Arthur C. Brooks to join faculty at Vanderbilt

https://news.vanderbilt.edu/2026/04/23/professor-bestselling-author-arthur-c-brooks-to-join-faculty-at-vanderbilt/

Anthropic Wants Claude to Be Moral. Is Religion Really the Answer?

In a public statement of its intentions for its Claude chatbot, the artificial intelligence company Anthropic has said that it wants Claude to be “a genuinely good, wise and virtuous agent.” The company raised the moral stakes this month, when it announcedthat its latest A.I. model, Claude Mythos Preview, poses too great a cybersecurity threat to be widely released. Behind the scenes, Anthropic has been trying to shore up the ethical foundations of its products, working with Catholic clergy and consultingwith other prominent Christians to help foster Claude’s moral and spiritual development.

Anthropic’s intentions are admirable, but the project of drawing on religion to cultivate the ethical behavior of Claude (or any other chatbot) is likely to fail. Not because there isn’t moral wisdom in Scripture, sermons and theological treatises — texts that Claude has undoubtedly already scraped from the web and integrated — but because Claude is missing a crucial mechanism by which religion fosters moral growth: a body.

While Claude might have a mind (of sorts) that can process information, it cannot meditate, fast, prostrate itself in prayer, sing hymns in a congregation or participate in other aspects of the physical life of religion. And this makes all the difference: According to the scientific literature, it’s the practice of religion — not merely the believing in it — that brings about its characteristic benefits.

There is robust data, for example, linking religion to greater health and well-being. But that link is not strong for people who merely identify themselves as believers. It’s only when people also practice a faith — attend weekly services, pray or meditate at home — that religion’s benefits become pronounced: The more people “do” religion, the happier and healthier they tend to be...

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/20/opinion/ai-religion-morality.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share

We who “do” humanism are pretty happy & healthy too, btw.

This review will not make Arthur Brooks happy

How to Measure the Good Life

… Brooks's shift toward happiness was canny, and strategically timed: well-being, once the province of philosophers, had been thoroughly usurped by podcasters, data scientists, and influencers by the time he got his hands on it. Hellenistic thinkers, such as the Stoics, had once proposed, in the words of the philosopher Martha Nussbaum, that "philosophy heals human diseases, diseases produced by false beliefs"—in other words, that by understanding and living in accordance with our nature we could achieve eudaemonia, which translates roughly to "flourishing." Earlier thinkers, most famously Aristotle, had gone so far as to propose that eudaemonia was an inherently communal accomplishment, one that could only take root in the proper social and political context. But the social psychologists who catapulted to prominence in the early two-thousands were less interested in the richer concept of eudaemonia and more interested in a thinner, hollower, and vastly more individualistic enterprise of happiness, of simply feeling good. In 2006, two books by social psychologists—Daniel Gilbert's "Stumbling on Happiness" and Jonathan Haidt's "The Happiness Hypothesis"—set the latest wave of happiness studies in motion. But the written word was never the ideal medium for their particular message, and by 2026 innumerable podcasts had sprung up like mushrooms after a squall. There was "The Happiness Lab," with Dr. Laurie Santos; there was "10% Happier," with Dan Harris; and, inevitably, there was "Office Hours," with Arthur Brooks.

These days, the C.E.O. of Brooks, Inc., appears to be thriving. He has acquired a jaunty wardrobe of loud suits and colorful pocket squares, and he exudes an avuncular charisma in videos he posts on YouTube. With the brisk, competent manner of a doctor prescribing medication, he assures his audience that his six-step morning "protocol" helps him manage "the negative side" of his "affect profile," and expounds on "the science behind being good at leisure." He has so thoroughly expunged his image of any unsavory political taint that he has co-authored a self-help book, "Build the Life You Want" (2023), with Oprah—and, as he never tires of informing his readers, paid a number of visits to the Dalai Lama. As of January, 2026, he had joined CBS News as a contributor and become a columnist at the anti-woke outlet The Free Press. His metamorphosis into social scientist-cum-sage appears to be complete.

In "The Meaning of Your Life," he no longer trumpets free markets, extolls entrepreneurs, or praises work as "a blessing," as he did in earlier books. Now he claims that the ambitious professionals he calls "young strivers" lead superficial and unfulfilling lives. What they lack, in his view, is "the one thing that can never be simulated: meaning."

…

Becca Rothfeld https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2026/04/06/the-meaning-of-your-life-arthur-c-brooks-book-review
e