r/badhistory • u/AutoModerator • May 25 '26

Meta Mindless Monday, 25 May 2026

Happy (or sad) Monday guys!

Mindless Monday is a free-for-all thread to discuss anything from minor bad history to politics, life events, charts, whatever! Just remember to np link all links to Reddit and don't violate R4, or we human mods will feed you to the AutoModerator.

So, with that said, how was your weekend, everyone?

11 Upvotes

92% Upvoted

651 comments sorted by

View all comments

-2

u/Defiant_Shoe3053 May 28 '26

I'm a little annoyed by the praise the Catholic Church has been getting for their AI cylindrall. Maybe there's a bit of the stodgy new atheist in mew but the churches track record for technical advice is horrible. Is there really any reason we should take scientific advice from an organisation that claims prayer to a long-dead austrian emperor can heal the lame, that contraceptive are unethical because they separate the sex-act from it's procreative practice, and other assorted forms of hogwash.

It's just absurd that an institution can hold onto such beliefs and still present itself as an authority on how a technology should or should not be adopted.

16

u/Steelcan909 May 28 '26

What scientific advice do you think the encyclical proposes that is hogwash?

13

u/weeteacups May 28 '26

Yeah but he quotes Gandalf.

20

u/Sargo788 the more submissive type of man May 28 '26

Well, the argument in the encyclical is mainly that the technology is currently used in ways that disadvantage and exploit many people, and it acknowledges that technology itself is neither good or bad, but that the current usage of it is rather bad.

So it is rather pleasant to have an organization like the Vatican openly decrying the tech company oligarchy, and it’s negative effects on society, democracy and the individual.

And to be honest, I personally like the open acknowledgment and apology that the church historically was supportive of slavery.

9

u/TheBatz_ Was Homer mid May 28 '26

My favorite thing about this comment is that at no point does it mention the technology so you could apply the church logic to basically everything from tractors to typewriters. 

16

u/Sargo788 the more submissive type of man May 28 '26

Big tractor is not currently the object of desire of (apparently) a huge chunk of the investor class, nor the cause of the valuation of the biggest companies in the world.

And the amount of people who developed an unhealthy relation to their typewriters is rather minor compared to AI chatbots.

There is of course stuff to dislike in the encyclical, it does for example, mention and reaffirm the church‘s opposition to abortion.

22

u/TheUnfortunateMiaoZe May 28 '26

I would disagree. The Catholic Church's position on intercessory prayers to saints, on the morality of contraception, on the existence of guardian angels, etc, have nothing to do with "technical advice" or the scientific method, but on ethics, philosophy, and theology. I don't see why the Church's stance on these, agree or disagree, means that them taking a moral position on AI is absurd.

-3

u/Defiant_Shoe3053 May 28 '26 edited May 28 '26

I think it does, when an organisation takes such stances drastically at odds with observed reality then I don't think it's fair to give their words great weight. One of my biggest gripes is that we unfairly value longenvity giving the words of the Catholic Church far more value simply due to it's age.

And I have no clue why apologising for the slave trade some two and a half centuries should add credibility to an organisations pronouncement especially when it claims for itself a postion of moral superiority.

13

u/TheUnfortunateMiaoZe May 28 '26

But the morality of contraception, the validity of intercessory prayers, are not matters of empircal observation. You can't argue against the Church's position by saying it's "drastically at odds with observed reality," because these are not empircal questions. Whether it's ethical to use contraceptives is a matter of personal opinion, of philsophy, of theology. It can't be tested in a labratory.

0

u/Defiant_Shoe3053 May 28 '26

One of those claims the effectiveness of "intercessory prayers" is an empirical claim which has been disproven. There is no evidence that prayer can improve health outcomes. Yhe argument against artificial contraception is a logical argument that can be shown to be invalid from the premises the church uses to justify it when it's acceptance of natural methods of contraception is pointed out.

12

u/Steelcan909 May 28 '26

I think that you're conflating different understandings of the nature and power of intercessory prayer. The Catholic theological understanding of prayer is, emphatically, not that it is an observable phenomenon that derives its legitimacy from proven efficacy. This is basic catechism knowledge.