II. what Is Artificial Intelligence?
Open
II. what Is Artificial Intelligence?
1. With wisdom both ancient and new (cf. Mt. 13:52), we are called to assess the existing challenges and opportunities presented by scientific and technological advancements, especially by the current advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The Christian custom concerns the present of intelligence as an essential element of how human beings are produced "in the image of God" (Gen. 1:27). Starting from an important vision of the human individual and the scriptural contacting us to "till" and "keep" the earth (Gen. 2:15), the Church stresses that this present of intelligence should be revealed through the accountable usage of reason and technical capabilities in the stewardship of the produced world.
2. The Church motivates the development of science, technology, the arts, and other types of human undertaking, seeing them as part of the "collaboration of male and woman with God in refining the visible development." [1] As Sirach affirms, God "gave skill to people, that he may be glorified in his wonderful works" (Sir. 38:6). Human abilities and creativity come from God and, when used appropriately, glorify God by showing his wisdom and goodness. Because of this, when we ask ourselves what it suggests to "be human," we can not leave out a consideration of our clinical and technological abilities.
3. It is within this viewpoint that today Note addresses the anthropological and ethical challenges raised by AI-issues that are particularly considerable, as one of the goals of this technology is to imitate the human intelligence that designed it. For example, unlike lots of other human developments, AI can be trained on the results of human creativity and after that produce new "artifacts" with a level of speed and ability that frequently rivals or surpasses what human beings can do, such as producing text or images indistinguishable from human compositions. This raises important issues about AI's prospective role in the growing crisis of fact in the general public online forum. Moreover, this innovation is created to discover and make certain options autonomously, adapting to new situations and providing services not visualized by its programmers, and therefore, it raises basic questions about ethical obligation and human safety, with wider ramifications for society as a whole. This new scenario has triggered many individuals to show on what it indicates to be human and the function of humankind worldwide.
4. Taking all this into account, there is broad agreement that AI marks a brand-new and considerable phase in humankind's engagement with technology, putting it at the heart of what Pope Francis has explained as an "epochal modification." [2] Its effect is felt internationally and in a wide variety of locations, including social relationships, education, work, art, health care, law, warfare, and worldwide relations. As AI advances quickly toward even higher accomplishments, it is critically crucial to consider its anthropological and ethical implications. This includes not only mitigating threats and avoiding damage but also making sure that its applications are utilized to promote human progress and the typical good.
5. To contribute positively to the discernment regarding AI, and in reaction to Pope Francis' call for a restored "wisdom of heart," [3] the Church uses its experience through the anthropological and ethical reflections contained in this Note. Committed to its active function in the worldwide discussion on these issues, the Church welcomes those entrusted with sending the faith-including moms and dads, instructors, pastors, and bishops-to dedicate themselves to this important subject with care and attention. While this document is intended specifically for them, it is also suggested to be available to a more comprehensive audience, especially those who share the conviction that clinical and technological advances need to be directed towards serving the human individual and the typical good. [4]
6. To this end, the file starts by distinguishing in between principles of intelligence in AI and in human intelligence. It then checks out the Christian understanding of human intelligence, offering a framework rooted in the Church's philosophical and theological tradition. Finally, the file offers standards to make sure that the development and usage of AI maintain human self-respect and promote the important development of the human person and society.
7. The principle of "intelligence" in AI has developed in time, making use of a variety of concepts from different disciplines. While its origins extend back centuries, a substantial milestone took place in 1956 when the American computer system researcher John McCarthy organized a summertime workshop at Dartmouth University to explore the issue of "Artificial Intelligence," which he defined as "that of making a device behave in methods that would be called intelligent if a human were so behaving." [5] This workshop introduced a research program focused on designing makers efficient in carrying out tasks typically related to the human intelligence and intelligent habits.
8. Since then, AI research has actually advanced quickly, leading to the development of complex systems efficient in carrying out highly advanced tasks. [6] These so-called "narrow AI" systems are usually designed to deal with particular and limited functions, such as equating languages, forecasting the trajectory of a storm, categorizing images, addressing concerns, or producing visual content at the user's demand. While the meaning of "intelligence" in AI research study differs, a lot of modern AI systems-particularly those utilizing maker learning-rely on statistical reasoning rather than rational deduction. By analyzing large datasets to identify patterns, AI can "anticipate" [7] results and propose new methods, mimicking some cognitive procedures typical of human analytical. Such achievements have been made possible through advances in computing technology (including neural networks, not being watched artificial intelligence, and evolutionary algorithms) along with hardware developments (such as specialized processors). Together, these technologies enable AI systems to react to different forms of human input, adapt to brand-new circumstances, and even recommend unique options not anticipated by their initial developers. [8]
9. Due to these quick improvements, many jobs as soon as managed exclusively by people are now delegated to AI. These systems can augment and even supersede what humans are able to carry out in lots of fields, particularly in specialized areas such as information analysis, image acknowledgment, and medical diagnosis. While each "narrow AI" application is developed for a specific task, numerous scientists aim to establish what is referred to as "Artificial General Intelligence" (AGI)-a single system efficient in operating throughout all cognitive domains and carrying out any task within the scope of human intelligence. Some even argue that AGI could one day attain the state of "superintelligence," going beyond human intellectual capacities, or contribute to "super-longevity" through advances in biotechnology. Others, however, fear that these possibilities, even if theoretical, could one day eclipse the human person, while still others invite this possible change. [9]
10. Underlying this and many other viewpoints on the topic is the implicit assumption that the term "intelligence" can be used in the exact same way to refer to both human intelligence and AI. Yet, this does not catch the complete scope of the principle. In the case of humans, intelligence is a professors that pertains to the individual in his or her totality, whereas in the context of AI, "intelligence" is comprehended functionally, frequently with the presumption that the activities characteristic of the human mind can be broken down into digitized actions that devices can replicate. [10]
11. This functional perspective is exhibited by the "Turing Test," which considers a device "smart" if an individual can not distinguish its behavior from that of a human. [11] However, in this context, the term "behavior" refers only to the efficiency of particular intellectual jobs; it does not account for the full breadth of human experience, that includes abstraction, emotions, imagination, and the visual, ethical, and religious sensibilities. Nor does it include the full variety of expressions characteristic of the human mind. Instead, when it comes to AI, the "intelligence" of a system is examined methodologically, but likewise reductively, based upon its ability to produce proper responses-in this case, those related to the human intellect-regardless of how those responses are created.
12. AI's sophisticated functions provide it sophisticated abilities to perform tasks, however not the ability to think. [12] This distinction is most importantly essential, as the method "intelligence" is defined inevitably forms how we understand the relationship in between human thought and this . [13] To value this, one must recall the richness of the philosophical tradition and Christian faith, which use a much 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 played a main role in comprehending what it means to be "human." Aristotle observed that "all people by nature desire to understand." [15] This understanding, with its capacity for abstraction that grasps the nature and significance of things, sets people apart from the animal world. [16] As theorists, theologians, and psychologists have analyzed the precise nature of this intellectual professors, they have actually likewise checked out how humans understand the world and their distinct location within it. Through this expedition, the Christian custom has pertained to understand the human individual as a being including both body and soul-deeply connected to this world and yet transcending it. [17]
14. In the classical tradition, the principle of intelligence is often understood through the complementary ideas of "factor" (ratio) and "intellect" (intellectus). These are not separate faculties but, as Saint Thomas Aquinas explains, they are 2 modes in which the very same intelligence runs: "The term intellect is inferred from the inward grasp of the reality, while the name factor is drawn from the curious and discursive process." [18] This concise description highlights the 2 fundamental and complementary dimensions of human intelligence. Intellectus describes the user-friendly grasp of the truth-that is, apprehending it with the "eyes" of the mind-which precedes and premises argumentation itself. Ratio pertains to thinking appropriate: the discursive, analytical process that leads to judgment. Together, intellect and reason form the 2 aspects of the act of intelligere, "the proper operation of the human being as such." [19]
15. Explaining the human person as a "reasonable" being does not minimize the person to a specific mode of idea; rather, it recognizes that the ability for intellectual understanding shapes and penetrates all elements of human activity. [20] Whether exercised well or inadequately, this capacity is an intrinsic element of humanity. In this sense, annunciogratis.net the "term 'reasonable' incorporates all the capacities of the human individual," consisting of those associated to "knowing and comprehending, in addition to those of prepared, loving, picking, and preferring; it likewise consists of all corporeal functions carefully associated to these capabilities." [21] This detailed point of view underscores how, in the human person, developed in the "picture of God," factor is incorporated in a manner that raises, shapes, and transforms both the individual's will and actions. [22]
16. Christian believed considers the intellectual professors of the human person within the structure of an important anthropology that views the human being as essentially embodied. In the human individual, spirit and matter "are not two natures united, but 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 individual is all at once both product and spiritual. This understanding reflects the mentor of Sacred Scripture, which sees the human individual as a being who lives out relationships with God and others (and therefore, an authentically spiritual measurement) within and through this embodied presence. [24] The extensive meaning of this condition is further brightened by the secret of the Incarnation, through which God himself handled our flesh and "raised it as much as a sublime dignity." [25]
17. Although deeply rooted in physical presence, the human individual goes beyond the material world through the soul, which is "practically on the horizon of eternity and time." [26] The intellect's capacity for transcendence and the self-possessed flexibility of the will belong to the soul, by which the human individual "shares in the light of the divine mind." [27] Nevertheless, the human spirit does not exercise its typical mode of understanding without the body. [28] In this way, the intellectual professors of the human person are an integral part of an anthropology that acknowledges that the human person is a "unity of body and soul." [29] Further elements of this understanding will be established in what follows.
18. People are "ordered by their very nature to social communion," [30] possessing the capacity to know one another, to provide themselves in love, and to participate in communion with others. Accordingly, human intelligence is not a separated professors but is exercised in relationships, discovering its maximum 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 eternal self-giving of the Triune God, whose love is revealed in creation and redemption. [31] The human individual is "called to share, by understanding and love, in God's own life." [32]
20. This vocation to communion with God is always connected to the call to communion with others. Love of God can not be separated from love for one's neighbor (cf. 1 Jn. 4:20; Mt. 22:37 -39). By the grace of sharing God's life, Christians are likewise contacted us to mimic Christ's outpouring present (cf. 2 Cor. 9:8 -11; Eph. 5:1 -2) by following his command to "like one another, as I have actually enjoyed you" (Jn. 13:34). [33] Love and service, echoing the divine life of self-giving, go beyond self-interest to react more totally to the human vocation (cf. 1 Jn. 2:9). Even more superb than understanding numerous things is the dedication to look after one another, for if "I comprehend all secrets and all knowledge [...] however do not have love, I am nothing" (1 Cor. 13:2).
21. Human intelligence is eventually "God's present fashioned for the assimilation of fact." [34] In the dual sense of intellectus-ratio, it allows the individual to check out truths that go beyond simple sensory experience or utility, given that "the desire for truth is part of human nature itself. It is a natural home of human factor to ask why things are as they are." [35] Moving beyond the limits of empirical data, human intelligence can "with genuine certitude attain to truth itself as knowable." [36] While truth remains only partially understood, the desire for fact "spurs reason always to go even more; certainly, it is as if factor were overwhelmed to see that it can always go beyond what it has actually already attained." [37] Although Truth in itself transcends the borders of human intelligence, it irresistibly attracts it. [38] Drawn by this attraction, the human individual is resulted in look for "realities of a greater order." [39]
22. This inherent drive toward the pursuit of reality is especially evident in the distinctly human capabilities for semantic understanding and creativity, [40] through which this search unfolds in a "manner that is appropriate to the social nature and dignity of the human person." [41] Likewise, an unfaltering orientation to the reality is essential for charity to be both authentic and universal. [42]
23. The search for reality finds its highest expression in openness to truths that go beyond the physical and developed world. In God, all realities attain their ultimate and original meaning. [43] Entrusting oneself to God is a "essential choice that engages the entire individual." [44] In this way, the human individual ends up being fully what he or she is called to be: "the intellect and the will display their spiritual nature," allowing the person "to act in such a way that understands personal flexibility to the full." [45]
24. The Christian faith understands development as the free act of the Triune God, who, as Saint Bonaventure of Bagnoregio explains, develops "not to increase his glory, however to reveal it forth and to interact it." [46] Since God produces according to his Wisdom (cf. Wis. 9:9; Jer. 10:12), creation is imbued with an intrinsic order that reflects God's strategy (cf. Gen. 1; Dan. 2:21 -22; Is. 45:18; Ps. 74:12 -17; 104), [47] within which God has called people to assume a special role: to cultivate and care for the world. [48]
25. Shaped by the Divine Craftsman, people live out their identity as beings made in imago Dei by "keeping" and "tilling" (cf. Gen. 2:15) creation-using their intelligence and abilities to take care of and establish creation in accord with God's plan. [49] In this, human intelligence shows the Divine Intelligence that created all things (cf. Gen. 1-2; Jn. 1), [50] continually sustains them, and guides them to their supreme purpose in him. [51] Moreover, people are contacted us to develop their capabilities in science and innovation, for through them, God is glorified (cf. Sir. 38:6). Thus, in a proper relationship with development, people, on the one hand, utilize their intelligence and ability to comply with God in guiding production toward the function to which he has actually called it. [52] On the other hand, production itself, as Saint Bonaventure observes, helps the human mind to "ascend slowly to the supreme Principle, who is God." [53]
26. In this context, human intelligence becomes more plainly understood as a professors that forms an integral part of how the entire individual engages with reality. Authentic engagement needs welcoming the full scope of one's being: spiritual, cognitive, embodied, and relational.
27. This engagement with truth unfolds in various methods, as each individual, in his or her diverse uniqueness [54], looks for to comprehend the world, associate with others, solve problems, express creativity, and pursue important wellness through the harmonious interaction of the numerous dimensions of the individual's intelligence. [55] This involves logical and linguistic capabilities but can likewise encompass other modes of interacting with truth. Consider the work of an artisan, who "should know how to discern, in inert matter, a specific kind that others can not recognize" [56] and bring it forth through insight and useful skill. Indigenous individuals who live close to the earth frequently have an extensive sense of nature and its cycles. [57] Similarly, a good friend who understands the best word to say or a person skilled at handling human relationships exemplifies an intelligence that is "the fruit of self-examination, discussion and generous encounter between persons." [58] As Pope Francis observes, "in this age of artificial intelligence, we can not forget that poetry and love are essential to conserve our humankind." [59]
28. At the heart of the Christian understanding of intelligence is the integration of reality into the ethical and spiritual life of the person, assisting his or her actions because of God's goodness and truth. According to God's strategy, intelligence, in its max sense, likewise consists of the ability to enjoy what is real, great, and lovely. As the twentieth-century French poet Paul Claudel revealed, "intelligence is absolutely nothing without delight." [60] Similarly, Dante, upon reaching the highest paradise in Paradiso, affirms that the conclusion of this intellectual pleasure is discovered in the "light intellectual filled with love, love of real great filled with joy, delight which transcends every sweet taste." [61]
29. A proper understanding of human intelligence, therefore, can not be reduced to the simple acquisition of facts or the ability to perform particular tasks. Instead, it involves the person's openness to the supreme questions of life and shows an orientation toward the True and the Good. [62] As an expression of the divine image within the person, human intelligence has the ability to access the totality of being, pondering presence in its fullness, which exceeds what is quantifiable, and understanding the significance of what has been comprehended. For believers, this capacity includes, in a particular way, the capability to grow in the knowledge of the secrets of God by using reason to engage ever more exceptionally with revealed truths (intellectus fidei). [63] True intelligence is shaped by magnificent love, which "is put forth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit" (Rom. 5:5). From this, it follows that human intelligence has a necessary reflective dimension, an unselfish openness to the True, the Good, and the Beautiful, beyond any utilitarian purpose.
30. Because of the foregoing conversation, the distinctions in between human intelligence and existing AI systems become apparent. While AI is a remarkable technological accomplishment efficient in mimicing certain outputs associated with human intelligence, it operates by carrying out jobs, attaining goals, or making choices based on quantitative information and computational reasoning. For example, with its analytical power, AI stands out at incorporating data from a variety of fields, modeling complex systems, and cultivating interdisciplinary connections. In this way, it can assist experts team up in resolving complex problems that "can not be handled from a single point of view or from a single set of interests." [64]
31. However, even as AI processes and imitates certain expressions of intelligence, it remains fundamentally confined to a logical-mathematical structure, which enforces inherent constraints. Human intelligence, on the other hand, establishes naturally throughout the individual's physical and psychological development, formed by a myriad of lived experiences in the flesh. Although advanced AI systems can "learn" through procedures such as artificial intelligence, this sort of training is basically various from the developmental growth of human intelligence, which is formed by embodied experiences, consisting of sensory input, psychological actions, social interactions, and the distinct context of each minute. These aspects shape and form people within their personal history.In contrast, AI, doing not have a physique, depends on computational thinking and learning based upon vast datasets that consist of taped human experiences and understanding.
32. Consequently, although AI can replicate elements of human reasoning and carry out particular tasks with unbelievable speed and efficiency, its computational capabilities represent just a portion of the wider capacities of the human mind. For instance, AI can not presently replicate ethical discernment or the ability to establish authentic relationships. Moreover, human intelligence is located within a personally lived history of intellectual and moral development that basically shapes the individual's point of view, encompassing the physical, psychological, social, ethical, and spiritual measurements of life. Since AI can not offer this fullness of understanding, approaches that rely entirely on this innovation or treat it as the main ways of analyzing the world can result in "a loss of gratitude for the whole, for the relationships between things, and for the broader horizon." [65]
33. Human intelligence is not mainly about completing practical jobs however about understanding and actively engaging with truth in all its dimensions; it is also efficient in unexpected insights. Since AI does not have the richness of corporeality, relationality, and the openness of the human heart to reality and goodness, its capacities-though relatively limitless-are unparalleled with the human ability to understand reality. So much can be gained from an illness, a welcome of reconciliation, and even an easy sunset; certainly, numerous experiences we have as human beings open new horizons and use the possibility of attaining new wisdom. No device, working exclusively with information, can measure up to these and countless other experiences present in our lives.
34. Drawing an excessively close equivalence in between human intelligence and AI threats catching a functionalist point of view, where individuals are valued based on the work they can perform. However, a person's worth does not depend on possessing particular abilities, cognitive and technological accomplishments, or individual success, but on the person's fundamental self-respect, grounded in being developed in the image of God. [66] This dignity remains intact in all circumstances, consisting of for those not able to exercise their abilities, whether it be a coming kid, an unconscious person, or an older person who is suffering. [67] It likewise underpins the tradition of human rights (and, in particular, what are now called "neuro-rights"), which represent "an essential point of convergence in the search for common ground" [68] and can, hence, serve as a basic ethical guide in discussions on the accountable advancement and use of AI.
35. Considering all these points, as Pope Francis observes, "the very usage of the word 'intelligence'" in connection with AI "can prove deceptive" [69] and dangers ignoring what is most valuable in the human person. Because of this, AI should not be viewed as an artificial kind of human intelligence however as an item of it. [70]
36. Given these factors to consider, one can ask how AI can be comprehended within God's plan. To address this, it is essential 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 creativity. [71]
37. Seen as a fruit of the prospective inscribed within human intelligence, [72] clinical inquiry and the advancement of technical abilities become part of the "collaboration of males and female with God in refining the visible development." [73] At the very same time, all clinical and technological achievements are, ultimately, presents from God. [74] Therefore, human beings should constantly use their abilities in view of the greater purpose for which God has actually granted them. [75]
38. We can gratefully acknowledge how technology has actually "corrected many evils which used to harm and restrict human beings," [76] a fact for which we must rejoice. Nevertheless, not all technological advancements in themselves represent genuine human progress. [77] The Church is especially opposed to those applications that threaten the sanctity of life or the self-respect of the human person. [78] Like any human undertaking, technological advancement needs to be directed to serve the human individual and contribute to the pursuit of "greater justice, more extensive fraternity, and a more gentle order of social relations," which are "better than advances in the technical field." [79] Concerns about the ethical ramifications of technological advancement are shared not only within the Church however also amongst numerous scientists, technologists, and expert associations, who significantly call for ethical reflection to assist this development in an accountable method.
39. To address these difficulties, it is important to highlight the value of moral responsibility grounded in the self-respect and occupation of the human person. This assisting concept likewise applies to questions worrying AI. In this context, the ethical dimension takes on main value due to the fact that it is people who develop systems and figure out the functions for which they are utilized. [80] Between a device and a human being, only the latter is genuinely a moral agent-a subject of ethical responsibility who works out liberty in his/her decisions and accepts their effects. [81] It is not the maker however the human who remains in relationship with reality and goodness, assisted by an ethical conscience that calls the person "to love and to do what is great 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 device and a human, just the human can be sufficiently self-aware to the point of listening and following the voice of conscience, discerning with vigilance, and seeking the great that is possible in every situation. [84] In reality, all of this also belongs to the person's workout of intelligence.
40. Like any product of human creativity, AI can be directed toward favorable or negative ends. [85] When utilized in manner ins which appreciate human dignity and promote the wellness of people and neighborhoods, it can contribute favorably to the human occupation. Yet, as in all areas where human beings are called to make choices, the shadow of evil likewise looms here. Where human flexibility permits the possibility of choosing what is wrong, the ethical evaluation of this innovation will require to take into account how it is directed and used.
41. At the exact same time, it is not only completions that are fairly considerable but also the ways utilized to attain them. Additionally, the total vision and understanding of the human person ingrained within these systems are very important to consider as well. Technological items reflect the worldview of their developers, owners, users, and regulators, [86] and have the power to "form the world and engage consciences on the level of worths." [87] On a social level, some technological advancements might also strengthen relationships and power dynamics that are inconsistent with an appropriate understanding of the human person and forum.altaycoins.com society.
42. Therefore, completions and the means utilized in a given application of AI, as well as the total vision it incorporates, should all be evaluated to guarantee they appreciate human dignity and promote the typical good. [88] As Pope Francis has stated, "the intrinsic self-respect of every guy and every woman" need to be "the crucial requirement in examining emerging technologies; these will prove fairly sound to the degree that they assist regard that dignity and increase its expression at every level of human life," [89] including in the social and financial spheres. In this sense, human intelligence plays an important role not only in creating and producing innovation however likewise in directing its usage in line with the genuine good of the human individual. [90] The obligation for handling this sensibly pertains to every level of society, guided by the principle of subsidiarity and other principles of Catholic Social Teaching.
43. The dedication to ensuring that AI constantly supports and promotes the supreme value of the dignity of every person and the fullness of the human vocation functions as a requirement of discernment for developers, owners, operators, and regulators of AI, along with to its users. It remains valid for every application of the technology at every level of its usage.
44. An assessment of the implications of this guiding concept might start by thinking about the value of ethical responsibility. Since full moral causality belongs just to individual agents, not synthetic ones, it is important to be able to recognize and define who bears obligation for the procedures associated with AI, especially those capable of discovering, correction, and reprogramming. While bottom-up approaches and extremely deep neural networks allow AI to resolve intricate problems, they make it tough to comprehend the procedures that lead to the solutions they adopted. This makes complex accountability given that if an AI application produces unwanted outcomes, determining who is accountable becomes tough. To resolve this problem, attention needs to be given to the nature of responsibility procedures in complex, extremely automated settings, where results may just end up being apparent in the medium to long term. For this, it is essential that supreme duty for choices made using AI rests with the human decision-makers and that there is accountability for making use of AI at each phase of the decision-making process. [91]
45. In addition to identifying who is responsible, it is important to determine the goals offered to AI systems. Although these systems may use without supervision autonomous learning systems and often follow paths that humans can not reconstruct, they ultimately pursue goals that people have actually designated to them and are governed by procedures established by their designers and programmers. Yet, this provides a challenge since, as AI designs end up being significantly efficient in independent learning, the capability to maintain control over them to ensure that such applications serve human purposes may successfully lessen. This raises the critical question of how to make sure that AI systems are bought for the good of individuals and not against them.
46. While responsibility for the ethical use of AI systems starts with those who develop, 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 numerous possibilities based either on well-defined criteria or on statistical inferences. Human beings, however, not just pick, however in their hearts are capable of choosing." [92] Those who use AI to achieve a task and follow its results create a context in which they are eventually accountable for the power they have delegated. Therefore, insofar as AI can help human beings in making decisions, the algorithms that govern it should be credible, safe, robust enough to handle disparities, and transparent in their operation to mitigate biases and unintended negative effects. [93] Regulatory structures should make sure that all legal entities remain responsible for making use of AI and all its repercussions, with proper safeguards for transparency, privacy, and responsibility. [94] Moreover, those using AI ought to beware not to become extremely based on it for their decision-making, a trend that increases modern society's currently high reliance on innovation.
47. The Church's moral and social teaching provides resources to help make sure that AI is utilized in a manner that maintains human firm. Considerations about justice, for instance, should also attend to concerns such as promoting just social characteristics, maintaining worldwide security, and promoting peace. By exercising prudence, people and neighborhoods can discern methods to utilize AI to benefit humankind while avoiding applications that might degrade human dignity or harm the environment. In this context, the idea of duty ought to be comprehended not only in its most minimal sense but as a "duty for the take care of others, which is more than simply accounting for results attained." [95]
48. Therefore, AI, like any technology, can be part of a conscious and accountable response to mankind's occupation to the excellent. However, as previously gone over, AI must be directed by human intelligence to align with this occupation, ensuring it respects the dignity of the human individual. Recognizing this "exalted dignity," the Second Vatican Council affirmed that "the social order and its advancement should usually work to the benefit of the human person." [96] Because of this, making use of AI, as Pope Francis said, need to be "accompanied by an ethic inspired by a vision of the typical good, a principles of freedom, responsibility, and fraternity, efficient in cultivating the complete development of people in relation to others and to the entire of development." [97]
49. Within this general viewpoint, some observations follow below to highlight how the preceding arguments can help offer an ethical orientation in useful scenarios, in line with the "wisdom of heart" that Pope Francis has proposed. [98] While not extensive, this conversation is offered in service of the discussion that thinks about how AI can be utilized to maintain the dignity of the human person and promote the typical good. [99]
50. As Pope Francis observed, "the inherent self-respect of each person and the fraternity that binds us together as members of the one human family should undergird the advancement of brand-new innovations and act as unassailable criteria for examining them before they are employed." [100]
51. Viewed through this lens, AI might "introduce crucial developments in agriculture, education and culture, an improved level of life for entire nations and individuals, and the growth of human fraternity and social friendship," and thus be "utilized to promote important human development." [101] AI might also assist companies determine those in need and counter discrimination and marginalization. These and other comparable applications of this technology could add to human development and the common good. [102]
52. However, while AI holds lots of possibilities for promoting the good, it can also impede or even counter human development and the typical good. Pope Francis has noted that "evidence to date suggests that digital technologies have actually increased inequality in our world. Not just distinctions in material wealth, which are likewise significant, but likewise differences in access to political and social impact." [103] In this sense, AI could be used to perpetuate marginalization and discrimination, produce new kinds of poverty, 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 effective companies raises significant ethical concerns. Exacerbating this problem is the inherent nature of AI systems, where no single individual can exercise complete oversight over the large and intricate datasets used for calculation. This absence of distinct accountability develops the danger that AI could be manipulated for personal or business gain or to direct popular opinion for the benefit of a particular industry. Such entities, motivated by their own interests, have the capacity to exercise "types of control as subtle as they are invasive, producing systems for the adjustment of consciences and of the democratic process." [105]
54. Furthermore, there is the threat of AI being used to promote what Pope Francis has actually called the "technocratic paradigm," which perceives all the world's problems as solvable through technological means alone. [106] In this paradigm, human self-respect and fraternity are typically reserved in the name of efficiency, "as if truth, goodness, and truth instantly stream from technological and financial power as such." [107] Yet, human dignity and the typical good should never be breached for the sake of effectiveness, [108] for "technological advancements that do not cause an enhancement in the quality of life of all humankind, but on the contrary, intensify inequalities and conflicts, can never ever count as true development. " [109] Instead, AI needs to be put "at the service of another type of development, one which is healthier, more human, more social, more integral." [110]
55. Attaining this goal needs a deeper reflection on the relationship between autonomy and responsibility. Greater autonomy increases everyone's obligation throughout numerous elements of common life. For Christians, the structure of this responsibility depends on the acknowledgment that all human capabilities, consisting of the individual's autonomy, originated from God and are implied to be used in the service of others. [111] Therefore, instead of merely pursuing financial or technological goals, AI ought to serve "the typical good of the whole human household," which is "the amount total of social conditions that allow individuals, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their fulfillment more totally and more quickly." [112]
56. The Second Vatican Council observed that "by his inner nature guy is a social being; and if he does not get in into relations with others, he can neither live nor establish his gifts." [113] This conviction highlights that residing in society is intrinsic to the nature and championsleage.review occupation of the human individual. [114] As social beings, we look for relationships that include mutual exchange and the pursuit of fact, in the course of which, individuals "show each other the truth they have actually discovered, or believe they have actually found, in such a method that they assist one another in the search for truth." [115]
57. Such a mission, in addition to other elements of human communication, presupposes encounters and shared exchange between people formed by their distinct histories, thoughts, convictions, and relationships. Nor can we forget that human intelligence is a diverse, complex, and intricate reality: private and social, rational and affective, conceptual and symbolic. Pope Francis underscores this vibrant, keeping in mind that "together, we can look for the fact in dialogue, in unwinded conversation or in enthusiastic argument. To do so requires determination; it entails moments of silence and suffering, yet it can patiently welcome the more comprehensive experience of people and individuals. [...] The procedure of building fraternity, be it local or universal, can just be undertaken by spirits that are complimentary and available to authentic encounters." [116]
58. It remains in this context that one can think about the challenges AI postures to human relationships. Like other technological tools, AI has the possible to foster connections within the human household. However, it might likewise prevent a true encounter with reality and, eventually, lead people to "a deep and melancholic frustration with social relations, or a hazardous sense of isolation." [117] Authentic human relationships need the richness of being with others in their pain, their pleas, and their delight. [118] Since human intelligence is revealed and enhanced likewise in social and embodied ways, genuine and spontaneous encounters with others are important for engaging with reality in its fullness.
59. Because "true knowledge requires an encounter with truth," [119] the rise of AI introduces another difficulty. Since AI can efficiently mimic the products of human intelligence, the capability to know when one is interacting with a human or a machine can no longer be taken for given. Generative AI can produce text, speech, images, and other advanced outputs that are usually connected with people. Yet, it needs to be understood for what it is: a tool, not an individual. [120] This difference is often obscured by the language utilized by professionals, which tends to anthropomorphize AI and hence blurs the line between human and device.
60. Anthropomorphizing AI likewise positions particular difficulties for the advancement of kids, potentially encouraging them to establish patterns of interaction that treat human relationships in a transactional way, as one would associate with a chatbot. Such practices might lead youths to see teachers as simple dispensers of details instead of as coaches who assist and support their intellectual and moral development. Genuine relationships, rooted in empathy and a steadfast commitment to the good of the other, are vital and irreplaceable in promoting the complete advancement of the human individual.
61. In this context, it is important to clarify that, despite the usage of anthropomorphic language, no AI application can truly experience compassion. Emotions can not be minimized to facial expressions or phrases generated in action to prompts; they reflect the way an individual, as an entire, connects to the world and to his or her own life, with the body playing a main function. True compassion requires the ability to listen, acknowledge another's irreducible originality, invite their otherness, and understand the meaning behind even their silences. [121] Unlike the realm of analytical judgment in which AI stands out, real compassion comes from the relational sphere. It includes intuiting and collaring the lived experiences of another while maintaining the distinction in between self and other. [122] While AI can simulate compassionate responses, it can not reproduce the eminently individual and relational nature of genuine compassion. [123]
62. Because of the above, it is clear why misrepresenting AI as an individual need to constantly be avoided; doing so for deceptive functions is a serious ethical infraction that could erode social trust. Similarly, utilizing AI to trick in other contexts-such as in education or in human relationships, consisting of the sphere of sexuality-is likewise to be considered unethical and requires careful oversight to prevent damage, maintain transparency, and guarantee the dignity of all people. [124]
63. In an increasingly isolated world, some people have turned to AI searching for deep human relationships, easy friendship, or even psychological bonds. However, while human beings are indicated to experience authentic 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 implied to be. If AI is used to help individuals foster real connections in 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 replacing genuine relationality with a lifeless image (cf. Ps. 106:20; Rom. 1:22 -23). Instead of pulling away into synthetic worlds, we are contacted us to take part in a committed and intentional way with truth, particularly by recognizing with the bad and suffering, consoling those in sorrow, and forging bonds of communion with all.
64. Due to its interdisciplinary nature, AI is being increasingly incorporated into financial and financial systems. Significant financial investments are presently being made not only in the innovation sector however likewise in energy, financing, and media, especially in the areas of marketing and sales, logistics, technological development, compliance, and risk management. At the exact same time, AI's applications in these locations have actually likewise highlighted its ambivalent nature, as a source of significant chances but likewise extensive dangers. A very first real important point in this location concerns the possibility that-due to the concentration of AI applications in the hands of a couple of corporations-only those big business would gain from the worth produced by AI rather than the organizations that use it.
65. Other more comprehensive aspects of AI's influence on the economic-financial sphere should likewise be carefully analyzed, especially concerning the interaction between concrete truth and the digital world. One important factor to consider in this regard involves the coexistence of varied and alternative types of economic and banks within a provided context. This element should be motivated, as it can bring benefits in how it supports the genuine economy by promoting its advancement and stability, especially throughout times of crisis. Nevertheless, it must be worried that digital truths, not limited by any spatial bonds, tend to be more uniform and impersonal than neighborhoods rooted in a specific location and a specific history, with a common journey defined by shared values and hopes, but likewise by inevitable disputes and divergences. This variety is an undeniable asset to a community's financial life. Turning over the economy and finance totally to digital technology would decrease this range and richness. As an outcome, numerous solutions to financial problems that can be reached through natural discussion between the included parties might no longer be attainable in a world controlled by procedures and just the look of proximity.
66. Another location where AI is currently having an extensive effect is the world of work. As in lots of other fields, AI is driving basic improvements throughout many professions, with a range of effects. On the one hand, it has the prospective to improve expertise and productivity, create brand-new tasks, make it possible for employees to concentrate on more ingenious tasks, and open brand-new horizons for imagination and innovation.
67. However, while AI assures to enhance efficiency by taking over ordinary tasks, it frequently forces workers to adjust to the speed and demands of makers instead of makers being designed to support those who work. As an outcome, contrary to the advertised benefits of AI, present approaches to the innovation can paradoxically deskill workers, subject them to automated security, and relegate them to stiff and repeated jobs. The requirement to keep up with the pace of technology can deteriorate workers' sense of firm and suppress the ingenious capabilities they are expected to bring to their work. [125]
68. AI is currently removing the need for some jobs that were once performed by humans. If AI is used to change human employees rather than complement them, there is a "considerable risk of disproportionate benefit for the couple of at the rate of the impoverishment of lots of." [126] Additionally, as AI becomes more powerful, there is an associated danger that human labor may lose its worth in the financial realm. This is the sensible effect of the technocratic paradigm: a world of humanity oppressed to effectiveness, where, eventually, the expense of mankind should be cut. Yet, human lives are fundamentally valuable, independent of their economic output. Nevertheless, the "existing design," Pope Francis explains, "does not appear to prefer an investment in efforts to help the slow, the weak, or the less talented to discover chances in life." [127] Due to this, "we can not permit a tool as powerful and vital as Artificial Intelligence to reinforce such a paradigm, however rather, we should make Artificial Intelligence a bulwark against its expansion." [128]
69. It is important to keep in mind that "the order of things must be secondary to the order of individuals, and not the other way around." [129] Human work must not just be at the service of profit however at "the service of the entire human person [...] taking into consideration the person's material needs and the requirements of his/her intellectual, moral, spiritual, and spiritual life." [130] In this context, the Church recognizes that work is "not just a way of earning one's daily bread" however is likewise "a necessary measurement of social life" and "a means [...] of individual growth, the building of healthy relationships, self-expression and the exchange of gifts. Work offers us a sense of shared duty for the development 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 course to development, human advancement and individual fulfillment," "the objective ought to not be that technological progress significantly changes human work, for this would be damaging to humankind" [132] -rather, it needs to promote human labor. Seen in this light, AI should help, not replace, human judgment. Similarly, it needs to never ever deteriorate imagination or decrease workers to mere "cogs in a machine." Therefore, "regard for the self-respect of laborers and the value of employment for the financial well-being of people, households, and societies, for job security and just wages, ought to be a high concern for the worldwide neighborhood as these kinds of technology penetrate more deeply into our workplaces." [133]
71. As individuals in God's recovery work, health care professionals have the occupation and duty to be "guardians and servants of human life." [134] Because of this, the health care profession carries an "intrinsic and undeniable ethical measurement," recognized by the Hippocratic Oath, which requires doctors and health care professionals to dedicate themselves to having "outright respect for human life and its sacredness." [135] Following the example of the Good Samaritan, this dedication is to be carried out by males and females "who decline the production of a society of exemption, and act instead as neighbors, raising up and rehabilitating the fallen for the sake of the common good." [136]
72. Seen in this light, AI seems to hold immense capacity in a variety of applications in the medical field, such as helping the diagnostic work of healthcare suppliers, facilitating relationships between clients and medical personnel, offering brand-new treatments, and broadening access to quality care also for those who are separated or marginalized. In these ways, the innovation could enhance the "thoughtful and caring closeness" [137] that healthcare providers are called to encompass the ill and suffering.
73. However, if AI is used not to enhance however to replace the relationship in between patients and health care providers-leaving patients to interact with a machine rather than a human being-it would decrease a crucially crucial human relational structure to a central, impersonal, and unequal structure. Instead of encouraging uniformity with the sick and suffering, such applications of AI would run the risk of aggravating the loneliness that typically accompanies disease, specifically in the context of a culture where "persons are no longer viewed as a critical value to be cared for and appreciated." [138] This abuse of AI would not line up with respect for the self-respect of the human person and solidarity with the suffering.
74. Responsibility for the well-being of clients and the choices that touch upon their lives are at the heart of the healthcare occupation. This responsibility needs doctor to exercise all their ability and intelligence in making well-reasoned and fairly grounded options relating to those entrusted to their care, constantly appreciating the inviolable dignity of the patients and the requirement for informed permission. As a result, choices regarding patient treatment and the weight of duty they entail need to constantly remain with the human person and needs to never ever be delegated to AI. [139]
75. In addition, using AI to determine who ought to get treatment based mainly on economic measures or metrics of effectiveness represents an especially bothersome instance of the "technocratic paradigm" that need to be rejected. [140] For, "optimizing resources suggests utilizing them in an ethical and fraternal method, and not punishing the most delicate." [141] Additionally, AI tools in healthcare are "exposed to types of predisposition and discrimination," where "systemic errors can easily increase, producing not only oppressions in private cases however also, due to the cause and effect, real types of social inequality." [142]
76. The integration of AI into health care also presents the threat of amplifying other existing disparities in access to treatment. As health care becomes increasingly oriented towards avoidance and lifestyle-based approaches, AI-driven services may inadvertently favor more affluent populations who already enjoy better access to medical resources and quality nutrition. This pattern risks enhancing a "medication for the rich" design, where those with financial methods gain from innovative preventative tools and individualized health details while others battle to gain access to even standard services. To prevent such injustices, fair structures are required to ensure that using AI in healthcare does not worsen existing healthcare inequalities however rather serves the common good.
77. The words of the Second Vatican Council remain totally relevant today: "True education aims to form people with a view towards their last end and the good of the society to which they belong." [143] As such, education is "never a mere procedure of passing on facts and intellectual skills: rather, its aim is to add to the person's holistic formation in its various elements (intellectual, cultural, spiritual, and so on), including, 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 involves a commitment to cultivating the mind, however always as a part of the essential development of the person: "We must break that idea of education which holds that informing methods filling one's head with concepts. That is the way we educate automatons, cerebral minds, not people. Educating is taking a danger in the tension between the mind, the heart, and the hands." [145]
79. At the center of this work of forming the whole human individual is the important relationship between teacher and trainee. Teachers do more than convey understanding; they design important human qualities and inspire the joy of discovery. [146] Their existence inspires trainees both through the material they teach and the care they show for their trainees. This bond cultivates trust, shared understanding, and the capability to address each individual's unique dignity and potential. On the part of the trainee, this can produce a real desire to grow. The physical existence of an instructor produces a relational dynamic that AI can not reproduce, one that deepens engagement and supports the trainee's integral advancement.
80. In this context, AI presents both chances and obstacles. If used in a sensible way, within the context of an existing teacher-student relationship and bought to the genuine objectives of education, AI can become an important educational resource by boosting access to education, providing tailored support, and offering immediate feedback to trainees. These benefits might boost the knowing experience, specifically in cases where individualized attention is needed, or academic resources are otherwise limited.
81. Nevertheless, an important part of education is forming "the intellect to reason well in all matters, to reach out towards reality, and to understand it," [147] while assisting the "language of the head" to grow harmoniously with the "language of the heart" and the "language of the hands." [148] This is all the more vital in an age marked by innovation, in which "it is no longer merely a concern of 'utilizing' instruments of communication, however of residing in a highly digitalized culture that has had an extensive influence on [...] our ability to interact, discover, be notified and participate in relationship with others." [149] However, instead of promoting "a cultivated intellect," which "brings with it a power and a grace to every work and profession that it undertakes," [150] the substantial usage of AI in education might cause the trainees' increased dependence on technology, deteriorating their capability to carry out some abilities independently and aggravating their reliance on screens. [151]
82. Additionally, while some AI systems are created to help individuals establish their important thinking capabilities and problem-solving abilities, lots of others merely supply answers instead of triggering trainees to arrive at answers themselves or write text for themselves. [152] Instead of training young people how to collect details and produce quick reactions, education needs to motivate "the responsible usage of liberty to face issues with good sense and intelligence." [153] Building on this, "education in making use of forms of expert system must aim above all at promoting crucial thinking. Users of any ages, but particularly the young, need to develop a discerning technique to making use of information and content gathered on the internet or produced by expert system systems. Schools, universities, and clinical societies are challenged to assist trainees and experts to comprehend the social and ethical aspects of the development and usages of innovation." [154]
83. As Saint John Paul II remembered, "in the world today, defined by such fast developments in science and innovation, the tasks of a Catholic University assume an ever greater value and seriousness." [155] In a specific way, Catholic universities are advised to be present as excellent laboratories of hope at this crossroads of history. In an inter-disciplinary and cross-disciplinary key, they are prompted to engage "with knowledge and creativity" [156] in mindful research study on this phenomenon, helping to extract the salutary potential within the various fields of science and reality, and directing them constantly towards fairly sound applications that plainly serve the cohesion of our societies and the typical great, reaching brand-new frontiers in the discussion in between faith and factor.
84. Moreover, it must be noted that present AI programs have been understood to supply prejudiced or made details, which can lead trainees to trust incorrect content. This problem "not only risks of legitimizing phony news and enhancing a dominant culture's advantage, but, in other words, it likewise undermines the educational process itself." [157] With time, clearer differences may emerge between proper and incorrect uses of AI in education and research study. Yet, a definitive standard is that making use of AI ought to always be transparent and never misrepresented.
85. AI might be utilized as an aid to human self-respect if it helps people comprehend complex concepts or directs them to sound resources that support their look for the truth. [158]
86. However, AI likewise presents a serious threat of producing controlled content and false details, which can quickly misinform people due to its resemblance to the fact. Such misinformation might occur unintentionally, as when it comes to AI "hallucination," where a generative AI system yields results that appear real but are not. Since creating material that mimics human artifacts is main to AI's performance, alleviating these dangers proves tough. Yet, the consequences of such aberrations and false details can be rather severe. For this factor, all those associated with producing and utilizing AI systems must be devoted to the truthfulness and precision of the details processed by such systems and disseminated to the general public.
87. While AI has a latent potential to create incorrect details, an even more troubling problem lies in the intentional abuse of AI for adjustment. This can take place when people or organizations deliberately produce and spread out incorrect material with the aim to trick or cause harm, such as "deepfake" images, videos, and audio-referring to an incorrect representation of an individual, edited or generated by an AI algorithm. The danger of deepfakes is particularly obvious when they are utilized to target or hurt others. While the images or videos themselves may be artificial, the damage they trigger is genuine, leaving "deep scars in the hearts of those who suffer it" and "real wounds in their human dignity." [159]
88. On a more comprehensive scale, by misshaping "our relationship with others and with truth," [160] AI-generated phony media can slowly undermine the foundations of society. This issue needs mindful guideline, as misinformation-especially through AI-controlled or influenced media-can spread inadvertently, sustaining political polarization and social discontent. When society becomes indifferent to the reality, numerous groups build their own versions of "realities," damaging the "mutual ties and shared reliances" [161] that underpin the fabric of social life. As deepfakes cause individuals to question whatever and AI-generated false material erodes trust in what they see and hear, polarization and conflict will only grow. Such extensive deception is no unimportant matter; it strikes at the core of humanity, taking apart the foundational trust on which societies are constructed. [162]
89. Countering AI-driven falsehoods is not just the work of market experts-it requires the efforts of all individuals of goodwill. "If innovation is to serve human self-respect and not hurt it, and if it is to promote peace instead of violence, then the human community should be proactive in attending to these trends with regard to human dignity and the promo of the good." [163] Those who produce and share AI-generated content needs to constantly exercise diligence in confirming the fact of what they distribute and, in all cases, must "prevent the sharing of words and images that are breaking down of humans, that promote hatred and intolerance, that debase the goodness and intimacy of human sexuality or that make use of the weak and vulnerable." [164] This calls for the ongoing prudence and mindful discernment of all users concerning their activity online. [165]
90. Humans are inherently relational, and the information each individual generates in the digital world can be seen as an objectified expression of this relational nature. Data conveys not just details however also individual and relational knowledge, which, in an increasingly digitized context, can total up to power over the person. Moreover, while some types of information may pertain to public aspects of an individual's life, others might discuss the individual's interiority, possibly even their conscience. Seen in this way, personal privacy plays an important role in protecting the limits of an individual's inner life, maintaining their freedom to associate with others, reveal themselves, and make choices without undue control. This security is likewise connected to the defense of religious flexibility, as surveillance can likewise be misused to apply control over the lives of believers and how they express their faith.
91. It is proper, for that reason, to address the concern of personal privacy from an issue for the genuine freedom and inalienable self-respect of the human person "in all scenarios." [166] The Second Vatican Council consisted of the right "to protect personal privacy" amongst the fundamental rights "needed for living a genuinely human life," a right that ought to be encompassed all individuals on account of their "superb self-respect." [167] Furthermore, the Church has actually also verified the right to the genuine regard for a personal life in the context of affirming the person's right to a good reputation, defense of their physical and mental integrity, and liberty from harm or undue intrusion [168] -important elements of the due respect for the intrinsic self-respect of the human person. [169]
92. Advances in AI-powered data processing and analysis now make it possible to infer patterns in an individual's habits and believing from even a percentage of details, making the role of information personal privacy a lot more crucial as a secure for the self-respect and relational nature of the human individual. As Pope Francis observed, "while closed and intolerant attitudes towards others are on the increase, ranges are otherwise shrinking or vanishing to the point that the right to privacy rarely exists. Everything has actually become a type of phenomenon to be taken a look at and checked, and individuals's lives are now under constant security." [170]
93. While there can be legitimate and appropriate ways to use AI in keeping with human dignity and the typical excellent, utilizing it for surveillance aimed at making use of, restricting others' liberty, or benefitting a few at the expenditure of the numerous is unjustifiable. The risk of security overreach must be kept an eye on by appropriate regulators to guarantee openness and public responsibility. Those responsible for monitoring ought to never ever exceed their authority, which must constantly prefer the dignity and freedom of every individual as the essential basis of a simply and gentle society.
94. Furthermore, "fundamental regard for human dignity demands that we decline to enable the uniqueness of the individual to be related to a set of data." [171] This especially uses when AI is used to assess individuals or groups based on their habits, qualities, or history-a practice understood as "social scoring": "In social and economic decision-making, we ought to be cautious about entrusting judgments to algorithms that process information, frequently collected surreptitiously, on a person's makeup and prior behavior. Such information can be infected by social bias and preconceptions. A person's past habits should not be used to reject him or her the opportunity to change, grow, and contribute to society. We can not permit algorithms to restrict or condition respect for human dignity, or to exclude empathy, mercy, forgiveness, and above all, the hope that people are able to change." [172]
95. AI has many promising applications for enhancing our relationship with our "common home," such as creating models to anticipate severe environment occasions, proposing engineering services to minimize their effect, managing relief operations, and forecasting population shifts. [173] Additionally, AI can support sustainable farming, optimize energy usage, and provide early caution systems for public health emergency situations. These improvements have the possible to reinforce strength against climate-related obstacles and promote more sustainable development.
96. At the exact same time, present AI models and the hardware needed to support them take in large quantities of energy and water, considerably adding to CO2 emissions and straining resources. This reality is typically obscured by the method this technology is presented in the popular creativity, where words such as "the cloud" [174] can give the impression that data is kept and processed in an intangible world, removed from the physical world. However, "the cloud" is not a heavenly domain different from the real world; similar to all calculating innovations, it depends on physical makers, cables, and energy. The very same holds true of the technology behind AI. As these systems grow in intricacy, especially large language models (LLMs), they require ever-larger datasets, increased computational power, and higher storage facilities. Considering the heavy toll these technologies handle the environment, it is crucial to develop sustainable options that minimize their effect on our typical home.
97. Even then, as Pope Francis teaches, it is essential "that we try to find solutions not just in technology however in a change of mankind." [175] A complete and genuine understanding of development recognizes that the value of all produced things can not be lowered to their mere utility. Therefore, a completely human technique to the stewardship of the earth rejects the distorted anthropocentrism of the technocratic paradigm, which looks for to "extract whatever possible" from the world, [176] and declines the "misconception of progress," which presumes that "environmental problems will solve themselves just with the application of new innovation and without any need for ethical considerations or deep modification." [177] Such a mindset must pave the way to a more holistic approach that respects the order of creation and promotes the important good of the human person while protecting our common home. [178]
98. The Second Vatican Council and the consistent mentor of the Popes considering that then have actually firmly insisted that peace is not merely the absence of war and is not limited 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 items of persons, totally free interaction, respect for the dignity of persons and peoples, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is the work of justice and the result of charity and can not be attained through force alone; instead, it must be mainly developed through client diplomacy, the active promotion of justice, uniformity, essential human advancement, and regard for the self-respect of all people. [180] In this method, the tools utilized to maintain peace needs to never ever be permitted to validate injustice, violence, or injustice. Instead, they need to always be governed by a "firm decision to regard other individuals and countries, along with their self-respect, in addition to the intentional practice of fraternity." [181]
99. While AI's analytical capabilities could assist countries seek peace and guarantee security, the "weaponization of Artificial Intelligence" can likewise be extremely troublesome. Pope Francis has observed that "the ability to carry out military operations through remote control systems has actually resulted in a minimized perception of the devastation triggered by those weapon systems and the problem of obligation for their use, leading to a a lot more cold and removed method to the enormous tragedy of war." [182] Moreover, the ease with which self-governing weapons make war more feasible militates against the concept of war as a last option in genuine self-defense, [183] possibly increasing the instruments of war well beyond the scope of human oversight and precipitating a destabilizing arms race, with disastrous effects for human rights. [184]
100. In specific, Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, which are capable of identifying and striking targets without direct human intervention, are a "cause for grave ethical concern" due to the fact that they do not have the "unique human capacity for ethical judgment and ethical decision-making." [185] For this factor, Pope Francis has actually urgently called for a reconsideration of the advancement of these weapons and a restriction on their use, beginning with "an effective and concrete commitment to introduce ever greater and correct human control. No maker must ever pick to take the life of a person." [186]
101. Since it is a small step from machines that can eliminate autonomously with accuracy to those efficient in large-scale damage, some AI researchers have actually revealed concerns that such technology positions an "existential risk" by having the prospective to act in manner ins which could threaten the survival of whole regions and even of humanity itself. This threat needs serious attention, showing the enduring issue about technologies that approve war "an uncontrollable damaging power over multitudes of innocent civilians," [187] without even sparing children. In this context, the call from Gaudium et Spes to "carry out an evaluation of war with an entirely new mindset" [188] is more immediate than ever.
102. At the exact same time, while the theoretical risks of AI deserve attention, the more instant and pushing issue lies in how individuals with malicious intents may misuse this innovation. [189] Like any tool, AI is an extension of human power, and while its future capabilities are unforeseeable, mankind's previous actions supply clear warnings. The atrocities dedicated throughout history suffice to raise deep issues about the prospective 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 decrease it to a stack of rubble." [190] Given this reality, the Church reminds us, users.atw.hu in the words of Pope Francis, that "we are free to use our intelligence towards things developing favorably," or towards "decadence and shared destruction." [191] To prevent humankind from spiraling into self-destruction, [192] there need to be a clear stand against all applications of technology that inherently threaten human life and dignity. This commitment needs cautious discernment about making use of AI, particularly in military defense applications, to guarantee that it constantly respects human dignity and serves the typical good. The development and deployment of AI in weaponries must undergo the greatest levels of ethical scrutiny, governed by a concern for human self-respect and the sanctity of life. [193]
104. Technology provides exceptional tools to oversee and develop the world's resources. However, sometimes, humanity is progressively delivering control of these resources to makers. Within some circles of researchers and futurists, there is optimism about the potential of artificial general intelligence (AGI), a hypothetical form of AI that would match or surpass human intelligence and bring about inconceivable improvements. Some even speculate that AGI could attain superhuman capabilities. At the exact same time, as society drifts away from a connection with the transcendent, some are tempted to turn to AI looking for meaning or fulfillment-longings that can just be truly pleased in communion with God. [194]
105. However, the presumption of substituting 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 show a lot more sexy than conventional idols for, unlike idols that "have mouths however do not speak; eyes, but do not see; ears, however do not hear" (Ps. 115:5 -6), AI can "speak," or at least provides the impression of doing so (cf. Rev. 13:15). Yet, it is important to keep in mind that AI is however a pale reflection of humanity-it is crafted by human minds, trained on human-generated material, responsive to human input, and sustained through human labor. AI can not have many of the abilities particular 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 responsibilities, humanity dangers producing a replacement for God. However, it is not AI that is eventually deified and worshipped, but mankind itself-which, in this method, ends up being enslaved to its own work. [195]
106. While AI has the possible to serve humankind and contribute to the common good, it remains a development of human hands, bearing "the imprint of human art and resourcefulness" (Acts 17:29). It should 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 man can form a god which is like himself. He is mortal, and what he makes with lawless hands is dead, for he is better than the things he worships given that he has life, however they never have" (Wis. 15:16 -17).
107. In contrast, human beings, "by their interior life, transcend the whole product universe; they experience this deep interiority when they enter into 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 advises us, that each private finds the "strange connection between self-knowledge and openness to others, between the encounter with one's personal originality and the desire to offer oneself to others. " [197] Therefore, it is the heart alone that is "efficient in setting our other powers and enthusiasms, and our entire person, in a position of respect and loving obedience before the Lord," [198] who "offers to deal with every one of us as a 'Thou,' always and forever." [199]
108. Considering the numerous obstacles postured by advances in technology, Pope Francis emphasized the need for growth in "human responsibility, values, and conscience," proportionate to the development in the capacity that this innovation brings [200] -recognizing that "with an increase in human power comes a widening of responsibility on the part of individuals and neighborhoods." [201]
109. At the very same time, the "necessary and basic concern" remains "whether in the context of this progress man, as guy, is becoming really better, that is to state, more mature spiritually, more knowledgeable about the dignity of his humankind, more responsible, more available to others, especially the neediest and the weakest, and readier to give and to aid all." [202]
110. As a result, it is vital to understand how to assess specific applications of AI in particular contexts to determine whether its use promotes human self-respect, the vocation of the human individual, and the common good. As with numerous technologies, the impacts of the numerous usages of AI might not always be predictable from their creation. As these applications and their social effects become clearer, proper actions must be made at all levels of society, following the concept of subsidiarity. Individual users, households, civil society, corporations, organizations, federal governments, and worldwide companies ought to operate at their appropriate levels to make sure that AI is utilized for the good of all.
111. A significant difficulty and opportunity for the typical good today depends on considering AI within a framework of relational intelligence, which stresses the interconnectedness of individuals and neighborhoods and highlights our shared obligation for fostering the integral well-being of others. The twentieth-century theorist Nicholas Berdyaev observed that individuals frequently blame machines for personal and social problems; however, "this just humiliates guy and does not correspond to his self-respect," for "it is unworthy to transfer duty from male to a maker." [203] Only the human individual can be morally responsible, and the obstacles of a technological society are eventually spiritual in nature. Therefore, facing those obstacles "demands a climax of spirituality." [204]
112. A further indicate consider is the call, triggered by the appearance of AI on the world phase, for a renewed appreciation of all that is human. Years back, the French Catholic author Georges Bernanos warned that "the danger is not in the multiplication of machines, however in the ever-increasing variety of males accustomed from their youth to desire only what machines can give." [205] This obstacle is as real today as it was then, as the quick speed of digitization runs the risk of a "digital reductionism," where non-quantifiable elements of life are reserved and after that forgotten or even deemed unimportant since they can not be computed in formal terms. AI ought to be used only as a tool to match human intelligence rather than change its richness. [206] Cultivating those aspects of human life that go beyond calculation is essential for maintaining "an authentic humanity" that "seems to stay in the middle of our technological culture, practically undetected, like a mist leaking gently underneath a closed door." [207]
113. The huge area of the world's understanding is now available in manner ins which would have filled past generations with wonder. However, to guarantee that developments in understanding do not become humanly or spiritually barren, one should go beyond the mere accumulation of information and aim to attain true wisdom. [208]
114. This wisdom is the gift that humanity requires most to attend to the extensive questions and ethical challenges positioned by AI: "Only by adopting a spiritual way of viewing reality, only by recuperating a wisdom of the heart, can we challenge and translate the newness of our time." [209] Such "wisdom of the heart" is "the virtue that enables us to incorporate the whole and its parts, our choices and their effects." It "can not be looked for from machines," but it "lets itself be found by those who seek it and be seen by those who like it; it expects those who want it, and it goes in search of those who deserve it (cf. Wis 6:12 -16)." [210]
115. In a world marked by AI, we need the grace of the Holy Spirit, who "enables us to look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, situations, occasions and to uncover their genuine significance." [211]
116. Since a "person's perfection is measured not by the details or understanding they possess, but by the depth of their charity," [212] how we integrate AI "to consist of the least of our brothers and sisters, the vulnerable, and those most in requirement, will be the true step of our humanity." [213] The "knowledge of the heart" can brighten and guide the human-centered use of this innovation to assist promote the typical great, take care of our "typical home," advance the look for the fact, foster integral human development, prefer human uniformity and fraternity, and lead humanity to its ultimate objective: happiness and complete communion with God. [214]
117. From this point of view of knowledge, followers will be able to function as moral representatives efficient in utilizing this innovation to promote an authentic vision of the human person and society. [215] This need to be made with the understanding that technological development becomes part of God's prepare for creation-an activity that we are called to order towards the Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ, in the continuous search for the True and the Good.
The Supreme Pontiff, Francis, at the Audience approved 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, approved this Note and ordered its publication.
Given up Rome, at the workplaces 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 Important 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 document explaining the outputs or procedures of AI are utilized figuratively to explain its operations and are not intended to anthropomorphize the machine.
[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 advancements will allow human beings to conquer their biological constraints and boost both their physical and cognitive abilities. Posthumanists, on the other hand, contend that such advances will eventually alter human identity to the extent that mankind itself might no longer be thought about genuinely "human." Both views rest on a basically negative perception of human corporality, which treats the body more as a challenge than as an integral part of the person's identity and call to full awareness. Yet, this unfavorable view of the body is irregular with an appropriate understanding of human dignity. While the Church supports authentic clinical development, it verifies that human self-respect is rooted in "the person as an inseparable unity of body and soul. " Thus, "self-respect is likewise intrinsic in each person's body, which takes part in its own method remaining in imago Dei" (Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita [8 April 2024], par. 18).
[10] This approach shows a functionalist perspective, which minimizes the human mind to its functions and assumes that its functions can be entirely measured in physical or mathematical terms. However, even if a future AGI were to appear genuinely intelligent, it would still remain practical in nature.
[11] Cf. A.M. Turing, "Computing Machinery and Intelligence," Mind 59 (1950) 443-460.
[12] If "thinking" is associated to makers, it needs to be clarified that this describes calculative thinking rather than crucial thinking. Similarly, if makers are said to operate utilizing abstract thought, it must be specified that this is limited to computational logic. On the other hand, by its very nature, human idea is an innovative process that avoids programming and transcends constraints.
[13] On the foundational function 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 2010, 141-182).
[14] For additional 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 ad litteram III, 20, 30: PL 34, 292: "Man is made in the image of God in relation to that [professors] by which he is remarkable to the irrational animals. Now, this [professors] is factor itself, or the 'mind,' or 'intelligence,' whatever other name it might more appropriately be given"; Id., Enarrationes in Psalmos 54, 3: PL 36, 629: "When considering all that they have, people discover that they are most identified from animals exactly by the truth they possess intelligence." This is likewise reiterated by Saint Thomas Aquinas, who mentions that "guy is the most ideal of all earthly beings endowed with motion, and his correct and natural operation is intellection," by which guy abstracts from things and "receives 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 modern viewpoint that echoes aspects of the classical and medieval distinction between these 2 modes of cognition, cf. D. Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, New York 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 truth of things through reflection, experience and discussion, and pertain to acknowledge because truth, which transcends it, the basis of certain universal moral demands."
[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 "usually considers 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 instead fully 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 might have a presence and an operation ideal 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 also have reason and with it they circle in discourse around the reality of things. [...] [O] n account of the way in which they can focusing the many 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 - 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 can going beyond instant concerns and grasping certain realities that are changeless, as real now as in the past. As it peers into human nature, reason discovers 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 case of reason 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 permits us to understand messages in any kind of communication in a manner that both takes into account and transcends their product or empirical structures (such as computer code). Here, intelligence ends up being a knowledge that "enables us to look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, scenarios, 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 imagination enables us to create new content or ideas, mainly by providing an initial perspective on truth. Both capabilities depend on the presence of an individual subjectivity for their full 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 dedication to the truth, is far more than individual sensation [...] Certainly, its close relation to truth fosters its universality and maintains it from being 'restricted to a narrow field lacking relationships.' [...] Charity's openness to fact thus protects it from 'a fideism that deprives 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 quoted in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 293. Cf. ibid., par. 294.
[47] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 295, 299, 302. Bonaventure compares deep space to "a book showing, 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: "humans inhabit a distinct place in deep space according to the divine strategy: they take pleasure in the benefit of sharing in the magnificent governance of visible production. [...] Since man's location as ruler remains in truth an involvement in the divine governance of production, 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 idea is also reflected in the creation account, where God brings creatures 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 demonstrates 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., Encyclical Letter 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 noticing and relishing facts."
[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 standard of human life is the magnificent law itself-eternal, unbiased and universal, by which God orders, directs and governs the entire world and the methods of the human neighborhood according to a plan conceived in his wisdom and love. God has actually allowed man to take part in this law of his so that, under the mild disposition of divine providence, numerous may be able to come to a much deeper and 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 inscribed his own image and likeness on male (cf. Gen 1:26), giving upon him an incomparable 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, however which circulation from his vital 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, recalling that the expression is also used to designate the discipline and not just 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 example, see the encouragement of scientific exploration in Albertus Magnus (De Mineralibus, II, 2, 1) and the appreciation for the mechanical arts in Hugh of St. Victor (Didascalicon, I, 9). These writers, archmageriseswiki.com among a long list of other Catholics took part in clinical research study and technological expedition, show that "faith and science can be united in charity, supplied that science is put at the service of the men and woman of our time and not misused to hurt or perhaps destroy 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, 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 guy an ethical subject. When he acts deliberately, man 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 make sure that innovation 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 firm in picking a wider aim (Ziel) that then informs the specific purpose (Zweck) for which each technological application is created, cf. F. Dessauer, Streit um pass away 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 effect on human society, always represents a kind of order in social relations and a plan of power, hence enabling certain individuals to perform specific actions while avoiding others from performing different ones. In a basically explicit method, this constitutive power-dimension of innovation always includes the worldview of those who developed and developed 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 choose separately, we must be extremely clear that decision-making [...] should always be delegated the human individual. We would condemn humankind to a future without hope if we removed people's ability to make decisions about themselves and their lives, by dooming them to depend on the options of makers."
[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 "predisposition" in this file describes algorithmic bias (methodical and consistent errors in computer system systems that may disproportionately prejudice certain groups in unintended ways) or finding out predisposition (which will result in training on a biased information set) and not the "predisposition vector" in neural networks (which is a criterion utilized to adjust the output of "nerve cells" to adjust more precisely 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 consensus "on the requirement for development procedures to respect such values as addition, openness, security, equity, privacy and reliability," and also invited "the efforts of global organizations to control these innovations so that they promote authentic development, contributing, that is, to a much 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 questions raised by AI from a Catholic viewpoint, 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 value of dialogue in a pluralist society oriented towards a "robust and strong social ethics," 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; quoting 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:" [Lots of people] want their interpersonal relationships offered by advanced devices, by screens and systems which can be turned on and off on command. Meanwhile, the Gospel informs us constantly to run the risk of an in person encounter with others, with their physical presence which challenges us, with their pain and their pleas, with their joy which infects us in our close and constant interaction. True faith in the incarnate Son of God is inseparable from self-giving, from membership 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 estimated 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 guy 'for work.' Through this conclusion one appropriately pertains to acknowledge the pre-eminence of the subjective meaning 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 priced quote 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 healthcare. When an ill person is not placed in the center or their self-respect is ruled out, this generates mindsets that can lead even to speculation on the misery of others. And this is really serious! [...] The application of a business technique to the healthcare sector, if indiscriminate [...] may run the risk of discarding humans."
[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 king-wifi.win 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, quoting Id., Address to the Members of the "Consilium de Laicis" (2 October 1974): AAS 66 (1974 ), 568: "if [the modern individual] does listen to teachers, 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, 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): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316.
[149] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 86: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413, pricing estimate 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, UNESCO notes: "Among the crucial questions [of making use of generative AI (GenAI) in education and research study] is whether humans can perhaps cede basic levels of thinking and skill-acquisition processes to AI and rather focus on higher-order thinking skills based on the outputs offered by AI. Writing, for instance, is typically related to the structuring of thinking. With GenAI [...], human beings can now begin with a well-structured outline provided by GenAI. Some professionals have defined the usage of GenAI to create text in this method as 'writing without thinking'" (UNESCO, Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research [2023], 37-38). The German-American philosopher Hannah Arendt visualized such a possibility in her 1959 book, The Human Condition, and warned: "If it should end up being real that knowledge (in the sense of know-how) and thought have parted company for great, then we would certainly become the helpless slaves, not so much 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 may assist people gain access to the "selection of resources for generating higher understanding of truth" contained in the works of approach (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 really indifferent to the concern of whether what they know holds true or not. [...] It is this that Saint Augustine teaches when he composes: 'I have fulfilled many who desired to trick, but none who wanted to be tricked'"; estimating 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 Network (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 violate that human dignity which God himself treats with excellent reverence"; as quoted 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 obliges States to likewise respect the right to personal privacy, by shielding people from intrusive monitoring and allowing them to secure their personal details from unauthorized 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 recognized a list of "early guarantees of AI helping to deal with climate change" (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 data into insights and insights into actions, AI-enabled tools may assist develop new methods and financial investments to lower emissions, influence new private sector financial investments in net zero, protect biodiversity, and construct broad-based social resilience" (ibid.).
[174] "The cloud" describes a network of physical servers throughout the world that makes it possible for users to shop, process, and manage their data from another location.
[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, 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, 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 require to ensure and safeguard a space for appropriate 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 usage of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) that do not have the suitable human control would position basic ethical concerns, considered that LAWS can never ever be ethically responsible topics capable of abiding by international 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 overlook the possibility of advanced weapons ending up in the wrong hands, facilitating, for instance, terrorist attacks or interventions aimed at destabilizing the institutions of legitimate systems of government. In a word, the world does not need brand-new innovations that contribute to the unfair development of commerce and the weapons trade and as a result wind up promoting the folly 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 mere accumulation of items and services [...] is not enough for the awareness of human joy. Nor, in effect, does the availability of the lots of real benefits supplied in recent times by science and innovation, including the computer technology, bring liberty from every type of slavery. On the contrary, [...] unless all the considerable body of resources and potential at man's disposal is directed by a moral understanding and by an orientation towards the real good of the mankind, it quickly turns against man 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 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 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: pediascape.science 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 produce higher knowledge. Wisdom is not born of fast searches on the web nor is it a mass of unverified information. That is not the method to grow in the encounter with truth."
[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.