data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/28c9c/28c9c25872f861e3f538db67d0ef5befaa5cb2ec" alt=""
It has been a few days since the world witnessed the events of November 13 in Paris. The initial words used to describe the event were naturally filled with emotion: “Paris mourns,” “an act of war,” “World War III,” “Blood-bath,” and “massacre.” Now that a few days have passed, I am in a better place to look at the nature of what happened and I pray that you are as well. Of course, anytime someone or some group of people intentionally kill innocent persons, it is evil; but some who speak of these events then go on to attribute the blame to religion and say that if it were not for religion this would not be happening. Some, specifically blame Islam and label it a violent faith. This is wrong thinking.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/626a9/626a9d37ed500555e1a09aa063b93a76c7193006" alt=""
Alberta,
days, oil has become a dirty word. Our federal government is gearing up for
presentations in Paris at the United Nations Climate Change Conference. Our
provincial government will experience pressure to reconsider royalty rates and,
if Saskatchewan is any indicator, pressure to create a new price for expelling
carbon into the atmosphere. Those who capture carbon will be able to sell their
rights and carbon will have a defined price.
our province, for the sake of our children and grand-children, for the sake of
jobs, for the sake of my friends who are already looking for jobs and those who
may be afraid they will soon be looking for jobs, can I please ask you to stop
thinking like CEOs of Oil companies and ask you to start thinking like CEOs of
Energy companies?
industry if their company is diversifying. They have responded, “Oh yes, we are
diversifying. We used to be into nothing but conventional oil and now we have
holdings in both heavy oil and conventional oil. With the latest downturn in
oil prices we are diversifying back to conventional oil and even gas!” That’s
not diversifying, CEOs! Or at least, it is not diversifying enough. What about
diversifying into other forms of energy: building high capacity batteries,
installing fields of solar panels, building wind turbines, or investing in fuel
cell research? What about looking at other ways to provide energy and power?
ask you to do something different than wait for the roller-coaster ride
of oil and gas to come back to the top? Please show us that you can truly
diversify, for the sake of our unhealthy addiction to oil, for the sake of our province.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/daf67/daf6700b5254d9244517a04a03f4e6f4bf288bf6" alt=""
alive? To think, to feel, to love and to envy? André Alexis explores all of
this and more in the extraordinary Fifteen Dogs, an insightful and
philosophical meditation on the nature of consciousness. It’s a novel filled
with balancing acts: humour juxtaposed with savagery, solitude with the
desperate need to be part of a pack, perceptive prose interspersed with playful
poetry. A wonderful and original piece of writing that challenges the reader to
examine their own existence and recall the age old question, what’s the meaning
of life?”[1]
screenwriters have been writing about consciousness and the essence of life for
a very long time. Fifteen Dogs, by
Andre Alexis, which recently won the 2015 Scotiabank Giller Prize is a significant
addition to the genre. If you add to this the concept of artificial
intelligence (AI), as a related subject, the list of stories grows even longer.
A few key questions continue to be asked. Would it ever be possible to create
life? How would one know if life had been created? Would it ever be possible to
create consciousness? How would one know if consciousness had been created? Would
it be possible to create an artificial intelligence that was indistinguishable
from a human? If one were able to do this, would it indeed be human? What does
it mean to be human? Is there a need to protect humans from their own
creations?
Machina, a 2015 movie, focused on robots that were
designed to be indistinguishable from humans. Even as the Giller Prize judges
ruminate upon the words, “to think, to feel, to love, to envy,” so also do the
writers of this screenplay. Another film, Her
(2013), grappled with the concept of an intelligence that resided in the
hardware of a computer and went on to develop feelings. Eventually the OS being was capable of learning beyond
the capabilities of the ones who had created it and exhibited feelings for
humans and other OS entities. Although a much older discussion, I, Robot, a 1950 collection of
short-stories by famed Sci-Fi writer Isaac Asimov, asked questions about the
safety of creating artificial intelligences and constructed the “Three Laws of
Robotics.”
through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.[2]
the brilliant billionaire CEO of Bluebook, in the movie Ex Machina, would have saved himself a lot of trouble if he had
read these principles of robotics and built them into his own version of the
positronic brain.
C. Clarke, in his novel 2001: A Space Odyssey, wrote about a renegade computer that managed to outsmart a team of
astronauts on a mission to one of the moons of Jupiter. The novel became a
stunning movie in 1968 under the direction of Stanley Kubrick. The murderous
computer, HAL 9000, considers himself a conscious entity and finds that he is
afraid when he begins to lose his ability to think.[3]
the Genesis creation account, we read that “God created human beings
in his own image. In the image of God he created them; male and
female he created them;” and for centuries, theologians and philosophers have
been seeking to understand the nature of this imago dei (image of God). We have much yet to learn, but I am
convinced that the beginning of wisdom is to take seriously this concept. The
more we understand the nature of this image, the greater we will comprehend
what it is that makes us truly human. God is a Creator and we are creators. God
is in relationship and calls us to be in relationship with him and with others.
God is a communicator and we are communicators. God is truth and calls us to
truth. God is love and calls us to be love as well.
the final answers regarding the image of God, we need not fear the AI
apocalypse that has been depicted in so many of the stories, movies and
writings in our majority culture. God, who created us from the dust of the earth,
and created the dust before that, is the ultimate creator and sustainer. He is
in control of all life and has set humans to be stewards of His creation. Even
as we struggle to achieve this assignment, and sometimes pursue short-cuts to
cleaning up the messes we have made, the God of the universe watches us and
engages us with gracious concern. May His will be done; for this is what it
means to be alive.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c08b5/c08b522a33336234116b4a0762d421acd52ce3fc" alt=""
A portion of “Recessional,” a poem by Rudyard Kipling, composed in 1897.
God of our fathers, known of old—
Lord of our far-flung battle line—
Beneath whose awful hand we hold
Dominion over palm and pine—
Lord God of Hosts, be with us yet,
Lest we forget—lest we forget!
The tumult and the shouting dies—
The Captains and the Kings depart—
Still stands Thine ancient sacrifice,
An humble and a contrite heart.
Lord God of Hosts, be with us yet,
Lest we forget—lest we forget!
Far-called our navies melt away—
On dune and headland sinks the fire—
Lo, all our pomp of yesterday
Is one with Nineveh and Tyre!
Judge of the Nations, spare us yet,
Lest we forget—lest we forget!
With “an humble and a contrite heart.”
See also Recessional (poem), Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recessional_(poem)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e904f/e904ff6b0f17caeda89064beaeb5522c0da5c4da" alt=""
of the emotional journey of Lorraine and Frank. By saying “emotional journey,”
I mean that Simon is relating the ups and downs, the ecstasies and the miseries
in the emotions of their relationship. He could have tracked the logic of the
marriage or the history as seen from outside of the relationship; but instead,
he follows the ebb and flow of their feelings for each other. It is a captivating
window into one couple’s turbulent relationship. Interspersed throughout are
insights into how feelings often overrule common sense. It is a cautionary tale
of the power of emotions. Dallas Willard said, “Feelings are, with a few exceptions, good
servants. But they are disastrous masters.”[1]
“Darling Lorraine”The first time I saw herI couldn’t be sureBut the sin of impatienceSaid “She’s just what you’re looking for”So I walked right up to herAnd with the part of me that talksI introduced myself as FrankFrom New York,New YorkShe’s so hotShe’s so coolI’m notI’m just a fool in love with Darling LorraineAll my life I’ve been a wandererNot really, I mostly lived near my parent’s homeAnyway Lorraine and I got marriedAnd the usual marriage stuffThen one day she says to meFrom out of the blueShe says, “Frank, I’ve had enoughRomance is a heart-breakerI’m not meant to be a homemakerAnd I’m tired of being Darling Lorraine”What!? you don’t love me anymore?What!? you’re walking out the door?What!? you don’t like the way I chew?Hey, let me tell youYou’re not the woman that I wedYou say you’re depressed but you’re notYou just like to stay in bedI don’t need you darling LorraineDarling LorraineLorraineI long for your loveFinancially speakingI guess I’m a washoutEverybody’s buy and sellAnd sell and buyThat’s what the whole thing’s all aboutIf it had not been LorraineI’d have left here long agoI should have been a musicianI love the pianoShe’s so lightShe’s so freeI’m tight, well, that’s meBut I feel so goodWith Darling LorraineOn Christmas morning Frank awakesTo find Lorraine has made a stack of pancakesThey watch the television, husband and wifeAll afternoon “It’s a wonderful life”What!? you don’t love me anymore?What!? you’re walking out the door?What!? you don’t like the way I chew?Hey let me tell youYou’re not the woman that I wedGimme my robe I’m going back to bedI’m sick to death of you LorraineDarling LorraineLorraineHer hands like woodThe doctor was smilingBut the news wasn’t goodDarling LorrainePlease don’t leave me yetI know you’re in painPain you can’t forgetYour breathing is like an echo of our loveMaybe I’ll go down to the corner storeAnd buy us something sweetHere’s an extra blanket honeyTo wrap around your feetAll the trees were washed with April rainAnd the moon in the meadowTook Darling LorraineWords and music by Paul SimonCopyright held by Universal Music Publishing Group
Works Cited:
the Heart. Carol Stream: NavPress, 2002.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c43a7/c43a7679d14aff7667d27e9e4366512e56dac003" alt=""
For most of us, as we continue to think
about who we are and the road that we have traveled, we find that there are both
regrets and celebrations; there is obedience and inconsistency along the road. We
find that we only partially live the philosophies by which we say we have
chosen to live. Our “love of wisdom” – the literal meaning of philosophy –
struggles with our philo-solatium – “love of comfort.” We sometimes wish we could
go back to the beginning and live it better a second time around. Perhaps this
is the reason why dreams of reincarnation are so prevalent. To borrow a term
from golf: we would all like a “mulligan.”
Even if we could go back with
greater wisdom, and a greater love for wisdom, we would still find ourselves
making choices at each turn of our lives and with each revolution of the earth.
How would we fair on the myriad of choices a second time around? I suggest that
this would not so much be an instance of living our lives over again, but
rather living someone else’s life. Each choice along the way would be a type of
birth from which there would be no return.[1]
Each choice would shape us and contribute to the person we would become. The
product of the series of choices would look very unlike the person we are
today. Going back is not an option.
Wendell Berry expresses a similar idea in one
of his books entitled Hanna Coulter. A character in the story expresses it this way.
“You mustn’t wish for another life. You
mustn’t want to be somebody else. What you must do is this:
“Rejoice evermore.
Pray without ceasing.
In everything give thanks.”
I am not all the way capable of so much, but those are the right instructions.”[2]
I will start again today. This “love of
wisdom,” this “philosophy of life,” can guide me even when I am “not all the
way capable of so much” for “those are the right instructions.” Even if you are
not so convinced that those are the right instructions, you might try the
path and see where it will lead. We can walk it together.
Crow. Berkeley: Counterpoint, 2000; and Stages of Life – https://www.keithshields.ca/2015/11/stages-of-life.html
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/5c605/5c605fc6114a948f94a1c042d4ef56a1993410b3" alt=""
“I know better by now than to try to
predict what is to come. But of all of the stages of my life – Goforth, Squires
Landing, The Good Shepherd; Pigeonville, Lexington, Port William – this one
here on the riverbank bids fair to be the last. Unless of course I fall and
break something or become an emergency of some other kind, and give up the
ghost finally in front of the institutional TV set down at Hargrave. Who knows?”[1]
Crow tells the story of Jayber moving from his life as the village barber
to taking up residence in a “little camp house” along the river. From his “public
life” to the commencement of “a private one.” As he moves, he reminisces about
his life and its stages by referring to the places he had lived.
own life and the places I have lived. I wrote a list of all the places I could
remember that I had lived. It wasn’t a long list and it was a good exercise for
me. It occurred to me that the stages of my life did not always change with the
location in which I lived. Sometimes it was just a move. Other times it was a paradigm
shift in my way of life. I am a farmer’s son who helped with many a carpentry,
mechanical, or veterinary task. I am the science nerd who created experiments
to diagnose genetic disorders using the latest DNA technologies in a clinical
laboratory. I have lived in one of the most densely populated portions of
Vancouver and I have lived where there was a full section of land between us
and our neighbours. I am a son, a husband, a father, and a grandfather. I am a
pastor, church planter, teacher, and
administrator. I am the generalist who knows something about many topics. I
have spent time regretting that I have not learned enough in one specific area
and I have rejoiced in the fact that God has given me a good mind with which to
understand the world. I have spoken with people who were at the top of their
field of science, philosophy, education, theology, entertainment, and financial
investment. I have spoken with people who suffered abuse and who went on to
harm others and spend a good portion of their life in prison. I have seen
people healed of their diseases and I have watched friends die at a young age.
would say that “Some of the changes in my life were imposed, and some were
chosen. . . And each change has been a birth, each having taken me to a new
life from which I could not go back.”[2]
I have often wondered what would have happened if there were other impositions
or other choices along the way. “But of course I have no answer.”[3]
Works Cited:
Berkeley: Counterpoint, 2000.
p. 299.
p. 299.
p. 299.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/06a2f/06a2f15f2d877f088298aa02c6b6d568fdc204c1" alt=""
There
are times when I struggle with what to write in my blog. Annie Dillard is often
a source of inspiration.
Write as if you were dying. At the
same time, assume you write for an audience consisting solely of terminal
patients. That is, after all, the case. What would you begin writing if you
knew you would die soon? What could you say to a dying person that would not
enrage by its triviality?[1]
wrote as if I were dying?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a50b4/a50b4cabf91d63171a8734c56469b53f3a2f16c2" alt=""
Your glory is higher than the heavens.
2 You have taught children and infants
to tell of your strength,
silencing your enemies
and all who oppose you.
the moon and the stars you set in place—
4 what are mere mortals that you should think about them,
human beings that you should care for them?
5 Yet you made them only a little lower than God
and crowned them with glory and honor.
6 You gave them charge of everything you made,
putting all things under their authority—
7 the flocks and the herds
and all the wild animals,
8 the birds in the sky, the fish in the sea,
and everything that swims the ocean currents.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/81a8c/81a8c5a152bb88ac93abb60567a58ad844079fd0" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e7547/e7547d8f3954085ba3db9b2f7e20bdcb81206423" alt=""
who has written hundreds of songs and has 16 Grammy awards. Most of us know him
by the name, Sting. One of my favourite songs written by Sumner is this one,
“Fortress Around Your Heart.” (Listen as you read these lyrics.)
Fortress Around Your
HeartUnder the ruins of a walled city
Crumbling towers in beams of yellow light
No flags of truce, no cries of pity
The siege guns had been pounding through the night
It took a day to build the city
We walked through it’s streets in the afternoon
As I returned across the fields I’d known
I recognised the walls that I once made
I had to stop in my tracks for fear
Of walking on the mines I’d laidAnd if I’ve built this fortress around your heart
Encircled you in trenches and barbed wire
Then let me build a bridge
For I cannot fill the chasm
And let me set the battlements on fireThen I went off to fight some battle
That I’d invented inside my head
Away so long for years and years
You probably thought, or even wished that I was dead
While the armies all are sleeping
Beneath the tattered flag we’d made
I had to stop in my tracks for fear
Of walking on the mines I’d laidAnd if I’ve built this fortress around your heart
Encircled you in trenches and barbed wire
Then let me build a bridge
For I cannot fill the chasm
And let me set the battlements on fireThis prison has now become your home
A sentence you seem prepared to pay
It took a day to build the city
We walked through it’s streets in the afternoon
As I returned across the lands I’d known
I recognised the fields where I’d once played
I had to stop in my tracks for fear
Of walking on the mines I’d laidAnd if I’ve built this fortress around your heart
Encircled you in trenches and barbed wire
Then let me build a bridge
For I cannot fill the chasm
And let me set the battlements on fireWords and Music by Gordon Matthew Sumner; Published by Sony/ATV
Music Publishing LLC
flourished and was built to withstand the temptations and destructive forces of
the world. It uses the metaphor of building castle walls, barbed wire, and land
mines around the loved one to protect them and keep the world from harming
them. But the song is now sung from the perspective of some time after the
relationship has failed. Now, the battlements still stand and obstruct the lover
from getting close to the woman he loved. There is a longing to once again approach
her and pain in not being able to draw next to her. He must withdraw for fear of
the danger of getting too close. Yet, there is still hope. The singer believes
he will be able to build a bridge and once again draw near. He will set fire to
the battlements that keep him away. Enjoy the rich poetry of this song as you
listen to its melodic tone.