Alan Jacobs

Ezra Klein: “Do we want a world filled with A. I. systems that are designed to seem human in their interactions with human beings? Because make no mistake: That is a design decision, not an emergent property of machine-learning code. A.I. systems can be tuned to return dull and caveat-filled answers, or they can be built to show off sparkling personalities and become enmeshed in the emotional lives of human beings.”

Dr. Bill Gardner: “MAID (Medical Assistance In Dying) is inexpensive, completely effective, and easily delivered. If we do not resist it, the system will, as if pulled by gravity, increasingly provide suicide and euthanasia instead of healing for the poor, elderly, and severely ill.”

“The internet does not recognize the state of Montana, Wheeler explained."

Spotify Gives 49 Different Names to the Same Song: “The biggest problem on the web today is that the dominant platforms have shifted from serving users to manipulating them. But unlike some other free web platforms, Spotify has tens of millions of paying customers. It’s one thing to manipulate people who are using your service for free—you might argue that they get what they’re (not) paying for. But how should we feel about a world where you pay money every month, and still get deceived and manipulated?”

Here I argue that our Christianity-and-culture conversations are often fruitless because we don’t have a clear, shared understanding of what we mean by “culture.”

This essay by Brad East is very smart, and takes the Christianity-and-culture conversation usefully beyond H. Richard Niebuhr’s categories. But I have one big question: What is “culture”?

Almost everyone who writes on this subject treats it as unproblematic, yet it is anything but. In the late 18th century Herder wrote of Cultur (the German spelling would only later become Kultur): “Nothing is more indeterminate than this word, and nothing more deceptive than its application to all nations and periods.”

I suspect that (a) when most people use the term they have only the haziest sense of what they mean by it, and (b) no two writers on this subject are likely to have a substantially similar understanding of it.

I certainly don’t believe Niebuhr had any clear idea at all what he meant by “culture”: though he devotes many pages to defining it, he also uses it interchangeably with both “civilization” and “society,” which is, I think, indefensible. And he writes things like this:

Culture is social tradition which must be conserved by painful struggle not so much against nonhuman natural forces as against revolutionary and critical powers in human life and reason.

So “revolutionary and critical powers in human life and reason” are not part of culture? Coulda fooled me. Brad says that Niebuhr’s book “stubbornly resists … dismissal,” but I — waving my elegantly manicured hand through the haze of smoke from my expensive cigar — I dismiss it. I think its influence has been wholly pernicious: it has confused and distracted.

Brad’s essay, for all its virtues, suffers from its reluctance to dismiss the eminently dismissable Niebuhr. He doesn’t straightforwardly say what he means by “culture,“ but he begins his essay thus: “Christendom is the name we give to Christian civilization, when society, culture, law, art, family, politics, and worship are saturated by the church’s influence and informed by its authority.” This suggests that culture is something distinct from the other items in the list, but if culture does not include “society, … law, art, family, politics, and worship” I’m not sure what’s left over for it to be.

In his still-magisterial book Keywords, Raymond Williams famously wrote that “Culture is one of the two or three most complicated words in the English language.” And near the end of his entry on it, he writes,

Between languages as within a language, the range and complexity of sense and reference indicate both difference of intellectual position and some blurring or overlapping. These variations, of whatever kind, necessarily involve alternative views of the activities, relationships and processes which this complex word indicates. The complexity, that is to say, is not finally in the word but in the problems which its variations of use significantly indicate.

Indeed. That entry, along with Williams’s book Culture and Society: 1980-1950, ought to be the the starting points for any discourse (Christian or otherwise) about culture. Another helpful orienting element: the distinction between “private culture” and “public culture” that James Davison Hunter makes in Chapter 2 of Culture Wars.

A quotation from Hunter

Both public culture and, for lack of a better term, "private culture" can be understood as "spheres of symbolic activity," that is, areas of human endeavor where symbols are created and adapted to human needs. At both levels, culture orders our experience, makes sense of our lives, gives us meaning. The very essence of the activity taking place in both realms — what makes both public and private culture possible — is "discourse" or conversation, the interaction of different voices, opinions, and perspectives. Yet, while public and private culture are similar in constitution, they are different in their function — one orders private life; the other orders public life.

If we can agree on some boundaries for this elusive concept we might be able to have a more profitable conversation. I’m trying here to start a conversation, not to conclude one, but I will just end with this: More often than not, when Christians oppose Christianity to or distinguish it from culture, what they mean by “culture” is what Foucault famously called the power-knowledge regime. And if that’s what you mean, that’s what you should say — because there is no form of Christian belief or practice that is not cultural through-and-through.

Rory Smith is correct: many of soccer’s problems have easy fixes. Limit the use of VAR, quit pretending you can discern when someone is 3mm offside, stop calling every single accidental brush of a finger a handball. He is also right that the Bosses of Footy totally ignore the easy fixes.

Angus likes to show me his kills.

Didn’t really need another reason to avoid flying, but, sure, let’s have one more.

“Mr Bergman, I’m ready for my close-up!”

Apple weather: 100% chance of rain tonight.

Carrot (using Accuweather): 0% chance of rain tonight.

I rarely offer advice, but once I gave two items of writing advice, and another time I gave two items of productivity advice. I’ll now add one more widely-applicable suggestion: Instead of trying to find shiny new tools, strive to become a better user of the tools you already have.

Irina Dumitrescu on the body’s memories, and the comparative ghostliness of digital experience: “I find it hard to articulate what this meant to me, how strange and wonderful it felt to be drawn into the past, to find out I carried a past within me somewhere beyond conscious recollection, and that it only needed to be activated. The body is already a memory device. The body already keeps count, of more than I know or care to admit. I can remember a dance partner’s breath on my face twenty years ago, but the months of text chats blur together, even if in the moment they gave me a feeling of connection for a while.”

Something about to happen here.

What @dave says about Mastodon has been my experience also. I look through Mastodon posts and think “Oh, right, these folks liked Twitter.”