Elias Kruger, Author at AI Theology

Klara and the Sun: Robotic Faith for an Unbelieving Humanity

In his first novel since winning the Nobel prize of literature, Kazuo Ishiguro explores the world through the lens of an AI droid. The novel retains many of the features that made him famous for previous bestsellers such as concentrating in confined spaces, building up emotional tension, and fragmented story-telling. All of this gains a fresh relevance when applied to the Sci-Fi genre and more specifically to the relationship between humanity and sentient technology. I’ll do my best to keep you from any spoilers as I suspect this will become a motion picture in the near future. Suffice it to say that Klara and the Sun is a compelling statement for robotic faith. How? Read on.

Introducing the Artificial Friend

Structured into 6 long sections, the book starts by introducing us to Klara. She is an AF (Artificial Friend), a humanoid equipped with Artificial Intelligence and designed commercially to be a human companion. At least, this is what we can deduce from the first pages as no clear explanation is given. In fact, this is a key trait in the story: we learn about the world along with Klara. She is the one and only narrator throughout the novel.

Klara is shaped like a short woman with brown hair. The story starts in the store where she is on display for sale. There she interacts with customers, other AFs, and “Manager”, the human responsible for the store. All humans are referred to by their capitalized job or function. Otherwise, they are classified by their appearance or something peculiar to them.

The first 70 pages occur inside the store where she is on display. We learn about her personality, the fact that she is very observant, and what peer AFs think of her. At times, she is placed near the front window of the store. That is when we get a glimpse of the outside world. This is probably where Ishiguro’s brilliance shines through as he carefully creates a worldview so unique, compelling, humane but in many ways also true to a robotic personality. The reader slowly grows fond of her as she immerses us in her whimsical perspective of the outside world. To her, a busy city street is a rich mixture of sights with details we most often take for granted.

We also get to learn how Klara processes emotions and even has a will of her own. At times she mentions feeling fear. She is also very sensitive to conflict, trying to avoid it at all costs. With that said, she is no push over. Once she sabotages a customer attempt to buy her because she had committed herself to another prospect. She also seems to stand out compared to the other AFs instilling both contempt and admiration from them.

The World Through Klara’s Eyes

She is sensitive, captivating and always curious. Her observations are unique and honest. She brings together an innocence of a child with the mathematical ability of a scientist. This often leads to some quirky observations as she watches the world unfold in front of her. In one instance, she describes a woman as “food-blender-shaped.”

Klara also has an acute ability to detect complex emotions in faces. In this way, she is able to peer through the crevices of the body and see the soul. In one instance, she spots how a child is both smiling at her AF while her eyes portray anger. When observing a fight, she could see the intensity of anger in the men’s faces describing them as horrid shapes as if they were no longer human. When seeing a couple embrace, she captures both the joy and the pain of that moment and struggles to understand how it could be so.

This uncanny ability to read human emotion becomes crucial when Klara settles in her permanent home. Being a quiet observer, she is able understand the subtle unspoken dynamics that happen in family relationships. In some instances, she could see the love between mother and daughter even as they argued vehemently. She could see through the housekeeper’s hostility towards her not as a threat but as concern. In this way, her view of humans tended err on the side of charity rather than malice.

Though being a keen human observer, it is her relationship with the sun that drives the narrative forward. From the first pages, Klara notices the presence of sun rays in most situations. She will usually start her description of an image by emphasizing how the sun rays were entering a room. We quickly learned that the sun is her main source of energy and nourishment. Hence it is not surprising that its looms so large in her worldview.

Yet, Ishiguro’s takes this relationship further. Similar to ancient humans, Klara develops a religious-like devotion to the sun. The star is not only her source of nourishment but becomes a source of meaning and a god-like figure that she looks to when in fear or in doubt.

That is when the novel gets theologically interesting.

Robotic Faith and Hope

As the title suggests, the sun plays a central role in Klara’s universe. This is true not only physiologically as she runs on solar energy, but also a spiritual role. This nods towards a religious relationship that starts through observation. Already understanding the power of the sun to give her energy, she witnesses how the sun restores a beggar and his dog back to health. Witnessing this event become Klara’s epiphany of the healing powers of the sun. She holds that memory dear and it becomes an anchor of hope for her later in the book when she realizes that her owner is seriously ill.

Klara develops a deep devotion toward the sun and like the ancients, she starts praying to it. The narrative moves forward when Klara experiences theophanies worthy of human awe. Her pure faith is so compelling that the reader cannot help but hope along with her that what she believes is true. In this way, Klara points us back to the numinous.

Her innocent and captivating faith has an impact in the human characters of the novel. For some reason, they start hoping for the best even as there is no reason to do so. In spite of overwhelming odds, they start seeing a light at the end of the tunnel. Some of them willingly participate, in this case the men in the novel, in her religious rites without understanding the rationale behind her actions. Yet, unlike human believers who often like to proselytize, she keeps her faith secret from all. In fact, secrecy is part of her religious relationship with the sun. In this way, she invites humans to transcend their reason and step into a child-like faith.

This reminds me of a previous blog where I explore this idea of pure faith and robots . But I digress.

Conclusion

I hope the first part of this review sparks your interest in reading this novel. It beautifully explores how AI can help us find faith again. Certainly, we are still decades away from the kind of AI that Ishiguro’s portrays in this book. Yet, like most works of Science Fiction, they help us extrapolate present directions so we can reflect on our future possibilities.

Contrasting to the dominant narrative of “robot trying to kill us”, the author opts for one that highlights the possibility that they can reflect the best in us. As they do so, they can change us into better human beings rather than allowing us to devolve into our worse vices. Consequently, Ishiguro gives us a vivid picture of how technology can work towards human flourishing.

In the next blog, I will explore the human world in which Klara lives. There are some interesting warnings and rich reflection in the dystopian situation described in the book. While our exposure to it is limited, maybe this is one part I wish the author had expanded a bit more, we do get enough ponder about the impact of emerging technologies in our society. This is especially salient for a digital native generation who is learning to send tweets before they give their first kiss.

How to Integrate the Sacred with the Technical: an AI worldview

At first glance, the combination between AI and theology may sound like strange bedfellows. After all, what does technology have to do with spirituality? In our compartmentalization-prone western view, these disciplines are dealt with separately. Hence the first step on this journey is to reject this separation, aiming instead to hold these different perspectives in view simultaneously. Doing so fosters a new avenue for knowledge creation. Let’s begin by examining an AI worldview

What is AI?

AI is not simply a technology defined by algorithms that create outcomes out of binary code. Instead, AI brings with it a unique perspective on reality. For AI, in its present form, to exist there must be first algorithms, data, and adequate hardware. The first one came on the scene in the 1950s while the other two became a reality mostly in the last two decades. This may partially explain why we have been hearing about AI for a long time while only now it is actually impacting our lives on a large scale.

The algorithm in its basic form consists of a set of instructions to perform, such as to transform input into output. This can be as simple as taking the inputs (2,3), passing through an instruction (add them), and getting an output (5). If you ever made that calculation in your head, congratulations: you have used an algorithm. It is logical, linear, and repeatable. This is what gives it “machine” quality. It is an automated process to create outputs.

Data + Algorithms + Hardware = AI

Data is the very fuel of AI in its dominant form today. Without it, nothing would be accomplished. This is what differentiates programming from AI (machine learning). The first depends on a human person to imagine, direct and define the outcomes of an input. Machine learning is an automated process that takes data and transforms it into the desired outcome. It is learning because, although the algorithm is repeatable, the variability in the data makes the outcome unique and at times hard to predict. It involves risk but it also yields new knowledge. The best that human operators can do is to monitor the inputs and outputs while the machine “learns” from new data.

Data is digitized information so that it can be processed by algorithms. Human brains operate in an analog perspective, taking information from the world and processes them through neural pulses. Digital computers need information to be first translated into binary code before they can “understand” it. As growing chunks of our reality are digitized, the more the machines can learn.

All of this takes energy to take shape. If data is like the soul, algorithms like the mind, then hardware is like the body. It was only in the last few decades when, through fast advancement, it was possible to apply AI algorithms to the commensurate amount of data needed for them to work properly. The growth in computing power is one of the most underrated wonders of our time. This revolution is the engine that allowed algorithms to process and make sense of the staggering amount of data we now produce. The combination of the three made possible the emergence of an AI ecosystem of knowledge creation. Not only that but the beginning of an AI worldview.

Photo by Franki Chamaki on Unsplash

Seeing the World Through Robotic Eyes

How can AI be a worldview? How does it differ from existing human-created perspectives? It is so because its peculiar process of information processing in effect crafts a new vision of the world. This complex machine-created perspective has some unique traits worth mentioning. It is backward-looking but only to recent history. While we have a wealth of data nowadays, our record still does not go back for more than 20-30 years. This is important because it means it will bias the recent past and the present as it looks into the future.

Furthermore, an AI worldview while recent past-based is quite sensitive to emerging shifts. In fact, algorithms can detect variations much faster than humans. That is an important trait in providing decision-makers with timely warnings of trouble or opportunities ahead. In that sense, if foreseeing a world that is about to arrive. A reality that is here but not yet. Let the theologians understand.

It is inherently evidence-based. That it is, it approaches data with no presuppositions. Instead, especially at the beginning of a training process, it looks at from the equivalent of a child’s eyes. This is both an asset and a liability. This open view of the world enables it to discover new insights that would otherwise pass unnoticed to human brains that rely on assumptions to process information. It is also a liability because it can mistake an ordinary even for extraordinary simply because it is the first time it encounters it. In short, it is prime for forging innovation as long as it is accompanied by human wisdom.

Rationality Devoid of Ethics

Finally, and this is its more controversial trait, It approaches the world with no moral compass. It applies logic devoid of emotion and makes decisions without the benefit of high-level thinking. This makes it superior to human capacity in narrow tasks. However, it is utterly inadequate for making value judgments.

It is true that with the development of AGI (artificial general intelligence), it may acquire capabilities more like human wisdom than it is today. However, since machine learning (narrow AI) is the type of technology mostly present in our current world, it is fair to say that AI is intelligent but not wise, fast but not discerning, and accurate but not righteous.

This concludes the first part of this series of blogs. In the next blog, I’ll define the other side of this integration: theology. Just like AI, theology requires some preliminary definitions before we can pursue integration.

Integrating Technology and Religion in a Post-Secular World

This blog discusses how the post-secular can be a fitting stage for the promising dialogue between religion, science and technology.

Last Friday I “zoomed into” a stimulating academic dialogue entitled “Theology, Technology and the Post-Secular.” In it, a world-class team of scholars explored how the intersection of theology, science, and technology has evolved in the last 50 years and where it is going in the future. In this blog, I’ll provide a short overview of the conversation while also offering reflections on how the discussion enriches our dialogue in the AI theology community.

If the post-secular is our reality, it is time we learn how to build bridges there.

An Overview of the Field

The talk started with Dr. Tirosh-Samuelson asking Dr. Burdett to provide a short overview of the burgeoning field of religion and science. In the United States, the establishing of the Zygon journal of religion and science inaugurated the dialogue in 1966. In essence, the challenge was to find a place where these two can interact. Science tends to bracket the question of metaphysics (why things are the way they are) while religion lives in that space. This can often lead to misunderstanding and members of each side talking past each other.

Rejecting the notion of incompatibility, Dr. Burdett prefers to define the relationship as complex. For example, on the one hand, theology paved the way for scientific inquiry by first positing a belief in an orderly world. On the other hand, Christian Geocentrism clashed directly with Galileo’s accurate Heliocentric view. Therefore, the theologian believes in forging integrative models where conflict is not glossed over but carefully sorted out through respectful dialogue.

According to Dr. Burdett, the field is currently undergoing a shift from natural to human sciences. While the conversation started in topics like the implications Big Bang and Evolution, the focus now is on Neuroscience, questions of personhood and cognitive science of religion. The field has zoomed in from the macro view of cosmology to the micro view of anthropology.

Furthermore, the field is shying away from theoretical discussions opting instead to work on concrete questions. This new focus highlights where science and religion meet in the social-political stage. For example, how does religion and science interact when someone is considering in vitro fertilization? How do religion and science meet in people’s decision to take the vaccine? How does one comprehend the motivation of climate change deniers? These are just a few questions fueling research in this nascent field.

Image by Michael Schwarzenberger from Pixabay

A Theologian in a Tech-saturated World

In the next segment, Dr. Gaymon Bennett asked Dr. Burdett to speak about the role of the theologian in a technology-saturated world. How can a theologian tell a compelling story in the public square to those who do not align with his religious beliefs? Do religious perspectives still have a place in a secular world?

In his answer, Dr. Burdett pointed to Vatican II’s formula of Ressourcement and Agiornamiento. The first word has to do with a return to the sources, namely, the traditions and writings of the faith. It means examining carefully what we received through tradition and practices from past generations. The second points to updating that knowledge to the current context. How can these sources speak fresh insight into new evolving questions? The dual movement of reaching for the past while engaging with the present becomes a vital framework on how to do public theology in our times.

To illustrate the point, Dr. Burdett shared a personal anecdote about his journey to scholarship. Growing up in Northern California in the 1990s, he asked “what are the main driving forces shaping culture?” To him, it was clear that the rise of PCs, the Internet, and smartphones would categorically transform society. What would theology have to say about that? He wanted to know it from a technical perspective so he could see it from the inside. This is what moved him to focus his studies on the intersection of theology and technology after a stint in the industry.

Photo by Natalya Letunova on Unsplash

Grappling with the Post-Secular

Closer to the end, the conversation shifted towards grappling with the term “post-secular.” For decades, western society divided the world between the secular and the religious, with little intersection between the two. Science and technology have in effect been the major driving forces of secularism. Yet, we now find Silicon Valley, arguably the global center of this marriage, teeming with religious aspirations.

Even so, Dr. Burdett suggested that we still live in a God-haunted world. The removal of religion from public life left a jarring vacuum yet to be replaced. Along with religion was also any notion of the supernatural, all sacrificed in the altar of Modernity. Victorian poet Matthew Arnold expresses this sentiment well in the following verses from Dover Beach:

  The Sea of Faith
  Was once, too, at the full, and round earth’s shore
  Lay like the folds of a bright girdle furled.
  But now I only hear
  Its melancholy, long, withdrawing roar,
  Retreating, to the breath
  Of the night-wind, down the vast edges drear
  And naked shingles of the world.

This vacuum generated a thirst for new avenues of meaning. This in turn dethroned science as the sole arbiter of truth as it proved inadequate to fill humanity’s soul. The post-secular dashes the illusion that science and technology are sufficient to explain the world and therefore cannot be elevated above other views. Instead, it is a space where religious, mystical, and secular (scientific and technological) views are on the same footing again. The task, therefore, is to bring all these disparate perspectives into respectful dialogue while recognizing their common goals.

Reflections and Implications

Here I offer a few reflections. The first one relates to an important clarification. Throughout the dialogue, the unspoken assumption was that the relationship between religion and science was equivalent to that of religion and technology. However, it is worth noting that while science and technology are deeply intertwined today, that was not always the case. Hence, I would love to see an interdisciplinary branch that focuses on questions of religion and technology independent of science.

It was also illuminating to see scholars name a phenomenon we have been experiencing for a while now. While I have not heard of the term before, its reality resonates well. Nowhere else is this more true than in the cyber global space of social media. Given the pervasive nature of these platforms, this reality is also spilling over to other spheres of human connection. University, churches, companies, and non-profits are also becoming post-secular spaces. This is a fascinating, harrowing, and alarming development all at once.

Finally, I would add that it is not just about connecting with ultimate meaning but also about a return to nature. Whether it is the climate crisis or the blatant confession of how disconnected we are from creation, the post-secular is about digging down to our roots.

Maybe the sea of faith is not just calling us to ultimate meaning but also to encounter the oceans again.

Does God Hear Robot Prayers? A Modern Day Parable

The short video above portrays Juanello Turiano’s (1500-1585 AD) invention, an automated monk that recites prayers while moving in a circle. It was commissioned by King Philip II to honor a Friar whom he believed had healed his son. The engineer delivered a work of art, creepy but surprisingly life-like, in a time where Artificial Intelligence was but a distant dream. This Medieval marvel now sits at the Smithsonian museum in Washington, DC.

Take a pause to watch the 2 minute video before reading on.

What can this marvelous work of religious art teach us today, nearly 5 centuries later, about our relationship with machines?

In a beautifully well-written piece for Aeon, Ed Simon asks whether robots can pray. In discussing the automated monk, he argues that the medieval invention was not simply simulating prayer. It was actually praying! Its creation was an offer of thanksgiving to the Christian God and till this day continues to recite its petitions.

Such reflection opens the door for profound theological questions. For if the machine is indeed communicating with the divine, would God listen?

Can an inanimate object commune with the Creator?

We now turn to a short parable portraying different responses to the medieval droid.

A Modern Day Parable

Photo by Drew Willson on Unsplash

In an effort to raise publicity for its exhibit, the Smithsonian takes Turiano’s invention above in a road show. Aiming to create a buzz, they place the automated monk in a crowded square in New York city along with a sign that asks:

When this monk prays, does God listen?

They place hidden cameras to record peoples’ reaction.

A few minutes go by and a scientist approaches to inspect the scene. Upon reading the sign he quickly dismisses it as an artifact from a bygone era. “Of course, machines cannot pray” – he mulls. He posits that because they are not alive, one cannot ascribe to them human properties. That would be anthropomorphising. That is when people project human traits on non-human entities. “Why even bother asking why God would listen if prayer itself is a human construct?” Annoyed by the whole matter, he walks away hurriedly as he realizes he is late for work.

Moments later, a priest walks by and stops to examine the exhibit. The religious person is taken aback by such question. “Of course, machines cannot pray, they are mere human artifacts” – he mulls. “They are devoid of God’s image which is exclusive property of humans” he continues. “Where in Scripture can one find a example of an object that prays? Machines are works of the flesh, worldly pursuits not worthy of an eternal God’s attention” he concludes. Offended by the blasphemous display, the priest walks away from the moving monk on to holier things.

Finally, a child approaches the center of the square. She sees the walking monk and runs to the droid filled with wonder. “Look at the cool moving monk, mom!” she yells. Soon, she gives it a name: monk Charlie. She sits down and watches mesmerized by the intricate movements of his mouth. The child notices the etched sandals on his feet. She also pays attention to the movement of his arms and mouth.

After a while, she answers: “Yes, God listens to Charlie.” She joins with him, imitating his movement with sheer delight. In that moment, the droid becomes her new playmate.

How would you respond?

Green Tech: How Scientists are Using AI to Fight Deforestation

In the previous blog, I talked about upcoming changes to US AI policy with a new administration. Part of that change is a renewed focus on harnessing this technology for sustainability. Here I will showcase an example of green tech – how machine learning models are helping researchers detect illegal logging and burning in the vast Amazon rainforest. This is an exciting development and one more example of how AI can work for good.

The problem

Imagining trying to patrol an area nearly the size of the lower 48 states of dense rainforest! It is as the proverbial saying goes: finding needle in a haystack. The only way to to catch illegal activity is to find ways to narrow the surveilling area. Doing so gives you the best chances to use your limited resources of law enforcement wisely. Yet, how can that be done?

How do illegal logging and burning happen in the Amazon? Are there any patterns that could help narrow the search? Fortunately, there is. A common trait for them is happening near a road. In fact, 95% of them occur within 6 miles from a road or a river. These activities require equipment that must be transported through dense jungle. For logging, lumber must be transported so it can be traded. The only way to do that is either through waterways or dirt roads. Hence, tracking and locating illegal roads go along way to honing in areas of possible illegal activity.

While authorities had records for the government-built roads, no one knew the extent of the illegal network of roads in the Amazon. To attack the problem, enforcing agencies needed richer maps that could spot this unofficial web. Only then could they start to focus resources around these roads. Voila, there you have, green tech working for preserving rather than destroying the environment.

An Ingenious solution

In order to solve this problem, Scientist from Imazon (Amazon’s Institute of Humans and the Environment) went to work in a search for ways to detect these roads. Fortunately, by carefully studying satellite imagery they could manually trace these additional roads. In 2016 they completed this initial heroic but rather tedious work. The new estimate was now 13 times the size of the original! Now they had something to work with.

Once the initial tracing was complete, it became clear updating it manually would be an impossible task. These roads could spring up overnight as loggers and ranchers worked to evade monitoring. That is when they turned to computer vision to see if it could detect new roads. The initial manual work became the training dataset that taught the algorithm how to detect these roads from the satellite images. In supervised learning, one must first have a collection of data that shows the actual target (labels) to the algorithm (i.e: an algorithm to recognize cats must first be fed with millions of Youtube videos of cats to work).

The result was impressive. At first, the model achieved 70% accuracy and with some additional processing on top, it increased to 90%. The research team presented their results in the latest meeting of the American Geophysical Union. They also plan to share their model with neighboring countries so they can use it for their enforcement of the Amazon in areas outside Brazil.

Reflection

Algorithms can be effective allies in the fight for preserving the environment. As the example of Imazon shows, it takes some ingenuity, hard work, and planning to make that happen. While a lot of discussions around AI quickly devolve into cliches of “machines replacing humans”, this example shows how it can augment human problem-solving abilities. It took a person to connect the dots between the potential of AI for solving a particular problem. Indeed the real future of AI may be in green tech.

In this blog and in our FB community we seek to challenge, question and re-imagine how technologies like AI can empower human flourishing. Yet, this is not limited to humans but to the whole ecosystem we inhabit. If algorithms are to fulfill their promise, then they must be relevant in sustainability.

How is your work making life more sustainable on this planet?

5 Changes the Biden-Harris Administration will Bring to AI Policy

As a new administration takes the reins of the federal government, there is a lot of speculation as to how they will steer policy in the area of technology and innovation. This issue is even more relevant as social media giants grapple with free speech in their platforms, Google is struggles with AI ethics and concerns over video surveillance grows. In the global stage, China moves forward with its ambitions of AI dominance and Europe continues to grapple with issues of data governance and privacy.

In this scenario, what will a Biden-Harris administration mean for AI in the US and global stage? In a previous blog, I described the decentralized US AI strategy, mainly driven by large corporations in Silicon Valley. Will a Biden administration bring continuity to this trend or will it change direction? While it is early to say for sure, we should expect 5 shifts as outlined below:

(1) Increased investment in non-military AI applications: In contrast to the $2 Bi promised by the Trump White House, Biden plans to ramp up public investment in R&D for AI and other emerging technologies. Official campaign statements promise a whopping $300 billion of investment. This is a significant change since public research funds tend to aim at socially conscious applications rather than profit-seeking ventures preferred by private investment. These investments should steer innovation towards social goals such as climate change, revitalizing the economy, and expanding opportunity. In the education front, $5 billion is earmarked for graduate programs in teaching STEM. These are important steps as nations across the globe seek to gain the upper hand on this crucial technology.

(2) Stricter bans on facial recognition: While this is mostly speculation at this point, industry observers cite Kamala’s recent statements and actions as an indication of forthcoming stricter rules. In her plan to reform the justice system, she cites concerns with law enforcement’s use of facial recognition and surveillance. In 2018, she sent letters to federal agencies urging them to take a closer look at the use of facial recognition in their practices as well as the industries they oversee. This keen interest in this AI application could eventually translate into strong legislation to regulate, curtail or even ban the use of facial recognition. It will probably fall somewhere between Europe’s 5-year ban on it and China’s pervasive use to keep the population in check.

Photo by ThisisEngineering RAEng on Unsplash

(3) Renewed anti-trust push on Big Tech: The recent move started by Trump administration to challenge the big tech oligarchy should intensify under the new administration. Considering that the “FAMG”(Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft, and Google) group is in the avant-garde of AI innovation, any disruption to their business structures could impact advances in this area. Yet, a more competitive tech industry could also mean an increase in innovation. It is hard to determine how this will ultimately impact AI development in the US but it is a trend to watch in the next few years.

(4) Increased regulation: It is likely but not certain at this point. Every time a Democratic administration takes power, the underlying assumption by Wall Street is that regulation will increase. Compared to the previous administration’s appetite for dismantling regulation, the Biden presidency will certainly be a change. Yet, it remains to be seen how they will go about in the area of technology. Will they listen to experts and put science in front of politics? AI will definitely be a test of it. They will certainly see government as a strong partner with private industry. Also, they will likely walk back Trump’s tax cuts on business which could hamper innovations for some players.

(5) Greater involvement in the global stage: the Biden administration is likely to work closer with allies, especially in Europe. Obama’s AI principles released in 2012 became a starting point for the vigorous regulatory efforts that arose in Europe in the last 5 years. It would be great to see increased collaboration that would help the US establish strong privacy safeguards as the ones outlined by the GDPR. In regards to China, Biden will probably be more assertive than Obama but less belligerent than Trump. This could translate into restricting access to key technologies and holding China’s feet to the fire on surveillance abuses.

The challenges in this area are immense requiring careful analysis and deliberation. Brash decisions based on ideological short-cuts can both hamper innovation and fail to safeguard privacy. It is also important to build a nimble apparatus that can respond to the evolving nature of this technology. While not as urgent as COVID and the economy, the federal government cannot afford to delay reforming regulation for AI. Ethical concerns and privacy protection should be at the forefront seconded by incentives for social innovation.

Union Tech: How AI is Empowering Workers

Is technology empowering or hindering human flourishing?

This week, I found a promising illustration of empowerment. While driving back from South Carolina, I listened to an episode from Technopolis podcast which explores how technology is altering urban landscapes. Just like in a previous post, the podcast did not disappoint. In this episode, they talk to Palak Shah from the National Domestic Worker Alliance digital lab. The advocacy group seeks innovative ways to empower 2.5 million nannies, house cleaners, and care workers in the United States. Because of its highly distributed workforce (most domestic workers work for one or a few households making it difficult to organize in a way that auto workers could), they quickly saw that technology was the best way to reach and engage the workers they trying to reach.

The lab developed two main products: the Alia platform and a La Alianza chatbot. The platform aggregates small contributions from clients to offer benefits for the workers. One of the biggest challenges with domestic workers is that they have no safety net. Most only get paid when they work and do not have health insurance. By pooling workers and getting an additional contribution from clients with little overhead, the platform is able to give the workers some of these benefits. The chatbot offers news and resources to over 200K domestic worker subscribers.

When the pandemic hit, the lab team with some help from Google was able to fully pivot in order to address new emerging problems. The Alia platform became a cash-transfer tool to help workers that were not getting any income. Note that most of them did not receive unemployment or the stimulus checks coming from the government. Furthermore, the chatbot surveyed domestic workers to better understand the impact of the pandemic on their livelihoods so they could adequately respond to their needs.

The NDWA lab story illustrates well the power of harnessing technology for human flourishing.

As a technology worker myself, I wonder how my work is expanding or hindering human flourishing. Some of us may not be doing work that is directly aligned with a noble cause. Yet, there are many ways in which we can take small steps re-direct technology towards a more human future.

Last week, in a history-making move, a group of Google employees formed the first union in a major technology company. Before that, tech employees have played crucial roles as whistleblowers for abuses and excesses from their companies. Beyond that, numerous tech workers have contributed their valuable skills for non-profit efforts in what is often known as the “tech for good” movement. These efforts range from hackathons to long-term projects organized by foundations embedded within large multinational companies.

These are just a few examples of how technology workers are taking steps to keep large corporations accountable and contribute to their communities. There are many other ways in which one can work towards human flourishing.

How is your work contributing to human flourishing today?

A Call to Post-Trump America: Make the Environment Great Again

As electors cast their vote today, we can breathe a sigh of relief: Donald J Trump is no longer president of the United States. Let that sink in! I honestly believe that even those who supported the president will not miss his conduct in the office, his tantrums, and undignified tweets. They may miss his policies but most will gladly dispense with his destructive personality.

The last four years have been a long whirlwind of chaos that I hope our nation never returns to. Just not having to deal with his tweets and the consequent media outrage surrounding it has been refreshing. Moreover, we can celebrate that civility is returning to the White House.

My main hope is that a Biden presidency can make politics boring again unlike the intrusive disruption it was in our lives for the last four years. With that said, this cannot be an invitation for disengagement as the work is far from complete. Let us not repeat the mistakes of 2009-2010 when an Obama presidency was quickly undermined by losses in the mid-term elections. While the electorate sat back, radical factions of the right woke up and mobilized. Their efforts would eventually bear fruit in the election of 45. A vacuum of a common cause that unites that country will invite a resurgence of irrational populism.

Listening to the 2020 electorate

How do we move forward? For those inclined, I recently posted a summary of election statistics. I don’t speak here as a progressive but as a moderate person of faith. First, it is important not to interpret 2020 as a mandate for the Democratic party. While the party re-took the coveted White House, the losses in Congress point to an electorate that disapproved of Trump but was not fully ready to ride a blue wave. If there was a mandate, it was for the parties to work together, a task that was all but impossible under the previous president.

In the past years, most of my comments and concerns were with a self-destructing GOP. While much work remains before Republicans become a vestige of the party it used to be, I think the moment calls for a plea to the other side. Biden won with a broad coalition that included moderates in the center along with die-hard progressives in the left. The threat of 45 was enough to bring them together but keeping the coalition together will be a different story. If we are to see Americans regain confidence in our institutions again, here is a place to start.

While Trumpism will certainly not fade away, its influence will be diminished in the next years. The best way to combat it is not to simply denounce it and shame its believers. Instead, it should be by showing a viable alternative that listens to the pain that made so many susceptible to populist lies and responds with effective governance. Sure, the right-wing noise machine will constantly put forth a narrative that undermines any progress that does not align with its narrow ideological shackles. Yet, we must believe that eventually, reality will break through the noise.

Make the Environment Mainstream

One of the greatest losses of the last 4 years was in our care for this earth. Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris accord and systematic dismantling of the EPA can have devastating consequences for the long term health of our nation. It is vitally urgent that these steps are remedied right away. It is encouraging to hear that Biden already signaled a return to the Paris agreement in day one of his presidency. That is a good start but much more work needs to be done.

My plea to Democrats is that they become the Green party. Show the American people that it is not about destroying capitalism but saving it and making it sustainable. Work with Republicans, corporations, and anyone willing to tilt this economy towards sustainability. The COVID reset should be an opportunity to shift the economy towards more equitable, holistic, and long-term thinking. An economic system in which a tree is worth more dead than alive is not just an impediment but the root of the problem. We cannot address our climate crisis until this structural problem is rectified.

As a person of faith, I believe there is no issue that carries as much importance and consequence as this one. The environment impacts all races, ethnicities, and socio-economic statuses. It is not even limited to humanity but affects all of life on our beloved planet. Furthermore, it has the potential to unite us but also the danger of ending our existence if we ignore it.

A Task for All of us

Above all, it requires bold leadership that is able to build consensus across many interest groups represented in our political system. That is why it must be de-politicized. This requires a change of approach from both Republicans and Democrats. On the GOP side, moderate voices must rise up and reject climate denialism. We need conservative voices to participate in this process as government policy will not be enough. Courageous moderates should buck the more radical voices in the party that question the science on this matter.

Democrats, on the other hand, should not use this issue as an excuse to enact progressive policies. They should also be willing to work with moderates on the other side who take this issue seriously. It is important that this issue does not get confused with Socialism but is understood as the transcending matter it actually is. The Green New Deal is a good start but Democrats should be willing to incorporate Republican ideas that can help it make it more effective.

Finally, faith leaders must also do their part. Celebrating “Creation Sunday” once a year won’t cut it. If conservative Christians are militant about life and progressive Christians are passionate about the poor, they both can come together to uplift the planet that sustains life and empowers the poor through its bounty. Christians and people of other faiths in this country should come together on this matter. They can play a crucial role in compelling a distracted society to join in the fight to preserve, restore, and maintain our biosphere.

2020 Voters Fire Trump but Democrats Have Reasons to Worry

Joe Biden: Gage Skidmore from Peoria, AZ, United States of America (source: Joe Biden); User:TDKR Chicago 101 (clipping)Donald Trump: Shealah Craighead (source: White House)Сombination: krassotkin, CC BY-SA 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0, via Wikimedia Commons

As a data geek, I could not resist pouring over the early statistics coming out of this election. In previous blogs, I expressed my thoughts on the issues at stake. In this blog, I offer a brief summary of the main insights coming out of the data published on the election so far. Certainly, more data will come but there is enough already for some interesting points.

Turnout was the highest in 120 years hovering around 67% of eligible voters.
African Americans (87%), first-time voters (64%), and people under 30 (60%) voted overwhelmingly for Biden. 9 out of 10 African-American women voted for Biden, by far the largest alignment in the electorate.
White evangelicals or born again (76%) and white with no college degree (67%) and white men (61%) voted overwhelmingly for Trump.
From a regional perspective, Trump bested Biden in the South and Midwest while Biden won by larger margins in the East and West.
Trump voters thought that the economy and public safety were the top issues in this election. Biden voters saw the pandemic and racial inequality as the most pressing issues.
Nearly a 1/3 of Biden voters did so to oppose Trump rather than support Biden. This is an important statistic for the Democrats to keep in mind if they have any hope of keeping the presidency in 4 years.
Biden won in every income level except those with $100K or more where Trump won by 12 points.
For every moderate that voted for Trump, there were two who voted for Biden.
Biden narrowly edged Trump in the suburbs: 50/48
Compared to 2016, Biden was able to convince 3% more voters to switch from Trump than from Clinton. More importantly, Biden was the choice of 58% of those who did not vote in 2016 but decided to vote this time.

Note that it is still early to draw any definite conclusions but these numbers already paint an interesting picture of voter’s preference in 2020. As I reflect on these findings, I would like to highlight some main observations.

By J4p4pn

Voters want a balanced government

The blue wave did not materialize. In fact, Democrats lost seats in Congress though still retained a majority. The Senate is up for grabs as the country waits for Georgia to vote in a January runoff. What that means is enough voters rejected Trump at the top of the ballot but were not willing to commit to the Democrats elsewhere ballot choices. The majority of the electorate wants the party to work together even if the most radical factions continue to control the narrative and the campaign money.

Considering the lagging popularity of the president with the majority of the electorate and a Republican party that stood steadfastly behind him, it is surprising how the Democrats struggled in the house and senate races. These initial numbers suggest that the electorate is still hesitant to give a solid mandate. I think a lot of that is suburban voters who are wary of “defund the Police” rhetoric among Democrats. Others are concerned with a rise in Socialism, which however realistic a claim, was an effective GOP attack. This was especially true for voters making $100K or more, the only income group where Trump won by a decisive margin.

Biden won narrowly in those areas that continue to be the bellwether for American politics. While the cities and rural areas get the most attention for their opposing views, it is the suburbs that decide elections. It was demographic changes in two large Atlanta suburban counties (I live in one of them and would like to believe was part of that change) that turned the state blue for the first time since 92. Yet, this cannot be interpreted as a turn to progressive politics but more of a reaction against the worse incarnation of conservative politics reflected in Trumpism.

In short, Democrats have a long way to go if they want to keep these voters in the blue column. As point 8 above demonstrates, Biden won in large part by courting the moderate vote. The president-elect and his party have a monumental challenge ahead as they seek to balance appealing to moderates while keeping the progressive wing of the party happy.

Voters Lack Choices

While we celebrate the record turn out, it is important to highlight that close to 1/3 of eligible voters refused to participate. Furthermore, the high rate and is still below other industrialized nations. This is a remarkable finding considering the amount of media attention on this year’s contest. Some could attribute it to the Trump effect that brought new voters to the polls either to support or reject him. Hence, it is possible this turnout rate is not sustainable.

There was a lot of outcry about polarization in politics but the elephant (and donkey) in the room remains unaddressed. Voters still are under the tyranny of a duopoly that cannot represent the diversity of the American population. Unfortunately, there are no prospects of change as the two dominant parties have erected large barriers for new entrants. The only way to expand turn out is to open the political system to viable third and fourth parties. I was hoping moderate Republicans disgusted by Trump would take the lead. Instead, they opted to either support Biden or remain on the sidelines.

Until the system is reformed, turnout will continue to hit a ceiling of 66-70%. It is tragic that so many Americans who are eligible to vote do not have adequate representation. We are made poorer as a nation for it.

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/11/03/us/elections/exit-polls-president.html

Waking up to the Power of Dreams for Self-Awareness

I am not sure how it started but I was riding shotgun with Dr. Charles Stanley. Yes, that Charles Stanley, the famous pastor who just recently retired from ministry. We were deep in a conversation where he shared his regrets from the last years. I was honored to be worthy of his trust but deep inside was wondering: why me? When it came to my turn to talk, I awkwardly mumbled trite words of empathy and encouragement. What else was I to do? It probably took a lot for him to share his heart with me, a stranger.

We finally arrived at our destination. At that point, I realized we were in front of a hospital. Dr. Stanley went in and when I opened the door, to my surprise, it fell out. Felling embarrassed, I tried putting the door back on the hinges but it was not staying. At that point, Dr. Stanley came back out and signaled me to come in. He told me to not bother as the door was broken for a long time. “Not bother?” I thought; “I can’t just leave the door here in the street”. Finally, I tried one more time when I saw that the side mirror of the broken door was covered with gray epoxy.

That is when I woke up.

An Unexpected Journey

I wasn’t one to pay attention to dreams. To me, they were mere confusing accidents of nature carrying little relevance to the real world. Occasionally, I would remember one, tell my wife, and move on with life. Nothing to see here, carry on with more pressing matters. Yet, recently my perspective changed. All it took was social isolation and a few sleepless nights that forced me to pay more attention to my dreams.

Apparently, I am not alone. Many have reported a surge of vivid dreams lately. At first, I thought this was simply an anomaly. However, the more I journaled about it, the more I realized how little I have paid attention to my dreams. What if they were trying to tell me something important? What if they revealed truths about myself I refuse to confront?

It was then, through friends and a few google searches, that I discovered Jungian psychology. A contemporary of Freud, Carl Jung was one of the fathers of modern psychology. He started his own school of thought in the field which among other things took dreams seriously. He believed they were not simply side effects of stomach indigestion but important symbolic messages our subconscious was trying to convey.

Faithful Dreams

In my religious upbringing, dreams played a role. Inspired by biblical passages, dreams could be warnings, premonitions, or messages of hope. In short, the tradition is aware of the importance of dreams even if centuries of Enlightenment in the West has made serious theological engagement with it a rarity at best. Yet, my religious upbringing was too concerned with morality to dig deeper into the symbolic world of dreams. It often gave me little options as to what the dream could be.

Hence, unless the dream was revealing a message of eternal value or carrying a warning of things to come, there was simply no interest in probing further. It lacked a more robust understanding of self that went beyond a narrow consideration of right and wrong. Consequently, in an attempt to focus my eyes on heavenly topics, it left me blind to the earthly mundane work of self-awareness. This where the wealth of knowledge accumulated through psychoanalysis in the last century and a half comes in hand.

Ultimately, Jungian analysis focuses on what the dream has to speak of the dreamer him or herself. If we suspend the question of source, namely who or what is creating the dream, the dream is there to deliver a message to the individual (or ego, the conscious individual). It most often is not about an earth-shattering message but a hidden insight that helps the conscious self better understand what is underneath.

In that sense, looking at dreams this way requires faith. That is, it requires trust that whatever source is speaking to us is worth listening to. Furthermore, it calls for a belief that that message is there ultimately for our good. I confess, that I struggled with this one. As a Christian, I was trained to doubt the human voice. Inherent in our theology is the idea that humanity is fallen and in need of divine intervention. This can oftentimes lead us to turning away from our humanity in pursuit godly things. Yet, here we are invited to trust that God can and will speak through our very human subconscious.

Extending an Invitation

The best of Christian tradition embodies the habit of hospitality. It is often preoccupied with inviting others into a new reality. In the same way, my journey through Jungian psychology is shaping into an invitation to go within. It is a call to listen to dreams and imagination without judgement, only seeking to listen to what is saying. Can our dreams speak life into our awaken selves?

Unfortunately, staying in the abstract level will not be sufficient. An invitation must translate into a call to action. Action in this area, for many of us who have grown distant and neglectful of the inner life, requires some training and coaching. Towards that aim, I was delighted to discover from the suggestion of a friend, Robert A Johnson’s Inner work: Using Dreams and Active Imagination for Personal Growth. This practical yet dense book is proving to be a great tool in my own personal journey within.

In the next blog, I will summarize the main points Dr. Johnson brings up in this book. Yet, you don’t have to wait for them. If you are serious about this journey, go ahead and purchase the book and read it for yourself. In this extended time of social isolation, it is never too late to embark on a journey inwards.

Author: Elias Kruger