profoundly depressing the extent to which the pope’s encyclical, which is mostly about the dangers of technocracy, and the ways in which big tech is colonizing and enslaving the global south, and the enactment of an arms race by states and corporations, and the right of every human to safe and fulfilling work, is being summarized by news organizations as just “calling for more regulation of A·I”
Replies:
14
Boosts:
1
i get it is 42,000 words and all but can you fucking read
204. We live at a time of significant spiritual and cultural blindness. A false pragmatism urges us to sever the roots of our history, as if it were possible to inaugurate a kind of “new creation” detached from the past. Even those who cite important moral principles can fall into this historical nihilism, mistakenly believing that the atrocities of the twentieth century can never happen again. Yet, in reality, the same dynamics are re-emerging under new guises. The mentality of armed equilibrium and deterrence appears to be reasserting itself.
@u2764 Okay obligatory "the Catholic Church formally wishes us vanished from this earth; you do not have to hand --", but calling advocates and believers in the Fukuyama Neoliberal End-Of-History thelogical heretics claiming to perform/usurp divine powers
absolutely SLAPS.
@gaditb the bit in here where the pope says “techbros are trying to transcend humanity and become god, but remember that literal god transcended divinity and became man” is possibly the closest i have ever gotten to thinking jesus-as-god theology is kind of cool
@u2764 Honestly I don't think I have a strong objection to Jesus-as-god theology as a whole. There is a lot of cool, pro-humanity, theologizing you can do with it -- this, "I am the least among you" (or whatever the quote is), ... prolly a few others, I'm not a Christian.
It has its failure modes -- all the failure modes of humanism, for one. Like, Jesus becomes in every society or subsociety the unmarked default human, which means that deviation from that (white (where relevant which is most places and also globally), male, cis*, straight, ablebodied, etc.) default is (interpretable as) deviation from god.
The massive issues I have are what feels like a failure of most Christianities I see, most often, to have more than just the one story to compare things to, like, "oh well this is like when Jesus--". (Leading to a terrible flattening of the uses you can get out of religion.) (Catholicism is /better/ about that I think, but.)
(Which.. maybe that's downstream of the Jesus-as-god?)
@gaditb i think for me, Jesus-as-god is usually tied very much with doctrines of sin/forgiveness/salvation, which are the parts of religion i care least about. in terms of wanting to be a good person who walks a path of righteousness, the fully human aspect of Jesus is a lot more important (Jesus as exemplar of doing the right thing despite being human and suffering human weakness). it is too easy to misread Jesus as Good as just being downstream of his divinity, which is a misreading that obscures the fact that you can (and should) also be Good. this is one of the reasons Marian theology has developed so much, since Mary also lived a life free of sin and didn’t need to also be god to do it, making her possibly a better example for the rest of us
but the parts that are like: god did not find poverty beneath him. god did not find weakness beneath him. god did not find suffering or mortality beneath him. and you are not better than god, so you shouldn’t either. those parts are cool
@u2764 Yeah agreed. I'll defer to you about how tied in Jesus-as-god is the all the sin/salvation BS -- it doesn't make intuitive sense to me why that should be, but I don't know nuthin.
Is Marian theology much of a thing outside of (large parts of) Catholicism?
Not to say Catholicism isn't, like, a huge part of Christianity, just that I'm at least somewhat familiar with the central place of Mary in a lot of practices of Catholicism, and don't think I've seen much outside that. (But also, haven't looked carefully and don't know where to look. Like also, I haven't even been exposed to much of what Marian theologizing looks like and what people get from it/go to it for, just that it is popular.)
@gaditb re: sin/salvation, “Jesus died for our sins” is the explanation for why Jesus “had to die” which is all very tied in with his divinity. because christians believe only god could sacrifice himself on behalf of all humanity, as he is the creator of all humanity. it is a debt he pays back to himself. but i don’t really care about that and find the whole “debt” theology to be kind of meaningless
Marianism exists in Christian traditions with saints and not in ones without saints. so Catholicism, but also Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Christianity, and High Church Lutheranism, and Anglicanism/Episcopalianism. Christian traditions which don’t think you should care about sainthood, which are mostly descendants of Reformed/Calvinist thought, i think do not venerate Mary for the same reasons
@u2764 I get the connection going in reverse, but why does the crucifiction (and its theological centrality) necessarily need to follow from the embodiment?
Like I feel like I can easily imagine "god chose to become human, experienced humanity and suffering and temptation, gave a revelation, died painfully, continued giving revelation informed by that" in a way that mostly just skips over the dying bit and doesn't hold it as the meaning-making centerpoint to the whole episode.
(I realize there probably IS some reason it's necessary. And I definitely realize that I'm kinda going up to Christians like "hey so, Christianity, cool interesting ideas, sure, but is the whole 'cross' thing REALLY that important?")
Today, however, in contrast to the two-sided dynamic of the Cold War, the proliferation of operatives and battlefields makes this mentality increasingly fragile. Escalating conflicts lead to asymmetric and “hybrid” wars, fought not only on the battleground but also on the economic, financial and cyber fronts, where disinformation and campaigns that feed people’s fears are used to manipulate public opinion. In many countries, including those in the Global South, increased military spending is presented as the only response to an uncertain future or perceived threats. Meanwhile, the real cost falls on the poorest, who see resources for healthcare, education and social services being reduced.
205. At the core of these issues is a false realism, based not only on the prevailing mentality of force, but on the cultural and anthropological belief that war is an inevitable part of human nature. It is said that things have always been this way, except for occasional pauses, and that it will always be so! As a result, the concern is no longer the search for peace — which has been lost as a point of reference on the international stage — but rather how and when to take military action. This same argument maintains that it would be irresponsible not to prepare for conflict.
Today, however, in contrast to the two-sided dynamic of the Cold War, the proliferation of operatives and battlefields makes this mentality increasingly fragile. Escalating conflicts lead to asymmetric and “hybrid” wars, fought not only on the battleground but also on the economic, financial and cyber fronts, where disinformation and campaigns that feed people’s fears are used to manipulate public opinion. In many countries, including those in the Global South, increased military spending is presented as the only response to an uncertain future or perceived threats. Meanwhile, the real cost falls on the poorest, who see resources for healthcare, education and social services being reduced.
