A while ago, I don’t recall where, I heard someone mention that because the Industrial Revolution relieved a great deal of heavy labor for vast numbers of people, now we have 24/7 fitness centers so that people can maintain conditioning which was otherwise attained from more physical work. Similarly, because of little screens which allow us to look up everything nearly instantly, we don’t have to remember anything. Compound this with the revolution of A.I. and we may be on the verge of vast numbers of people who lack the ability to think. That would be seriously dangerous.
If Leo XIII had to face the impact of the Industrial Revolution, as he did with his 1891 encyclical Rerum novarum, Leo XIV is going to have to deal with the impact of the A.I. Revolution.
Frankly, this might be the most pressing issue of this pontificate.
The papal spokesman, Matteo Bruni, stated that Papa Prevost chose the name Leo precisely in reference to Leo XIII and his challenging revolution. Leo has already spoken about the impact of A.I. in producing a “throwaway culture”.
I found today an interesting piece by Uvencio Blanco on the Indian chess site, ChessBase. It is about the warning of a British reactionary feminist Mary Harrington. I looked about on the interwebs for her to get a sense of what she thinks. Reactionary feminism is, according to wiki:
Reactionary feminism is a conservative variant of feminism that emphasizes traditional gender roles, heteronormativity, and the family as solutions to women’s socio-economic challenges. The term originated in a 2021 article by the author Mary Harrington and was later expanded upon in her book Feminism Against Progress. Louise Perry has also been associated with reactionary feminism.
Reactionary feminists argue that progressive politics deny biologically based, evolutionarily determined differences between men and women. Many reactionary feminists are anti-abortion. They align with aspects of maternal feminism and reject the sexual revolution. Reactionary feminism attributes the increased acceptance of transgender identities to technological advancements in biotechnology since the 1960s.
That’s a fast overview. Reactionary feminism is interesting.
I think most will agree that feminism – in particular 2nd wave and after – has produced, apart from some benefits, some really bad consequences for women.
In addition, I think most will agree that, at least in these USA, public education has NOT produced acceptable result.
Back to the piece at ChessBase, which is about Harrington’s warning. My emphases and comments:
Thinking as a luxury good: A warning for the digital age
British writer Mary Harrington warns that the ability to think deeply is at risk of becoming a privilege in the digital age. Drawing on her own education and recent research, she links declining literacy and attention spans to the rise of smartphones and a “post-literate” culture. Her analysis suggests this shift could create a widening cognitive gap, with serious implications for social equality, democratic health, and the preservation of reflective, reasoned thought.
A new kind of inequality
Thinking is one of the most fundamental human abilities, underpinning decision-making, learning, creativity, civic participation, adaptability and emotional well-being. [We are images of God, made to be rational.] It allows us to analyse situations, evaluate options, and arrive at informed choices in both everyday matters and complex challenges. Beyond problem-solving, it enables personal growth, continuous learning, the questioning of narratives, and the development of innovative solutions. Without it, our ability to navigate a complex world, build fair and creative societies and lead meaningful lives is severely diminished.
British journalist and writer Mary Harrington, an editor at UnHerd and author of Feminism Against Progress (2023), has raised the alarm about the erosion of this ability in modern society in an opinion piece for the New York Times. Known for her critiques of identity politics and the effects of globalisation, she argues that digital technology – especially smartphones – is steadily undermining concentration and reasoning. This, she warns, is creating a new kind of inequality, where the ability to think deeply is becoming an increasingly exclusive privilege.
Harrington contrasts her childhood education at a Waldorf school, where television was discouraged in favour of reading and outdoor play, with the hyper-connected reality of today. [There comes to mind the practice at Wyoming Catholic College.] Modern life, she observes, requires conscious effort to avoid the constant distractions of the internet and mobile devices. Although IQ scores once rose consistently (the Flynn effect), she points to recent evidence of declining literacy rates in both adults and children across OECD countries, with the steepest drops occurring among those from less privileged backgrounds.
She attributes this trend to a “post-literate” culture, in which short videos and images dominate over dense written texts. [Compare a movie from the 1950’s and one made now. Note how fast the editing has become. There are, now, hardly any long shots without cutting to something else. Now it is bam bam bam bam, rapid cuts, almost blinks.] As with the junk food industry’s impact on physical health, low-quality, attention-fragmenting media is creating a “cognitive gap” between those who can shield themselves from it and those who cannot. Affluent families often impose strict limits on screen time, sometimes opting for expensive schools that prioritise reading and long-form learning, while poorer households may lack the resources to create such environments.
Harrington emphasises that deep reading is not an innate ability but a learned skill that reshapes the brain, strengthening focus, comprehension and linear thought. [There comes to mind the important essay by Dorothy Sayers, The Lost Tools Of Learning.] In contrast, digital platforms are deliberately engineered to encourage rapid switching between stimuli. This reconditions the mind towards scanning rather than analysing, eroding the mental discipline needed for sustained engagement with complex ideas. Over time, such habits make deep concentration an increasingly rare and fragile capacity.
The social and political implications, Harrington warns, are grave. A population less able to think critically and for extended periods becomes more vulnerable to manipulation, tribalism and misinformation. Public discourse risks being reduced to emotionally charged, simplified messaging rather than evidence-based argument. In such an environment, demagogues can advance their agendas through short, emotive content that humiliates political opponents, bypassing the need for coherent, reasoned debate. This dynamic could weaken democratic accountability and civic engagement.
Ultimately, Harrington’s warning that “thinking is becoming a luxury good” highlights the risk of a culturally stratified society. A small, self-protective elite may preserve the skills of sustained reasoning and reflective thought, while the majority drifts into a post-literate state shaped by constant distraction. Such a divide threatens not only individual potential but also the intellectual and moral foundations of democratic society.
“a post-literate state shaped by constant distraction”
I’ll suggest a few things.
First, consider engaging in lectio divina and mental prayer, even for short periods at first. There is a plenary indulgence available for reading Scripture for at least a half hour.
Next, leave your phone behind or alone for awhile every day.
Also, practice careful undistracted listening along with reading.
And, play chess.









Christ is consubstantial with the Father. Christ is consubstantial with His Mother.
There are not elaborate reflections in the writings of the Fathers on the Assumption, because it was not a main point of reflection. Still, we can find their thoughts on some passages of Scripture which help us to understand Mary’s role in the plan of our salvation.
While this concerns Wisdom, in a sense it harks to Mary, Wisdom’s seat. Here is the reflection of Athenagoras on this section of Proverbs:
This fellow sounds a bit like a subordinationist, but he is fascinating. This passage is interesting also for its hints at the cosmology and physics of late antiquity. Also, it aims at the spiritual hierarchy in which our wondrous Lady has a privileged place.
Our Lady, who would feel Christ leap beneath her heart, herself leapt after Christ in her heart by her “Fiat”. She leapt to begin His public ministry when she said at Cana “Do whatever He tell you.” She leapt up Calvary with Him when the Blood and water flowed down. Her motherly and Christian heart leapt in joy in seeing Him gloriously risen. She leapt to Him in heaven when her earthly life was concluded.
Of course Christ founded the Church on the Apostles, and chiefly upon the Rock who is Peter. The description of the woman, however, fits Mary the Mother of the Church as well as the Church herself. Here is an extended piece by someone not too many in the West may read, Oecumenius (6th c.) called the “Rhetor” who wrote the earliest Greek commentary on Revelation:
being carried in the womb, was the shelter of His own mother and the whole creation, it says that He was enclothing the woman. Indeed, the holy angel said something similar to the holy Virgin: “The Spirit of the Lord will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you.” For to overshadow is to protect, and to enclothe is the same according to power. [Commentary on the Apocalypse 12.1-2]





































