed promising—from Eng­land to the Unit­ed States, more young peo­ple report mak­ing a per­son­al com­mit­ment to Jesus and attend­ing church. The num­ber of peo­ple with no reli­gious affil­i­a­tion, which had been increas­ing for decades, seemed to stall. To me, it felt like watch­ing a pot of water heat up—there were iso­lat­ed bub­bles but not enough to real­ly call it a boil.”
    • An encour­ag­ing arti­cle. Two notes:
      • I’m not hear­ing sim­i­lar reports from any min­istry at Stan­ford (note the Chica­go anec­dotes, though)
      • The Gospel Coali­tion’s the­o­log­i­cal com­mit­ments mean that this arti­cle is focused on cer­tain min­istries. I believe oth­er min­istries are see­ing sim­i­lar things nation­wide.
  4. ‘I Should Have Quit’ (John Fet­ter­man, The Free Press): “Gise­le looked over at me. The cor­ner of my mouth was droop­ing ever so slight­ly. The droop­ing last­ed only a sec­ond or two, but she had watched a pub­lic ser­vice announce­ment on strokes, and it had stayed with her. She spoke to the state troop­er who was dri­ving us. ‘I think he’s hav­ing a stroke. We have to get to the hos­pi­tal now.’ I thought she was crazy: ‘What are you talk­ing about? You’re nuts. I’m fine.’ She thought I was crazy: ‘We have to get to the emer­gency room now!’ The troop­ers switched on the police lights. We hap­pened to be 10 min­utes from Lan­cast­er Gen­er­al Hos­pi­tal, which spe­cial­izes in strokes and prob­lems of the heart. Had we been in a rur­al area of the state, with­out close access to a hos­pi­tal, I would have died. I did any­way. I am not entire­ly sure of the sequence, but dur­ing surgery, my heart stopped for sev­er­al sec­onds.”
    • Tears came to my eyes while read­ing this. Rec­om­mend­ed regard­less of your polit­i­cal affil­i­a­tion.
  5. That New Hit Song on Spo­ti­fy? It Was Made by A.I. (Kyle Chay­ka, The New York­er): “No realm of cul­ture or enter­tain­ment remains untouched by arti­fi­cial intel­li­gence: Coca-Cola just released a Christ­mas ad made with A.I. visu­als; A.I. actors are being hyped in Hol­ly­wood. But the tech­nol­o­gy has had an espe­cial­ly swift impact on song­writ­ing. A cou­ple of years ago, a smat­ter­ing of A.I. tracks went viral for using tricks like repli­cat­ing the voic­es of pop stars, includ­ing Jay‑Z and Drake. Now we’re in the midst of a full-blown A.I. music moment. This month, an A.I. coun­try song called ‘Walk My Walk’ (with per­cus­sive claps and for­get­table lyrics such as ‘Kick rocks if you don’t like how I talk’) hit No. 1 on Billboard’s Coun­try Dig­i­tal Song Sales chart, and passed three mil­lion streams on Spo­ti­fy; the per­former behind it is a square-jawed dig­i­tal avatar named Break­ing Rust. In Sep­tem­ber, Xania Mon­et, an A.I. R. & B. singer cre­at­ed by a young poet in Mis­sis­sip­pi, land­ed a mul­ti­mil­lion-dol­lar record deal after sev­er­al Bill­board-chart­ing sin­gles.”
  6. Rise of the ‘porno-trolls’: how one porn plat­form made mil­lions suing its view­ers (Tarp­ley Hitt, The Guardian): “…since Sep­tem­ber 2017, Vixen’s own­ers had been pur­su­ing anoth­er rev­enue stream: fil­ing thou­sands of boil­er­plate copy­right law­suits against indi­vid­ual ‘John Does’ and col­lect­ing mil­lions in set­tle­ment fees – a mass lit­i­ga­tion cam­paign one fed­er­al judge likened to ‘a hi-tech shake­down’.… Accord­ing to West­law and Pac­er data from the past three years, Strike 3 account­ed for 50% of the fed­er­al copy­right dock­et all on its own. I first heard about Strike 3 in Sep­tem­ber, when some legal clerk friends men­tioned that near­ly every judge on their cir­cuit was han­dling a stack of Strike 3 cas­es – which are now so con­sis­tent as to have become rou­tine.”
    • I am shocked, SHOCKED, that a porn com­pa­ny would be uneth­i­cal in any way. How could they treat their users with any­thing but the utmost respect and cour­tesy? Treat­ing peo­ple with dig­ni­ty is prac­ti­cal­ly their entire busi­ness mod­el.
  7. Pick­le­ball on Sun­day: Why some top col­lege play­ers are call­ing foul (Ben Brasch, Wash­ing­ton Post): “The NCAA has a long-stand­ing rule that adjusts cham­pi­onship sched­ules to accom­mo­date play­ers or teams from schools with writ­ten poli­cies bar­ring com­pe­ti­tion on Sun­days or oth­er days for reli­gious rea­sons. Twen­ty-two of the NCAA’s rough­ly 1,100 mem­ber schools have such poli­cies this year, the group told The Wash­ing­ton Post. But pick­le­ball is not an NCAA sport. And it’s not clear whether all three orga­ni­za­tions at the fore­front of the col­lege game, which includes more than 100 schools, are ready to make a change. Chris­tian­i­ty is cen­tral to the Nation­al Col­le­giate Pick­le­ball Asso­ci­a­tion, which hosts region­al and nation­al tour­na­ments, said its founder, Noah Suem­nick. The league’s web­site promi­nent­ly ref­er­ences a Bible verse from the Book of Matthew.”

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Why Do You Send This Email?

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

Disclaimer

Chi Alpha is not a par­ti­san orga­ni­za­tion. To para­phrase anoth­er min­is­ter: we are not about the donkey’s agen­da and we are not about the elephant’s agen­da — we are about the Lamb’s agen­da. Hav­ing said that, I read wide­ly (in part because I believe we should aspire to pass the ide­o­log­i­cal Tur­ing test and in part because I do not believe I can fair­ly say “I agree” or “I dis­agree” until I can say “I under­stand”) and may at times share arti­cles that have a strong par­ti­san bias sim­ply because I find the arti­cle stim­u­lat­ing. The upshot: you should not assume I agree with every­thing an author says in an arti­cle I men­tion, much less things the author has said in oth­er arti­cles (although if I strong­ly dis­agree with some­thing in the arti­cle I’ll usu­al­ly men­tion it). And to the extent you can dis­cern my opin­ions, please under­stand that they are my own and not nec­es­sar­i­ly those of Chi Alpha or any oth­er orga­ni­za­tion I may be per­ceived to rep­re­sent. Also, remem­ber that I’m not report­ing news — I’m giv­ing you a selec­tion of things I found inter­est­ing. There’s a lot hap­pen­ing in the world that’s not mak­ing an appear­ance here because I haven’t found stim­u­lat­ing arti­cles writ­ten about it. If this was for­ward­ed to you and you want to receive future emails, sign up here. You can also view the archives.

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 527: beyond adolescent atheism, counterproductive peer review, and Girls Gone Bible

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. As we grow out of intel­lec­tu­al ado­les­cence, religion’s pop­u­lar­i­ty soars (Charles Mur­ray, New York Post): “…I had con­clud­ed that when reli­gion no longer sup­plies a frame­work for think­ing about tran­scen­dent qual­i­ties, artists tend to make their work about their per­son­al pref­er­ences, and their per­son­al pref­er­ences tend­ed to be self-absorbed and banal. As an unbe­liev­er, what was I to make of that? One option was to infer that the great artists of the past had fool­ish­ly imag­ined they were tap­ping into the tran­scen­dent, and their delu­sion inspired them. But that line of thought became embar­rass­ing when I con­front­ed their work. Is it plau­si­ble that those indi­vid­u­als who achieved things so far beyond the rest of us were uni­form­ly stu­pid about the great ques­tions? I decid­ed they under­stood things we don’t. Johann Sebas­t­ian Bach does not need to explain him­self.”
  2. 1 in 5 chemists have delib­er­ate­ly added errors into their papers dur­ing peer review, study finds (Dalmeet Singh Chawla, Chem­i­cal and Engi­neer­ing News): “More than 20% of chem­istry researchers have delib­er­ate­ly added infor­ma­tion they believe to be incor­rect into their man­u­scripts dur­ing the peer review process, in order to get their papers pub­lished.”
  3. The Girls Who Found God in a Pod­cast (Kara Kennedy, The Free Press): “Girls Gone Bible launched in 2023, with a week­ly show, and has since amassed more than 20 mil­lion lis­tens, and near­ly two mil­lion fol­low­ers on Insta­gram and Tik­Tok com­bined.… what struck me most about the audi­ence at the Keswick The­ater was how nor­mal, how cool, they all were. These weren’t the car­i­ca­ture of ‘Jesus freaks,’ but more like Regi­na George with eye­lash exten­sions. They spoke about burnout, and lone­li­ness, and how hard it is to get a guy to com­mit to you, and want­i­ng to take life seri­ous­ly.”
  4. Two arti­cles about a wide­spread sin:
    • Escape the Lit­tle Hell of Porn (Marc Sims, The Gospel Coali­tion): “Hat­ing your­self in the after­math of habit­u­al sin feels so right because it feels so close to repen­tance. But it isn’t. Judas hat­ed him­self for his sin, but he didn’t repent. What’s the dif­fer­ence between self-hatred and repen­tance? Real repen­tance begins with what the sin­ful woman in Luke 7 does as she weeps over Jesus’s feet. She’s aware of her sin, so she weeps. But she’s also aware of her Sav­ior, so she brings her tears to him.”
    • What Porn Does to Us (Chris­tine Emba, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “That under­stand­ing of what women are for can spill out into real life and into real inter­ac­tions with oth­er peo­ple. Peo­ple say, ‘It’s just pornog­ra­phy. It’s just some­thing I’m watch­ing. It doesn’t have any­thing to do with my real life.’ That’s not how peo­ple work. Our brains aren’t wired like that. And our souls are not wired like that.”
  5. My Dad Is in a Chi­nese Prison (Grace Jin Drex­el, The Free Press): “My dad’s name is Ezra Jin. He is the head pas­tor of the Zion Church in Chi­na, a com­mu­ni­ty with a reach of tens of thou­sands of Chris­tians across the coun­try who pri­mar­i­ly prac­tice their faith online or via small under­ground church­es in rent­ed spaces. They are a com­mu­ni­ty of peo­ple whose faith has endured despite a years-long cam­paign by the Chi­nese Com­mu­nist Par­ty to intim­i­date them into renounc­ing their faith. In 2018, Chi­nese police shut down my dad’s church in Bei­jing, a beau­ti­ful sanc­tu­ary with over 1,500 con­gre­gants. Refus­ing to cow­er in the face of a total­i­tar­i­an regime, my dad got cre­ative. He moved his ser­mons online, mak­ing them acces­si­ble to peo­ple across the coun­try, and from there, he con­tin­ued to build his con­gre­ga­tion.”
  6. The Appeal of the Cam­pus Right (Julia Stein­berg, The Atlantic): “I arrived at Stan­ford in the fall of 2021 as a pro­gres­sive from Los Ange­les, where most of my peers and I had thought of con­ser­v­a­tives as, essen­tial­ly, evil. At a club fair, I signed up for the Stan­ford Young Demo­c­ra­t­ic Social­ists of Amer­i­ca, as well as the left­ist mag­a­zine, The Stan­ford Sphere. I hoped to live in one of Stanford’s co-op hous­es, com­mu­nal liv­ing spaces large­ly focused on left-lean­ing activism. As the school year got under way, how­ev­er, I began to notice some­thing that grat­ed on me. Debates in the class­room, whether about social­ism or Pla­to or the Quran, felt high­ly del­i­cate, as if every­one was afraid of offend­ing every­one else.”
    • Includ­ing large­ly because of the Stan­ford-spe­cif­ic obser­va­tions. I don’t believe I ever crossed paths with the author when she was an under­grad.
  7. If You Ask A.I. for Mar­riage Advice, It’ll Prob­a­bly Tell You to Get Divorced (Samuel D. James, Sub­stack): “…users who ask AI bots for coun­sel­ing or therapy—which is right now a lot of peo­ple, and is going to be a lot more peo­ple in the future—are going to get a lot of answers pulled from Red­dit. In oth­er words, these LLMs are going to spit­ting out answers to ques­tions like, ‘Should I get divorced,’ by repeat­ing how users on Red­dit answer those kinds of ques­tion. And we know how users on Red­dit tend to answer those ques­tions!”

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.