It is necessary to fall in love… if only to provide an alibi for all the random despair you are going to feel anyway. —Albert Camus
Even if nudity were legal, we all know damn good and well that very few people would ever just go waltzing down the street naked. Still, the chance that someone might decide to take such a stroll should encourage more people to walk
I passed an alleged statistic somewhere this week, one of those that I can never go back and find when I need it, which said something to the effect that 20% of all American couples in a long-term relationship had experienced a three-way sexual triste or “some other form of kink.” I didn’t have time to stop and read at the moment and didn’t think to save the link, so I have no idea who is making that claim. If it was the Kinsey Institute, which is entirely possible, then I really want to read that study and find out what they mean by “some other form of kink.” I have a feeling their definition is broader than mine.
Human nature is funny in that we all, to one degree or another, are drawn toward those things which we are told are off limits. Even the most ancient mythologies about the beginning of human civilization involve some form of “disobedience” whether it be Adam and Eve in Abrahamic mythologies or Izanami and Izanagi in Japanese mythologies. With both, as well as many others, there is some random “fruit” that someone eats when they’re told it’s forbidden. We all want what we can’t have.
Yet, if we had what we think we want, would we be happy? Probably not. We are motivated by the pursuit of things, even if we don’t know how best to use them once we have them. That includes mates. Ancient bedouins, for example, considered the number of wives had to be a symbol of their wealth. King Solomon, circa 970 – 931 BCE, allegedly had 700 wives and 300 concubines and they called him wise. I might want to challenge that assertion. Do you think he actually knew the names of all his wives, their birthdays, or their country of origin? Ancient misogynists collected wives like trophies. They didn’t know what to actually do with them once they had them and trying to keep them all happy was undoubtedly a nightmare.
That’s why I don’t think allowing for more open, casual nudity in public would actually result in much, if any, change. People are too into fashion, too self-conscious of their bodies, and too afraid of being shamed to just run around naked all the time. Sure, there would be some, here and there, who would take advantage of the opportunity, and that might provide a momentary thrill for a neighboring 15-year-old. But random naked people isn’t likely to set off any kind of a crime spree; incidents of rape aren’t likely to increase (because it’s not about sex, moron), communicable diseases aren’t likely to spread (that would involve some form of contact and they’re really just not that into you), and Beelzebub will not suddenly appear and take over the world (too many have already voted for him in the Republican primaries).
There’s nothing wrong with a little random nudity. So here, enjoy some I pulled from the catalog.
Friday, January 3, 2025
Today’s update is considerably shorter than yesterday’s, despite the fact I have extensive thoughts swirling around in my head. Something’s off. I feel as though my t-shirt is choking me; it’s not, but there’s an uncomfortable feeling of tightness around my lower neck. I’m having some minor difficulty breathing and I’m a bit lightheaded. Put it all together and I’m having some difficulty stringing words together.
An interesting article appears in the online edition of the New York Times (I can’t find it in the print edition, but it could be in section C) that asks the question, “Can God speak through AI?” The article is totally benign and nonsectarian, as one might expect from the Times. Rabbis, Imams, and pastors are experimenting with AI writing and sometimes delivering their sermons. There has always been some wrangling required as religion wrestles with any new technology going all the way back to the printing press. The question inevitably asked comes down to whether the voice and inspiration of a deity can flow through something other than a human hand or voice.
The question raised in my sloggy excuse for a brain is how long will it take before AI becomes the deity? After all, we’re dealing with mythologies as the source material. While current experiments use a leader’s previous material to fashion new sermons or worship experiences, we’re not that far away from AI being able to translate and interpret the original languages of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. In fact, AI may produce the most accurate translation yet as it would likely have the ability to reflect tone and usage common to the authors. Put it all together and we may not be too far from Lifeway Press marketing a 52-part Sunday morning package to small churches who can’t really afford a pastor. From there, it’s a short step to AI taking over religion.
Think I’m crazy? Look at how the printing press ultimately participated in dividing Christianity. Catholicism reigned supreme as long as only priests had access to Bibles. Gutenberg’s invention changed that, eventually allowing for there to be a Bible in the hands of every parishioner. People started interpreting scripture for themselves and as they did, differences in those interpretations resulted in the splits and fractures we now recognize as different denominations. There are still millions of people who believe that the King James version of the Bible is the only one actually inspired by God.
Understand, when it comes to the topic of what is or is not ‘inspired’ we’re not dealing with reality. Faith is in no way moored to fact. The vast majority of believers in any religion are dependent on what is said by the leaders. Scriptures in ancient languages with references that no longer apply are practically impossible for even a reasonably educated person to decipher. Data from the Pew Research Center shows that only 38% of North American Christians have post-secondary degrees, the level at which one might begin to understand the intonation of the original texts. Among Hindus, that number is only 6%. Everyone else falls somewhere in between. The dependency on the presumed knowledge of religious leaders is the glue that holds most religions together. Begin replacing that dependency with AI and the potential for the whole thing to go off the rails becomes immense.
Once again, I’m limited in my concern. I doubt I’ll be alive with the First Church of OpenAI starts accepting new members, or requiring devotion and tithes. I do wonder if ChatGPT or something could be trained to write my morning updates. I know it could summarize the news. Could it know how I’m feeling without waking me up? If AI can speak for God then what’s stopping it from speaking for me?
Hmmmm … is there an AI model fueled by coffee?
Share this:
Like this: