Road Trip: AI Theology Goes to Nashville

This week, I take a break from my recent blog series to report on my road trip to Nashville last week. This was a unique experience as I traveled in the middle of the work week to meet new friends and engage in meaningful conversations in the evening all while working from different offices in the day. One of the perks of working remotely for a company that is present in 40 states is that I can always find an office in most large and mid-size cities. So, while my work week started in Acworth, GA (Monday), it took me to Chattanooga, TN (Tuesday), Nashville (Wednesday and Thursday), returning home on Friday. I logged over 600 miles of driving, listened to hours of podcasts and attended three different events in my stay in Nashville.

Leaving the family behind for three days was a challenge that took some preparation. I am very grateful for my wife that held the fort with our three kids so I could go. She continues to be my rock and my safe refuge that I can return to. I am also grateful for my adopted grandma Carolyn who warmly received me in Nashville so I could be there for three days. Finally, I am thankful to both Scott Hawley and Micah Redding for re-arranging their schedule to accommodate my visit and greeting me with open arms. Though we had not met in person, I felt like I was visiting old friends.

Reflections on the Road

I hit the road on Tuesday at 7:30 am. The way to Tennessee is visually stunning. Early in the morning, I can still see the mist in the air as I drive through large open prairies. The sun is just starting to rise, the open road and inviting scenery can only be enhanced by listening to inspiring podcasts. My list includes an eclectic mixture of Economics (Freaknomics), Theology (Homebrewed Christianity), Data Science (Linear Digressions) to futuristic journalism (The Future of Everything) , Christian Transhumanism (CTA Podcast) and sermons from Trinity Anglican in Atlanta. For this trip, I added Richard Rohr’s “Another Name for Everything,” which is a series of interviews where he introduces chapters of his new book, The Universal Christ.

I am an auditory learner who can easily get lost into rich conversations and stories. Listening to podcasts in the road makes time pass faster allowing me to forget that I am driving. I will often go through a full podcast and then have 20 minutes of silence so I can react mentally to what I just heard. This is often the time where ideas, deep thoughts and life-giving insights come to me.

Recently, I have learned that the process is not just limited to thoughts but also includes feelings. At times, I will hear something that will cause an emotional reaction which I can’t immediately identify the cause of it. In this trip, this happened after listening to a sermon from Trinity, an evangelical Anglican church I attend on occasion. I could not pinpoint what triggered it but I noticed an acute discomfort while listening. When I started probing it, I realized this was a recurring feeling that emerged when I went there.

I have grown increasingly bothered by the evangelical tendency to reduce the gospel to individual piety. Everything becomes a moral lesson on how to become a better person, a plea to read my Bible more or to tell others about God. While those are all good things, they no longer captivate my imagination. I yearn for a bigger vision of God’s activity on earth, one that encompasses not just my individual life but also my community and the world.

Later in the trip, I heard Richard Rohr’s reflections on the Universal Christ and found hope that he may be onto something. Is this the cosmic vision I am yearning? Above all, is this the next station God is leading in my spiritual journey? The jury is still out but the traveling must continue.

Visiting Belmont University

My time in Belmont started with a lovely dinner with a group that included a physicist, a mathematician, a theologian (the visiting lecturer) and an engineering student. Our conversation touched on many topics, most notably, how deep specialization in academia has hindered the integration between humanities, science and technology. This is even more problematic in the US where PhD curriculums tend to be more narrow than in Europe. Thankfully, our dinner felt like a step in the right direction. If we could get more Mathematicians to talk to Theologians, maybe integration can start.

After dinner, we all headed to campus for the talk entitled “Remaining Human in a Technological Age.” Dr. Waters’ lecture was in essence a critical Christian response to Transhumanism (H+). In his view, H+ offers an attractive but flawed vision for the future of humanity. In its search for perfection, it threatens to erase the very traits that make us humans, namely, our imperfections. Instead, he believes Christianity offers a counter-message in encouraging us to find God in the mundane and by accepting rather than fighting the limitation brought on by death. All creatures have a beginning and an end, and therefore humans must accept that their lives on earth will eventually come to a conclusion.

Photo taken by Scott Hawley

In the next day, I sat beside Dr. Waters in Dr. Hawley’s class where we took turns answering pre-submitted questions from students. Interacting with the student’s questions was one of the highlights of the trip. The questions ranged from the impact of AI on humanity to what it means to be human. Dr. Waters offered insights majorly hinging upon the view he expressed in the night earlier. He called students to continue to attend to the mundane in a fast-changing world intoxicated by novelty.

Hoping to provide an alternative, though not necessarily opposing perspective, I challenged students to re-think about how they see technology. At times, I questioned the notion of artificial and natural, affirming that technology was part of nature. That is why, when asked whether one could be a cyborg and Christian, I answered with an unwavering yes.

Finally, one of them asked whether the development of AI would turn out to be good or bad for humanity. Instead on speculating on an answer, I turned to them and said: “I turn this question on you. You will decide how AI impact our future.” It is my hope they , and all of us, heed to this call to engage in the debates that are shaping the use of AI technologies in our times. We neglect this reality to our peril.

Christian Transhumanist Association Meetup

The meetup, the following evening, closed the trip in grand style. There I met fellow Christians seeking to engage Transhumanism from a more receptive stance. I shared a bit about my journey from feeling a call to the ministry to discovering it in Data Science. Sometimes, when you re-tell your story, you gain new insights. As I shared in the meetup, I realized that my journey was really about integration. Seeking to bring together profession with faith, technology with meaning, piety with concrete action, and hopefully people from different upbringing with each other.

While the initial topic was around AI, we ended up having a deeper discussion around what is means to be a Christian in our time. One issue was the role of Scripture in a world where knowledge is becoming more democratized. I confessed that the fundamentalist view of Scripture handed over to me by my upbringing was simply inadequate to navigate reality today. This perspective tried to build a virtual fortress around Scripture to protect from all questioning, fearing that any perceived error would collapse the whole edifice of faith. In doing so, it not only failed to address reality but also kept us from experiencing the true power of Scripture, namely its ability to point us to God in new situation. Change must be in order.

Photo by Micah Redding

Micah shared how Christianity has undergone major upheavals every 500 years where the primary question was the source of authority. At first, the question settled on the creeds, then on the figure of the Pope and finally on Scripture itself. Our 500 years is up, is it time for a new reformation? What would that look like? I would suggest that the path to that answer must pass through science and technology, even if it does not end there.

Coming Home

I often wonder how community can happen online. So far, my answer would be: only if accompanies, supports or facilitates actual encounters. This trip was an example of the online world paving the way to real world connections . It would not have happened have I not started blogging and met Dr. Hawley and Micah through the Christian Transhumanist Association Facebook group. Is this how a connected world work? Virtual friendships that culminate on dialogue over good burgers and beer? My trip to Nashville suggests that may be so.

Writing this blog was a journey of its own. I wasn’t sure what I would say but wanted to allow the writing to take me there. My intent here was to pull back the curtain on my internal musings so the reader may relate with aspects of my own personal experience. While I don’t think mine or anyone’s experience is normative, sharing them can open doors of meaning in others. That is my hope with this blog

Thanks for joining me on this ride and see you next week!

Reframing: Moving Technology from Oppression to Liberation

In my last blog, I explored Philip Hefner’s theory of “Created Co-Creators” to set a foundation for a theology of technological hope. In this blog, I want to flesh out more what it means to shape and re-direct the ethos of technology using Moltman’s cycle of oppression and liberation. This framework provides a critical lens through which we can evaluate the aims, impact and implications of technology while also setting a blueprint for an alternative. If technology is to be the means of liberation then it must aspire for more than the endless accumulation of gadgets.

A Theology of Liberations

In Moltmann’s seminal work, The Crucified God, the theologian works out the political implications of a theology of the cross. In short, he concludes that the event of the Christ crucifixion challenges the very structure of political power. If Christ was killed as a condemned political prisoner, this reality in turn challenges the legitimacy of all political power henceforth. What that means, in practice, is that the Christian community should never align itself with those in power but instead with the oppressed, persecuted and marginalized.

The kingdom of God proclaims a re-doing of human society, challenging existing structures of political oppression and pointing humanity to new ways of living together. In essence, the message of the gospel is one where humans choose life over death, supporting new ways that breed flourishing over and against existing systems that perpetuate death.

Concretely, Moltmann talks about 5 cycles of oppression* that perpetuate themselves in societies:

  1. Poverty and destitution through economic deprivation
  2. Political oppression where one group subjugates another
  3. Cultural and racial alienation where minority groups identity is undermined by ruling cultures
  4. Ecological destruction where economic development happens at the expense of natural ecosystems.
  5. Nihilism where people no longer find meaning in their lives.

To counteract these cycles, Moltmann speaks of 5 cycles of liberation that the Christian community should engage in. I took some liberty here to update and revise some of these concepts to a 21st century reality:

  1. Fostering economic justice that creates (what capitalism does best) and distributes (what socialism does best) wealth so ALL have the basics for living (health, food, clothing and shelter).
  2. Distributing political power and responsibility through all sectors of society. This is not just about voting rights but a situation where government listens to the populace and people take responsibility for their communities.
  3. Integrating society with diversity where unity happens in the recognition and celebration of difference.
  4. Cultivating peace with nature through sustainability, where human creation respects, preserves and perpetuates God’s creation.
  5. Cultivating meaningful living through communities that enrich, nourish and develop the individual.

Moltmann’s categories presented here offer a helpful structure to start speaking of liberation in concrete terms. He touches on a wide variety of issues such as economics, politics, culture and identity. In doing so, he expands our understanding of liberation opening way for creative thinking in pursuing wholeness in all these areas.

What is missing from these categories, however, is a deeper understanding of how technology can affect, reinforce or reshape these issues which is what I turn to now.

Liberation and Technology

First, it is worth noting that technology already plays prominent role in all 5 areas described above. Technological breakthroughs have created wealth (not always distribute it) and alleviated poverty all over the world. As medicine, goods and services become more available because of technology, economic scarcity gives away to abundance. Wishful thinking? Just consider how technologies like indoor plumbing, heating and cooling, computation, manufacturing have changed the earth in the last century. Life expectancy and quality improved through these gifts of ingenuity. It is true that since these good have been delivered through unequal systems they also have not benefited all equally. However, the overall results is undeniable: people live longer today than they did fifty or even twenty years ago.

In the area of political freedom and integration with diversity the impact of technology is mixed. Social media platforms were critical in the mobilization of mass protests in Arab spring. It is likely they would have not happen without it. Yet, the improvement of biometric technology also empowers authoritarian governments to tighten their control on their people. Mobile payments have empowered the poor in remote villages of Africa all the while the bot-aided proliferation of fake news threatens the integrity of democracies all over the world. The rise in connectivity have emboldened previous marginalized groups to find community while also empowering the fringe hate groups that seek to eliminate them.

Technology has also been pivotal in the area of sustainability while also a key culprit in in environmental destruction. The advance of clean energy technologies shows how we can both meet energy needs while also preserving earth’s resources for future generations. Even so, the legacy of dirty technologies from the 20th century continue to pollute our air and water. The choice is not between whether to use technology or not but how to harness it in ways that cultivate renewal. This path is most often more complex and costly in the short run which often gives way to the temptation of cheaper but more destructive methods.

The hardest one to evaluate is how technology has impacted the cultivation of a meaningful life. This probably where it is most lacking. For all the wealth and convenience it has brought humanity, many wonder whether we are qualitatively better off. Through technology, humanity has conquered its fear of nature yet done little to solve the struggles of our soul. If technology is to play a role in this dimension, then it must be radically re-configured. Such predicament calls for the wisdom to realize the limits of technological advance and where it cannot benefit humanity. This is by far, our most daunting task.

Refle(A)ction

Technology is not just the stuff we make but a reflection of the systems that produce it. Whether technology can empower liberation or reinforce oppression depends not only in its uses but it starts by recognizing its role and ethos. As long as we bracket technology out of the discussion we will never truly experience its power to liberate. Thus, the first step to move technology towards liberation is awareness and reflection. Hence, what I propose is that we stop this bracketing and start looking at technology within the context of political, social, economic and ethical dimensions.

We can start this journey through questions like what is the driving force of technological advancement in our time? Where has it been effective in addressing true human need and where has it not? How can we harness, re-direct and re-purpose it towards life flourishing aims? Where do we need less and where do need more? How can we ensure that its benefits are spread out more equitably over all humanity?

Yet, this first move will not be complete if such reflection stays at the evaluation stage. Instead, it must also foster a new way of doing and using technology. Where is that already happening and how can we replicate these examples? This is the topic of my next blog.

*For more detail consult pages 480-490.

A Theology of Technological Hope: Created to Create

The previous three blogs were setting the stage for what I want to discuss here. I traced the beginnings of Moltmann’s theology of hope, discussed the development of liberation theology and then made the case for why technology is the main driving force of change of our time. In this part, I want to build on this point to show the contours of a theology of technological hope. That is, what does it mean to imagine liberation through technology? In order to get there, we must first re-formulate the relationship between God, humans and creation.

Created to Create

In the previous blog, I mentioned that technology is a lot more than gadgets but any material extension of ourselves into objects to fulfill a task. Observing this undeniable feature of humanity leads us to conclude that to be human is to be creative. While creativity is often associated with art, in technology, creativity is about solving problems or overcoming limitations. There is an innate drive, whether facilitated or not through our circumstances, to build our way out of challenging environments.

Philipe Hefner’s theory of “created co-creators” is illuminating in this discussion.* It is impossible to do justice to this topic in a short blog, but I will attempt to highlight the main points of the theory as a foundation for a theology of technological hope.

If you are scanning through this, I recommend you slowdown. Even a short version of the theory will only make sense as a unit which requires careful attention.

Let me try to put forth an abbreviated bullet point version of the theory

  1. Humans are created, that is placed in an ecosystem with a genetic makeup.
  2. Within these conditions, Humans are free. This is not a guarantee but a choice. I God who truly loves freedom would not only create free humans but also create humans who want to be free.
  3. In a Technological Civilization as we live today, this freedom has become all the more important as it allows humans to truly influence the destiny of the planet.
  4. Humanity’s purpose is to use technology to work with God in the continual work of creation for the preservation and flourishing of life in the biosphere.
  5. This requires a re-thinking of God’s purpose and our future. Instead of envisioning a super-natural divine compensation, we must believe that because God not just created but continues to create on earth, God has a vested interest in the flourishing of the planet.

From Coping to Thriving

For the purpose of this blog, I want to highlight his theory’s most astounding implication to Christian mission. That is:

The work of God’s people on earth is not about helping people cope with suffering by giving them a promise of a future divine justice in a different realm. The work of God’s people on earth is about embodying wholeness/holiness HERE and NOW, believing that God IS currently working (creating) to make the earth WHOLE.

This is what is truly revolutionary and presents the foundation for a theology of technological hope. In a technological society, Christians should take their technological and scientific work, not as secondary to ministry but as the very place where we co-create with the creator. God continues to work on the Earth and we join God’s work by co-creating. As we co-create we fulfill our purpose as free humans who seek to advance the biosphere to a sustainable future. We are called to thrive along with creation rather than coping with its fallen state.

By this I don’t mean that only technologists or scientists are doing God’s work. Certainly, co-creating with God is not limited to bytes and test tubes. Yet, framing this type of work this way gives it a whole new meaning. It also forces us to re-think how technology is done. What is the purpose of doing technology? How does it impact our biosphere? How can it be re-directed towards human flourishing?

As we start asking these questions, the first step is to observe and analyze closely how technology is done today, especially in the form of technocapitalism. What is its philosophy and aims? How is it impacting our biosphere? This is the topic of my next blog.

*For those interested in digging deeper into his work, I recommend “The Human Factor: Evolution, Culture and Religion.” Pgs 264-265 provide a complete summary for the theory.