Is Logos 4 theologically biased?

Any validity to these concerns?

It is a very valid concern. I dont think the programmers have anything to do with it though. It is the type of books you have in your library. [;)]

Jacob Hantla

Your search results will look like the resources in your library not like the programmers behind Logos

Just wondering about the L4 theology. I have not purchased L4 and I need this question answered before purchase. My question is this, is there a theological position the programmers have that is influencing the out come of a search in L4. I have heard it said, "Water tastes like the hose pipe you drink out of". Let me explain. My concern is that if a programmer has a Calvinistic (or any other) theological convictions, would that come out when doing a search on "eternal security"?

Just echoing your thoughts in a different way: in Zondervan's Glo software, it seems clear that they designed it more around a premill/dispensationalist view point, by the sheer fact that the related terms in their constellation catered to that view (rapture, etc). Not that those SHOULDN'T be there, but that other related terms would NOT be there, that would be more in line with Amill, Postmill, etc.

That said, I am not Calvinist--in regard to a particular perspective on predestination and election--and i use Logos all the time. For nearly a decade. But I feel my resolve crumbling . . . (that was humor). I love the software and I recommend your purchase it. If anything, if you notice that the technology veers toward a particular persuasion, you can make comments on this forum and often, they are heard and addressed.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84675#Comment_84675

Your search results will look like the resources in your library not like the programmers behind

Agreed.

The question is like going to a Library and asking the librarian, does the card catalog favor one kind of literature over another? There is no bias, just a search for what you tell it to find.

Matthew C Jones

Can a computer software be netrual when programmed by a human?

have been a user of Logos starting on ver.1.6 I love the product but I have a concern that the Word of God may be transitioning out of the hands of the Holy Spirit into the hands of some great and well meaning programmers.

Any validity to these concerns?

Your inquiry is good. Blair & Jacob have answered well. My 2 cents follows:

No validity from a computer programmer's perspectivce. To keep you from getting search results they don't want you to have the programmers would have to specifically EXCLUDE those hits from your search queries. That isn't going to happen by design. (There are too many search possibilities and too many programmers involved for them to all agree on theological points and pull off the conspiracy.) The only realistic way to sway the results is by limiting WHAT content is searched. Logos has already proven they have a wide umbrella of theological viewpoints they will publish. Certainly they haven't published the Satanic bible but many users have complained to see doctrinal positions they disagree with. If you don't buy certain resources, they will not be searched. There is some wide variety of beliefs covered in the base package content. You can always hide that content if you find it distracting or objectionable. You may want to read some for apologetics purposes.

My concern is more with the new Bble translations not being faithful to the original texts and popular leaders who preach to "itching ears."

John, Even if you hide big portions of the Scholar's library, the non-controversial content is well worth using for productive study. The sale prices do end tomorrow night.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84680#Comment_84680

Your search results will look like the resources in your library not like the programmers behind
Agreed.
The question is like going to a Library and asking the librarian, does the card catalog favor one kind of literature over another? There is no bias, just a search for what you tell it to find.

overall, I would agree. but Logos is making certain interpretive decisions, are they not, in using synonyms, and the like in topical searches--right? Now to that particular example of mine, it might be argued that synonyms are not susceptible to theological interpretation. Perhaps not. But in the effort to show relationships (domains and L/N, for example), involves a bit of interpretive work and that could be colored by theology. In the world of grammar, just see how translators have translated Romans 9:22 according to theology. (and that in so-called "literal" translations).

Just saying that it is more than doing a simple search for words that appear in your library. My brief allusion to what I notice in Z's glo software regarding related themes in end-times study is a case in point where theology has steered the options available.

Kevin Becker

When it comes to the search algorithms of Logos, I most certainly doubt that the programmers have the time or inclination to color the results. You are in the drivers seat when searching a Bible or your library. The quality of the results depends on how well you understand the search syntax.

With that said, the various databases Logos uses (Morphological, syntactical and so forth) are edited by human beings with theological preferences and biases (I mean nothing negative by this) most of the time these things are not in the realm of debate but it's possible that some choices here and there come down to a particular theological/epistemological bent. And, of course, all the books come from the perspective of the authors/contributors. The trick is to take the secondary literature with a critical and prayerful eye. If I rely on these sources to tell me what the Bible means/says without reading it and prayerfully considering then yes, I may have supplanted the Holy Spirit's role in interpretation. However, this would be my fault, not Logos or its programmers.

Ted Hans

My take on this is, if you have Calvinist resources in your library that's what the search will bring up. If you have Arminian resources, you get Arminian hits. If you do not want either hits then do not have those( Calvinist and Arminian) resources in your Logos library. In the end it depends on what resources you have in your library & not to any bias from the programmers. Logos 4 simply searches the resources in your library.

Ted.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84686#Comment_84686

i realize that my last post is not carefully enough written . . . it may seem like I am making leaps in logic. No, just poorly written in some parts. But after posting, I see Richard makes the point that programmers could limit WHAT content is searched. Now, he may be referring to what resources are available. If that is so, I am not too worried about that with Logos, either. But again, if programmers make decisions on how we can search topically (what connects with what) they may (unintentionally) combine or exclude terms/topics based on theology.

I haven't yet noticed that within Logos, but it would be possible.

Mark Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84688#Comment_84688

My take on this is, if you have Calvinist resources in your library that's what the search will bring up. If you have Arminian resources, you get Arminian hits.

[Y]

BillS

Hi John,

As others have noted, the search technologies are theology-neutral. It's the selection of available resources where "bias" shows up, though at worst it's unintentionally a product of the user/buyer base.

Damian McGrath

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84801#Comment_84801

the search technologies are theology-neutral.

Except for the occasional place where a particular Canon is still assumed....

BillS

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84804#Comment_84804

Except for the occasional place where a particular Canon is still assumed....

Hi Damian,

I'm probably blind, too, in that area. [:)] Please say more as a welcomed corrective.

Blessings to you!

Damian McGrath

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84805#Comment_84805

I'm probably blind, too, in that area.

Something that's come up in the Septuagint translation section of the BWS: see this thread: http://community.logos.com/forums/t/10670.aspx. If one hovers over the little graph above the Septuagint translation ring, it says "number of hits in book" - this is false. It is the number of hits in the Spetuagint when the deuterocanonicals are ignored.

MJ. Smith

I have a concern that the Word of God may be transitioning out of the hands of the Holy Spirit into the hands of some great and well meaning programmers.

Any validity to these concerns?

It is not the great and well meaning programmers that you should be concerned about. It is the user who believes that they know more than they really do - reading commentary excerpts without understanding the author's use of terms, the taking of syntax diagrams as established fact without understanding why there is controversy ... In short readers are still readers with the same shortcomings as always. Perhaps magnified a bit.

Logos resources show a primary focus on non-liturgical traditions using what I have nicknamed the NAP canon (North American Protestant). However, within the program functions this is much less true than it was a few years ago. Logos as you actually use it, should reflect your own theological biases - as you set the priorities, build your library, add your notes Logos shows you first the items you have chosen with their theological bias. Forget about programmers - it is use who most strongly affects the bias of Logos.

Note: this is written from the perspective of one from a liturgical tradition using an expanded canon.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84808#Comment_84808

f one hovers over the little graph above the Septuagint translation ring, it says "number of hits in book" - this is false.

I tested it, and your right. In all fairness they are not left out of other sections

Rene Atchley

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84812#Comment_84812

While I don't think that the programmers themselves stack the deck in the way the program responds to a general search there does seem to be some serious bias's related to the library material. In a Scholar package with all available Galaxie journals (some 1600 resources) try running a search on Paul Tillich or Christian Existentialism...perhaps 3 hits a piece (you get my point I think). What maybe taken as liberal among Evangelical Conservatives (Barth perhaps) may not be considered liberal in many mainline seminaries at the moment. Nothing wrong with stacking the deck, so to speak, in this direction but I don't really think there are too many "liberals" sneaking around in the libraries Logos is putting together....perhaps I'm wrong.

Damian McGrath

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84830#Comment_84830

I tested it, and your right.

Yes, I must file a bug report....

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84840#Comment_84840

Yes, I must file a bug report....

[;)] God Bless

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84836#Comment_84836

In a Scholar package with all available Galaxie journals (some 1600 resources) try running a search on Paul Tillich or Christian Existentialism...

Logos did not publish the Galaxie Journals.

And even this only shows the interest of publishers, not a bias from Logos. Any publisher can use the Logos system if they choose.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84852#Comment_84852

In a Scholar package with all available Galaxie journals (some 1600 resources) try running a search on Paul Tillich or Christian Existentialism...
Logos did not publish the Galaxie Journals.
And even this only shows the interest of publishers, not a bias from Logos. Any publisher can use the Logos system if they choose.

Dag nabbit, what IS IT with these backwoods Publishers and their stubborn ways? In all seriousness, i wonder what is the hesitancy to use Logos more for their publications. Afraid of not getting as big a cut? Wanting to do their own technology? Maybe call it Pradis, or something?

[8o|]

[;)]

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84854#Comment_84854

Dag nabbit, what IS IT with these backwoods Publishers and their stubborn ways?

I agree. I would like to see a LOT more diversity in the resources because it is so much more helpful when doing research and writing.

But is is not just publishers. There are a lot more resources languishing in pre-pub that would add some good diversity to the Logos Library.

Rene Atchley

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84852#Comment_84852

Without regard to who published the particular set of journals Galaxie reflects, I believe, the general theological approach that Logos has. Plus the search results that I noted didn't were not in the Galaxie material rather they hits which were no more than bare mentions mostly in dictionaries. In terms of back-wood publishers money is money for a three volume systematic (well over $100 prepub I think) for Tillich without regard to how one feels toward the theologian..diversity of opinion does not mean agreement especially when a profit is to be made.

Mike Childs

Everyone has a bias.

However, I am not a Calvinist, but an evangelical in the Wesley tradition. I have never found bias to be a problem with Logos.

Furthermore, many of my favorite books / commentaries are by Calvinists. In fact, I highly value John Calvin's commentaries. Martyn Lloyd-Jones is tremendous. I can benefit from someone whose doesn't agree with me on every theological point. Anyone who loves the Word and does solid study can help me.

The real value of Logos is the tremendous number and variety of the most scholarly resources from nearly every theological prespective. No one has more Calvinist, Wesleyan, Dispensational, Covenant theology, Catholic, Pentecostal, Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian, Reformed and other resources. If you want only resources that agree with you (why would you?) then you will find more of them here. But you can also find so much more.

I am not very worried about someone's theological bias. I can sift through that and take what is of benefit.

I would not rely too heavily on any search for a topic such as "eternal sercurity" other than as a starting place. No matter what software I was using.

Logos is the best.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84863#Comment_84863

In terms of back-wood publishers money is money for a three volume systematic (well over $100 prepub I think) for Tillich without regard to how one feels toward the theologian..diversity of opinion does not mean agreement especially when a profit is to be made.

not sure what you mean here. you mean that Logos is asking too much? Or that the publishers want to ask too much, so Logos won't get them published?

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84867#Comment_84867

Pentecostal, Baptist

I dont see much baptistcostal stuff, there should be more of that. [;)] Calvary Chapel resources anyone ?

Mike Childs

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84862#Comment_84862

Joe,

You make a point. If there is a problem in deversity in Logos resources, then it probably is more the result of the customers than the company. Logos generally tries to produce what the customers are willing to buy. Logos customers tend to be more evangelical. At least it seems so to me.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84862#Comment_84862

There are a lot more resources languishing in pre-pub that would add some good diversity to the Logos Library.

right now, I am very glad they are languishing. But only because my budget would not be able to handle most of them going live in the next 4 or 5 months. I have a lot of Paternoster stuff that is just sitting there. I have already backed out of Zondervan (own most on Pradis), downsized my A/Y collection, deleted a few others (pending College Press, etc) and I still have over $3,000 on prepub. And that doesn't count my payment plan for Portfolio, TCOT/TCNT, and other recent purchases. You just can't do it all. If we could buy more individual volumes, diversity would grow. Having to plunk down 1,000 at a time for sets really drains the budget--and I usually go for those more within my theological spectrum if I have to make a choice (ie, why i didn't buy Hermeneia, although I would love to have them)

Alan Charles Gielczyk

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84879#Comment_84879

I need to say something that has been missed so far in this thread. In all likelihood there is much diversity of theological bent amongst the programmers. I highly doubt Logos only hires Calvinistic programmers. That being said, it would be very counterproductive for programmers to bias the searches as this would only create more work as they constantly had to go highjack the work of other programmers who were biasing the searches in a direction they disagreed with. Before long we would have anarchy amongst our beloved Logos programmers and nothing would get done. I think the fact the Logos 4 actually was released is proof enough this did not occur. Just my 2 cents.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84883#Comment_84883

it would be very counterproductive for programmers to bias the searches

fwiw, Alan, my own position is not at all that they would intentionally bias the searches. Nor is it that they have even unintentionally biased the program. From what I can tell, it is a killer program and all of them take great care to make it top notch. That said, it is possible for people to build in bias without realizing it. (and I realize that you were not specifically addressing, necessarily, anything that I wrote)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84894#Comment_84894

That said, it is possible for people to build in bias without realizing it.

Ah, the old, "I don't see any evidence of it, but it must be there" argument.. LOL Sorry brother, I could not resist [;)]

Matthew C Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84909#Comment_84909

It is similar to my youthful days when the John Birch Society told me there was a great conspiracy for world domination. I discovered they were right about the conspiracy but wrongly credited mere humans for the devious agenda. This world of Logos is much too big for a successful human effort to hide some truths from Bible students and promote a certain dogma. Now if Logos started giving away resources of a specific doctrinal bent (like a certain other publisher is actually doing!) then maybe there could be some charge laid about bias. But a free download of a single Piper book, or a $1 Dicken's Christmas Carol does not constitute a conspiracy in my book.

I do appreciate Logos not publishing occultic, New Age or Eastern religious texts for the time being. There are only so many resources that can be worked on with the finite resources available. I'd much rather have Tillich and the LOEB library first.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84894#Comment_84894

That said, it is possible for people to build in bias without realizing it.

Given the basic structure of Logos, built in bias would be far more likely in the tagging of resources rather than in the program code. So let's leave the programmers out of this. [:P] [retired programmer/analyst/manager]

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84863#Comment_84863

Without regard to who published the particular set of journals Galaxie reflects, I believe, the general theological approach that Logos has.

I think it reflects the publishers who are willing to use Logos for their electronic books. What books would you like to see? Who publishes these books? Are they available in other electronic formats? Do you have evidence Logos has refused to publish their books? I suggest you contact these publishers and ask why they are biased against electronic distribution.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84942#Comment_84942

I suggest you contact these publishers and ask why they are biased against electronic distribution

Back in the old days they could have burned the publishers for not converting. [:P] Wait... Sorry that was for heresy or.... Well, all should take advantage of electronic format. Convert !!!![:@][A][]

Mike Aubrey

have been a user of Logos starting on ver.1.6 I love the product but I have a concern that the Word of God may be transitioning out of the hands of the Holy Spirit into the hands of some great and well meaning programmers.

I doubt the Spirit would let go very easily...

Rene Atchley

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84942#Comment_84942

A simple observation about the nature of both the general theological orientation of the libraries available (i.e. company) and what is in those library is not an open ended invitation to either defend or attack Logos. It is not my place to investigate Logos, other publishers, availability of theological resources, motivations of publishers, or industry bias against certain formats. Nor do I particularly care if the product appears in Logos format..its a matter of convenience for my present project. The issue of the op was possible bias of the program which I addressed from my perspective as a long term customer of this company. I believe its time for me to leave this topic.. Thank you for your perspective.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84966#Comment_84966

The issue of the op was possible bias of the program which I addressed from my perspective as a long term customer of this company.

Same here, just sharing my opinion from my perspective as a customer of 12+ years. [H]

I believe its time for me to leave this topic..

Okay. Have a nice day.

Mike Aubrey

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84836#Comment_84836

While I don't think that the programmers themselves stack the deck in the way the program responds to a general search there does seem to be some serious bias's related to the library material. In a Scholar package with all available Galaxie journals (some 1600 resources) try running a search on Paul Tillich or Christian Existentialism...perhaps 3 hits a piece (you get my point I think). What maybe taken as liberal among Evangelical Conservatives (Barth perhaps) may not be considered liberal in many mainline seminaries at the moment. Nothing wrong with stacking the deck, so to speak, in this direction but I don't really think there are too many "liberals" sneaking around in the libraries Logos is putting together....perhaps I'm wrong.

You may want to peruse the Semeia articles then. You might even find some incredibly morally questionable material.

Jack Caviness

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84684#Comment_84684

My concern is more with the new Bble translations not being faithful to the original texts and popular leaders who preach to "itching ears."

That should be the biggest primary concern to us in this age.

John Bowling

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/85006#Comment_85006

If the goal of Logos is to have the broadest possible customer base then they shouldn't simply cater to Christians. They should cater to non-Christian religions and secularists/atheists too.

Is that the goal of Logos? Obviously not. They cater to a niche and even a niche within a niche. This means there will *always* be some disgruntled customer complaining about why Logos doesn't agree with and, therefore, excludes their theological niche.

"Why doesn't Logos have more resources by John Shelby Spong?"

Isn't that question a bit absurd? I guess that depends. Is your name John Dominic Crossan? Then it probably doesn't look so absurd.

Why does Logos have a bias in favor of the protestant canon? We might as well ask why they have a bias against the Secret Gospel of Mark.

One of the reasons why we see these sorts of complaints is because Logos is seen primarily as a powerful searching and researching tool. Naturally, everyone wants to put that tool to use for their own purposes. I'm sure atheists would love to have a Logos type program for their atheological literature.

Robert Pavich

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84954#Comment_84954

have been a user of Logos starting on ver.1.6 I love the product but I have a concern that the Word of God may be transitioning out of the hands of the Holy Spirit into the hands of some great and well meaning programmers.

I doubt the Spirit would let go very easily...

Not only that....I'm not even sure what this means? The HS only enlightens "paper book users" or something? [:O]

Roger Feenstra

How do we know we are getting all sides of an issue? Do the resources available have a balanced perspective on issues of theology?

This is an issue regardless of the media you use to study God's Word. This is where the human aspect comes in -- This is what is called study. Never take a search result and think you've done your work. It takes prayer, hard work, and digging to get a balanced perspective.

I have a concern that the Word of God may be transitioning out of the hands of the Holy Spirit

When a person performs a search, he or she is going to get back a plethora of results. Just like going to the library and pulling ten books off the same shelf. They may all be cataloged the same, but that is not the librarian's bias in trying to sway you one way or the other. You pull the books, look through them, weigh the evidence, pray for the Holy Spirit's guidance -- it's all comes back to the person doing the studying...not the librarian, not the programmer.

Mike Aubrey

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/84684#Comment_84684

My concern is more with the new Bble translations not being faithful to the original texts and popular leaders who preach to "itching ears."

Which translations are those?