Description Today I’m joined by my brother Ian — one of my closest friends, an incredible poet, writer, and teacher of seven-plus years — for a conversation I’ve been looking forward to for a while and is really special as it is my twentieth episode (thanks for continuing to listen). We both read the Pope’s new encyclical on AI, technology, and human dignity. Our conversation ranges from what stuck with us, what it means for how Ian teaches, and how I parent, and build things with AI every day. Fair warning going in: I use AI constantly — this conversation isn’t anti-AI (at least from my point of view), it’s a “how do we use this well/can we use this well” conversation. Enjoy. Lessons 1. Two building projects: Babel vs. Nehemiah 00:00–19:45 The Pope frames the whole encyclical around two images: the Tower of Babel — a unified, impressive project built without reference to God, that sacrifices human dignity for efficiency and ends in confusion — versus Nehemiah rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem, a humbler, collaborative, dignified project. Ian reads the Pope’s own language on Babel (”sacrifices human dignity for efficiency, and aspires to reach heaven without God’s blessing”) and calls it the interpretive lens for the rest of the letter. * Ian’s overall take: multi-layered, doesn’t even get to AI directly until nearly halfway through — grounded first in Catholic social doctrine. * Ian self-describes as leaning “Luddite” (Matt pushes back — “cautious,” not Luddite) but says the letter surfaced dangers he hadn’t considered, especially effects on the global poor and lower-income workers, not just wealthy tech users. * Despite the warnings, both agree the letter’s overall tone is hopeful, not fatalistic — it appeals to leaders to steer AI deliberately rather than treating its trajectory as inevitable. * Tangent: the “self-fulfilling prophecy” logic of “we have to keep optimizing/innovating because that’s just what you do” (Instagram reel reference). 2. The technocratic paradigm & “using power well” 19:45–33:55 Centered on the Romano Guardini quote from paragraph 95 — “Contemporary man has not been trained to use power well” — and Pope Francis’s earlier term “the technocratic paradigm” (¶92): the logic of efficiency, control, and profit shaping personal, social, and economic decisions. * Matt’s question: has any era actually used power well, or is this just the permanent human condition (the Fall)? * Rabbit trail: they Google Romano Guardini (1885–1968) — lived through both World Wars, which frames the quote historically. * Matt only half-jokingly stakes out a monarchist position; Ian counters with George Washington voluntarily relinquishing power after two terms as a counterexample of power used well. * Ian’s key read: the technocratic paradigm makes technology more than a tool — it becomes the standard by which everything is judged, reducing creation to something to exploit and people to “cogs in a system driven toward ever greater efficiency” (¶93). 3. Does AI level the playing field, or concentrate power? 33:55–47:46 Matt’s question, tied to paragraph 108: is AI an amplifier for those who already have resources (design bias, business logic baked into models — e.g., the Google Gemini historical-image controversy) or a leveling force for the average person (e.g., Matt building his own half-Ironman training app in a couple hours with no coding background)? * Ian’s pushback: individual convenience isn’t the same as global equity — the Pope is thinking at the scale of nations and supply chains, not just individual hustle. * The “genie in a bottle” illusion: prompts feel weightless but sit on top of real infrastructure — data centers, water and power consumption for cooling, and (ties to later chapters) labor in the majority world extracting the materials and running the infrastructure that makes AI possible. * Shared conclusion: AI can lower the barrier to entry for individuals with ideas, but that doesn’t cancel out the larger pattern the Pope is naming — the people already holding capital, data, and expertise still benefit most. 4. “Cultivated, not built”: AI in Ian’s classroom 47:46–1:08:00 The heart of the education conversation. Starting from paragraph 104’s point that AI is never morally neutral — every model embodies choices about what it measures, ignores, and optimizes — Matt asks whether Ian distinguishes between “cultivating” and “building” a student. * Ian prefers “cultivation” as the education metaphor: ongoing, slow, never a one-time finished product — closer to tending land than assembling a thing. * Real policy detail: Ian’s school moved to fully handwritten, in-class work once ChatGPT went free ~2 years ago, because there’s no reliable way to verify authorship of anything typed at home. Matt calls it a hard line; Ian says he doesn’t know a more effective alternative if the goal is guaranteeing kids actually think for themselves. * Direct question: has Ian seen students lose the ability to sit with hard questions or tolerate difficulty because of AI/instant-answer culture? Ian: yes, sees it constantly — the “fill out the worksheet as fast as possible, then check out” mindset. Learning that comes fast doesn’t get valued or retained; things that took a year (like finally speaking up in a seminar) stick. * Riff on paragraph 100 — AI’s simulated care and the risk of losing “the very desire to form genuine human connections.” Extended into a broader point: TikTok/social media isn’t a neutral tool either — “tools don’t use you back,” but attention-economy products do. “You are the product.” * That Hideous Strength (C.S. Lewis) comes up as a parallel — the disembodied, reanimated head that the human characters believe they control but is actually being animated by an outside force — as a picture of the spiritual dimension behind powerful technology, regardless of whether its builders believe in the spiritual world. 5. Two loves, limitation, and the fruit of patience 1:08:00–1:18:07 Drawing on paragraphs 118, 120, and 130 — the “two cities/two loves” framing (love of self vs. love of God and neighbor) and the idea that humanity flourishes through its limitations, not despite them. * Ian reads paragraph 120 in full as one of his favorite passages in the whole document — the point that eliminating suffering would also extinguish love and desire, and that “the wonders of the soul” only occur through the interplay of freedom, failure, dreams, and disappointment. * Matt connects this to efficiency as an idol: wanting to get through pain quickly and “learn everything about it as fast as possible” is never actually how growth happens. Patience, like the fruit of the Spirit, is cultivated, not built. * Concrete example: information you look up instantly (Matt’s margarita-history example) doesn’t stick the way information earned slowly does — ties directly back to what Ian sees in students. 6. Closing reflections: slowness, parenthood, and craftsmanship 1:18:07–1:27:00 * Matt reflects on the paradox of his current season as a new dad — life feels fast, but he wants to be more intentional about slowing down and being deliberate about what he’s “cultivating” in his family, since “so much of how we do life is how we’re taught.” * Ian’s personal takeaway from the encyclical: conviction to prioritize interruptions from real people (e.g., a student who wants to talk) over routine/efficiency, and more awareness of how AI’s costs land hardest on the poor and the majority world — a blind spot he named in himself. * Malcolm Guite’s Arthurian narrative poems (Ian corrects Matt on-air: it’s a quartet, not trilogy — first is Galahad) come up as a picture of the “sweat equity” and cultivation baked into real craftsmanship, contrasted with what a single AI prompt can generate. Extends into a short reflection on the beauty of expertise and craft generally (coding included) as part of how God wired creativity into the world. Connector Questions Question from our last guest: What is one habit you know you need but haven’t started yet? Ian’s question for the next guest: What is something that’s making your life more disembodied or less human — and how could you rehumanize your life more? Guest Background Notes Guest: Ian Heisler, Matt’s brotherReference material discussed on the episode:- The Pope’s 2026 encyclical (full text/audio, ~3 hrs at normal speed)- C.S. Lewis’s That Hideous Strength- Malcolm Guite’s Arthurian poetry quartet (starting with Galahad) Get full access to Matt Heisler at mattheisler.substack.com/subscribe