Search
Close this search box.

Tag: religion

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.

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.

The Machine Learning Paradigm: How AI Can Teach Us About God

It is no secret that AI is becoming a growing part of our lives and institutions. There is no shortage of article touting the dangers (and a few times the benefits) of this development. What is less publicized is the very technology that enables the growing adoption of AI, namely Machine Learning (ML). While ML has been around for decades, its flourishing depended on advanced hardware capabilities that have only become available recently. While we tend to focus on Sci-Fi like scenarios of AI, it is Machine Learning that is most likely to revolutionize how we do computing by enabling computers to act more like partners rather than mere servants in the discovery of new knowledge. In this blog, I explain how Machine Learning is a new paradigm for computing and use it as a metaphor to suggest how it can change our view of the divine. Who says technology has nothing to teach religion? Let the skeptics read on.

What is Machine Learning?

Before explaining ML, it is important to understand how computer programming works. At its most basic level, programs (or code) are sets of instructions that tell the computer what to do given certain conditions or inputs from a user. For example, in the WordPress code for this website, there is an instruction to show this blog in the World Wide Web once I click the button “Publish” in my dashboard. All the complexities of putting this text into a platform that can be seen by people all over the world are reduced to lines of code that tell the computer and the server how to do that The user, in this case me, knows nothing of that except that when I click “Publish,” I expect my text to show up in a web address. That is the magic of computer programs.

Continuing on this example, it is important to realize that this program was once written by a human programmer. He or she had to think about the user and its goals and the complexity of making that happen using computer language. The hardware, in this scenario was simply a blind servant that followed the instructions given to it. While we may think of computers as smart machines they are as smart as they are programmed to be. Remove the instructions contained in the code and the computer is just a box of circuits.

Let’s contrast that with the technique of Machine Learning. Consider now that you want to write a program for your computer to play and consistently win an Atari game of Pong (I know, not the best example, but when you are preparing a camp for Middle Schoolers that is the only example that comes to mind). The programming approach would be to play the game yourself many times to learn strategies to win the game. Then, the player would write them down and codify these strategies in a language the computer can understand. She or he would then spend countless hours writing the code that spells out multiple scenarios and what the computer is supposed to do in each one of them. Just writing about it seems exhausting.

Now compare that with an alternative approach in which the computer actually plays the game and maximizes the score in each game based on past playing experiences. After some initial coding, the rest of the work would be incumbent on the computer to play the game millions of time until it reaches a level of competency where it wins consistently. In this case, the human outsources the game playing to the computer and only monitors the machine’s progress. Voila, there is the magic of Machine Learning.

A New Paradigm for Computing

As the example above illustrates, Machine Learning changes the way we do computing. In a programming paradigm, the computer is following detailed instructions from the programmer. In the ML paradigm, the learning and discovery is done by the algorithm itself. The programmer (or data scientist) is there primarily to set the parameters for how the learning will occur as opposed to giving instructions for what the computer is to do. In the first paradigm, the computer is a blind servant following orders. In the second one, the computer is a partner in the process.

There are great advantages to this paradigm. Probably the most impactful one is that now the computer can learn patterns that would be impossible for the human mind to learn. This opens the space to new discoveries that was previously inaccessible when the learning was restricted to the human programmer.

The downside is also obvious. Since the learning is done through the algorithm, it is not always possible to understand why the computer arrived at a certain conclusion. For example, last week I watched the Netflix documentary on the recent triumph of a computer against a human player in the game of Go. It is fascinating and worth watching in its own right. Yet, I found striking that the coders of Alpha Go could not always tell why the computer was making a certain move. At times, the computer seemed delusional to human eyes. There lies the danger: as we transfer the learning process to the machine we may be at the mercy of the algorithm.

A New Paradigm for Religion

How does this relate to religion? Interestingly enough these contrasting paradigms in computing shed light in a religious context for describing the relationship between humans and God. As the foremost AI Pastor Christopher Benek once said: “We are God’s AI.” Following this logic, we can see how of a paradigm of blind obedience to one of partnership can have revolutionary implications for understanding our relationship with the divine. For centuries, the tendency was to see God as the absolute Monarch demanding unquestioning loyalty and unswerving obedience from humans. This paradigm, unfortunately, has also been at the root of many abusive practices of religious leaders. This is especially dangerous when the line between God and the human leader is blurry. In this case, unswerving obedience to God can easily be mistaken by blind obedience to a religious leader.

What if instead, our relationship with God could be described as a partnership? Note that this does not imply an equal partnership. However, it does suggest the interaction between two intelligent beings who have separate wills. What would be like for humanity to take on responsibility for its part in this partnership? What if God is waiting for humanity to do so? The consequences of this shift can be transformative.

Altered Carbon and The Eternal Soul: Sci-Fi Gets Religion

In the hit Netflix show Altered Carbon, the people become immortal by making their consciousness portable. They perpetuate their existence by moving into a new body (or “sleeve”) when the old one is no longer useful. Their consciousness live in a device that is inserted into the back of their neck. As long as the device remains intact, the person lives on independent of the body.  Yet, Science fiction is not the first genre to discuss our individual essence as something that transcends the body. Religious thought has been reflecting on this for Millennia. Can anything be learned in a dialogue between a religious (in this case Christian) view of the soul and consciousness? In this blog, I want to explore how the Christian vision of the soul can inform the Science-Fiction view of consciousness and vice-versa.

Christian thought has a similar idea about personhood. Instead of a device, it believes the person has a soul, an internal invisible energy that contains the individual’s essence. Once the body dies, the soul lives on eternally in a place of torment or bliss.[note] Early Christians did not share this notion of a soul independent of the body but instead emphasize a full-body resurrection. It was only later, as Christianity Westernized that we got this conception of body-less souls going to live with God eternally. [/note] In that way, Christian thought connects this idea that we transcend our bodies with a notion of justice. The destiny of a soul is tied to how the body lived in its time on Earth. Interestingly enough, in the Altered Carbon series, the Christians (Neo-Catholics) are the main group opposing the idea of transferring the consciousness to different bodies. They believe such practice would condemn one to punishment in the afterlife (if that individual ever reaches it, I guess).

While Religion and Science may have similar ideas of our personhood, the first defines that personhood in a context of an ideal of justice, while the second wants to leave it alone. For the scientist, one’s consciousness destiny is independent of ideas of justice, but instead it just is. Yet, to many humans being with an insatiable search for meaning, such explanation seems insufficient even if descriptively accurate. There has to be more, even if we cannot know for sure what that “more” is. That is where Science-Fiction comes in. If Science is indifferent to the human longings, Sci-Fi takes scientific ideas, speculate on its assumptions and possibilities and places them in a context of human stories. Sci-Fi brings “objective” science into the “subjective” world of human story.

Yet, Sci-Fi, while pursuing similar ends as religion has also a different way of pursuing it. Religions looks at the past to bring lessons to the present. It aims to expose the depravity of the human heart through history in a hope that present humanity can avoid or rectify those mistakes. Sci-Fi reverses this order, teaching moralistic lessons from the future. If Christianity says “look what your ancestors did wrong – don’t do that”, Sci-fi says “look at the future world your children will live in – change now.”

To be fair, Christian tradition has a similar genre to Sci-fi in the prophetic and apocalyptic writings. In them, writers paint a vision, often full of symbolism, to tell people on the present of a future doom. Yet, if in Sci-fi the focus is in how humanity can screw up their future, in the Christian tradition it is God who brings destruction because of human depravity. The aim is the same – to force us to re-think about how we live our lives in the present.

While some Sci-Fi literature can imagine a world where our consciousness lives on this earth by jumping from body to body, it can also envision something akin to a blissful heaven. This is present in the idea of uploading one’s consciousness to the cloud. No, this is not the cloud of angels but the cloud of 1s and 0s of the Internet. A National Geographic Documentary Year Million even explores what would be like for people to abandon their bodies to live in the cloud. What would be like to live a life where individuality disappears and we are absorbed by an universal consciousness? At first glance, this approach to the afterlife has more in common with Buddhism than monotheistic religions like Christianity, Islam and Judaism. The first one sees the unity of all beings as the ultimate goal, while the latter keeps our individuality intact in relationship to a personal God.

Where does this comparison leave us? What I described above demonstrated how the dialogue between Science-Fiction and Christianity can enrich both disciplines. Sci-Fi could benefit from a more defined vision of justice offered by religious imagery while religion (in this case Christian tradition) could take it more seriously the role of human action in the future. Christian tradition does a good job in teasing out personal sins of immorality while not giving enough attention to corporate sins of environmental destruction. Sci-Fi, conversely, does a great job in extrapolating our corporate ills into the future while not being so concerned with personal morality. Furthermore, Sci-Fi rarely gives us a positive view of our present and how that can create a harmonious future. Instead, it is mostly concerned in highlighting what could go wrong. Christian tradition offers a robust view of a ideal future in the book of Revelation where all nations will come together as one. It speaks of a city where God’s (the source of all goodness in religious thought) is present at its very center. In this way, it gives something to look forward to, not just something to look away from.

A full conversation between the two can bring a fuller picture of the challenges ahead while also highlighting the promise of what is possible if we dare to change our ways. I would love to see one day the emergence of a religious sci-fi genre that takes both scientific and religious themes seriously while also captivating our imagination in the process. I am encouraged to see how Altered Carbon hints at this conversation by including a religious element to the story. Yet, much more could be done.

Is anyone doing that already? If so, I would love to hear about it.

Test – new block

Can AI Usher in a New Reformation?

As the 500th anniversary of the Protestant Reformation approaches, I want to offer some thoughts on how emerging technologies like AI will revolutionize the face of Christianity. At first, these two seem mostly disconnected yet this could not be further from the truth. AI and other emerging technologies have the potential to disrupt, re-organize, and re-arrange the institutional church for centuries to come. But I am getting ahead of myself. Let me frame this question by first examining the role of technology in the Reformation 500 years ago

Simply put: without the printing press, there would not have been a Reformation in the early 1500’s Europe. With it, Luther and other Reformers were able to disseminate their ideas quickly, bringing turmoil and political unrest for most of Europe. This technological innovation sped up the process of disseminating new ideas enough to irreversibly change the course of history. Now individuals could own a physical copy of the Bible and that changed everything. Would the Reformation have succeeded without it? It is possible but it certainly would have taken much longer and have looked very different from what it did. The printing press enabled unprecedented access to knowledge that would lead to challenging the Roman Catholic’s claim of truth and usher in new centers of authority not just for religion but for reality itself. Along with the Enlightenment, they would lead to the scientific and technological revolutions of the centuries that followed.

Internet as the Printing Press of the 21st Century

At first glance, one could say that the Internet could play a similar role in our times. Internet extended exponentially the access to knowledge that the printing press had started. It allowed individuals anywhere in the world to access information in a revolutionary way. The individual did not need to own a physical copy anymore but could access the text electronically in real-time. Furthermore, with the increase in bandwidth and the rise of Internet 2.0, the dissemination of information was no longer bound to text alone but could now come with sound and moving image. With the emergence of social media, the process of information and knowledge sharing further increased exponentially since anyone could create and share content in a global platform.

However, it is important to highlight the limitation of the Internet as it exists today. While information is abundant, knowledge is scarce. The content is 10 miles wide but 5 inches deep. Then there are issues with accuracy, false information and simply a lot of triviality. The Internet is not a place for knowledge sharing only but also a place to entertain or simply express one-self. Content is abundant and being created each day but in a very disorganized and fragmented way. It is basically an amalgamation of crowds, for good or for ill.

AI Will Bring Order to the Internet Chaos

This is precisely why I believe AI can be a game changer that can truly harness the power of the Net towards more purposeful aims. How? AI will take Internet to a new-level of effectiveness by organizing and transmitting knowledge more efficiently. Intelligence is about analyzing data, identifying patterns and making decisions. Currently, content in the Internet is a mixture of some information with a lot of noise surrounding it. AI algorithms that can filter out the noise from the real information would be a welcome enhancement to the Net.

This can manifest itself in many fronts. One of them is in search engines where AI can improve the accuracy of a search by not only knowing the topic but also the context of the user. Furthermore, with improvements in translation, someone’s search can transcend the bounds of the user’s search language to capture content in other languages. It can also improve the ability to find content not just in text but sound and video which now is fairly limited. All of these enhancements would greatly increase the accuracy of searches greatly optimizing the process of research and knowledge sharing.

Another front is in machine-human interfaces. AI will revolutionize the relationship between humans and machines, therefore bringing the Internet much closer to our bodies. I have covered this extensively in my blogs about cyborgization. For here, I just want to highlight the fact that AI will move the Net closer to our brain. The culmination of this process is what some have called the Hive Mind. Basically, when our minds are connected to the Internet and can work as one collective consciousness. This is similar to swarms of insects that act in one direction with surprising coordination and purpose. Needless to say, this trend has seismic implications not just to the diffusion of knowledge but even how we experience reality itself.

Some of this is years if not decades down the road. Yet, even the process to move towards intelligent content and a collective consciousness is fairly disruptive on its own to upend governments, businesses and, yes, the church as well.

Glimpses of a New Reformation

How will this AI-enabled Internet facilitate a new reformation in the church? Before answering this question, we must recognize that unlike the 1500’s the Christian church is no longer the center of power and knowledge of Western societies. However, it is yet still a remarkable global hub of influence, especially in the developing world. In a world where political, technological and economic change fragments the legitimacy of all centers of power, the search of meaning becomes all the more salient. Many have found it in the ancient path of the Christian faith a contemporary way to make sense of their world (including the writer of this blog). I say this to qualify that any reformation in the church will have very different consequences than the one 500 years ago by the simple fact that now Christianity is just one of the many centers of influence on any given society. Hence, its effects will be more subtle and more spread out than the original Reformation.

With that said, the Internet is already disrupting the church. Computer Scientist and Researcher Allan Downey, believes the Internet is one of the driving factors in the decline of Christianity in the West.  Would an AI-enabled Internet mean the end of the church? I don’t believe so. Yet, it would be naive to think that the church would survive this time without any major changes. The main question is what will the church look like in this new era of turbo-charged, AI-enabled disruption of how we create and share knowledge?

It is very difficult to anticipate all the changes that may come in this scenario. One thing is certain, for Christianity to prosper in this future it must learn to integrate advances of science and technology while also holding on to the century-old traditions of worship, prayer, Scripture reading, proclamation and service. Adapting to change while staying true to its values is the challenge for any institution trying to navigate the coming changes. This is especially true for an institution like the church that has notoriously resisted and combated change in the last centuries. It is time to replace old-wineskins with new ones if we are to receive new wine.

My prayer is that in an age of exponential knowledge creation and sharing, the diverging paths between the Reformation and the Enlightenment will come together in a view of the world that is unafraid of discovery but also filled with divine wonder. For the last two centuries, these currents have diverged and opposed each other. Now it is time to reconcile them. I am not sure exactly what that would look like, but I hope to see a glimpse of it in my lifetime.