There have been various threads of discussion recently in the blogosphere about the depth of blogging and its role as a medium for doing theology. (See Maggi (1) & (2), Steve (1) & (2), Dan and me (1) & (2). (As well as many others out there)

For some it represents the cutting edge of theological endeavour, for others a forum to enter into that domain for a first time, and for some it serves as a useful outlet for the “traditional” theology they do.

I’ve been asked to participate in a colloquium on “virtual theology” early next year and one of the possible topics to address is: Does the fluidity of digital media create a different world-view affecting how theology is done?

Themes such as the nature of authority, multiplicity and simultaneity of information, and virtual presence will all come up at some point.

So I watch with interest the ongoing discussion.

The colloquium is sponsored by the RJ Thompson Centre for Theological Studies here in Auckland and aims to bring a group of trans-Tasman (Australasian) scholars to explore and discuss themes related to doing theology (& related disciplines) in the context of an electronic world. The coordinator is Tim Bulkeley (who also blogs here: SansBlogue).

Seen on jonnybaker: test your political leanings a link to The Political Compass. Here you can take a quick quiz (5 minutes) and see where you lie on the socio-political spectrum (with comparisons to well-known political figures).

Connecting with the earlier post about “I, Robot” Damaris have a brief study guide to the file at: Culture Watch – I, Robot

They also have Part 3 of the interview with Douglas Coupland I’ve blogged about before too. See: Culture Watch – Interview with Douglas Coupland (Part 3)

Full article at Weblog: Fuller Prof Ordered to Leave U.S. – Christianity Today Magazine. Interpretation of what a religious professional is and the Homeland Security departments definition of “approved” seminary for employing them forces Finn Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen out of the country.

Slacktivist comments here on it as well: slacktivist: Mysterious Ways

My fieldtrips for my research often tend to be to the movies. Movies such as the Matrix trilogy, A.I. Artificial Intelligence, Star Trek: Nemesis and today I, Robot serve as a source for thinking about human nature in relation to technology.

In her book on technoculture Lelia Green comments on the increasing number of contemporary narratives that are being told about machine-human interaction.

Cyborgs and science fiction form an area of popular culture which seems to have increased in importance as technology has become more integral to our cultures and our communities. This burgeoning interest in narratives about the future, and about parallel universes, may indicate a desire to understand and explore the present. In speculating about others we are also speculating about ourselves.

Furthermore she says,

Through films such as Blade Runner and The Matrix, our society tells itself stories about what it is to be human in a world where humans are increasingly influenced by, and dependent upon, technology and technocultures. Here the myths of loss and longing are played out in the context of technologically driven futures, where machines can feel feelings and have roles with more humanity in them than the �people� characters do.

I’d definitely put “I, Robot” in this category.

Issues to do with dehumanization, human-machine fusion, technological dependence, the essence of humaness, the relationships between the concepts of body, mind and soul, and the place of love all come out in this film. More so, I think, than did in the slower-paced and “deeper” “A.I. Artificial Intelligence” (though there are moments in that film that are equally provoking).

I enjoyed “I, Robot”, both as an intellectual vehicle for my research and as a story. The ending of the movie with it’s “what next?” questions leaves it open for continuing discussion. Hopefully, they don’t make a sequel.

Wired Magazine Issue 12.07 (July 2004) was themed around “Human Being 2.0″ with lots of interesting articles related to “I, Robot”.

Article seen on the AdBusters web site about Republican attempts to mobilise support for Bush directly through church groups. (CultureJammers: Onward Christian Voter)

The article comments,

It’s no surprise that Bush is counting on the religious right to put him back in office, but how far is he willing to go? And since when is it okay for churches to engage in partisan activity?

Define “partisan”? Does that mean the church cannot express a view on any issue at all. Some of Jesus’ teachings seem pretty partisan to me. The main point in the article seems to be that if you’re seen to be polically partisan you lose your tax-free charitable status. Couldn’t that be seen as a bribe?

Funny sort of a day today. Asked to speak at the School of Theology postgrad seminar on my experiences at the ANZATS conference in Melbourne last month and on participating in the uni postgrad poster expo/competion last year. Sort of felt like a “what did you do in the holidays?” school project.

This year it looks like there’ll be more scope for posters outside of the science/engineering fields so hopefully there will be more theologians out there wanting to get involved with this year’s poster expo. Got very wet going to give the talk as I had to park a long way off campus even though I’d added in extra time to find a park. Dripped my way through the talks.

Also had to complete and hand in my annual PhD review today. It was good to do – I’ve been thinking that progress is slow but when I started writing down all the stuff I’ve done (conferences, papers, expos, chapters etc.) I found it all quite encouraging.

Nice to take time to look back and get some encouragement to go forward.

Even though I’ve been busy preparing theology lectures and generally stressing out being busy recently I’ve been reading these too.

Just finished Alan Jamieson’s Journeying in Faith. To be honest I think I got more out of A Churchless Faith but as with that book the stories told by the various people interviewed were the highlight for me. I admit I found some of the middle chapters dragged a bit but the final chapter “Belonging In and Beyond the Church” will be one I will revisit. After reading it that was the section that I’d like to see expanded upon. (Triggering thoughts with Miroslav Volf’s “exclusion and embrace” motifs)

Also on the bedside table are Stephen Baxter’s Evolution and David Slack’s Bullshit, Backlash and Bleeding Hearts: A confused person’s guide to The Great Race Row. Finding both stimulating reading.

Also on the reading agenda are Evangelical Ecclesiology: Reality or Illusion? (The shift I perceive in some parts of evangelicalism away from a broad movement toward becoming a narrow “denomination” disturbs me) and The Dynamics of Human Life.

I’m in the process of reading the anthology Dark Matter : A Century of Speculative Fiction from the African Diaspora edited by Sheree R. Thomas. I’m finding it both enjoyable, confusing in places and extremely challenging all at the same time. There are short stories and essays in the collection.

Derrick Bell’s short story “The Space Traders” (1992) has been my favourite so far. A story about an alien offer to the US for technology and resources to solve their financial, ecological and energy problems in exchange for all the African Americans living in the US. Some challenging material on the nature of democracy, business, government, racism, slavery and pragmatism in it.

Samuel R. Delany’s essay “Racism and Science Fiction” (1999) is an interesting read too. (Maybe this was picked up by the Star Trek Deep Space 9 episode Far Beyond the Stars)

If you have a chance track the collection down in the local library.

From David Slack’s web site a a short quiz about aspects of the Treaty of Waitangi.

See A Question of Proportion: Questionnaire.

At the end of it you can see how you rate against others who’ve done the quiz.

Finally, a chance to prove that you really are the “expert” you proclaim to be in the tea room.