For Comment I wrote about my pilgrimage to France earlier this summer.
For Comment I wrote about my pilgrimage to France earlier this summer.
Tyler Cowen excerpts Peter Gray on children and smartphones. I’ll have to read the book, but the reason I am skeptical of these “anti–moral panic” responses to Haidt et al is that they work from a strange premise: If empirical studies cannot demonstrate that smartphones and/or social media are a mega-mono-cause for child and teen suffering (esp. mental health but other areas as well), then it necessarily follows that we need not be particularly worried about them, they must not be doing much harm, and we ought simply to find a proper use for them. As Gray writes:
Future research should focus on understanding better the ways teens use these tools and how to help them maximize the benefits and minimize the harm.
But why should we make this assumption? We don’t need smartphones or social media to be the mega-mono-cause of anything to see with our own eyes how they are affecting young people. Why treat them as “merely” a neutral tool? Why not still go ahead and restrict them to adults? The burden of proof is on those who presuppose their teen use, not on those who are cautious about a global generational experiment.
Despite the “debunking” subhead, this is a usefully dispassionate, empirical approach to the question of a literacy crisis.
L. M. Sacasas, “AI as Christian Heresy”:
Discussions around the human in relation to technology, specifically AI, parallel older debates about science and religion. In that discursive context, there was a form of argument known as “God of the gaps.” The idea was that God was simply a name for the gaps in our scientific understanding of the world. Of course, once those gaps were filled, God would be effectively squeezed out of the metaphysical picture. Similarly, we are operating with a “human of the gaps” model when we try to locate the essence of the human creature by pointing to what cannot yet be accomplished by a machine, whether these be matters of physical prowess, cognitive ability, or creativity. Such an approach to the human is misguided, just as it was when it was applied to God.
It had been a while, so I rewatched O Brother, Where Art Thou?
And Alastair Roberts is right: If you’re looking for a truly Christian, ingenious interpretation of Homer’s Odyssey, it’s not Nolan you’re seeking. It’s the Coen brothers.
You keep using that word. I do not think, etc.
Two Compact essays by Nathan Pinkoski: one with a sharp descriptive analysis of the return of ethnic politics in the U.K.; another with a deflating and unpersuasive recommendation for conservative popular culture-making in America.
“Somewheres, Everywheres, and Elsewheres” will stick with me. A patriotic Disney World will not.
Michael Tracey explains how podcasts ruined America. Exactly five years ago I wrote, “Quit podcasts." I did, for a year or two. It was a good thing to do. I came back, but I’m not sure I was wrong. Tracey’s point stands even if some pods are worth listening to.
I’m partial to Dwight Macdonald, and I enjoyed this tribute to him via a new collection of his political essays.
Read Jay Caspian Kang on the enrollment cliff.
I found MBD’s three posts on the common good, arguing against his colleagues at NR, an enthralling read.
Per usual, ditto this MLA screed against incorporating AI into teaching and education.
I enjoyed Samuel James’s double-post on Nolan and Gen Z’s “buffered” communication style.
Klein’s read of Nolan’s adaptation is, like French’s, just too didactic and on the nose. It’s worthwhile to attempt to make the familiar strange, by making neighbor-love exotic, but the message is rammed home so solemnly and explicitly that the result is conventional, not radical.
Read Scialabba on the kind of work Graeber was wrong about.
On the blog I wrote about the future tense of the AI-pilled.
Clever meta-take from Douthat. I’ll miss him when he’s at 60 Minutes.
I hope he doesn’t forget how to type the way Bill Simmons did. I like writers to stay writers!
How is it possible that no one knows how to make an IMAX camera anymore, including IMAX?
We love showing our kids “old” movies from our childhoods in the ’80s and ’90s, and usually they work just as well on them as they did on us.
Last night we put on Hocus Pocus from 1993. It was unwatchable. We turned it off after ten minutes. Was this film really so beloved that they made a sequel three decades later?
I finally wrote up my thoughts on Nolan’s Odyssey.
In Pro Ecclesia I have a review of Michael Peppard’s How Catholics Encounter the Bible.
Even though The Odyssey is out and by now everybody’s seen it, I enjoyed reading David Denby write (sight unseen) about the challenges of cinematic adaptation. Every one of the problems he identifies shows up in Nolan’s film in one way or another (not always as problems, but always as decisions).
I enjoyed these “25 Unsolicited Thoughts on American Literature for America’s 250th."
(H/T: Robin Sloan.)
Karl Johnson, writing about sabbath in Books & Culture in 2010: “when it comes to the ever-encroaching world of work, resistance is greatly aided by legal proscription.”
Audrey Watters asks: “Who is ed-tech for?" The question answers itself.