That was a great ending adapting 1 Corinthians 13 like that - very memorable and profound!
When I think of saints two things comes to mind - their ordinariness and limitedness. Yes, many achieved great things, but in the day-to-day of their lives were was this sense of ordinariness, faithfully doing the means of grace and letting God reap a rich harvest through them. And also their limitedness - they devoted their lives often to small things, rooted in place and were keenly aware of their weakness and failings.
Only as we look at the totality of their lives do we see the huge impact they made - and this I believe is how God intends it to be (or pride easily comes)
Technology tempts us to the reverse of the saintly dynamic above. Social media, algorithms, AI etc tell us we can have huge and world-transcending impact now - it is at our fingertips no less. We can be instantly known, and our good deeds go viral. Once severed from the limits of time and space (crucially technology can sever us from a rooted local place, transporting us to a placeless virtual world) our impact through technology can be "limitless", and thus we kid ourselves we need to be limitless too.
But this is a lie. The truth that has hit home for me this past year is limitations are natural and God-given and were given for our flourishing (the Maker knows best!). It is within our limitations that we do our best and God-honouring (ordinary work). The desire to be limitless makes us less human (transhumanism is the classic example) and more like a machine. The trajectory and pull of technology towards limitless therefore dehumanises us. And needs to be resisted by the saints.
Lots of what you wrote here really resonated with me - thank you for writing it.
“It is within our limitations that we do our best”
I’m inclined to agree with this. I think of it, sometimes, as playing the violin. It is a highly limited instrument, in the sense that it is not designed to be a bongo drum, or a guitar, or a hammer, although you can probably try and use it that way (and ruin it). But if we master the violin within its very strict limitations, the result is beautiful and limitless.
Yes, completely agree. Also, the analogy of a computer, if you push it too hard, the fan goes into overdrive and it will burn out. Same with humans - if you work too hard ignoring limitations (sleep, rest, play etc) you will burn out.
One more thought. If with all our limitations, humans have caused as much ecological destruction as we have witnessed, just think what capacity we would have for destruction if we were not constrained by these natural limitations (e.g had superhuman strength and stamina). This is one of the many reasons why the transhumanist's vision is so dark.
God is the thesis; Science the antithesis. Now is time for developing the synthesis. This has been occupying my thoughts and my reading for the past several months. This is precisely the conversation we need to be having. Thank you for this.
I’m trying to free up more time and energy so I can make more substantive contributions to this conversation. I have woken up to the extent to which there’s little objective about the secular values, worldview, and metaphysics I was raised with. When it comes to the big questions, it’s all just the dogma of our age. I’ve been experimenting with ways to point people in this direction, though with limited success so far.
But I see this as absolutely necessary. Science is dead. Not in an absolute sense, but the story of science/technology/progress as the overriding unifying myth of civilization has run its course. Our story must evolve to a higher level through reunion with God.
You’re making an idol of technology. We are not co-creators, we are god’s children, made in his image. We are meant to follow in his wake and glorify him through love. Like a child loves a parent. This is our relationship to him. Spirit is the recognition of the reality of unseen things. It raises our perspective to a higher level, a Birds Eye view. Technology is just another tool, no different than any other tool humans have used in the past. To consider it as a substitute for spirit is illogical because they are not inherently comparable. It like comparing the cosmos to a microwave. Dog just don’t hunt.
I too, have been wrestling with the concept of technology being a neutral “tool”, but I’m not so sure that viewpoint covers the whole paradigm. a hammer can build a house or kill another human. a hunting rifle can feed a family or also kill our neighbor. it all comes down to the goal of the user. but let say, a nuclear bomb, or a rocket launcher has only one use: the mass destruction of human beings. this is the Telos of the thing.
we might be tempted to think of a smart phone or social media as being neutral, but what is it’s Telos? I would say it’s to suck the attention of the user for as long as possible and getting longer. I believe this is a crucial point of understanding as we go forward into the Brave New World...
Technology has no will of its own. It cannot make a user do anything. Technology isn’t neutral it’s an inanimate object, it’s not alive or conscious. Telos can only belong to a human being. Technology or a hammer without a human being has no telos, it just is.
Human beings are responsible for the mass destruction of other human beings. The telos for original sin is death. It’s not technology that is causing it, it’s the inevitable outcome of rejecting Jesus Christ as Lord.
I think I sense what you’re getting at, Hollis, in your various remarks. Tools/tech are indeed neutral, and yet it is hard to avoid connecting a telos to them. The moment we have a new tool/tech, it spawns ideas, at times fantastical ideas, about what we can do with it—creating a sense of telos almost before we can resist it.
To put it another way, tools don’t just hang there, waiting for us to “figure out” their role in society. They evoke our imagination and desires, whether good or ill.
AI, of course, is a different matter, as it might indeed come with a built-in telos, or develop one on its own, depending on its parameters and capabilities.
Im an engineer. AI is a computational algorithm, it does whatever logic it is programed to do. It cannot develop or create ANYTHING on its own. Pattern recognition is not telos, its useful to use when processing large quantities of data but that's as sophisticated as it gets. These billionaires are pushing these theories bc its going to make their own companies and computational methods obsolete. Like when smartphones replaced cameras. I suggest taking the time to learn how to manipulate and operate these systems as it will be an incredibly useful skill to have. Correctly implemented AI will replace excel and word and can be used to eliminate busywork therefore maximizing time for creativity and other tasks ect.
I think you’re right, but let’s break it down further.
To restate your position: Hammers and guns are tools that can be used for good or bad purposes. However, a nuclear weapon is different in that it’s only purpose for being (telos) is to turn cities into parking lots.
But what is a nuclear bomb other than a way of taking observable, natural phenomena and arranging it in a way so as to cause a large detonation? Is the radium and tritium used to create bombs suddenly instilled with a “bad telos” (roughly speaking) when it is harvested and put into the form of a weapon? At what point does something from the natural world become a tool for good or evil?
Curious to see your opinion. I’m trying to flesh out my thoughts on this subject.
For me, the difficulty with the neutrality view is that it is strictly correct, but practically incorrect. As I noted to commentator Hollis and also in the essay, tech comes with transcendent fantasies. The moment we grab hold of a hammer, or nuclear power, or whatever, we start to imagine what can be done with it; our intentions, real or potential, become part of the practical reality of the tool. The more powerful the tool, the more powerful the fantasy, for good or evil—although given our human nature and failings, there is a tendency to stumble in the latter direction.
Hi lily of heaven – it wasn’t clear if this comment was directed toward myself. In any case, to clarify, I quite agree we are not “co-creators” (and this word does not show up in the essay). We are sub-creators, which places us below (“sub”) the Primary Creator.
Ah gotcha, sorry a bit distracted today. AI is being way oversold, kinda like the Jan 6th insurrection. I find it incredibly unethical and predatory that some of these “experts” in the field are deceiving ppl by spreading these theories. AI is just a better version of excel in my opinion and could massively help out all the little guys and small businesses if given the chance.
I really enjoyed this essay; gives me so much to consider. I look forward to your postings; you're a thoughtful and skilled writer.
Also enjoyed reading the comments, tho' a little less so :-), as they can be edgy. Would not quibble with the concept of "sub-creators," but i prefer to think of us as "designers," as in my mind, only God can create. Meaning something from nothing.
Maybe we're unwise to ignore the evil to which man can affect the telos, purpose, nature, usefulness, whatever term is best, of any designed thing. God created a rock; we designed it into a hammer, and also a weapon, and slew our brother. Technology, the legacy of Cain, indeed has a benign nature in itself, but it is double-edged. We have chosen to design it into both a tool and a weapon.
Excel and algorithms rule and control many a life and vast amounts of power and money. Now, it seems with AI that we are purposefully designing it into a life-form, a techno-mind, and placing our spiritual hopes in it. In and of itself, it may be just another tool. Yet, its designers have in mind a totally different purpose. It's a Tower of Babel, and I'm curious to see how God reacts to that. He's proven that He's a jealous God before, when we've tried to rise above Him.
All technology not merely the wireless “high tech” kinds is an exchange. All tools facilitate an exchange. In every exchange there is a cost and a reward. So no technology’s dangers cannot be easily dismissed by labeling them “just another tool” used by man. Modern tech is a tool but as such it is not neutered of the potency of exchange - in fact the exchange is exceedingly amplified as the power of a tool determines the proportions of the exchange.
I enjoyed the focus on time/speed in this essay. It’s not something I’ve considered before. But thinking about speed has made me see there in lies the primary cost in the exchange we make with these tools. We gain speed and in exchange we miss out on a lot of things that stillness and repose afford us. Inaction and quiet afford us opportunities for self reflection, contemplation of the world, and greater perspective.
Modern technology has sped up life, information, communication, and productivity. We naively thought we could possess those benefits without paying any costs. We underestimated our own human need for repose and stillness. We need it like we need food and water and love. We cannot go on living like machines that aren’t connected to time. We are part of nature and therefore must appreciate that time is in us and we are in time. We are intimately connected to seasons and the ebbs and flows of all other creation. We cannot defy the consequences of time on our humanity by Simply claiming it doesn’t matter. Speed hurts us in the same way that speed hurts a seedling if it’s forced to grow too quickly. Sprouts get “leggy” in gardening terms and although they are tall when put into the ground they rarely survive. They grew too quickly and become all stem and no roots. Those seedlings will not fruit. In fact they just die.
Well if you direct seed to ground nature will take care of them at the right pace. It’s when you start seeds indoors under “grow lights” that they can get leggy.
fantastic reflection here. Thank you for sharing
That was a great ending adapting 1 Corinthians 13 like that - very memorable and profound!
When I think of saints two things comes to mind - their ordinariness and limitedness. Yes, many achieved great things, but in the day-to-day of their lives were was this sense of ordinariness, faithfully doing the means of grace and letting God reap a rich harvest through them. And also their limitedness - they devoted their lives often to small things, rooted in place and were keenly aware of their weakness and failings.
Only as we look at the totality of their lives do we see the huge impact they made - and this I believe is how God intends it to be (or pride easily comes)
Technology tempts us to the reverse of the saintly dynamic above. Social media, algorithms, AI etc tell us we can have huge and world-transcending impact now - it is at our fingertips no less. We can be instantly known, and our good deeds go viral. Once severed from the limits of time and space (crucially technology can sever us from a rooted local place, transporting us to a placeless virtual world) our impact through technology can be "limitless", and thus we kid ourselves we need to be limitless too.
But this is a lie. The truth that has hit home for me this past year is limitations are natural and God-given and were given for our flourishing (the Maker knows best!). It is within our limitations that we do our best and God-honouring (ordinary work). The desire to be limitless makes us less human (transhumanism is the classic example) and more like a machine. The trajectory and pull of technology towards limitless therefore dehumanises us. And needs to be resisted by the saints.
Lots of what you wrote here really resonated with me - thank you for writing it.
“It is within our limitations that we do our best”
I’m inclined to agree with this. I think of it, sometimes, as playing the violin. It is a highly limited instrument, in the sense that it is not designed to be a bongo drum, or a guitar, or a hammer, although you can probably try and use it that way (and ruin it). But if we master the violin within its very strict limitations, the result is beautiful and limitless.
Yes, completely agree. Also, the analogy of a computer, if you push it too hard, the fan goes into overdrive and it will burn out. Same with humans - if you work too hard ignoring limitations (sleep, rest, play etc) you will burn out.
One more thought. If with all our limitations, humans have caused as much ecological destruction as we have witnessed, just think what capacity we would have for destruction if we were not constrained by these natural limitations (e.g had superhuman strength and stamina). This is one of the many reasons why the transhumanist's vision is so dark.
Yes, I’ve also heard it stated as “a train does its most perfect task only if confined and limited to its tracks”.
Beautiful.
God is the thesis; Science the antithesis. Now is time for developing the synthesis. This has been occupying my thoughts and my reading for the past several months. This is precisely the conversation we need to be having. Thank you for this.
I’m trying to free up more time and energy so I can make more substantive contributions to this conversation. I have woken up to the extent to which there’s little objective about the secular values, worldview, and metaphysics I was raised with. When it comes to the big questions, it’s all just the dogma of our age. I’ve been experimenting with ways to point people in this direction, though with limited success so far.
But I see this as absolutely necessary. Science is dead. Not in an absolute sense, but the story of science/technology/progress as the overriding unifying myth of civilization has run its course. Our story must evolve to a higher level through reunion with God.
You’re making an idol of technology. We are not co-creators, we are god’s children, made in his image. We are meant to follow in his wake and glorify him through love. Like a child loves a parent. This is our relationship to him. Spirit is the recognition of the reality of unseen things. It raises our perspective to a higher level, a Birds Eye view. Technology is just another tool, no different than any other tool humans have used in the past. To consider it as a substitute for spirit is illogical because they are not inherently comparable. It like comparing the cosmos to a microwave. Dog just don’t hunt.
I too, have been wrestling with the concept of technology being a neutral “tool”, but I’m not so sure that viewpoint covers the whole paradigm. a hammer can build a house or kill another human. a hunting rifle can feed a family or also kill our neighbor. it all comes down to the goal of the user. but let say, a nuclear bomb, or a rocket launcher has only one use: the mass destruction of human beings. this is the Telos of the thing.
we might be tempted to think of a smart phone or social media as being neutral, but what is it’s Telos? I would say it’s to suck the attention of the user for as long as possible and getting longer. I believe this is a crucial point of understanding as we go forward into the Brave New World...
Technology has no will of its own. It cannot make a user do anything. Technology isn’t neutral it’s an inanimate object, it’s not alive or conscious. Telos can only belong to a human being. Technology or a hammer without a human being has no telos, it just is.
Human beings are responsible for the mass destruction of other human beings. The telos for original sin is death. It’s not technology that is causing it, it’s the inevitable outcome of rejecting Jesus Christ as Lord.
I don’t mean to have a semantic argument.
I realize Telos is a human term.
my point is that a hammer can have many functions, creative or destructive.
a nuclear bomb only has one function.
I think that’s my only point going forward.
having said that, we might be seeing an AI that develops a Telos of it’s very own soon.
and it will not be a semantic difference...
I think I sense what you’re getting at, Hollis, in your various remarks. Tools/tech are indeed neutral, and yet it is hard to avoid connecting a telos to them. The moment we have a new tool/tech, it spawns ideas, at times fantastical ideas, about what we can do with it—creating a sense of telos almost before we can resist it.
To put it another way, tools don’t just hang there, waiting for us to “figure out” their role in society. They evoke our imagination and desires, whether good or ill.
AI, of course, is a different matter, as it might indeed come with a built-in telos, or develop one on its own, depending on its parameters and capabilities.
Im an engineer. AI is a computational algorithm, it does whatever logic it is programed to do. It cannot develop or create ANYTHING on its own. Pattern recognition is not telos, its useful to use when processing large quantities of data but that's as sophisticated as it gets. These billionaires are pushing these theories bc its going to make their own companies and computational methods obsolete. Like when smartphones replaced cameras. I suggest taking the time to learn how to manipulate and operate these systems as it will be an incredibly useful skill to have. Correctly implemented AI will replace excel and word and can be used to eliminate busywork therefore maximizing time for creativity and other tasks ect.
said the spider to the fly...
I think you’re right, but let’s break it down further.
To restate your position: Hammers and guns are tools that can be used for good or bad purposes. However, a nuclear weapon is different in that it’s only purpose for being (telos) is to turn cities into parking lots.
But what is a nuclear bomb other than a way of taking observable, natural phenomena and arranging it in a way so as to cause a large detonation? Is the radium and tritium used to create bombs suddenly instilled with a “bad telos” (roughly speaking) when it is harvested and put into the form of a weapon? At what point does something from the natural world become a tool for good or evil?
Curious to see your opinion. I’m trying to flesh out my thoughts on this subject.
For me, the difficulty with the neutrality view is that it is strictly correct, but practically incorrect. As I noted to commentator Hollis and also in the essay, tech comes with transcendent fantasies. The moment we grab hold of a hammer, or nuclear power, or whatever, we start to imagine what can be done with it; our intentions, real or potential, become part of the practical reality of the tool. The more powerful the tool, the more powerful the fantasy, for good or evil—although given our human nature and failings, there is a tendency to stumble in the latter direction.
I like that: strictly correct but practically incorrect.
I'll think about that.
Hi lily of heaven – it wasn’t clear if this comment was directed toward myself. In any case, to clarify, I quite agree we are not “co-creators” (and this word does not show up in the essay). We are sub-creators, which places us below (“sub”) the Primary Creator.
Ah gotcha, sorry a bit distracted today. AI is being way oversold, kinda like the Jan 6th insurrection. I find it incredibly unethical and predatory that some of these “experts” in the field are deceiving ppl by spreading these theories. AI is just a better version of excel in my opinion and could massively help out all the little guys and small businesses if given the chance.
I really enjoyed this essay; gives me so much to consider. I look forward to your postings; you're a thoughtful and skilled writer.
Also enjoyed reading the comments, tho' a little less so :-), as they can be edgy. Would not quibble with the concept of "sub-creators," but i prefer to think of us as "designers," as in my mind, only God can create. Meaning something from nothing.
Maybe we're unwise to ignore the evil to which man can affect the telos, purpose, nature, usefulness, whatever term is best, of any designed thing. God created a rock; we designed it into a hammer, and also a weapon, and slew our brother. Technology, the legacy of Cain, indeed has a benign nature in itself, but it is double-edged. We have chosen to design it into both a tool and a weapon.
Excel and algorithms rule and control many a life and vast amounts of power and money. Now, it seems with AI that we are purposefully designing it into a life-form, a techno-mind, and placing our spiritual hopes in it. In and of itself, it may be just another tool. Yet, its designers have in mind a totally different purpose. It's a Tower of Babel, and I'm curious to see how God reacts to that. He's proven that He's a jealous God before, when we've tried to rise above Him.
Reminded of the quote from Léon Bloy:
“The only real sadness, the only real failure, the only great tragedy in life, is not to become a saint.”
Speed shreds the metaphysical fabric of existence
Incredible article.
All technology not merely the wireless “high tech” kinds is an exchange. All tools facilitate an exchange. In every exchange there is a cost and a reward. So no technology’s dangers cannot be easily dismissed by labeling them “just another tool” used by man. Modern tech is a tool but as such it is not neutered of the potency of exchange - in fact the exchange is exceedingly amplified as the power of a tool determines the proportions of the exchange.
I enjoyed the focus on time/speed in this essay. It’s not something I’ve considered before. But thinking about speed has made me see there in lies the primary cost in the exchange we make with these tools. We gain speed and in exchange we miss out on a lot of things that stillness and repose afford us. Inaction and quiet afford us opportunities for self reflection, contemplation of the world, and greater perspective.
Modern technology has sped up life, information, communication, and productivity. We naively thought we could possess those benefits without paying any costs. We underestimated our own human need for repose and stillness. We need it like we need food and water and love. We cannot go on living like machines that aren’t connected to time. We are part of nature and therefore must appreciate that time is in us and we are in time. We are intimately connected to seasons and the ebbs and flows of all other creation. We cannot defy the consequences of time on our humanity by Simply claiming it doesn’t matter. Speed hurts us in the same way that speed hurts a seedling if it’s forced to grow too quickly. Sprouts get “leggy” in gardening terms and although they are tall when put into the ground they rarely survive. They grew too quickly and become all stem and no roots. Those seedlings will not fruit. In fact they just die.
Wonderful observations. I didn’t know about the sprouts. I will be paying closer attention to our garden this spring!
Well if you direct seed to ground nature will take care of them at the right pace. It’s when you start seeds indoors under “grow lights” that they can get leggy.