WiW: Outsourcing humanity

The Week in Words

“Peter Suderman…argues that…’it’s no longer terribly efficient to use our brains to store information.’ Memory, he says, should now function like a simple index, pointing us to places on the Web where we can locate the information we need at the moment we need it….
Don Tapscott, the technology writer, puts it more bluntly. Now that we can look up anything ‘with a click on Google,’ he says, ‘memorizing long passages or historical facts’ is obsolete. Memorization is ‘a waste of time.'”
~Nicholas Carr The Shallows

Memorization is a waste of time, Tapscott suggests.

I understand where Tapscott is coming from.

If memorization is merely a means by which information is stored for future recall, information can be stored much more easily, with much less work, online.

Why memorize sports stats if I can just look them up online whenever I need them? Why memorize the dates of friend’s birthdays when Facebook can remind me on the day?

“[Clive Thompson] suggest that ‘by offloading data onto silicon, we free our own gray matter for more germanely ‘human’ tasks like brainstorming and daydreaming.'”
~Nicholas Carr The Shallows

It’s a nice idea. Let the computers do the dreary work of memorizing. Let’s stick to the parts that make humans unique. The stuff that can’t be outsourced.

Thompson lists brainstorming and daydreaming as more “germanely” (fittingly, appropriately) human tasks than the task of memory.

In a way, he’s right.

We can outsource “memory” (the storage of facts) to computers–but we cannot outsource brainstorming or daydreaming.

As such, brainstorming and daydreaming are more germanely human than memory.

But he fails to mention what I think is an even more germanely human task–the task of thinking.

Humans are unique among created beings in that they have a mind in addition to just a brain.

Humans can think. They can sort through stored information. They can make new connections between information. They can discover new applications of information. And they can be transformed as they think through information.

You can memorize without thinking. Computers do that.

But I don’t know that you can think without memory.

Thinking. It’s an integral part of the Imago Dei.

And memory is an integral part of thinking.

That’s why I disagree with the above commentators.

We can’t outsource memory–because if we do so, we lessen our ability to think. And in doing so, we lose an essential part of what it means to be human.

That’s one thing we can’t outsource.

Don’t forget to take a look at Barbara H’s meme “The Week in Words”, where bloggers collect quotes they’ve read throughout the week.


Heresy Hunter

Yesterday, I discussed the issue of the stereotypical “Critical Calvinist”. In the article I cited, a number of commentors stated that Calvinists were quick to label something heresy. Their most common accusation was that all Arminians are actually semi-Pelagian. (I’ll admit that I’ve occasionally been wont to note the dangerous tendency of Arminian thought towards semipelagianism.) At any rate, the critical Calvinists are also derided as heresy hunters, judgmental, always trying to figure out what’s right and wrong about everything.

I can see how people get that idea. After all, Reformed thought is very interested in truth. I personally am very interested in truth. I believe that there is truth and there is falsehood–and that believers should critically evaluate information in light of truth as it is revealed in God’s word. I believe that there is a right way and a wrong way to read the Bible. I believe that we should read the Bible with the aim of discovering what God intended in Scripture rather than finding what “I get out of it.”

This insistence on truth being truth and not open to individual interpretation already opens me up to charges of judgmentalism from some.

Yet, I don’t think Scripture would agree. 2 Peter 1:20-21 speaks of Scripture saying: “…no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.”

So the conclusion that objective truth does indeed exist is supported by Scripture.

But I am not just interested in the premise that objective truth does exist–I am interested in knowing what that objective truth IS. I want to know and live by truth–and I want to evaluate and reject falsehood.

When I hear that a student has been told by a speaker that he/she needs to “work to be chosen by God”, I bristle.

This piece of information, this idea is clearly unbiblical. In Deuteronomy 7:6-8, God warns the Israelites against thinking that they have been chosen by any merit of their own: “The LORD did not set His love on you nor choose you because you were more in number than any other people, for you were the least of all peoples; but because the LORD loves you…” Romans 9:10-13 speaks of Jacob and Esau and how God chose one over the other: “…for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls…” Jacob was not chosen because he worked for God’s choosing–he was chosen because God, in His divine sovereignty chose to choose him.

In the same way, none of us merit salvation (or any of God’s gifts). We do not receive favor from God because we have worked for it. We receive favor from God because He has sovereignly bestowed it. We don’t work to be chosen. We are chosen. Period. God chooses, we’re chosen (by no act of our own).

Truth. Falsehood. I have evaluated this information in light of truth and have rejected it. I have passed judgment on it.

Scripture is in favor of is sort of evaluation and judgment of what others say. The Bereans were praised in Acts 17 for searching out the Scripture “to find out whether these things [that Paul and Silas taught] were so.” To evaluate ideas on the basis of Scripture is a good thing.

On the other hand, I Corinthians 8:1-2 warns “Knowledge puffs up, but love edifies. And if anyone things that he knows anything, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know.”

The problem with the “Critical Calvinist” and the “Heresy Hunter” isn’t that he evaluates information critically based on the Word of God–it’s that he becomes puffed up with pride and uses his knowledge to tear down the body rather than building it up.

Some might read I Corinthians 8 and suggest that knowledge is a bad thing. “We need childlike faith,” they might say. “Why bother with all this thinking stuff?” Much of the church has unfortunately grabbed hold of this idea and embraced anti-intellectualism.

But I don’t think that when Paul said that knowledge puffs up, he was arguing for anti-intellectualism. Instead, he was arguing for more love and humility.

Knowledge, by itself, makes one think much of himself–and little of those around him who have less knowledge. But, as Paul points out, anybody who thinks he knows something shows that he really doesn’t know much–after all, compared to the vastness of God’s knowledge, our greatest knowledge is but the smallest subset of His infinite wisdom.

So keep thinking, Christians (or start thinking if you haven’t been already)–but consider all the while the smallness of your knowledge compared to the greatness of God’s, lest you become a puffed-up heresy hunter.