Tag: politics

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 383

On Fri­days (Sat­ur­days when I offi­ci­ate a wed­ding on Fri­day — con­grats Alex & Andrea!) I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions. If you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

Hap­py New Year! Most of my read­ers know this, but this bun­dle of links is an over­flow from a min­istry called Chi Alpha Chris­t­ian Fel­low­ship at Stan­ford Uni­ver­si­ty. Today is Decem­ber 31st, which is the biggest giv­ing day of the year. If you are inclined toward gen­eros­i­ty on New Year’s Eve, con­sid­er mak­ing a year-end dona­tion to sup­port the min­istry.

This is vol­ume 383, which is both a prime num­ber and a palin­drome. Not too shab­by, 383. Hold your head up high among the num­bers.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Rea­sons to believe, Christ­mas edi­tion:
    • How Would You Prove That God Per­formed a Mir­a­cle? (Mol­ly Worthen, New York Times): “Josh Brown directs the pro­gram in neu­ro­science at Indi­ana Uni­ver­si­ty Bloom­ing­ton. He has pub­lished dozens of arti­cles on top­ics like the neur­al basis of deci­sion mak­ing in the brain. He has wire-rimmed glass­es and a calm, method­i­cal way of speak­ing. And after almost two decades of keep­ing rel­a­tive­ly qui­et, he is now speak­ing open­ly about his most sur­pris­ing research find­ing: He believes that God mirac­u­lous­ly healed him of a brain tumor.”
      • High­ly rec­om­mend­ed. The author is a his­to­ri­an at UNC.
    • When Mary Met the Angel (Rebec­ca McLaugh­lin, Wall Street Jour­nal): “ ‘Sci­ence is the descrip­tion of how God choos­es to work most of the time,’ writes Rus­sell Cow­burn, a pro­fes­sor of physics at the Uni­ver­si­ty of Cam­bridge. ‘We know dead bod­ies don’t come back to life accord­ing to sci­ence. And yet Chris­tian­i­ty is built on the obser­va­tion that Jesus came back to life. I am very hap­py to say that at that spe­cial moment, God was act­ing dif­fer­ent­ly.’ Like many oth­er world-class sci­en­tists I’ve interviewed—including Fran­cis Collins, for­mer direc­tor of the Nation­al Insti­tutes of Health—Prof. Cow­burn came to faith in Jesus as an adult. He is not just try­ing to make sci­en­tif­ic sense of a child­hood faith that he can­not shed.”
      • Dis­claimer: I know the author and am thrilled she was invit­ed to write about faith for the WSJ.
    • A Christ­mas Con­ver­sa­tion About Christ (Nico­las Kristof inter­view­ing Rus­sell Moore, New York Times): “The most impor­tant blind spot is per­haps miss­ing why so many of us are drawn to faith in the first place. We real­ly do believe the Gospel is Good News that answers the deep­est long­ings of the human heart. I would just rec­om­mend that peo­ple read one of the Gospels with an open mind. Jesus loves New York Times read­ers, too.”
  2. A Dark­ness Revealed (Rod Dreher, The Amer­i­can Con­ser­v­a­tive): “…the great chal­lenge here, as ever, is to strive to see our ances­tors and our con­tem­po­raries with moral clar­i­ty, not white­wash­ing their sins and fail­ings with poet­ic mem­o­ry, while also rec­og­niz­ing their virtues — and in all cas­es, nev­er, ever allow­ing their full human­i­ty, the good and the bad alike, to be assim­i­lat­ed into the realm of ideas.”
    • I found this grip­ping. A man wres­tles with the not-entire­ly-sur­pris­ing rev­e­la­tion that his father was in the KKK.
  3. Urbana Mis­sions Con­fer­ence That Once Drew 20,000 Expect­ed to Fall Far Short (Bob Smi­etana, Min­istry Watch): “Jao said that lin­ger­ing con­cerns over COVID-19 and the country’s eco­nom­ic woes are help­ing to dri­ve pro­ject­ed atten­dance down for the con­fer­ence, usu­al­ly held every three years, but delayed until this year by the pan­dem­ic. Like many church­es, he said, Inter­Var­si­ty and oth­er cam­pus min­istries are still rebuild­ing their atten­dance.”
  4. Our First Close­up Image of Mars Was a Paint-By-Num­bers Pas­tel Draw­ing (Jason Kot­tke, per­son­al blog): “On July 15, 1965, NASA’s Mariner 4 probe flew with­in 6,118 miles of the sur­face of Mars, cap­tur­ing images as it passed over the plan­et. The image data was trans­mit­ted back to sci­en­tists on Earth, but they didn’t have a good way to quick­ly ren­der a pho­to­graph from it. They deter­mined that the fastest way to see what Mariner 4 had seen was to print out the imag­ing data as a series of num­bers, paste them into a grid, buy a set of pas­tels from a near­by art store, and do a paint-by-num­bers job with the pas­tels on the data grid.”
    • This is actu­al­ly beau­ti­ful.
  5. Amer­i­cans Have Found Their Hap­py Place (Tyler Cowen, Bloomberg): “Two econ­o­mists, David G. Blanch­flower of Dart­mouth and Alex Bryson of Uni­ver­si­ty Col­lege Lon­don, have come up with a new and more intu­itive way to mea­sure well-being. The results are strik­ing. If you con­sid­er US states as com­pa­ra­ble to coun­tries, 16 of the top 20 polit­i­cal units in the world for well-being are in the US — includ­ing the top sev­en.”
  6. The Media Very Rarely Lies (Scott Alexan­der, Astral Codex Ten): “The point is: the media rarely lies explic­it­ly and direct­ly. Reporters rarely say spe­cif­ic things they know to be false. When the media mis­in­forms peo­ple, it does so by mis­in­ter­pret­ing things, exclud­ing con­text, or sig­nal-boost­ing some events while ignor­ing oth­ers, not by par­tic­i­pat­ing in some bright-line cat­e­go­ry called ‘mis­in­for­ma­tion’.”
    • Fol­low-up: Sor­ry, I Still Think I Am Right About The Media Very Rarely Lying (Scott Alexan­der, Astral Codex Ten): “…I find it real­ly inter­est­ing that so many com­menters were so resis­tant to the idea that the worst and dumb­est con­spir­a­cy the­o­ries of our time don’t involve out­right lies. I think all of us — not just cen­sors — want to main­tain the com­fort­ing illu­sion that the bad peo­ple are doing some­thing fun­da­men­tal­ly dif­fer­ent than the good peo­ple, some­thing that marks them as Obvi­ous­ly Bad in bright neon paint.”
  7. Is the right win­ning the com­e­dy wars? (Con­stance Grady, Vox): “It’s as though there’s some sort of fun­da­men­tal dis­con­nect between right and left on the issue of com­e­dy. On a very basic lev­el, the two sides seem to dis­agree on the ques­tion of what a joke should look like, what it’s okay to joke about, and what is so under threat that to joke about it would be unthink­able. No one seems sure how to talk about the dif­fer­ence, exact­ly. They just know that they want to be the fun­ny ones.”

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have Fer­til­i­ty rate: ‘Jaw-dropping’ glob­al crash in chil­dren being born (James Gal­lagher, BBC): “China, cur­rent­ly the most pop­u­lous nation in the world, is expect­ed to peak at 1.4 bil­lion in four years’ time before near­ly halv­ing to 732 mil­lion by 2100. India will take its place.” From a long-term per­spec­tive, this is pos­si­bly the most sig­nif­i­cant news you will read this year. Some of you will still be alive when China’s pop­u­la­tion is half what it is now. And it’s not just Chi­na — many nations are on the same path (with only a few siz­able ones head­ed in the oppo­site direc­tion). From vol­ume 259

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 379

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

This is vol­ume 379, the 75th prime num­ber.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. The Holy Spir­it is a Polit­i­cal Lia­bil­i­ty (Samuel D. James, Sub­stack): “It does not mean we have to accept that we sim­ply can­not win. It means the oppo­site: accept­ing that we have already won. When Christ emerged from that tomb, all the gen­der insan­i­ty, all the reli­gious per­se­cu­tion, all the aban­don­ment of first prin­ci­ples in the uni­verse were giv­en a death sen­tence. Christ him­self is truth. Truth was killed, then got back up, and will nev­er die again. This is not just piety. It’s a real­i­ty that must go down deep in our meth­ods, our speech, our atti­tudes.”
  2. Tolkien Was Right: Notes on the Respect for Mar­riage Act and the Post-Boomer Church (Jake Meador, Mere Ortho­doxy): “Some time after his death, an edi­tor was going through the papers and books in J. R. R. Tolkien’s library when he came across an old copy of C. S. Lewis’s pam­phlet ‘Chris­t­ian Behav­ior,’ which would lat­er be re-pub­lished as one sec­tion in Lewis’s clas­sic Mere Chris­tian­i­ty. Fold­ed inside the book was a let­ter Tolkien had writ­ten but appar­ent­ly nev­er sent to his long-time friend and fel­low Oxford don. In it, Tolkien took issue with Lewis’s treat­ment of divorce in the pam­phlet.” Rec­om­mend­ed by an alum­nus.
  3. FORUM: The New Shape of Chris­t­ian Pub­lic Dis­course (Jay Green, Cur­rent): “ ‘Left’ and ‘Right’ do not have self-explana­to­ry or sta­ble mean­ings. The old labels tend to obscure at least as much as they reveal. The ter­mi­nol­o­gy is handy in a fight as long we aren’t asked to define exact­ly what we mean by them. But espe­cial­ly dur­ing the past sev­en years some of the most acri­mo­nious dis­agree­ments among Chris­tians about pub­lic life go well beyond the issues iden­ti­fied by Hunter in the 1990s. Our pub­lic fights have become far more than basic dis­agree­ments over ‘issues.’ ”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by an alum­nus. The author is a his­to­ry pro­fes­sor at Covenant Col­lege. I think he is on to some­thing, but his fram­ing is not quite right.
  4. Check out Chat­G­PT — it’s free to play with and extreme­ly impres­sive. You can sign up at https://beta.openai.com/playground
    • I had it write a wor­ship song: https://beta.openai.com/playground/p/iWbGQyANHXhdXGw2fM0AGQQJ
    • Andy Crouch, a shrewd Chris­t­ian thinker, believes this rep­re­sents the end of a lot of home­work. https://twitter.com/ahc/status/1598323606303424512 — this sim­ple tool can do col­lege-lev­el home­work pret­ty eas­i­ly.
    • Jail­break­ing Chat­G­PT on Release Day (Zvi Mow­showitz, Sub­stack): “One of the things it attempts to do to be ‘safe.’ It does this by refus­ing to answer ques­tions that call upon it to do or help you do some­thing ille­gal or oth­er­wise out­side its bounds. Makes sense. As is the default with such things, those safe­guards were bro­ken through almost imme­di­ate­ly. By the end of the day, sev­er­al prompt engi­neer­ing meth­ods had been found.”
    • In anoth­er bit of AI news, On the Diplo­ma­cy AI (Zvi Mowsh­witz, Sub­stack): “When peo­ple say the AI ‘solved’ Diplo­ma­cy, it real­ly real­ly didn’t. What it did, which is still impres­sive, is get a han­dle on the basics of Diplo­ma­cy, in this par­tic­u­lar con­text where bots can­not be iden­ti­fied and are in the minor­i­ty, and in par­tic­u­lar where mes­sage detail is suf­fi­cient­ly lim­it­ed that it can use an LLM to be able to com­mu­ni­cate with humans rea­son­ably and not be iden­ti­fied.”
  5. Some Stan­ford news:
    • Stan­ford president’s research under inves­ti­ga­tion (Theo Bak­er, Stan­ford Dai­ly): There’s a lot hap­pen­ing in this arti­cle and what fol­lows is not the main point, but this para­graph caught my atten­tion: “Pri­or to tak­ing on Stanford’s pres­i­den­cy in ear­ly 2016, Tessier-Lav­i­gne direct­ed more than a thou­sand sci­en­tists at biotech­nol­o­gy com­pa­nies Genen­tech as well as Regen­eron. Tessier-Lavigne’s salary at Regen­eron in 2014 was $1,764,032, accord­ing to a pre­vi­ous­ly-unre­port­ed class action law­suit alleg­ing exces­sive com­pen­sa­tion for mem­bers of the Com­pen­sa­tion Com­mit­tee, which includ­ed Tessier-Lav­i­gne. It was lat­er set­tled. He earned $1,555,296 from Stan­ford in 2021 with an addi­tion­al $700,000 annu­al­ly as a board direc­tor for Regen­eron.”
    • ‘This actu­al­ly changes every­thing’: Altered image in 1999 paper rais­es poten­tial per­il for Stan­ford pres­i­dent (Olivia Gold­hill  & Megan Molteni, Stat News): “The new­ly iden­ti­fied appar­ent manip­u­la­tion in Cell is espe­cial­ly seri­ous as it seems to alter the results and appears to be inten­tion­al, said Bik. ‘I would tes­ti­fy in court that’s been dig­i­tal­ly altered,” she told STAT. “This actu­al­ly changes every­thing. … It’s a more severe lev­el of dig­i­tal altering.‘”
    • Most damn­ing — lat­er in the arti­cle they explain that sim­i­lar prob­lems have occurred at mul­ti­ple insti­tu­tions with vary­ing sets of coau­thors with MTL being the only con­stant pres­ence. Eep!
    • Depart­ment of Edu­ca­tion opens inves­ti­ga­tion into Stan­ford for bias against male stu­dents (Judy Liu, Stan­ford Dai­ly): “The com­plaint, which was filed by Uni­ver­si­ty of South­ern Cal­i­for­nia emer­i­tus pro­fes­sor James Moore and Kur­sat Pekgoz, CEO of Turk­ish real estate com­pa­ny Doruk, alleges that mul­ti­ple Stan­ford pro­grams vio­late Title IX, a fed­er­al civ­il rights law that pro­tects peo­ple from sex-based dis­crim­i­na­tion in edu­ca­tion pro­grams that receive fed­er­al funds.” An inevitable devel­op­ment in our iden­ti­ty-obsessed cul­ture.
  6. ‘It’s The First Time I’ve Seen This in Chi­na’ (Simon Leplâtre, Bari Weis­s’s Sub­stack): “When some­one shout­ed, ‘Xi Jin­ping, resign,’ the crowd explod­ed, and soon oth­er peo­ple were say­ing it, and it was as if the shouter had bro­ken a taboo in a coun­try where peo­ple usu­al­ly low­ered their voice when men­tion­ing the name of their leader.  Then some­one else in the crowd shout­ed, ‘Down with the Com­mu­nist Par­ty,’ which was a big no-no—the Chi­nese gen­er­al­ly broad­cast their ide­o­log­i­cal fervor—and the crowd loved that, too. It was like top­pling the stat­ue of a dic­ta­tor. I told a col­league we were prob­a­bly wit­ness­ing some­thing impor­tant that might become very impor­tant.”
  7. Fire Them All; God Will Know His Own (Brooks B. Ander­son, Har­vard Crim­son): “Across the Uni­ver­si­ty, for every aca­d­e­m­ic employ­ee there are approx­i­mate­ly 1.45 admin­is­tra­tors. When only con­sid­er­ing fac­ul­ty, this ratio jumps to 3.09. Har­vard employs 7,024 total full-time admin­is­tra­tors, only slight­ly few­er than the under­grad­u­ate pop­u­la­tion. What do they all do?” The sit­u­a­tion is sim­i­lar at Stan­ford.

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have Reli­gious ser­vices may low­er risk of ‘deaths of despair’ (Chris Sweeney, Har­vard Gazette): “After adjust­ing for numer­ous vari­ables, the study showed that women who attend­ed ser­vices at least once per week had a 68 per­cent low­er risk of death from despair com­pared to those nev­er attend­ing ser­vices. Men who attend­ed ser­vices at least once per week had a 33 per­cent low­er risk of death from despair.” Those are HUGE reduc­tions! From vol­ume 251.

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 376

My favorite line from this week: “Men bond by insult­ing each oth­er and not real­ly mean­ing it; women bond by com­pli­ment­ing each oth­er and not real­ly mean­ing it.”

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

This, vol­ume 376, is an auto­mor­phic num­ber because when raised to a pow­er it ends in itself. 3762 = 141376. It con­tin­ues: 3763 = 53157376 and so on. 37615 = 424441337012461701988020381601157349376 and so on.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. The Male-War­rior Hypoth­e­sis (Rob Hen­der­son, Sub­stack): “…young human males often address each oth­er with abu­sive insults. The rit­u­al tests the strength of the friend­ship. If light­heart­ed ver­bal quips do not dam­age the rela­tion­ship, then the bonds are like­ly rel­a­tive­ly strong. In con­trast, women and girls sel­dom insult their friends, and often work extra hard to praise them to avoid any signs of hos­til­i­ty. Men bond by insult­ing each oth­er and not real­ly mean­ing it; women bond by com­pli­ment­ing each oth­er and not real­ly mean­ing it.”
    • This arti­cle is engross­ing even if you already know the gist.
  2. The Fever Is Break­ing (David Brooks, New York Times): “The sin­gle most impor­tant result of this elec­tion was the tri­umph of the normies. Estab­lish­men­tar­i­an, prac­ti­cal lead­ers who are not always scream­ing angri­ly at you did phe­nom­e­nal­ly well, on right and left: Mike DeWine in Ohio, Josh Shapiro in Penn­syl­va­nia. Work­man­like incum­bents from John Thune in South Dako­ta to Ron Wyden in Ore­gon had suc­cess­ful nights. Gov. Tony Evers of Wis­con­sin had the quo­ta­tion that sum­ma­rized the elec­tion: ‘Bor­ing wins.’ ”
    • Relat­ed (in that it is about pol­i­tics): 3 Prin­ci­ples for Set­tling Polit­i­cal Spats in the Church (Daniel K. Williams, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “Any attempt to make soci­ety more moral through leg­is­la­tion will inevitably be selec­tive and incom­plete and may offer mixed results. Which major polit­i­cal par­ty in the Unit­ed States is com­mit­ted to address­ing the prob­lems of divorce, gam­bling addic­tions, mar­i­tal infi­deli­ty, and alco­hol abuse? Which par­ty will do the most to pro­tect the poor from being exploit­ed through pay­day loans? Which par­ty will fight against the pornog­ra­phy indus­try? If you haven’t seen any polit­i­cal ads this elec­tion sea­son that address any of these issues, per­haps that’s a sign of the moral selec­tiv­i­ty in our cur­rent par­ti­san pol­i­tics.”
    • The author is a his­to­ry pro­fes­sor at the Uni­ver­si­ty of West Geor­gia. Empha­sis in orig­i­nal.
  3. A Tra­di­tion of Anti-Tra­di­tion­al­ists (Mark Bauer­lein, First Things): “All the talk in the human­i­ties back then turned on ‘open­ing up the canon’ and break­ing up the dom­i­nance of Dead White Males—less John Dry­den and more Aphra Behn, more diver­si­ty and few­er idols—but in the the­o­ry area, these fig­ures were as canon­i­cal as the saints.… What this bias has pro­duced is two gen­er­a­tions of col­lege teach­ers who don’t real­ize their bias. They got a nar­row edu­ca­tion that they trust­ed was the broad­est one. They gen­uine­ly don’t know that anoth­er crit­i­cal tra­di­tion besides the progressive/transgressive one exists.” This essay is a bulls­eye.
    • Relat­ed: An Exis­ten­tial Threat to Doing Good Sci­ence (Lua­na Maro­ja, Bari Weis­s’s Sub­stack): “The restric­tion of aca­d­e­m­ic free­dom comes in two forms: what we teach and what we research. Let’s start with teach­ing. I need to empha­size that this is not hypo­thet­i­cal. The cen­so­ri­ous, fear­ful cli­mate is already affect­ing the con­tent of what we teach.”
    • There’s a Stan­ford con­nec­tion in this sec­ond arti­cle, btw. The arti­cle is an adap­ta­tion of a speech giv­en at a pri­vate con­fer­ence at Stan­ford quite recent­ly.
  4. Con­tra Res­i­dent Con­trar­i­an On Unfal­si­fi­able Inter­nal States (Scott Alexan­der, Astral Codex Ten): “But in the sto­ries these peo­ple told me, it was more about — they found that this effort was pro­duc­ing some­thing unex­pect­ed, and devel­op­ing new per­son­al­i­ty aspects that they need­ed, so they kept going. If you take one step towards Darth Vad­er, he will take two steps toward you (sor­ry if I am sound­ing like a Sith youth pas­tor).”
    • This is absolute­ly fas­ci­nat­ing and the excerpt does not do it any jus­tice. Rec­om­mend­ed.
  5. New Endorse­ments for Col­lege Ath­letes Resur­face an Old Con­cern: Sex Sells (Kurt Streeter, New York Times): “Haley Jones, an All-Amer­i­ca guard at Stan­ford and a can­di­date for the Play­er of the Year Award, said she didn’t want to play up sex appeal. Her endorse­ment income is dri­ven by a social media image that por­trays her as a light­heart­ed stu­dent-ath­lete with­out an overt­ly provoca­tive tone.”
    • Inter­est­ing in its own right, also a stronger Stan­ford angle than I expect­ed.
  6. It’s Always a ‘Negative World’ for Chris­tian­i­ty (David French, The Dis­patch): “One of [the] core con­ser­v­a­tive Chris­t­ian cri­tiques of Amer­i­can cul­ture is that Amer­i­ca is grow­ing ever-more hos­tile to the authen­tic Chris­t­ian faith. We’ve left a friend­ly and hos­pitable past, and now we’re con­fronting a hos­tile future.… But this analy­sis is fun­da­men­tal­ly wrong. It’s dan­ger­ous­ly wrong. It’s wrong not because the present moment is par­tic­u­lar­ly hos­pitable to the Chris­t­ian faith, but because it fun­da­men­tal­ly mis­un­der­stands both Amer­i­can his­to­ry and Amer­i­can Chris­ten­dom, and it fun­da­men­tal­ly mis­un­der­stands the per­ma­nent coun­ter­cul­tur­al real­i­ty of authen­tic Chris­tian­i­ty.”
  7. Pay­walls or Con­stant Intru­sive Ads: Pick One (Fred­die deBoer, Sub­stack): “And I also want to say, if you’re annoyed that you can’t get past a pay­wall — tough. Because an era of ris­ing pay­walls is absolute­ly nec­es­sary if you want writ­ing to sur­vive as a pro­fes­sion, and if you want good jour­nal­ism and analy­sis to endure.”

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have The Small World Net­work of Col­lege Class­es: Impli­ca­tions for Epi­dem­ic Spread on a Uni­ver­si­ty Cam­pus (Wee­den & Corn­well, Soci­o­log­i­cal Sci­ence): “If one chose a giv­en stu­dent at ran­dom, that stu­dent is like­ly to attend class with a stu­dent who, in turn, attends class with any oth­er ran­dom­ly cho­sen stu­dent. Put dif­fer­ent­ly, although it is unlike­ly that any two ran­dom­ly cho­sen stu­dents would be enrolled in the same course, it is high­ly like­ly that they would be enrolled in dif­fer­ent cours­es that both include the same third party.“

The authors, pro­fes­sors at Cor­nell, were curi­ous about the poten­tial for dis­ease spread among under­grads at their school. Tak­ing this in a com­plete­ly dif­fer­ent direc­tion: the aver­age stu­dent at Stan­ford is like­ly only one or two steps away from Chi Alpha. WOW! Invite your friends! From vol­ume 246

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 375

a week full of wild arti­cles

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

This is vol­ume 375, which can also be writ­ten at 3·53. I like the threes on either side of the five.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Truth Cops: Leaked Doc­u­ments Out­line DHS’s Plans to Police Dis­in­for­ma­tion (Ken Klip­pen­stein & Lee Fang, The Inter­cept): “DHS’s mis­sion to fight dis­in­for­ma­tion, stem­ming from con­cerns around Russ­ian influ­ence in the 2016 pres­i­den­tial elec­tion, began tak­ing shape dur­ing the 2020 elec­tion and over efforts to shape dis­cus­sions around vac­cine pol­i­cy dur­ing the coro­n­avirus pan­dem­ic.”
    • This is the arti­cle of the week and it’s not close. Wow. Some more excerpts:
    • “U.S. offi­cials have rou­tine­ly lied about an array of issues, from the caus­es of its wars in Viet­nam and Iraq to their more recent obfus­ca­tion around the role of the Nation­al Insti­tutes of Health in fund­ing the Wuhan Insti­tute of Virology’s coro­n­avirus research. That track record has not pre­vent­ed the U.S. gov­ern­ment from seek­ing to become arbiters of what con­sti­tutes false or dan­ger­ous infor­ma­tion on inher­ent­ly polit­i­cal top­ics.”
    • This bit was wild: “Dur­ing the 2020 elec­tion, the Depart­ment of Home­land Secu­ri­ty, in an email to an offi­cial at Twit­ter, for­ward­ed infor­ma­tion about a poten­tial threat to crit­i­cal U.S. infra­struc­ture, cit­ing FBI warn­ings, in this case about an account that could imper­il elec­tion sys­tem integri­ty. The Twit­ter user in ques­tion had 56 fol­low­ers, along with a bio that read ‘dm us your weed store loca­tions (hoes be mad, but this is a par­o­dy account),’ under a ban­ner image of Blu­cifer, the 32-foot-tall demon­ic horse sculp­ture fea­tured at the entrance of the Den­ver Inter­na­tion­al Air­port.”
  2. Neg­a­tive World Arrives in Aus­tralia (Simon Kennedy, Mere Ortho­doxy): “This was a water­shed cul­tur­al moment for Aus­tralia, and pos­si­bly for the West. A man with out­stand­ing cre­den­tials was told that, because of some ser­mons preached by some­one else from almost a decade ago, he need­ed to recon­sid­er his fit for the role he had just been appoint­ed to. For all we know, Thor­burn may dis­agree with these ser­mons. He may nev­er have been aware of them or lis­tened to them. The bot­tom line here was guilt-by-asso­ci­a­tion.”
  3. Black, Chris­t­ian and Tran­scend­ing the Polit­i­cal Bina­ry (Tish Har­ri­son War­ren, New York Times): “The con­ser­v­a­tive and pro­gres­sive approach­es are not the only way to approach pol­i­tics. Every­thing that doesn’t fit isn’t ille­git­i­mate. Once we real­ize those aren’t the only two approach­es, then we open up space for peo­ple of col­or, peo­ple of faith and oth­ers who are polit­i­cal­ly home­less to real­ly have a voice and help heal some­thing that’s been bro­ken and won’t be fixed by either of those two sides.”
  4. Racial Dis­crim­i­na­tion Is Not the Path to Racial Jus­tice (David French, The Dis­patch): “If schools tru­ly want to pri­or­i­tize diver­si­ty, they should focus on class. Fos­ter­ing greater class-based diver­si­ty can help achieve greater diver­si­ty across the board: More racial diver­si­ty, more eco­nom­ic diver­si­ty, more ide­o­log­i­cal diver­si­ty, and more diver­si­ty on the basis of reli­gion. Empha­siz­ing diver­si­ty of class doesn’t just cre­ate a stu­dent body that looks like Amer­i­ca. It cre­ates a stu­dent body that is like Amer­i­ca.”
    • Some­what relat­ed: Racial Iden­ti­ty Pol­i­tics: A Warn­ing From Sara­je­vo (Rod Dreher, The Amer­i­can Con­ser­v­a­tive): “White racial con­scious­ness is taboo for a good his­tor­i­cal rea­son, but any­one with a lick of com­mon sense has to see that you can­not keep attack­ing white peo­ple as moral­ly bad because of the col­or of their skin, and pun­ish them in pub­lic and pri­vate life because they are white, with­out invit­ing push­back.”
    • We are play­ing with fire when it comes to race in Amer­i­ca and pray we open our eyes before the flames rage out of con­trol.
  5. Stan­ford knew about the cam­pus imposter for a year. He kept com­ing back. (Theo Bak­er, Stan­ford Dai­ly): “Stan­ford admin­is­tra­tors and the pub­lic safe­ty depart­ment have been aware since at least Decem­ber 2021 that William Cur­ry, the Alaba­ma native who was removed from cam­pus Thurs­day, had pre­tend­ed to be a Stan­ford stu­dent and lived in mul­ti­ple Uni­ver­si­ty dorms, accord­ing to com­mu­ni­ca­tions obtained by The Daily.” Very detailed. A well-report­ed sto­ry.
    • Imposter recounts his time on cam­pus (Theo Bak­er, The Stan­ford Dai­ly): “Cur­ry said he lied to peo­ple in high school about attend­ing Stan­ford and claimed his par­ents believed he was enrolled in the Uni­ver­si­ty. He con­firmed many ele­ments of the Daily’s report­ing and even mes­saged a Dai­ly reporter after the inter­view, say­ing ‘always my duty to help my fel­low stu­dents.’ ” — empha­sis added. Less inter­est­ing than the main sto­ry, but still intrigu­ing.
    • In oth­er Stan­ford news, Stan­ford Tree gets the axe, sus­pend­ed until Jan­u­ary (Car­o­line Chen & Yana Kim, Stan­ford Dai­ly): “In the fall of 2020, the Band tran­si­tioned from a Vol­un­tary Stu­dent Orga­ni­za­tion (VSO) to being under the Depart­ment of Ath­let­ics (DAPER). At the same time, its Con­sti­tu­tion, which allowed stu­dent self-expres­sion such as kneel­ing dur­ing the nation­al anthem and tap­ing ‘Abol­ish ICE’ on the back of their jack­ets, was dis­solved, accord­ing to Band social chair and recruiter Noah Bartlett ’23, who described there being a sig­nif­i­cant ‘cul­ture shift’ since he joined the Band in 2019.” HOW DARE YOU SAY WE DON’T LIKE FUN! NO FUN FOR YOU!
  6. NYC judge rules polyamorous unions enti­tled to same legal pro­tec­tions as 2‑person rela­tion­ships (Julia Mus­to, NY Post): “In the case at hand, Bac­dayan notes how changes since 1989 play a role, includ­ing changes to the def­i­n­i­tion of ‘fam­i­ly.’ She notes the law has rapid­ly pro­ceed­ed in rec­og­niz­ing that it is pos­si­ble for a child to have more than two legal par­ents. ‘Why then, except for the very real pos­si­bil­i­ty of implic­it majori­tar­i­an ani­mus, is the lim­i­ta­tion of two per­sons insert­ed into the def­i­n­i­tion of a fam­i­ly-like rela­tion­ship for the pur­pos­es of receiv­ing the same pro­tec­tions from evic­tion accord­ed to legal­ly for­mal­ized or blood rela­tion­ships?’ asked Bac­dayan.”
    • “Two per­son rela­tion­ships”
    • This is from ear­ly last month
  7. Mod­er­a­tion Is Dif­fer­ent From Cen­sor­ship (Scott Alexan­der, Astral Codex Ten): “A min­i­mum viable prod­uct for mod­er­a­tion with­out cen­sor­ship is for a plat­form to do exact­ly the same thing they’re doing now — remove all the same posts, ban all the same accounts — but have an opt-in set­ting, ‘see banned posts’. If you per­son­al­ly choose to see harass­ing and offen­sive con­tent, you can tog­gle that set­ting, and every­thing bad will reap­pear.” The meme near the top made me chuck­le.

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have S/NC and the pur­pose of high­er edu­ca­tion (Thomas Slabon, Stan­ford Dai­ly): “As a Ph.D. can­di­date in the phi­los­o­phy depart­ment, I have TA’d or taught eight cours­es, and I want to let you in on an open secret of post-sec­ondary edu­ca­tors: We all hate grad­ing. Every. Sin­gle. One of us. Every TA you’ve ever had has con­tem­plat­ed grad­ing piles of prob­lem sets or papers with dread — and half the rea­son you had a TA in the first place was because your pro­fes­sor want­ed to grade your work even less.” This is a won­der­ful essay. From vol­ume 245.

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 374

More Stan­ford-relat­ed links than nor­mal, includ­ing an absolute­ly wild one about a fake stu­dent.

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

Accord­ing to peo­ple who know such things, 374 is the small­est num­ber that can be expressed as the sum of 3 pos­i­tive squares 8 dif­fer­ent ways: 374 = 1^2 + 7^2 + 18^2 = 2^2 + 3^2 + 19^2 = 2^2 + 9^2 + 17^2 = 3^2 + 13^2 + 14^2 = 5^2 + 5^2 + 18^2 = 6^2 + 7^2 + 17^2 = 6^2 + 13^2 + 13^2 = 7^2 + 10^2 + 15^2

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Stan­ford-relat­ed:
    • Inside “Stanford’s War On Fun”: Ten­sions mount over University’s han­dling of social life (Theo Bak­er, Stan­ford Dai­ly): “The stu­dent said the Uni­ver­si­ty is ‘exces­sive­ly bureau­crat­ic’ and those try­ing to host events are ‘burnt out’ from try­ing to nav­i­gate a rule­set that ‘has expand­ed and [adds] chal­lenges that don’t need to be there.’ Har­ris, who also respond­ed on behalf of the Office of Stu­dent Engage­ment, wrote that the Uni­ver­si­ty has worked to expand social oppor­tu­ni­ties. ‘Stu­dent Affairs, stu­dent lead­ers, and cam­pus part­ners have been work­ing earnest­ly to pro­vide many and vibrant social options for under­grad­u­ates this fall,’ Har­ris wrote.”
    • Imposter stu­dent caught, removed from Crothers Hall (Cas­sidy Dal­va, Theo Bak­er and Ori­ana Riley, Stan­ford Dai­ly): “Stu­dents liv­ing in the dorm told The Dai­ly Thurs­day night that the man, who iden­ti­fied him­self as William Cur­ry, has lived in the dorm since the sec­ond week of the quar­ter, social­ized with the oth­er res­i­dents and was let into the dorm reg­u­lar­ly by sym­pa­thet­ic RAs.”
    • The Review Inter­views Dr. Scott Atlas (Stan­ford Review): “I want to high­light that lock­downs were not the stan­dard pan­dem­ic pre­scrip­tion (nei­ther in 2006, nor in ear­li­er pan­demics). It was known that they were extreme­ly harm­ful. Also, I want to high­light that the uni­ver­si­ty-side of sci­ence became high­ly politi­cized, pos­si­bly because it was an elec­tion year. I was warned by Stan­ford pro­fes­sors that I should not help the Pres­i­dent. This was moral­ly repug­nant: to let peo­ple die sim­ply because you didn’t like the cur­rent admin­is­tra­tion.”
    • A Closed Dis­cus­sion on Aca­d­e­m­ic Free­dom? (Colleen Fla­her­ty, The Chron­i­cle of High­er Edu­ca­tion): “Con­fer­ence orga­niz­ers told FIRE that they’d invit­ed numer­ous pro­gres­sives to par­tic­i­pate [in the con­fer­ence at Stan­ford], Per­ri­no also said, but over time ‘more con­ser­v­a­tives said yes, and very few of the big-name pro­gres­sives said yes. The polit­i­cal polar­iza­tion and trib­al­ism is dispir­it­ing.’ Abbot said that orga­niz­ers invit­ed sev­er­al dozen pro­gres­sives who’d pre­vi­ous­ly expressed a ‘neg­a­tive view’ of aca­d­e­m­ic free­dom, who ulti­mate­ly declined.”
  2. Don’t Even Go There (James Lee, City Jour­nal): “A pol­i­cy of delib­er­ate igno­rance has cor­rupt­ed top sci­en­tif­ic insti­tu­tions in the West. It’s been an open secret for years that pres­ti­gious jour­nals will often reject sub­mis­sions that offend pre­vail­ing polit­i­cal orthodoxies—especially if they involve con­tro­ver­sial aspects of human biol­o­gy and behavior—no mat­ter how sci­en­tif­i­cal­ly sound the work might be.”
    • The author is a pro­fes­sor of Psy­chol­o­gy, Bioin­for­mat­ics and Com­pu­ta­tion­al Biol­o­gy at the Uni­ver­si­ty of Min­neso­ta.
    • Relat­ed: Blas­phe­my is dead. Long live blas­phe­my (Mary Har­ring­ton, Sub­stack): “…if some­thing looks a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s prob­a­bly a duck. And when a move­ment with an instant­ly recog­nis­able sym­bol, a dis­tinc­tive meta­physics (iden­ti­ty pre­cedes biol­o­gy, all desire must be cel­e­brat­ed) and a cal­en­dar of feast days cel­e­brat­ed by gov­ern­ments, cor­po­ra­tions, uni­ver­si­ties and pub­lic bod­ies acquires the abil­i­ty to pun­ish those who deface its sym­bols, the only pos­si­ble thing you can call it is an emerg­ing faith — one with a tight­en­ing grip on insti­tu­tion­al pow­er across the West.”
  3. Most trans chil­dren just going through a phase, advis­es NHS (Eleanor Hay­ward, The Times of Lon­don): “Most chil­dren iden­ti­fy­ing as trans­gen­der are sim­ply going through a ‘tran­sient phase’, new NHS guid­ance states. Doc­tors car­ing for young­sters dis­tressed about their gen­der have been told that it is not a ‘neu­tral act’ to help them tran­si­tion social­ly by using their pre­ferred new names or pro­nouns.”
  4. New­som vs. DeSan­tis Is Our Inevitable Cul­ture War (Ross Douthat, New York Times): “…in gen­er­al you need lib­er­al­ism plus some over­ar­ch­ing vision to sus­tain sol­i­dar­i­ty, ener­gy and hope. And you def­i­nite­ly need the ‘plus’ to ful­ly resolve ques­tions like, ‘Is abor­tion a form of mur­der or a fun­da­men­tal right?’ or ‘Is it child abuse to give teenagers puber­ty block­ers or child abuse to refuse them?’ ”
  5. Woman: My Dad Was Ser­i­al Killer; I Helped Bury the Bod­ies (Arden Dier, News­er): “Studey says she long ago went to ‘law enforce­ment all over Iowa and Nebras­ka try­ing to get some­thing done’ but ‘they could­n’t trust the mem­o­ry of a child.’ Yet her mem­o­ry is vivid. She says her father would kill sex work­ers and tran­sients, often in the fam­i­ly’s trail­er, then get his chil­dren to help move the bod­ies using a wheel­bar­row or tobog­gan.”
  6. Mayra Flo­res Pre­vent­ed From Join­ing the Con­gres­sion­al His­pan­ic Cau­cus (Julio Rosas, Town­hall): “Flo­res is not only first Mex­i­can-born woman to serve in Con­gress, but she also rep­re­sents a dis­trict along the U.S.-Mexico bor­der that is over­whelm­ing­ly Lati­no.… The CHC’s web­site web­sites states the Cau­cus ‘address­es nation­al and inter­na­tion­al issues and crafts poli­cies that impact the His­pan­ic com­mu­ni­ty. The func­tion of the Cau­cus is to serve as a forum for the His­pan­ic Mem­bers of Con­gress to coa­lesce around a col­lec­tive leg­isla­tive agen­da.’ The web­site does not state in its ‘About’ sec­tion that only Democ­rats can join the orga­ni­za­tion.”
    • Lat­er in the arti­cle we learn “Sim­i­lar­ly, Rep. Byron Don­alds (R‑FL) was pre­vent­ed from join­ing the Con­gres­sion­al Black Cau­cus last year.”
    • This is fas­ci­nat­ing to me and I share it in an entire­ly non-par­ti­san way. I some­times hear state­ments from these cau­cus­es and while I assumed they lean Demo­c­rat because their con­stituen­cy over­whelm­ing­ly leans Demo­c­rat, I had no idea Repub­li­cans were lit­er­al­ly for­bid­den from join­ing them.
  7. Nan­cy Pelosi: Intrud­er was search­ing for US Speak­er in attack on hus­band (Sam Cabral, BBC): “Paul Pelosi, 82, was tak­en to hos­pi­tal after a break-in at their Cal­i­for­nia home on Fri­day morn­ing. The sus­pect has been iden­ti­fied as a 42-year-old man and is fac­ing crim­i­nal charges includ­ing attempt­ed homi­cide. He broke a glass rear door and — after con­fronting Mr Pelosi — report­ed­ly shout­ed: ‘Where is Nan­cy?’ ” Yikes!

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have Are Mor­mons Chris­tians?: A Review of “The Saints of Zion: An Intro­duc­tion to Mor­mon The­ol­o­gy” (Tim Miller, Detroit Bap­tist The­o­log­i­cal Sem­i­nary): “He makes clear that Mor­mons are not Chris­tians, but does so by point­ing out that this has been the claim of the Mor­mon church itself through­out his­to­ry (despite recent attempts to argue differently).” From vol­ume 244.

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 373

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

This is vol­ume 373, a per­mutable prime. That means it is a prime num­ber even when you rearrange its dig­its (337, 733).

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Recon­struct­ing Faith: Chris­tian­i­ty in a New World (Tim Keller, Life In The Gospel): “Chris­tians in our cul­tur­al moment will have to rethink their faith, but at the same time they must learn to ‘doubt their doubts.’ They must decon­struct not only their tac­it, mis­tak­en beliefs and their sec­ondary beliefs that pose as pri­ma­ry, but also just as impor­tant­ly, the cul­tur­al nar­ra­tives that are offered as the alter­na­tives to Chris­t­ian faith.” Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent.
  2. The Math of Mea­sure­ments (Tum­blr): “The base 12 sys­tem of the tra­di­tion­al Eng­lish foot is fan­tas­tic for men­tal math, because 12 is a high­ly divis­i­ble num­ber. It’s eas­i­ly divis­i­ble into halves, thirds, quar­ters, and sixths by most peo­ple in their heads.… This is the kind of math most arti­sans need to do. You want sup­ports placed even­ly along a wall, to divide a piece of fab­ric in half, or to dou­ble a recipe. Nobody 1.7x’s a recipe. Met­ric would be great for that, but why would you do that? It would­n’t be worth the math involved.”
    • I very much like this rant. There’s a lot to like about met­ric, but not as much as some of its enthu­si­asts claim.
  3. Co-ops are the New Greek Life (Julia Stein­berg, Stan­ford Review): “While attempt­ing to pro­vide an alter­na­tive social and liv­ing envi­ron­ment based on prin­ci­ples of coun­ter­cul­tur­al­ism, many co-ops recre­ate the social pres­sures of Greek Life through a flim­sy veneer of coun­ter­cul­tur­al­ism.… co-ops present a space to safe­ly pre­tend to be coun­ter­cul­tur­al, while forg­ing a liv­ing com­mu­ni­ty with peo­ple who are just like them, pre­vent­ing the expres­sion of true dif­fer­ence and diver­si­ty. If co-ops seek to hold onto the lega­cy of the 60s and 70s that birthed these hous­es, they must reck­on with the fact that they are cur­rent­ly co-ed Greek Hous­es in a cro­chet sweater.”
  4. Boston Uni­ver­si­ty CREATES a new Covid strain that has an 80% kill rate — echo­ing dan­ger­ous exper­i­ments feared to have start­ed pan­dem­ic (Caitlin Tilley, Dai­ly Mail): “It will no doubt sur­prise many Amer­i­cans that such exper­i­ments con­tin­ue to go on in the US despite con­cerns sim­i­lar stud­ies may have led to the glob­al Covid out­break.”
    • The research paper is here — https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.10.13.512134v1.full.pdf
    • One good response: Irre­spon­si­ble Gain of Func­tion Research (Alex Tabar­rok, Mar­gin­al Rev­o­lu­tion): “Frankly, the authors of the study were irre­spon­si­ble. Boston Uni­ver­si­ty also failed ter­ri­bly in its over­sight. Final­ly, I also put some blame on Antho­ny Fau­ci for evad­ing and obfus­cat­ing ear­li­er gain of func­tion research in a way that sug­gest­ed very lit­tle falls under this cat­e­go­ry. (Rand Paul was right about this).”
    • Anoth­er ratio­nal response that also address­es com­mon objec­tions: Can We At Least Ban Gain of Func­tion Research? (Zvi Mow­showitz, Sub­stack): “Imag­ine the worst thing you could do that doesn’t involve nuclear weapons. Then imag­ine some­one went ahead and did it, and pub­lished, and it was all not only legal. It was fund­ed. Here in Amer­i­ca.”
  5. Amer­i­can Idol: How Pol­i­tics Replaced Spir­i­tu­al Prac­tice (Michael Wear, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “…the Chris­t­ian faith offers tremen­dous resources for com­bat­ing polit­i­cal sec­tar­i­an­ism and so much else that ails our pol­i­tics, but we have to con­nect those resources to our pub­lic life and pol­i­tics. Chris­tians don’t need to be remind­ed of kind­ness, gen­tle­ness, and joy. But many do need to be con­vinced that the way of Jesus is up to the task of pol­i­tics. They need to be con­vinced that the pub­lic are­na, too, is a forum for faith­ful­ness.”
  6. Key find­ings from The Post’s series on vet­er­an­s’ lucra­tive for­eign jobs (Craig Whit­lock and Nate Jones, Wash­ing­ton Post): “More than 500 retired U.S. mil­i­tary per­son­nel — includ­ing scores of gen­er­als and admi­rals — have tak­en jobs as con­trac­tors and con­sul­tants for for­eign gov­ern­ments since 2015, cash­ing in on their mil­i­tary exper­tise and polit­i­cal clout. Most have worked as civil­ian con­trac­tors for Sau­di Ara­bia, the Unit­ed Arab Emi­rates and oth­er Per­sian Gulf monar­chies, play­ing a crit­i­cal, though large­ly invis­i­ble, role in upgrad­ing their mil­i­taries.”
    • Some­what relat­ed: Amer­i­can tech­nol­o­gy boosts China’s hyper­son­ic mis­sile pro­gram (Cate Cadell & Ellen Nakashima, Wash­ing­ton Post): “Mil­i­tary research groups at the lead­ing edge of China’s hyper­son­ics and mis­sile pro­grams — many on a U.S. export black­list — are­pur­chas­ing a range of spe­cial­ized Amer­i­can tech­nol­o­gy, includ­ing prod­ucts devel­oped by firms that have received mil­lions of dol­lars in grants and con­tracts from the Pen­ta­gon, a Wash­ing­ton Post inves­ti­ga­tion has found.”
    • See a non-pay­walled sum­ma­ry of the mis­sile sto­ry at US soft­ware gives Chi­na its hyper­son­ic edge (Gabriel Hon­ra­da, Asia Times)
  7. Stan­ford Apol­o­gizes for Lim­it­ing Jew­ish Admis­sions in the 1950s (Aman­da Holpuch, New York Times): “Sev­er­al col­leges and uni­ver­si­ties, includ­ing Har­vard, Yale and Dart­mouth, lim­it­ed Jew­ish enroll­ment in the 1920s through the 1960s, but Stan­ford had long denied rumors that it had used sim­i­lar prac­tices.” Of inter­est in this sto­ry is (a) the inter­view at the end with Jes­si­ca, the direc­tor of Hil­lel and (b) the fact that a Sub­stack arti­cle start­ed all this.
    • The Sub­stack arti­cle which launched it: How I Dis­cov­ered Stan­ford’s Jew­ish Quo­ta (Charles Petersen, Sub­stack): “One Jew­ish stu­dent who attend­ed Stan­ford in the 1960s was told by his high school guid­ance coun­selor that the uni­ver­si­ty would only accept one Jew­ish stu­dent from each high school each year — he had been the one to get in. If this is true (and this stu­dent ver­i­fied the claim from per­son­al expe­ri­ence), it might offer an expla­na­tion for how Sny­der imple­ment­ed the sug­ges­tion, men­tioned ear­li­er, from the Jew­ish pres­i­dent of Stanford’s board of trustees. When Sny­der want­ed to admit a few Gen­tiles with less than stel­lar grades, he made sure to admit pre­cise­ly one Jew­ish appli­cant near the top of the class.”

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have 3 Types of Skep­tics (C. Michael Pat­ton, Cre­do House): “1. Those who need answer­s…. 2. Those who don’t like the answer­s…. 3. Those who need healing.” From vol­ume 244.

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 367

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

This is the 367th install­ment, notable because 367 is a prime num­ber and also the largest num­ber whose square is com­posed of strict­ly increas­ing dig­its: 3672 = 134689.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Social­ism, Nation­al­ism, and Tolkien (Alec Dent, The Dis­patch): “In our time of unprece­dent­ed wealth and safe­ty, the once-defeat­ed foe of illib­er­al­ism has made a reap­pearence.… due large­ly to a lack of appre­ci­a­tion for how good we have things right now, a lack of under­stand­ing of how we got here, and a lack of under­stand­ing of how a rad­i­cal over­haul of soci­ety would alter the world as we know it.”
  2. The Despo­tism of Isa­ias Afew­er­ki (Alex de Waal, The Baf­fler): “…fight­ers protest­ed the deci­sion that they should con­tin­ue to serve with­out pay for two more years. A group of dis­abled vet­er­ans marched—there’s no verb that con­veys the deter­mined col­lec­tive motion of their wheel­chairs, arti­fi­cial limbs, and sticks—towards the cap­i­tal to demand their pen­sions. They were shot at with live ammu­ni­tion. Some were killed, oth­ers were arrest­ed and dis­ap­peared.”
    • I’d heard before that Eritrea was worse than North Korea in some ways, but this arti­cle real­ly drove it home. Wow.
  3. Why Peo­ple Are Los­ing Faith In Pub­lic Insti­tu­tions (Rod Dreher, The Amer­i­can Con­ser­v­a­tive): “…if you relied on the Post to tell you about the world you actu­al­ly live in, it would not have occurred to you that there is any oth­er side to the library sto­ry than the vir­tu­ous pink-haired queer librar­i­an and her allies ver­sus the mob of big­ots. If you are on the Left, isn’t it in your inter­est to under­stand why peo­ple are so upset, even if you don’t agree with them? Isn’t it in your inter­est to at least think about why the peo­ple of a town would rather defund their library rather than see it used in this way?”
    • This one is wild and Dreher, as they say, has the receipts.
  4. Can an Athe­ist Be a Moral Real­ist? (J. Budziszews­ki, per­son­al blog): “…I can’t see how you can be an athe­ist and a moral real­ist at the same time. It is like eat­ing a cake and still hav­ing it. If nat­u­ral­ism is true, then aren’t we just meat bags full of water with no dig­ni­ty? My friend says I am car­i­ca­tur­ing his posi­tion. Am I miss­ing some­thing, or is he?”
    • This is well argued. The author is a pro­fes­sor of gov­ern­ment and phi­los­o­phy at the Uni­ver­si­ty of Texas.
  5. Trump should fill Chris­tians with rage. How come he doesn’t? (Michael Ger­son, Wash­ing­ton Post): “I know that peo­ple inspired by [Jesus] have done great things in the past — build­ing hos­pi­tals for the poor, improv­ing the rights of women and chil­dren, mil­i­tat­ing against slav­ery, car­ing for the men­tal­ly dis­abled, work­ing for a mer­ci­ful wel­fare state, fight­ing prej­u­dice, improv­ing glob­al health. But pre­cise­ly because these things have hap­pened, it is dif­fi­cult for me to com­pre­hend why so many Amer­i­can evan­gel­i­cals have reject­ed the splen­dor and romance of their call­ing and set­tled for the cul­tur­al and polit­i­cal resent­ments of the hard right.”
    • Long and a bit ram­bly, nonethe­less inter­est­ing.
  6. Pub­lish­ing needs JK Rowl­ing to be a mon­ster (Vic­to­ria Smith, The Crit­ic Mag­a­zine): “The trou­ble with JK Rowl­ing is that she has done noth­ing wrong. Back in 2020, she wrote a care­ful­ly word­ed, com­pas­sion­ate piece about sex and gen­der.… This is a sit­u­a­tion in which the pun­ish­ment has cre­at­ed the crime and it’s one that is need­ed by mem­bers of the pub­lish­ing indus­try who have spent years embrac­ing the argu­ments of the most extreme trans activists while ignor­ing those of fem­i­nists. They need Rowl­ing to be a mon­ster. Oth­er­wise they might have to respond, not just to what Rowl­ing has writ­ten, but to the real­i­ties of the move­ment to which they have pledged alle­giance.”
  7. Died: Queen Eliz­a­beth II, British Monarch Who Put Her Trust in God (Dud­ley Delffs, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “The Queen’s love of the Bible and its gospel mes­sage led to her par­tic­i­pa­tion in the pub­li­ca­tion of a spe­cial book to com­mem­o­rate her 90th birth­day. Titled The Ser­vant Queen and the King She Serves.… Her Majesty per­son­al­ly wrote the fore­word, thank­ing read­ers for their prayers and good wish­es. ‘I have been—and remain—very grate­ful to … God for His stead­fast love. I have indeed seen His faith­ful­ness,’ she wrote. The book was dis­trib­uted to thou­sands of church­es across the UK and through­out many Com­mon­wealth coun­tries pri­or to the Queen’s birth­day in 2016. The book proved so pop­u­lar that the Bible Soci­ety had to print anoth­er 150,000 copies to meet demand.”

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have Big Data+Small Bias « Small Data+Zero Bias (Alex Tabar­rok, Mar­gin­al Rev­o­lu­tion): “Suppose you want to esti­mate who will win the 2016 US Pres­i­den­tial elec­tion. You ask 2.3 mil­lion poten­tial vot­ers whether they are like­ly to vote for Trump or not. The sam­ple is in all ways demo­graph­i­cal­ly rep­re­sen­ta­tive of the US vot­ing pop­u­la­tion but poten­tial Trump vot­ers are a tiny bit less like­ly to answer the ques­tion, just .001 less like­ly to answer (note they don’t lie, they just don’t answer).” I was stunned. From vol­ume 234.

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 363

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

This is num­ber 363, which can be rep­re­sent­ed as 31 + 32 + 33 + 34 + 35

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Why aren’t smart peo­ple hap­pi­er? (Adam Mas­troian­ni, Sub­stack): “My grand­ma does not know how to use the ‘input’ but­ton on her TV’s remote con­trol, but she does know how to raise a fam­i­ly full of good peo­ple who love each oth­er, how to car­ry on through a tragedy, and how to make the per­fect pump­kin pie.… Exclud­ing this kind of intel­li­gence from our def­i­n­i­tions doesn’t just hurt our grandmas—it hurts us too. If you don’t val­ue the abil­i­ty to solve poor­ly defined prob­lems, you’ll nev­er get more of it. You won’t seek out peo­ple who have that abil­i­ty and try to learn from them, nor will you lis­ten to them when they have some­thing impor­tant to say. You’ll spend your whole life try­ing to solve prob­lems with clev­er­ness when what you real­ly need is wis­dom.”
  2. New York City’s Largest Evan­gel­i­cal Church Plans Bil­lion-Dol­lar Devel­op­ment (Emi­ly Belz, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “On 10.5 acres of church land, the pro­posed vil­lage would include thou­sands of units of afford­able hous­ing, a trade school, a super­mar­ket, a per­form­ing arts cen­ter, 24/7 child­care for night-shift work­ers, senior liv­ing facil­i­ties, and oth­er ameni­ties designed to revi­tal­ize the East New York neigh­bor­hood.”
    • But I thought church­es were leech­es on soci­ety exploit­ing their tax-exempt sta­tus with­out help­ing their com­mu­ni­ties! I’m sure some­one told me that once. 
  3. When mix­ing faith with fur­ries, things can get hairy (Riley Far­rell, Reli­gion News Ser­vice): “…Chris­tians in the fur­ry com­mu­ni­ty are cau­tious about who knows about both their fur­ry and faith­ful selves. Chris­t­ian fur­ries inter­viewed for this sto­ry, includ­ing lead­ers of the group that calls itself the Chris­t­ian Fur­ry Fel­low­ship, asked to be anony­mous, fear­ing ‘doxxing’ from with­in the large­ly sec­u­lar fur­ry com­mu­ni­ty for their Chris­t­ian iden­ti­ty and ostra­ciza­tion from their pro­fes­sion­al lives for their fur­ry hob­by.”
    • This was by far the most unex­pect­ed arti­cle I read this week. There’s a lot hap­pen­ing here. I draw your atten­tion to my dis­claimers.
  4. Fact-Check­ing Ran­dall Balmer’s Urban Leg­end on the Real Ori­gin of the Reli­gious Right (Jonathan White­head, The Gospel Coali­tion): “By the ear­ly 1970s, Evan­gel­i­cals, Catholics, and oth­er reli­gious vot­ers had dis­cov­ered that pol­i­tics would not leave them alone. Then their con­cerns about abor­tion, gov­ern­ment over­reach in schools, sec­u­lar human­ism at the FCC, and an unre­spon­sive ‘born again’ Pres­i­dent all merged into a sin­gle out­let, cre­at­ing a tor­rent of Repub­li­can vot­ers in 1978 and beyond.”
    • I post­ed a debunk­ing of this claim a while ago, but this one is quite good. And the claim gets repeat­ed enough in cer­tain cir­cles that debunk­ings should be repeat­ed as well.
  5. There Is a Sec­u­lar Case for Life (David French, The Dis­patch): “Amidst a squadron of reli­gious con­ser­v­a­tive lawyers, there was a sin­gle athe­ist pro­gres­sive. He was beard­ed, disheveled, and qui­et, but when he spoke every­one fell silent. Every­one leaned for­ward to hear what he had to say. His name was Nat Hentoff. He was a writer for the Vil­lage Voice; he’d pub­lished in Play­boy. He was a pro­gres­sive civ­il lib­er­tar­i­an. He was also one of the most per­sua­sive pro-life voic­es in the land.”
  6. Yearn­ing for a Banana Repub­lic (Jon­ah Gold­berg, The Dis­patch): “When seri­ous peo­ple talk seri­ous­ly about chang­ing a regime, they’re talk­ing about chang­ing the sys­tem of gov­ern­ment. Regime change in Iraq meant get­ting rid of a total­i­tar­i­an, ter­ror­is­tic dic­ta­tor­ship, not sim­ply replac­ing Sad­dam Hus­sein with a more pli­able and coop­er­a­tive tyrant. America’s regime isn’t on any bal­lot. Sym­bol­i­cal­ly, it is the bal­lot. More prop­er­ly, it is the con­sti­tu­tion­al sys­tem that requires our lead­ers to be elect­ed.”
    • This is straight fire. Not espe­cial­ly par­ti­san but def­i­nite­ly polit­i­cal. Gold­berg is a tremen­dous word­smith.
  7. 1st syn­thet­ic mouse embryos — com­plete with beat­ing hearts and brains — cre­at­ed with no sperm, eggs or womb (Nico­let­ta Lanese, Live Sci­ence): “To achieve this feat, the researchers used only stem cells and a spin­ning device filled with shiny glass vials.”
    • The title is, I think, poor­ly word­ed. These are not embryos assem­bled from raw mate­ri­als; rather, the researchers suc­cess­ful­ly mor­phed a stem cell into an embryo. Which is also amaz­ing!

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have  Evangelicalism’s Silent Major­i­ty (Emma Green, The Atlantic): “One of my big take­aways from report­ing on evan­gel­i­cal com­mu­ni­ties is that, con­trary to some stereo­types, evan­gel­i­cals are some of the most glob­al­ly mind­ed peo­ple in Amer­i­ca. They donate to char­i­ties that do exten­sive aid work over­seas. They’re exposed to oth­er coun­tries through mis­sion work or human­i­tar­i­an trips.” First shared in vol­ume 232. (sad­ly, this is pay­walled)

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 360

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

360 is, of course, the num­ber of degrees in a cir­cle. It’s also due north on a com­pass.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. The God Gap Helps Explain a ‘Seis­mic Shift’ in Amer­i­can Pol­i­tics (David French, Sub­stack): “Count­less polit­i­cal and cul­tur­al issues don’t have a clear ‘Chris­t­ian’ pol­i­cy solu­tion, yet when a party’s mem­bers per­ceive it to be the par­ty of Amer­i­can Chris­tian­i­ty, then the plat­form is wrong­ly infused with reli­gious fer­vor, even on issues (like tax rates, gun pol­i­cy, envi­ron­men­tal pol­i­cy, for­eign pol­i­cy, and count­less oth­ers) where the cor­rect reli­gious answer is far from clear.”
    • The excerpt is not the main point, which is also good. High­ly rec­om­mend­ed.
  2. I’m a Scam Pre­ven­tion Expert, and I Got Scammed (Natasha Lupinia, per­son­al web­site): “This scam went against every­thing I thought I knew about social engi­neer­ing attacks. The caller was pro­fes­sion­al, knowl­edge­able, patient, and easy to under­stand (con­nec­tion issues notwith­stand­ing). He had so much infor­ma­tion about me already that, even know­ing how easy it is to find sen­si­tive infor­ma­tion about peo­ple, I was inclined to take him at face val­ue…”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by an alum­nus.
  3. A clus­ter of links which touch on com­mon col­lege sce­nar­ios:
    • Bomb­shell alco­hol study fund­ed by Bill & Melin­da Gates Foun­da­tion finds only risks, zero ben­e­fits for young adults (Chloe Tay­lor, For­tune): “Researchers said that for peo­ple aged between 15 and 39, the rec­om­mend­ed amount of alco­hol that could be con­sumed before risk­ing their health was ‘a lit­tle more than one-tenth of a stan­dard drink.’ They defined a stan­dard drink as 3.4 flu­id ounces of red wine or 12 flu­id ounces of beer.”
    • When We Con­sent, We Shouldn’t Feel Ter­ri­ble After, Right? (Emma Camp, New York Times): “Con­sent edu­ca­tion takes already anx­ious, inex­pe­ri­enced young peo­ple, and gives them a sim­plis­tic, bina­ry way of under­stand­ing sex. It’s no sur­prise then that many of us have absorbed the mes­sage that sex is a straight­for­ward trans­ac­tion with lit­tle room for com­pli­cat­ed feel­ings — and that we’re con­fused when we expe­ri­ence the inevitable com­pli­ca­tions that sex­u­al inti­ma­cy brings.”
      • A cri­tique of uni­ver­si­ty mes­sag­ing around sex. It does­n’t say all I would like, but it accu­rate­ly iden­ti­fies prob­lems with the cur­rent sys­tem.
    • First base is hook­ing up, sec­ond base is talk­ing, third base is going on a date and fourth base is dat­ing (Rob Hen­der­son, Sub­stack): “In terms of attrac­tive­ness, the bot­tom 80% of men are com­pet­ing for the bot­tom 22% of women and the top 78% of women are com­pet­ing for the top 20% of men.”
      • Fas­ci­nat­ing through­out.
    • Pro­nouns: Progressivism’s Pre­pos­ter­ous Plight (Farhana K, Tra­vers­ing Tra­di­tion): “With­out the abil­i­ty to define a woman as female, for exam­ple, encroach­ment into women’s only spaces will become com­mon­place. There is no way for the state to pro­tect the needs and wants of women, because noth­ing is essen­tial to being a woman and no defin­i­tive fea­ture of women that require such pro­tec­tions, because a woman is any­one who defines them­selves as one. Yet for the Mus­lim woman who abides by the shar’i com­mands to veil from unre­lat­ed men and min­i­mize phys­i­cal con­tact, increas­ing­ly decon­struc­tive atti­tudes to gen­der will pose a clash that few pol­i­cy­mak­ers and mem­bers of the pub­lic have had the strength to accom­mo­date.”
      • Inter­est­ing to see a Mus­lim per­spec­tive.
  4. The Great Fic­tion of AI (Josh Dzieza, The Verge): “…it might not be such a bad thing to have to apply a Tur­ing test to every­thing I read, par­tic­u­lar­ly in the more com­mer­cial­ized mar­ket­ing-dri­ven cor­ners of the inter­net where AI text is most often deployed. The ques­tions it made me ask were the sorts of ques­tions I should be ask­ing any­way: is this sup­port­ed by facts, inter­nal­ly con­sis­tent, and orig­i­nal, or is it coast­ing on pleas­ant-sound­ing lan­guage and rehash­ing con­ven­tion­al wis­dom?; how much human writ­ing meets that stan­dard?; how often am I read­ing with enough atten­tion to notice? If this is the epis­temic cri­sis AI-gen­er­at­ed text is going to bring, maybe it’s a healthy one.”
    • I found this one super inter­est­ing and some­what amaz­ing.
  5. The Hypocrisy of Elites (Erik Toren­berg, Sub­stack): “…we see this every­where: elites pro­mote body pos­i­tiv­i­ty — the idea that being over­weight is healthy — while being most obsessed with main­tain­ing per­fect health. Elites pro­mote sex­u­al inde­pen­dence and polyamory, yet them­selves are most like­ly to be monog­a­mous in sta­ble long-term rela­tion­ships. Elites com­plain about over­pop­u­la­tion and car­bon foot­print, but they’re the ones hav­ing the most kids and inflict­ing the largest car­bon foot­print.”
  6. The Fall of His­to­ry as a Major–and as a Part of the Human­i­ties (Tan­ner Greer, per­son­al blog): “Amer­i­can cul­ture has lost faith in his­to­ry as a vehi­cle for under­stand­ing the human expe­ri­ence. Our high cul­ture ques­tions the very con­cept of shared human expe­ri­ence. It is hard for history—or any of the humanities—to flour­ish in a world that does not put much stock in the human. By adopt­ing inter­sec­tion­al ide­ol­o­gy as their own, the pro­fes­sion­al human­ists have con­firmed that they do not believe in the promise of their own dis­ci­pline. And if they do not believe in it…. why should any 18 year old stu­dent?” This is an extra­or­di­nar­i­ly insight­ful essay.
  7. 33 Prob­lems With Media in One Chart (Nick Rout­ley, Visu­al Cap­i­tal­ist): rec­om­mend­ed by an alum­nus. I now know what astro­turf­ing is.

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have The Dis­hon­esty of the Abor­tion Debate (Caitlin Flana­gan, The Atlantic): “The argu­ment for abor­tion, if made hon­est­ly, requires many words: It must evoke the recent past, the dire con­se­quences to women of mak­ing a very sim­ple med­ical pro­ce­dure ille­gal. The argu­ment against it doesn’t take even a sin­gle word. The argu­ment against it is a pic­ture…. The truth is that the best argu­ment on each side is a damn good one, and until you acknowl­edge that fact, you aren’t speak­ing or even think­ing hon­est­ly about the issue. You cer­tain­ly aren’t going to con­vince any­body. Only the truth has the pow­er to move.” First shared in vol­ume 227. I know I shared this recent­ly in light of the Dobbs deci­sion, and it is def­i­nite­ly worth shar­ing again.

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 356

from the week abor­tion fell

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

This is vol­ume 356, which is a hap­py num­ber (some­thing I learned about only today). A hap­py num­ber is a num­ber whose dig­its when squared sum to 1 if the process is repeat­ed long enough. 356 takes six iter­a­tions.

  1. 356 ==> 32+52+62 = 9+25+36 = 70.
  2. 70 ==> 72+02 = 49.
  3. 49 ==> 42+92 = 16+81 = 97.
  4. 97 ==> 92+72 = 81+49 = 130
  5. 130 ==> 12+32+02 = 1+9+0 = 10
  6. 10 ==> 12 + 02 = 1

I got way more into that than I expect­ed.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. The huge news today is that abor­tion is no longer a con­sti­tu­tion­al right in Amer­i­ca. I expect deep­er analy­ses to appear by next week — most colum­nists appear to be sav­ing their big pieces for the Sun­day papers. Send rec­om­men­da­tions my way!
    • What changed from Jus­tice Alito’s draft opin­ion to final rul­ing on Roe (Kel­ly Hoop­er, Politi­co): “…Ali­to did add to his orig­i­nal opin­ion, with a fierce rebut­tal of the court’s lib­er­al dis­senters, plus a direct shot at Chief Jus­tice John Roberts in the final text. Roberts was the only con­ser­v­a­tive jus­tice on the court to side with its three lib­er­als, mak­ing the final vote 5–4 in the deci­sion to strike down Roe and give states the green light to ban abor­tion.”
    • Supreme Court over­turns con­sti­tu­tion­al right to abor­tion (Amy Howe, SCO­TUS­blog): “Stare deci­sis, Ali­to stressed, ‘is not a strait­jack­et’ when a rul­ing is griev­ous­ly incor­rect.… Notably, the dis­senters fin­ished by not­ing only that they dis­sent­ed, omit­ting the word ‘respect­ful­ly’ that com­mon­ly accom­pa­nies the dis­sent.”
      • A good sum­ma­ry of the opin­ion. The author used to teach at Stan­ford Law School. That last sen­tence is impor­tant.
    • From the right: The Land is Bright (Jake Meador, Mere Ortho­doxy): “Some desire to down­play this vic­to­ry or even to lament the man­ner of it. We should not. Fed­er­al law in Amer­i­ca once rec­og­nized a right to kill unborn chil­dren. Now it does not. Our feel­ings should be unam­bigu­ous: it is a great good that over half the states in our union are soon like­ly to have laws grant­i­ng sweep­ing pro­tec­tions to the unborn. And we can just say that it is good.”
    • From the left: Which rights are next on the Supreme Court’s chop­ping block? (Ian Mill­houser, Vox): “In any event, the future of rights oth­er than abor­tion will like­ly need to be lit­i­gat­ed. There is no doubt that Thomas would hap­pi­ly light many exist­ing rights on fire. And there is lit­tle doubt that Ali­to, based on his Oberge­fell dis­sent, would also hap­pi­ly tear down same-sex mar­riage. But it takes five votes to strip away an exist­ing con­sti­tu­tion­al right, and it remains to be seen whether Jus­tices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Bar­rett — con­ser­v­a­tives who some­times break with Alito’s most aggres­sive attempts to dri­ve the law to the right — will sup­port mass roll­backs of exist­ing rights.”
      • Mill­houser is often hyper­bol­ic and fails to read ideas he dis­agrees with fair­ly, but this is a pret­ty good sum­ma­ry.
    • From the right: The Supreme Court strikes down Roe and Casey (Albert Mohler, World): “…pro-life Amer­i­cans have learned not to assume any­thing and to wait to see any deci­sion in the black and white of plain text. Well, we have the plain text. It is explo­sive. It is earth­shak­ing.… It is an answer to prayer.”
      • The author is a sem­i­nary pres­i­dent and also the pres­i­dent of the Evan­gel­i­cal The­o­log­i­cal Soci­ety.
    • From the left: Get­ting Real About the Post‑‘Roe’ World (Scott Lemieux, The Amer­i­can Prospect): “The the­o­ry went that Repub­li­can elites didn’t real­ly want to over­rule Roe, but were mere­ly pre­tend­ing to for the sake of pan­der­ing to their base. This nar­ra­tive was always false; the sur­vival of Roe was always a high­ly con­tin­gent fluke, the prod­uct of sev­er­al mis­takes by Repub­li­can pres­i­dents.”
    • From the right: The Long Bat­tle to Over­turn Roe (Ed Whe­lan, Nation­al Review): “There are at least two large rea­sons that the long bat­tle to over­turn Roe has suc­ceed­ed. First, pro-lif­ers did not heed Casey’s com­mand that they give up on work­ing to defend the lives of unborn human beings, and they remained a pow­er­ful polit­i­cal force in the Repub­li­can par­ty, all the more so as near­ly all Democ­rats had aban­doned the pro-life cause. Sec­ond, the con­ser­v­a­tive legal move­ment grew and flour­ished, thanks in large part to the Fed­er­al­ist Soci­ety and to Jus­tice Scalia and Jus­tice Thomas.”
    • From the left: Repub­li­cans Are Will­ing to Pay a Polit­i­cal Price to Ban Abor­tion. It’s Up to Democ­rats to Make Them Pay It. (Josh Bar­ro, Sub­stack): “After the draft deci­sion leaked, Democ­rats brought a wish-list bill to the floor of both cham­bers that even pro-choice Repub­li­cans — even Sen. Susan Collins — were able to com­fort­ably vote against on the grounds that it was too extreme, more expan­sive than Casey. Democ­rats need to break the agen­da into pieces.… Unlike a catch-all bill, there are many indi­vid­ual ideas about pro­tect­ing abor­tion rights that are very broad­ly pop­u­lar — bring­ing them to the floor puts Repub­li­cans in the posi­tion of either vot­ing for poli­cies to pro­tect abor­tion rights, or going home to defend votes that are actu­al­ly hard to defend in elec­tion cam­paigns.”
      • Both par­ties should do this on a whole host of issues. Pol­i­tics would change quick­ly if our lead­ers gov­erned this way. Bar­ro is right about the shrewd strat­e­gy, but I think it unlike­ly that his par­ty will heed him.
  2. Made in Amer­i­ca: Goods Exports by State (Raul Amoros, Visu­al Cap­i­tal­ist): “Texas has been the top export­ing state in the U.S. for an incred­i­ble 20 years in a row. Last year, Texas export­ed $375 bil­lion worth of goods, which is more than Cal­i­for­nia ($175 bil­lion), New York ($85 bil­lion), and Louisiana ($77 bil­lion) com­bined. The state’s largest man­u­fac­tur­ing export cat­e­go­ry is petro­le­um and coal prod­ucts, but it’s also impor­tant to men­tion that Texas led the nation in tech exports for the ninth straight year. Cal­i­for­nia was the sec­ond high­est exporter of goods in 2021 with a total val­ue of $175 bil­lion, an increase of 12% from the pre­vi­ous year.”
    • Sur­pris­es here, rec­om­mend­ed by an alum­nus. Empha­sis in the orig­i­nal.
  3. Mike Pence and the Chris­t­ian Con­flict on Jan­u­ary 6 (David French, The Dis­patch): “A healthy nation­al cul­ture both con­demns cow­ardice and hon­ors val­or, even when val­or is sim­ply part of the job. And we should do both with an immense mea­sure of humil­i­ty. How many of us have proven our own courage under sim­i­lar cir­cum­stances? Pence faced threats to his fam­i­ly, threats to him­self, threats to his pow­er, and threats to the rest of his career. How many of us have pre­vailed in the face of such pressure?  To scorn courage in such cir­cum­stances fur­ther incen­tivizes cow­ardice. At least the cow­ard­ly retain their polit­i­cal pow­er and their polit­i­cal home.”
  4. In Defense of Polit­i­cal Esca­la­tion (Abi­gail Shri­er, Bari Weiss’ Sub­stack): “If our ulti­mate goal is return­ing to a nor­mal­cy in which gov­ern­ment agen­cies and cor­po­ra­tions treat all Amer­i­cans fair­ly regard­less of view­point, how are we to achieve this? At a min­i­mum, we must acknowl­edge that these insti­tu­tions are already weaponized and their artillery points only in one direc­tion: against the oppo­nents of the left.”
    • To my knowl­edge Shri­er is not reli­gious and is in no way con­ser­v­a­tive, but she is artic­u­lat­ing an argu­ment that I see fre­quent­ly on the right (most famous­ly in the French/Ahmari dust­up). It ani­mates Trump­ism and is one of the rea­sons DeSan­tis is so pop­u­lar on the right and that Amer­i­can con­ser­v­a­tives have such a fas­ci­na­tion with Orban in Hun­gary.
  5. Pen­te­costal­s’ Polit­i­cal War­fare (Miguel Pet­rosky, The Reveal­er): “Issues like abor­tion and same-sex mar­riage, and even fears of creep­ing ‘Marx­ism,’ have long been of con­cern to some fac­tions of Amer­i­can con­ser­vatism. But in parts of the Pen­te­costal and charis­mat­ic world, these issues con­tain cos­mic impli­ca­tions for the country’s rela­tion­ship with God. In the Hebrew Scrip­tures, each of Israel’s kings either ‘did what was right’ or ‘did what was evil’ in the eyes of God—with either bless­ings or curs­es for the king­dom. Since Pen­te­costals view them­selves as being a con­tin­u­a­tion of the bib­li­cal nar­ra­tive, they are cer­tain God will judge Amer­i­ca by the issues they view as stray­ing from the Bible.”
  6. Leaked Audio From 80 Inter­nal Tik­Tok Meet­ings Shows That US User Data Has Been Repeat­ed­ly Accessed From Chi­na (Emi­ly Bak­er-White, Buz­zFeed News): “Law­mak­er­s’ fear that the Chi­nese gov­ern­ment will be able to get its hands on Amer­i­can data through ByteDance is root­ed in the real­i­ty that Chi­nese com­pa­nies are sub­ject to the whims of the author­i­tar­i­an Chi­nese Com­mu­nist Par­ty, which has been crack­ing down on its home­grown tech giants over the last year. The risk is that the gov­ern­ment could force ByteDance to col­lect and turn over infor­ma­tion as a form of ‘data espi­onage.’ There is, how­ev­er, anoth­er con­cern: that the soft pow­er of the Chi­nese gov­ern­ment could impact how ByteDance exec­u­tives direct their Amer­i­can coun­ter­parts to adjust the levers of TikTok’s pow­er­ful ‘For You’ algo­rithm, which rec­om­mends videos to its more than 1 bil­lion users. Sen. Ted Cruz, for instance, has called Tik­Tok ‘a Tro­jan horse the Chi­nese Com­mu­nist Par­ty can use to influ­ence what Amer­i­cans see, hear, and ulti­mate­ly think.’ ”
  7. Quest to Con­quer a Dis­ease (Amy Lynn Smith, AG News): “Gib­son met Hong as he ate lunch with anoth­er intern in the stu­dent union. Hong asked to join them, and after­ward Gib­son and Hong began meet­ing for tea or cof­fee every week. Gib­son learned that Hong, the night before he intro­duced him­self, had a dream in which a man encour­aged Hong to meet peo­ple on cam­pus. Hong lat­er came to rec­og­nize the man in the dream as Jesus. A friend­ship devel­oped between Hong and Gib­son.”
    • This is about two of our alum­ni: Dan Gib­son, who did his min­istry train­ing with Chi Alpha Stan­ford sev­er­al years ago, and Guosong “Frank” Hong who did his PhD here and is now a pro­fes­sor.

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have How To Ask Your Men­tors For Help (Derek Sivers): this is super‐short and very good. Excerpt­ing it would ruin it. Read the whole thing. First shared in vol­ume 224.

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.