Dear Real Intelligence (RI?) Seekers:

Last year my brother Bruce (Prof. Emeritus electrical engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, and Founding Director CMU Africa) was interviewed by CNBC Africa regarding current technological developments on the continent. In the interview, which may be found here, he discussed the importance of context in Artificial Intelligence (AI) learning models. In our conversations, my brother has talked about the vast difference between American and European AI models and African continental models relating to everything from logistics to health care to banking. 

If you were to use models trained with data from legacy countries and inquire as to how developing nations in Africa could improve the delivery of goods and finances, the AI output would most likely commend grand infrastructure projects requiring the construction of massive dams, highway systems and power plants. However, African nations are currently using networks of smaller and vastly more efficient tools to accomplish quite sophisticated outcomes. For example, the delivery of laboratory specimens and blood to and from rural clinics does not require the construction of a complex interstate highway system—they are currently using nimble and reliable drones to achieve the same results. Likewise, retail financial services are not reliant on an infrastructure of banks but are provided directly through the cell phone companies. Anyone with a cell phone immediately has savings, checking and loan services in their hand. Solutions in real time cannot be found by aggregating massive AI data from the West. The technology is global, but problems are local and current; their solutions must rely on relevant regional resources, not distant legacy-generated models.

I muse about this information for two reasons: first to brag about my brother, but second to ask what legacy data is hampering our ability to solve current problems? Because I am a professional in the “Christian Church Industry”, I’ll focus my considerations there, but this difficulty arises in any field facing substantial shifts in resources and context.

I would suggest that the most significant change in the church landscape over the past decade has been the maturation of the “nones”, which are those individuals who mark themselves as “none of the above” when asked their religious preference. If you query AI about what makes for a successful church, the aggregated legacy data offers suggestions like “spiritual growth, vibrant worship, strong community, prayer and spirituality and impactful teaching”, but these elements presume newcomers have some clue what these categories mean. With a growing portion of the population being third generation descendants of church dropouts, we can no longer presume that folks hunger for what we’re serving. Forty years ago, new churches attempted to develop ‘seeker sensitive’ worship experiences; even that has lost meaning in a world that is no longer even looking.

Our mission remains: “Inviting people into a life of meaning and purpose in Christ”, but the implementation of that mission needs to adapt to our current reality. This involves reimagining our resources. We do not need to redefine Christ, but we do need to creatively reconsider what an invitation looks like to someone who has never been to a party.

Rethinking our data, I remain,

With love,
Jonathan Krogh
Your Pastor