Show notes
The folly of human construction is similar to that of large language models. Noam Chomsky talks about this in his famous critique of the current state of artificial intelligence and the absence of scientific analysis. We imagine that these expansive predictive systems are creative. Sure, they are impressive, even helpful—for good and ill—and yes, they will likely replace or change your job, but these tools are not creative. They simply regurgitate what was already found before the LLMs themselves were made functional.
LLMs validate the power of syntax. In effect, a machine is Sola Syntaxis: by merely observing word order and function at scale, it can channel the content of a written text without philosophical abstraction or creativity. LLMs do not comprehend. A machine does not tell you what it thinks, feels, or experiences. Yet, it can often accurately repeat what is found in a text, unlike theologians and philosophers, who are tripped up by human creativity and reason.
At the same time, if you ask an LLM a question about a data set, instead of analyzing the data, it will accurately repeat what other people have said about that data. In that case, it often sounds as stupid as we do.
I believe the marketing people and even some programmers when they say that they do not understand how these systems work because they are neither scientists nor grammarians. They are capitalists, digital tycoons, corporate shills, and engineers. You know, the people who control education, media, politics, and religion in the West in the service of making a buck or pursuing their dreams.
I, myself, am not an expert. The industry may or may not be close to general artificial intelligence. Then again, food, water, and medicine may or may not reach Palestinian children who may or may not be in mortal danger and who may or may not deserve the same benefits upon which you gorge yourself daily. I don't need the Holocaust media to tell me that. I heard it in the Torah.
But hey, ignorance is strength, Habibi.
Whether or not large language models become creative, I do not doubt that industry will leverage them in harmful and destructive ways as we do with all technology—as we already have in West Asia because “nothing changes under the sun.”
But that’s the point. An LLM is just a mechanism of regurgitation. Ask it a question, and you get the same old answer, just faster, at scale. It does a miraculous job of aggregating, processing, regurgitating, and predicting more of the same more efficiently. That’s what human construction is. You take something that was there at the world’s foundation—something you did not create—and rearrange it. You can’t make something new because you are not the builder. The environmental crisis is just more damage piled up. Even the nuclear bomb, as ugly and stupid as it is, is just a bigger bomb. There’s nothing to brag about. It’s not new. It’s just bigger and dumber. You, O man, can’t make one hair on your head black or white.
Or do you have an arm like God? Can you thunder with a voice like his? (Job 40:9)
Unfortunately, I’m convinced that most of you, based on where you are found in the Parable of the Sower, are convinced that you do thunder with a voice like God’s—best of luck to you.
This week, I discuss Luke, chapter 6, verses 46 to 49.
Show Notes
ח-ר-שׁ (ḥet-resh-shin) —or— ח-ר-שׂ (ḥet-resh-sin)In the original consonantal Hebrew, “sin” and “shin” are not differentiated; the reader must infer the correct pronunciation. Is Paul, the self-proclaimed “ἀρχιτέκτων” of 1 Corinthians 3:10, the חֶ֫רֶשׁ (ḥeresh)—the expert “artisan” or the wise חֶֽרֶשׂ (ḥeres), “earthen vessel” of Isaiah 3:3?
“The captain of fifty and the honorable man, the counselor and the expert artisan (or wise earthen vessel),and the skillful enchanter.” (Isaiah 3:3)The Arabic function ح-ر-ش (ḥāʾ-rāʾ-shīn) conveys usages that relate to pottery, for example, “to scratch” or “to be rough” but functions more broadly concerning acts of incitement, provocation, and can mean “to stir up.”
- حَرَشَ (ḥarasha)– to incite or stir up (as in creating conflict).
- تحريش (taḥrīsh) – incitement, provocation, or stirring up discord.
ע-ש-ק (‘ayin-shin-qof) / ع-س-ق (‘ayn-sīn-qāf)The Greek term πλήμμυρα (plēmmyra), “flood,” occurs only once in the New Testament (Luke 6:48) and only once in the LXX:
“If a river rages (יַעֲשֹׁ֣ק ya‘ashoq), he is not alarmed; He is confident, though the Jordan rushes to his mouth. (Job 40:23)In Arabic, عَسَقَ (‘asaq) means “to commit injustice” or “to oppress” and extends to wrongful treatment or exploitation.
★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★
Our TOPPODCAST Picks 
Stay Connected
