About
By Randall Smith
At Mass the other day, the priest said, "Today, we face a pivotal choice." He was referring to the challenges of artificial intelligence. AI presents a challenge, but it's important to understand that the challenges we face and the pivotal choices we must make are the ones mankind has faced repeatedly – ever since the beginning.
It is often said that we are in a "new age" where "everything has changed." This is a tendency exacerbated by the way remarks in the Second Vatican Council's Pastoral Constitution on the Modern World (Gaudium et spes) have been interpreted by some. In Gaudium et spes 4, it says: "Today, the human race is involved in a new stage of history. Profound and rapid changes are spreading by degrees around the whole world."
Contrary to the oft-made claim that Gaudium et spes was overly optimistic, the Council fathers warn: "As happens in any crisis of growth, this transformation has brought serious difficulties in its wake. Thus while man extends his power in every direction, he does not always succeed in subjecting it to his own welfare." They then go on to mention some of the serious problems: continuing starvation, lack of educational resources, the destructive force of atomic weapons, increased atheism – and its consequences in a lack of respect for the dignity of the human person.
In retrospect, I think the Council Fathers can be excused for being amazed at the changes that had taken place in their lifetimes. If you were a Council Father born in 1900, when you were young, you would have mostly seen people traveling at the speed people had traveled since the time of Christ: on foot or by horse. But when you traveled to the Second Vatican Council in 1965, you likely would have traveled on jet plane, and your interviews on radio and television could be beamed around the world.
Mankind was just four years from landing men on the moon. You would have seen two destructive world wars, the Holocaust, the murder of millions in Russia and China, and the creation of atomic weapons. We think we face changes, but they are nothing compared to the changes faced by that generation.
Although we shouldn't discount the startling developments that took place in the twentieth century, we might wonder whether there was ever an age that didn't consider itself "pivotal."
The ancient Greek world took itself to be "pivotal" culturally, moving past the "barbarian" cultures that did not know Greek philosophy and culture.
The Romans took themselves to be "pivotal," civilizing the world with law and public works.
Charlemagne saw himself as a "pivotal" figure pushing back against the Muslim invasions of Europe.
Theologians in the thirteenth century described their style as "modern" to distinguish it from their predecessors.
The thinkers of the Renaissance saw themselves as "pivotal," as did the thinkers of the Enlightenment and the Marxists of the twentieth century.
But we're all very "modern" now, whatever that means. According to some, modernity began with Galileo and Descartes in the sixteenth century; others claim it was with Francis Bacon and Thomas Hobbes in the seventeenth century; and still others say "modernity" began with Darwin, Marx, and Freud in the late nineteenth century.
Read Paul Johnson's classic work Modern Times and you'll find that the "modern world" began with Sir Arthur Eddington's experiments validating Albert Einstein's theory of relativity. So what does it mean to be "modern"? People used to claim we're "postmodern." But that was a while ago. I don't know what we are now.
In each age, the claim was made that "it's a new age," so "everything will be different now." When America was discovered, they called it "the New World," and many imagined that in this "new world," everything would be different. It was, and it wasn't. The old diseases, both physical and spiritual, traveled with them.
But this question about "pivotal moments" – when we face "a fork in the road" – can be traced further back...
At Mass the other day, the priest said, "Today, we face a pivotal choice." He was referring to the challenges of artificial intelligence. AI presents a challenge, but it's important to understand that the challenges we face and the pivotal choices we must make are the ones mankind has faced repeatedly – ever since the beginning.
It is often said that we are in a "new age" where "everything has changed." This is a tendency exacerbated by the way remarks in the Second Vatican Council's Pastoral Constitution on the Modern World (Gaudium et spes) have been interpreted by some. In Gaudium et spes 4, it says: "Today, the human race is involved in a new stage of history. Profound and rapid changes are spreading by degrees around the whole world."
Contrary to the oft-made claim that Gaudium et spes was overly optimistic, the Council fathers warn: "As happens in any crisis of growth, this transformation has brought serious difficulties in its wake. Thus while man extends his power in every direction, he does not always succeed in subjecting it to his own welfare." They then go on to mention some of the serious problems: continuing starvation, lack of educational resources, the destructive force of atomic weapons, increased atheism – and its consequences in a lack of respect for the dignity of the human person.
In retrospect, I think the Council Fathers can be excused for being amazed at the changes that had taken place in their lifetimes. If you were a Council Father born in 1900, when you were young, you would have mostly seen people traveling at the speed people had traveled since the time of Christ: on foot or by horse. But when you traveled to the Second Vatican Council in 1965, you likely would have traveled on jet plane, and your interviews on radio and television could be beamed around the world.
Mankind was just four years from landing men on the moon. You would have seen two destructive world wars, the Holocaust, the murder of millions in Russia and China, and the creation of atomic weapons. We think we face changes, but they are nothing compared to the changes faced by that generation.
Although we shouldn't discount the startling developments that took place in the twentieth century, we might wonder whether there was ever an age that didn't consider itself "pivotal."
The ancient Greek world took itself to be "pivotal" culturally, moving past the "barbarian" cultures that did not know Greek philosophy and culture.
The Romans took themselves to be "pivotal," civilizing the world with law and public works.
Charlemagne saw himself as a "pivotal" figure pushing back against the Muslim invasions of Europe.
Theologians in the thirteenth century described their style as "modern" to distinguish it from their predecessors.
The thinkers of the Renaissance saw themselves as "pivotal," as did the thinkers of the Enlightenment and the Marxists of the twentieth century.
But we're all very "modern" now, whatever that means. According to some, modernity began with Galileo and Descartes in the sixteenth century; others claim it was with Francis Bacon and Thomas Hobbes in the seventeenth century; and still others say "modernity" began with Darwin, Marx, and Freud in the late nineteenth century.
Read Paul Johnson's classic work Modern Times and you'll find that the "modern world" began with Sir Arthur Eddington's experiments validating Albert Einstein's theory of relativity. So what does it mean to be "modern"? People used to claim we're "postmodern." But that was a while ago. I don't know what we are now.
In each age, the claim was made that "it's a new age," so "everything will be different now." When America was discovered, they called it "the New World," and many imagined that in this "new world," everything would be different. It was, and it wasn't. The old diseases, both physical and spiritual, traveled with them.
But this question about "pivotal moments" – when we face "a fork in the road" – can be traced further back...