By By Joe Nalven
It’s been two years since I asked a chatbot to help me write about a Jewish issue. I worked with the Gemini chatbot to anticipate the White House plan to counter antisemitism. Since then, I’ve been writing about AI in education and art.
There are many pros and cons in using AI. But it is here to stay. The question is how we use this tool.
I decided to test Gemini on Jewish topics. I wondered if the chatbot would have insight into Jewish concerns: What would be three uplifting Jewish topics and three dispiriting ones?
I was rewarded with a list that made eminent Jewish sense. Uplifting topics: The Power of Tzedakah, A New Generation of Jewish Leaders and The Flourishing of Jewish Arts and Culture. Dispiriting topics: Rising Antisemitism, The Challenge of Assimilation and Internal Divides and Political Polarization.
Such lists are a superficial reading of the data on which AI is trained. The challenge, and value of a conversation with a chatbot, is to drill down into contested areas of knowledge. I decided to juxtapose how a new generation of Jewish leaders would confront the problem of rising antisemitism. The chatbot considered the last three years. It recognized that Jewish aspirations for alliances with other marginalized groups was undermined by intersectional ideology and the Israel-Palestine litmus test.
Gemini analyzed the ideological clash that confronted Jews: “The intersectional framework, as it is often applied, can sometimes position Jews as a ‘privileged’ or ‘white’ group, overlooking the long history of persecution and the diversity of the Jewish people, including Jews of color.”
I pressed the inquiry further. I brought up the impact of October 7th. The chatbot acknowledged the impact of that tragic event but only after I brought it to its attention. Maybe a Jewish chatbot would have anticipated my concern earlier. But rather than blaming the chatbot for its oversight, I wondered how it would evaluate the response of the new generation of Jewish leaders compared to the older generation on October 7th.
What did the chatbot “think”?
For a long time, the older generation often focused on institutional antisemitism, like fighting for Holocaust education or against neo-Nazi groups. While important, this can sometimes feel abstract. For the younger generation, October 7th made antisemitism terrifyingly real and visceral. It demonstrated that even in a highly secure place, Jews could be targeted and murdered en masse for simply being Jewish. This event and its aftermath directly informed their strategies, pushing them toward a more urgent and grassroots approach to fighting a hate that they now saw as an immediate threat to their physical safety, not just their identity.
In short, the ‘new generation of Jewish leaders’ would have brought up the tragic event sooner and framed it as a central pillar of their analysis because it directly validated their pre-existing concerns about antisemitism in a way that resonated deeply with their personal experiences and digital-native approach to activism.
Now it’s our turn. What do we think?
Joe Nalven is a former associate director of the Institute for Regional Studies of the Californias at San Diego State University.
Comments