What is This?

Who am I, what this blog is about, and what to expect.

Welcome to That Digital Strength!

I’m Fernando Pasquini Santos, a Computer Science professor at Calvin University. This blog is, as you can see, an attempt to record and share some of the research and scholarship I have been doing here.

Objective

In the case you’re not familiarized, Calvin University is an institution with a strong focus on the liberal arts, fostering broad reflection that goes beyond technical aspects, encompassing cultural, social, and interdisciplinary issues. So a recurring need when teaching STEM subjects here is the availability of accessible materials for students delving into these areas focusing on broader cultural reflections about the science and technology presented in the classroom. Although we notice today a vast academic production in the humanities, my impression is that many these materials are often not accessible to STEM students. Frequently, they are either extensive and deep reflections with overly specialized language, or just broad overviews that usually do not connect to specific topics covered in the day to day curricular topics.

Given this scenario, I have considered various strategies, like publishing books and papers. One ideal solution, for example, would be to publish a “Cultural/Interdisciplinary Companion” to the specific themes covered in technical disciplines (for example, as done by Amy Ko, or Matthew Fuller). Sometimes I think how nice it would be to have a complimentary “broader reflection” on each concept we study in a computer programming class, such as if-elses, loops, functions, classes, etc. And, well, that is kind of what we are aiming to do here in this blog. We all know that publishing books and papers are processes that take time, and meanwhile my students are all here, waiting for materials. So, this blog is a way to respond to this urgency. It is surely a more agile solution, allowing for informal and direct dissemination. Of course, blogs are not always valued in academia, especially since they do not undergo a rigorous peer-review process. However, I believe this initiative can make a difference in the lives of students and anyone interested in these reflections on technology and society.

Of course, I will also focus on broader and different topics, not just those strictly related to curricular programs. Some of you may be wondering why religion is included alongside cultural issues, as stated in the blog's subtitle. This is a personal matter related both to my role at a Christian university, where there is a real need to connect themes of Christianity and religion, and to my own academic journey, where I have increasingly recognized the importance of integrating this religious outlook across disciplines—especially in science and technology. I firmly believe there are crucial intersections here that deserve exploration, and this blog will also reflect that focus.

Orientation

That said, I must clarify my approach. Much discussion has been directed to how religious reflections interact with academic subjects, and lots of approaches are possible, including ones that may be… well, not so useful. Let’s keep clear that I don’t want to reflect any simplistic or triumphalistic outlook, posing that merely acknowledging a religious conviction provides solutions to all of the world’s problems. Perhaps this will become clearer as I develop my writings, but for now, let’s just say that I believe there are valuable Christian theological perspectives that can contribute to reflections on contemporary technological issues — not to mention their moral frameworks, orientations and virtues. Religion touches on ultimate questions, and I can’t avoid them as I tackle these technological themes with broader perspectives and interests.

You may also be wondering about my academic, philosophical, or theological orientations. I believe it is part of my intellectual honesty to make this clear, even though it can be challenging in a time when it is so easy to dismiss and distrust those who do not align precisely with our own perspectives. (I do not have the solution to situations like this, especially with this kind of media, so usually, the approach is just to have people at a face-to-face coffee conversation.) Nevertheless, what I can say is that I come from a Reformed Christian tradition, which is also the tradition of the institution where I teach. However, I strongly believe in engaging in dialogue with other traditions, especially to foster self-critique and to address blind spots in our own tradition — which is something that I hope you’ll find me doing recurrently. In this sense, I might even prefer the term 'Christian humanism' to describe my perspective, as it distances me from certain recent triumphalist “worldview analysis” endeavors, and puts me besides other Christian thinkers that I influenced me so much, such as C. S. Lewis, Simone Weil, and Jacques Maritain.

To complement, let’s say that, in the philosophy of technology areas, I am particularly drawn to the phenomenological outlook, following authors such as Martin Heidegger, Bernard Stiegler, and Albert Borgmann. And in the realms of sociology and social critique, mention the influence of thinkers like Ivan Illich, Jacques Ellul, and Hartmut Rosa.

On being “post”

One thing I find myself doing (though I'm still not sure if it's a habit or a virtue) is adding the prefix "post" before various possible designations that I consider taking. What attracts me is that this signals an awareness of the problems and limitations of certain positions while also striving to move beyond them without entirely discarding some of their contributions. When we say "post-something," we are not necessarily saying "anti-something" (though, in some cases, that might be true). The problem with that, however, is that the prefix “post” also doesn’t define the new ideas we're trying to adopt in order to correct and move past the original position. This ambiguity thus leaves room for various interpretations, as multiple and sometimes conflicting positions can all be considered "post" in their own ways. But I think I can live with that. Let’s say that being “post” means that we are all on the move. We are seeking something. And we need to talk about it.

So, with that considered, l’ll take the courage to describe myself as post-evangelical, post-liberal, and someone seeking a post-digital perspective on life.

I was born and raised in an evangelical Christian tradition, and continue being a Christian, practicing its disciplines and rituals, going to church and holding to its core convictions. However, I find important to say here that, over the years—through personal study and exposure to historical studies such as developed by scholars like Mark Noll, George Marsden and Kristin Du Mez—I have come to recognize some fundamental problems within evangelicalism, particularly in its post-war developments. When I look at the pre-war evangelical tradition, I see many valuable aspects that I hold dear and still carry with me. However, in the post-war era, I notice some developments that I believe have strayed from basic Christian orthodoxy, often leading to paths that have now become evident in movements like American Christian nationalism, which I reject strongly and want to keep maximum distance, not to mention the way that it also walks alongside market-oriented mindsets, celebrity culture and abuse in all its forms.

It is in this sense that I prefer to position myself as post-evangelical, recognizing the need for a new reformation within contemporary Christianity—one that, just to start, would reject individualism, embrace peaceful dialogue between Christian traditions, move away from sect-like configurations of spiritual abuse and "us versus them" mentalities, ethnocentric and racist outlooks, and fundamentally rethink its relationship with power. Instead, it should pay a renewed attention to Jesus, and his kingdom of love, mercy, and hospitality (here, my influences surely pass through thinkers like Stanley Hauerwas and John Milbank).

Anyway, there have been various attempts to define what exactly this “post-evangelical” turn entails, and I align with many of its perspectives, though it includes, of course, broad and diverse spectrum of positions. Let’s just reinforce that I remain committed to Christianity as expressed in the ecumenical creeds and core tenets of the faith.

Now, about post-liberalism, it's clear that not only does the prefix "post" encompass various positions, but even the term "liberal" itself admits multiple interpretations. To clarify, I am referring to liberalism in the sense of political philosophy. To say: I am discussing the liberal tradition that has shaped Western democracies over the past centuries.

One of my reasons for adding “post” is to show that I do not align with the obvious anti-liberal movements that have manifested in violent fascist and nationalist ideologies, both in past and present. In fact, I firmly uphold many core convictions of classical liberalism, such as the value of democracy, tolerance, and individual freedom. That said, I am also increasingly convinced of some shortcomings of this form of political philosophy. Liberalism's emphasis on individualism and personal autonomy usually comes at the expense of the role of communities, and social covenants where people care for one another. It also discourages the search for a common life, oriented around shared social goods, leaving the question of good life to a limited notion of “personal choice”. Furthermore, it also degenerates into an ethic of hoarding and acceleration that fosters a generalized societal collapse, spreading through all spheres of life, such as environmental, psychological and institutional. These are big issues that we face today, and of course there has been both more conservative and more progressive outlooks, which even I am still exploring, learning, and could share in later posts.

Finally, let’s turn to post-digitality. I've done some research and noticed some movements promoting this idea, and spanning across a wide range of perspectives and disciplines. Many of them even align with post-humanism, a perspective I haven't deeply explored and am unsure if I fully align with (in fact, I see many potential issues with it). But my particular perspective, here, starts with the awareness of how information and digital technologies dominate everything today, shaping nearly every aspect of our lives—from work to entertainment. We are used to hearing terms "digital society" or the "information society." So, when I talk about post-digitality, I mean a movement that acknowledges the value, importance, and utility of digital technologies—i.e., it is not an anti-technology stance —, but rather an attempt to find their rightful place within a vision of the common good and a flourishing life. Digital and information technology can dominate our lives and societies in non-flourishing ways; thus, we need to move past them (therefore the “post”) and recover other aspects of life that do not reduce to digital information. What are these? What is the precise role of information technology inside a view of the good life, where it is put in an harmonious (or, some would say, ecological) relationship with other aspects of life? Well, these questions are what I believe to be my whole scholarship project, and I hope to share my reflections about this here in later texts.

Why this title?

That actually brings us to the title of this blog. The digital is a strong presence in today’s world, and indeed it can become a hideous strength. Yes, the title here is a wordplay with C. S. Lewis’ science fiction novel, That Hideous Strength. And yes, it sounds dark and pessimistic, as well as the novel. And that is part of my intention, surely — I’m trying to be honest and realist, and notice that our digital society does not seem to be heading to a good direction, especially as it is in the hands of big-tech corporations and other forces, operating under regimes of acceleration, surveillance capitalism, and techno-feudalism. After some reading and reflection, I must say I’m not afraid to even attribute some theological meaning to it, as Jacques Ellul has done extensively in his works. (I may discuss this in more detail later).

But I also don't want this blog's title to suggest that everything I discuss here would support an extreme stance of abandoning all digital technology, demonizing it, or maybe “retreating to the wilderness” (although that is a temptation to many of us working with IT, let’s be honest!). I believe that a good part of our moral responsibility today is to acknowledge the dominance of digital technology—sometimes even suffering from its effect—and to adopt a dual, perhaps even paradoxical, approach of both engagement and withdrawal from these large systems that dominate our world. You might notice that I am, after all, a professor of computer science: I teach programming and machine learning, for example. While doing it, understand that there is still “something there”, in these fields, be it some kind of beauty or human aspiration, even though embedded in vast systems of injustice and numerous challenges. Therefore, I find it adequate to just work with what we have, in this world and place where God put me (and us), in a kind of incarnational attitude that doesn’t dread getting stained by engaging with a stained world. That is to say that yes, I like computer science and information technology in general (otherwise I wouldn’t have so much pleasure in teaching and doing research), though it sometimes seem to me as it is a kind of what Nineveh was to Jonah. Sometimes, the easiest thing would be to throw all away and go to the other direction. But that is not our mission.

With that said, let’s just keep the thought that this blog’s title points to the force of digital technology in our world and lives, and our mission to think our way through it.

Looking forward

I’m surely not expecting a big audience here, but let’s hope we can foster some nice and interesting discussions. As I noticed at the start, you can expect next posts touching on specific topics in programming and machine learning, as I try to put together some wide reflections while teaching these courses. But I’m also planning to put some other ideas once in a while, such as what I believe that are some “post-digital” directions or ways that I see Christian faith connecting to technological themes. I hope you find something thought-provoking here. Let’s dive in together!