Tag: Research

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 506: isms, nonsense responders, and tap water

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

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. ismism (J. Budziszews­ki, blog): “Ismism – four syl­la­bles, ‘izzum izzum’ — is the bad men­tal habit of crit­i­ciz­ing a propo­si­tion not on its own terms, but in terms of the ‘ism’ which one takes it to express. For exam­ple, sup­pose Sheila is con­cerned that young peo­ple who mar­ry are tying the knot lat­er and lat­er in life. Bri­an snorts, ‘You’re one of those con­ju­gal­ists.’ Then he crit­i­cizes Sheila for oth­er beliefs which he him­self asso­ciates with so-called con­ju­gal­ism. For instance, he protests ‘I don’t think every­one has to mar­ry.’ But Sheila didn’t say that every­one has to mar­ry. She may not even think so, and it doesn’t fol­low as a con­clu­sion from her premise. Ismism is guilt by asso­ci­a­tion: ‘Your belief must be wrong, because I, per­son­al­ly, group it with oth­er beliefs I con­sid­er wrong.’ ”
    • The author is a phi­los­o­phy prof at UT Austin.
  2. Fas­ci­nat­ing: “non­sense respon­ders” sig­nif­i­cant­ly affect sur­vey data https://x.com/cremieuxrecueil/status/1926128833947738321
    • The entire thread is worth read­ing. Bot­tom line from a tweet near the end of the thread: “Men­tal­ly adjust sur­vey results in your head if you don’t see the authors rig­or­ous­ly work­ing to remove non­sense respon­ders.”
  3. How to Find Ancient Assyr­i­an Cities Using Eco­nom­ics (Max Tabar­rok, Sub­stack): “In ancient Kaneš, court tran­scripts, trad­ing con­tracts, and mer­chant account­ing were all record­ed on clay tablets. Clay tablets pre­serve well, so this peri­od is in some ways bet­ter known then the next sev­er­al thou­sand years of his­to­ry. The authors claim that ‘the clos­est com­pa­ra­ble cor­po­ra of ancient trade data are almost 3,000 years lat­er, com­ing, for exam­ple, from the medieval Ital­ian mer­chant archives and the Cairo Genizah’.… The cher­ry on top: the entire city burned in a fire, pre­serv­ing the clay records to be recov­ered forty cen­turies lat­er. The authors use some nat­ur­al lan­guage pro­cess­ing and man­u­al inspec­tion to nar­row down from tens of thou­sands of tablets to sev­er­al hun­dred unam­bigu­ous men­tions of trade between two of 25 Ana­to­lian cities that have enough trade con­nec­tions with each oth­er to be iden­ti­fied in a grav­i­ty mod­el.”
  4. Star Har­vard busi­ness pro­fes­sor stripped of tenure, fired for manip­u­lat­ing data in stud­ies on dis­hon­esty (Richard Pol­li­na, New York Post): “A renowned Har­vard Uni­ver­si­ty pro­fes­sor was stripped of her tenure and fired after an inves­ti­ga­tion found she fab­ri­cat­ed data on mul­ti­ple stud­ies focused on dis­hon­esty.”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent.
  5. Doug Wil­son Has Spent Decades Push­ing for a Chris­t­ian Theoc­ra­cy. In Trump’s DC, the New Right Is Lis­ten­ing. (Ian Ward, Politi­co): “In Moscow, Wil­son explained that his polit­i­cal phi­los­o­phy is not theo­crat­ic in the com­mon­ly under­stood sense of a gov­ern­ment run exclu­sive­ly by the church. To the con­trary, he main­tains that God ordains earth­ly author­i­ty in three sep­a­rate spheres of life: the church, the fam­i­ly and the civ­il gov­ern­ment. With­in each of these spheres, the rel­e­vant author­i­ties must abide by scrip­tur­al com­mand­ments. In the famil­ial sphere, for instance, par­ents must edu­cate their chil­dren accord­ing to Bib­li­cal prin­ci­ples, and wives must sub­or­di­nate them­selves to their hus­bands in accor­dance with a covenan­tal view of the fam­i­ly. In the sphere of civ­il gov­ern­ment, offi­cials should strive to bring the law in line with Bib­li­cal com­mand­ments, although those prin­ci­ples don’t have to be applied ‘wood­en­ly,’ as Wil­son put it: Gov­ern­ments do not have to enforce the Bib­li­cal man­date that house­holds build balustrades on their roofs, but they should enforce the prin­ci­ple that home­own­ers are liable for risks incurred on their prop­er­ty. Above all, Wil­son believes, the three spheres of earth­ly author­i­ty must remain sep­a­rate.”
    • This is a far more informed arti­cle than I expect­ed it to be. The jour­nal­ist (Ian Ward) and the sub­ject (Doug Wil­son) have both been fea­tured in these emails before. I high­ly rec­om­mend this arti­cle as an exam­ple of what fair report­ing of a reli­gious per­son looks like.
    • For a taste of Wilson’s style, check out his response to this and a few oth­er arti­cles about him: Pete Hegseth, Me, and Meet­ing with Impor­tant Jews (Doug Wil­son, per­son­al blog).
    • My quick take on Wil­son: when he is right he is very right and when he is wrong he is very wrong, and whether he is right or wrong he is almost always con­fi­dent and enter­tain­ing.
  6. The Unpar­al­leled Dai­ly Mir­a­cle of Tap Water (A. Cerisse Cohen, New York Times): “Dur­ing a two-year stint in Mon­tana, I went on long hikes and sipped stream water, shock­ing­ly cold and straight from the glac­i­ers, but oth­er than that, I drank from the tap. And then I land­ed in Los Ange­les, where every­one I met used a fil­ter.… Thanks to warn­ings from seem­ing­ly every­one around me in the city, I began to wor­ry about things I nev­er before con­sid­ered threat­en­ing, like dust (could cause can­cer), any­thing with seeds (could cause can­cer) or cer­tain plan­e­tary con­fig­u­ra­tions (respon­si­ble for all oth­er mis­for­tunes). If I put my purse on the floor, or ori­ent­ed my bed the wrong way, it was endan­ger­ing my ener­gy! Maybe I’d been lulled into a false sense of secu­ri­ty about every­day life.”
    • Drink tap water. It’s awe­some.
  7. U.S. Will ‘Aggres­sive­ly’ Revoke Visas of Chi­nese Stu­dents, Rubio Says (Edward Wong, New York Times): “Sec­re­tary of State Mar­co Rubio announced on Wednes­day evening that the Trump admin­is­tra­tion would work to ‘aggres­sive­ly revoke’ visas of Chi­nese stu­dents, includ­ing those with ties to the Chi­nese Com­mu­nist Par­ty or who are study­ing in ‘crit­i­cal fields.’.… In 2020, offi­cials in the first Trump admin­is­tra­tion can­celed the visas of more than 1,000 Chi­nese grad­u­ate stu­dents and researchers after announc­ing they were ban­ning from cam­pus­es Chi­nese cit­i­zens with direct ties to mil­i­tary uni­ver­si­ties in their coun­try. It was the first time the U.S. gov­ern­ment had moved to bar a cat­e­go­ry of Chi­nese stu­dents from get­ting access to Amer­i­can uni­ver­si­ties, a ban the Biden admin­is­tra­tion kept in place.”

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Why Do You Send This Email?

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

Disclaimer

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

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 226

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

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. I’m a Cli­mate Sci­en­tist Who Believes in God. Hear Me Out. (Katharine Hay­hoe, New York Times): “…I believe that evan­gel­i­cals who take the Bible seri­ous­ly already care about cli­mate change (although they might not real­ize it). Cli­mate change will strike hard against the very peo­ple we’re told to care for and love, ampli­fy­ing hunger and pover­ty, and increas­ing risks of resource scarci­ty that can exac­er­bate polit­i­cal insta­bil­i­ty, and even cre­ate or wors­en refugee crises.” The author is a pro­fes­sor at Texas Tech and, as it hap­pens, spoke at Stan­ford last night.
  2. Split the Cedars of Lebanon: Evan­gel­i­cals Bal­ance Prayer, Protest, and Pol­i­tics in Ongo­ing Upris­ing (Jayson Casper, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “There can be no uni­ty with pro­test­ers curs­ing and hurl­ing hatred at the polit­i­cal class, he said, urg­ing Chris­t­ian sep­a­ra­tion from such behav­ior. If cit­i­zens are unsat­is­fied, they should vote their offi­cials out. And as for the eco­nom­ic trou­bles, he believes a great God will take care of their needs. Oth­er pas­tors have endorsed demon­stra­tions as a vehi­cle for change. Some have called for prayer and fast­ing. Either way, many of the pre­vi­ous­ly apo­lit­i­cal have become engaged.”
  3. The New Par­ty of the Rich (Darel E. Paul, First Things): “The rich­est 15 per­cent of House dis­tricts are now rep­re­sent­ed by 56 Democ­rats and just 10 Repub­li­cans. In 2018, vot­ers in America’s wealth­i­est coun­ties, cities, and neigh­bor­hoods made a deci­sive turn toward the Democ­rats, and now America’s tra­di­tion­al par­ty of the left—whether it admits it or not—is the par­ty of the rich.” The author is a pro­fes­sor of polit­i­cal sci­ence at Williams Col­lege.
  4. How I Got Rich On The Oth­er Hand (Derek Sivers, per­son­al blog): “It’s not how much you have. It’s the dif­fer­ence between what you have and what you spend. If you have more than you spend, you’re rich. If you spend more than you have, you’re not. If you live cheap­ly, it’s easy to be free.” This is real­ly sim­ple and real­ly true. Empha­sis in the orig­i­nal.
  5. The Church, inten­sive kin­ship, and glob­al psy­cho­log­i­cal vari­a­tion (Schulz et al, Sci­ence): “…we pro­pose that the West­ern Church (i.e., the branch of Chris­tian­i­ty that evolved into the Roman Catholic Church) trans­formed Euro­pean kin­ship struc­tures dur­ing the Mid­dle Ages and that this trans­for­ma­tion was a key fac­tor behind a shift towards a WEIRD­er psy­chol­o­gy.” This is real­ly inter­est­ing if it holds up.
  6. It’s Offi­cial: Pres­i­dent Trump Has Tweet­ed More Words Than James Joyce’s ‘Ulysses’ (Chris Wil­son, Time): “In the 1,020 days since he took office, Pres­i­dent Trump’s Twit­ter account has post­ed 266,055 words. Ulysses, which runs about 780 pages, has 264,564. That’s using the same mea­sure of count­ing words with the freely avail­able dig­i­tal ver­sion of the tome on Project Guten­berg. (How one counts words is slight­ly fun­gi­ble depend­ing on, for exam­ple, on how one con­sid­ers hyphens and con­trac­tions, but my fig­ure is very close to var­i­ous oth­er tal­lies).” Wow. That’s a lot of words.
  7. The Dan­gers of Flu­ent Lec­tures (Colleen Fla­her­ty, Inside High­er Ed): “The study, involv­ing Har­vard Uni­ver­si­ty under­grad­u­ates in large, intro­duc­to­ry physics class­es, com­pared stu­dents’ self reports about what they’d learned with what they’d actu­al­ly learned, as deter­mined by a mul­ti­ple choice tests. Stu­dents were taught using exact­ly the same course mate­ri­als — a key con­trol that many oth­er stud­ies com­par­ing active ver­sus pas­sive learn­ing have failed to estab­lish. But one group learned via active instruc­tion meth­ods for a week at the end of the semes­ter and the oth­er learned via lec­tures from expe­ri­enced and well-regard­ed instruc­tors.” Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent. See a relat­ed link back in vol­ume 218.

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 Land of We All (Richard Mitchell, The Gift of Fire), an essay built on this insight: “Think­ing can not be done cor­po­rate­ly. Nations and com­mit­tees can’t think. That is not only because they have no brains, but because they have no selves, no cen­ters, no souls, if you like. Mil­lions and mil­lions of per­sons may hold the same thought, or con­vic­tion or sus­pi­cion, but each and every per­son of those mil­lions must hold it all alone.” (first shared in vol­ume 2)

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 220

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues. My hope is that every­one will find at least one link intrigu­ing enough to click through for more. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions, so if you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Does a Reli­gious Upbring­ing Pro­mote Gen­eros­i­ty or Not? (Tyler J. Van­der­Weele, Psy­chol­o­gy Today): “In 2015, a paper by Jean Dece­ty and co-authors report­ed that chil­dren who were brought up reli­gious­ly were less gen­er­ous. The paper received a great deal of atten­tion, and was cov­ered by over 80 media out­lets includ­ing The Econ­o­mist, the Boston Globe, the Los Ange­les Times, and Sci­en­tif­ic Amer­i­can. As it turned out, how­ev­er, the paper by Dece­ty was wrong.” Rec­om­mend­ed by an alum­nus who not­ed, “it seemed up your alley.” A sto­ry which touch­es on reli­gion, fea­tures a sta­tis­ti­cal screwup, and high­lights media bias? Indeed it is! The author is an epi­demi­ol­o­gist at Har­vard whose writ­ing I have high­light­ed before. 
  2. Is Amer­i­can Chris­tian­i­ty on Its Last Legs? The Data Say Oth­er­wise. (Bradley Wright, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “…evan­gel­i­cal Chris­tian­i­ty is doing rather well for itself. Where it is not increas­ing, it is hold­ing steady. As Stan­ton writes, ‘Church­es that are faith­ful­ly preach­ing, teach­ing, and prac­tic­ing Bib­li­cal truths and con­ser­v­a­tive the­ol­o­gy are hold­ing sta­ble over­all. In some areas, they are see­ing growth.’ In con­trast, the for­tunes of main­line Protes­tantism in Amer­i­ca are falling fast. Its long decline has been doc­u­ment­ed before, and Stan­ton updates our under­stand­ing of it. As he puts it, ‘peo­ple are leav­ing those church­es like the build­ings are on fire.’” The author is a soci­ol­o­gist at U Conn whose writ­ing I have high­light­ed before.
  3. Look­ing back at the Snow­den rev­e­la­tions (Matthew Green, per­son­al blog): “One of the most impor­tant lessons we learned from the Snow­den leaks was that the NSA very much pri­or­i­tizes its sur­veil­lance mis­sion, to the point where it is will­ing to active­ly insert vul­ner­a­bil­i­ties into encryp­tion prod­ucts and stan­dards used on U.S. net­works…. This kind of sab­o­tage is, need­less to say, some­thing that not even the most para­noid secu­ri­ty researchers would have pre­dict­ed from our own intel­li­gence agen­cies. Agen­cies that, osten­si­bly have a mis­sion to pro­tect U.S. net­works.” The author is a pro­fes­sor at Johns Hop­kins.
  4. Harvard’s Lega­cies Are Noth­ing to Be Proud Of (Tyler Cowen, Bloomberg Opin­ion): “If you are won­der­ing why Amer­i­cans do not trust the cur­rent estab­lish­ment, or why Amer­i­cans are not so con­vinced that the Demo­c­ra­t­ic Par­ty actu­al­ly will reverse income inequal­i­ty, look no fur­ther than the Har­vard admis­sions case.”
  5. Inside Stanford’s Last Fall­out Shel­ter: a time cap­sule to Cold War pol­i­tics and protests (Patrick Mon­re­al, Stan­ford Dai­ly): “At the height of the Cold War, Stan­ford and the Office of Civ­il Defense, a fed­er­al agency estab­lished by Franklin D. Roo­sevelt, des­ig­nat­ed as many as 56 fall­out shel­ters on cam­pus. The Uni­ver­si­ty man­aged these shel­ters, which col­lec­tive­ly had a max­i­mum occu­pan­cy of 49,269 peo­ple, as a part of emer­gency plans in the event of a nuclear strike or nat­ur­al dis­as­ter.”
  6. Some diverse per­spec­tives on max­i­miz­ing your time at Stan­ford.
    • Class­es for the Col­lege Con­trar­i­an: The Com­pre­hen­sive Guide to Get­ting More out of Stan­ford (Anni­ka Nordquist, Stan­ford Review): “Although Stanford’s dom­i­nance in STEM fields is uni­ver­sal­ly acknowl­edged, it can be hard­er to find stel­lar human­i­ties and social sci­ences class­es, which don’t have the same struc­tured cur­ricu­lums and are more like­ly to suf­fer from severe grade infla­tion. This is not even to men­tion the dif­fi­cul­ty of find­ing class­es which rep­re­sent oppos­ing view­points and teach crit­i­cal thought rather than aca­d­e­m­ic ortho­doxy.” Anni­ka is involved in Chi Alpha. 
    • Eleven Must-Take Class­es This Fall (Stan­ford Sphere edi­to­r­i­al board): “In our old­est recur­ring fea­ture, we present below an alpha­bet­ized list of the most inter­est­ing class­es of the fall.”
    • I pro­pose a new rule at Stan­ford — all stu­dents shall be auto­mat­i­cal­ly enrolled in any cours­es which are rec­om­mend­ed by both the Sphere and the Review 
    • How to Major in Uni­corn (Max Read & Andrew Grana­to, New York Mag­a­zine): “Google was found­ed by two Stan­ford grad­u­ate stu­dents, Insta­gram by two Stan­ford alum­ni, Snapchat by a Stan­ford dropout. What­sApp, Net­flix, LinkedIn, Yahoo, and Hewlett-Packard were all found­ed by one­time Stan­ford stu­dents; the ear­li­est investors in Face­book and Ama­zon were Stan­ford grad­u­ates. Even Eliz­a­beth Holmes, sym­bol of Sil­i­con Val­ley self-delu­sion and fraud, was a stu­dent at Stan­ford when she dropped out to found Ther­a­nos. About the only two famous tech founders with no imme­di­ate­ly appar­ent Stan­ford con­nec­tion are Steve Jobs and Bill Gates — though is it a coin­ci­dence that each had a daugh­ter attend the school?”
    • If Not Snapchat, What? A Guide to Stanford’s Non-Tech Fief­doms (Andrew Grana­to, New York Mag­a­zine): “An anec­dote about the uni­ver­si­ty that is posi­tion­ing itself to take charge of the 21st cen­tu­ry: Jack­son Beard ’17, the for­mer stu­dent body pres­i­dent, told me a sto­ry about how a cab­i­net mem­ber of hers tried to sched­ule a meet­ing with the head of the stu­dent health cen­ter to dis­cuss school pol­i­cy on invol­un­tary psy­chi­atric holds of stu­dents. After many delays, a meet­ing occurred where the admin­is­tra­tor ‘just asked, straight up, “When do you two grad­u­ate?” He said, “I want to know when you’ll stop car­ing about this issue.”’” A remark­ably brief sum­ma­ry of a very real Stan­ford dynam­ic.
    • An Optimist’s Guide to Find­ing Mean­ing at Stan­ford (Ibrahim Bhar­mal and Ali­na Utra­ta, Medi­um) “The best advice I ever got about pick­ing a major was: plan out all the class­es you want to take, and then see what major lets you take those class­es. YOU HAVE TONS OF TIME! Spend fresh­man and sopho­more year tak­ing all the class­es you’re inter­est­ed in and expand­ing your hori­zons — even class­es that don’t seem ‘use­ful’ to you.”
  7. The Dan­ger of Reusing Nat­ur­al Exper­i­ments (Alex Tabar­rok, Mar­gin­al Rev­o­lu­tion): “A cor­re­spon­dent writes to ask whether I was aware that Reg­u­la­tion SHO has been used by more than fifty oth­er stud­ies to test a vari­ety of hypothe­ses. I was not! The prob­lem is obvi­ous. If the same exper­i­ment is used mul­ti­ple times we should be impos­ing mul­ti­ple hypoth­e­sis stan­dards to avoid the green jel­ly bean prob­lem, oth­er­wise known as the false pos­i­tive prob­lem.” 

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 Facts Are Not Self‐Interpreting (Twit­ter) — this is a short, sound­less video. Rec­om­mend­ed. First shared in vol­ume 184.

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 201

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

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. The alleged syn­a­gogue shoot­er was a church­go­er who artic­u­lat­ed Chris­t­ian the­ol­o­gy, prompt­ing tough ques­tions for evan­gel­i­cal pas­tors (Julie Zauzmer, The Wash­ing­ton Post va SF Gate): “Before he alleged­ly walked into a syn­a­gogue in Poway, Cal­i­for­nia and opened fire, John Earnest appears to have writ­ten a sev­en-page let­ter spelling out his core beliefs: That Jew­ish peo­ple, guilty in his view of faults rang­ing from killing Jesus to con­trol­ling the media, deserved to die. That his inten­tion to kill Jews would glo­ri­fy God…. Earnest, 19, was a mem­ber of an OPC con­gre­ga­tion. His father was an elder. He attend­ed reg­u­lar­ly. And in the man­i­festo, the writer spewed not only invec­tive against Jews and racial minori­ties, but also cogent Chris­t­ian the­ol­o­gy he heard in the pews.”
    • Kin­ism, Cul­tur­al Marx­ism, and the Syn­a­gogue Shoot­er (Joe Carter, Gospel Coali­tion): “Sev­er­al years ago a friend of mine, a Pres­by­ter­ian min­is­ter, asked me to speak to his con­gre­ga­tion about cul­tur­al issues. Dur­ing the dis­cus­sion, an old­er cou­ple asked me a ques­tion about sep­a­ra­tion of eth­nic groups, specif­i­cal­ly white Amer­i­cans from blacks and Jews. I told them I must have mis­un­der­stood their ques­tion, because what they were talk­ing about could be mis­tak­en for pro­mot­ing a view called kin­ism. The wife replied, ‘And what’s wrong with kin­ism?’”
    • Why white nation­al­ism tempts white Chris­tians (Jemar Tis­by, Reli­gion News Ser­vice): “I absolute­ly do not believe that pas­tors in the OPC or any sim­i­lar denom­i­na­tion are reg­u­lar­ly spew­ing anti-Semi­tism and racism from the pul­pit or on any oth­er occa­sion. But the rigid exclu­sion of dis­cus­sions of racial injus­tice from the reg­u­lar preach­ing and teach­ing in these church­es means that white nation­al­ists are sel­dom chal­lenged in their beliefs.”
    • a Twit­ter thread in which Duke Kwon talks about this
  2. https://scite.ai/ — this is a cool con­cept. Enter a research paper and it will algo­rith­mi­cal­ly assess whether sub­se­quent research sup­ports or under­mines the con­clu­sions. For exam­ple: https://scite.ai/reports/10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.1615
  3. As church­es are demol­ished at home, Chi­nese Chris­tians find reli­gious free­dom in Kenya (Jen­ni Marsh, CNN): “Kenya is not a place you’d expect to find an under­ground church. Chris­tian­i­ty is the lifeblood of the nation’s pol­i­tics and soci­etal fab­ric, and is cel­e­brat­ed in huge, ram­bunc­tious ser­vices attend­ed by thou­sands of danc­ing and singing wor­shipers. But, in the north­ern stretch­es of the sprawl­ing, traf­fic-choked cap­i­tal of 4 mil­lion peo­ple, an under­ground Chi­nese house church is exact­ly what May Li, wife of a Malaysian-Chi­nese pas­tor, helps to lead — illus­trat­ing just how far the Com­mu­nist Par­ty’s reli­gious crack­down has trav­eled. Li and oth­er Chi­nese Chris­tians in this sto­ry did not want to use their real names for fear of being pun­ished by the gov­ern­ment when they return to Chi­na. The Chi­nese embassy in Nairo­bi has already reached out to the lead­ers of some Chi­nese Chris­t­ian groups in the city and asked them to desist, says Li. Her ser­vice tries to stay below the radar.”
  4. The Belt and Road is about domes­tic inter­est groups, not devel­op­ment (Andrew Bat­son, per­son­al blog): “The broad­er point here is that look­ing at the Belt and Road through the lens of ‘grand strat­e­gy’ or ‘geopol­i­tics,’ as so many com­men­ta­tors do, or even por­tray­ing it as some kind of new phi­los­o­phy of eco­nom­ic devel­op­ment, is quite mis­lead­ing. All of these grand con­cepts are jus­ti­fi­ca­tions invent­ed after the fact for a pat­tern of actions that was already well under­way before Xi Jin­ping made his 2013 speech about the Belt and Road. The Belt and Road is real­ly the expan­sion of a spe­cif­ic part of China’s domes­tic polit­i­cal econ­o­my to the rest of the world.”
  5. Ro Khan­na and the ten­sions of Sil­i­con Val­ley lib­er­al­ism (Ezra Klein, Vox): “Pelosi invit­ed me to her house,” Khan­na recalls. “And when I asked her not to make an endorse­ment, she said, ‘Absolute­ly not. I stand for my incum­bents.’ So I get very dis­cour­aged, and Pelosi could see that. As I’m leav­ing the room, she said, ‘Ro, let me tell you some­thing. If I had wait­ed around, I’d have nev­er been speak­er of the House. Pow­er is nev­er giv­en. It’s always tak­en.’”
  6. Is Times Colum­nist David Brooks a Chris­t­ian or a Jew? (Sarah Pul­liam Bai­ley, Wash­ing­ton Post via the Salt Lake Tri­bune): “In the world of nation­al colum­nists, David Brooks is a star. But in the past few years, The New York Times writer and author has whipped up fas­ci­na­tion among a cer­tain sub­set of read­ers for a spe­cif­ic, gos­sipy rea­son: They won­der if the Jew­ish writer has become a Chris­t­ian.”
    • Relat­ed: David Brooks’s Con­ver­sion Sto­ry (Ben­jamin Wal­lace-Wells, The New York­er): “For Brooks, this car­ried the clar­i­ty of rev­e­la­tion, and soon he let it be known, among his acquain­tances, that he was expe­ri­enc­ing reli­gious curios­i­ty. An infor­mal com­pe­ti­tion opened for David Brooks’s soul. He received, by his own esti­ma­tion, three hun­dred gifts of spir­i­tu­al books, ‘only one hun­dred of which were dif­fer­ent copies of C. S. Lewis’s Mere Chris­tian­i­ty.’ ”
  7. Ter­ror­ists in Burk­i­na Faso Exe­cute Six at Pen­te­costal Church (Kate Shell­nutt, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “A dozen gun­men on motor­cy­cles stormed the court­yard of the Sir­gad­ji church after wor­ship, fatal­ly shoot­ing its long­time pas­tor as well as five oth­er con­gre­gants after demand­ing they con­vert to Islam, accord­ing to a state­ment sent to CT by the gen­er­al super­in­ten­dent of the Assem­blies of God in Burk­i­na Faso, Michel Oué­drao­go.”

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 Sis­ter… Show Mer­cy! (Dan Phillips, Team Pyro): “Sis­ter, if there’s one thing you and I can cer­tain­ly agree on, it’s this: I don’t know what it’s like to be a woman, and you don’t know what it’s like to be a man. We’re both prob­a­bly wrong where we’re sure we’re right, try as we might. So let me try to dart a telegram from my camp over to the distaff side.” (first shared in vol­ume 148)

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 151

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

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. These Bombs Led Me To Christ (Kim Phuc Phan Thi, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “You have seen my pic­ture a thou­sand times. It’s a pic­ture that made the world gasp—a pic­ture that defined my life. I am nine years old, run­ning along a pud­dled road­way in front of an expres­sion­less sol­dier, arms out­stretched, naked, shriek­ing in pain and fear, the dark con­tour of a napalm cloud bil­low­ing in the dis­tance.” WHOA.
  2. If I Were 22 Again (John Piper, Desir­ing God): “There have been about 18,340 days since I turned 22, and I think I have read my Bible on more of those days than I have eat­en. I have cer­tain­ly read my Bible on more of those days that I have watched tele­vi­sion or videos.… Read your Bible every day of your life. If you have time for break­fast, nev­er say that you don’t have time for God’s word.” This whole thing is real­ly good. High­ly rec­om­mend­ed.
  3. What Hap­pened To Alan Der­showitz? (Evan Man­dery, Politi­co Mag­a­zine): “Talk­ing to him, it’s not hard to get the impres­sion that expos­ing that truth—the hypocrisy of both sides—may be his ulti­mate project. As he sees it, the best way to achieve his goal—and to get it the atten­tion it deserves—is by defend­ing the most odi­ous clients in the most provoca­tive pos­si­ble way on the very prin­ci­ples lib­er­als claim to love.” I real­ly liked this arti­cle.
  4. A Mus­lim Among Israeli Set­tlers (Waja­hat Ali, The Atlantic): “Ever since the cre­ation of the mod­ern state of Israel—a mir­a­cle for the Jews, the Nak­ba (‘cat­a­stro­phe’) for the Palestinians—Jerusalem’s dai­ly weath­er fore­cast could be described as sun­ny with a slight chance of apoc­a­lypse.”
  5. Give Amnesty for Col­lege Writ­ings (David Lat, Wall Street Jour­nal): “Col­le­giate scrib­blings from decades ago should have no bear­ing on one’s fit­ness for pub­lic office, and mak­ing an issue of them is bad for the coun­try. Col­lege is tra­di­tion­al­ly a time of exper­i­men­ta­tion and explo­ration. We adopt and dis­card ideas and try out dif­fer­ent iden­ti­ties, some­times in rapid suc­ces­sion. These iden­ti­ties often bear lit­tle resem­blance to our mature selves— Hillary Clin­ton was once a ‘Gold­wa­ter girl,’ while Clarence Thomas was a Black Pan­ther sympathizer—but explor­ing them is how we learn about our­selves and acquire wisdom—how we grow up.”
    • Speak­ing of col­lege writ­ings, here are two pieces by Stan­ford stu­dents. They are pre­sent­ed with­out any impli­ca­tion that these are views the authors will lat­er recant; rather, by putting them here as sub-bul­let points I can tell myself I lim­it­ed myself to sev­en top­ics this week.
    • Think the Right Cares About Free Speech? Not Always. (Anni­ka Nordquist, Stan­ford Review): “With­in Amer­i­can pol­i­tics, free­dom of speech is a top­ic of great self-right­eous­ness on both fronts. As the Left adopts an increas­ing­ly politi­cized def­i­n­i­tion of ‘hate speech,’ includ­ing even the most mun­dane top­ics like ‘microag­gres­sions,’ the Right pats itself on the back for defend­ing nat­ur­al lib­er­ties. Yet in Poland, where pro­gres­sives have been vot­ed almost entire­ly out of gov­ern­ment, the Right instead restricts the speech of the Left.” That’s our very own Anni­ka.
    • The Orig­i­nal Sin of Stan­ford Din­ing (Andrew Fried­man, Stan­ford Review): “Cur­rent­ly 12 admin­is­tra­tors run R&DE, along with numer­ous assis­tants. If admin­is­tra­tors object to turn­ing the school’s food ser­vice into a land­lord, it is like­ly because they know leas­ing space to third par­ty ven­dors, besides being bet­ter for every­one else, could be done by a sin­gle per­son, with­out the bureau­crat­ic bloat of the cur­rent sys­tem.”
  6. A real-life Lord of the Flies: the trou­bling lega­cy of the Rob­bers Cave exper­i­ment (David Shari­at­madari, The Guardian): “The ‘Rob­bers Cave exper­i­ment’ is con­sid­ered sem­i­nal by social psy­chol­o­gists, still one of the best-known exam­ples of ‘real­is­tic con­flict the­o­ry’. It is often cit­ed in mod­ern research. But was it sci­en­tif­i­cal­ly rig­or­ous? And why were the results of the Mid­dle Grove exper­i­ment – where the researchers couldn’t get the boys to fight – sup­pressed? … [The researcher’s method was] think of the the­o­ry first and then find a way to get the results that match it. If the results say some­thing else? Bury them.”
  7. A Design Lab Is Mak­ing Rit­u­als for Sec­u­lar Peo­ple (Sigal Samuel, The Atlantic): “Rit­u­al Design Lab has its roots in Stanford’s Insti­tute of Design, where Ozenc and Hagan both teach. In 2015, they pro­posed a new course on rit­u­al design. To their sur­prise, more than 100 stu­dents signed up. Most were sec­u­lar.” I large­ly agree with Rod Dreher’s take: New Rit­u­als For Self-Wor­ship

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 Let­ter To My Younger Self (Ryan Leaf, The Player’s Tri­bune): “Con­grat­u­la­tions. You offi­cial­ly have it all — mon­ey, pow­er and pres­tige. All the things that are impor­tant, right?… That’s you, young Ryan Leaf, at his absolute finest: arro­gant, boor­ish and nar­cis­sis­tic. You think you’re on top of the world and that you’ve got all the answers. Well I’m sor­ry to have to tell you this, but the truth is….” Such a grip­ping let­ter. High­ly rec­om­mend­ed. (first shared in vol­ume 99)

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).

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 21

In the time of King David, the tribe of Issachar pro­duced shrewd war­riors “who under­stood the times and knew what Israel should do” (1 Chron 12:32). In a sim­i­lar way, we need to become wise peo­ple whose faith inter­acts with the world.

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

With­out fur­ther ado, I give you the inter­est­ing things:

  1. How big of a deal do you have to be for POTUS to inter­view you? Pres­i­dent Oba­ma & Mar­i­lynne Robin­son: A Con­ver­sa­tion In Iowa (NY Review of Books). You might recall that Robin­son is speak­ing at Stan­ford soon and also that I men­tioned her essay “Fear” a few emails back.
  2. Won­der­ing why peo­ple are flee­ing Syr­ia? Check out Syria’s War: A Five Minute His­to­ry (a Vox video). This is real­ly well-done. 
  3. There is also vio­lence erupt­ing in Israel. For­eign Pol­i­cy asks Can Any­one Pre­vent A Third Intifa­da?  Inci­den­tal­ly, if you won­der why peo­ple are skep­ti­cal of the way news con­cern­ing Israel is report­ed, take a look at Return­ing to the Copy Desk, Briefly (Kevin Williamson, Nation­al Review). It is a take­down of a NY Times arti­cle show­ing how much bias can creep into an appar­ent­ly objec­tive arti­cle (this is from the right cri­tiquing the left — for coun­terex­am­ples search for clips from the Dai­ly Show). Bot­tom line: it’s real­ly hard to find trust­wor­thy news about Israel.
  4. Lying About Our Reli­gion, and Oth­er Prob­lems With Polling (Reli­gion Dis­patch­es). There real­ly is a prob­lem devel­op­ing with polling, which is bad news because we rely upon polling in our nation­al life to tell us what the pub­lic thinks. Nate Sil­ver is also wor­ried about this — Polling Is Get­ting Hard­er, But It’s A Vital Check On Pow­er (FiveThir­tyEight).
    • An insight­ful obser­va­tion from the “Lying About Our Reli­gion” arti­cle: “In a democ­ra­cy with hun­dreds of mil­lions of peo­ple, how do you know what the pub­lic thinks and wants? How do you fig­ure out what binds them togeth­er, besides an annu­al oblig­a­tion to the IRS and a love of fire­works? In short: how do you know what the pub­lic is? Like many hard ques­tions, these prob­lems have been ren­dered large­ly invis­i­ble, in no small part because “The Pub­lic” and “The Amer­i­can Peo­ple” are favorite fic­tion­al char­ac­ters for politi­cians and jour­nal­ists, who speak of them with­out a trace of pre­ci­sion. So let’s indulge in a quick real­i­ty check. The Super Bowl—that nation­al spec­ta­cle that unites us around the flick­er­ing LCD hearth—had 115 mil­lion view­ers in the Unit­ed States last Feb­ru­ary; in oth­er words, near­ly two-thirds of us weren’t watch­ing it. The most-viewed polit­i­cal spec­ta­cle of the year, the State of the Union address, draws around 10% of the pop­u­la­tion. Barack Oba­ma won the 2012 pres­i­den­tial elec­tion with 62 mil­lion votes, mean­ing that few­er than 20% of us vot­ed for him. The peo­ple have spoken…kind of.”
  5. Quick links:

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.