Blog - Page 12 of 20 - AI Theology

Defining Public Theology for a New Decade (Part II – Moving Outward)

In the previous blog, I described the move inward exploring the first part of the following statement:

Public theology is prayerful reflection flowing out of love of God for the world as a way to instill hope and longing for the good planet.

The “public theology is prayerful reflection flowing out of love of God” section spells out the move inward through contemplation, prayer and reflection. It defines not just what it is but also its motivation, which in this case it is divine love, or charity. In this blog, I want to explore the second portion of the description above that traces a path outward towards our planet.

For the World

One of the most overlooked failures of evangelical (and mainline to a certain extent) theology in the last century is its inability to connect people with the world they live in. For the most part, it has built its main argument on the premise that we live in a fallen world beyond hope of repair. It does that so in the second breath, it can say that God is the only solution. In other words, it exacerbates the problem so it can better sell a solution. After all, a world that is intrinsically good needs no saving.

By building its argument as a sales pitch for the salvation of the soul, Christian theology left a legacy of disengagement. It has often produced disciples as the saying goes: ‘too heavenly minded to be any earthly good.’ It is great for filling stadiums and auditoriums but terrible for producing civic engagement. This is not to say that Christians in general, and evangelicals more in specific, have not engaged in productive action to help the common good. It is, however, to recognize that this came in spite of not because of this prevailing ethos that narrowly focuses on after-life fire insurance.

Oftentimes, civic engagement was a means to the goal of preaching salvation. Hence, public theology for this new decade, must re-define and re-orient this ethos of service away from being a means to being an end. Instead, it should see serving the world as the goal, a tangible incarnated reflection of our worship to the Creator. Because God ‘so loved’ the world, we, in turn, love the world too.

The world here is not just human beings but our whole planet, everything about this rock in our galaxy. Hence, we love this planet enough to work with people from all faiths to address human-generated climate change. We need to include notions of sustainability in our concept of holiness. The righteous person is the one who not only cares for their human neighbor but also for the global neighborhood. If we fail at loving the ground we live on, loving other humans may be a mute point if our planet cannot sustain life.

Of course, turning our gaze to the world also means loving other humans. I believe this we demonstrate this best by how we love both the marginalized and the very people that oppose us. Let’s also be honest: to be opposed for supporting or failing to challenge systems that oppress the poor, the different and the stranger is not the type of persecution we should be after. Yet, regardless of how or why we are opposed, loving our adversaries is at the heart of the Christian faith.

As a Way to Instill Hope and Longing

As I mentioned in the last blog, we do not live out this public theology without expecting to persuade others. Yes, I dare say, we do look for followers. We do seek to evangelize and to persuade those outside our institutional gates to consider their ways. We proclaim a message to build the common good also praying for metanoia – change of minds.

Yet, this is no longer a sales pitch to ask them to make a public confession of allegiance to our savior, nor an appeal for them to join our community and be baptized. If that happens, then we rejoice and receive them with open and hospitable arms. However, we aim for a much more audacious transformation. We dare, and are naive enough to believe that the whole Earth will be filled with the glory of God. That is, we dare believe the world can and will get better. The glory of God is Shalom, all living beings co-existing in mutual love and harmony. All living beings working to preserve, improve and develop this earth towards a better future.

Words are empty and often ineffective conduits to produce hope and longing. That is why this public theology must transcend mere proclamation and translate into concrete actions that in fact instill hope for a better world. It should manifest itself in grand visible gestures that run counter the narrative of death and disillusion propagated by our screens. It also happens in small personal acts of sacrifice. Small but enduring acts that demonstrate that we love those near and far well. Acts that express that we love this earth well.

For the Good Planet

The word “good” is often associated with the inferior option of excellent. That is not what I mean here. Goodness here (with a capital G) has to do with a vision of a planet where life flourishes, justice rolls down like rivers and all creatures live in harmony. To me, that is what it means to work for the common Good. It is not simply a flimsy notion of seeking compromise at all costs. Instead, it entails a vigorous negotiation in which all parties involved come out better than they started. Furthermore, I believe it is inspired in the vision of the Jewish prophet Isaiah as demonstrated in the painting below and in the quote right under it:

Edward Hicks (American, 1780-1849). The Peaceable Kingdom, ca. 1833-1834

In that day the wolf and the lamb will live together;
    the leopard will lie down with the baby goat.
The calf and the yearling will be safe with the lion,
    and a little child will lead them all.
The cow will graze near the bear.
The cub and the calf will lie down together.
The lion will eat hay like a cow.The baby will play safely near the hole of a cobra.
    Yes, a little child will put its hand in a nest of deadly snakes without harm.
Nothing will hurt or destroy in all my holy mountain,
    for as the waters fill the sea,
    so the earth will be filled with people who know the Lord
Isaiah 11:6-9 New Living Translation

Isaiah envisions a world in which reconciliation is not just a human affair but one that encompasses all creatures. The enmity that was the modus operandi for the survival of the fittest gives way to cooperation and solidarity. It is the belief that we do better together than divided; produce more when in peace than in war; and flourish brighter when cooperation replaces domination. That is at the heart of Isaiah’s vision – a world where all creation peacefully coexist.

This is not a utopian vision of human progress. It is a radical, and even illogical, hope that God can use anything and everything to the flourishing of life in this planet and beyond. It is not only a hope of an event in the distant future but a patient longing that each day we inch closer to this reality.

To me, that is the vision of the good planet: one where life flourishes and love is the rule.

Do we dare believe in the Jewish prophet’s vision?

Defining Public Theology for a New Decade (Part I: Moving Inward)

In the previous two blogs, I cleared the way for defining theology by first explaining what is not and then emphasizing the importance of location. These entries serve as a necessary preamble to the definition provided at the end of the second. In this blog, I will break down this definition to further flesh out what it means. By doing so, I intend to establish some markers of what I think is the key task of public theology for our time.

Let me begin by re-stating the definition:

Public theology is prayerful reflection flowing out of love of God for the world as a way to instill hope and longing for the good planet.

Public Theology

Why add a qualifier to theology? As I demonstrated in the previous blog, the context from which theology emerges is crucial. It will define the audience, concerns and scope of the task. In this case, by calling “public”, it becomes clear that this is speaking beyond the institutional church and even beyond the Christian community. It means that its language must transcend traditional Christian symbols or at least make an attempt to translate them to a common language.

Furthermore, it aims to enhance the common good. In that way, it cannot be sectarian or simply exist to support or strengthen the church’s institutional influence in society. If it extends the Christian church influence as a byproduct, then that is a bonus. It cannot be, however, its primary goal. Yet, it must assume that by working towards the common good, most will benefit, including the Christian community.

Consequently, it should communicate through humble persuasion as one voice in a larger dialogue. The humility means that it must be willing to listen and learn from others believing that God often speaks through those outside the Christian community. That humility should not diminish its desire to persuade. If it is to speak in the public square, the theologian must believe that what they say is worth listening and even following. That is, it must not be void of conviction, but instead should seek to invite others into a new understanding.

Prayerful

Prayer is not a monologue or just speaking to an “imaginary friend”. It is, at its essence, a communal act. While one can pray alone in a room, when the individual prays, they are never alone but are supported by others through a human chain that connects them through time and geography. Beyond that, prayer is about accessing deeper sentiments in silence. It is about a turn inwards and a letting go of thoughts and rationality. It is an invitation to operate below consciousness.

Yet, prayer is not always about quiet reverence. It can also be about pleading loudly with others in lament, protest or even desperation. Many in the North are not accustomed to this type of disruptive prayer yet our brothers and sisters in the South practice that daily. For them, it is simply a way of life.

Moreover, prayer, within the Christian tradition, entails believing in a personal God that is invested in the fate of this world but also transcends it. It is trusting in a God that both suffers with but also rescues his creation. Because of that, prayer also invites us to both suffer with and take action on behalf of the poor, oppressed and the lost. When we act like the God we pray to, we also pray.

Reflection

To develop theology, one must take this prayerful life and engage it in reflection. In age where information flickers in front of us at light speed, reflection is about slowing down and thinking deeply. It is about pondering on intractable questions that plague the community. While it includes personal reflection, it transcends the individual and tends to be others-oriented. Even as we consider our own struggles we do so in the hope that our reflection may help others who are facing similar struggles.

This process of prayerful reflection cannot stay in one’s individual interiority but must flow out through writing, speaking or artistic expression. The reflection is not complete until sincerely and effectively communicated to others in the public commons. The communicator lives in the tension of urgency and limited understanding. There is a constant sense of unfinished task in crafting the message along with a persistent call to speak out. They communicate as they gain clarity and as events call for responses.

Flowing out of Love of God

The animus of the prayerful reflection described above must be love. As the Apostle Paul reminds us, all the work we do without love would be meaningless. Because the word love in English lost its meaning through multiple applications, it is important first to define what it is. Here we borrow the Greek term agape, often translated as charity. Charity is a self-less love that puts other’s benefit before our own. It is actually a higher goal than loving one like oneself. I also believe we humans cannot do this exclusively even as we strive for it continuously. It is, therefore, a transhuman type of love.

Hence why in the definition I speak of “love of God,” using the multiple meanings of the preposition “of” in that sentence. First, it is a love that emanates from God, from a Being that is beyond human limitations. Second, it is love directed to God as a response to God’s love to us humans. It is God loving God in and through us. Just sit and ponder on that. It does not make sense at face value forcing us to go deeper than a logical understanding.

Another point I want to make is that how we do theology matters. We must be often vigilant of our motivations and passions animating our action. This does not mean we must “feel” love every time we do theology only that we often remember why we do what we do. Losing sight of motivations that do not flow out of love is often where we get lost. The how and the what are important in this activity.

Conclusion

Let me end here for part 1. So far, I have reviewed how public theology is prayerful reflection flowing out of love of God. There is so much more that could be said but the paragraphs above act as a starting point to this definition. In the next blog, I’ll go over the remaining parts, summing up a complete sketch of a vision for a non-clerical, Christian, earthly-grounded theology for our time.

What is Theology? (Part II: Location Matters)

In my previous blog, I started on this path to define theology by first outlining what is not. In short, while associated with ministry, biblical studies and doctrine, theology cannot be confined to any of these. You would think I would be ready to define it but there are few more items to clear before getting to that. Before I risk losing you with a long preamble, let me jump right into it.

The Question of Context

For many centuries, the underwriting assumption was that theology was absolute and universal. That is, it spoke of a timeless truth that could be expressed uniformly in every context. In the late 19th century, there was even an attempt to make theology an exact science based on facts. The idea was to paint theology in a frame of objectivity in order to prove its legitimacy. While this eventually proved to be a misguided enterprise, some segments of the Christian church especially the more conservative parts of evangelicalism, still hold on to that notion. In part this stemmed from the need to defend theology from the challenges coming from science and historical criticism.

if theology is not Bible interpretation, or doctrine, then it no longer needs that rigid legitimacy that these theologians sought. In other words, because theology is a solidly human endeavor it has the freedom to make mistakes, postulate tentative ideas and even push the boundaries of Christian knowledge into what in the past would be classified as heretical. By dissociating itself from institutional obligations, theology can be a rigorous but free pursuit of knowledge and understanding of God, humanity and all of creation.

Under this new terms, theology does not aim to be objective but instead to start with an awareness of its preconceived assumptions. Hence, there is a “where and a “who” behind every theological proposal. Throughout history, theology was mostly done by middle-aged Euro-descendant clergy. Inevitably, that shaped and formed the content and transmission of theological thinking. For one, it often meant that theologians were writing for their peers who were male clergy like them. This theology was then transmitted as divine knowledge and often times used as a tool to legitimize the authority of the group that created it.

This who and where (and when) of theology can be aggregated under the term of location. All theology is developed in a milieu of culture, geography, socio-economic and political factors, namely, its location. Theological thinking, pursuing the knowledge of God, occurs in the theater of human existence. Inevitably that experience shapes, guides and forms the message.

This earthiness of theology is not a reason for concern but joy. It celebrates the gift of incarnation, when God decided to make a home among us, sanctifying all of the material world. That gives us the confidence that even our human thoughts about God can somehow be divinely inspired.

If in the 19th century, the aim was to achieve a pure truth the emanated from a perfect God, a 21st century planet steeped in ecological crisis yearns for a theology made of star dust, sweat and blood.

Introducing Public Theology

What is the location from which theology emerges from today? While the institutional church will continue to influence and nurture theological thinking, I believe the location of theology is moving to the public square. For one, even pastor theologians, developing thinking for their congregation will no longer be free of outside scrutiny. That is, they won’t be able to afford preaching a worldview that is shielded from the societies and communities surrounding that congregation.

In a globally connected age, all theology is public theology.

Public theology happens outside of church walls. Now, that does not mean that it loses its commitment to the Christian faith and its traditions but developed for the human community. That includes but is not limited to the church community. It is not done in opposition of church theology but as a dialogue partner who listens but also speaks truth to it. It proclaim its message in the public square as an invitation to all who are willing to listen.

It does not impose itself as the only legitimate source of truth. However, it is also not afraid to speak truth. It is committed to the Creator and to creation. It is open to science, technology and other religious thinking while still rooted in a Christian foundation.

Above all, it cannot count on legitimacy from the patronage of political power, the longevity of tradition or even by economic value. Instead, it must prove its relevancy by the merits of its claims and also by how it responds to criticism. It is by default open to scrutiny, and must always flow out of love. The last point is crucial. Without love, public theology is a pointless exercise in speculative knowledge.

A Working Definition

After a long preamble that began in the previous blog, I am now ready to finally answer the question: what is (public) theology? More specifically, how do I define it and use it here in this blog. I don’t claim that it is the authoritative definition but a working definition nonetheless. So here it goes:

Public theology is prayerful reflection flowing out of love of God for the world as a way to instill hope and longing for the good planet.

I submit this definition for consideration as a starting point. In the next blogs, I’ll break down this definition to expand on each part.

What is Theology? (Hint: it is NOT what you think)

In my seminary years, I was often amused by people’s reactions when I told them I was studying theology. Some looked confused, others elated, some indifferent while others awkwardly tried to change the subject. The standard assumption was that I was training to be a pastor or a priest. That is true for about half of those who enter seminary today. However, theology is much more than preparing to serve in a Christian church. In this series of blogs, I would like to dive into defining this term in a hope to set a baseline of understanding on the topic while also dispelling some myths.

Christian or Religious

As I step into a multi-cultural cyber space, I cannot start defining theology without first addressing the question of sources. At face value, theology means “the study of God” or the “divine.” This immediately begs the question: which conception of God? Different cultures speak of a higher being through diverse conceptions. We often assign this type of thinking to the broad term of religion. So, is theology religious thinking?

I would contend that it is not. Theology proper as a discipline emerged in the West within the Judeo-Christian school of thought. This is not take away from thinking emerging from other religious contexts. In fact, one could argue that theology has been developed in at least all the Abrahamic faiths (Christianity, Islam and Judaism). For the purposes of this blog, I am narrowing it to Christian theology. It would be disingenuous not to do so when that is the tradition from which I am rooted in and have studied for all my life. This is not a matter of legitimacy but only of narrowing the scope and of expertise.

Does that mean that theology is irrelevant to non-Christians? I would disagree. It is true that Christian and a non-Christian will approach theology differently. However, I firmly believe that theological thinking has something to say to all humanity, regardless of ethnicity or religious background. That also means that it must be open to scrutiny from the outside as well. If cannot be transmitted as an imposition but as a proposal at the common table of humanity. It cannot be the ultimate arbiter of truth in a multicultural public place but it certainly can and should have a voice.

What (Christian) Theology is NOT

Theology is not ministry. As my anecdote above illustrates, the most common misconception is to associate theology narrowly with the pastoral profession. Candidates to the ministry do study theology along with other disciplines. However, studying theology does not in itself prepares one for ministry. At its best, it offers a mental framework that undergirds the work of ministry. It can provide a cohesive worldview from which the minister can operate from. Yet, to do that well, the minister needs practice, mentoring and other skills beyond what theology offers.

If theology is not ministry, one can often confuse it with doctrine (church teaching) or dogma. This is especially true in reformed circles. Doctrine has to do with teachings of the church passed on through time. While not always, they often denote rigid statements of belief which serve primarily to define the boundaries of what is Christian and what is not. Also, they often emerged through the the history of the church when disagreements arose about a new idea or practice.

This is not to say that theology and doctrine are mutually exclusive. Doctrinal statements both spring from and inform theological thinking. The main difference is not as much of content but of orientation. Doctrine is meant to be a conclusion while theology is meant to be a question. That is, doctrines are often developed to settle debates. Theology, and healthy theology at that, aims to continually raise questions. It is constantly evolving and it is often times independent from the institutional church.

Finally, theology is not biblical interpretation. This is a common misconception in the evangelical culture I grew up in. In fact, in some circles, theology was seen as unnecessary given that all we need is in the Bible. That is gross myopic misconception of both what theology is and what the Bible is for. Christian theology often flows from, emerges and in some cases start from the biblical text. However, healthy theology also wrestles with and challenges the text. While the Bible is crucial source for theology it certainly not the only one. They both seek to make sense of the divine and the Bible carries a historical legitimacy and authority that theology often lacks. With that said, it is important to differentiate the two.

Theology is a way to make sense of the Biblical text. In fact, I believe no one approaches the Bible without some theological framework. Theology is the path to connect the dots of areas that the Bible is silent or even where the text transmits diverging ideas. Theology enriches biblical interpretation while the Bible grounds theology.

Conclusion

So far, I have only described what theology is not. You may wonder: “So, what is it?” I will present a working definition in the next blog. Yet, that would have not been possible before addressing the confusion around this term. I hope this short listing of what is not can clear the way for re-discovering theology anew. I firmly believe in re-introducing theology in the public sphere as we move towards a Post-Christendom society (one where Christianity is no longer the official religion). In order to do that, the first step is rejecting assumptions that are often taken for granted. Only then can we start formulating it as a source hope and wisdom for our planet.

Political Intelligence: Empowering Voters With Data

In this blog, I introduce political intelligence. The past 2016 presidential election demonstrated the power of data to influence election in unexpected ways. The Cambridge Analytica scandal revealed the growing trend of data-driven campaign strategies for targeting voters with customized political ads. This practice, which started with marketing in the corporate world has made its way well into political campaigning. Now politicians can optimize their hard-won campaign dollars into efforts that are more likely to turn up the vote for them.

It would be great if such optimization would also diminish the need of money in politics but that has not been the case. I digress. No, this blog is not about using data for better campaign targeting. Quite the opposite, it is about flipping the table and delivering intelligence not candidate but to the electorate. What if election was less about self-promotion and frivolous attack but a true debate on ideas and practices informed by data? What if our political electoral process was more intelligent?

Defining Intelligence

Let me take a step back. It is important to better define intelligence here. For the purposes of this blog, I do not seek a general definition of intelligence that could apply to animals, humans and computers. Instead, I want to borrow the term from the business world. In business analytics, we often use the term business intelligence (BI) that encompasses all the ways in which you present data to business audiences. That is, it includes graphs, dashboards, reports and tables. If Data Science is focused on analyzing and producing insights, BI focuses on delivering those insights in a way that non-technical audiences can understand and take action on it – hence the term actionable insights.

Developing actionable insights has become the goal of every analytics department. Data is not good unless it can guide the direction of a business. It requires a fair amount of distilling, curating, formatting and presenting in a way that helps executives make better decisions.

BI also requires triaging and prioritization. With the abundance of data flowing into a business, it is crucial to decide what to track and what not to track. Picking the right measures is an important step in the process of developing actionable insights. What does not get measured, does not get the attention of management.

Learning from this parallel, intelligence means the process of selecting, tracking and analyzing key measures that give an overall picture of the challenges and opportunities a business face. Could that be applied to government?

Introducing Political Intelligence

Clearly the government sector could learn a lot from the business sector in how to better run their operations. Yet, what I propose here is not about simply producing dashboards for lawmakers. Instead, I propose we leverage this practice to help voters vote more intelligently.

Of the many ills of political campaigning, and there are many, one of the worst is the absence of reliable data. It is not that this data does not exist, it just simply not part of the political discourse. This is a tragic outcome, as data is the best way to provide evidence-based feedback from policies.

Let me break this down a bit. When candidates are not busy attacking each other characters, the best we get today is a debate of ideas. Political parties put out platforms based on principles and ideologies. This is helpful but falls short for at least two reasons. First, untested ideas do very little against real-world, entrenched, long-lasting social problems. They may sound appealing at face value but often times produce many unintended consequences. Second, a debate that lives on abstract discussions will most often lose voter engagement. Voters are looking for pocket-book issue solutions and have little patience for drawn-out discussions on political philosophies.

I believe data remediates both of these problems. 1) It grounds political proposals against real-world results; 2) it quantifies complex issues into easily digestible set of metrics. For example, for those concerned with poverty in their community measures such as unemployment rate, households living under the poverty line and percentage of population in government assistance are good beginning points to have an informed discussion.

A Good Start

Will this settle all political disputes? Absolutely not. Political intelligence does not mend political divides but it does improve political discourse. When we force those running for office to explain their proposals with data, we now have a way to check on their progress. This is much better than what we have now where elected officials spin the results of their efforts to maximize their accomplishments and minimize their shortcomings. On the other side, opponents inflate government failures while also overstating their own abilities to solve it. Both sides portray a distorted view of reality. Agreeing on a set of metrics up-front give us a tool against political propaganda that keeps both major parties in US accountable to the same standard.

Finally, a robust discussion on metrics can further localize a conversation that is often dominated by national issues. Most of politics is local but that rarely comes through the prevailing media sources. A vigorous debate on the metrics that matter for a particular community allows them to focus on local issues rather than transposing national ones into theira community. This improves the political discourse of local elections and allows voters to engage deeper into government decisions that directly affect their lives.

Empowering voters with political intelligence: that is what I call a good start to reform our democracy.

AI Impact on Jobs: How can Workers Prepare?

In a previous blog, I explored the main findings from a recent MIT paper on AI’s impact on work. In this blog, I want to offer practical advice for workers worried about their jobs future. There is a lot automation anxiety surrounding the topic which often gets amplified through click-bait sensational articles. Fortunately, the research from the MIT-IBM Watson paper offers sensible and detailed enough information to help workers take charge of their careers. Here are the main highlights.

From Jobs to Tasks

The first important learning from the report is to think of your job as group of tasks rather than a homogenous unit. The average worker performs a wide range of tasks from communicating issues, solving problems, selling ideas to evaluating others. If you never thought of your job this way, here is a suggestion: track what you do in one work day. Pay attention to the different tasks you perform and write down the time it takes to complete them. Be specific enough in descriptions that go beyond “checking emails.” When you read and write emails, you are trying to accomplish something. What is it?

Once you do that for a few days, you start getting a clearer picture of your job as a collection of tasks. The next step then is to evaluate each task asking the following questions:

Which tasks brings the most value to the organization you are working for?
Which tasks are repetitive enough to be automated?
Which tasks can be delegated or passed on to other in your team?
Which tasks can you do best and which ones do you struggle the most?
Which tasks do you enjoy the most?

As you evaluate your job through these questions, you can better understand not just how good of a fit it is for your as an individual but also how automation may transform your work in the coming years. As machine learning becomes more prevalent, the repetitive parts of your job are most likely to disappear.

Tasks on the rise

The MIT-IBM Watson report analyzed job listings over a period of ten years and identified groups of tasks that were in higher demand than others. That is, as job change, certain tasks become more valuable either because they cannot be replaced by machine learning or because there is growing need for it.

According to the research, tasks in ascendance are:

Administrative
Design
Industry Knowledge
Personal care
Service

Note that the last two tend to be part of lower wage jobs. Personal care is an interesting one (i.e.: hair stylist, in-home nurses, etc.). Even with the growing trend in automations, we still cannot teach a robot to cut hair. That soft but precise touch from the human hand is very difficult to replicate, at least for now.

How much of your job consists of any of the tasks above?

Tasks at risk

On the flip side, some tasks are in decline. Some of this is particular to more mature economies like the US while others have a more general impact due to wide-spread adoption of technologies. The list of these tasks highlighted in the report are:

Media
Writing
Manufacturing
Production

The last two are no surprise as the trend of either offshoring or mechanizing these tasks has been underway for decades. The first two, however, are new. As technologies and platforms abound, these tasks either become more accessible to wider pool of workers which makes them less valuable in the workplace. Just think about what it took to broadcast a video in the past and what it takes to do it now. In the era of Youtube, garage productions abound sometimes with almost as much quality as studio productions.

If your job consists mostly of these tasks, beware.

Occupational Shifts

While looking at tasks is important, overall occupations are also being impacted. As AI adoption increases, these occupations either disappear or get incorporated into other occupations. Of those, it is worth noting that production and clerical jobs are in decline. Just as an anecdote, I noticed how my workplace is relying less and less on administrative assistants. The main result is that everybody now is doing scheduling what before used to be the domain of administrative jobs.

Occupations in ascendance are those in IT, Health care and Education/Training. The latter is interesting and indicative of a larger trend. As new applications emerge, there is a constant need for training and education. This benefits both traditional educational institutions but also entrepreneurial start ups. Just consider the rise of micro-degrees and coding schools emerging in cities all over this country.

Learning as a Skill

In short, learning is imperative. What that means is that every worker, regardless of occupation or wage level will be required to learn new tasks or skills. Long gone are the days where someone would learn all their professional knowledge in college and then use it for a lifetime career. Continual training is the order of the day for anyone hoping to stay competitive in the workplace.

I am not talking just about pursuing formal training paths through academic degrees or even training courses. I am talking about learning as a skill and discipline for you day-to-day job. Whether from successes or mistakes, we must always look for learning opportunities. Sometimes, the learning can come through research on an emerging topic. Other times, it can happen through observing others do something well. There are many avenues for learning new skills or information for those who are willing to look for it.

Do you have a training plan for your career? Maybe is time to consider one.

AI Impact on Work: Latest Research Spells Both Hope and Concern

In a recent blog I explored Mckinsey’s report on the AI impact for women in the workplace. As the hype around AI subsides, a clearer picture emerges. The “robots coming to replace humans” picture fades. Instead, the more realistic picture is one where AI automates distinct tasks, changing the nature of occupations rather than replacing them entirely. Failure to understand this important distinction will continue to fuel the misinformation on this topic.

A Novel Approach

In this blog, I want to highlight another source that paints this more nuanced picture. The MIT-IBM Watson released a paper last week entitled “The Future of Work: How New Technologies Are Transforming Tasks.” The paper was significant because of its innovative methodology. It is the first research to use NLP to extract and analyze information on tasks coming from 170 million online job postings from 2010-2017 in the US market. In doing so, it is able to detect changes not only in the volume but also in job descriptions themselves. This allows for a view on how aspects of the same job may change over time.

The research also sheds light on how these changes translate into dollars. By looking at compensation, the paper can analyze how job tasks are valued in the labor market and how this will impact workers for years to come. Hence, they can test whether changes are eroding or increasing income for workers.

With that said, this approach also carry some limitations. Because they look only at job postings, they have no visibility into jobs where the worker has stayed consistently for the period analyzed. It is also relying on proposed job descriptions which often time do not materialize in reality. A job posting represents a manager’s idea for the job at that time. Yet circumstances around the position can significantly change making the actual job look very different. With that said, some data is better than perfect data and this researches open new avenues of understanding into this complex phenomenon.

Good News: Change is Gradual

For the period analyzed, researches conclude that the shift in jobs has been gradual. Machine learning is not re-shaping jobs a neck-breaking speed as some may have believed. Instead, it is slowly replacing tasks within occupations over time. On average, the worker is asked to perform 3.7 less tasks in 2017 as compared to 2010. As the researchers dig further, they also found a correlation between suitability to machine learning and faster replacement. Tasks more suitable to machine learning do show a larger average of replacement, at around 4.3 tasks while those not suited for machine learning show 2.9 average replacement. In general, jobs are becoming leaner and machine learning is making the process go faster.

This is good news but not necessarily reassuring. As more industries adopt AI strategies the rate of task replacement should increase. There is little reason to believe what we saw in 2010-2017 will repeat itself in the next 10 years. What the data signal demonstrates is that the replacement of tasks has indeed started. What is not clear is how fast it will accelerate in the next years. The issue is not the change but the speed in which it happens. Fast change can be de-stabilizing for workers and it is something that requires monitoring.

Bad News: Job Inequality Increased

If the pace is gradual, its impact has been uneven. Mid-income jobs are the worst hit by task replacement. As machine learning automate tasks, top tier middle income jobs move to the top income bracket while jobs at the bottom of the middle income income move to the low income jobs. That is, occupations in the low tier of the middle become more accessible to workers with less education or technical training. At the top, machine learning replace simpler tasks and those jobs now require more specialized skills.

This movement is translating into changes in income. Middle jobs has seen an overall erosion in compensation while both high and low income jobs have experienced an increase in compensation. This polarizing trend is concerning and worthy of further study and action.

For now, the impact of AI in the job market is further exacerbating monetary value of different tasks. The aggregate effect is that jobs with more valued tasks will see increases while those with less value will either become more scarce or pay less. Business and government leaders must heed to these warnings as they spell future trouble for businesses and political unrest for societies.

What about workers? How can these findings help workers navigate the emerging changes in the workplace? That is the topic for my next blog

CTA Conference 2019: Engagement, Solidarity and Hope

I was looking forward to this conference for months. It was my only opportunity in the year to get together with friends that I interact online throughout the year. The line up of speakers was impressive. There were academics, activists, engineers, theologians, pastors and entrepreneurs which made it for a fairly unique event destined to spark engaging dialogue and stretch us into uncomfortable spaces.

In the opening, Micah Redding, Christian Transhumanist Association (CTA) president and founder mentioned that if the conference did no make you uncomfortable then it was not doing its job. This was not a place for cozy group think. In eyes of many, Christianity and Transhumanism make for strange bedfellows. Furthermore, mixing religion, science and technology is still a novel concept. As an emerging organization, CTA is still defining its own identity in an environment where many are too willing to dismiss it as an oxymoron. On the one hand, Science and Technology are weary of religious talk getting into their business. Religious people, on the other hand, get very uncomfortable with movements that exalt a changing humanity.

Entering a new world

Conference main speakers: Science Mike, Liz Parish, Cheryle Renee Moses and Jim Stump

The morning kicked off with Bio Logos VP, Jim Stump. He offered preliminary thoughts on how to engage Transhumanism from a Christian perspective. In his view, the jury was still out on the movement and its impact. With that said, instead of fearful rejection, he proposed active engagement. In other words, it was an opportunity to enter the conversation as disciples of Christ with humility, caution and openness.

This was a fitting introduction as the speakers that followed exemplified that engagement. They offered a Christian cultural critique that was not limited to Transhumanism but expanded into digital cultures, AI and the Internet. It is hard to summarize here all the great points made throughout these presentations. I hope that CTA posts the presentations so those interested can browse through them.

One speaker that stood out was Liz Parish. Liz was patient zero in genetic modification treatment. She underwent this unprecedented procedure in 2015 and since then has stayed involved in the longevity and human enhancement movement as an entrepreneur. Her company, BioViva, seeks to find safe ways to expand to make genetic intervention more affordable. Watching her presentation gave mixed feelings of awe, hope and fear. It reminded me that we were entering a new world, one full of possibilities but with no shortage of dangers. Messing with our genes is not something I am comfortable with. Yet, what if that is the way for the cure of many terminal diseases? Don’t we owe ourselves to at least try? Liz Parish’s life and work challenged us all to re-think our pre-conceived answers to these questions.

Learning Solidarity

Right before lunch, I received a text from Micah. I was scheduled to speak in the afternoon right before a panel on future and equity. My presentation explored how the movie Black Panther, as a prime example of Afro-Futurism, represented a hopeful, original and promising vision for the future. In the text, Micah informed me that Cheryle Renee Moses, an African-American activist and one of the key speakers in the event objected to the title of my presentation “Dreaming Alternative Futures with Black Panther.” The plan was to sit down at lunch to discuss her concerns.

In our conversation, Cheryle expressed that she had reservations with the fact that I, a Euro-Brazilian was speaking about a story that belonged to Africans. She was also offended at the word “dreaming” for it reminded her of how slave owners have used that word to keep slaves from asserting their humanity. To be more specific, she was referring to how Christianity was used to tell slaves to simply hope for a better future after death rather than fight for freedom. It reminded her, I write this with tears in my eyes, of how the gospel was used, and in some cases continues to be used for social control and racial subjugation.

There was no choice other than to pull the presentation from the program and to extend the following forum on future and equities. From a personal level this was a difficult decision. I had poured hours into that presentation and thought that it would actually connect a mostly white and male audience with a beautiful African vision of the future. Yet, there was something happening here much bigger than that. If we were to be serious about equitable futures, we could not ignore Cheryle’s concern. As an activist, she was speaking for the margins in a way that none of us could. Her voice at that moment was more important than anything I had to say.

Photo by Mike Morrell – Elias Kruger, Cheryle Renee Moses and Micah Redding

In the forum, Cheryle reminded us of the uncomfortable truths about racism and how this continues to impact even the conversations we were having about technology, faith and the future. She challenged the audience to expand their networks to ensure they were hearing perspectives from diverse voices. For a room full of white men, still the vast majority involved in the conversation, the awkwardness was palpable. It was an unplanned, uncomfortable, awkward moment that was sorely needed.

A few days later, after reflecting on this experience, it dawned on me that I never apologized or expressed sympathy for the hurtful reality that Cheryle was bringing forth. Thankfully, I was able to call her this week and express my heartfelt sorrow for this painful heritage that we often want to forget rather than make it right. Cheryle graciously accepted my apologies and thanked me for reaching out. I also asked her to review this text to ensure I was not working under short-sighted assumptions in my writing. Part of building equitable futures is learning to listen to diverse voices and feel their pain.

It is only in solidarity that we can move forward.

Fruitful Conversations

Like most conferences, great dialogue happens in the breakout sessions. In an age of on-demand streaming, one can watch great speakers at the tip of their fingers. What is rare and even more valuable is good old face-to-face conversations. We were a small but high caliber group. Among attendants there were scientists, theologians, college students, professors, pastors and a good share of technology enthusiasts. The conference offered two opportunities for break out conversations with a broad range of topics.

Photo by Seth Cartwright

In the first one, I attended a break out on “AI and the impact on the local church.” Not surprisingly the topic attracted its share of ministry-oriented folks. It did not take long, about 5 minutes to be precise, for our conversation to veer into sex-bots. That’s what happens when pastors discuss AI, we joked . Beyond that, we had fruitful discussions on the differences between narrow and general AI, applications for ministry and the technology impact on social inclusion. Some reported the church’s reluctance to embrace new technologies. Others discussed the benefits and perils of taking virtual communion or conducting virtual baptism. Welcome to doing ministry in the 21st century.

In the second breakout, I joined a stimulating conversation on the future of Christian Transhumanism (XH+). We discussed the baggage Transhumanism carries and why many Christians are reluctant to join or be identified with the movement. There is also resistance from secular Transhumanism in accepting the legitimacy of a religious voice. We explored which audiences had the most to benefit from XH+ and found that it would fit well within a faith at work movement. At its best, the XH+ could help Christians boldly connect their faith with their vocations. Yet, our discussion left many unanswered questions. What is XH+? How does it fit the church ecosystem? What does it believe? These are questions the CTA will be engaging for years to come.

Unexpected Ending

Science Mike closed the night with a stimulating and at times entertaining presentation on technology, faith and Transhumanism. He brought up many valuable points. For one, he questioned the narrative that AI is overtaking humanity and computers would surpass human intelligence. Showing recent trends in computer performance, Mike bluntly put: “Electrons are getting tired of our shit!” In short, we are now finding limits in Moore’s law challenging the projections for machine super intelligence. He also questioned the possibility of brain uploading, cryonics and even whether life prolongation was desirable.

At points, he delivered heart-felt reflections on how one could live out a Christian faith in the midst of so much technological change. He affirmed the bodily shape of our humanity asserting that mind uploading was simply confusing people with brains on a stick. He also encouraged us to re-think our relationship with technology as a separate entity from nature. As an example, he said we should look at Manhattan as an island filled with human nests. In making these points, he offered some provocative insights to help us move forward in a time of great confusion.

Unfortunately, his talk ended in a very pessimistic tone. Mike was weary of Silicon Valley and American Christianity, claiming that both were built on a foundation of white supremacy. Because of that, he lost faith in them and instead was looking for ways to live a Christian life that resisted these forces. Hence, he saw little hope on technology or the church in effecting positive change in the world.

While partially agreeing with his assessment, I was disappointed that he could not also see the potential and opportunity for Christianity and technology in our time. That is what attracted me the XH+ in the first place. I saw it as an alternative to the prevailing luddite narrative that focuses on the negative impact of technology in the world. While he left a grave reminder of our current reality, he overlooked the potentiality of technology and faith. These issues are not mutually exclusive, we can dismantle oppressive systems while building an alternative equitable-techno-natural-spiritual future. In fact, accomplishing the first is only possible by pursuing the second.

I would like to hear more about this hopeful vision in the 2020 CTA conference.

AI and Women at the Workplace: A Sensible Guide for 2030

Even a few years in, the media craze over AI shows no sign of subsiding. The topic continues to fascinate, scare and befuddle the public. In this environment, the Mckinsey report on AI and Women at the workplace is a refreshing exception. Instead of relying on hyperboles, they project meaningful but realistic impact of AI on jobs. Instead of a robot apocalypse, they speak of a gradual shifting of tasks to AI-enabled applications. This is not to say that the impact will be negligible. Mckinsey still projects that between 40 – 160 M women may need to transition into new careers by 2030 worldwide. This is not a small number when the low end accounts for roughly population of California! Yet, still much less than other predictions.

Impact on Women

So why do a report based on one gender? Simply put, AI-driven automation will affect men and women differently in the workplace as they tend to cluster in different occupations. For example, women are overly represented in clerical and service-oriented occupations, all of which are bound to be greatly impacted by automation. Conversely, women are well-represented in health-care related occupations which are bound to grow in the period forecasted. These facts alone will assure that genders will experience AI impact differently.

There are however, other factors impacting women beyond occupation clusters. Social norms often make it harder for women to make transitions. They have less time to pursue training or search for employment because they spend much more time than men on house work and child care. They also have lower access to digital technology and participation in STEM fields than men. That is why initiatives that empower girls to pursue study in these areas are so important and needed in our time.

The main point of the report is not that automation will simply destroy jobs but that AI will move opportunity between occupations and geographies. The issue is less of an inevitable trend that will wipe out sources of livelihood but one that will require either geographic mobility or skill training. Those willing to make these changes are more likely to survive and thrive in this shifting workplace environment.

What Can You Do?

For women, it is important to keep your career prospects open. Are you currently working in an occupation that could face automation. How can you know? Well, think about the tasks you perform each day. Could they be easily learned and repeated by a machine? While all of our jobs have portions we wish were automated, if that applies to 60-80% of your job description, then you need to re-think your line of work. Look for careers that are bound to grow. That may not may simply learning to code but also consider professions that require human touch and cannot be easily replaced by machines. Also, an openness to moving geographically can greatly improve job prospects.

For parents of young girls, it is important to expose them to STEM subjects early on. A parent encouragement can go a long way in helping them consider those areas as future career options. That does not mean they will become computer programmers. However, early positive experiences with these subjects will give them the confidence later in life to pursue technical occupations if they so choose. A big challenge with STEM is the impression that it is hard, intimidating and exclusive to boys. The earlier we break these damaging paradigms the more we expand job opportunity for the women of the future.

Finally, for the men who are concerned about the future job prospects of their female loved ones, the best advice is get more involved in housework and child rearing. In short, if you care about the future of women in the workplace, change a diaper today and go wash those dishes. The more men participate in unpaid house work and child rearing the more women will be empowered to pursue more promising career paths.

AI Theology Goes to NY: Sandy e Junior and the Power of Music

This blog started with a dare. My father-in-law, a faithful reader of the blog, challenged me to write a post about my recent trip to New York I took with my wife. We were there for one night to watch the one and only US concert of the Brazilian band Sandy e Junior in the Barclay’s center. He wanted to see if I could tie that experience with theology or AI.

Daniel, challenge accepted! Let’s see how it goes.

That’s the look of excitement of spending 30 hours with no kids. This picture also clears up who married up. I am a lucky man!

Our trip really started in the Atlanta airport. Arriving with plenty of time, enjoying a kid-free trip, we decided to walk to the concourse rather than catching the train. It made for a pleasant 25 minutes walk, helping us reach and surpass the 10K steps goal for the day. Not only that but we also greatly enjoyed an exposition on African art and learned about the history of Atlanta. It is very well done and a great way to pass time while waiting for a flight. Next time you are stranded in the Atlanta airport, I highly recommend it.

After less than two hours of flight we saw this in our window and knew we were close. Even with all the smog, NY still boasts some stunning views. We have not been in the big apple for over 15 years and a lot has changed since then.

Picture of New York’s skyline from the plane.

A Brazilian Enclave in the Big Apple

After finding some exquisite cuisine for dinner in Brooklyn we headed to the arena. The walk there in the rain was an unexpected treat. It reminded us of a family tradition: dancing in the rain. This is something we started doing before we had kids and have passed on to them. Now every time it rains, our girls ask: can we go out there to dance? Nope, we did not dance in the crowded sidewalks and car congested streets of Brooklyn. However, getting soaking wet prior to the concert was the closest to it. It was a preparation for what was to come.

As we approached the arena, it felt like we were in another country. Just noticing the way people dressed and conducted themselves, we knew there were Brazilians all around us. You see, Brazil is fairly diverse country making it difficult to spot what the typical Brazilian looks like. However, you can often tell by subtle clues. For example, women will wear their purses crossing their shoulder instead on the side. We could also hear a lot of Portuguese being spoken around us. Before crossing the street, I man behind us warned in Portuguese to stay way from the puddle anticipating cars to splash unsuspecting pedestrians. Good reminder, that we heeded willingly though unnecessary since we were already soaked.

When we got inside we felt like we were in Brazil. Everybody was speaking Portuguese except for the stadium’s staff. It felt like we were going back to our adolescence. We both grew up in Brazil. I left as a teenager and Priscila when she married me. It also reminded us of the time we met, when I was 17 and she was 15 years old. A trip back in time to a distant but crucial moment in both of our lives.

Mandatory selfie with my beautiful wife in front of the venue. Notice that I still haven’t figured out where the camera is. One day I’ll learn!

An Unique Sister-Brother Duo

Sandy e Junior are quite unique artists in the Brazilian music scene. Children of a famous sertanejo (Brazilian country music) singer, they walked into the spotlight very early in life. Their first appearance was in 1989 at the tender age of 6 and 5. From then on, they enjoyed a successful career as a duo until 2007 when they parted ways. This concert marked their 30 year anniversary of their launch in ’89. It was a reunion tour which planed for a few concerts in Brazil but quickly expanded into an international tour. Though in their mid-30’s, they already boasted three decades of career and over 20 million albums sold – a rare feat for any Brazilian artist!

Picture of the Duo captured in the NY concert

Their longevity is not the only aspect that stands out. In an industry crowded by divas and big personalities, it is quite refreshing to see self-effacing, humble and authentic artists perform. They showed genuine gratitude and recognition for the fans efforts to be there and faced the opportunity to play in an international stage not as a right but as a responsibility. Both of them are still married to their first spouses and have kids. Yes, sometimes good guys and gals do become famous.

Their songs centered mostly on young love and heart break. Because they grew up doing this, their music reflects their different developmental stages. From kid’s crushes, painful teenage breakups to long-lasting friendship; it is all there in a pleasant mixture of songs to an overall pop sound. Sandy is the lead singer while Junior sings harmony and plays multiple instruments. The closest I comparison I could think would be if Taylor Swift teamed up with a Jonas brother.

The Power of a Shared Experience

As expected for this reunion show, the fan base was quite varied in age. Given their long career, you could see both those who have grown up with them as well as their children coming to the concert. I must confess I was a very late comer to their fandom. My wife was a fan from her teenage years in the 90’s while I scoffed at their association with sertanejo. It was an unfair prejudice that I regret. In our house now, Priscila had already made fans out of all our kids and I was the only hold out. After this concert that is no longer the case and I have the picture to prove it.

Priscila’s passion for the duo rubbed on me. Often, I would turn to look at her face fully immersed into the music experience. It was like I had my teenager Priscila back, almost twenty years later after marriage and kids. Her genuine delight was contagious and captivating making me fall in love again.

She was not alone. We were surrounded by committed fans who stood up and sang along for the whole two hours plus of concert time. Looking at their faces you could see memories of crushes, heart breaks and kids play all coming back. It was as if that experience was transporting them to an earlier and simpler time, a precious memory from their younger years.

The fact that it was in the US made the experience all the more memorable. Many of them, like us, have left their childhood place along with friends and family. They now live in a country where they were no longer sure they were welcome. Many carry the toll of the lonely immigrant life punctuated by hard work and isolation. All of that was forgotten for two hours while they sang their memories at the top of their lungs. The last song invited the whole arena to jump. Twenty thousand fans (including myself) gladly obliged bouncing our sorrows away.

Theology, AI, anything?

There was nothing about AI in that night. After all, I do have other interests in my life and don’t walk around only thinking about how the world relates to AI! Yet, there was ample opportunity for theological reflection. I could talk about the fact that music has the power to transport us into other dimensions in time and space. I could also speak of the nostalgia, the struggle of the immigrant life and the never-ending pervasiveness of love. You see, to me all of this is part of theology.

I am recently reflecting on a theology that embraces the world. I have recognized that my Christian formation, unfortunately, have often led me to despise the world around me and minimize experiences that were outside of religious contexts. Because of that, I was grateful to be part of this intoxicatingly human experience. It left me enriched by having my horizons opened and a bit convicted by my past prejudice. I also felt closer to my wife, the very relationship that continues to teach me most about God.

Learning to embrace the world reminds me that God does not sit “out there” in a “separate” infinite world but pours through in the richness of human experience, in the materiality of this earth, in joy, pain and sorrow.

All of it is sacred.