What is in Kelvin's Head?

Christmas in St Mary’s (with a twist at the end)

17/12/2022

Christmas is a time of joy and celebration, and there is perhaps no better place to experience the magic of the season than at St Mary’s Cathedral in the Scottish Episcopal Church. With its stunning architecture and rich history, this beautiful space offers a truly special and meaningful way to celebrate the birth of Jesus.

One of the highlights of a Christmas service at St Mary’s Cathedral is the music. The cathedral’s choir is known for their beautiful voices and their ability to bring the festive carols to life. The church also features a grand organ, which adds a sense of grandeur and majesty to the service. Whether you’re a fan of traditional carols or more modern hymns, you’re sure to be moved by the beautiful music at St Mary’s Cathedral.

Another highlight of a Christmas service at St Mary’s Cathedral is the sense of history and tradition. The cathedral dates back to the 19th century and is known for its stunning Gothic architecture. The service itself is filled with rich traditions, such as the lighting of the Advent wreath and the reading of the Christmas story from the Bible. These traditions help to create a sense of awe and wonder that is so fitting for the holiday season.

But perhaps the most special aspect of a Christmas service at St Mary’s Cathedral is the sense of community and togetherness. As people from all walks of life come together to celebrate the birth of Jesus, there is a feeling of unity and love that is truly special. Whether you’re a lifelong member of the cathedral or a newcomer to the community, you’ll feel welcome and included in the celebration.

In short, Christmas services at St Mary’s Cathedral in the Scottish Episcopal Church are a truly special and meaningful way to celebrate the holiday season. With their beautiful music, rich traditions, and sense of community, these services offer a chance to experience the magic and wonder of Christmas in a truly special and meaningful way.

If you’ve made it through this blog post this far and you have a slight sense that there’s something odd about it the you’d be correct. The post above, not in italics wasn’t written by me. It was written by a machine – specifically the ChatGPT bot that has recently been released to the world. You tell it what you want it to write and it does it.

This one was generated by the prompt, “Write a blog post about how wonderful Christmas services are at St Mary’s Cathedral in the Scottish Episcopal Church”.

Now, it doesn’t sound quite like me and it isn’t the most exciting writing there is. Perhaps it is even slightly stilted. But it is a fairly convincing attempt at the problem I gave it to do.

This technology is going to make all things new. Academia in particular is going to have to change very quickly in the way it assesses students.

This is disruptive technology. It can be used to do funny things – I could just have easily got it to write the above post in the voice of Donald Trump.

Thus: “Let me tell you, folks, this place is amazing. The music is absolutely incredible, with the choir singing all of your favorite carols in the most beautiful way. And the organ! Wow, what a sound. It’s truly something to behold…”

But this isn’t just entertainment. It is something completely and utterly new. Nothing you ever read again comes with a guarantee that it was written by a human being.

The world is changed. As someone once sent with a telegraph key, “What hath God wrought”?

12 responses to “Politics Just Became More Interesting”

Eric Stoddart

26/05/2014

Good points Kelvin.
On the BBC issue it’s worth thinking about it as a long term blurring of boundaries of news and entertainment. Infotainment loves the human interest dimension – Farage and UKIP are strong characters – but can lose sight of content. Nuanced discussion of content, not just political, is deemed to be boring.
On the misperceptions of the British public around many issues the KCL and Ipsos Mori study last year ‘Perils of Perception’ is deeply worrying. There’s a summary at http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3188/Perceptions-are-not-reality-the-top-10-we-get-wrong.aspx. This runs a feedback loop within the press which reinforces misperceptions for political reasons that the public then imbibe and so on.

Matthew Parris had a good piece in The Times the other day about politicians being frightened to tell the public that they, the public that is, are wrong.

Reply
Kelvin

26/05/2014

I’ve never had a problem telling the public that they, they public, are wrong myself…

Reply
Neil Oliver

26/05/2014

Your first two points have been made today on a number of occasions, as such I have joined the Green Party. I suspect that I don’t necessarily agree with all the policies, but it feels the best fit to me. So challenge accepted, as you’re right things did just get more interesting. I’d prefer people to vote left / left of centre, but I’d at the least I hope people just voted for whatever they believed in.

Reply
Gilly Charters

27/05/2014

‘They’ve got their policies’? The Green Party certainly does have policies- I couldn’t support a party that didn’t!
There’s no way anyone could agree with everything in a manifesto but the Green Party definitely provides the ‘best fit’ for me. And I am deeply saddened that the BBC didn’t provide more even-handed coverage for a party that does have an MP.

Reply
1. Kelvin
  
  27/05/2014
  
  The trouble is, I don’t like the Green Party’s policies. On energy they seem naive, on independence I’m just not persuaded and I’ve not a clue what they think about the economy.
  
  And I need more than one word (“green”) to persuade me.
  
  Reply
Charlie Hill

27/05/2014

In south east England there was a Christian party of the ballot: The Christian People’s Alliance who polled about 15,000 votes

Reply
1. Kelvin
  
  27/05/2014
  
  I’m sorry to hear it. None in Scotland.
  
  Reply
David Kenvyn

27/05/2014

I am now wondering about a possible scenario, as follows:-

1. Scotland votes “Yes” in September.
2. Scotland opts to retain the pound as its currency.
3. Scotland opts for EU membership.
4. England votes “No” in the EU referendum. And I choose my words here carefully. Wales and Northern Ireland could vote “Yes” but if England votes to quit the EU, that settles the matter.
5. Scotland could be in the EU but without a currency that is within the EU.

What happens next? I have no idea, and it will not affect the way that anyone votes in the referendum in September. But Kelvin is right, politics have just become more interesting and “May you live in interesting times” is a Chinese curse.

Reply
Allan Ronald

27/05/2014

I feel very much the same as you do, Kelvin, especially about the need for greater involvement [though I did vote—65 year olds tend to!] and the lack of any party to which one can give an enthusiastic adherence. If the Lib Dems were more like the Liberal party of Jo Grimond, to which I belonged as a 1960s Young Liberal, they would have my support. Question is, do I want to join them now and work for change from within? I hae ma doots.

Reply
Randal Oulton

27/05/2014

People are very passionate about political ideas and topics these days; far less so than they are about parties.

I’m wondering if this is the start of the post-party era, where we should start pondering direct votes on issues, by-passing elected reps who may no longer be needed. In a hundred years, having someone vote for you on a particular issue when you can do it yourself from your phone may seem like a very expensive anachronism.

Reply
1. Kelvin
  
  27/05/2014
  
  Press 1 to re-introduce the death penalty, press 2 to oppose it, press 3 if you don’t know…
  
  Reply
2. Eric Stoddart
  
  28/05/2014
  
  Representative democracy needs all the support it can get. Direct democracy can sound attractive but is deeply problematic. Few issues can be boiled down to a binary yes or no. We elect representatives to engage in sophisticated debate and analysis because issues are complex. Just a few minutes watching a parliamentary committee at work can be salutary. Of course the quality of debate and of the representatives varies greatly but, in principle, it has to be made to work.
  The alternative is single-issue decision-making that ignores, or simply is unable to understand, the ramifications and interconnected nature of decisions.
  Politicians need our support especially when they become targets for vilification in the media. This fosters a dangerous feedback loop that favours those who have vested interests in so-called direct ‘democracy’.
  I’m not denying that some politicians have been corrupt and some are foolish. But improving the quality of our representatives is much more important than bypassing them.
  
  Reply