Eloquent argument for humanity
Danielle Sobkin’s admonitions for mitigating the harms of social media to the practice of Judaism are eloquent (“You may think you’re beyond manipulation, but social media knows better,” June 24). The existential threats of artificial intelligence to the experience of being human cannot be overstated. One question to ask ourselves: Can you have an I-Thou relationship with AI? And if so, would you want one in the first place?
As Sobkin says, “We are not data.” We need firsthand experiences with one another and Jewish practice. We need purpose. Life cannot be monetized.
May parents, educators, rabbis and all of us heed Sobkin’s counsel for meeting the challenges of algorithmic designs, so that we retain our human capacity for deep learning of Jewish text and communal practice, for critical thinking and creativity and for experiencing a meaningful life.
Molly Freeman
Berkeley
‘We are not data’
“Yasher koach” — good job — to Danielle Sobkin! Many thanks to the author for skillfully addressing the onslaught of social media that poses as a reflection of Jewish life. Even those of us who are affiliated with Jewish organizations and who attempt to lead meaningful Jewish lives are assaulted by the constant flow of media bites and shallow commentary.
The cost will be a Jewish community that is less connected and less in touch with the depth of what Judaism has to offer. As the author says, “We are not data. We are not branding.” The challenge for all of us, leaders and lay people, is to take the time to look deep into what Judaism means and take that message into our daily lives.
Cindy Ostroff
San Rafael
Talk to parents about ethnic studies
Gabe Stutman’s reporting on the San Francisco Unified School District’s ethnic studies curriculum was a good introduction to this topic for readers of J., but more reporting needs to be done (“S.F. schools will replace ethnic studies curriculum, superintendent says,” online June 30).
The district has not been up front and transparent with parents, the board of education or the community about the current curriculum’s origins, its lack of standards-based content, its distortions and omissions and its anti-Jewish content.
How did we even get here in the first place? Where was the oversight and the due diligence in vetting the current curriculum? How is it that activist teachers were able to replace education with indoctrination, violating the public trust? How can we be confident that a new ethnic studies curriculum will be any better than the current one, given the district’s track record of obfuscation, deceit, hasty decisions and failure to monitor the content of its courses?
Stutman interviewed the superintendent and quoted the mayor, but we need to hear from the real stakeholders: concerned parents and educators. A follow-up article should include interviews with parents and educators about their concerns with the current curriculum and their vision for a replacement curriculum that is historically accurate and free of ideological bias.
Ethnic studies has tremendous potential to effect positive social change. A standards-based curriculum would encourage students’ curiosity, expose them to factual information about cultures other than their own and foster open-mindedness, tolerance and acceptance.
Marinell Jochnowitz
San Francisco
Editor’s Note: A previous story about the pause on ethnic studies included comments from parents and educators. See tinyurl.com/tinyurl.com/parents-complain.
Show Israeli strength, not destruction
I was very disappointed when I saw the front-page photograph in the June 27 issue of J. was of a destroyed building in Israel with the headline, “WHAT NOW?”
No doubt the cowardly response of the Iranians was to inflict powerful missiles on Israeli civilians (a war crime) resulting in nearly 30 deaths and many injuries. But where was your acknowledgement of the truly remarkable and many would say miraculous achievements of the Israel Defense Forces? Military strategists worldwide were in awe of what tiny Israel accomplished against a country infinitely larger and with a population 10 times the size of the Jewish state’s.
The only commentary I could find in J. on the “12-Day War” was lifted from the far-left Israeli newspaper Haaretz, which has great difficulty recognizing anything positive about Israel (“Five key questions on what the future holds for Israel,” June 27).
I realize most of your readers are on the left, but this moment in Jewish history exceeded all partisanship, or so I mistakenly thought.
Mervyn Danker
San Mateo