LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
December 23, 2025
People keep actively seeking AI mistakes, hoping to discredit the technology. Yet, every new technology has had its early bugs. When computers first became common, some people even received telephone bills for millions of dollars.
AI and data centers are advancing, regardless of public protests or lawn signs. History shows that Luddites never halt technological progress. So, why not make the most of it? Maybe we should just insist on environmental safeguards and demand strong tax revenues.
Why is AI inevitable? Because it is smarter than we are. While each of us has areas of expertise, our knowledge is quite limited elsewhere. And we should be cautious about our own certainty, since humans are remarkably prone to self-deception. We get tired and bored and defensive. We overlook mistakes that even Grammarly would catch, because we know what we meant.
Our short-term memory is limited to about nine items. Not nine gigabytes or megabytes, just nine. This means we can only consider a few factors when making decisions, forcing us to prioritize some and ignore the rest. In contrast, AI can consider all relevant factors and use its attention mechanisms to rank them without discarding any information.
Humans excel at serendipity, but how often can we stumble upon inspiration from a walk in the woods? AI can generate billions of random combinations instantly and is getting better at identifying which ones are useful. Consider the new drug combinations AI has discovered, which might have taken decades to have come up wit by accident.
So, why not adapt to being the second-most-intelligent species? Right now, that title goes to dolphins, elephants, crows, or chimpanzees, depending who you ask. None of these animals are extinct, nor do they seem particularly inconvenienced by that status.
November 11, 2025
As I was leaving Gary-New Duluth, I noticed a city bus and slowed down to let it merge into traffic. But it didn't. Instead, it pulled into a parking area where a white SUV with a DTA logo was waiting. I looked down at the dashboard and saw that it was exactly noon.
Oh, so, that’s how DTA drivers often change shifts, I thought. The bus driver gets into the DTA vehicle and drives back to the central building where his or her car is parked, and meanwhile the person in the DTA vehicle takes over the bus route. This was not just something I didn't know, it was something I'd never even thought about.
It reminded me how much more complicated things are than they seem to be. There are so many things people know about their own jobs, and of which the rest of us are completely unaware. We often find ourselves looking at someone’s decisions or reading about them in the News Tribune and thinking, “That was stupid. I could've done better,” just because we don’t like the result.
But the truth is, we’re almost certainly wrong. We don’t really understand what the job involves or why certain choices are made. There are all kinds of factors and challenges that go into decisions and about which we know nothing. Expertise does matter, after all.
October 03, 2025
I saw a very moving photograph recently. It was a beautiful image of a vast memorial to thousands of healthy young men. They should be helping us figure out how to deal with climate change. They should be marrying and raising children to be tomorrow’s citizens and problem-solvers. They should be writing books or trying to outmaneuver coworkers to get a promotion. They should be laughing at comedians and crying at movies and complaining about taxes. Instead, their country sent them out to be slaughtered, so their flag wouldn’t change from one color to another.
I think we can do better than this.
September 06, 2025
Sometimes I chat with Christina online about a car I can test drive. When I get to the dealer's showroom, though, there is no Christina. Albert, an old guy desperate for one more sale this month, tells me, "That's just our chatbot." This is low-key disappointing but not important and certainly won't prevent me from buying the car if it's a good deal.
That's how I feel about "How can we tell if it's AI or a real person?". Surely we have more important things to think about. When we've reversed global warming, learned to negotiate at a table instead of on a battlefield, and stopped tolerating school shootings to protect the profits of our arms dealers, then we can worry about artificial intelligence.
May 28, 2024
Kansas City Chiefs kicker Harrison Butker's commencement speech shared views that many liberals like me disagreed with.
He started by listing beliefs he sees as contributing to societal decay: abortion, IVF, surrogacy, euthanasia, and certain cultural values in media. I believe listening to diverse perspectives even when we disagree is a key part of inclusion.
Butker criticized President Joe Biden, labeling him delusional for making the sign of the cross at a pro-abortion rally. We must admit there's clear tension between Catholic doctrine and support for abortion, even though many Catholics do not align with the church's strict stance.
Butker also voiced concern about some (even some Catholics) supporting "dangerous gender ideologies" for youth. From my perspective, allowing LGBTQ individuals to express themselves freely isn't pushing an ideology. Yet, some conservatives feel uncomfortable and pressured by changes coming so fast. It’s important to understand and be sensitive to their concerns if we are to avoid a strong and dangerous backlash.
Speaking to the "ladies present," Butker additionally suggested many might value marriage and children over careers, reflecting his wife's feelings. The 18 seconds of applause following this were quite uncomfortable for me. While some women may feel this way, it's unlikely this applies to the majority. However, Butker did not state that this was the only path to fulfillment or that all women should follow it, so his statement really shouldn’t have been that controversial. Should feminism mandate career pursuits for women who prefer different paths?
To be inclusive and lead Americans effectively, we must stretch ourselves to meet people halfway. It was hard to disagree with Butker's closing that life requires doing small things well and surrounding ourselves with people who push us to be the best version of ourselves.
Let’s give him a break.
October 08, 2021
In the year 1692, young girls in Salem Village (present day Danvers, Massachusetts) started behaving strangely. They suffered fevers, screaming fits and were writhing about. We now suspect that the fungus ergot (found on rye and wheat) was the cause of this outbreak. But the Salem doctor was unable to find any physical cause at the time and pronounced that the girls had been bewitched.
A special court was set up. Two unpopular local women were put on trial. Evidence included testimony that the sick girls had seen a specter or ghost of one of these women just before their ailments set in. Since it was thought that the devil could not create such apparitions without the complicity of the people involved, this spectral evidence counted against the accused witches.
But Gov. William Phips was a reasonable man and worried about the reliability of such spectral evidence. On Oct.12, 1692, he paused the witch trials. He wrote a letter to the British rulers William and Mary, seeking their guidance. We have no record of their response, but the special court was dissolved 17 days later. Prisoners were released and survivors were eventually compensated. Reason had prevailed over superstition.
That’s why several nonprofit groups celebrate National Freethought Day on Oct. 12 each year. It reminds us how important it is to let the facts and logical reasoning be our guide in important matters. Why not take some time this year to think about whether our own political and other beliefs would hold up to these standards?
March 27, 2021
Three things in the recent Meghan Markle interview have gotten a lot of press. But I think the reaction against the royal family has been too strong.
Markle reported being isolated and lonely. This was the experience of Prince Philip and Princess Diana, among others, who became part of the royal family without having been raised in that context. A life of service means almost completely surrendering who you are to become a representative of the country. This is painful, but it is neither a mistake nor a personal attack on Markle; it is a feature of royal life.
Markle reported being denied therapy for suicidal depression. This is a real problem and a valid criticism. In the past, such issues have been referred to pastors or priests, whose presence at the palace creates less drama. The stigma here is a very real problem, but, again, is not aimed at Markle specifically.
Markle reported that someone was concerned about the skin color of her baby. This is very unwoke and certainly racist. But we should note that this was one person only; the many others in the palace apparently kept their curiosity to themselves. It's hard to imagine not being curious about how the offspring of a mixed couple might look. It is certainly inappropriate to mention and especially to think of it as a problem, but the curiosity is understandable, and luckily there apparently was only once such person.
Overall, while Markle’s stories and experiences are very real and very painful, I don't think the correct conclusion is that the monarchy is cruel, racist, and unnecessary.
February 07, 2021
How can people believe the far-fetched claims of groups like QAnon? We know extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. We learned science and critical thinking all through school. What makes people susceptible to claims that seem ridiculous on their face? Jewish lasers set off the California wildfires? An ex-presidential candidate and others eat babies at Satanic rituals? What makes us think such unlikely ideas could be real?
Is it because our religions ask us to accept things that defy logic? Jesus may have walked with his disciples after being dead for three days, but that is certainly not the way things normally happen. Mary might have been a virgin when she gave birth to Jesus, but that's not how it usually works. Science shows that dead things tend to stay dead, and that conception requires a sperm and an egg cell. In the special context of religion, we accept ideas that seem unscientific and magical to the unfamiliar eye.
Sure, it's easy to see why church itself is desirable. Gathering once a week to hear an inspiring message and share bad coffee with our neighbors seems like a very good idea, even to me (the current leader of the Lake Superior Freethinkers). But must we agree to believe magical ideas that open our minds to illogical concepts? Doesn't nature provide us with enough awe-inspiring reasons for reverence and obedience to her laws? Aren't our existing buildings and works of art enough to encourage us to work together to create lasting beauty? Do we really need a magical figure, operating outside of nature and reality, to keep us on the straight and narrow?
Perhaps the crazy ideas of QAnon and others are unintended consequences of allowing ourselves untestable and unscientific beliefs.
June 05, 2020
I saw a picture of a sign in the news. The sign read, “Take your mask off because God's got you covered.”
First, it may not be safe to assume that God has you covered. One of the largest COVID-19 outbreaks in the world occurred at a Christian mega-church in Korea. God did not prevent more than 5,000 believers from getting — and spreading — the coronavirus, killing hundreds of people.
Second, this statement reminded me of a fellow I encountered driving in the fog without his headlights on. He may have thought, “Why should I turn them on? I can’t see any better that way.” But when I tried to turn left, and there he suddenly was, there was a near collision. His car was not visible until the last minute. Headlights are not there just for our own benefit; they are required because they make our cars visible to others.
Finally, even if God does have you covered and might prevent you from catching COVID-19, what about the rest of us? If I remember my Bible study correctly, Christians are judged on how they treat "the least of these." Surely that group includes friends and neighbors, whether they've been saved or not.
So, by all means, pray and have faith that God will protect you, but please also use the masks and social distancing that will protect your neighbors. It’s just a matter of simple Minnesota courtesy.
January 20, 2020
Thursday, Jan. 16 was National Religious Freedom Day. Let's take a moment to appreciate that we in America can believe in and worship whatever god we want or many gods or no gods at all, without fearing for our lives or those of our family.
December 18, 2019
If the House impeaches President Donald Trump, the Senate will begin a trial. Many Democratic candidates are senators who will be pulled off the campaign trail to attend the trial. Even non-Sen. Joe Biden will likely get a subpoena and be pulled off the campaign trail. Senate Republicans, I suspect, will drag the process out for as long as humanly possible, introducing every crazy conspiracy theory and every embarrassing, even if irrelevant, fact about Democrats. After eight or nine months of this, the Senate will declare the president innocent — just in time for the election.
Please do not fall for this, Democrats.
November 19, 2018
In a way, it's great to see so much new construction in the area. There are jobs for contractors, designers, and builders. And there's a sense that Duluth is moving forward instead of standing still.
But it's also a shame. We have huge empty buildings left over from when we used to shop in retail stores. More than just eyesores, these locations are liable to evolve into rat farms or heroin hotels. And the effects of online purchasing are only going to get stronger over time.
Why don't we quadruple the charge for permits to construct new buildings? Those who want to do business or preach to the masses in Duluth would have an economic incentive then to repurpose abandoned retail spaces - and there'd still be jobs for contractors, designers, and renovators.
October 14, 2018
The American Civil Liberties Union strayed from its own long-standing policy when it came out against the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court. I think that was a very bad thing.
The ACLU, like the Senate, is an institution. It has policies to keep its efforts on track. Without them, it might drift from topic to topic and goal to goal, according to the moods of its members and/or the fashions of the social moment. As someone with both master's and doctoral degrees in the study of organizations, I think this is dangerous.
I believe that neither people nor organizations should stoop to the level of their opponents. And just think of how you would feel if you were a conservative person whose civil rights were in jeopardy, for whatever reason. Would you now feel comfortable trusting the ACLU to fight for justice? Does that organization still seem to be on your side no matter who you are? Is it a civil rights organization or a political organization?
June 29, 2018
The Supreme Court is out of control.
Many of us dislike unions. Their mantra "of strength in numbers" seems to imply that individuals lack their own strength and need to gang up to get anything done. We who don't like unions but work in union shops have never agreed with that. But we have always paid our non-association, or "fair-share," dues. After all, we benefited from the collective agreements unions negotiated. Also, other workers have a First Amendment right to associate, whether we agree with them or not.
Our First Amendment rights were never being infringed. Unions have to calculate their percentage of spending for anything besides negotiating and maintaining the collective agreement. Then they have to refund that percentage of workers' dues. Thus, we workers were never funding political activities with which we disagreed.
The recent ruling by the Roberts Court ("High court ruling bans mandatory union fees," June 28) seemed aimed at defunding and disarming, if not destroying, public-sector labor unions. The ruling could lead to the removal of union leaders who criticize capitalism and allow managers to exploit workers freely. It effectively removed workers' First Amendment right to associate as they see fit.
It doesn't literally do that, of course. The judges are willing to play games with such technicalities, as they showed when ruling that the travel ban was not a Muslim ban, because North Korea had been added (at least temporarily).
Conservatives often ask for "strict constructionist" judges. I don't know how strict this behavior is, but it certainly counts as construction.
May 23, 2018
We've all heard the hissing that sounds like "Yanny" to some people and "Laurel" to others. Some say it "blew up the internet" or "people are split." It's interesting to discuss why that happens.
But the important question for us, today, is why it should divide us.
My dad liked marmalade while most of us preferred jam. He used to say, "All the more for me!" The fact that we're different isn't a design flaw; it's a fundamental aspect of being conscious. Why do people write that they heard "Yanny" and cannot imagine how anyone could hear "Laurel?" That's where we should begin.
There's a popular optical illusion in which I see an old woman but others see a young girl. Since this illusion was made up, it's possible to see it both ways without much difficulty. Someone who sees the young girl points out where they see a nose or a cheek, and the rest of us can "find" the young girl. This only works when we get down to the little details. But once we've seen that, it becomes easy to accept the other interpretation and quite ridiculous to blame or shame others who see it differently.
No one can see what the other person sees if they're busy yelling, "Hooray for my side!" Dividing into teams and taking up one side or the other are absurd undertakings that just confuse matters and block us from working together toward proper solutions. Why would we ever do that?
Ask Roger Stone or Karl Rove or Steve Bannon or Vladimir Putin. Or, maybe, resist these cynical manipulators and just listen to one another in spite of them.
March 15, 2018
On Feb. 27, there was a small chance that students at the Duluth Edison Charter School's North Star Academy were in danger ("Teen arrested after alleged school shooting threat," Feb. 28). The school kept all students indoors just in case, and I noticed a police presence around the building. Later, after school, parents got a notice describing what had happened and noting that all was well.
Some parents thought they should have been informed sooner, but I do not agree.
Imagine all of us parents showing up at the building to get information and perhaps pull our kids out of school. Besides missing classes and inducing panic among the students, this would have created chaos in and around the building. It likely would have attracted media attention to further complicate the scene and make it nearly impossible to screen people who came on campus, perhaps letting someone with bad intentions sneak onto the property.
Transparency is nice, but there is a time to be quiet and wait out the situation. I am grateful to the management of the Duluth Edison Charter School for once again handling a situation in a measured and wise fashion instead of exhibiting a knee-jerk response that would have created far more trouble than it would have eased.
December 02, 2017
Congratulations to Dr. Rajesh Prabhu and Essentia Health. They stood up for science. They made good on their commitment to fire employees who refused to take reasonable steps to protect patient health ("Essentia: No more than fifty terminated for failing to comply with flu shot mandate," Nov. 21).
Since science shows that hospital patients are particularly vulnerable to harm from the flu, and since science also shows that immunization is at least somewhat effective in preventing that flu, Essentia required everyone who works near patients to be inoculated against that disease. Although constitutionally protected religious exemptions had to be honored, Essentia, nonetheless, did everything it could do to respect the scientific evidence and protect the safety of its patients.
While we all want people to have as much personal freedom as possible, that freedom cannot be allowed to infringe on the freedoms of others. We cannot let those who work with vulnerable hospital patients to simply choose not to take appropriate steps to protect those patients.
October 15, 2016
Wednesday, Oct. 12, was National Freethought Day, an opportunity to remember how important it is to think things through.
Considering all the facts one can find from diverse sources, noticing what is relevant and what is just a distraction, making choices based on defensible principles instead of only emotion or self-interest: These are skills that professionals take for granted. Doctors, lawyers, professors, engineers, scientists: They all think for themselves. This doesn’t mean they run with any idea that pops into their head. It means they have developed a regular habit of thinking things through in a disciplined and reasoned way.
Does anyone think our children are learning to do this in school? Maybe it’s time to start offering philosophy classes for children, sometimes called P4C. There are many resources available, especially the Institute for the Advancement of Philosophy for Children at Montclair State University and the Center for Philosophy for Children at the University of Washington.
One way or another, we’d better make sure our kids can think for themselves because they’re liable to grow up and vote.
June 26, 2016
On June 14, Greg Sandbulte (“Decision on building third high school in Duluth deserves wider discussion,”) wrote that the decision to open a third high school deserves wider discussion and should perhaps be made by the school board that was elected by the people of Duluth. That might be true if the board represented the people of Duluth. Unfortunately, it seems more like an arm of the teachers’ union. It describes Edison as its competition. It refuses to sell to Edison to remedy its poor decision making. Worse, it refuses to learn from Edison and modernize its approach.
Every year, Duluth parents (myself included) apply to Edison’s kindergarten and go through a lottery. Why do we do that? When the teachers’ union stops being defensive and starts to understand the real answers to that question, all of the children of Duluth will benefit.
My daughter, at Edison, starts school several days before the public schools. She stays until 4 p.m. every day, not 2:15 p.m. She studies Spanish and music and art in every grade from kindergarten forward. Teachers are required to use proven learning software and deliver measurable results, while being there to get to know my daughter and notice and celebrate her unique gifts. This model reflects the fact that the 1950s are over now.
So, whose decision should this be? DFL-endorsed labor supporters? What Mr. Sandbulte calls “a small group of Edison supporters?” No. Within the regulations that govern all schools in Minnesota, it should always be the free market that decides.
June 19, 2016
Support for second-time parents: Northland class offers help for grandparents raising children
By Kim Schneider
Jim Lyttle of Duluth lifts his 6-year-old daughter Heather up in the air for fun as he drops her off with Karen Snydarich, child care aid, before attending the grandparents class in Proctor. Although Lyttle isn't her grandparent he finds the class helpful as an older parent. (Bob King)May 05, 2016
The Duluth school district reminds me of a bankrupt business. It faced a $3.3 million budget shortfall this spring. And that was after taking tax dollars from residents who have no children, residents who have no school-aged children and those of us who send our children to Marshall, Edison, St. John’s, Harbor City or home schooling to avoid what the district has to offer.
The School Board honored the wishes of its union masters by refusing to sell Central High School to one of the union’s competitors (“Central High property offer rejected,” April 1). Any plan to subdivide and develop that property is just a pipe dream.
Maybe it’s time we forced this financially struggling school district to liquidate the white-elephant properties it created with its Red Plan - so it can repay its debts to us.
March 30, 2016
Schoolteachers often are mischaracterized as petty fools who care more about political correctness than results, more about making students feel nice in their tummies than pushing them to learn anything, and more about winning battles than working to find out who was right. Independent School District 709 teachers in Duluth could go a long way toward debunking this unflattering image if they pressed for the sale and development of the Central High School.
A nonprofit affiliated with Edison has made an offer for the Central site that is well above the asking price. Refusing to sell to competitors who are challenging the public education system does the district no credit at all. Why let a childish attitude get in the way of recovering the public money that was put into that school in the first place?
February 15, 2016
The thinly veiled delight of my fellow humanists, agnostics and other secularists at Justice Antonin Scalia’s passing is not only disgusting but, frankly, stupid.
Since when do we celebrate the loss of a sincere, intelligent and hilarious opponent who kept us on our toes? Since when do people who call ourselves freethinkers seek to replace Scalia with a “secular” jurist who would never challenge us on our opinions and arguments? Since when do people who call ourselves humanists care more about his positions than the humanity of a very good man who fought hard for what he believed in?
I have to call out the Freedom From Religion Foundation in particular on this issue. Justice Scalia always said that the framers meant religious freedom to protect our right to worship any god we want - not to arrogantly deny the existence of any greater purpose or any being greater than ourselves. He did not agree that the framers meant to protect us from religion itself. We lefties do not agree with this interpretation, of course, but Scalia’s quest always was to find out what the framers meant at the time they wrote the Constitution, not to say what we think it ought to mean today.
Our disrespect for this very worthy opponent does us no credit at all.
March 20, 2015
March 11’s “Can nontheists and theists work together?” was a thoughtful letter to the editor regarding my new organization, called the Iron Range Coalition of Reason. As I understood it, the letter advocated for a more conciliatory tone from nontheists if they expect to work alongside theists to solve global problems together.
The letter questioned the name, “Coalition of Reason.” Although this group is a local chapter of the United Coalition of Reason and had little choice in the name, questioning it is certainly valid. Why not just call it a “Coalition of Nontheists?” My guess is that the name was a defensive reaction to having been characterized simply as faithless or godless people and was meant to introduce something positive about nontheism. But I took the point that the name can easily be seen as unnecessarily provocative.
In the same vein, the letter expressed worry about nontheists’ claim to “a scientific approach to life.” It reminded us that many theistic scientists “can be reasonable, scientific, and rational and thus can usefully contribute to the work that needs to be done.” Again, I took the point that there have been many theistic scientists who have been extremely successful and productive.
My only quibble is that these theists, who clearly took a scientific approach to their work, did not necessarily take a scientific approach to their lives. It is hard to imagine the scientific argument supporting miracles, resurrections or other articles of faith. Perhaps nontheists are more committed to taking a scientific approach to more parts of their lives.
The writer of the letter knows no good reason to believe there is a god or to believe there is no god. The scientific approach to any claim probably should be to withhold belief in it until sufficient evidence supports it. We await that.
March 10, 2015
The person interviewed in the “Five Questions” feature on Sunday, Feb. 22, Jim Lyttle, is the coordinator of the Iron Range Coalition of Reason; he said the purposes of the coalition were to unite various nontheistic groups across the Northland and to raise the visibility of local nontheistic groups. He also said nontheists are people who do not believe in a personal god and who doubt the existence of the supernatural.
Because “Coalition of Nontheists” would have been a very appropriate name for the organization, it seems likely its name, “Coalition of Reason,” was chosen to imply that nontheists are more reasonable than theists.
The coordinator also said non-theists support a scientific approach to life, which implies that theists do not support a scientific approach to life. However, science has nothing to say regarding the existence of a god, and many theists and nontheists are good scientists.
Personally, I do not know of any good reason to believe there is a god, and I do not know of any good reason to believe there is no god. Therefore, I call myself a “neutral.” I am not an atheist, except in the minds of those atheists who want to change the classic definition of “atheist” to make “atheist” a synonym for “nontheist.”
The coordinator said that a rational mind-set is urgently needed at this time to address global (and local?) threats. If the coordinator wants nontheists and theists to work together to address such threats, he should clearly say whether he thinks both theists and nontheists can be reasonable, scientific and rational and can usefully contribute to the work that needs to be done.
Charles E. Stephan
Duluth
February 21, 2015
By Mike Creger
January 21, 2015
The recent assassination of cartoonists of the publication Charlie Hebdo was deplorable. Producing humor that helps us deal with the day-to-day stress of modern living should not be a life-threatening occupation - even if it is the traditional French “gouaille” humor, which is intentionally outrageous and offensive.
Satire is a good tool for social commentary. Satire doesn’t (usually) kill anyone. It is an irreverent rebellion against the target’s power and influence. The fact that a satirist has made us laugh about something forces us to at least wonder if there is some truth in it. Maybe we were wrong, after all. Since considering that we may be wrong is the hallmark of an intelligent mind, this is a very good thing.
Satire seems legitimate when it makes fun of the powerful. It can bring them down a peg. That’s why it is OK for a humorist to make fun of politicians. They have some power. Ridiculing them - in theory, at least - is an act of courage.
By the same standard, it certainly is not OK for people to make fun of those with, say, Down syndrome. They have little power, and ridiculing them is an act of bullying.
Cartoonists at Charlie Hebdo have claimed to be protecting the separation of church and state. Laurent Léger, who survived the attack, once told CNN, “Everyone can be religious, but extremist thoughts and acts we cannot accept.”
But Gérard Biard, another survivor, once told the New York Times, “You’re not meant to identify yourself through a religion, in any case not in a secular state.”
This seems to imply that it is wrong, in Biard’s view, to declare or celebrate your religion at all. This is quite different from only attacking extremists. One worries that he feels justified in attacking anyone who wears a hajib/burqa, turban or even a cross in public.
Let’s consider the case of drawing pictures of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH, “peace be upon him”). On the one hand, there is no reason for non-Muslims to follow Muslim rules. When we eat with Muslim neighbors, they never eat pork. We would not even consider serving them pork. But we can eat all the pork we want, because we are not Muslims and not subject to their dietary restrictions. So why should we have to avoid drawing those pictures?
This comes down to “the ethics of humor.” As we have to keep reminding ourselves, the vast majority of the 2 billion Muslims in the world are peaceful, hardworking neighbors who just want to raise their children in a world that is safe and provides opportunities. Drawing pictures of the Prophet Muhammad deeply offends all Muslims - not only the few radical Islamists we mean to target. Attacking Muslims in general is not only bullying (since they already are a distrusted minority in France), but it also plays right into the hands of radical Islamists. They are delighted to have examples they can characterize as a part of a Christian crusade against Islam, because it helps them recruit followers.
As Pope Francis recently said, there is freedom of expression and there is respect for a person’s deeply held beliefs. These things have to be balanced by thoughtful people, including cartoonists and humorists.
By all means, let’s ridicule radical Islamists. Anytime we make light of a fearful situation, it helps us cope. If it is done carefully and with respect for the dignity of Islam, such humor might even encourage mainstream Muslims to speak out against extremists. But in the process, let’s not ridicule Islam, the Prophet Muhammad, afternoon prayers or anything else that attacks all Muslims indiscriminately and aids radicals in recruiting.
Jim Lyttle is a business professor at the University of Minnesota Duluth whose research has focused on the effective and responsible use of humor.