Try With a Little Help From My Friends

| December 7, 2022

ChatGPT and Wolfe’s book on Christian Nationalism

So, OpenAI’s ChatGPT has been all the rage in artificial intelligence (AI) circles in the last week or so and I decided to experiment with it in evaluating Wolfe’s book on Christian Nationalism. Apparently, there are some who disagree that his work represents nineteenth century romantic nationalism more than it does any historic Reformed perspective. And, of course, not everyone is familiar with critical theory as a methodology and why I see it in his case over and above whatever he might be saying about historic Reformed theology. Remember, even according to Wolfe he’s doing political theory and not theology proper or biblical interpretation (16).

So, below are several interactions with OpenAI’s ChatGPT where I ask a question about Wolfe’s work and provide the text to the AI itself. The answers are quite in line with what I’ve already pointed out but read it for yourself. Each question is followed by a quote from Wolfe’s book and the answer OpenAI’s ChatGPT client provides.

First, can we find racist statements in Wolfe’s book (139)?

ChatGPT What is racist?

Next, are there any parallels between Wolfe’s ideas and Nazism (139)?

What kind of philosophers might be represented in Wolfe’s point of view in quoting Renan, underlying his definition of what a nation and ethnicity are (140)?

The next question is interesting as it seems OpenAI may be using texts from the likes of C.S. Lewis to define something like love, Christianity’s historical theology on this point is actually quite a bit more complex than that (cf. Nygren’s work if you want to jump into that ocean). But, does ChatGPT think Wolfe is right about how he views love? Wolfe’s assertion re: Aquinas and Edwards is in fact, as the AI points out, highly selective and rare (151).

Here ChatGPT explains what is wrong with Wolfe’s problematization of today’s Christianity (4):

Oh. You don’t say. Wolfe’s problematization echoes who?

And, for those not up on their critical theory and analyzing various issues in the social sciences, can ChatGPT tell us what problematization is?

So, overall, just a passing check via ChatGPT reveals some serious problems with Wolfe’s work from a more objective basis than the well-considered opinion of one particular person like myself who traffics in critical theory and philosophy all the time. While the chat function is itself experimental and not conclusive on its own, given what I’ve already pointed out in other blog posts and what other reviews have also considered one can only conclude that Wolfe’s work represents the sort of nineteenth-century romantic nationalism the world just never wants to see again.

On Technology and Self-Control

| October 20, 2022

I listened to this podcast a couple of days ago, a conversation between Pastor Steve Jeffery of All Saints in Dallas (CREC) and Tyler Turner. Jeffery is one of the pastors in the CREC that might go easily unnoticed since he sticks to the normal everyday stuff of ministry and discipleship. I admire him for that and he has a lot of very good content online.

Here, however, I want to register some level of disagreement with his considerations on technology because it reflects a common outlook that seems to resonate well in some Reformed circles. There is a tendency for some Reformed folks to take a detailed look at something like this with an operative paradigm without questioning the foundational assumptions in play. So, while I respect Jeffery’s work immensely, given the subject matter I have to say a few words.

Given how heavy many of us read in philosophy and theology, a preference typically exists in the books we source for doing so that are on the older side. One of the problems with doing this is that sometimes new research and additional considerations aren’t in play for a particular topic we might examine. Calvin’s commentaries are a great read in studying the Bible as long as you understand we don’t live in sixteenth century Geneva and the Roman Catholic Church’s hierarchy isn’t the great threat it once was to all of Europe. Similarly, when it comes to Neil Postman’s work and others like it that were produced ~1985 or so what we have are dated takes on technological and cultural issues that can’t be immediately applied to this present hour.

Further, what we do know about things like dopamine signals and the brain remain in the most nascent stages of neuroscience that keep us from being as dogmatic about it as we might otherwise think. Movies like Netflix’s Social Dilemma are designed to trash social media not because it’s addictive but because Netflix has a vested interest in getting you off your phone to watch their content. So, we can’t simply take some of the conclusions offered here at face value based off these types of sources without a great deal of reserve or qualification.

In the church, we need to learn to do better social science in terms of refraining from thinking correlation equals causation, that somehow our own impressions are the fact of the matter when we really only have a very few examples in play of what we think is happening typically tied to our own use of technology, and we forget the complex and diverse nature of the social reality we enjoy in our society.

We know that technology is not neutral but in saying so its telos is not to be subdued because really technology is a giftedness granted to us in Creation by the power and work of the Holy Spirit. So talking about ‘controlling technology’ as if it was something bad is not exactly being accurate with our words. Nature is what we exercise dominion over and subdue, not technology. Technology is the result of that subjugation we enable in practicing dominion. So, properly used and understood technology is actually helping us fulfill the dominion mandate.

As such, one of the things we know is that technology has both good and bad uses. Technology can be perverted toward ill ends and it can also be moved to help us in living life to the glory of God. This is one reason why the critique of social media offered here is somewhat empty. Technology can be used for good quite apart from the intentions of its designers and often in ways they don’t expect. It really doesn’t matter that some Facebook developers and executives try to make social media addictive. We are not bound to their intention in using the platform.

The other thing I would ask is what exactly is the problem being identified here in this podcast? I’d suggest it boils down to self-control. The issue is not technological. Technology only happens to be the means focused on here where self-control is a problem. I’d venture to say if you’re having problems with self-control whatever you’re doing with technology won’t be the only place where such a problem is demonstrated. Self-control, if you remember, is a fruit of the Holy Spirit. So, the remedy is not going to be additional restrictions on technology usage or setting up filters or any manner of other things that somehow make us more or less free. You’re also not handling your lack of self-control wisely if all you’re really doing is avoiding the ability to make a choice in obedience to God. We forget that the Scriptures don’t really enjoin us to “don’t touch” or “don’t taste” in thinking about how me might fence the law.

We might also remember that fencing the law never worked for the Pharisees and that it was really just their demise. Our Lord can be seen fencing the law in the Sermon on the Mount but what we really see there is not more restrictions per se but a strike at the intentions of the heart. The fencing of the law that the Pharisees tried wasn’t enough because going out of your way not to disobey is irrelevant if you’re going to miss the whole point of obedience to God in the first place. For the Pharisees external conformance was never enough, what they needed was to be born again and then to live in the Spirit.

Technology is rarely defined in a presentation like this. What Pastor Jeffery and his friend discuss is never really put on the dock in terms of examining what exactly they’re talking about when they mean technology. It’s clear that they’re working roughly with social media/computers/iPhones and the like, but a lathe that you fashion wood with is just as technological as any computer today. Even hand tools are technology in play. So, you’re not getting away from technology if you turn off your iPhone and take the time to go and do some woodworking in your garage with a lathe and a drill press.

I do think we’re often too critical about how we use our time in Reformed circles. Technology has gifted us with the ability to have a lot of time free and there is something to be said for being productive. But, as Deut. 14:26 enjoins, once you’ve met your obligations spending your money and your time feasting and enjoying yourself with close family, friends, and even doing things like playing video games with people a thousand miles away isn’t necessarily problematic. Rather, such festive lives mark the abundant life of a believer in Christ who sees true shalom in play with extensions provided by technology. I’d argue that this reality is the very thing the technology of the liturgy points to in taking bread and wine from the harvest in communing with one another. A proper theology of work is important but so is the Sabbath and all that it entails.