GitLab

1. With knowledge both ancient and brand-new (cf. Mt. 13:52), we are contacted us to assess the current difficulties and chances posed by clinical and technological improvements, particularly by the current advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The Christian tradition relates to the present of intelligence as a necessary element of how people are developed "in the image of God" (Gen. 1:27). Starting from an important vision of the human person and the biblical calling to "till" and "keep" the earth (Gen. 2:15), the Church highlights that this present of intelligence should be expressed through the accountable usage of reason and technical abilities in the stewardship of the created world.

2. The Church motivates the development of science, technology, the arts, and other types of human endeavor, seeing them as part of the "collaboration of males and female with God in perfecting the noticeable creation." [1] As Sirach verifies, God "gave ability to people, that he may be glorified in his splendid works" (Sir. 38:6). Human abilities and creativity originate from God and, when used rightly, glorify God by showing his knowledge and goodness. Because of this, when we ask ourselves what it means to "be human," we can not omit a consideration of our scientific and technological abilities.

3. It is within this point of view that today Note addresses the anthropological and ethical challenges raised by AI-issues that are particularly considerable, as one of the objectives of this technology is to mimic the human intelligence that created it. For example, unlike lots of other human developments, AI can be trained on the results of human creativity and then generate new "artifacts" with a level of speed and skill that frequently matches or exceeds what human beings can do, such as producing text or images equivalent from human compositions. This raises vital issues about AI's possible function in the growing crisis of truth in the public online forum. Moreover, this innovation is designed to find out and make certain choices autonomously, adjusting to new circumstances and supplying solutions not visualized by its programmers, and hence, it raises fundamental questions about ethical duty and human security, with broader ramifications for society as a whole. This new circumstance has actually prompted lots of people to assess what it indicates to be human and the role of humanity in the world.

4. Taking all this into account, there is broad consensus that AI marks a new and substantial phase in humankind's engagement with innovation, putting it at the heart of what Pope Francis has actually explained as an "epochal change." [2] Its impact is felt internationally and in a large range of areas, consisting of social relationships, education, work, art, health care, law, warfare, and global relations. As AI advances rapidly toward even higher achievements, it is critically important to consider its anthropological and ethical implications. This involves not just mitigating risks and preventing damage however likewise ensuring that its applications are used to promote human progress and the common good.

5. To contribute positively to the discernment regarding AI, and in reaction to Pope Francis' call for a renewed "wisdom of heart," [3] the Church offers its experience through the anthropological and ethical reflections contained in this Note. Committed to its active function in the worldwide discussion on these concerns, the Church welcomes those delegated with transmitting the faith-including moms and dads, teachers, pastors, and bishops-to devote themselves to this vital subject with care and attention. While this document is meant specifically for them, it is also indicated to be available to a wider audience, particularly those who share the conviction that scientific and technological advances must be directed towards serving the human person and the common good. [4]
6. To this end, the file begins by comparing concepts of intelligence in AI and in human intelligence. It then explores the Christian understanding of human intelligence, providing a structure rooted in the Church's philosophical and theological custom. Finally, the file provides standards to ensure that the development and usage of AI maintain human dignity and promote the essential advancement of the human person and society.

7. The principle of "intelligence" in AI has actually evolved gradually, making use of a range of ideas from numerous disciplines. While its origins extend back centuries, a considerable turning point happened in 1956 when the American computer scientist John McCarthy organized a summer workshop at Dartmouth University to check out the problem of "Artificial Intelligence," which he specified as "that of making a machine act in methods that would be called intelligent if a human were so behaving." [5] This workshop released a research program focused on designing devices capable of performing tasks usually connected with the human intelligence and intelligent habits.

8. Ever since, AI research has actually advanced quickly, leading to the development of complex systems efficient in carrying out extremely sophisticated tasks. [6] These so-called "narrow AI" systems are generally created to handle particular and restricted functions, such as translating languages, predicting the trajectory of a storm, classifying images, answering concerns, or producing visual content at the user's request. While the definition of "intelligence" in AI research varies, a lot of modern AI systems-particularly those utilizing maker learning-rely on analytical inference instead of logical reduction. By examining big datasets to recognize patterns, AI can "anticipate" [7] outcomes and propose brand-new approaches, mimicking some cognitive processes common of human analytical. Such accomplishments have actually been enabled through advances in computing technology (including neural networks, not being watched artificial intelligence, and evolutionary algorithms) in addition to hardware developments (such as specialized processors). Together, these technologies enable AI systems to react to various kinds of human input, adjust to brand-new circumstances, and even recommend unique options not expected by their original programmers. [8]
9. Due to these rapid improvements, many jobs as soon as managed specifically by humans are now entrusted to AI. These systems can enhance or perhaps supersede what human beings are able to carry out in many fields, particularly in specialized locations such as data analysis, image acknowledgment, and medical diagnosis. While each "narrow AI" application is developed for a specific job, lots of scientists aim to develop what is understood as "Artificial General Intelligence" (AGI)-a single system capable of operating throughout all cognitive domains and performing any task within the scope of human intelligence. Some even argue that AGI might one day attain the state of "superintelligence," exceeding human intellectual capabilities, or contribute to "super-longevity" through advances in biotechnology. Others, nevertheless, fear that these possibilities, even if hypothetical, might one day eclipse the human person, while still others welcome this prospective improvement. [9]
10. Underlying this and lots of other perspectives on the subject is the implicit assumption that the term "intelligence" can be used in the very same way to describe both human intelligence and AI. Yet, this does not catch the complete scope of the concept. When it comes to human beings, intelligence is a professors that pertains to the person in his/her entirety, whereas in the context of AI, "intelligence" is understood functionally, often with the anticipation that the activities quality of the human mind can be broken down into digitized actions that devices can reproduce. [10]
11. This functional perspective is exemplified by the "Turing Test," which considers a device "intelligent" if a person can not differentiate its habits from that of a human. [11] However, in this context, the term "habits" refers only to the performance of specific intellectual tasks; it does not represent the complete breadth of human experience, which includes abstraction, feelings, creativity, and the aesthetic, moral, and religious sensibilities. Nor does it incorporate the full variety of expressions particular of the human mind. Instead, when it comes to AI, the "intelligence" of a system is examined methodologically, however also reductively, based on its capability to produce suitable responses-in this case, those associated with the human intellect-regardless of how those responses are generated.

12. AI's innovative functions offer it sophisticated abilities to perform tasks, but not the capability to think. [12] This difference is most importantly crucial, as the way "intelligence" is defined inevitably forms how we understand the relationship between human idea and this innovation. [13] To appreciate this, one must recall the richness of the philosophical custom and Christian faith, which provide a deeper and more detailed understanding of intelligence-an understanding that is main to the Church's mentor on the nature, self-respect, and vocation of the human individual. [14]
13. From the dawn of human self-reflection, the mind has actually played a main function in understanding what it suggests to be "human." Aristotle observed that "all individuals by nature desire to understand." [15] This knowledge, with its capability for abstraction that grasps the nature and meaning of things, sets human beings apart from the animal world. [16] As philosophers, theologians, and psychologists have actually taken a look at the exact nature of this intellectual faculty, they have actually also checked out how human beings understand the world and their unique place within it. Through this exploration, the Christian custom has actually pertained to understand the human individual as a being including both body and soul-deeply linked to this world and yet transcending it. [17]
14. In the classical custom, the concept of intelligence is often understood through the complementary principles of "reason" (ratio) and "intellect" (intellectus). These are not different faculties however, as Saint Thomas Aquinas explains, they are two modes in which the exact same intelligence runs: "The term intellect is presumed from the inward grasp of the fact, while the name reason is taken from the analytical and discursive process." [18] This succinct description highlights the two basic and complementary measurements of human intelligence. Intellectus refers to the instinctive grasp of the truth-that is, capturing it with the "eyes" of the mind-which precedes and grounds argumentation itself. Ratio pertains to reasoning proper: the discursive, analytical process that causes judgment. Together, intellect and factor form the two facets of the act of intelligere, "the correct operation of the human being as such." [19]
15. Explaining the human individual as a "logical" being does not lower the person to a specific mode of thought; rather, it acknowledges that the capability for intellectual understanding shapes and penetrates all elements of human activity. [20] Whether worked out well or poorly, this capacity is an intrinsic aspect of human nature. In this sense, the "term 'rational' incorporates all the capabilities of the human person," consisting of those related to "understanding and understanding, along with those of willing, caring, selecting, and wanting; it also includes all corporeal functions closely related to these abilities." [21] This detailed point of view highlights how, in the human person, produced in the "image of God," reason is integrated in a method that raises, shapes, and changes both the individual's will and actions. [22]
16. Christian believed considers the intellectual faculties of the human individual within the structure of an important sociology that sees the human being as essentially embodied. In the human person, spirit and matter "are not two natures joined, however rather their union forms a single nature." [23] Simply put, the soul is not simply the immaterial "part" of the individual contained within the body, nor is the body an external shell housing an intangible "core." Rather, the entire human person is concurrently both material and spiritual. This understanding reflects the mentor of Sacred Scripture, which sees the human person as a being who lives out relationships with God and others (and hence, an authentically spiritual dimension) within and through this embodied existence. [24] The extensive significance of this condition is additional lit up by the mystery of the Incarnation, through which God himself took on our flesh and "raised it approximately a sublime self-respect." [25]
17. Although deeply rooted in bodily existence, the human person goes beyond the material world through the soul, which is "almost on the horizon of eternity and time." [26] The intelligence's capacity for transcendence and the self-possessed freedom of the will come from the soul, by which the human person "shares in the light of the divine mind." [27] Nevertheless, the human spirit does not exercise its regular mode of understanding without the body. [28] In this way, the intellectual professors of the human person are an essential part of an anthropology that recognizes that the human person is a "unity of body and soul." [29] Further elements of this understanding will be established in what follows.

18. Humans are "ordered by their very nature to interpersonal communion," [30] possessing the capability to know one another, to give themselves in love, and to get in into communion with others. Accordingly, human intelligence is not a separated professors however is exercised in relationships, discovering its fullest expression in dialogue, cooperation, and uniformity. We learn with others, and we find out through others.

19. The relational orientation of the human person is eventually grounded in the everlasting self-giving of the Triune God, whose love is revealed in production and redemption. [31] The human person is "contacted us to share, by understanding and love, in God's own life." [32]
20. This occupation to communion with God is necessarily connected to the call to communion with others. Love of God can not be separated from love for one's next-door neighbor (cf. 1 Jn. 4:20; Mt. 22:37 -39). By the grace of sharing God's life, Christians are also called to mimic Christ's outpouring gift (cf. 2 Cor. 9:8 -11; Eph. 5:1 -2) by following his command to "like one another, as I have enjoyed you" (Jn. 13:34). [33] Love and service, echoing the magnificent life of self-giving, transcend self-interest to react more completely to the human occupation (cf. 1 Jn. 2:9). A lot more sublime than understanding lots of things is the commitment to care for one another, for if "I understand all mysteries and all understanding [...] but do not have love, I am nothing" (1 Cor. 13:2).

21. Human intelligence is eventually "God's present fashioned for the assimilation of reality." [34] In the double sense of intellectus-ratio, it enables the person to check out truths that go beyond simple sensory experience or energy, since "the desire for fact becomes part of human nature itself. It is a natural home of human reason to ask why things are as they are." [35] Moving beyond the limits of empirical data, human intelligence can "with real certitude attain to reality itself as knowable." [36] While truth remains only partly known, the desire for reality "spurs factor constantly to go further; certainly, it is as if reason were overwhelmed to see that it can constantly exceed what it has already attained." [37] Although Truth in itself goes beyond the borders of human intelligence, it irresistibly attracts it. [38] Drawn by this attraction, the human person is resulted in look for "facts of a greater order." [39]
22. This natural drive toward the pursuit of reality is especially evident in the noticeably human capabilities for semantic understanding and creativity, [40] through which this search unfolds in a "manner that is proper to the social nature and dignity of the human person." [41] Likewise, a steadfast orientation to the reality is important for charity to be both authentic and universal. [42]
23. The look for reality discovers its greatest expression in openness to truths that transcend the physical and produced world. In God, all truths attain their supreme and original significance. [43] Entrusting oneself to God is a "basic decision that engages the whole individual." [44] In this way, the human individual becomes completely what she or he is called to be: "the intelligence and the will display their spiritual nature," enabling the individual "to act in a manner that understands personal flexibility to the complete." [45]
24. The Christian faith comprehends production as the totally free act of the Triune God, who, as Saint Bonaventure of Bagnoregio explains, develops "not to increase his magnificence, however to show it forth and to interact it." [46] Since God develops according to his Wisdom (cf. Wis. 9:9; Jer. 10:12), production is imbued with an intrinsic order that reflects God's plan (cf. Gen. 1; Dan. 2:21 -22; Is. 45:18; Ps. 74:12 -17; 104), [47] within which God has actually called human beings to assume an unique function: to cultivate and take care of the world. [48]
25. Shaped by the Divine Craftsman, humans live out their identity as beings made in imago Dei by "keeping" and "tilling" (cf. Gen. 2:15) creation-using their intelligence and skills to take care of and wiki.vst.hs-furtwangen.de establish production in accord with God's plan. [49] In this, human intelligence shows the Divine Intelligence that developed all things (cf. Gen. 1-2; Jn. 1), [50] continually sustains them, and guides them to their ultimate purpose in him. [51] Moreover, people are called to establish their abilities in science and technology, for through them, God is glorified (cf. Sir. 38:6). Thus, in a correct relationship with production, humans, on the one hand, utilize their intelligence and ability to comply with God in directing creation towards the purpose to which he has called it. [52] On the other hand, development itself, as Saint Bonaventure observes, assists the human mind to "rise slowly to the supreme Principle, who is God." [53]
26. In this context, human intelligence becomes more plainly comprehended as a faculty that forms an essential part of how the entire person engages with truth. Authentic engagement needs embracing the complete scope of one's being: spiritual, cognitive, embodied, and relational.

27. This engagement with reality unfolds in different ways, as everyone, in his/her multifaceted individuality [54], seeks to comprehend the world, connect to others, resolve problems, express imagination, and pursue important wellness through the unified interaction of the different measurements of the person's intelligence. [55] This involves logical and linguistic capabilities but can likewise encompass other modes of communicating with reality. Consider the work of an artisan, who "must understand how to determine, in inert matter, a particular form that others can not recognize" [56] and bring it forth through insight and useful ability. Indigenous peoples who live near the earth typically possess an extensive sense of nature and its cycles. [57] Similarly, a friend who knows the ideal word to say or a person skilled at handling human relationships exhibits an intelligence that is "the fruit of self-examination, dialogue and generous encounter in between persons." [58] As Pope Francis observes, "in this age of expert system, we can not forget that poetry and love are required to conserve our humanity." [59]
28. At the heart of the Christian understanding of intelligence is the integration of fact into the moral and spiritual life of the person, guiding his/her actions in light of God's goodness and truth. According to God's plan, intelligence, in its max sense, also consists of the ability to appreciate what holds true, excellent, and gorgeous. As the twentieth-century French poet Paul Claudel revealed, "intelligence is nothing without pleasure." [60] Similarly, Dante, upon reaching the highest paradise in Paradiso, affirms that the conclusion of this intellectual pleasure is discovered in the "light intellectual loaded with love, love of real great filled with pleasure, happiness which transcends every sweet taste." [61]
29. A proper understanding of human intelligence, therefore, can not be lowered to the mere acquisition of facts or the capability to perform specific tasks. Instead, it includes the individual's openness to the ultimate questions of life and reflects an orientation towards the True and the Good. [62] As an expression of the magnificent image within the person, human intelligence has the capability to access the totality of being, considering existence in its fullness, which goes beyond what is quantifiable, and comprehending the significance of what has actually been understood. For believers, this capacity consists of, in a particular method, the ability to grow in the understanding of the mysteries of God by utilizing reason to engage ever more profoundly with revealed truths (intellectus fidei). [63] True intelligence is shaped by divine love, which "is poured forth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit" (Rom. 5:5). From this, it follows that human intelligence possesses a necessary contemplative measurement, an unselfish openness to the True, the Good, and the Beautiful, beyond any utilitarian function.

30. Due to the foregoing discussion, the distinctions between human intelligence and existing AI systems end up being apparent. While AI is an amazing technological achievement efficient in mimicing certain outputs related to human intelligence, it operates by performing tasks, attaining objectives, or making choices based on quantitative data and computational reasoning. For instance, with its analytical power, AI excels at incorporating information from a range of fields, modeling complex systems, and cultivating interdisciplinary connections. In this way, it can help specialists work together in resolving intricate problems that "can not be handled from a single perspective or from a single set of interests." [64]
31. However, even as AI procedures and imitates certain expressions of intelligence, it remains basically restricted to a logical-mathematical structure, which enforces intrinsic constraints. Human intelligence, in contrast, establishes naturally throughout the individual's physical and mental growth, shaped by a myriad of lived experiences in the flesh. Although innovative AI systems can "learn" through processes such as artificial intelligence, this sort of training is essentially various from the developmental growth of human intelligence, which is shaped by embodied experiences, consisting of sensory input, psychological reactions, social interactions, and the special context of each minute. These aspects shape and form people within their personal history.In contrast, AI, doing not have a physique, relies on computational reasoning and knowing based upon vast datasets that include taped human experiences and understanding.

32. Consequently, although AI can replicate aspects of human reasoning and carry out particular tasks with incredible speed and efficiency, its computational capabilities represent just a fraction of the broader capabilities of the human mind. For circumstances, AI can not presently duplicate ethical discernment or the capability to develop authentic relationships. Moreover, human intelligence is situated within a personally lived history of intellectual and ethical formation that fundamentally shapes the person's viewpoint, incorporating the physical, emotional, social, ethical, and spiritual measurements of life. Since AI can not use this fullness of understanding, approaches that rely exclusively on this innovation or treat it as the main methods of analyzing the world can result in "a loss of appreciation for the entire, for the relationships between things, and for the more comprehensive horizon." [65]
33. Human intelligence is not mainly about completing practical jobs however about understanding and actively engaging with reality in all its measurements; it is likewise efficient in unexpected insights. Since AI lacks the richness of corporeality, relationality, and the openness of the human heart to reality and goodness, its capacities-though seemingly limitless-are unparalleled with the human ability to understand truth. A lot can be gained from an illness, an embrace of reconciliation, and even a basic sundown; certainly, many experiences we have as humans open brand-new horizons and offer the possibility of attaining brand-new knowledge. No device, working exclusively with information, can determine up to these and many other experiences present in our lives.

34. Drawing an extremely close equivalence in between human intelligence and AI threats succumbing to a functionalist viewpoint, where individuals are valued based upon the work they can perform. However, a person's worth does not depend upon having particular skills, cognitive and technological achievements, or individual success, but on the individual's inherent self-respect, grounded in being developed in the image of God. [66] This self-respect remains intact in all scenarios, including for those not able to exercise their capabilities, whether it be an unborn kid, an unconscious individual, or an older individual who is suffering. [67] It likewise underpins the custom of human rights (and, in particular, what are now called "neuro-rights"), which represent "an essential point of merging in the look for typical ground" [68] and can, therefore, act as a fundamental ethical guide in conversations on the responsible development and usage of AI.

35. Considering all these points, as Pope Francis observes, "the very use of the word 'intelligence'" in connection with AI "can prove misleading" [69] and threats overlooking what is most precious in the human individual. Due to this, AI must not be seen as an artificial form of human intelligence but as an item of it. [70]
36. Given these considerations, one can ask how AI can be understood within God's plan. To answer this, it is necessary to recall that techno-scientific activity is not neutral in character but is a human endeavor that engages the humanistic and cultural measurements of human imagination. [71]
37. Viewed as a fruit of the potential engraved within human intelligence, [72] clinical query and the development of technical abilities are part of the "collaboration of males and female with God in improving the visible production." [73] At the exact same time, all scientific and technological accomplishments are, eventually, gifts from God. [74] Therefore, human beings need to always use their abilities in view of the greater purpose for which God has actually approved them. [75]
38. We can gratefully acknowledge how technology has actually "remedied numerous evils which used to hurt and limit people," [76] a reality for which we need to rejoice. Nevertheless, not all technological developments in themselves represent authentic human progress. [77] The Church is especially opposed to those applications that threaten the sanctity of life or the dignity of the human person. [78] Like any human undertaking, technological advancement must be directed to serve the human individual and contribute to the pursuit of "greater justice, more substantial fraternity, and a more humane order of social relations," which are "more important than advances in the technical field." [79] Concerns about the ethical ramifications of technological advancement are shared not only within the Church however likewise among lots of scientists, technologists, and expert associations, who progressively call for ethical reflection to direct this advancement in a responsible method.

39. To resolve these challenges, it is necessary to highlight the importance of ethical responsibility grounded in the dignity and vocation of the human person. This guiding principle likewise uses to concerns worrying AI. In this context, the ethical dimension handles main importance since it is people who design systems and determine the functions for which they are utilized. [80] Between a maker and a person, just the latter is genuinely a moral agent-a subject of moral duty who works out freedom in his/her choices and accepts their consequences. [81] It is not the device but the human who remains in relationship with reality and goodness, directed by a moral conscience that calls the person "to love and to do what is good and to avoid evil," [82] attesting to "the authority of reality in recommendation to the supreme Good to which the human individual is drawn." [83] Likewise, in between a machine and a human, just the human can be sufficiently self-aware to the point of listening and following the voice of conscience, discerning with prudence, and seeking the good that is possible in every circumstance. [84] In reality, all of this also belongs to the person's exercise of intelligence.

40. Like any product of human imagination, AI can be directed toward positive or negative ends. [85] When utilized in ways that appreciate human self-respect and promote the wellness of individuals and neighborhoods, it can contribute positively to the human occupation. Yet, as in all areas where human beings are called to make decisions, the shadow of evil also looms here. Where human flexibility enables the possibility of picking what is wrong, the ethical assessment of this innovation will need to take into account how it is directed and utilized.

41. At the exact same time, it is not only the ends that are fairly considerable but also the ways used to attain them. Additionally, the total vision and understanding of the human person ingrained within these systems are necessary to think about too. Technological items reflect the worldview of their designers, owners, users, and regulators, [86] and have the power to "shape the world and engage consciences on the level of worths." [87] On a social level, some technological advancements might likewise reinforce relationships and power dynamics that are irregular with an appropriate understanding of the human individual and society.

42. Therefore, the ends and the ways utilized in a given application of AI, as well as the general vision it incorporates, need to all be assessed to guarantee they appreciate human dignity and promote the typical good. [88] As Pope Francis has mentioned, "the intrinsic dignity of every male and every woman" must be "the crucial criterion in evaluating emerging technologies; these will prove fairly sound to the degree that they assist regard that self-respect and increase its expression at every level of human life," [89] including in the social and economic spheres. In this sense, human intelligence plays an essential role not only in developing and producing technology but also in directing its usage in line with the genuine good of the human person. [90] The duty for managing this carefully pertains to every level of society, guided by the principle of subsidiarity and other concepts of Catholic Social Teaching.

43. The dedication to making sure that AI always supports and promotes the supreme value of the dignity of every human being and the fullness of the human vocation acts as a criterion of discernment for developers, owners, operators, and regulators of AI, along with to its users. It remains valid for every single application of the technology at every level of its usage.

44. An evaluation of the implications of this guiding concept might start by thinking about the importance of moral duty. Since full ethical causality belongs just to personal agents, not artificial ones, it is vital to be able to determine and specify who bears duty for the procedures associated with AI, especially those capable of learning, correction, and reprogramming. While bottom-up techniques and really deep neural networks allow AI to fix complicated issues, they make it tough to understand the procedures that lead to the options they adopted. This complicates responsibility considering that if an AI application produces unwanted outcomes, determining who is accountable becomes challenging. To resolve this problem, attention requires to be provided to the nature of responsibility procedures in complex, highly automated settings, where results may just become evident in the medium to long term. For this, it is very important that ultimate obligation for choices made using AI rests with the human decision-makers and that there is responsibility for making use of AI at each stage of the decision-making process. [91]
45. In addition to identifying who is accountable, it is vital to determine the objectives given to AI systems. Although these systems may utilize without supervision autonomous learning mechanisms and often follow courses that humans can not reconstruct, they ultimately pursue objectives that human beings have actually assigned to them and are governed by procedures developed by their designers and developers. Yet, this presents an obstacle because, as AI designs end up being progressively efficient in independent knowing, the ability to maintain control over them to guarantee that such applications serve human purposes might successfully lessen. This raises the important question of how to make sure that AI systems are bought for the good of individuals and not against them.

46. While duty for the ethical usage of AI systems starts with those who establish, produce, handle, and manage such systems, it is also shared by those who utilize them. As Pope Francis kept in mind, the device "makes a technical option among several possibilities based either on well-defined criteria or on analytical inferences. Humans, however, not only pick, however in their hearts are capable of deciding." [92] Those who utilize AI to achieve a job and follow its outcomes produce a context in which they are ultimately accountable for the power they have entrusted. Therefore, insofar as AI can help humans in making choices, the algorithms that govern it ought to be trustworthy, protected, robust enough to manage inconsistencies, and transparent in their operation to alleviate predispositions and unintentional side impacts. [93] Regulatory frameworks should guarantee that all legal entities remain accountable for using AI and all its repercussions, with suitable safeguards for transparency, personal privacy, and responsibility. [94] Moreover, those using AI ought to beware not to become overly reliant on it for their decision-making, a pattern that increases contemporary society's already high reliance on technology.

47. The Church's moral and social mentor provides resources to help ensure that AI is utilized in a manner that maintains human firm. Considerations about justice, for example, need to also resolve problems such as fostering just social dynamics, maintaining worldwide security, and promoting peace. By exercising vigilance, individuals and communities can recognize methods to use AI to benefit mankind while preventing applications that might deteriorate human self-respect or damage the environment. In this context, the idea of duty ought to be comprehended not just in its most restricted sense but as a "obligation for the take care of others, which is more than just representing outcomes attained." [95]
48. Therefore, AI, like any technology, can be part of a conscious and accountable response to humankind's vocation to the good. However, as formerly discussed, AI must be directed by human intelligence to align with this vocation, guaranteeing it respects the self-respect of the human person. Recognizing this "exalted self-respect," the Second Vatican Council verified that "the social order and its development should usually work to the benefit of the human individual." [96] Due to this, making use of AI, as Pope Francis said, must be "accompanied by an ethic inspired by a vision of the common great, an ethic of flexibility, obligation, and fraternity, capable of cultivating the complete advancement of individuals in relation to others and to the entire of production." [97]
49. Within this basic perspective, some observations follow below to highlight how the preceding arguments can assist supply an ethical orientation in useful scenarios, in line with the "knowledge of heart" that Pope Francis has proposed. [98] While not extensive, this conversation is used in service of the discussion that considers how AI can be used to maintain the self-respect of the human individual and promote the typical good. [99]
50. As Pope Francis observed, "the intrinsic dignity of each human and the fraternity that binds us together as members of the one human household need to support the advancement of new innovations and function as unassailable criteria for examining them before they are utilized." [100]
51. Viewed through this lens, AI might "present crucial innovations in agriculture, education and culture, a better level of life for whole nations and individuals, and the growth of human fraternity and social relationship," and therefore be "used to promote integral human development." [101] AI might also assist companies determine those in requirement and counter discrimination and marginalization. These and other similar applications of this innovation might add to human advancement and the typical good. [102]
52. However, while AI holds lots of possibilities for promoting the excellent, it can also prevent or perhaps counter human development and the common good. Pope Francis has actually kept in mind that "proof to date recommends that digital technologies have actually increased inequality in our world. Not simply differences in material wealth, which are also significant, but likewise distinctions in access to political and social impact." [103] In this sense, AI could be utilized to perpetuate marginalization and discrimination, develop brand-new types of hardship, expand the "digital divide," and aggravate existing social inequalities. [104]
53. Moreover, the concentration of the power over mainstream AI applications in the hands of a couple of powerful companies raises significant ethical concerns. Exacerbating this issue is the inherent nature of AI systems, where no single individual can work out total oversight over the large and complex datasets used for computation. This absence of distinct accountability produces the risk that AI might be manipulated for personal or business gain or to direct popular opinion for the advantage of a specific market. Such entities, inspired by their own interests, possess the capability to exercise "kinds of control as subtle as they are invasive, developing systems for the control of consciences and of the democratic procedure." [105]
54. Furthermore, there is the risk of AI being utilized to promote what Pope Francis has called the "technocratic paradigm," which perceives all the world's problems as solvable through technological methods alone. [106] In this paradigm, human dignity and fraternity are frequently reserved in the name of performance, "as if reality, goodness, and truth immediately stream from technological and economic power as such." [107] Yet, human dignity and the common great should never be broken for the sake of performance, [108] for "technological developments that do not lead to an enhancement in the lifestyle of all mankind, but on the contrary, intensify inequalities and disputes, can never ever count as real progress. " [109] Instead, AI should be put "at the service of another kind of progress, one which is healthier, more human, more social, more essential." [110]
55. Attaining this objective needs a much deeper reflection on the relationship in between autonomy and responsibility. Greater autonomy increases each person's responsibility throughout different aspects of communal life. For Christians, the foundation of this responsibility depends on the recognition that all human capacities, consisting of the person's autonomy, originated from God and are suggested to be utilized in the service of others. [111] Therefore, rather than simply pursuing economic or technological goals, AI must serve "the common good of the whole human household," which is "the sum total of social conditions that enable people, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their satisfaction more totally and more quickly." [112]
56. The Second Vatican Council observed that "by his innermost nature man is a social being; and if he does not participate in relations with others, he can neither live nor establish his presents." [113] This conviction underscores that living in society is intrinsic to the nature and occupation of the human individual. [114] As social beings, we seek relationships that involve mutual exchange and the pursuit of fact, in the course of which, people "share with each other the fact they have actually found, or think they have actually discovered, in such a way that they assist one another in the look for truth." [115]
57. Such a mission, along with other elements of human interaction, presupposes encounters and mutual exchange between people formed by their special histories, thoughts, convictions, and relationships. Nor can we forget that human intelligence is a diverse, diverse, and complex reality: individual and social, rational and affective, conceptual and symbolic. Pope Francis underscores this vibrant, keeping in mind that "together, we can seek the truth in discussion, in relaxed discussion or in enthusiastic argument. To do so requires perseverance; it entails moments of silence and suffering, yet it can patiently embrace the broader experience of individuals and peoples. [...] The process of structure fraternity, be it regional or universal, can only be carried out by spirits that are free and available to authentic encounters." [116]
58. It remains in this context that a person can think about the difficulties AI postures to human relationships. Like other technological tools, AI has the possible to foster connections within the human household. However, it could likewise impede a real encounter with truth and, eventually, lead people to "a deep and melancholic dissatisfaction with interpersonal relations, or a hazardous sense of isolation." [117] Authentic human relationships require the richness of being with others in their pain, their pleas, and their joy. [118] Since human intelligence is revealed and improved also in social and embodied ways, authentic and spontaneous encounters with others are indispensable for engaging with reality in its fullness.

59. Because "real wisdom requires an encounter with reality," [119] the rise of AI presents another challenge. Since AI can effectively mimic the products of human intelligence, the capability to understand when one is engaging with a human or a device can no longer be taken for approved. Generative AI can produce text, speech, images, and other sophisticated outputs that are normally associated with people. Yet, it should be understood for what it is: a tool, not an individual. [120] This distinction is typically obscured by the language utilized by specialists, which tends to anthropomorphize AI and thus blurs the line between human and device.

60. Anthropomorphizing AI likewise poses particular difficulties for the advancement of kids, potentially motivating them to develop patterns of interaction that deal with human relationships in a transactional manner, as one would associate with a chatbot. Such practices might lead young individuals to see instructors as simple dispensers of details instead of as mentors who direct and nurture their intellectual and moral development. Genuine relationships, rooted in compassion and a steadfast dedication to the good of the other, are important and irreplaceable in cultivating the complete advancement of the human individual.

61. In this context, it is important to clarify that, despite using anthropomorphic language, no AI application can really experience compassion. Emotions can not be minimized to facial expressions or phrases produced in action to prompts; they reflect the method a person, as a whole, associates with the world and to his or her own life, with the body playing a main role. True compassion needs the capability to listen, acknowledge another's irreducible originality, welcome their otherness, imoodle.win and comprehend the meaning behind even their silences. [121] Unlike the realm of analytical judgment in which AI excels, true compassion belongs to the relational sphere. It involves intuiting and collaring the lived experiences of another while maintaining the difference in between self and other. [122] While AI can simulate compassionate reactions, it can not duplicate the incomparably personal and relational nature of authentic empathy. [123]
62. Because of the above, it is clear why misrepresenting AI as a person ought to constantly be prevented; doing so for fraudulent functions is a severe ethical offense that might wear down social trust. Similarly, utilizing AI to deceive in other contexts-such as in education or in human relationships, consisting of the sphere of sexuality-is also to be thought about immoral and needs careful oversight to avoid harm, maintain openness, and make sure the dignity of all individuals. [124]
63. In a progressively isolated world, some people have turned to AI looking for deep human relationships, easy companionship, and even psychological bonds. However, while people are meant to experience genuine relationships, AI can only mimic them. Nevertheless, such relationships with others are an integral part of how an individual grows to become who he or she is indicated to be. If AI is used to help individuals foster authentic connections between people, it can contribute positively to the full awareness of the person. Conversely, if we change relationships with God and with others with interactions with technology, we run the risk of changing genuine relationality with a lifeless image (cf. Ps. 106:20; Rom. 1:22 -23). Instead of retreating into synthetic worlds, we are contacted us to engage in a dedicated and intentional method with truth, particularly by identifying with the poor and suffering, consoling those in grief, and forging bonds of communion with all.

64. Due to its interdisciplinary nature, AI is being increasingly incorporated into economic and financial systems. Significant investments are presently being made not only in the technology sector but likewise in energy, finance, and media, particularly in the locations of marketing and sales, logistics, technological innovation, compliance, and threat management. At the same time, AI's applications in these areas have actually also highlighted its ambivalent nature, as a source of remarkable opportunities but also extensive threats. A very first real vital point in this area worries the possibility that-due to the concentration of AI applications in the hands of a couple of corporations-only those big companies would gain from the worth created by AI rather than business that utilize it.

65. Other broader elements of AI's influence on the economic-financial sphere must also be carefully analyzed, particularly concerning the interaction in between concrete truth and the digital world. One important factor to consider in this regard includes the coexistence of diverse and alternative types of financial and banks within a given context. This element should be motivated, as it can bring benefits in how it supports the genuine economy by cultivating its development and stability, specifically throughout times of crisis. Nevertheless, it must be worried that digital realities, not restricted by any spatial bonds, tend to be more homogeneous and impersonal than communities rooted in a specific place and a particular history, with a typical journey identified by shared values and hopes, however likewise by unavoidable differences and divergences. This variety is an undeniable property to a community's economic life. Turning over the economy and finance completely to digital innovation would reduce this variety and richness. As a result, numerous solutions to economic problems that can be reached through natural dialogue in between the involved parties may no longer be attainable in a world dominated by procedures and just the look of proximity.

66. Another area where AI is currently having an extensive impact is the world of work. As in numerous other fields, AI is driving basic improvements across numerous occupations, with a series of results. On the one hand, it has the possible to enhance know-how and performance, create new tasks, make it possible for workers to focus on more ingenious jobs, and open brand-new horizons for creativity and development.

67. However, while AI promises to improve efficiency by taking over mundane tasks, it regularly requires workers to adjust to the speed and demands of machines rather than devices being created to support those who work. As a result, contrary to the advertised benefits of AI, existing techniques to the technology can paradoxically deskill workers, subject them to automated monitoring, and relegate them to rigid and recurring jobs. The need to keep up with the pace of innovation can erode workers' sense of agency and suppress the ingenious capabilities they are expected to bring to their work. [125]
68. AI is presently removing the requirement for some tasks that were when performed by human beings. If AI is utilized to replace human workers instead of complement them, there is a "significant risk of disproportionate advantage for the couple of at the cost of the impoverishment of numerous." [126] Additionally, as AI becomes more powerful, there is an involved threat that human labor might lose its value in the financial realm. This is the sensible consequence of the technocratic paradigm: a world of humankind enslaved to efficiency, where, eventually, the expense of humanity must be cut. Yet, human lives are fundamentally important, independent of their economic output. Nevertheless, the "present design," Pope Francis explains, "does not appear to favor an investment in efforts to help the sluggish, the weak, or the less gifted to discover chances in life." [127] Due to this, "we can not permit a tool as powerful and essential as Artificial Intelligence to reinforce such a paradigm, but rather, we should make Artificial Intelligence a bulwark against its growth." [128]
69. It is crucial to keep in mind that "the order of things need to be subordinate to the order of individuals, and not the other way around." [129] Human work needs to not just be at the service of earnings but at "the service of the entire human individual [...] taking into account the individual's material requirements and the requirements of his/her intellectual, ethical, spiritual, and religious life." [130] In this context, the Church acknowledges that work is "not only a way of making one's daily bread" but is also "an essential dimension of social life" and "a means [...] of personal growth, the structure of healthy relationships, self-expression and the exchange of gifts. Work gives us a sense of shared responsibility for the advancement of the world, and eventually, for our life as an individuals." [131]
70. Since work is a "part of the meaning of life on this earth, a path to growth, human advancement and individual fulfillment," "the goal ought to not be that technological progress progressively replaces human work, for this would be destructive to humanity" [132] -rather, it needs to promote human labor. Seen in this light, AI needs to help, not replace, human judgment. Similarly, it must never break down imagination or minimize employees to mere "cogs in a machine." Therefore, "respect for the self-respect of laborers and the importance of work for the financial well-being of individuals, households, and societies, for job security and simply salaries, should be a high top priority for the global community as these kinds of innovation permeate more deeply into our work environments." [133]
71. As participants in God's recovery work, healthcare professionals have the occupation and duty to be "guardians and servants of human life." [134] Because of this, the healthcare occupation carries an "intrinsic and indisputable ethical measurement," acknowledged by the Hippocratic Oath, which requires physicians and health care specialists to devote themselves to having "absolute respect for human life and its sacredness." [135] Following the example of the Good Samaritan, this commitment is to be carried out by males and females "who turn down the creation of a society of exclusion, and act rather as next-door neighbors, raising up and restoring the fallen for the sake of the common good." [136]
72. Seen in this light, AI appears to hold enormous capacity in a variety of applications in the medical field, such as helping the diagnostic work of doctor, assisting in relationships in between clients and medical staff, using brand-new treatments, and broadening access to quality care likewise for those who are separated or marginalized. In these ways, the technology could enhance the "caring and caring nearness" [137] that doctor are contacted us to extend to the ill and suffering.

73. However, if AI is used not to enhance but to change the relationship in between clients and healthcare providers-leaving patients to interact with a maker rather than a human being-it would reduce a most importantly crucial human relational structure to a central, impersonal, and unequal framework. Instead of encouraging uniformity with the ill and suffering, such applications of AI would risk getting worse the loneliness that typically accompanies illness, particularly in the context of a culture where "persons are no longer viewed as a vital value to be taken care of and respected." [138] This abuse of AI would not line up with respect for the dignity of the human person and uniformity with the suffering.

74. Responsibility for the wellness of patients and the choices that touch upon their lives are at the heart of the healthcare occupation. This accountability requires medical experts to work out all their skill and intelligence in making well-reasoned and fairly grounded options concerning those delegated to their care, constantly respecting the inviolable self-respect of the patients and the requirement for informed consent. As a result, decisions concerning patient treatment and the weight of responsibility they entail must constantly remain with the human individual and should never be entrusted to AI. [139]
75. In addition, utilizing AI to determine who should get treatment based mainly on financial procedures or metrics of efficiency represents a particularly bothersome circumstances of the "technocratic paradigm" that should be rejected. [140] For, "enhancing resources implies utilizing them in an ethical and fraternal method, and not punishing the most vulnerable." [141] Additionally, AI tools in healthcare are "exposed to types of predisposition and discrimination," where "systemic mistakes can quickly multiply, producing not only oppressions in private cases however also, due to the cause and effect, genuine types of social inequality." [142]
76. The integration of AI into health care also presents the danger of amplifying other existing disparities in access to healthcare. As health care ends up being progressively oriented towards prevention and lifestyle-based methods, AI-driven solutions might accidentally prefer more affluent populations who already delight in much better access to medical resources and quality nutrition. This pattern risks strengthening a "medication for the abundant" model, where those with financial means gain from sophisticated preventative tools and customized health details while others battle to gain access to even fundamental services. To prevent such injustices, fair structures are required to make sure that making use of AI in healthcare does not intensify existing healthcare inequalities however rather serves the common good.

77. The words of the Second Vatican Council remain fully pertinent today: "True education aims to form individuals with a view towards their last end and the good of the society to which they belong." [143] As such, education is "never ever a simple procedure of passing on truths and intellectual abilities: rather, its aim is to contribute to the individual's holistic formation in its different elements (intellectual, cultural, spiritual, and so on), consisting of, for example, community life and relations within the scholastic neighborhood," [144] in keeping with the nature and dignity of the human individual.

78. This method includes a dedication to cultivating the mind, but constantly as a part of the integral advancement of the person: "We must break that idea of education which holds that informing methods filling one's head with ideas. That is the method we inform automatons, cerebral minds, not individuals. Educating is taking a threat in the stress in between the mind, the heart, and the hands." [145]
79. At the center of this work of forming the whole human person is the important relationship in between teacher and trainee. Teachers do more than convey knowledge; they design essential human qualities and motivate the joy of discovery. [146] Their existence encourages trainees both through the content they teach and the care they demonstrate for their trainees. This bond promotes trust, shared understanding, and the capability to address each person's distinct dignity and capacity. On the part of the trainee, this can create a real desire to grow. The physical existence of an instructor develops a relational dynamic that AI can not reproduce, one that deepens engagement and nurtures the trainee's essential advancement.

80. In this context, AI provides both chances and difficulties. If used in a sensible manner, within the context of an existing teacher-student relationship and purchased to the authentic goals of education, AI can become a valuable educational resource by enhancing access to education, offering tailored support, and offering instant feedback to trainees. These benefits might enhance the knowing experience, specifically in cases where customized attention is needed, or academic resources are otherwise scarce.

81. Nevertheless, an important part of education is forming "the intelligence to factor well in all matters, to reach out towards fact, and to grasp it," [147] while helping the "language of the head" to grow harmoniously with the "language of the heart" and the "language of the hands." [148] This is even more essential in an age marked by innovation, in which "it is no longer simply a concern of 'using' instruments of communication, however of residing in a highly digitalized culture that has had a profound impact on [...] our ability to interact, discover, be informed and participate in relationship with others." [149] However, instead of fostering "a cultivated intellect," which "brings with it a power and a grace to every work and profession that it carries out," [150] the substantial use of AI in education could result in the trainees' increased dependence on technology, eroding their capability to carry out some abilities individually and aggravating their dependence on screens. [151]
82. Additionally, while some AI systems are developed to assist people develop their crucial believing abilities and analytical abilities, lots of others merely offer answers rather of triggering trainees to come to answers themselves or write text for themselves. [152] Instead of training young people how to collect details and create quick responses, education ought to encourage "the responsible use of freedom to face issues with great sense and intelligence." [153] Building on this, "education in using kinds of expert system must aim above all at promoting critical thinking. Users of any ages, however specifically the young, require to develop a discerning technique to using data and content collected online or produced by expert system systems. Schools, universities, and scientific societies are challenged to assist trainees and professionals to comprehend the social and ethical elements of the development and uses of technology." [154]
83. As Saint John Paul II remembered, "worldwide today, characterized by such fast advancements in science and innovation, the tasks of a Catholic University presume an ever greater importance and urgency." [155] In a specific way, Catholic universities are urged to be present as fantastic labs of hope at this crossroads of history. In an inter-disciplinary and cross-disciplinary secret, they are advised to engage "with knowledge and imagination" [156] in mindful research on this phenomenon, assisting to extract the salutary capacity within the various fields of science and truth, and directing them constantly towards fairly sound applications that plainly serve the cohesion of our societies and bybio.co the typical great, reaching new frontiers in the discussion between faith and reason.

84. Moreover, it must be kept in mind that present AI programs have been understood to supply biased or produced details, which can lead trainees to trust inaccurate content. This problem "not just risks of legitimizing fake news and enhancing a dominant culture's advantage, but, in other words, it also weakens the instructional process itself." [157] With time, clearer differences may emerge between correct and improper uses of AI in education and research. Yet, a definitive guideline is that making use of AI must constantly be transparent and never misrepresented.

85. AI might be utilized as an aid to human self-respect if it helps people understand complex concepts or directs them to sound resources that support their look for the truth. [158]
86. However, AI also provides a major threat of producing manipulated material and incorrect details, which can easily misguide individuals due to its resemblance to the fact. Such false information may happen unintentionally, as in the case of AI "hallucination," where a generative AI system yields results that appear genuine but are not. Since creating content that simulates human artifacts is main to AI's functionality, alleviating these risks shows difficult. Yet, the effects of such aberrations and incorrect details can be rather serious. For this reason, all those included in producing and using AI systems should be devoted to the truthfulness and accuracy of the details processed by such systems and shared to the general public.

87. While AI has a latent potential to produce incorrect details, a a lot more unpleasant issue lies in the purposeful abuse of AI for manipulation. This can happen when individuals or organizations deliberately produce and spread false material with the aim to deceive or cause damage, such as "deepfake" images, videos, and audio-referring to an incorrect depiction of a person, modified or created by an AI algorithm. The danger of deepfakes is particularly apparent when they are utilized to target or damage others. While the images or videos themselves may be artificial, the damage they cause is genuine, leaving "deep scars in the hearts of those who suffer it" and "real wounds in their human self-respect." [159]
88. On a wider scale, by distorting "our relationship with others and with reality," [160] AI-generated fake media can gradually undermine the foundations of society. This issue needs careful policy, as misinformation-especially through AI-controlled or affected media-can spread unintentionally, sustaining political polarization and social discontent. When society ends up being indifferent to the fact, various groups build their own versions of "truths," weakening the "mutual ties and mutual dependences" [161] that underpin the material of social life. As deepfakes cause people to question whatever and AI-generated false content erodes rely on what they see and hear, polarization and dispute will just grow. Such extensive deception is no trivial matter; it strikes at the core of humanity, taking apart the fundamental trust on which societies are built. [162]
89. Countering AI-driven falsehoods is not only the work of market experts-it needs the efforts of all individuals of goodwill. "If innovation is to serve human dignity and not harm it, and if it is to promote peace instead of violence, then the human neighborhood should be proactive in attending to these patterns with regard to human dignity and the promotion of the great." [163] Those who produce and share AI-generated content ought to always work out diligence in confirming the fact of what they distribute and, in all cases, ought to "prevent the sharing of words and images that are deteriorating of humans, that promote hatred and intolerance, that debase the goodness and intimacy of human sexuality or that exploit the weak and vulnerable." [164] This requires the ongoing vigilance and careful discernment of all users concerning their activity online. [165]
90. Humans are naturally relational, and the data each individual generates in the digital world can be seen as an objectified expression of this relational nature. Data communicates not only details but likewise personal and relational understanding, which, in a progressively digitized context, can total up to power over the person. Moreover, while some kinds of information might pertain to public elements of a person's life, others may touch upon the person's interiority, maybe even their conscience. Seen in this way, personal privacy plays a necessary function in safeguarding the boundaries of an individual's inner life, maintaining their freedom to associate with others, reveal themselves, and make choices without unnecessary control. This defense is also connected to the defense of spiritual liberty, as security can also be misused to apply control over the lives of believers and how they reveal their faith.

91. It is appropriate, for that reason, to deal with the concern of privacy from a concern for the legitimate freedom and inalienable self-respect of the human person "in all circumstances." [166] The Second Vatican Council included the right "to safeguard personal privacy" amongst the essential rights "required for living a really human life," a right that should be reached all people on account of their "sublime dignity." [167] Furthermore, the Church has actually likewise verified the right to the legitimate regard for a private life in the context of verifying the individual's right to a great track record, defense of their physical and psychological integrity, and liberty from harm or unnecessary invasion [168] -vital components of the due respect for the intrinsic self-respect of the human person. [169]
92. Advances in AI-powered information processing and analysis now make it possible to infer patterns in an individual's behavior and thinking from even a little quantity of details, making the role of information privacy a lot more essential as a secure for the dignity and relational nature of the human person. As Pope Francis observed, "while closed and intolerant mindsets towards others are on the increase, distances are otherwise shrinking or disappearing to the point that the right to personal privacy hardly exists. Everything has ended up being a type of phenomenon to be analyzed and inspected, and individuals's lives are now under constant monitoring." [170]
93. While there can be genuine and appropriate ways to use AI in keeping with human dignity and the common excellent, utilizing it for surveillance aimed at making use of, limiting others' freedom, or benefitting a couple of at the expense of the many is unjustifiable. The threat of security overreach need to be kept an eye on by appropriate regulators to make sure openness and public accountability. Those responsible for surveillance ought to never exceed their authority, which should always favor the self-respect and flexibility of every individual as the important basis of a just and gentle society.

94. Furthermore, "essential regard for human dignity needs that we refuse to enable the originality of the individual to be identified with a set of data." [171] This especially applies when AI is utilized to assess individuals or groups based on their habits, qualities, or history-a practice referred to as "social scoring": "In social and economic decision-making, we need to be cautious about handing over judgments to algorithms that process data, frequently collected surreptitiously, on an individual's makeup and previous habits. Such information can be contaminated by societal bias and prejudgments. A person's past behavior must not be utilized to reject him or her the opportunity to change, grow, and contribute to society. We can not allow algorithms to restrict or condition regard for human self-respect, or to omit empathy, mercy, forgiveness, and above all, the hope that individuals have the ability to change." [172]
95. AI has many appealing applications for improving our relationship with our "common home," such as producing models to forecast severe climate occasions, proposing engineering solutions to minimize their impact, managing relief operations, and anticipating population shifts. [173] Additionally, AI can support sustainable agriculture, optimize energy use, and provide early caution systems for public health emergencies. These advancements have the possible to enhance durability against climate-related difficulties and promote more sustainable advancement.

96. At the very same time, present AI models and the hardware needed to support them consume huge quantities of energy and water, significantly adding to CO2 emissions and straining resources. This reality is often obscured by the way this technology exists in the popular imagination, where words such as "the cloud" [174] can provide the impression that data is stored and processed in an intangible realm, removed from the real world. However, "the cloud" is not a heavenly domain different from the real world; just like all computing innovations, it depends on physical machines, cables, and energy. The same is true of the innovation behind AI. As these systems grow in intricacy, specifically big language designs (LLMs), they need ever-larger datasets, increased computational power, and greater storage infrastructure. Considering the heavy toll these technologies handle the environment, it is essential to develop sustainable services that reduce their impact on our typical home.

97. Even then, as Pope Francis teaches, it is important "that we search for options not only in innovation however in a modification of humankind." [175] A complete and genuine understanding of development acknowledges that the value of all created things can not be decreased to their mere utility. Therefore, a completely human approach to the stewardship of the earth rejects the distorted anthropocentrism of the technocratic paradigm, which looks for to "draw out everything possible" from the world, [176] and declines the "misconception of development," which presumes that "ecological issues will resolve themselves just with the application of new innovation and without any need for ethical considerations or deep modification." [177] Such a state of mind must provide method to a more holistic method that respects the order of production and promotes the integral good of the human person while securing our typical home. [178]
98. The Second Vatican Council and the constant teaching of the Popes ever since have actually firmly insisted that peace is not merely the absence of war and is not restricted to maintaining a balance of powers between enemies. Instead, in the words of Saint Augustine, peace is "the tranquility of order." [179] Certainly, peace can not be attained without securing the goods of persons, free interaction, regard for the self-respect of persons and peoples, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is the work of justice and the effect of charity and can not be attained through force alone; rather, it should be mainly built through patient diplomacy, the active promotion of justice, uniformity, essential human advancement, and respect for the self-respect of all individuals. [180] In this way, the tools used to maintain peace must never be enabled to justify injustice, violence, or oppression. Instead, they should always be governed by a "firm determination to respect other individuals and nations, along with their dignity, in addition to the purposeful practice of fraternity." [181]
99. While AI's analytical abilities could assist nations seek peace and ensure security, the "weaponization of Artificial Intelligence" can also be highly problematic. Pope Francis has observed that "the capability to conduct military operations through remote control systems has actually resulted in a reduced understanding of the destruction brought on by those weapon systems and the burden of duty for their use, leading to an even more cold and removed technique to the enormous tragedy of war." [182] Moreover, the ease with which self-governing weapons make war more practical militates against the concept of war as a last hope in genuine self-defense, [183] potentially increasing the instruments of war well beyond the scope of human oversight and precipitating a destabilizing arms race, with devastating repercussions for human rights. [184]
100. In particular, Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, which can determining and striking targets without direct human intervention, are a "cause for serious ethical issue" since they do not have the "special human capability for ethical judgment and ethical decision-making." [185] For this reason, Pope Francis has urgently required a reconsideration of the advancement of these weapons and a prohibition on their use, beginning with "a reliable and concrete commitment to present ever greater and appropriate human control. No machine needs to ever select to take the life of a human being." [186]
101. Since it is a small action from makers that can eliminate autonomously with precision to those capable of massive destruction, some AI researchers have expressed issues that such technology poses an "existential threat" by having the possible to act in ways that might threaten the survival of whole areas or perhaps of humanity itself. This risk demands serious attention, reflecting the enduring concern about innovations that grant war "an uncontrollable destructive power over excellent numbers of innocent civilians," [187] without even sparing children. In this context, the call from Gaudium et Spes to "undertake an examination of war with a totally new attitude" [188] is more urgent than ever.

102. At the exact same time, while the theoretical threats of AI are worthy of attention, the more immediate and pressing concern lies in how individuals with malicious intents may abuse this technology. [189] Like any tool, AI is an extension of human power, and while its future abilities are unpredictable, humanity's previous actions supply clear warnings. The atrocities dedicated throughout history suffice to raise deep concerns about the possible abuses of AI.

103. Saint John Paul II observed that "humankind now has instruments of extraordinary power: we can turn this world into a garden, or reduce it to a pile of rubble." [190] Given this truth, drapia.org the Church advises us, in the words of Pope Francis, that "we are totally free to use our intelligence towards things progressing favorably," or toward "decadence and mutual damage." [191] To prevent humankind from spiraling into self-destruction, [192] there must be a clear stand against all applications of innovation that naturally threaten human life and self-respect. This dedication needs cautious discernment about making use of AI, particularly in military defense applications, to guarantee that it constantly appreciates human dignity and serves the common good. The advancement and deployment of AI in weaponries ought to undergo the greatest levels of ethical analysis, governed by an issue for human dignity and the sanctity of life. [193]
104. Technology offers amazing tools to manage and establish the world's resources. However, in some cases, mankind is significantly delivering control of these resources to devices. Within some circles of scientists and futurists, there is optimism about the capacity of synthetic general intelligence (AGI), a hypothetical type of AI that would match or exceed human intelligence and bring about unthinkable improvements. Some even speculate that AGI might attain superhuman capabilities. At the same time, as society drifts away from a connection with the transcendent, some are lured to turn to AI in search of significance or fulfillment-longings that can just be genuinely satisfied in communion with God. [194]
105. However, the anticipation of replacing God for an artifact of human making is idolatry, a practice Scripture clearly alerts against (e.g., Ex. 20:4; 32:1 -5; 34:17). Moreover, AI might prove even more seductive than conventional idols for, unlike idols that "have mouths but do not speak; eyes, however do not see; ears, however do not hear" (Ps. 115:5 -6), AI can "speak," or at least provides the illusion of doing so (cf. Rev. 13:15). Yet, it is crucial to keep in mind that AI is but a pale reflection of humanity-it is crafted by human minds, trained on human-generated product, responsive to human input, and sustained through human labor. AI can not possess a lot of the capabilities specific to human life, and it is also fallible. By turning to AI as a viewed "Other" higher than itself, with which to share existence and obligations, humanity threats developing a replacement for God. However, it is not AI that is ultimately deified and worshipped, but mankind itself-which, in this way, ends up being enslaved to its own work. [195]
106. While AI has the potential to serve humankind and contribute to the typical great, it remains a production of human hands, bearing "the imprint of human art and ingenuity" (Acts 17:29). It needs to never ever be ascribed unnecessary worth. As the Book of Wisdom affirms: "For a guy made them, and one whose spirit is obtained formed them; for no guy can form a god which is like himself. He is mortal, and what he makes with lawless hands is dead, for he is much better than the objects he worships because he has life, however they never ever have" (Wis. 15:16 -17).

107. In contrast, human beings, "by their interior life, transcend the entire product universe; they experience this deep interiority when they participate in their own heart, where God, who probes the heart, awaits them, and where they choose their own fate in the sight of God." [196] It is within the heart, as Pope Francis reminds us, that each private discovers the "mysterious connection between self-knowledge and openness to others, between the encounter with one's personal originality and the desire to give oneself to others. " [197] Therefore, it is the heart alone that is "efficient in setting our other powers and enthusiasms, and our whole person, in a stance of respect and caring obedience before the Lord," [198] who "uses to deal with every one of us as a 'Thou,' constantly and permanently." [199]
108. Considering the numerous difficulties posed by advances in innovation, Pope Francis stressed the requirement for development in "human duty, values, and conscience," proportionate to the growth in the potential that this innovation brings [200] -recognizing that "with an increase in human power comes an expanding of obligation on the part of individuals and communities." [201]
109. At the same time, the "important and essential concern" remains "whether in the context of this progress man, as man, is ending up being genuinely better, that is to say, more mature spiritually, more conscious of the self-respect of his mankind, more responsible, more available to others, specifically the neediest and the weakest, and readier to offer and to aid all." [202]
110. As a result, it is crucial to know how to examine private applications of AI in specific contexts to determine whether its usage promotes human self-respect, the vocation of the human person, and the typical good. As with numerous innovations, the effects of the numerous uses of AI may not always be foreseeable from their inception. As these applications and their social impacts end up being clearer, appropriate actions must be made at all levels of society, following the concept of subsidiarity. Individual users, households, civil society, corporations, organizations, governments, and worldwide companies should operate at their appropriate levels to make sure that AI is used for the good of all.

111. A substantial challenge and opportunity for the common good today lies in considering AI within a structure of relational intelligence, which stresses the interconnectedness of people and communities and highlights our shared obligation for cultivating the important wellness of others. The twentieth-century philosopher Nicholas Berdyaev observed that people often blame machines for personal and social issues; however, "this only humiliates man and does not represent his self-respect," for "it is unworthy to move responsibility from guy to a machine." [203] Only the human person can be morally accountable, and the challenges of a technological society are ultimately spiritual in nature. Therefore, facing those challenges "demands a climax of spirituality." [204]
112. A more indicate consider is the call, prompted by the look of AI on the world phase, for a renewed appreciation of all that is human. Years earlier, the French Catholic author Georges Bernanos warned that "the threat is not in the multiplication of machines, but in the ever-increasing number of men accustomed from their youth to desire just what machines can offer." [205] This obstacle is as true today as it was then, as the rapid pace of digitization risks a "digital reductionism," where non-quantifiable aspects of life are set aside and after that forgotten or perhaps deemed unimportant because they can not be computed in official terms. AI ought to be utilized just as a tool to match human intelligence instead of change its richness. [206] Cultivating those elements of human life that transcend calculation is important for maintaining "an authentic humanity" that "appears to stay in the midst of our technological culture, nearly undetected, like a mist permeating gently beneath a closed door." [207]
113. The huge area of the world's understanding is now available in ways that would have filled previous generations with wonder. However, to guarantee that improvements in understanding do not become humanly or spiritually barren, one should go beyond the simple accumulation of information and aim to attain true knowledge. [208]
114. This knowledge is the present that mankind needs most to deal with the extensive concerns and ethical challenges posed by AI: "Only by adopting a spiritual method of seeing reality, only by recovering a wisdom of the heart, can we confront and interpret the newness of our time." [209] Such "knowledge of the heart" is "the virtue that allows us to incorporate the entire and its parts, our choices and their effects." It "can not be sought from machines," however it "lets itself be discovered by those who seek it and be seen by those who like it; it expects those who desire it, and it enters search of those who are worthwhile of it (cf. Wis 6:12 -16)." [210]
115. In a world marked by AI, we need the grace of the Holy Spirit, who "allows us to look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, scenarios, occasions and to reveal their genuine meaning." [211]
116. Since a "person's perfection is measured not by the details or understanding they have, however by the depth of their charity," [212] how we include AI "to consist of the least of our siblings and sis, the vulnerable, and those most in requirement, will be the real step of our mankind." [213] The "knowledge of the heart" can brighten and direct the human-centered use of this innovation to help promote the common great, care for our "typical home," advance the look for the fact, foster integral human development, prefer human uniformity and fraternity, and lead mankind to its supreme goal: joy and full communion with God. [214]
117. From this viewpoint of wisdom, believers will be able to function as moral representatives efficient in using this innovation to promote an authentic vision of the human individual and society. [215] This must be finished with the understanding that technological development is part of God's prepare for creation-an activity that we are contacted us to order toward the Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ, in the continual search for the True and the Good.

The Supreme Pontiff, Francis, at the Audience granted on 14 January 2025 to the undersigned Prefects and Secretaries of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Dicastery for Culture and Education, authorized this Note and ordered its publication.

Given up Rome, at the offices of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Dicastery for Culture and Education, on 28 January 2025, the Liturgical Memorial of Saint Thomas Aquinas, Doctor of the Church.

Ex audientia pass away 14 ianuarii 2025 Franciscus

Contents

I. Introduction

II. What is Artificial Intelligence?

III. Intelligence in the Philosophical and Theological Tradition

Rationality

Embodiment

Relationality

Relationship with the Truth

Stewardship of the World

An Essential Understanding of Human Intelligence

The Limits of AI

IV. The Role of Ethics in Guiding the Development and Use of AI

Helping Human Freedom and Decision-Making

V. Specific Questions

AI and Society

AI and Human Relationships

AI, the Economy, and Labor

AI and Healthcare

AI and Education

AI, Misinformation, Deepfakes, and Abuse

AI, Privacy, and Surveillance

AI and the Protection of Our Common Home

AI and Warfare

AI and Our Relationship with God

VI. Concluding Reflections

True Wisdom

[1] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. See also Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. [2] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 307. Cf. Id., Christmas Greetings to the Roman Curia (21 December 2019): AAS 112 (2020 ), 43. [3] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [4] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 2293; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [5] J. McCarthy, et al., "A Proposition for the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence" (31 August 1955), http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/history/dartmouth/dartmouth.html (accessed: 21 October 2024). [6] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), pars. 2-3: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [7] Terms in this file explaining the outputs or procedures of AI are utilized figuratively to explain its operations and are not intended to anthropomorphize the maker. [8] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3; Id., Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [9] Here, one can see the main positions of the "transhumanists" and the "posthumanists." Transhumanists argue that technological improvements will allow human beings to overcome their biological constraints and improve both their physical and cognitive capabilities. Posthumanists, on the other hand, contend that such advances will eventually alter human identity to the degree that mankind itself might no longer be thought about truly "human." Both views rest on a fundamentally unfavorable understanding of human corporality, which treats the body more as an obstacle than as an integral part of the individual's identity and contact us to full realization. Yet, this negative view of the body is inconsistent with a proper understanding of human dignity. While the Church supports authentic scientific progress, it verifies that human dignity is rooted in "the person as an inseparable unity of body and soul. " Thus, "dignity is likewise inherent in each person's body, which takes part in its own way in remaining in imago Dei" (Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita [8 April 2024], par. 18). [10] This technique reflects a functionalist perspective, which decreases the human mind to its functions and assumes that its functions can be totally quantified in physical or mathematical terms. However, even if a future AGI were to appear truly intelligent, it would still remain practical in nature. [11] Cf. A.M. Turing, "Computing Machinery and Intelligence," Mind 59 (1950) 443-460. [12] If "believing" is credited to machines, it needs to be clarified that this describes calculative thinking instead of crucial thinking. Similarly, if makers are said to operate using abstract thought, it must be defined that this is limited to computational logic. On the other hand, by its very nature, human idea is a creative procedure that avoids programming and transcends constraints. [13] On the fundamental role of language in forming understanding, cf. M. Heidegger, Über den Humanismus, Klostermann, Frankfurt am Main 1949 (en. tr. "Letter on Humanism," in Basic Writings: Martin Heidegger, Routledge, London - New York City 2010, 141-182). [14] For further discussion of these anthropological and theological foundations, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 43-144. [15] Aristotle, Metaphysics, I. 1, 980 a 21. [16] Cf. Augustine, De Genesi advertisement litteram III, 20, 30: PL 34, 292: "Man is made in the image of God in relation to that [faculty] by which he is remarkable to the irrational animals. Now, this [professors] is reason itself, or the 'mind,' or 'intelligence,' whatever other name it may more appropriately be provided"; Id., Enarrationes in Psalmos 54, 3: PL 36, 629: "When considering all that they have, humans discover that they are most distinguished from animals precisely by the truth they have intelligence." This is likewise restated by Saint Thomas Aquinas, who mentions that "man is the most perfect of all earthly beings endowed with motion, and his correct and natural operation is intellection," by which guy abstracts from things and "gets in his mind things really intelligible" (Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 76). [17] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [18] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 49, a. 5, ad 3. Cf. ibid., I, q. 79; II-II, q. 47, a. 3; II-II, q. 49, a. 2. For a contemporary perspective that echoes aspects of the classical and middle ages difference between these two modes of cognition, cf. D. Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, New York City 2011. [19] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 76, a. 1, resp. [20] Cf. Irenaeus of Lyon, Adversus Haereses, V, 6, 1: PG 7( 2 ), 1136-1138. [21] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 9. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1045: "The intelligence can examine the reality of things through reflection, experience and discussion, and pertain to acknowledge in that truth, which transcends it, the basis of certain universal ethical needs." [22] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [23] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 365. Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 75, a. 4, resp. [24] Certainly, Sacred Scripture "generally thinks about the human individual as a being who exists in the body and is unthinkable outside of it" (Pontifical Biblical Commission, "Che cosa è l'uomo?" (Sal 8,5): Un itinerario di antropologia biblica [30 September 2019], par. 19). Cf. ibid., pars. 20-21, 43-44, 48. [25] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 22: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1042: Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 7: AAS 100 (2008 ), 863: "Christ did not disdain human bodiliness, however rather totally divulged its meaning and value." [26] Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 81. [27] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [28] Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I, q. 89, a. 1, resp.: "to be separated from the body is not in accordance with [the soul's] nature [...] and hence it is unified to the body in order that it may have a presence and an operation appropriate to its nature." [29] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1035. Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 18. [30] International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 56. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 357. [31] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), pars. 5, 8; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 15, 24, 53-54. [32] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 356. Cf. ibid., par. 221. [33] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 13, 26-27. [34] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Donum Veritatis (24 May 1990), 6: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1552. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), par. 109: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1219. Cf. Pseudo-Dionysius, De divinis nominibus, VII, 2: PG 3, 868B-C: "Human souls likewise possess reason and with it they circle in discourse around the fact of things. [...] [O] n account of the way in which they can focusing the numerous into the one, they too, in their own style and as far as they can, deserve conceptions like those of the angels" (en. tr. Pseudo-Dionysius: The Complete Works, Paulist Press, New York City - Mahwah 1987, 106-107). [35] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 3: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7. [36] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [37] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 42: AAS 91 (1999 ), 38. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 208: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1043: "the human mind is capable of transcending immediate concerns and grasping certain facts that are unvarying, as real now as in the past. As it peers into human nature, reason finds universal values obtained from that exact same nature"; ibid., par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034. [38] Cf. B. Pascal, Pensées, no. 267 (ed. Brunschvicg): "The last proceeding of factor is to recognize that there is an infinity of things which are beyond it" (en. tr. Pascal's Pensées, E.P. Dutton, New York City 1958, 77). [39] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [40] Our semantic capacity enables us to understand messages in any type of communication in a manner that both considers and transcends their material or empirical structures (such as computer code). Here, intelligence becomes a wisdom that "allows us to take a look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, circumstances, occasions and to uncover their genuine significance" (Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications [24 January 2024]: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8). Our creativity allows us to produce brand-new content or ideas, mainly by providing an initial perspective on truth. Both capabilities depend on the presence of a personal subjectivity for their complete realization. [41] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. [42] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034: "Charity, when accompanied by a commitment to the reality, is much more than individual feeling [...] Certainly, its close relation to truth cultivates its universality and maintains it from being 'restricted to a narrow field devoid of relationships.' [...] Charity's openness to reality thus secures it from 'a fideism that denies it of its human and universal breadth.'" The internal quotes are from Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), pars. 2-4: AAS 101 (2009 ), 642-643. [43] Cf. International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 7. [44] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [45] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15. [46] Bonaventure, In II Librum Sententiarum, d. I, p. 2, a. 2, q. 1; as priced quote in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 293. Cf. ibid., par. 294. [47] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 295, 299, 302. Bonaventure likens the universe to "a book reflecting, representing, and explaining its Maker," the Triune God who approves existence to all things (Breviloquium 2.12.1). Cf. Alain de Lille, De Incarnatione Christi, PL 210, 579a: "Omnis mundi creatura quasi liber et pictura nobis est et speculum." [48] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 67: AAS 107 (2015 ), 874; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 6: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589-592; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 57: "human beings occupy a special place in deep space according to the magnificent strategy: they delight in the advantage of sharing in the divine governance of visible production. [...] Since guy's place as ruler remains in reality a participation in the divine governance of development, we mention it here as a type of stewardship." [49] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), pars. 38-39: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1164-1165. [50] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. This concept is also reflected in the production account, where God brings animals to Adam "to see what he would call them. And whatever [he] called every living animal, that was its name" (Gen. 2:19), an action that shows the active engagement of human intelligence in the stewardship of God's production. Cf. John Chrysostom, Homiliae in Genesim, XIV, 17-21: PG 53, 116-117. [51] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 301. [52] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 302. [53] Bonaventure, Breviloquium 2.12.1. Cf. ibid., 2.11.2. [54] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 236: AAS 105 (2023 ), 1115; Id., Address to Participants in the Meeting of University Chaplains and Pastoral Workers Promoted by the Dicastery for Culture and Education (24 November 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 November 2023, 7. [55] Cf. J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 5.1, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 99-100; Francis, Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [56] Francis, Address to the Members of the National Confederation of Artisans and Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises (CNA) (15 November 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 15 November 2024, 8. [57] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Querida Amazonia (2 February 2020), par. 41: AAS 112 (2020 ), 246; Id., Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 146: AAS 107 (2015 ), 906. [58] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 864. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), pars. 17-24: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47-50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985-987. [59] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 20: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [60] P. Claudel, Conversation sur Jean Racine, Gallimard, Paris 1956, 32: "L'intelligence n'est rien sans la délectation." Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 13: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5: "The mind and the will are put at the service of the higher great by picking up and appreciating truths." [61] Dante, Paradiso, Canto XXX: "luce intellettüal, piena d'amore;/ amor di vero ben, pien di letizia;/ letizia che trascende ogne dolzore" (en. tr. The Divine Comedy of Dante Alighieri, C.E. Norton, tr., Houghton Mifflin, Boston 1920, 232). [62] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931:" [T] he highest norm of human life is the magnificent law itself-eternal, unbiased and universal, by which God orders, directs and governs the whole world and the ways of the human community according to a plan conceived in his wisdom and love. God has allowed man to take part in this law of his so that, under the mild disposition of divine providence, numerous might have the ability to arrive at a deeper and much deeper knowledge of unchangeable reality." Also cf. Id., Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. [63] Cf. First Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius (24 April 1870), ch. 4, DH 3016. [64] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [65] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 891. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 204: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1042. [66] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 11: AAS 83 (1991 ), 807: "God has imprinted his own image and similarity on male (cf. Gen 1:26), giving upon him a matchless dignity [...] In effect, beyond the rights which man obtains by his own work, there exist rights which do not represent any work he carries out, but which circulation from his necessary dignity as a person." Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [67] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 8. Cf. ibid., par. 9; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 22. [68] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2024 ), 310. [69] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [70] In this sense, "Artificial Intelligence" is comprehended as a technical term to indicate this technology, remembering that the expression is also used to designate the discipline and not only its applications. [71] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 34-35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 51: AAS 83 (1991 ), 856-857. [72] For instance, see the support of scientific exploration in Albertus Magnus (De Mineralibus, II, 2, 1) and the gratitude for the mechanical arts in Hugh of St. Victor (Didascalicon, I, 9). These authors, among a long list of other Catholics took part in clinical research and technological exploration, show that "faith and science can be joined in charity, supplied that science is put at the service of the men and female of our time and not misused to hurt and even damage them" (Francis, Address to Participants in the 2024 Lemaître Conference of the Vatican Observatory [20 June 2024]: L'Osservatore Romano, 20 June 2024, 8). Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 36: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053-1054; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), pars. 2, 106: AAS 91 (1999 ), 6-7.86 -87. [73] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. [74] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [75] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [76] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 102: AAS 107 (2015 ), 888. [77] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889; Id., Encyclical Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 27: AAS 112 (2020 ), 978; Benedict XVI, Encyclical Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 23: AAS 101 (2009 ), 657-658. [78] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39, 47; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, wiki.vst.hs-furtwangen.de Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), passim. [79] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par 2293. [80] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2-4. [81] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1749: "Freedom makes man a moral topic. When he acts deliberately, male is, so to speak, the father of his acts." [82] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1776. [83] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1777. [84] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 1779-1781; Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 463, where the Holy Father motivated efforts "to ensure that technology remains human-centered, fairly grounded and directed towards the excellent." [85] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 166: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1026-1027; Id., Address to the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (23 September 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 September 2024, 10. On the function of human agency in choosing a broader aim (Ziel) that then notifies the specific function (Zweck) for which each technological application is developed, cf. F. Dessauer, Streit um die Technik, Herder-Bücherei, Freiburg i. Br. 1959, 70-71. [86] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4: "Technology is born for a function and, in its influence on human society, constantly represents a type of order in social relations and a plan of power, therefore enabling certain people to perform specific actions while preventing others from performing different ones. In a basically specific way, this constitutive power-dimension of technology always includes the worldview of those who created and established it." [87] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 309. [88] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [89] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti, pars. 212-213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [90] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 5: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589; Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [91] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "Confronted with the marvels of makers, which seem to understand how to pick separately, we ought to be extremely clear that decision-making [...] should constantly be delegated the human individual. We would condemn humanity to a future without hope if we eliminated individuals's ability to make decisions about themselves and their lives, by dooming them to depend on the choices of devices." [92] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [93] The term "bias" in this document describes algorithmic predisposition (methodical and consistent errors in computer systems that may disproportionately prejudice certain groups in unexpected methods) or discovering predisposition (which will result in training on a biased information set) and not the "bias vector" in neural networks (which is a criterion utilized to change the output of "nerve cells" to change more properly to the information). [94] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464, where the Holy Father verified the development in agreement "on the requirement for advancement processes to respect such worths as inclusion, transparency, security, equity, privacy and dependability," and also invited "the efforts of international organizations to control these technologies so that they promote authentic development, contributing, that is, to a better world and an integrally higher quality of life." [95] Francis, Greetings to a Delegation of the "Max Planck Society" (23 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 February 2023, 8. [96] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [97] Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1571. [98] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. For more discussion of the ethical concerns raised by AI from a Catholic perspective, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 147-253. [99] On the significance of dialogue in a pluralist society oriented toward a "robust and solid social principles," see Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 211-214: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [100] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [101] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [102] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [103] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. [104] Cf. Pontifical Council for Social Communications, Ethics in Internet (22 February 2002), par. 10. [105] Francis, Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414; pricing estimate the Final Document of the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops (27 October 2018), par. 24: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1593. Cf. Benedict XVI, Address to the Participants in the International Congress on Natural Moral Law (12 February 2017): AAS 99 (2007 ), 245. [106] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-33: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047-1050. [107] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-21: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047. [108] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 308-309. [109] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [110] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [111] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 101, 103, 111, 115, 167: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1004-1005, 1007-1009, 1027. [112] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047; cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 35: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 123. [113] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 12: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1034. [114] Cf. Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church (2004 ), par. 149. [115] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [116] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [117] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 865. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), pars. 88-89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414. [118] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057. [119] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985. [120] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [121] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [122] Cf. E. Stein, Zum Problem der Einfühlung, Buchdruckerei des Waisenhauses, Halle 1917 (en. tr. On the Problem of Empathy, ICS Publications, Washington D.C. 1989). [123] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057:" [Many individuals] want their social relationships offered by sophisticated devices, by screens and systems which can be switched on and off on command. Meanwhile, the Gospel tells us constantly to risk of a face-to-face encounter with others, with their physical existence which challenges us, with their pain and their pleas, with their joy which infects us in our close and continuous interaction. True faith in the incarnate Son of God is inseparable from self-giving, from subscription in the community, from service, from reconciliation with others." Also cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 24: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1044-1045. [124] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 1. [125] Cf. Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570; Id, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 18, 124-129: AAS 107 (2015 ), 854.897-899. [126] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [127] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 209: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1107. [128] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4. For Pope Francis' teaching about AI in relationship to the "technocratic paradigm," cf. Id., Encyclical Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 106-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893. [129] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047.; as priced estimate in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1912. Cf. John XXIII, Encyclical Letter Mater et Magistra (15 May 1961), par. 219: AAS 53 (1961 ), 453. [130] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par 64: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1086. [131] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 162: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1025. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 6: AAS 73 (1981 ), 591: "work is 'for male' and not man 'for work.' Through this conclusion one rightly pertains to acknowledge the pre-eminence of the subjective significance of work over the objective one." [132] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 128: AAS 107 (2015 ), 898. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 24: AAS 108 (2016 ), 319-320. [133] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [134] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae (25 March 1995), par. 89: AAS 87 (1995 ), 502. [135] Ibid. [136] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 67: AAS 112 (2020 ), 993; as estimated in Id., Message for the XXXI World Day of the Sick (11 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 10 January 2023, 8. [137] Francis, Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [138] Francis, Address to the Diplomatic Corps Accredited to the Holy See (11 January 2016): AAS 108 (2016 ), 120. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 18: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975; Id., Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [139] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465; Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [140] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105, 107: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-890; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 18-21: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975-976; Id., Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465. [141] Francis, Address to the Participants at the Meeting Sponsored by the Charity and Health Commission of the Italian Bishops' Conference (10 February 2017): AAS 109 (2017 ), 243. Cf. ibid., 242-243: "If there is a sector in which the throwaway culture appears, with its painful effects, it is that of health care. When an ill individual is not positioned in the center or their self-respect is ruled out, this provides increase to attitudes that can lead even to speculation on the misfortune of others. And this is really grave! [...] The application of a company technique to the health care sector, if indiscriminate [...] may risk disposing of people." [142] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [143] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729. [144] Congregation for Catholic Education, Instruction on making use of Distance Learning in Ecclesiastical Universities and Faculties, I. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729; Francis, Message for the LXIX World Day of Peace (1 January 2016), 6: AAS 108 (2016 ), 57-58. [145] Francis, Address to Members of the Global Researchers Advancing Catholic Education Project (20 April 2022): AAS 114 (2022 ), 580. [146] Cf. Paul VI, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi (8 December 1975), par. 41: AAS 68 (1976 ), 31, estimating Id., Address to the Members of the "Consilium de Laicis" (2 October 1974): AAS 66 (1974 ), 568: "if [the modern individual] does listen to instructors, it is since they are witnesses." [147] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 6.1, London 18733, 125-126. [148] Francis, Consulting With the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [149] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 86: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413, pricing quote the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, Final Document (27 October 2018), par. 21: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1592. [150] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 7.6, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 167. [151] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 88: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413. [152] In a 2023 policy document about the usage of generative AI in education and research study, UNESCO notes: "Among the crucial concerns [of using generative AI (GenAI) in education and research study] is whether humans can perhaps deliver fundamental levels of thinking and skill-acquisition procedures to AI and rather concentrate on higher-order thinking skills based upon the outputs supplied by AI. Writing, for example, is often associated with the structuring of thinking. With GenAI [...], human beings can now start with a well-structured outline supplied by GenAI. Some experts have identified the use of GenAI to produce text in this way as 'writing without thinking'" (UNESCO, Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research [2023], 37-38). The German-American thinker Hannah Arendt anticipated such a possibility in her 1959 book, The Human Condition, and cautioned: "If it ought to end up being true that knowledge (in the sense of knowledge) and thought have actually parted company for great, then we would certainly end up being the helpless slaves, not a lot of our machines as of our know-how" (Id., The Human Condition, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 20182, 3). [153] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 262: AAS 108 (2016 ), 417. [154] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 7: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3; cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 167: AAS 107 (2015 ), 914. [155] John Paul II, Apostolic Constitution Ex Corde Ecclesiae (15 August 1990), 7: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1479. [156] Francis, Apostolic Constitution Veritatis Gaudium (29 January 2018), 4c: AAS 110 (2018 ), 9-10. [157] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3. [158] For example, it might help people gain access to the "selection of resources for producing greater understanding of fact" contained in the works of philosophy (John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio [14 September 1998], par. 3: AAS 91 [1999], 7). Cf. ibid., par. 4: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7-8. [159] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 43. Cf. ibid., pars. 61-62. [160] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [161] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par 25: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053; cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), passim: AAS 112 (2020 ), 969-1074. [162] Cf. Francis., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 414; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 25: AAS 91 (1999 ), 25-26: "People can not be genuinely indifferent to the question of whether what they understand holds true or not. [...] It is this that Saint Augustine teaches when he composes: 'I have actually met numerous who wished to deceive, however none who wished to be tricked'"; quoting Augustine, Confessiones, X, 23, 33: PL 32, 794. [163] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), par. 62. [164] Benedict XVI, Message for the XLIII World Day of Social Communications (24 May 2009): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2009, 8. [165] Cf. Dicastery for Communications, Towards Full Presence: A Pastoral Reflection on Engagement with Social Media (28 May 2023), par. 41; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Decree Inter Mirifica (4 December 1963), pars. 4, 8-12: AAS 56 (1964 ), 146, 148-149. [166] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 1, 6, 16, 24. [167] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046. Cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 40: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 127: "no guy might with impunity breach that human dignity which God himself treats with terrific reverence"; as estimated in John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 9: AAS 83 (1991 ), 804. [168] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2477, 2489; can. 220 CIC; can. 23 CCEO; John Paul II, Address to the Third General Conference of the Latin American Episcopate (28 January 1979), III.1-2: Insegnamenti II/1 (1979 ), 202-203. [169] Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to the Thematic Discussion on Other Disarmament Measures and International Security (24 October 2022): "Maintaining human dignity in cyberspace requires States to likewise respect the right to privacy, by protecting residents from intrusive security and permitting them to safeguard their individual details from unapproved gain access to." [170] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 42: AAS 112 (2020 ), 984. [171] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [172] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465. [173] The 2023 Interim Report of the United Nations AI Advisory Body identified a list of "early guarantees of AI assisting to deal with environment modification" (United Nations AI Advisory Body, Interim Report: Governing AI for Humanity [December 2023], 3). The document observed that, "taken together with predictive systems that can transform information into insights and insights into actions, AI-enabled tools may assist establish brand-new methods and financial investments to reduce emissions, affect brand-new economic sector investments in net zero, protect biodiversity, and construct broad-based social resilience" (ibid.). [174] "The cloud" refers to a network of physical servers throughout the world that makes it possible for users to shop, procedure, and handle their data remotely. [175] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 9: AAS 107 (2015 ), 850. [176] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 106: AAS 107 (2015 ), 890. [177] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 60: AAS 107 (2015 ), 870. [178] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 3, 13: AAS 107 (2015 ), 848.852. [179] Augustine, De Civitate Dei, wiki.philo.at XIX, 13, 1: PL 41, 640. [180] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 77-82: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1100-1107; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 256-262: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1060-1063; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 38-39; Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2302-2317. [181] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 78: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1101. [182] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, smfsimple.com 14 December 2023, 3. [183] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2308-2310. [184] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 80-81: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1105. [185] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "We need to guarantee and secure an area for proper human control over the choices made by expert system programs: human self-respect itself depends on it." [186] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to Working Group II on Emerging Technologies at the UN Disarmament Commission (3 April 2024): "The advancement and use of lethal self-governing weapons systems (LAWS) that lack the appropriate human control would pose basic ethical issues, provided that LAWS can never ever be ethically accountable topics capable of adhering to global humanitarian law." [187] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 258: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1061. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [188] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [189] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3: "Nor can we neglect the possibility of advanced weapons winding up in the incorrect hands, helping with, for example, terrorist attacks or interventions aimed at destabilizing the organizations of genuine systems of government. In a word, the world does not require brand-new technologies that contribute to the unfair development of commerce and the weapons trade and consequently end up promoting the recklessness of war." [190] John Paul II, Act of Entrustment to Mary for the Jubilee of Bishops (8 October 2000), par. 3: Insegnamenti XXIII/2 (200 ), 565. [191] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 79: AAS 107 (2015 ), 878. [192] Cf. Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 51: AAS 101 (2009 ), 687. [193] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39. [194] Cf. Augustine, Confessiones, I, 1, 1: PL 32, 661. [195] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (30 December 1987), par. 28: AAS 80 (1988 ), 548:" [T] here is a better understanding today that the simple accumulation of products and services [...] is not enough for the awareness of human joy. Nor, in consequence, does the availability of the numerous genuine advantages offered in current times by science and technology, consisting of the computer sciences, bring liberty from every type of slavery. On the contrary, [...] unless all the considerable body of resources and possible at guy's disposal is directed by a moral understanding and by an orientation towards the real good of the mankind, it quickly turns against guy to oppress him." Cf. ibid., pars. 29, 37: AAS 80 (1988 ), 550-551.563 -564. [196] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [197] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 18: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [198] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 27: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 6. [199] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 25: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5-6. [200] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. R. Guardini, Das Ende der Neuzeit, Würzburg 19659, 87 ff. (en. tr. The End of the Modern World, Wilmington 1998, 82-83). [201] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [202] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptor Hominis (4 March 1979), par. 15: AAS 71 (1979 ), 287-288. [203] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," in C. Mitcham - R. Mackey, eds., Philosophy and Technology: Readings in the Philosophical Problems of Technology, New York City 19832, 212-213. [204] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," 210. [205] G. Bernanos, "La révolution de la liberté" (1944 ), in Id., Le Chemin de la Croix-des-Âmes, Rocher 1987, 829. [206] Cf. Francis, Meeting with the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023). [207] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [208] Cf. Bonaventure, Hex. XIX, 3; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986: "The flood of details at our fingertips does not make for higher wisdom. Wisdom is not born of fast searches on the web nor is it a mass of unproven data. That is not the method to develop in the encounter with reality." [209] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [210] Ibid. [211] Ibid. [212] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate (19 March 2018), par. 37: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1121. [213] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate (19 March 2018), par. 46: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1123-1124. [214] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [215] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570-1571.