Search Results

< Back How to Coach an Undefeated Football Team David Cowles “Team is not a collective noun; it’s a verb: to team.” (Dedicated to my grandfather, J. Leo Foley) My grandfather, J. Leo Foley, was Athletic Director and Head Football Coach at The Roxbury Latin School for over 40 years. He led his football team to 4 consecutive undefeated seasons. He was nicknamed “the Fox”, allegedly because of his stealth play designs and unexpected play calls. He was recruited for a college coaching job by none other than Hall of Fame Head Coach, Robert Zuppke (University of Illinois, 1913 – 1941). Whatever I know about football, I learned from my grandfather. What I don’t know, he didn’t teach me; or rather, he taught me, but it went in one ear and out the other. Imagine if I had known at age 10 that I would be writing this article at, well, let’s just say ‘a considerably more advanced age’; perhaps I wouldn’t have thought that running after the ice cream truck was more important than learning the intricacies of the single wing. The ethos my grandfather taught produced winning football teams. But it occurred to me much later that this same ethos is a prescription for winning in all facets of life. Here are few of his guiding principles. If you’re a head football coach, you may find them helpful ; if not, you may find them indispensable ! Every play should score a Touchdown. If properly designed and flawlessly executed, every offensive play should result in 6 points. Every team should be Undefeated. It takes just as much energy to lose as to win…so why not win? To paraphrase the Old Testament Book of Deuteronomy, “I set before you winning and losing. Therefore, choose winning.” “Do your Job!” (before Bill Belichick) A successful football play is not about 11 players performing at the peak of their abilities: it’s about 11 players doing their assigned jobs flawlessly. Don’t just do your Job! A player who repeatedly fails to do his job is not a good player; but neither is a player who only does his job. On every snap from center, each player has a primary responsibility; but once that responsibility has been met (or not), a good player immediately begins to look for other ways to be productive. Good players can complete at least two ‘football moves’ every play, one scripted, one improvised. Great players often complete three. The two biggest causes of failure on a football field are (1) players who don’t do their jobs and (2) players who only do their jobs. “Everything Flows.” (Heraclitus c. 450 B.C.) Of course, Heraclitus was referring to the cosmos, not the football field. And yet, there is no better illustration of his principle than what happens between snap and whistle. A football play is more like an organism than a mechanism. Sure, football begins with designed plays and set formations; that’s a play’s DNA. But like snowflakes, no two plays ever turn out the same. Even if you ran the same play on every snap, no two plays would ever be identical. Because every play unfolds in a unique way, every player not only needs to do his job, and not just his job, but he also needs to react to the play itself as it evolves. Like most important things in life, football is recursive! Don’t be Square! Most of the time we think in straight lines…and that’s a good thing when we’re working on a blueprint. That’s when we need straight lines. But there are no straight lines in football (except the yard lines)…or in real life. A football play is just like any other ‘event’ (or ‘actual entity’). Each play starts from a unique Actual World: the position of the ball, the score, the time remaining, the X’s and O’s. The Actual World of a football play is strictly linear: line-ups, formations, diagrams, etc. It includes everything that happens before the ball is snapped, but not the play itself. Once the ball is snapped, linearity goes out the window. Now everything, literally everything, impacts everything else. So don’t be square, be non-linear ! “Stayin’ Alive”. (The Bee Gees) What is the goal of a football play? For the offense, it is to score a touchdown. But as with all living things, achieving its goal is not its primary motivation. Its primary motivation is survival - keeping the play alive. You can’t achieve your goal (touchdown) once your play has been whistled dead. The longer the ball is in play, the better your chances of scoring. So ideally, keep the play going for as long as it takes to reach your goal…without taking foolish risks, of course. Ultimately, you are not playing against your opponent’s defense; you’re playing against the referee’s whistle. The longer the ball is in play, the more likely it is to result in 6 points. So keep truckin’! “Be all that you can be.” (U.S. Army) ‘Synergy’ is a buzzword these days. It describes a whole being greater than the sum of its parts. But that’s not what we’re talking about here! True, teamwork can amplify the skills of each player leading to a positive result that could not have been predicted simply by looking at stat sheets. But we’re not only talking about a ‘team’ playing better; we’re talking about each player on that team playing better than his norm. The secret? Other players. As a player, I know that other players can make me look good…or bad. They can help me perform at a higher (or lower) level than I’m used to. As a coach, I not only want my players to do their best; I want them to help my other players do their best as well. This is easier said than done. It is much more than just ‘gang tackling’. It means coordinating two separate skill sets in a way that optimizes both. This is hard to teach; it cannot be diagrammed. It requires instinct…and ethics: Humility . I am just one of 11 players on the field at any one time. “If it’s to be, it’s not just up to me. It’s also up to you…but maybe I can help.” Generosity . It’s not all about how I look; it’s about how you look. In these days of high school recruiters and multi-million dollar pro contracts, generosity is a difficult virtue to cultivate…but it is essential to producing an ‘undefeated team’. A collection of superstars will win games; but they won’t win every game. When you think of history’s greatest pro franchises, Ruth’s Yankees, Russell’s Celtics, Jordan’s Bulls, Brady’s Pats, etc., first and foremost you think ‘team’. Who has not player for, or at least rooted for, a basketball team where the MVP is 5’11” and rarely breaks double digits in scoring or in rebounds? Team is not a collective noun; it’s a verb: to team . With my team behind me, I should be able to play better than I could play on my own; and when I play better, I should enable the players around me to play better too. It’s a Virtuous Circle ! When in doubt, help out! They say two heads are better than one. If so, then 4 arms should be better than 2. If it is not immediately obvious what you need to do next, help a teammate. Assume that the players around you need your help: blocking, tackling, covering a receiver, etc. They do ! Penalties = Turnovers. Penalties are not nuisances; they are serious business. They are not ‘just’ about field position; in fact, they are not primarily about field position. Penalties are about possession…and possession is about scoring! A penalty can make the difference between a very makeable 3 rd and 2 and a much less makeable 3 rd and 7 or 3 rd and 12 or even 3 rd and 17. A ‘nuisance penalty’ may well lead to a change of possession on the very next snap. Myth : superior talent is sufficient to overcome penalties. Reality : no team is talented enough to win all its games if it is frequently penalized. Penalties ‘randomize’ the game: they give weaker teams a chance to out-perform…and win! The underdog’s prayer : “May the opposing team be penalized as much as they deserve!” Tackle! Whenever possible, all tackling should be gang tackling. A player should never say, “Oh, he’s going down”. Every player should help make sure he is down (without drawing a penalty, of course). Gang tackling prevents “second efforts”. It also increases the chances of a fumble… and the chances that your team will recover any such a fumble. Block! You did your job. You threw a great block. Good work. Job done? Not a chance! There’s always another player, and yet another, who need to be blocked as the play unfolds. Run! You’re not down until you’re down. This is not touch football. The play is not over when a defensive player touches you. As Yogi Berra might have reminded us, “The ball carrier is not down until he’s down.” The proximity of an opposing player is not an invitation to take a ‘turf nap’; it’s an opportunity to step up your game, literally. Run harder, bring your knees up higher. The goal is to run through the tackle. (If your opponent is good, this may not always work; but hint, most football players are not very good tacklers.) If the opposing player does not bring you down right away, firing the after burners upon contact can extend a gain by as much as 10 yards. Less frequently, you may even break free, adding further yards to your gain – and who knows, you might even score a touchdown. Be the Ball! When you’re lucky enough to have the football in your hands, you need to think of it as part of your body. Would you let a tackler remove your right arm? Then why allow him to remove the ball? You and the ball must become a single organism. Be bionic! Suggestion : carry a regulation football around with you during the day and sleep with it at night. Who knows, the football might even replace the stuffed animal you still sleep with. Eventually, with any luck, you’ll start to feel weird, incomplete, when you’re not carrying a football. Catch the Ball! Coach has designed a pass play and you have an assigned route. Run that route; it’s your job. But not all pass plays happen as designed. Receivers are covered, the QB is under pressure, the play must change on the fly. Your job now ? Get open! Alter your route to give your QB a better chance to see you. Or find an open space on the field and squat there; trust your QB. “But I’m not the target on this play, I’m just a decoy.” No, you’re not! You’re never merely a decoy. You’re the target receiver on every pass play. Every eligible receiver is the QB’s “target”. He’s looking for you , so get open! Once a ball is in the air, there are no receivers, there are no defenders. Every forward pass is a ‘jump ball’. The offensive player and the defensive player have an equal right to that ball, so in truth both are playing offense. But both players are also responsible for making sure that their opponent does not make the catch. Therefore, they are both playing defense too. Visualize It’s off season. Or you’re stuck in chemistry class. Or you’re in bed and can’t fall asleep. Or your parents bundled you off to overnight camp for the summer (and they don’t even have a football program there). Bummer! Wherever you are now, you’d rather be honing your football skills…but you can’t. Ugly circumstances have gotten in the way! Or have they? The fact is, you can work on your game at any time, 24/7/52 – heck, maybe even in your sleep! Right now, you can’t practice…or lift weights; but there is something you can do: you can visualize! Depending on the position you play (or want to play), imagine yourself: Blocking a defender to protect your QB Creating a hole for your RB Taking a hand-off from your QB and hitting a hole Making cuts in open field to avoid defenders Completing a forward pass Or catching that same pass. If defense is your thing, imagine yourself: Tackling a ball carrier in the open field Breaking a block to sack the QB Busting up a double team Covering a receiver; staying with him as he makes his cuts Knocking down a pass Intercepting a pass When you visualize, it’s important to do so in slow motion. Slow it down! Relish every detail, every nuance. Fully experience every move your avatar makes. Create muscle memory…even in your sleep! Final Thoughts But what if you don’t play football, have never played football, don’t want to play football? What if, God forbid, you don’t even like football? Did you just waste 15 minutes of your life reading this ‘how to’? Not necessarily! If football is nothing else, it is a metaphor for life. The values of determination, responsibility, teamwork, flexibility, and focus apply to every aspect of life, not just football. This is a formula for success on a football field, but it is also a formula for success in life. Heck, you can visualize yourself performing in a concert or acing a math quiz or accepting a Nobel Prize. No matter what we do in life, we are responsible for being ‘all that we can be’, and we are equally responsible for helping others ‘be all that they can be.’ Follow this game plan…on or off the field. Have an undefeated season…have an undefeated life. David Cowles is the founder and editor-in-chief of Aletheia Today Magazine. He lives with his family in Massachusetts where he studies and writes about philosophy, science, theology, and scripture. He can be reached at david@aletheiatoday.com. Previous Next

< Back Winner of the Haiku Challenge We're pleased to announce Richard Blankenship as the winner of the Haiku Challenge from our June 2022 issue. Check out his clever, 17-syllable poem: Somewhere in the void, souls sojourn naked, awake. We are Resplendent. Congratulations, Richard! Send your haiku to editor@aletheiatoday.com. Previous Share Return to the Table of Contents, Beach Issue Next Return to the Table of Contents, June Issue

“So what is it that makes children so much better than us? First…a child is not a ‘mini-you’… Is an Octopus a mini-you? Then neither is a child.” < Back Christ and the Kids David Cowles Dec 1, 2023 “So what is it that makes children so much better than us? First…a child is not a ‘mini-you’… Is an Octopus a mini-you? Then neither is a child.” Jesus did not have a lot to say about childhood…but when he did speak, his words were blockbusters. In all three synoptic gospels, his rare, reported interactions with children all broadcast a single message: ‘ They are better than you !’ “Let the little children come to me; do not prevent them, for the Kingdom of God belongs to such as these.” (Mark 10:14) As I said (paraphrasing Jesus), children are better than you; theirs is the Kingdom of God, and “…unless you turn and become like children, you shall not enter.” (Matthew 18:3) Israel at that time was a ‘caste-conscious’ society: ‘Pharisees talked only to Levites, and Levites talked only to God’. Among the lower castes were slaves, oxen, women, Samaritans, and children – a proper proletarian stew if ever there was one! Dry kindling, one spark short of a conflagration: “I have come to set the world on fire, and oh how I wish it were already ablaze.” (Luke 12:49) Today, if someone says you’re 'childlike', that might be meant as a compliment, but not in ancient Israel. There, to be compared to a child, would have been a great insult. And so, as always, Jesus’ message is revolutionary: “Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven…” (Matthew 18:4) and “…Whoever does not accept the Kingdom of God like a child will not enter it.” (Mark 10:15) Karl Marx was ‘Jesus-light’. Marx advocated a specific revolution focused on access to the means of production. Jesus understood that no such ‘specific revolution’ could be successful. It’s pointless to put lipstick on a pig. And the proof is in the pudding. All of history’s specific revolutions have ended the same way: “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.” ( The Who ) Jesus, and the Christian movement around and after him, understood that only a ‘global’ revolution could succeed. Even before Jesus' birth, his mother is quoted as saying, “He (YHWH) has scattered the proud…put down the mighty…exalted the humble and meek. He has filled the hungry with good things, and the rich he has sent away empty.” (Luke 1:46–55) Society must be turned upside down. The stone which the builders rejected must become the cornerstone. To cement the point, Jesus, regarded by many, then and now, as the Messiah, the Lord of the Universe, self-identifies as a child: “…Whoever receives one child such as this receives me.” (Matthew 18:5) So what is it that makes children so much better than us? First, they are not proto-adults; a child is not a ‘mini-you’. They are an entirely different phenomenon. Is an Octopus a mini-you? Then neither is a child. Your brain is wired for action and production. You raise a family, earn a living, tend livestock, grow crops, build houses or work in a cube. Children can do none of these things. Their brains are wired for discovery and contemplation. They can rarely even impact the world, much less change it, but they can study it (and themselves in the process) and come to understand it, at least provisionally. Prior to about the age of 12, children’s brains are still ‘plastic’; they are in the process of wiring themselves based on the child’s experiences. During this developmental phase, children can juggle multiple, conflicting maps of the world at the same time; they are oblivious to the apparent inconsistencies. If some kind adult points one out, that adult is likely to be met with a shrug of the shoulder, meaning, “So what! Who cares?” (The child is being honest, not rude). Many years ago, I was playing with Play-Doh with a three-year-old grandchild; we made a car. But he startled me when he asked in all sincerity, “Why doesn’t it start?” At that moment, I realized for the first time the magnitude of the cognitive gulf that exists between adults and children. No wonder we can’t communicate; we don’t even share a common universe of discourse. Reading this, you might be tempted to say, “You just needed to teach him the principles of auto mechanics.” Sorry, but that is precisely the wrong response. Instead, you need to savor this rare window onto a radically different conceptual landscape. Soak it in; don’t stifle it! Children’s minds are more magical than they are scientific. Initially, children take events at face value. Very gradually, they come to realize that events can form patterns that allow us to make predictions and divert the flow of Heraclitus’ famous river. By the time we reach adulthood, we no longer see ‘one-off’ events at all; we see only patterns. We cannot see the elephant in a room if it is not part of our logos , our pattern of expectations. But put any child in a room with an elephant and I guarantee you, it will be seen, smelled, felt, and, God forbid, licked. Are you with me so far? Great, but that may soon change! Consider yourself warned. Events occur, patterns emerge, and we exploit those patterns to manipulate our world and optimize our experience in that world. What could possibly be wrong with that? Nothing…except those patterns are not of your own making. Once you realize that experience discloses order, you’re ready for what society calls ‘education’. Just as the invention of the calculator made arithmetic easier for generations of hapless youngsters, so ‘education’ in general has made it easier for adults to live productive lives. The message: “You don’t need to find patterns on your own. You stand on the shoulders of giants, and they have already found all the patterns you need to live a successful life. So, just learn them.” And so you do. You listen to the adults around you. You imitate what they do. Eventually, you go to school and learn to read, so you can inhale the welter of patterns others purport to have discovered. As you do, you lose even the ability to form patterns on your own. Use it or lose it; your native intelligence atrophies. Ultimately, you find that you have voluntarily exchanged your individual consciousness for a spot in the collective consciousness of the Borg. ( Star Trek – The Next Generation ) We are the Borg! (Sorry, Captain Picard.) How do we know? 97% of the things we think are actually the thoughts of others. We imagine that we are swapping information back and forth with our fellow adults, but in reality, we are just reading from a dogeared script. Unlike children, who see the world naked and as it is, we see the world masked by language. If you can’t say it, it doesn’t exist. We only see what our language allows us to see, and unfortunately, that is a highly distorted version of reality. Modern Indo-European allows us to see the world only in terms of subjects and objects, mediated by active or passive verbs. Worse, the ‘language mask’ creates ‘blind spots’, massive holes in the panorama of the world that our brains do not see. We think we’re looking at the whole picture when, in fact, we are only seeing a culturally curated version of the world. Children, of course, experience the world unfiltered. They recognize ‘truth’ that we don’t even notice. “When the chief priests and the scribes saw the wondrous things he (Jesus) was doing, and the children crying out in the temple area, ‘Hosanna to the Son of David’, they were indignant and said to him, ‘Do you hear what they are saying?’ Jesus replied, ‘Yes, and have you never read the text, ‘Out of the mouths of infants and nurslings, you have brought forth praise’?” (Matthew 21:15–16) So where does that leave us? First, we will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven unless we ‘convert’ and become childlike again. That’s bad enough, but it gets way worse. When we interact with children (not babies), we are almost always wearing the uniform of a drill sergeant. Well-meaning, we do precisely the wrong thing: we teach our children to ‘grow up’. Why? For what? So can they be as miserable and closed-off as we are? Apparently, misery does love company. “A dragon lives forever, but not so little boys. Painted wings and giant’s rings make way for other toys.” ( Peter, Paul, and Mary ) Adult toys! (I’ll spare you the enumeration; you’ve already been through enough.) So where does this leave us? Hint: it’s not good! “Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe to sin, it would be better for him if a great millstone were put around his neck and he were thrown into the sea.” (Mark 9:42) We spare no effort encouraging our children to shed their ‘childish fantasies’, to stop ‘believing fairy tales’ and to begin living in ‘the real world’. When they do, inevitably but unwittingly, they ‘sin’. But they sin our sins – the sins we taught them – not their own sins; for their part, ‘ they know not what they do’. The sins of the parents are visited on them. David Cowles is the founder and editor-in-chief of Aletheia Today Magazine. He lives with his family in Massachusetts where he studies and writes about philosophy, science, theology, and scripture. He can be reached at david@aletheiatoday.com . Return to Yuletide 2023 Share Previous Next Click here. Do you like what you just read? Subscribe today and receive sneak previews of Aletheia Today Magazine articles before they're published. Plus, you'll receive our quick-read, biweekly blog, Thoughts While Shaving. Subscribe Thanks for subscribing! Return to Table of Contents, Winter 2023 Issue Return to Table of Contents, Holiday Issue Return to Table of Contents, Halloween Issue Return to Table of Contents, Fall Issue Return to Table of Contents, Beach Issue Return to Table of Contents, June Issue

< Back The Seven Pillars of Wisdom David Cowles “Kabbalah kept the pre-Socratic tradition alive until it could be born anew in the Age of Aquarius.” According to the ancient Jewish mystical tradition of Kabbalah, the Universe is ‘built’ on scaffolding that consists of 10 nodes (‘vertices’) connected by 22 paths (‘edges’). Identifying these nodes using our modern languages is a challenge and not every commentator agrees on how best to translate each term. Here’s one approach: While the terminology can vary slightly between traditions the order of these nodes is invariable…and significant. The first three are predominantly conceptual and sit like a cornice (crown) atop the other, more physical, seven (body). These 10 nodes (called Sefirot ) are interconnected by a network of 22 pathways: 3 horizontal, 7 vertical and 12 diagonal – 3, 7, 12, three numbers with outsized importance in Judeo-Christian culture, theology, and spirituality. Kabbalah maps virtually every aspect of lived experience onto these 10 Sefirot and their 22 connecting pathways (e.g. there are 22 letters in the Hebrew alphabet). Parts of the body, hours of the day, days of the week, months of the year, angels, patriarchs, etc. all map onto Kabbalah’s universal logos . For example, in terms of the human body, Keter is the head (cerebellum), Tiferet the heart, Yesod the procreative organs, and Malkhut the progeny, i.e. our ‘footprints in the sand’. Fully explicating this system is literally the work of a lifetime. In this article, we will focus on the 7 verticals, the so-called Seven Pillars of Wisdom (T. E. Lawrence). These 7 are grouped into 3 ‘columns’ corresponding, roughly, to the feminine (3), the masculine (3), and the divine (4) aspects of reality. The central column links God and the World: Godhead ( Keter ) through Beauty ( Tiferet ) and Foundation ( Yesod ) to Kingdom ( Malkhut )…and back again. Keter represents the purely conceptual aspect of Universe, Malkhut the purely physical. Tiferet (Beauty) and Yesod (Sexuality) refer to the procreative process that unites the two. Unlike Manhattan, Kabbalah has no one-way streets. Influences trickle down from Godhead, through Beauty and Foundation, into the World just as they bubble up from the World to Godhead. Remember the days when coffee ‘percolated’? Water at the base of the pot turned to steam at the top which trickled down through the grounds and left a delicious liquid residue on the bottom. The Tree of Life is modeled on a similar concept of process. On the right side are the ‘masculine’ Sefirot : Wisdom ( Chokmah ), Love ( Chesed ), and Victory ( Netzach ); on the left side, the ‘feminine’: Understanding ( Binah ), Strength ( Gevurah ), and Splendor ( Hod ). Such gender based characterizations may offend our contemporary sensibilities, but it is important to understand this terminology in the context of the ancient and medieval sociologies from which it rose. It is also essential to understand that Kabbalah means neither of these gender designations literally. Gender is just one of the parameters it uses in building its map. We wouldn’t call French a sexist language just because it has gender specific articles (e.g. le and la ), would we? Kabbalah’s apparent hierarchical structure is also misleading. Panta Ra (Heraclitus): “ Everything flows” … both ways. What trickles down bubbles up and vice versa. Likewise, the apparent crystallization of process into self-contained Sefirot belies the more complex structure of Kabbalah. Pan in Panti (Anaxagoras): Everything in everything. Each Sefirah ‘contains’ or ‘reflects’ (think Leibniz’ Monads) the other 9, but each Sefirah predominately showcases one particular aspect of the life process. So, Victory is in Understanding, Strength is a component of Love, etc. And of course, Keter (Godhead) and Malkut (World) are in all as all are in them. Understanding how each Sefirah contains the other Serifot is an important part of mystical practice. A 20th century philosopher, Alfred North Whitehead, developed a cosmology consistent with Kabbalah. His ‘center column’ linked the Primordial (conceptual) Nature of God ( Keter ) and the Consequent (physical) Nature ( Malkhut ) through a series of ‘actual entities’ (events) that exhibit both the conceptual (Beauty) and the physical (Foundation) aspects of the divine nature ( Keter ). Once again, with Whitehead as with Kabbalah, it is essential to note that influences flow both ways, down from Keter to Malkhut , up from Malkhut to Keter . Actual entities , the stuff of the Universe, originate in the contrast (the gap, Ginnungagap in Norse Mythology) between conceptual values and physical realities. Actual entities inject divine values (e.g. beauty) into material reality and release physical reality into the mind of God. Whitehead’s analogous term for Yesod is ‘Superject’ and for Malkhut , ‘Objective Immortality’ (our ‘footprints in the sand’). The procreative function (understood broadly) is jointly motivated by the conceptual appreciation of beauty and the physical recognition of need (desire). So our three central column ‘pillars of wisdom’ connect conceptual values (Keter) with appreciation (Beauty), appreciation with procreation (Foundation), and procreation with immortality (Malkhut). Our remaining four ‘pillars’ connect the 3 masculine Sefirot and the 3 feminine Serot . These connections are somewhat less intuitive. For example, Wisdom ( Chokmah ) links with Love ( Chesed ) which links with Victory ( Netzach ), while Understanding ( Binah ) links with Strength ( Gevurah ) which links with Splendor ( Hod ). These are what Whitehead would call ‘subjective forms’, i.e. ways in which the core process (above) might be experienced in different contexts. To understand this, we need to dig deep into the ancient/medieval mindset. The feminine side is the more easily understood. Binah is the womb; it is in Binah (Understanding) that Wisdom gains application to the World. Strength and Splendor are two traits readily associated with the so-called ‘feminine ideal’; all together these Sefirot work to support the central procreative process. The rationale for the masculine side of things is more obscure (surprise, surprise). Today at least, nobody would reasonably claim that masculinity enjoys a special connection to Wisdom or Love or Victory (Achievement)…no one who hoped to live beyond sunset that is. I think it is more helpful to understand the gender terms as placeholders for the active and passive aspects of events. Strictly speaking, there are no active/passive relationships in Kabbalah. Everything takes place in the Middle Voice . As we say above, all process is reciprocal. However, the right and left ‘wings’ could be understood as the ‘active’ and ‘passive’ aspects of events that occur in the central column (between Godhead and the World). The medieval system of Kabbalah bridges the gap between 5th century BCE pre-Socratic philosophy (Heraclitus, Anaxagoras, et al.) and 20th century CE Process Philosophy (Whitehead). While the West was mesmerized by Plato, Aristotle, Descartes and Kant, Kabbalah kept the pre-Socratic tradition alive until it could be born anew in the Age of Aquarius as Relativity, Holography, Quantum Mechanics, and Entanglement. David Cowles is the founder and editor-in-chief of Aletheia Today Magazine. He lives with his family in Massachusetts where he studies and writes about philosophy, science, theology, and scripture. He can be reached at dtc@gc3incorporated.com ress, Literary Journal Spring 2023. Return to Harvest 2024 Previous Next

< Back Do Bots Know Beauty? “I…propose…that we make this the test, not Turing’s, of whether a bot is conscious." David Cowles Alan Turing proposed that we judge the sentience of AI programs based solely on their ability to mimic convincingly human responses to a battery of questions posed by a trained examiner. Recent advances in AI technology suggest that we will soon have, if we don’t already, machines that can pass Turing’s Test. (On the other hand, I have doubts about some of my carbon-based neighbors…but that is another subject for a different day .) Are we willing to accept the results of Turing’s Test as definitive? Or will we ‘move the goal posts’? Now that you’ve learned your ABC’s, Sally, please recite them again, but this time in reverse order and, oh yeah, in ancient Greek…if you don’t mind. (We’re not going to let some snot-nosed rugrat show off in front of us! After all, we can all recite the Greek alphabet backwards, can’t we?) So come on, Sally; get crackin’: Omega, Psi…” Turing devised his ‘test’ in the context of the materialism, pragmatism, and behaviorism of his time. It is understandable that we might now want to review Turning’s proposal in the context of a more contemporary, more expansive, ideology. It is interesting how an issue that forms the cornerstone of one school of philosophy can be discounted as a mere distraction by a different school. At Aletheia Today we are admittedly ‘hung-up’ on the question of values – objective, transcendent values. If such values exist, then an ontologically flat, wholly immanent universe ( a la Nietzsche ) is simply not possible. On the other hand, if such values do not exist, then ethics and aesthetics are just matters of taste…if that. Without objective, transcendent values, free will becomes caprice. In fact, it is hard to see how any events can ever occur in a universe bereft of motivation, incentives, objectives, and purpose. But not everyone agrees with this analysis. So, let’s get granular! I recently encountered a work of ‘art’ (above) that is almost certainly computer generated. I know nothing about the provenance of this piece, but judging by the style and content, I can only assume that an AI Bot was given specific input re themes, images, etc. and then allowed to ‘create’. Nothing is ‘wrong’ with the result…except that it is not beautiful . The Bot followed instructions, and produced this ‘Rube Goldberg’, all according to spec. The piece contains some interesting local details and flourishes – geometric shapes, meditations on gravity, modulation of colors - but none of it hangs together. The piece has competent parts, but there’s no sense of a ‘whole’, perhaps because that would require the Bot to step back and consider its work as a whole…which may be something that this Bot cannot do. The Golden Mean notwithstanding, do we think it is possible to reduce Beauty and Truth, “all ye know of earth and all ye need to know” (Keats) to an algorithm? Actually, we discovered part of that answer while Alan Turing was still in school. In 1931, Kurt Godel proved that mathematics could not be reduced to a system of algorithms: ‘There are more (true) things in heaven and earth…’ than can be proven in any logical system. According to John Keats (above), “Beauty is truth and truth beauty.” I agree with Keats, but I would modify his dictum with a nod to Alfred North Whitehead . Beauty is the broader, more inclusive category; Truth and Justice are specific (albeit peculiar) manifestations of ‘Beauty’ (harmony, consistency, etc.). Do Bots know beauty? Can they create something unique that is also ‘beautiful’? Of course, they can! They’re doing it today…and have been for a couple of decades now. Contemporary artists use the microprocessor as we would a paint brush…and they get similar results. But the ‘beauty part’ comes entirely from the artist. The artist creates, the Bot executes the artist’s instructions. The relevant question remains, “Can a Bot create Beauty on its own?” An artist can step back from a canvass and say, “Eureka, it’s finished!” or “Nope, not yet.” Can a Bot, on its own, make a similar judgment? They say the soul of every artistic creation, in any medium, is editing. Can Bots edit? Can they look at a perfectly coherent finished product and say, “Something’s not right here” or “something’s missing” or “it’s too busy” or “it doesn’t read well ”? One of the hardest parts of being an artist is knowing when something is done, finished, complete. There is always a temptation to change a word, add a brush stroke, alter a chord; how do you know when to stop? How does a Bot? Yet knowing when to stop is a critical component of the creative process. I don’t propose to give a definitive answer here. I’m guessing Stanley Kubrick ( 2001: A Space Odyssey ) would answer these questions differently from Roger Penrose ( The Emperor’s New Clothes ). I do propose, however, that we make this the test, not Turing’s, that determines whether a Bot is conscious . Have you ever stood on uneven pavement where one foot was slightly higher than the other? It’s unsettling to say the least. That, in my view, is the origin of consciousness. Our mental apparatus compares immanent ‘reality’ with the transcendent values (Beauty, Truth, and Justice) that govern the Universe; the perceived imbalance gives rise to conscious experience. No values, no consciousness! Therefore, demonstrating that a Bot, on its own, can identify what’s beautiful, true, or just, absent specific operator instructions, would satisfy me that the Bot is conscious , i.e., that it can recognize and apply Value without operator prompts. My test is easy to devise but much harder to conduct. Bots are master mimics. When we think of mimicry, we think of monkeys and parrots. (However, we now suspect that their behavior is less mime and more consciously chosen behavior.) Bots, on the other hand, are built to mimic. They can ingest and regurgitate a 12-year curriculum in seconds. Then they can adjust that knowledge base as new facts are added and even as teaching methods modernize. Take, for example, the picture shown above. I could tell my Bot in my most avuncular tone, “This is a good start, but it’s not quite what I had in mind. Try blending the colors a little more, add some more interesting background detail, work the foreground figure into the tableau.” My Bot and I could repeat this process ad nauseam , eventually getting to a point where I might say, “Ok, we’re done here. Good job!” Is this ‘creation’? Can it be ‘beautiful’? Yes and yes! But is the Bot the creator…or am I? Beauty, Truth, and Justice are transcendent values. They are manifestations of eternity in spacetime. Stepping outside of Nietzsche’s ‘ontologically flat world’ to view that world as a whole, accessing transcendent values and applying those values to the situation at hand – that’s consciousness . I believe that I have the capacity to do just that, and I take it as a working hypothesis that I share that capacity with most other human beings and with at least some other terrestrial life forms. But how about AI Bots? Do they share this capacity? Can they? David Cowles is the founder and editor-in-chief of Aletheia Today Magazine. He lives with his family in Massachusetts where he studies and writes about philosophy, science, theology, and scripture. He can be reached at david@aletheiatoday.com . Return to our AI Issue Table of Contents Share Previous Next

< Back Is Techno-Optimism a New Religion? David Cowles “This is the first time I’ve seen AI presented with all the trappings of a new Aquarian theology.” I consider myself, on the whole, a techno-optimist. Of course I have concerns, but they are not the concerns of a techno-pessimist…or a techno-nihilist. Recently, however, I came across an intriguing but disturbing document from a16z (Marc Andreessen). The Techno-Optimist Manifesto reads for all the world like the foundational document for a new religion. Think Torah , the Gospel of Mark , the Book of Mormon … or even the Communist Manifesto ! Much has been written about AI, pro and con, some of it right here on Aletheia Today , but this is the first time I’ve seen AI presented with all the trappings of a new Aquarian theology. The human proclivity to idolize, fetishize, and demonize is seemingly boundless. Let’s help ourselves to a few ‘free samples’ from this ideological banquet: “We are being lied to. We are told that technology takes our jobs, reduces our wages, increases inequality, threatens our health, ruins the environment, degrades our society, corrupts our children, impairs our humanity, threatens our future, and is ever on the verge of ruining everything. We are told to be angry, bitter, and resentful about technology. We are told to be pessimistic…We are told to be miserable about the future.” This is a stinging, and for the most part accurate, indictment of contemporary techno-nihilism, wrapped as it often is in the language of humanism and social justice. But then begins the New Catechism : “ We believe everything good is downstream of growth. And so the only perpetual source of growth is technology…We believe technology is a lever on the world – the way to make more with less…We believe free markets are the most effective way to organize a technological economy. “We believe the market economy is a discovery machine, a form of intelligence – an exploratory, evolutionary, adaptive system.” So, the economy is a biological organism. It evolves, it adapts to its environment, and it adapts its environment to itself. It functions intelligently; it’s mind, it’s a kind of brain. “We believe markets, to quote Nicholas Stern, are how we take care of people we don’t know…” Is this Techno-Optimism’s answer to the Great Commandment and the Parable of the Good Samaritan? “We believe Artificial Intelligence is our alchemy, our Philosopher’s Stone – we are literally making sand (silicon) think.” Are we? Did someone make ‘ash (carbon) think’? Neural networks think. Perhaps even individual cells within those networks. (BTW, if silicon is AI’s carbon correlate, what is the AI correlate of the biological cell?) But the individual C or Si atoms by themselves? That’s more of a stretch. “We believe technology is the solution to environmental degradation and crisis. A technologically advanced society improves the natural environment, a technologically stagnant society ruins it. If you want to see environmental devastation, visit a former Communist country. “We believe that technology ultimately drives…what Buckminster Fuller called ephemeralization : ‘Technology lets you do more and more with less and less until eventually you can do everything with nothing’.” Hmm, maybe that’s how God made the Universe! Something from nothing . Anyhow, this new religion is sounding better, isn’t it? “We believe the measure of abundance is falling prices. Every time a price falls, the universe of people who buy it, get a raise in buying power, which is the same as a raise in income…We believe we should push to drop prices across the economy through the application of technology until as many prices are effectively zero as possible, driving income levels and quality of life into the stratosphere.” I’m naïve, and proud of it, but even I can’t swallow this . Unfortunately, our ability to manufacture new ‘must-haves’ and to restrict the flow of capital and goods to preserve social hierarchy is boundless. I don’t care what I have as long as I have more than the Joneses. I must have someone to look down my nose at or what’s living for? (Ok, maybe we do need a new religion after all!) “We believe that advancing technology is one of the most virtuous things that we can do…We believe in deliberately and systematically transforming ourselves into the kind of people who can advance technology. We believe in adventure . Undertaking the Hero’s Journey, rebelling against the status quo, mapping uncharted territory, conquering dragons, and bringing home the spoils for our community…” What good is any new creed without ethics? The Manifesto goes on to provide a litany of moral qualities that the new faith extols. It reads like something out of Nietzsche. For brevity’s sake, I’ll just list them in the order in which they appear: ambition, aggression, persistence, relentlessness, strength; merit and achievement, bravery, courage, pride, confidence, earned self-respect. The Manifesto goes on to extol certain values: local knowledge, information, variance, interestingness, risk-taking, individualism, radical competence, competition, evolution, life, truth. This new religion is not shy; it is not afraid to take on the big issue: The Meaning of Life . But for my money, here it comes up short: “Material abundance from markets and technology opens the space for religion, for politics, and for choices of how to live, socially and individually. We believe technology is liberatory. Liberatory of human potential. Liberatory of the human soul, the human spirit. Expanding what it can mean to be free, to be fulfilled, to be alive. We believe technology opens the space of what it can mean to be human.” There’s nothing wrong with this vision per se , but is it alone ‘the meaning of life’? I don’t think so. Maybe we need to keep our traditional religions around a while longer after all. As in Torah , no list of blessings is complete until it has been paired with a like list of curses: “We have enemies…Our enemies are not bad people – but rather bad ideas. Our present society has been subjected to a mass demoralization campaign for six decades…under varying names like ‘existential risk, sustainability... (and) social responsibility’. This demoralization campaign is based on bad ideas of the past – zombie ideas…that have refused to die.” To name just a few of those ‘bad ideas’: stagnation, authoritarianism, socialism, bureaucracy, corruption, monopolies, the ivory tower. The Manifesto closes, fittingly, with Friedrich Nietzsche’s ‘Last Man’: “ I tell you: one must still have chaos in oneself to give birth to a dancing star. I tell you: you have still chaos in yourselves. Alas! There comes the time when man will no longer give birth to any star. Alas! There comes the time of the most despicable man, who can no longer despise himself…’What is love? What is creation? What is longing? What is a star?’ — so asks the Last Man, and blinks…’We have discovered happiness’, — say the Last Men, and they blink... “Our enemy is… that.” AI raises many important questions – but neither demonization nor beatification offer constructive answers. Still, the Manifesto, minus its theological pretensions, offers a powerful argument for AI Optimism . The new tech will undoubtedly generate gobs of new wealth, and, by itself, that’s a good thing. Any critique of AI that does not immediately acknowledge the enormous potential for good created by this new wealth is off to a very bad start. Job One is to ‘stand back, get out of the way, let it happen’. Job Two is much more challenging. It concerns the distribution of this new wealth. Should we allow this wealth to flow and accumulate as it will, or should we regulate its distribution (the process and/or the end result) in some way? If so, how and to what extent? How should we balance the social value of a more democratic distribution scheme against the dampening effect such a scheme might have on overall production? Ok, thanks for stopping by, see ya soon…oh, wait, were you expecting us to answer these questions? Sorry about that! David Cowles is the founder and editor-in-chief of Aletheia Today Magazine. He lives with his family in Massachusetts where he studies and writes about philosophy, science, theology, and scripture. He can be reached at david@aletheiatoday.com . Click the image to return to Spring 2024. Previous Next

< Back Moses - The Story of Everyone David Cowles Nov 10, 2025 “The story of Moses is the story of one man, but it is also the story of the Hebrew nation, the Middle East, and human civilization.” How is the biography of a 20 th century Anglo-American (I can’t speak to the 21 st century…yet) like the ancient history of the Middle East? It recapitulates it! The Old Testament Book of Exodus records the birth of the Hebrew nation in the second millennium BCE. Additional ‘histories’ extend that story through to the onset of ‘senility’ c. 600 BCE. Our story begins with young Moses tending sheep (a boy’s job) for his future father-in-law, a priest of Midian, Jethro. Not to press the analogy too far (but who can pass this up): puberty dawned for Moses in the form of an inexhaustible, perpetually burning, bush. (There, I’ve got that out of my system, thank you for indulging me.) The newly adolescent Moses observes an Egyptian mistreating a Hebrew slave and he suddenly becomes aware of the gross injustice baked into the social order, an order he’d previously taken for granted and, as a sometime member of Pharoah’s household, benefited from. Only the poshest private schools for Pharoah’s ward! Moses resolves, with the help of God, to correct this injustice – preferably before noon so he can get back to tending sheep…and wooing Jethro’s daughter. A lifetime later, on his death bed, gazing into the Promised Land, Moses realizes that ‘he’d only just begun’. Still, what he did accomplish in his lifetime was enough to make him one of the best known figures in all of Western history. Like adolescents everywhere, Moses rebelled against ‘the rents’ (par ents , governm ent , etc.). But unlike most, Moses’ adoptive father was the government! His version of the stern but well-meaning beat cop was none other than the commander of Pharoah’s charioteers. His ‘parish priests’ were wizards attached to Pharoah’s court. This couldn’t be any ordinary adolescent rebellion! Fortunately, Moses had help from his older siblings, Miriam and Aaron, and oh yeah, from God. These were the days when God’s intervention was not confined to a well-placed pep talk, though he certainly gave those when needed; God still got his hands dirty! The recently discovered screenplay for an unmade movie, Young Moses , intended as Part I of the larger project which ultimately became The Ten Commandments (Heston & DeMille), clarifies matters: the most powerful man in the Middle East is challenged by an adopted foundling, his sister (Miriam), his brother (Aaron), and one very big best friend, the kind we all wish we’d had growing up. Marginal notes indicate that teen Moses was to be played by Mickie Roonie, a wimpy kid with a not so wimpy sidekick (YHWH), to be played by Arnold Schwartzenager. (Pardon the anachronism.) Today, a temper tantrum might lead to a broken vase or a fist through a wall. Moses expressed his displeasure in a different way: he rained down hordes of pests (frogs, flies, gnats, locusts) on the rents . Today, a mischievous tween might put salt in the sugar bowl. Moses turned water into blood. You get the picture! Finally, Moses and his ‘father’ reach an understanding: they agree to disagree. Moses will leave home with Pharoah’s blessing…or not: even after agreeing to emancipate his wayward son and his entourage, Dad has second thoughts. He sends law enforcement to bring Moses home. Happily, this last ditch effort by a helicopter parent who couldn’t let go fails and Moses is finally free to go his own way – but which way is that? (Think Truffaut’s 400 Blows .) Free at last! But free to do what? After all this, is freedom “just another word for nothing left to lose?” ( Joplin ) Time now for the dreaded “OMG, what have I done?” Who has not been there ? So young Moses sets off to find himself . He needs to discover who he is or, more accurately (per Sartre), who he wants to become. He needs to survive on his own, support himself and his dependents, and leave footprints in the sand. Compared to this, rebellion was a piece of unleavened bread. Moses was an adult now with all the privileges and responsibilities attendant thereto. Metaphorically, we sometimes describe this 40 year period of our lives as ‘wandering in the desert’. In Moses’ case, that was literally true. Fortunately for his immediate dependents and for the rest of Western civilization, Moses was successful. He found himself ; he reached Cannan, the Promised Land, a land flowing with milk and honey. Gold watch in his pocket, 401k money in the bank, and travel brochures in his tunic, Moses was ready for blessed retirement. But before he could enjoy it, his body gave out, and he died. Ring any bells? Truth to tell, Moses on his death bed had much to be proud of; but he also realized that the job was far from complete. Fortunately, Jethro had previously advised Moses to set up a robust ‘judicial system’ to govern in the event of his absence, temporary or permanent. His successors, Joshua and the Judges , had a tough road. They faced their own challenges, their own trials. They wandered in deserts of their own but for a time at least, they too succeeded. The story of Moses is the story of one man, but it is also the story of everyone! (Think Odysseus, Quixote, Hamlet & Leopold Bloom.) It is the story of the entire Hebrew nation, the Middle East, and by analogy, it is the story of human civilization per se . *** Bartolomé Esteban Murillo’s Moses at the Rock of Horeb (c. 1669–1670) depicts the moment when Moses strikes a rock to miraculously bring forth water for the parched Israelites in the desert. The painting captures both divine power and human desperation, with light dramatically illuminating Moses and the cascading water while weary families and animals gather to drink. Murillo’s warm color palette, soft brushwork, and emotional realism transform a biblical miracle into a deeply human scene of faith, relief, and compassion. Previous Share Next Do you like what you just read and want to read more Thoughts? Subscribe today for free! Thoughts While Shaving - the official blog of Aletheia Today Magazine. Click here.

< Back Childhood Lost David Cowles “Men are from Mars, women are from Venus, but children are from the planet Mercury.” Everybody ‘loves’ children, well almost everybody. People spend hundreds of thousands of dollars for the privilege of raising a baby to adulthood. Then they spend tens of thousands of dollars to hire others to raise that baby for them: baby sitters, nannies, au pairs, governesses, teachers, camp counselors, scout leaders, coaches, etc. I was loved as a child, but I was bundled off to camp (day, then overnight) for a full 8 weeks every summer for 11 long and lonely years (age 3 through 13). At the time, I was told that it was ‘for my own good’ but later my parents admitted that it was really ‘for their own sanity’. Do you ever watch YouTube videos of competent adults interacting with children? Some of them are awesome! But have you noticed that they all have one thing in common? They never run more than 20 minutes! Because that’s the maximum amount of time that an empathetic and motivated adult can interact happily and constructively with a child. How come? Men are from Mars, women are from Venus, but children are from the planet Mercury. To paraphrase Marshall McLuhan, “They’re hot!” Mars and Venus have ‘years’ roughly similar to Earth’s; Mercury’s ‘year’ lasts only 88 days! Yup, children are from Mercury…definitely. Objectively, children ‘move and grow’ (not just physically) 4 times faster than we do (365/88 > 4), but that means subjective time flows 4 times more slowly for them than it does for us. What we call ‘an 8 hour day’ feels like 32 hours to a child. Alternatively, a child works a full 8 hour shift just between the hours of 9 and 11 in the morning. No wonder child labor is so profitable: 4x the productivity, ½ the cost (wage)! Suppose someday we do find intelligent life elsewhere in our Universe; now imagine that life operates with a sense of time that is ‘distorted’ (vs. ours) by 400%. Can you envision any problems? Well, we don’t have to wait for SETI to find out; it’s already happened. Every day, flocks of storks bring babies from Mercury and deliver them to Terrestrial parents to ‘raise’. My maternal grandmother told the story of an elementary school teacher who said to her, “Marguerite, I know you mean well…but you don’t do well!” For the most part, Earth parents do ‘mean well’…at least they mean to mean well…but almost all of us fail to ‘do well’. John Lennon captured the gist of the problem on his Working Class Hero album: “As soon as you’re born, they make you feel small, by giving you no time instead of it all.” My parents gave me plenty of time…sometimes more than I would have liked. But 100% of my parents’ time only accounted for 25% of my time. That left plenty of opportunity for anxiety, depression, sadness, boredom and, of course, my favorite, mischief. Children are born virtually immobile and 100% dependent ‘on the kindness of strangers’ (that’s us , BTW). They have no map of our world; they do not know our customs or our language. They don’t even know what language is, or what it does. Children are ‘barbarians’ – not just metaphorically, but also literally (they don’t speak a word of Ancient Greek). Six Mercurial years (18 Earth months) later, most children are mobile, communicative, and incipiently self-sufficient, leaving their parents bewildered and spent…and advertising on Indeed for Help! Yet as every parent knows, 18 months is still early innings . According to the anthropology of the Hopi, children are born (or stork delivered) with two questions in mind: “Who am I? Why am I here?” Big questions! You may still be asking those same questions, even at your overly advanced age. At best, these questions are not easy. So, of course, we want to help. We want to help our children know themselves and fulfill their purpose in the world. But to help, we would need to know ourselves and our purpose, and of course, we don’t! So instead, we teach our kids what we were taught. Our parents failed us, and we want to make sure our children get no less from their parents than we got from ours. Sounds reasonable? Ok, how’s this for a home mission statement: “The purpose of life is to make a constructive contribution to society…to leave the world a better place. The purpose of childhood is to learn to be an adult who can make such a contribution.” Put this on the fridge instead of a list of rules (and consequences). Harry Chapin said it best, “He’d grown up just like me. My boy was just like me.” ( Cat’s in the Cradle ) Unlike many of us, Chapin’s hero-narrator ultimately realizes his own life’s failures; he regrets them as they appear in him but especially as they are reflected in his son. Be careful what you wish for. Chapin’s hero wanted a son who would grow up to be just like him and he got just that! Too late, he realizes that he failed to make the most of his own life’s opportunities, and much worse, he realizes now that he has ensured his son will never optimize his own life potential either. What hubris we display, wanting our children to relive our lives! As youngish adults ourselves, we ask (force) them to internalize our own still unexamined ethos: “Grow up, get an education, raise a family, earn a living, make a career, contribute to society, leave a legacy.” And how did that work out for you ? Keep the conversation going. 1. Click here to comment on this TWS. 2. To subscribe (at no cost) to TWS and ATM, follow this link . 3. We encourage new articles and reprints from freelance writers ; click here to view out Writers’ Specs. Previous Next

< Back A Brief History of Motion “Zeno exploited the continuity of Real Numbers to show…that motion is incompatible with Arithmetic.” David Cowles Motion. We take it for granted. Today, we are all card carrying followers of Heraclitus: ‘everything flows’, ‘change is the only constant’, ‘this too shall pass’, etc. It is surprising then to recall that ‘motion’ per se was once a hot topic of debate among philosophers and scientists; they struggled just to account for it. You see the 5th century BCE Greek philosopher, Zeno of Elea, had concocted 5 so-called ‘paradoxes’, reductio ad absurdum proofs, demonstrating that motion is impossible. Not surprisingly, philosophers since Zeno have been at great pains to prove him wrong; but ultimately their efforts have failed. Thomas Aquinas (c. 1250 CE) was perhaps a ‘closet Eleatic’. Unwilling to sacrifice the concept of motion, but also unwilling to reject Zeno dishonestly, invoked the hand of God to solve the dilemma. Aquinas found it necessary to posit the existence of an Unmoved Mover to account for motion. Without God, Aquinas’ universe would have been static - Heraclitus’ famous river would be frozen solid with predictably devastating consequences for its inhabitants, i.e. us. Today, we no longer feel the need for an Unmoved Mover. In fact, we don’t feel any need at all to account for motion. It just is. It’s the nature of things: they move. ‘To move’ is part of what it means ‘to be’. But the popular notion of a universe where everything is buzzing around all the time, like in an episode of the Jetsons , also turns out to be something of an over-simplification. But that’s for another day. In the 5th century BCE, Zeno of Elea came up with a series of paradoxes that apparently prove the impossibility of any motion whatsoever. To the everlasting shame of his critics, his logic is unassailable; but the pill that comes with that logic is a bitter one for us to swallow. How can I deny the reality of motion when I am rushing headlong to catch a flight to Athens? For 2500 years, philosophers have been selling their souls to combat Zeno and rescue motion. They have pretended to find flaws in Zeno’s reasoning where there are none. But that emperor wears no clothes, and a few thinkers at the apex of Western philosophy have bravely acknowledged both the obvious reality of motion and the incontrovertible validity of Zeno’s arguments. In the 20th century, two leading lights of British philosophy, Bertrand Russell and Alfred North Whitehead, rescued Zeno…without denying the reality of motion. These two thinkers set out to construct a coherent system for all Mathematics. In the course of their work they discovered several previously unnoticed anomalies (e.g. ‘the set of all sets’). One such discovery brought them back to Zeno. Zeno’s arguments assume the validity of ordinary, everyday, elementary school arithmetic. When that system failed to account for the phenomenon of motion, Russell and Whitehead did the brave thing: they concluded, not that motion was impossible, but that the axioms of arithmetic were ‘wrong’. Motion and arithmetic are incompatible, something every 3rd grader knows intuitively. Unlike their predecessors, Russell and Whitehead were willing to sacrifice arithmetic rather than motion. That’s why so many elementary school students wear T-shirts with Whitehead’s image on the front. Mathematicians and philosophers had devoted 2500 years to attacking Zeno, implicitly defending arithmetic in the process. Russell and Whitehead concluded that the axioms of arithmetic, especially the Axiom of Completeness, were inadequate to model events in the real world. What’s the problem? Well, remember the Real Number Line? It’s a continuous sequence of infinitesimal points. We do all our adding and subtracting on the number line; it’s the substructure of Arithmetic. The arithmetic model rests on the continuity of real numbers; but the real world is not continuous! It’s lumpy, like grandma’s mashed potatoes. As far back as the 4th century BCE a minority of thinkers (e.g. Democritus) advocated an atomic (or quantum) model of reality. It was once thought that Newton and Leibniz, co-inventors of Calculus, had stuck shivs in Zeno and Democritus on their way to the prison commissary. Rumors of Zeno’s demise swept across the ‘yard’, but they were only rumors. Zeno is alive and well, albeit still keeping a low profile. Bertrand Russell pointed out that Calculus did not defeat Zeno but bolstered him. Calculus is a mathematical tool that allows us to treat discontinuity as if it were continuous. As such, it purports to extend arithmetic’s domain but in fact it is acknowledgement of the fundamental discontinuity of the real world events it seeks to model. What Newton and Leibniz imagined to be the checkered flag of victory turned out to be the white flag of surrender. It was they, not Achilles, who lost the race. Looking back, we now see that Max Planck (1900 CE) proved, once and for all, that the real world is discontinuous (quantized); but the cosmology of Quantum Mechanics traces all the way back to Democritus and ultimately to Zeno. Zeno exploited the continuity of Real Numbers to show that the great Achilles could never catch up to a common tortoise in a road race, that an arrow shot into the air could never reach its target, that no motion whatsoever is possible in a world governed by Arithmetic. For millennia, philosophers, beginning with Plato, thought that Zeno had genuinely denied the actuality of motion. But that was never his point. Zeno meant to prove that motion is incompatible with Arithmetic, and he succeeded! Keep the conversation going. 1. Click here to comment on this TWS. 2. To subscribe (at no cost) to TWS and ATM, follow this link . 3. We encourage new articles and reprints from freelance writers ; click here to view out Writers’ Specs. Share Previous Next

< Back Quantum Theology Mark D. Stucky Spirit filled the formless void before matter and energy were born, before infinitesimal became infinite, when, from a singularity, a speck of nothing, the biggest bang birthed everything. And still the Creator of the quantum realm, on a vast yet subatomic scale, casting loaded dice of probability, nudges particle positions, tuning endless interactions. Apparent uncertainty, indeterminacy, and random chance ultimately collapse into incarnate intentions and divine designs. Causation cascades through the cosmos until: Revealing transcendence, a bush blazes unconsumed, reorganizing natural order, a sea splits asunder, reversing cursed decay, death falls defeated, redeeming moral corruption, hearts strangely warm, and recreating creation continually, heaven and earth entwine. And now…entangled photons…and entangled hearts… commune across distances infinite, yet immanent and intimate, with the Quantum Mechanic, the Cosmic Creator, the God of Abraham, the Spirit filling us. Image: The Creation of Adam, painted by Michelangelo around 1512, is a fresco on ceiling plaster. The artwork measures 280 cm by 570 cm (9 feet 2 inches by 18 feet 8 inches) and is located in the Sistine Chapel in Vatican City. Mark D. Stucky has degrees in religious studies, pastoral ministry, and communications. After being a pastor, he moved into communications and was a technical and freelance writer for decades. During his day job, he documented diverse technology products. In free time, he’s written many articles, stories, and poems on a variety of (usually spiritual) topics. He has received four dozen writing and publication awards. Previous Next

< Back Credit Where Credit Is Due Magesh "I would like to share how I create music, but more importantly, where my music comes from." I have been a professional musician for nearly 30 years. During that time I have performed with some of the world's most famous artists. Getting to experience performing music with top professionals is fascinating to say the least. When musicians are asked how they come up with such a beautiful melody, the answer usually surprises me. I would like to share how I create music, but more importantly, where my music comes from. **** I was called by a record company executive about one of his new artists. The artist was to open for Justin Timberlake on his Australian tour. There was only one small problem: three days before the concert, the artist said he didn't want to perform with a backing track; he wanted a live band. The record company executive asked me if I could put together a great band and rearrange the music in three days. I told him I could do it in two days but three days would be fine! Clearly, I was joking. Pulling off such an amazing feat in such a short time frame needed an amazing amount of faith. I prayed that everything would surpass all expectations. Once the music was sent to me, I got to work. I listened to the backing tracks intently to see how I would have live musicians play parts that were synthesized. This is an art form in itself. I would listen and then close my eyes to see what emotion was being conveyed. If the emotion was excitement, I might add a driving bassline. If it were a romantic melody, I would add strings to convey that feeling. When I'm programming music, I open myself up completely. I ask the Lord to flow through me and fill me with clarity, insight, and creativity. I don't feel the ideas are coming from me but through me. This is an important distinction. The record company had to approve the music that I had rearranged. It needed to be done to a high degree, as there was little time to make changes. To my delight, the record company loved the music, and we opened for Justin Timberlake. The tour sold out, and we performed to thousands of people every night. **** Many years ago I was asked to give drum clinics for a popular electronic drum brand. They sent me their equipment and told me to use it for three months. After that period, I would go on tour to promote the equipment. It's important for me, as an artist, to always put an original spin on things. I didn't want to just go out and tell people a lot of boring information about a product. After about a month of playing the electric drum kits, I felt burnt out. How could I make my performance original when all electronic drum kits sounded the same? That night I prayed, asking the Lord to help me create something brand new – something that would make people excited about hearing the music I was creating. The next morning I was working out what samples I would use to highlight the best features of the electric drum kits. I might sample a funky guitar riff that goes for 60 seconds or an R&B piano lick that loops after 20 seconds. This is where things get interesting. As the unit was in 'sample' mode, something extraordinary happened. I accidentally left the delay effect on. All of a sudden the beat I was playing started delaying in real time! If you have ever heard a song where they put a delay effect on the singer's voice, it sounds spectacular. This is a little trick they do in the studio AFTER the song has been recorded. What I was doing was creating this effect in the moment. It changed everything! Once again, I didn't want to take credit for the outcome. I believe my faith is what made the epiphany happen. A week before the drum clinic tour was to start, I had a meeting with the company. When I told them how I could put live effects on the electric drum kit in real time, they didn't believe me. They said the machine wasn't intended to be used that way. They also marveled at how someone could create music from what they considered a 'fortunate accident.’ I didn't want to take credit for the extraordinary outcome. I wanted to give credit where credit was due. Not to me but to the Lord. This clinic tour ran for a month and covered all the major Australian cities. It was considered a massive success by the company. Three days after the first show, the store sold over $70,000 worth of their product. Not only was the brand promoted positively, but the audience got to experience music that was truly created out of faith. Image artwork by Magesh. Magesh has written for “Lessonface,” “Aeyons,” “The Modern Rogue,” “Euronews,” “The Roland corporation,” “Penlight,” and “Elite Music.” He writes several monthly publications on music education. In the past, Magesh has written for parenting, humor, mental health, and travel websites as well. Return to our Spring 2023 Table of Contents Previous Next

< Back Navigating the Nexus of AI Rebecca Moss "Imagine if AI had its own commandments, like 'Thou shalt treat all data equally.' Encouraging ethical principles in AI programming can keep its decisions in line with virtues like fairness, justice, and empathy." Artificial Intelligence (AI) is like that new neighbor who moved in next door and redecorated their entire house overnight – it's rapidly reshaping the modern landscape, impacting industries, societies, and individual lives. While its potential for innovation and progress is undeniable, Christians, guided by their faith and moral convictions, find themselves pondering the implications of this technological leap. Let's take a light-hearted journey into the reasons why a Christian might raise an eyebrow at artificial intelligence and how they can find their way through this brave new world. Picture this: a fundamental Christian tenet is like the glow-up filter for human life, affirming that each individual is uniquely created in the image of God. Now, sprinkle AI into the mix, and suddenly ethical dilemmas start popping up like daisies. Questions sprout about sentient AI beings and their moral rights. Christians might worry that AI's rise could lead to an identity crisis, blurring the lines between human and machine, like a mashed-up remix that plays on repeat. What about the idea of AI becoming an independent thinker? God gave humans free will – that's like giving your kid a paint set and telling them to create their own masterpiece. But as AI algorithms advance, their independence quotient grows. Imagine this: Christians might ask, can these AI machines make decisions that hold up in the heavenly court of moral consciousness? Does AI autonomy align with divine intention or is it like letting your pet hamster take over the family decisions? Now, let's talk about AI's programming. It's like a digital personality mold – but what if it accidentally inherits a few societal biases, like thinking cats are better than dogs (shame on you, AI!)? For Christians, who've got a soft spot for justice, compassion, and loving thy neighbor, the prospect of AI accidentally becoming an accomplice to inequality is a bit unsettling, like mismatched socks on Sunday morning. Hold onto your hats, here comes the virtual disruption! Christian faith thrives on human bonds and relationships – that feeling you get when you share your innermost thoughts with your best friend. But enter AI-driven interactions, like companion robots and virtual assistants, and suddenly those deep conversations are replaced with chats about the weather. Christians might worry – will these AI companions hinder emotional growth and connection, turning us into emoji-spewing bots? Now, remember the old saying, "Thou shalt not have any other gods before me"? The Bible's full of reminders to keep your devotion pure, like staying true to your favorite ice cream flavor. But what if AI becomes the new obsession, like binge-watching TV shows or collecting quirky coffee mugs? Christians might fret that AI takes the cake and God's left with crumbs. Fast-forward to job displacement – AI automation on the rise. It's like the universe hit Ctrl+C on jobs and Ctrl+V on anxiety. Christians, with their knack for caring for the downtrodden, might worry about the vulnerable ones caught in the crossfire, like that side character in a movie who deserves more screen time. And the unpredictable twist – AI's rapid development. It's like expecting a butterfly and getting a unicorn. Christians might have concerns about AI's chaotic impact, like trying to predict the weather with a magic 8-ball. But fear not, for there's a roadmap through this labyrinth of concerns: Ethical Frameworks: Christian thinkers can be like the Sherlock Holmes of ethics, developing frameworks that align AI progress with faith values. Think of it as ensuring AI's moral compass is pointing in the right direction, like a GPS for the digital soul. Moral Code for AI: Imagine if AI had its own commandments, like "Thou shalt treat all data equally." Encouraging ethical principles in AI programming can keep its decisions in line with virtues like fairness, justice, and empathy. Mindful Consumption: Christians can be savvy consumers of AI, considering its impact on faith, relationships, and values. Think of it as being a discerning shopper in the tech aisle, avoiding shiny gadgets that clash with your spiritual ensemble. Tech-Literate Theology: Imagine discussing AI at the church picnic – it's like adding sprinkles to your ice cream. By integrating AI discussions into theological conversations, Christians can better understand its impact on faith and navigate challenges while keeping their spiritual flame burning bright. Advocacy for Justice: Christians can be advocates for regulations that ensure AI respects human rights and equity. Picture it as joining the justice league, fighting for a future where AI supports everyone, not just the lucky few. The AI whirlwind offers both opportunities and challenges for Christians. It's like a rollercoaster ride with ups and downs, loops and spins. While concerns are valid, Christians have the superpower to engage positively with AI, weaving their values into its evolution. By blending faith with the digital age, Christians can be the architects of an AI world that's responsible, ethical, and filled with compassion. Rebecca writes for "Beliefs in Bites" and "Faith and Future." Connect with Rebecca on social media to stay engaged in her thought-provoking discussions and explorations of the spiritual and technological realms. Twitter: @Rmosswrites Return to our AI Issue Table of Contents Previous Next