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

You’ve heard of TGIF? This is TGFI: Things Glen Found Inter­est­ing

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues like­ly to be of inter­est to Chris­tians in col­lege. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions, so if you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

Things Glen Found Interesting

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

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

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

Why Do You Send This Email?

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

Disclaimer

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

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 537: Hippo Poop & Manic Complainers

You’ve heard of TGIF? This is TGFI: Things Glen Found Inter­est­ing

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues like­ly to be of inter­est to Chris­tians in col­lege. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions, so if you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

Noth­ing here about Min­neso­ta or Iran. They’re both in the news, but I haven’t yet read any­thing about them that I’ve found stim­u­lat­ing.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. The Tyran­ny of the Com­plain­ers (Alex Tabar­rok, Mar­gin­al Rev­o­lu­tion): “In 2023, for exam­ple, 5059 sex­u­al dis­crim­i­na­tion com­plaints came from a sin­gle individual–from a total of 8151 com­plaints. Thus, one indi­vid­ual account­ed for 68.5% of all sex­u­al dis­crim­i­na­tion com­plaints in that year.… These com­plaints have to be inves­ti­gat­ed so this sin­gle indi­vid­ual may be cost­ing tax­pay­ers mil­lions. It’s as if a sin­gle indi­vid­ual were pulling a fire alarm thou­sands of times a year, mobi­liz­ing emer­gency ser­vices on demand, and nev­er fac­ing reper­cus­sions.”
  2. What I’ve Learned from Watch­ing Peo­ple Wait to Have Chil­dren (Sarah Pog­gi, The Free Press): “I’ve known all of this for as long as I’ve been a doc­tor. So have my col­leagues. That’s why ob-gyn res­i­dents, despite work­ing 80-hour weeks, are more like­ly to get preg­nant dur­ing their train­ing than any oth­er med­ical spe­cial­ists.”
    • The author is a med school prof at Johns Hop­kins.
  3. Why Suf­fer­ing for Christ Is More Than Just a “Nec­es­sary Evil” (Matt Rhodes, Cross­way): “You won’t go far in evan­ge­lis­tic con­ver­sa­tions in the West today before some­one asks you to explain the prob­lem of theod­i­cy: how it is that a good God could allow suf­fer­ing in the world.… But we mustn’t for­get that ques­tions can be loaded. Ask a defen­dant in court, ‘Have you stopped beat­ing your wife yet?’ and his lawyer is sure to object, ‘Your hon­or, the ques­tion pre­sup­pos­es my client has beat­en his wife.’ The ques­tion needs to be reframed, not respond­ed to.”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent.
  4. Why Chris­tians Ignore What the Bible Says About Immi­grants (Rus­sell Moore, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “The Bible does not give a com­pre­hen­sive pub­lic pol­i­cy for migra­tion or asy­lum. Chris­tians of good faith can dis­agree on those things. But the Bible does give a com­pre­hen­sive view on what we are to think of human beings, includ­ing migrants. The church has a mis­sion to shape con­sciences around how we min­is­ter to scared and vul­ner­a­ble peo­ple, regard­less of whether we think they should have stayed some­where else. And Jesus has already tak­en the ques­tion of ‘Who is my neigh­bor?’ off the table…”
  5. Some Venezuela per­spec­tives:
    • Was Trump’s Venezuela Attack Legal? (Jeb Ruben­feld, The Free Press): “Under cur­rent U.S. doc­trine and prece­dent, what Pres­i­dent Don­ald Trump just did in Venezuela is almost cer­tain­ly legal; in fact, the U.S. did the very same thing in Pana­ma four decades ago, and the courts upheld it after years of lit­i­ga­tion and care­ful con­sid­er­a­tion. But Trump’s plan to ‘run’ Venezuela for the fore­see­able future, declared at a press con­fer­ence ear­li­er today, is much murki­er.”
      • The author is a pro­fes­sor at Yale Law School.
    • Why the Venezuela Oper­a­tion Won’t Embold­en America’s Ene­mies (Eli Lake, The Free Press): “If any­thing, a pre­cise mil­i­tary oper­a­tion to seize a rogue tyrant in a predawn raid with no U.S. casu­al­ties will cause Chi­na and Rus­sia to think twice about test­ing Amer­i­can pow­er. Venezuela count­ed on a Russ­ian-made air defense sys­tem that failed to stop the U.S. Air Force from dom­i­nat­ing its air­space. That sends a chill­ing mes­sage to Rus­sia and any­one who has pur­chased its mil­i­tary hard­ware. Chi­na had invest­ed bil­lions in Venezuela’s oil sec­tor only to see the man who cut those deals arraigned this week before a U.S. fed­er­al court in Man­hat­tan.”
    • Why I Cold-Called Pres­i­dent Trump at 4:30 in the Morn­ing (Tyler Pager, New York Times): “I just called him direct­ly and he picked up. I wasn’t that sur­prised because the president’s phone habits are pret­ty well-doc­u­ment­ed — he reg­u­lar­ly picks up calls from reporters.… This is the first time I have ever called the pres­i­dent on his cell­phone.”
      • That’s a wild detail in a wild news cycle. How many reporters have Trump’s num­ber and are just wait­ing for the right moment to call?
  6. So What If the Bible Doesn’t Men­tion Embryo Screen­ing? (Brad East, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “Open up the glos­sary in the back of your Bible, and you won’t find Chat­G­PT, CRISPR, or IVF. There are no chap­ter-and-verse cita­tions for lip fillers, egg freez­ing, or prac­ti­cal ques­tions like the ‘right’ age to get mar­ried or the ‘ide­al’ num­ber of chil­dren.… Mature Chris­tians, and espe­cial­ly pas­tors and whole church­es, must there­fore be able to give con­fi­dent scrip­tur­al answers to new ques­tions even when overt bib­li­cal teach­ing is lack­ing.”
    • I hope these Fri­day emails are of some small ser­vice in this regard.
  7. The Case for Pro­hibit­ing Vice (Charles Fain Lehmann, Nation­al Affairs): “This fram­ing of the vice issue — as a mat­ter of per­mit­ting behav­ior that may be immoral but is more impor­tant­ly ‘harm­less’ — is so cen­tral to our pub­lic debate that both pro­po­nents and oppo­nents artic­u­late their crit­i­cisms in its lan­guage. They hag­gle about which is more harm­ful, vice or its pro­hi­bi­tion.… the fact that both pro­po­nents and oppo­nents of vice have resort­ed to appeals to harm actu­al­ly great­ly under­mines the harm prin­ci­ple’s util­i­ty. Part of the pur­pose of the prin­ci­ple is to sep­a­rate the tru­ly dam­ag­ing from the mere­ly unliked. But the dis­tinc­tion, it turns out, is far less coher­ent than pro­po­nents once claimed.… [Vice] is intrin­si­cal­ly a prob­lem, because human well-being — the good life — is always threat­ened by it.”

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Why Do You Send This Email?

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

Disclaimer

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

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 65

1 Chronicles 12:32 - they "understood the times"
1 Chron­i­cles 12:32 — they “under­stood the times”

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. The health effects of reli­gious ser­vice atten­dance (red­dit AMA): the researcher, Tyler Van­der­Weele, is a Har­vard pro­fes­sor and a believ­er. You can see his Ver­i­tas talks here.
  2. If you’re not a sports per­son, you may not know that the San Fran­ci­c­so 49’s quar­ter­back recent­ly refused to stand for the nation­al anthem because Amer­i­ca is unjust. Con­tro­ver­sy ensued. Two alum­ni shared rel­e­vant arti­cles: Col­in Kaeper­nick Is Righter Than You Know: The Nation­al Anthem Is a Cel­e­bra­tion of Slav­ery and the salti­er Why I’ll Nev­er Stand Again For ‘The Star-Span­gled Ban­ner’. Doug Wil­son offered good insights at The Seat­ed Col­in Kaeper­nickSee also Be Use­ful (A Post About Col­in Kaepernik) by Scott Adams and Insult­ing Col­in Kaeper­nick Says More About Our Patri­o­tism Than His by Kareem Abdul-Jab­bar. For a con­trary view, see Col­in Kaeper­nick, Meet Hen­ry John­son (David French, Nation­al Review).
  3. Framed. (Christo­pher Gof­fard, LA Times): this is one of the cra­zi­est things I have read all year. High­ly rec­om­mend­ed. Heads up: there is a Stan­ford con­nec­tion in the sto­ry and it is not a pos­i­tive one.
  4. What sci­ence real­ly has to say about sex­u­al­i­ty and gen­der (Joe Carter, ERLC): this is a read­able sum­ma­ry of a 144 page PDF writ­ten by Paul McHugh (a psy­chi­a­trist at Johns Hop­kins) and Lawrence May­er (an bio­sta­tis­ti­cian at Ari­zona State). From the orig­i­nal arti­cle: “Sex­u­al ori­en­ta­tion and gen­der iden­ti­ty resist expla­na­tion by sim­ple the­o­ries. There is a large gap between the cer­tain­ty with which beliefs are held about these mat­ters and what a sober assess­ment of the sci­ence reveals.”
  5. How The Catholic Church Doc­u­ment­ed Moth­er Tere­sa’s 2 Mir­a­cles (Tom Gjel­ten, NPR): “The group rea­soned that if Duf­fin, as an athe­ist, found there was no sci­en­tif­ic rea­son the woman should have recov­ered, who could doubt it was a mir­a­cle? In fact, after her inves­ti­ga­tion of the wom­an’s recov­ery, Duf­fin agreed that the wom­an’s heal­ing was — for lack of a bet­ter word — mirac­u­lous.” The Pope and I dis­agree about a lot of things (includ­ing saints), but I have long been impressed with the way the Catholic Church crit­i­cal­ly eval­u­ates mir­a­cles.
  6. FBI Says For­eign Hack­ers Pen­e­trat­ed State Elec­tion Sys­tems (Michael Isikoff, Yahoo News): I am con­vinced we are way more vul­ner­a­ble on this front than most peo­ple know.
  7. The Sneaky Pro­gram To Spy On Bal­ti­more From Above (Conor Frieder­dorf, The Atlantic): “In real­i­ty, unlike in 1984, Big Broth­er may watch for awhile with­out reveal­ing that there is a Big Broth­er.”
  8. Wait­ing To Die (Michael Pat­ton): well worth your time.

Things Glen Found Amusing

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.

Archives at http://glenandpaula.com/wordpress/category/links.