Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 19

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.

To that end, on Fri­days I’ve been shar­ing articles/resources I have found help­ful recent­ly in think­ing about broad­er cul­tur­al and soci­etal issues (be sure to see the dis­claimer at the bot­tom). May these give you greater insight, so that you may con­tin­ue the tra­di­tion of Issachar. Past emails are archived at http://glenandpaula.com/wordpress/category/links

With­out fur­ther ado, I give you the inter­est­ing things:

  1. There was a shoot­ing at a col­lege in Ore­gon yes­ter­day. There’s a reli­gious angle to this sto­ry, but the details are still not clear.
  2. For com­plete­ly dif­fer­ent news, read Googling For God (NY Times, Seth Stephens-Davi­d­owitz): file under “interesting but not that sur­pris­ing” (although I am sur­prised at the rel­a­tive posi­tions of ques­tions 1 and 2  — I assumed they were swapped)
  3. Pope Fran­cis and the Not-Quite-Sec­u­lar West (NY Times, Ross Douthat): Secularism’s grip on Amer­i­ca is weak­er than it appears.
  4. Stop The Robot Apoc­a­lypse (Amia Srini­vasan, Lon­don Review of Books): the title is mis­lead­ing — this is an insight­ful cri­tique of the effec­tive altru­ism move­ment from the left.
  5. Huh. The Cor­re­la­tions Between Arts and Crafts and a Nobel Prize (Rosie Cima, Priceo­nom­ics).

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.