II. What Is Artificial Intelligence: Porovnání verzí

Aktuální verse z 19. 2. 2025, 06:04

1. With knowledge both ancient and brand-new (cf. Mt. 13:52), we are called to reflect on the current challenges and opportunities posed by scientific and technological developments, particularly by the current development of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The Christian custom concerns the present of intelligence as an important aspect of how human beings are produced "in the image of God" (Gen. 1:27). Beginning with an integral vision of the human individual and the scriptural contacting us to "till" and "keep" the earth (Gen. 2:15), the Church stresses that this gift of intelligence must be expressed through the responsible usage of factor and technical abilities in the stewardship of the created world.


2. The Church encourages the improvement of science, innovation, the arts, and other kinds of human endeavor, viewing them as part of the "partnership of males and female with God in improving the visible creation." [1] As Sirach verifies, God "offered skill to people, that he might be glorified in his wonderful works" (Sir. 38:6). Human abilities and creativity come from God and, when utilized appropriately, glorify God by reflecting his knowledge and goodness. In light of this, when we ask ourselves what it indicates to "be human," we can not leave out a factor to consider of our clinical and technological abilities.


3. It is within this point of view that today Note addresses the anthropological and ethical obstacles raised by AI-issues that are especially considerable, as one of the objectives of this innovation is to mimic the human intelligence that created it. For instance, unlike many other human productions, AI can be trained on the outcomes of human creativity and then create new "artifacts" with a level of speed and skill that often rivals or surpasses what humans can do, such as producing text or images identical from human compositions. This raises important concerns about AI's potential role in the growing crisis of reality in the general public online forum. Moreover, this innovation is developed to discover and make certain options autonomously, adjusting to brand-new circumstances and providing solutions not predicted by its developers, and hence, it raises essential questions about ethical duty and human safety, with broader implications for society as a whole. This brand-new situation has triggered lots of people to review what it implies to be human and the function of mankind in the world.


4. Taking all this into account, there is broad consensus that AI marks a new and significant phase in humanity's engagement with technology, placing 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 areas, consisting of social relationships, education, work, art, health care, law, warfare, and global relations. As AI advances rapidly toward even higher achievements, it is seriously essential to consider its anthropological and ethical implications. This includes not only mitigating threats and preventing damage however likewise guaranteeing that its applications are utilized to promote human progress and the common good.


5. To contribute favorably to the discernment concerning AI, and in response to Pope Francis' call for a renewed "knowledge of heart," [3] the Church provides its experience through the anthropological and ethical reflections contained in this Note. Committed to its active role in the international dialogue on these concerns, the Church invites those turned over with transferring the faith-including parents, instructors, pastors, and bishops-to devote themselves to this important subject with care and attention. While this file is intended especially for them, it is also indicated to be available to a more comprehensive audience, especially those who share the conviction that scientific and technological advances must be directed toward serving the human person and the typical good. [4]

6. To this end, the file starts by comparing ideas of intelligence in AI and in human intelligence. It then checks out the Christian understanding of human intelligence, supplying a framework rooted in the Church's philosophical and doctrinal custom. Finally, the file provides standards to make sure that the advancement and use of AI maintain human dignity and promote the essential advancement of the human person and society.


7. The principle of "intelligence" in AI has evolved over time, making use of a series of ideas from numerous disciplines. While its origins extend back centuries, a substantial turning point happened in 1956 when the American computer scientist John McCarthy arranged a summertime workshop at Dartmouth University to explore the problem of "Artificial Intelligence," which he specified as "that of making a maker act in ways that would be called smart if a human were so acting." [5] This workshop introduced a research study program focused on designing makers efficient in carrying out jobs normally related to the human intelligence and smart habits.


8. Since then, AI research study has actually advanced quickly, causing the advancement of complex systems efficient in carrying out highly sophisticated tasks. [6] These so-called "narrow AI" systems are usually developed to deal with particular and restricted functions, such as translating languages, anticipating the trajectory of a storm, classifying images, answering questions, or producing visual material at the user's request. While the definition of "intelligence" in AI research study varies, a lot of modern AI systems-particularly those utilizing device learning-rely on analytical reasoning rather than sensible reduction. By examining large datasets to recognize patterns, AI can "anticipate" [7] outcomes and propose new approaches, simulating some cognitive procedures typical of human analytical. Such achievements have been enabled through advances in computing innovation (including neural networks, without supervision artificial intelligence, and evolutionary algorithms) in addition to hardware developments (such as specialized processors). Together, these technologies allow AI systems to react to different kinds of human input, adjust to new circumstances, and even recommend unique options not expected by their original developers. [8]

9. Due to these rapid advancements, many jobs when managed specifically by human beings are now turned over to AI. These systems can augment and even supersede what humans have the ability to carry out in numerous fields, especially in specialized locations such as information analysis, image acknowledgment, and medical diagnosis. While each "narrow AI" application is developed for a specific job, lots of scientists aim to develop what is understood as "Artificial General Intelligence" (AGI)-a single system efficient in running across all cognitive domains and performing any task within the scope of human intelligence. Some even argue that AGI might one day attain the state of "superintelligence," surpassing human intellectual capacities, or contribute to "super-longevity" through advances in biotechnology. Others, however, fear that these possibilities, even if theoretical, might one day eclipse the human person, while still others welcome this potential improvement. [9]

10. Underlying this and lots of other perspectives on the subject is the implicit assumption that the term "intelligence" can be used in the very same way to refer to both human intelligence and AI. Yet, this does not record the complete scope of the principle. In the case of humans, intelligence is a faculty that pertains to the person in his or her entirety, whereas in the context of AI, "intelligence" is comprehended functionally, often with the presumption that the activities attribute of the human mind can be broken down into digitized steps that makers can duplicate. [10]

11. This practical point of view is exemplified by the "Turing Test," which considers a device "smart" if a person can not distinguish its behavior from that of a human. [11] However, in this context, the term "behavior" refers only to the performance of specific intellectual jobs; it does not account for the full breadth of human experience, which includes abstraction, emotions, creativity, and the visual, ethical, and spiritual sensibilities. Nor does it encompass the complete range of expressions particular of the human mind. Instead, when it comes to AI, the "intelligence" of a system is examined methodologically, however also reductively, based on its capability to produce suitable responses-in this case, those related to the human intellect-regardless of how those responses are created.


12. AI's advanced functions offer it sophisticated abilities to carry out tasks, but not the ability to believe. [12] This distinction is crucially crucial, as the method "intelligence" is defined undoubtedly forms how we understand the relationship in between human idea and this technology. [13] To appreciate this, one need to remember the richness of the philosophical custom and Christian faith, which provide a deeper and more detailed understanding of intelligence-an understanding that is main to the Church's mentor on the nature, dignity, and vocation of the human individual. [14]

13. From the dawn of human self-reflection, the mind has actually played a main function in understanding what it suggests to be "human." Aristotle observed that "all individuals by nature desire to know." [15] This understanding, with its capability for abstraction that grasps the nature and significance of things, sets human beings apart from the animal world. [16] As theorists, theologians, and psychologists have actually taken a look at the exact nature of this intellectual professors, they have also checked out how human beings comprehend the world and their unique location within it. Through this expedition, the Christian tradition has actually pertained to understand the human person as a being including both body and soul-deeply linked to this world and yet transcending it. [17]

14. In the classical custom, the principle of intelligence is frequently comprehended through the complementary ideas of "reason" (ratio) and "intellect" (intellectus). These are not separate faculties however, as Saint Thomas Aquinas explains, they are two modes in which the exact same intelligence operates: "The term intelligence is inferred from the inward grasp of the truth, while the name factor is taken from the analytical and discursive procedure." [18] This concise description highlights the 2 basic and complementary dimensions of human intelligence. Intellectus describes the intuitive grasp of the truth-that is, collaring it with the "eyes" of the mind-which precedes and grounds argumentation itself. Ratio pertains to reasoning appropriate: the discursive, analytical process that leads to judgment. Together, intelligence and factor form the two aspects of the act of intelligere, "the correct operation of the human being as such." [19]

15. Explaining the human individual as a "logical" being does not reduce the person to a specific mode of thought; rather, it acknowledges that the ability for intellectual understanding shapes and permeates all elements of human activity. [20] Whether exercised well or improperly, this capacity is an intrinsic aspect of humanity. In this sense, the "term 'logical' includes all the capabilities of the human individual," including those associated to "understanding and comprehending, in addition to those of ready, caring, selecting, and desiring; it likewise includes all corporeal functions carefully related to these capabilities." [21] This detailed perspective highlights how, in the human individual, created in the "image of God," factor is incorporated in a manner that raises, shapes, and transforms both the person's will and actions. [22]

16. Christian thought considers the intellectual professors of the human person within the structure of an important anthropology that views the human being as basically embodied. In the human person, spirit and matter "are not two natures unified, but rather their union forms a single nature." [23] Simply put, the soul is not merely the immaterial "part" of the person contained within the body, nor is the body an external shell housing an intangible "core." Rather, the whole human individual is at the same time both product and spiritual. This understanding reflects the teaching of Sacred Scripture, which sees the human person as a being who lives out relationships with God and others (and hence, an authentically spiritual measurement) within and through this embodied existence. [24] The extensive significance of this condition is additional illuminated by the mystery of the Incarnation, through which God himself handled our flesh and "raised it as much as a superb dignity." [25]

17. Although deeply rooted in bodily existence, the human individual transcends the material world through the soul, which is "practically on the horizon of eternity and time." [26] The intellect's capability for transcendence and the self-possessed liberty of the will belong to the soul, by which the human individual "shares in the light of the magnificent mind." [27] Nevertheless, the human spirit does not exercise its typical mode of understanding without the body. [28] In this way, the intellectual faculties of the human person are an integral part of a sociology that recognizes that the human person is a "unity of body and soul." [29] Further elements of this understanding will be developed in what follows.


18. People are "purchased by their very nature to interpersonal communion," [30] having the capacity to know one another, to offer themselves in love, and to enter into communion with others. Accordingly, human intelligence is not an isolated professors however is exercised in relationships, discovering its max expression in dialogue, collaboration, and uniformity. We learn with others, and we discover through others.


19. The relational orientation of the human individual is ultimately grounded in the everlasting self-giving of the Triune God, whose love is revealed in development and redemption. [31] The human individual is "called to share, by understanding and love, in God's own life." [32]

20. This occupation to communion with God is always tied to the call to communion with others. Love of God can not be separated from love for one's next-door neighbor (cf. 1 Jn. 4:20; Mt. 22:37 -39). By the grace of sharing God's life, Christians are also contacted us to imitate Christ's outpouring gift (cf. 2 Cor. 9:8 -11; Eph. 5:1 -2) by following his command to "love one another, as I have enjoyed you" (Jn. 13:34). [33] Love and service, echoing the divine life of self-giving, go beyond self-interest to respond more totally to the human occupation (cf. 1 Jn. 2:9). Much more sublime than understanding numerous things is the commitment to look after one another, for if "I comprehend all secrets and all understanding [...] but do not have love, I am absolutely nothing" (1 Cor. 13:2).


21. Human intelligence is eventually "God's gift fashioned for the assimilation of fact." [34] In the double sense of intellectus-ratio, it allows the individual to check out realities that surpass simple sensory experience or energy, given that "the desire for fact is part of human nature itself. It is a natural residential or commercial property of human reason to ask why things are as they are." [35] Moving beyond the limits of empirical data, human intelligence can "with authentic certitude attain to truth itself as knowable." [36] While reality remains just partially understood, the desire for reality "spurs reason always to go further; 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 limits of human intelligence, it irresistibly attracts it. [38] Drawn by this tourist attraction, the human individual is resulted in seek "truths of a greater order." [39]

22. This natural drive toward the pursuit of fact is particularly evident in the clearly human capacities for semantic understanding and imagination, [40] through which this search unfolds in a "way that is proper to the social nature and dignity of the human individual." [41] Likewise, a steadfast orientation to the reality is necessary for charity to be both genuine and universal. [42]

23. The look for truth finds its highest expression in openness to realities that go beyond the physical and created world. In God, all truths attain their ultimate and initial meaning. [43] Entrusting oneself to God is a "essential choice that engages the entire individual." [44] In this method, the human person ends up being completely what he or she is contacted us to be: "the intelligence and the will display their spiritual nature," enabling the individual "to act in a method that understands individual liberty to the complete." [45]

24. The Christian faith comprehends production as the totally free act of the Triune God, who, as Saint Bonaventure of Bagnoregio explains, produces "not to increase his glory, however to show it forth and to interact it." [46] Since God creates according to his Wisdom (cf. Wis. 9:9; Jer. 10:12), development is imbued with an intrinsic order that reflects God's plan (cf. Gen. 1; Dan. 2:21 -22; Is. 45:18; Ps. 74:12 -17; 104), [47] within which God has actually called human beings to presume a distinct 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 look after and develop creation in accord with God's plan. [49] In this, human intelligence reflects the Divine Intelligence that developed all things (cf. Gen. 1-2; Jn. 1), [50] continuously sustains them, and guides them to their ultimate purpose in him. [51] Moreover, people are contacted us to develop their capabilities in science and technology, for through them, God is glorified (cf. Sir. 38:6). Thus, in a correct relationship with creation, human beings, on the one hand, utilize their intelligence and skill to cooperate with God in guiding creation towards the function to which he has called it. [52] On the other hand, creation itself, as Saint Bonaventure observes, helps the human mind to "rise gradually to the supreme Principle, who is God." [53]

26. In this context, human intelligence becomes more plainly comprehended as a faculty that forms an essential part of how the whole individual engages with reality. Authentic engagement requires welcoming the full scope of one's being: spiritual, cognitive, embodied, and relational.


27. This engagement with reality unfolds in numerous ways, as each person, in his or her multifaceted individuality [54], looks for to comprehend the world, relate to others, resolve problems, reveal imagination, and pursue essential wellness through the harmonious interplay of the different measurements of the person's intelligence. [55] This involves rational and linguistic capabilities but can also encompass other modes of engaging with truth. Consider the work of an artisan, who "need to know how to determine, in inert matter, a particular type that others can not recognize" [56] and bring it forth through insight and useful skill. Indigenous peoples who live near the earth frequently have an extensive sense of nature and its cycles. [57] Similarly, a buddy who understands the best word to say or an individual adept at managing human relationships exhibits an intelligence that is "the fruit of self-examination, discussion and generous encounter in between persons." [58] As Pope Francis observes, "in this age of artificial intelligence, we can not forget that poetry and love are necessary to conserve our humankind." [59]

28. At the heart of the Christian understanding of intelligence is the combination of fact into the ethical and spiritual life of the individual, directing his/her actions because of God's goodness and reality. According to God's plan, intelligence, in its max sense, also includes the ability to enjoy what is real, excellent, and gorgeous. As the twentieth-century French poet Paul Claudel expressed, "intelligence is 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 loaded with love, love of real great filled with joy, happiness which goes beyond every sweetness." [61]

29. An appropriate understanding of human intelligence, therefore, can not be lowered to the mere acquisition of truths or the capability to carry out specific jobs. Instead, it involves the person's openness to the supreme questions of life and reflects an orientation towards the True and the Good. [62] As an expression of the magnificent image within the person, human intelligence has the ability to access the totality of being, contemplating existence in its fullness, which goes beyond what is measurable, and comprehending the meaning of what has been comprehended. For believers, this capability includes, in a particular way, the ability to grow in the understanding of the secrets of God by utilizing reason to engage ever more exceptionally with exposed truths (intellectus fidei). [63] True intelligence is formed by divine love, which "is put forth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit" (Rom. 5:5). From this, it follows that human intelligence possesses an important contemplative measurement, an unselfish openness to the True, the Good, and the Beautiful, beyond any utilitarian purpose.


30. In light of the foregoing conversation, the distinctions in between human intelligence and existing AI systems become obvious. While AI is an extraordinary technological achievement capable of imitating certain associated with human intelligence, it runs by performing jobs, attaining objectives, or making choices based upon quantitative data and computational reasoning. For instance, with its analytical power, AI excels at incorporating information from a variety of fields, modeling complex systems, and promoting interdisciplinary connections. In this method, it can help professionals collaborate in resolving intricate issues that "can not be dealt with from a single point of view or from a single set of interests." [64]

31. However, even as AI procedures and mimics certain expressions of intelligence, it remains fundamentally restricted to a logical-mathematical framework, which enforces inherent constraints. Human intelligence, in contrast, establishes organically throughout the individual's physical and psychological development, formed by a myriad of lived experiences in the flesh. Although innovative AI systems can "discover" through procedures such as artificial intelligence, this sort of training is fundamentally various from the developmental growth of human intelligence, which is formed by embodied experiences, consisting of sensory input, emotional actions, social interactions, and the unique context of each minute. These components shape and kind individuals within their individual history.In contrast, AI, lacking a physical body, counts on computational reasoning and knowing based on vast datasets that consist of recorded human experiences and knowledge.


32. Consequently, although AI can simulate aspects of human thinking and carry out specific tasks with incredible speed and performance, its computational abilities represent just a fraction of the more comprehensive capacities of the human mind. For example, AI can not presently reproduce moral discernment or the ability to develop authentic relationships. Moreover, human intelligence is positioned within a personally lived history of intellectual and moral development that fundamentally shapes the individual's viewpoint, encompassing the physical, psychological, social, moral, and spiritual dimensions of life. Since AI can not provide this fullness of understanding, approaches that rely exclusively on this technology or treat it as the main methods of translating the world can cause "a loss of appreciation for the whole, for the relationships in between things, and for the broader horizon." [65]

33. Human intelligence is not mainly about completing practical jobs but about understanding and actively engaging with truth in all its dimensions; it is also capable of surprising insights. Since AI does not have the richness of corporeality, relationality, and the openness of the human heart to truth and goodness, its capacities-though apparently limitless-are matchless with the human capability to comprehend truth. So much can be gained from an illness, an accept of reconciliation, and even a basic sunset; certainly, numerous experiences we have as humans open brand-new horizons and use the possibility of attaining brand-new wisdom. No device, working entirely with information, can determine up to these and many other experiences present in our lives.


34. Drawing an excessively close equivalence in between human intelligence and AI threats catching a functionalist viewpoint, where people are valued based on the work they can carry out. However, an individual's worth does not depend on possessing specific skills, cognitive and technological accomplishments, or private success, however on the person's fundamental dignity, grounded in being developed in the image of God. [66] This dignity remains undamaged in all scenarios, including for those not able to exercise their capabilities, whether it be a coming kid, an unconscious person, or an older person who is suffering. [67] It also underpins the tradition of human rights (and, in particular, what are now called "neuro-rights"), which represent "an important point of merging in the search for typical ground" [68] and can, therefore, act as a fundamental ethical guide in conversations on the responsible development and use of AI.


35. Considering all these points, as Pope Francis observes, "the extremely usage of the word 'intelligence'" in connection with AI "can prove misleading" [69] and risks overlooking what is most valuable in the human person. Due to this, AI needs to not be viewed as a synthetic type of human intelligence but as an item of it. [70]

36. Given these considerations, one can ask how AI can be comprehended within God's strategy. To answer this, it is very important to recall that techno-scientific activity is not neutral in character however is a human endeavor that engages the humanistic and cultural dimensions of human creativity. [71]

37. Viewed as a fruit of the possible engraved within human intelligence, [72] scientific query and the advancement of technical skills are part of the "collaboration of males and female with God in improving the noticeable creation." [73] At the very same time, all scientific and technological achievements are, ultimately, gifts from God. [74] Therefore, wikibase.imfd.cl human beings should constantly use their capabilities in view of the greater function for which God has given them. [75]

38. We can gratefully acknowledge how technology has actually "corrected numerous evils which utilized to harm and limit people," [76] a truth for which we should rejoice. Nevertheless, not all technological improvements in themselves represent real human development. [77] The Church is particularly opposed to those applications that threaten the sanctity of life or the self-respect of the human person. [78] Like any human endeavor, technological advancement must be directed to serve the human person and contribute to the pursuit of "higher 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 implications of technological advancement are shared not just within the Church but also amongst numerous researchers, technologists, and expert associations, who progressively call for ethical reflection to direct this development in an accountable way.


39. To attend to these challenges, it is vital to stress the value of moral duty grounded in the dignity and occupation of the human individual. This guiding concept likewise applies to questions worrying AI. In this context, the ethical measurement takes on main value due to the fact that it is individuals who design systems and identify the purposes for which they are used. [80] Between a maker and a person, only the latter is really an ethical agent-a subject of moral responsibility who works out flexibility in his/her decisions and accepts their repercussions. [81] It is not the machine but the human who remains in relationship with reality and goodness, guided by an ethical conscience that calls the person "to love and to do what is good and to avoid wicked," [82] bearing witness to "the authority of fact in reference to the supreme Good to which the human person is drawn." [83] Likewise, in between a machine and a human, only the human can be adequately self-aware to the point of listening and following the voice of conscience, critical with vigilance, and seeking the good that is possible in every circumstance. [84] In reality, all of this also comes from the individual's exercise of intelligence.


40. Like any product of human creativity, AI can be directed towards favorable or unfavorable ends. [85] When used in manner ins which respect human dignity and promote the well-being of individuals and communities, it can contribute favorably to the human occupation. Yet, as in all locations where human beings are called to make decisions, the shadow of evil also looms here. Where human liberty permits the possibility of selecting what is incorrect, the moral assessment of this technology will need to take into consideration how it is directed and used.


41. At the same time, it is not only the ends that are fairly substantial but likewise the methods employed to attain them. Additionally, the general vision and understanding of the human person ingrained within these systems are necessary to think about also. Technological items show the worldview of their designers, owners, users, and regulators, [86] and have the power to "shape the world and engage consciences on the level of worths." [87] On a societal level, some technological advancements might likewise enhance relationships and power dynamics that are inconsistent with a proper understanding of the human person and society.


42. Therefore, completions and the methods used in a given application of AI, as well as the total vision it integrates, need to all be examined to guarantee they appreciate human dignity and promote the typical good. [88] As Pope Francis has stated, "the intrinsic dignity of every male and every lady" need to be "the crucial criterion in examining emerging innovations; these will prove fairly sound to the extent that they assist respect that self-respect and increase its expression at every level of human life," [89] including in the social and financial spheres. In this sense, human intelligence plays a vital role not only in creating and producing technology however likewise in directing its usage in line with the genuine good of the human person. [90] The responsibility for managing this carefully pertains to every level of society, directed by the principle of subsidiarity and other concepts of Catholic Social Teaching.


43. The dedication to ensuring that AI constantly supports and promotes the supreme value of the self-respect of every human being and the fullness of the human occupation works as a requirement of discernment for developers, owners, operators, and regulators of AI, along with to its users. It remains legitimate for every single application of the technology at every level of its use.


44. An examination of the implications of this directing principle could start by considering the significance of moral responsibility. Since complete moral causality belongs only to individual representatives, not artificial ones, it is essential to be able to identify and define who bears obligation for the procedures associated with AI, especially those efficient in discovering, correction, and reprogramming. While bottom-up techniques and extremely deep neural networks make it possible for AI to fix intricate problems, they make it tough to comprehend the processes that lead to the options they embraced. This complicates accountability since if an AI application produces undesirable results, identifying who is accountable ends up being challenging. To resolve this issue, attention requires to be offered to the nature of responsibility processes in complex, extremely automated settings, where outcomes may only become evident in the medium to long term. For this, it is necessary that supreme duty for decisions made using AI rests with the human decision-makers and that there is accountability for using AI at each stage of the decision-making process. [91]

45. In addition to identifying who is responsible, it is important to identify the objectives offered to AI systems. Although these systems might utilize not being watched autonomous learning mechanisms and in some cases follow courses that human beings can not reconstruct, they eventually pursue objectives that humans have assigned to them and are governed by processes established by their designers and programmers. Yet, this presents an obstacle since, as AI models become significantly capable of independent knowing, the capability to maintain control over them to ensure that such applications serve human functions might efficiently decrease. This raises the important question of how to ensure that AI systems are ordered for the good of individuals and not against them.


46. While obligation for the ethical use of AI systems begins with those who develop, produce, handle, and oversee such systems, it is likewise shared by those who use them. As Pope Francis kept in mind, the maker "makes a technical choice amongst a number of possibilities based either on distinct requirements or on statistical inferences. Humans, however, not only pick, but in their hearts can deciding." [92] Those who utilize AI to achieve a task and follow its outcomes develop a context in which they are ultimately accountable for the power they have handed over. Therefore, insofar as AI can assist human beings in making decisions, the algorithms that govern it must be reliable, protected, robust enough to manage disparities, and transparent in their operation to reduce predispositions and unintentional adverse effects. [93] Regulatory structures must ensure that all legal entities remain responsible for making use of AI and all its consequences, with appropriate safeguards for openness, privacy, and responsibility. [94] Moreover, those using AI must take care not to end up being extremely based on it for their decision-making, a pattern that increases contemporary society's already high reliance on innovation.


47. The Church's ethical and social teaching provides resources to assist make sure that AI is used in such a way that maintains human firm. Considerations about justice, for example, ought to also resolve problems such as promoting just social dynamics, maintaining worldwide security, and promoting peace. By exercising prudence, people and neighborhoods can determine methods to use AI to benefit mankind while preventing applications that might deteriorate human dignity or harm the environment. In this context, the idea of obligation ought to be comprehended not just in its most limited sense but as a "obligation for the look after others, which is more than simply accounting for results attained." [95]

48. Therefore, AI, like any innovation, can be part of a mindful and responsible response to mankind's occupation to the excellent. However, as formerly gone over, AI must be directed by human intelligence to line up with this occupation, ensuring it respects the dignity of the human person. Recognizing this "exalted dignity," the Second Vatican Council affirmed that "the social order and its advancement need to invariably work to the benefit of the human individual." [96] Due to this, the usage of AI, as Pope Francis said, must be "accompanied by an ethic influenced by a vision of the common great, an ethic of freedom, duty, and fraternity, capable of promoting the complete advancement of individuals in relation to others and to the entire of development." [97]

49. Within this general point of view, some observations follow listed below to highlight how the preceding arguments can assist provide an ethical orientation in useful scenarios, in line with the "knowledge of heart" that Pope Francis has actually proposed. [98] While not extensive, this discussion is offered in service of the discussion that considers how AI can be utilized to maintain the dignity of the human individual and promote the common good. [99]

50. As Pope Francis observed, "the intrinsic self-respect of each human being and the fraternity that binds us together as members of the one human family should undergird the development of new technologies and function as unassailable requirements for examining them before they are used." [100]

51. Viewed through this lens, AI could "introduce essential developments in agriculture, education and culture, a better level of life for whole nations and peoples, and the development of human fraternity and social friendship," and therefore be "utilized to promote essential human development." [101] AI might likewise assist organizations recognize those in need and counter discrimination and marginalization. These and other similar applications of this innovation could add to human development and the typical good. [102]

52. However, while AI holds lots of possibilities for promoting the good, it can likewise prevent or perhaps counter human development and the common good. Pope Francis has actually noted that "proof to date suggests that digital technologies have actually increased inequality in our world. Not simply distinctions in material wealth, which are also substantial, but also differences in access to political and social impact." [103] In this sense, AI could be utilized to perpetuate marginalization and discrimination, produce new types of poverty, widen the "digital divide," and aggravate existing social inequalities. [104]

53. Moreover, the concentration of the power over mainstream AI applications in the hands of a couple of powerful business raises considerable ethical concerns. Exacerbating this problem is the fundamental nature of AI systems, where no single individual can exercise total oversight over the huge and complicated datasets utilized for computation. This lack of distinct responsibility creates the threat that AI might be controlled for individual or corporate gain or to direct public opinion for the advantage of a specific market. Such entities, encouraged by their own interests, have the capability to exercise "kinds of control as subtle as they are intrusive, developing systems for the manipulation of consciences and of the democratic procedure." [105]

54. Furthermore, there is the threat of AI being utilized to promote what Pope Francis has called the "technocratic paradigm," which perceives all the world's problems as understandable through technological methods alone. [106] In this paradigm, human self-respect and fraternity are frequently set aside in the name of effectiveness, "as if reality, goodness, and reality automatically stream from technological and economic power as such." [107] Yet, human dignity and the common good needs to never be breached for the sake of performance, [108] for "technological advancements that do not lead to an improvement in the lifestyle of all humanity, however on the contrary, intensify inequalities and disputes, can never count as real progress. " [109] Instead, AI needs to be put "at the service of another type of progress, one which is healthier, more human, more social, more essential." [110]

55. Attaining this objective requires a much deeper reflection on the relationship in between autonomy and obligation. Greater autonomy increases each individual's responsibility across numerous elements of communal life. For Christians, the structure of this responsibility depends on the recognition that all human capacities, consisting of the individual's autonomy, originated from God and are suggested to be utilized in the service of others. [111] Therefore, rather than merely pursuing financial or technological goals, AI ought to serve "the common good of the whole human household," which is "the amount total of social conditions that allow individuals, either as groups or as people, to reach their fulfillment more fully and more easily." [112]

56. The Second Vatican Council observed that "by his inner nature male is a social being; and if he does not participate in relations with others, he can neither live nor develop his gifts." [113] This conviction underscores that residing in society is intrinsic to the nature and vocation of the human person. [114] As social beings, we seek relationships that include mutual exchange and the pursuit of reality, in the course of which, individuals "show each other the truth they have actually discovered, or think they have actually discovered, in such a method that they assist one another in the look for truth." [115]

57. Such a mission, in addition to other aspects of human communication, presupposes encounters and mutual exchange between individuals shaped by their distinct histories, ideas, convictions, and relationships. Nor can we forget that human intelligence is a diverse, multifaceted, and intricate truth: private and social, reasonable and affective, conceptual and symbolic. Pope Francis highlights this vibrant, noting that "together, we can look for the reality in discussion, in unwinded discussion or in enthusiastic debate. To do so requires perseverance; it entails moments of silence and suffering, yet it can patiently embrace the broader experience of individuals and individuals. [...] The procedure of building fraternity, be it local or universal, can just be carried out by spirits that are totally free and available to genuine encounters." [116]

58. It remains in this context that one can consider the obstacles AI poses to human relationships. Like other technological tools, AI has the possible to promote connections within the human household. However, it could likewise prevent a real encounter with truth and, eventually, lead individuals to "a deep and melancholic dissatisfaction with social relations, or a harmful sense of isolation." [117] Authentic human relationships require the richness of being with others in their pain, their pleas, and their delight. [118] Since human intelligence is expressed and enriched also in social and embodied methods, genuine and spontaneous encounters with others are important for engaging with reality in its fullness.


59. Because "real wisdom requires an encounter with reality," [119] the increase of AI presents another challenge. Since AI can successfully imitate the items of human intelligence, the capability to understand when one is communicating with a human or a machine can no longer be considered granted. Generative AI can produce text, speech, images, and other sophisticated outputs that are usually connected with human beings. Yet, it must be understood for what it is: a tool, not a person. [120] This distinction is frequently obscured by the language utilized by professionals, which tends to anthropomorphize AI and hence blurs the line between human and maker.


60. Anthropomorphizing AI likewise postures specific challenges for the development of kids, possibly motivating them to develop patterns of interaction that treat human relationships in a transactional manner, as one would associate with a chatbot. Such routines might lead young people to see teachers as simple dispensers of details rather than as coaches who direct and nurture their intellectual and moral development. Genuine relationships, rooted in compassion and an unfaltering commitment to the good of the other, are important and irreplaceable in cultivating the full development of the human individual.


61. In this context, it is necessary to clarify that, despite using anthropomorphic language, no AI application can really experience compassion. Emotions can not be decreased to facial expressions or expressions created in response to triggers; they reflect the way an individual, as a whole, associates with the world and to his or her own life, with the body playing a main function. True compassion needs the capability to listen, recognize another's irreducible uniqueness, invite their otherness, and comprehend the meaning behind even their silences. [121] Unlike the world of analytical judgment in which AI stands out, true compassion belongs to the relational sphere. It involves intuiting and collaring the lived experiences of another while maintaining the difference between self and other. [122] While AI can mimic understanding actions, it can not replicate the eminently individual and relational nature of genuine empathy. [123]

62. In light of the above, it is clear why misrepresenting AI as an individual must always be avoided; doing so for deceitful functions is a severe ethical infraction that might wear down social trust. Similarly, using AI to deceive in other contexts-such as in education or in human relationships, consisting of the sphere of sexuality-is also to be thought about unethical and requires mindful oversight to prevent harm, maintain openness, and make sure the dignity of all people. [124]

63. In a progressively isolated world, some individuals have actually turned to AI in search of deep human relationships, simple friendship, or perhaps psychological bonds. However, while people are meant to experience genuine relationships, AI can only mimic them. Nevertheless, such relationships with others are an essential part of how an individual grows to become who she or he is indicated to be. If AI is utilized to help individuals foster genuine connections in between individuals, it can contribute positively to the complete awareness of the individual. Conversely, if we change relationships with God and with others with interactions with innovation, we risk replacing genuine relationality with a lifeless image (cf. Ps. 106:20; Rom. 1:22 -23). Instead of retreating into artificial worlds, we are called to take part in a committed and deliberate way with truth, especially by determining with the poor and suffering, consoling those in sadness, and forging bonds of communion with all.


64. Due to its interdisciplinary nature, AI is being increasingly integrated into financial and financial systems. Significant investments are presently being made not only in the innovation sector but likewise in energy, financing, and media, especially in the locations of marketing and sales, logistics, technological innovation, compliance, and threat management. At the very same time, AI's applications in these areas have also highlighted its ambivalent nature, as a source of tremendous chances but also profound dangers. A first real crucial point in this location worries the possibility that-due to the concentration of AI applications in the hands of a few corporations-only those big companies would gain from the worth developed by AI instead of the services that utilize it.


65. Other broader elements of AI's effect on the economic-financial sphere need to also be carefully analyzed, especially concerning the interaction in between concrete truth and the digital world. One crucial consideration in this regard involves the coexistence of diverse and alternative forms of economic and monetary institutions within a provided context. This factor must be motivated, as it can bring benefits in how it supports the genuine economy by fostering its advancement and stability, particularly during times of crisis. Nevertheless, it ought to be stressed that digital realities, not limited by any spatial bonds, tend to be more homogeneous and impersonal than communities rooted in a specific place and a specific history, with a typical journey defined by shared values and hopes, but also by inevitable disputes and divergences. This diversity is an indisputable possession to a neighborhood's financial life. Turning over the economy and financing totally to digital technology would minimize this variety and richness. As a result, many services to financial problems that can be reached through natural dialogue between the involved celebrations might no longer be attainable in a world controlled by treatments and only the appearance of nearness.


66. Another location where AI is already having an extensive impact is the world of work. As in numerous other fields, AI is driving essential changes across lots of occupations, with a variety of results. On the one hand, it has the possible to boost know-how and efficiency, produce new jobs, allow employees to focus on more ingenious jobs, and open new horizons for creativity and innovation.


67. However, while AI promises to boost productivity by taking control of mundane jobs, it frequently requires workers to adjust to the speed and needs of makers instead of makers being developed to support those who work. As an outcome, contrary to the marketed benefits of AI, present techniques to the technology can paradoxically deskill employees, subject them to automated surveillance, and relegate them to rigid and recurring tasks. The need to stay up to date with the rate of technology can deteriorate employees' sense of firm and suppress the innovative capabilities they are anticipated to bring to their work. [125]

68. AI is presently eliminating the need for some jobs that were when performed by human beings. If AI is used to change human workers rather than complement them, there is a "considerable risk of disproportionate advantage for the few at the price of the impoverishment of many." [126] Additionally, as AI becomes more powerful, there is an involved risk that human labor might lose its worth in the economic realm. This is the logical effect of the technocratic paradigm: a world of mankind enslaved to performance, where, ultimately, the expense of humankind must be cut. Yet, human lives are inherently valuable, independent of their economic output. Nevertheless, the "present model," Pope Francis explains, "does not appear to prefer a financial investment in efforts to assist the slow, the weak, or the less skilled to discover opportunities in life." [127] Due to this, "we can not permit a tool as powerful and vital as Artificial Intelligence to enhance such a paradigm, but rather, we need to make Artificial Intelligence a bulwark against its growth." [128]

69. It is necessary to keep in mind that "the order of things should be subordinate to the order of persons, and not the other way around." [129] Human work needs to not only 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, ethical, spiritual, and religious life." [130] In this context, the Church recognizes that work is "not only a method of earning one's daily bread" however is likewise "an important dimension of social life" and "a method [...] of individual development, the structure of healthy relationships, self-expression and the exchange of gifts. Work offers us a sense of shared responsibility for the development of the world, and eventually, for our life as an individuals." [131]

70. Since work is a "part of the significance of life on this earth, a path to growth, human development and individual fulfillment," "the objective should not be that technological progress progressively replaces human work, for this would be detrimental to mankind" [132] -rather, it needs to promote human labor. Seen in this light, AI needs to assist, not change, human judgment. Similarly, it needs to never degrade creativity or minimize employees to mere "cogs in a maker." Therefore, "respect for the dignity of laborers and the significance of work for the economic well-being of people, households, and societies, for task security and simply wages, ought to be a high priority for the international community as these types of innovation penetrate more deeply into our work environments." [133]

71. As participants in God's recovery work, health care specialists have the occupation and obligation to be "guardians and servants of human life." [134] Because of this, the health care occupation carries an "intrinsic and indisputable ethical dimension," acknowledged by the Hippocratic Oath, which obliges physicians and healthcare experts to dedicate themselves to having "absolute regard for human life and its sacredness." [135] Following the example of the Do-gooder, this commitment is to be performed by males and females "who turn down the production of a society of exclusion, and act instead as next-door neighbors, raising up and rehabilitating the fallen for the sake of the typical good." [136]

72. Seen in this light, AI appears to hold tremendous potential in a variety of applications in the medical field, such as helping the diagnostic work of doctor, facilitating relationships between patients and medical staff, using brand-new treatments, and expanding access to quality care likewise for those who are isolated or marginalized. In these ways, the technology might boost the "thoughtful and caring nearness" [137] that healthcare suppliers are contacted us to extend to the ill and suffering.


73. However, if AI is utilized not to improve however to change the relationship between patients and health care providers-leaving patients to interact with a machine rather than a human being-it would reduce a crucially essential human relational structure to a centralized, impersonal, and unequal structure. Instead of motivating solidarity with the ill and suffering, such applications of AI would run the risk of worsening the loneliness that frequently accompanies illness, particularly in the context of a culture where "persons are no longer seen as a paramount worth to be looked after and respected." [138] This misuse of AI would not line up with respect for the self-respect of the human individual and uniformity with the suffering.


74. Responsibility for the wellness of clients and the decisions that discuss their lives are at the heart of the health care profession. This accountability requires medical professionals to work out all their skill and intelligence in making well-reasoned and fairly grounded choices concerning those delegated to their care, constantly appreciating the inviolable self-respect of the patients and the requirement for informed approval. As an outcome, decisions regarding patient treatment and the weight of duty they entail must constantly remain with the human individual and must never be entrusted to AI. [139]

75. In addition, utilizing AI to identify who must get treatment based mainly on financial steps or metrics of performance represents a particularly troublesome circumstances of the "technocratic paradigm" that need to be turned down. [140] For, "enhancing resources means using them in an ethical and fraternal method, and not penalizing the most vulnerable." [141] Additionally, AI tools in healthcare are "exposed to forms of bias and discrimination," where "systemic mistakes can quickly multiply, producing not just oppressions in private cases but also, due to the cause and effect, real kinds of social inequality." [142]

76. The combination of AI into health care likewise postures the risk of enhancing other existing disparities in access to treatment. As healthcare becomes progressively oriented toward avoidance and lifestyle-based approaches, AI-driven services might inadvertently prefer more affluent populations who currently enjoy much better access to medical resources and quality nutrition. This pattern dangers reinforcing a "medicine for the abundant" design, where those with monetary means gain from innovative preventative tools and personalized health details while others battle to gain access to even standard services. To avoid such inequities, fair frameworks are required to make sure that using AI in health care does not get worse existing healthcare inequalities however rather serves the typical good.


77. The words of the Second Vatican Council remain totally appropriate today: "True education aims to form people with a view towards their final end and the good of the society to which they belong." [143] As such, education is "never a simple procedure of passing on realities and intellectual abilities: rather, its aim is to contribute to the individual's holistic formation in its various aspects (intellectual, cultural, spiritual, etc), consisting of, for instance, community life and relations within the scholastic neighborhood," [144] in keeping with the nature and dignity of the human person.


78. This approach involves a commitment to cultivating the mind, but always as a part of the integral advancement of the individual: "We need to break that concept of education which holds that educating means filling one's head with ideas. That is the way we educate automatons, cerebral minds, not individuals. Educating is taking a danger in the tension in between the mind, the heart, and the hands." [145]

79. At the center of this work of forming the entire human individual is the vital relationship between instructor and trainee. Teachers do more than communicate understanding; they design essential human qualities and motivate the joy of discovery. [146] Their presence encourages trainees both through the content they teach and the care they show for their trainees. This bond cultivates trust, good understanding, and the capability to resolve each person's unique self-respect and potential. On the part of the trainee, this can produce a genuine desire to grow. The physical presence of a teacher develops a relational dynamic that AI can not reproduce, one that deepens engagement and supports the trainee's important development.


80. In this context, AI presents both opportunities and obstacles. If utilized in a prudent way, within the context of an existing teacher-student relationship and bought to the authentic objectives of education, AI can end up being a valuable instructional resource by improving access to education, using tailored assistance, and supplying immediate feedback to trainees. These benefits could boost the learning experience, specifically in cases where personalized attention is needed, or academic resources are otherwise limited.


81. Nevertheless, an important part of education is forming "the intellect to factor well in all matters, to connect towards truth, and to grasp it," [147] while helping the "language of the head" to grow harmoniously with the "language of the heart" and the "language of the hands." [148] This is even more vital in an age marked by technology, in which "it is no longer simply a question of 'utilizing' instruments of interaction, however of residing in an extremely digitalized culture that has had an extensive impact on [...] our capability to interact, learn, be notified and participate in relationship with others." [149] However, instead of promoting "a cultivated intelligence," which "brings with it a power and a grace to every work and profession that it undertakes," [150] the extensive usage of AI in education could cause the trainees' increased reliance on technology, eroding their capability to perform some skills individually and aggravating their reliance on screens. [151]

82. Additionally, while some AI systems are designed to help individuals establish their important believing capabilities and problem-solving skills, lots of others merely supply answers rather of triggering trainees to reach responses themselves or compose text on their own. [152] Instead of training young individuals how to amass details and generate quick actions, education should encourage "the accountable usage of freedom to face issues with excellent sense and intelligence." [153] Building on this, "education in making use of kinds of artificial intelligence need to aim above all at promoting vital thinking. Users of all ages, but particularly the young, require to develop a critical method to the use of information and content collected online or produced by expert system systems. Schools, universities, and clinical societies are challenged to help trainees and specialists to understand the social and ethical elements of the advancement and uses of technology." [154]

83. As Saint John Paul II remembered, "worldwide today, defined by such rapid developments in science and technology, the tasks of a Catholic University presume an ever greater value and urgency." [155] In a particular method, Catholic universities are advised to be present as fantastic labs 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 careful research on this phenomenon, assisting to extract the salutary potential within the different fields of science and reality, and assisting them always 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 reason.


84. Moreover, it must be kept in mind that current AI programs have actually been known to provide biased or produced details, which can lead trainees to rely on inaccurate material. This issue "not only risks of legitimizing fake news and strengthening a dominant culture's advantage, however, in short, it also weakens the educational procedure itself." [157] With time, clearer differences may emerge between correct and inappropriate uses of AI in education and research. Yet, a definitive guideline is that using AI ought to always be transparent and never misrepresented.


85. AI might be utilized as an aid to human dignity if it assists people understand complicated principles or directs them to sound resources that support their look for the reality. [158]

86. However, AI also provides a serious threat of generating controlled material and incorrect details, which can quickly deceive people due to its similarity to the reality. Such false information might happen inadvertently, as when it comes to AI "hallucination," where a generative AI system yields results that appear real but are not. Since producing material that simulates human artifacts is main to AI's performance, reducing these risks shows challenging. Yet, the consequences of such aberrations and incorrect details can be quite grave. For this reason, all those involved in producing and gratisafhalen.be using AI systems need to be committed 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 generate false details, a much more troubling problem lies in the purposeful abuse of AI for control. This can take place when people or organizations deliberately generate and spread out incorrect content with the aim to deceive or cause damage, such as "deepfake" images, videos, and audio-referring to an incorrect depiction of an individual, modified or generated by an AI algorithm. The danger of deepfakes is especially evident when they are utilized to target or hurt others. While the images or videos themselves may be artificial, the damage they cause is real, 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 distorting "our relationship with others and with reality," [160] AI-generated fake media can slowly weaken the foundations of society. This problem requires mindful policy, as misinformation-especially through AI-controlled or affected media-can spread unintentionally, sustaining political polarization and social unrest. When society becomes indifferent to the truth, different groups build their own versions of "truths," damaging the "reciprocal ties and mutual reliances" [161] that underpin the material of social life. As deepfakes trigger individuals to question everything and AI-generated false content deteriorates trust in what they see and hear, polarization and dispute will just grow. Such extensive deceptiveness is no minor matter; it strikes at the core of humanity, taking apart the fundamental trust on which societies are developed. [162]

89. Countering AI-driven fallacies is not only the work of market experts-it needs the efforts of all people of goodwill. "If innovation is to serve human self-respect and not harm it, and if it is to promote peace rather than violence, then the human community needs to be proactive in attending to these trends with regard to human self-respect and the promo of the excellent." [163] Those who produce and share AI-generated content should always exercise diligence in validating the truth of what they distribute and, in all cases, ought to "avoid 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 exploit the weak and susceptible." [164] This calls for the ongoing prudence and mindful discernment of all users regarding their activity online. [165]

90. Humans are naturally relational, and the information everyone creates in the digital world can be viewed as an objectified expression of this relational nature. Data communicates not only details however also individual and relational understanding, which, in a progressively digitized context, can amount to power over the individual. Moreover, while some kinds of data might pertain to public aspects of an individual's life, others may touch upon the person's interiority, maybe even their conscience. Seen in this way, personal privacy plays an essential function in securing the limits of a person's inner life, maintaining their flexibility to relate to others, reveal themselves, and make choices without excessive control. This protection is also tied to the defense of religious flexibility, as security can also be misused to apply control over the lives of believers and how they express their faith.


91. It is appropriate, therefore, to attend to the concern of personal privacy from a concern for the genuine freedom and inalienable self-respect of the human person "in all scenarios." [166] The Second Vatican Council included the right "to protect privacy" among the basic rights "needed for living a really human life," a right that ought to be reached all individuals on account of their "superb dignity." [167] Furthermore, the Church has actually also affirmed the right to the legitimate respect for a personal life in the context of affirming the person's right to an excellent track record, defense of their physical and mental stability, and flexibility from damage or undue intrusion [168] -vital parts of the due regard for the intrinsic self-respect of the human individual. [169]

92. Advances in AI-powered information processing and analysis now make it possible to presume patterns in an individual's behavior and believing from even a little amount of details, making the role of information privacy much more vital as a protect for the dignity and relational nature of the human individual. As Pope Francis observed, "while closed and intolerant mindsets towards others are on the increase, ranges are otherwise diminishing or disappearing to the point that the right to personal privacy rarely exists. Everything has ended up being a type of spectacle to be taken a look at and checked, and individuals's lives are now under continuous surveillance." [170]

93. While there can be legitimate and correct methods to use AI in keeping with human dignity and the common excellent, utilizing it for security aimed at making use of, limiting others' flexibility, or benefitting a couple of at the expenditure of the numerous is unjustifiable. The danger of monitoring overreach should be monitored by appropriate regulators to make sure transparency and public accountability. Those accountable for security should never exceed their authority, which must constantly prefer the self-respect and flexibility of everyone as the vital basis of a just and gentle society.


94. Furthermore, "fundamental regard for human self-respect demands that we decline to enable the uniqueness of the individual to be determined with a set of information." [171] This specifically applies when AI is utilized to examine people or groups based on their behavior, qualities, or history-a practice referred to as "social scoring": "In social and financial decision-making, we should be cautious about entrusting judgments to algorithms that process information, typically collected surreptitiously, on a person's makeup and previous habits. Such data can be contaminated by societal bias and prejudgments. An individual's previous habits need to not be utilized to deny him or her the chance to change, grow, and contribute to society. We can not enable algorithms to restrict or condition respect for human self-respect, or to exclude compassion, grace, forgiveness, and above all, the hope that individuals are able to change." [172]

95. AI has numerous promising applications for improving our relationship with our "typical home," such as producing designs to anticipate severe environment occasions, proposing engineering services to decrease their impact, managing relief operations, and predicting population shifts. [173] Additionally, AI can support sustainable farming, optimize energy use, and provide early caution systems for public health emergency situations. These advancements have the possible to strengthen durability against climate-related obstacles and promote more sustainable advancement.


96. At the exact same time, present AI designs and the hardware needed to support them take in large quantities of energy and water, substantially contributing to CO2 emissions and straining resources. This truth is frequently obscured by the way this technology exists in the popular imagination, where words such as "the cloud" [174] can provide the impression that information is kept and processed in an intangible realm, separated from the physical world. However, "the cloud" is not an ethereal domain separate from the physical world; as with all calculating technologies, it counts on physical devices, cables, and energy. The same holds true of the technology behind AI. As these systems grow in intricacy, especially big language models (LLMs), they need ever-larger datasets, increased computational power, and greater storage infrastructure. Considering the heavy toll these innovations handle the environment, it is crucial to develop sustainable solutions that lower their influence on our typical home.


97. Even then, as Pope Francis teaches, it is vital "that we look for solutions not just in innovation however in a change of humanity." [175] A total and genuine understanding of development acknowledges that the value of all developed things can not be lowered to their simple utility. Therefore, a completely human technique to the stewardship of the earth declines the distorted anthropocentrism of the technocratic paradigm, which seeks to "extract everything possible" from the world, [176] and declines the "misconception of progress," which assumes that "eco-friendly issues will solve themselves just with the application of new innovation and with no need for ethical factors to consider or deep change." [177] Such a frame of mind should pave the way to a more holistic method that respects the order of development and promotes the essential good of the human individual while securing our common home. [178]

98. The Second Vatican Council and the constant teaching of the Popes ever since have insisted that peace is not simply the absence of war and is not restricted to maintaining a balance of powers in between adversaries. Instead, in the words of Saint Augustine, peace is "the tranquility of order." [179] Certainly, peace can not be attained without safeguarding the products of individuals, totally free communication, regard for the self-respect of persons and individuals, 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 needs to be mainly built through patient diplomacy, the active promotion of justice, uniformity, important human advancement, wiki.eqoarevival.com and respect for the self-respect of all individuals. [180] In this method, the tools utilized to maintain peace needs to never ever be allowed to justify injustice, violence, or injustice. Instead, they need to always be governed by a "firm decision to regard other individuals and nations, along with their self-respect, as well as the intentional practice of fraternity." [181]

99. While AI's analytical capabilities might assist countries seek peace and make sure security, the "weaponization of Artificial Intelligence" can likewise be highly troublesome. Pope Francis has actually observed that "the capability to carry out military operations through push-button control systems has resulted in a lessened perception of the destruction brought on by those weapon systems and the problem of responsibility for their use, leading to a a lot more cold and removed method to the tremendous catastrophe of war." [182] Moreover, the ease with which self-governing weapons make war more feasible militates against the concept of war as a last hope in genuine self-defense, [183] potentially increasing the instruments of war well beyond the scope of human oversight and speeding up a destabilizing arms race, with catastrophic repercussions for human rights. [184]

100. In particular, Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, which can recognizing and striking targets without direct human intervention, are a "cause for severe ethical issue" due to the fact that they lack the "distinct human capability for moral judgment and ethical decision-making." [185] For this factor, Pope Francis has urgently required a reconsideration of the advancement of these weapons and a restriction on their use, beginning with "an effective and concrete commitment to introduce ever higher and proper human control. No machine should ever pick to take the life of a human." [186]

101. Since it is a little action from devices that can kill autonomously with accuracy to those capable of massive damage, some AI researchers have actually expressed issues that such technology presents an "existential risk" by having the possible to act in manner ins which could threaten the survival of whole regions and even of mankind itself. This risk demands serious attention, showing the long-standing issue about technologies that grant war "an uncontrollable devastating power over great numbers of innocent civilians," [187] without even sparing children. In this context, the call from Gaudium et Spes to "carry out an examination of war with a totally new mindset" [188] is more immediate than ever.


102. At the same time, while the theoretical dangers of AI should have attention, the more immediate and pressing issue lies in how people with malicious intents may misuse this technology. [189] Like any tool, AI is an extension of human power, and while its future abilities are unforeseeable, humankind's past actions provide clear warnings. The atrocities devoted throughout history suffice to raise deep concerns about the potential abuses of AI.


103. Saint John Paul II observed that "humanity now has instruments of unprecedented power: we can turn this world into a garden, or decrease it to a stack of rubble." [190] Given this reality, the Church advises us, in the words of Pope Francis, that "we are totally free to use our intelligence towards things progressing favorably," or toward "decadence and shared destruction." [191] To prevent humankind from spiraling into self-destruction, [192] there need to be a clear stand against all applications of innovation that inherently threaten human life and dignity. This dedication needs cautious discernment about using AI, particularly in military defense applications, to make sure that it always appreciates human self-respect and serves the typical good. The advancement and deployment of AI in armaments need to undergo the greatest levels of ethical scrutiny, governed by an issue for human self-respect and the sanctity of life. [193]

104. Technology offers exceptional tools to supervise and develop the world's resources. However, in many cases, humanity is significantly ceding control of these resources to machines. Within some circles of scientists and futurists, there is optimism about the capacity of synthetic general intelligence (AGI), a hypothetical form of AI that would match or go beyond human intelligence and cause unimaginable advancements. Some even hypothesize that AGI might attain superhuman capabilities. At the very same time, as society wanders away from a connection with the transcendent, some are lured to turn to AI searching for meaning or fulfillment-longings that can only be truly satisfied in communion with God. [194]

105. However, the presumption of replacing God for an artifact of human making is idolatry, a practice Scripture clearly cautions 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 but do not speak; eyes, however do not see; ears, but do not hear" (Ps. 115:5 -6), AI can "speak," or at least gives 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 possess much of the abilities particular to human life, and it is also imperfect. By turning to AI as a perceived "Other" greater than itself, with which to share existence and duties, humanity risks developing an alternative for God. However, it is not AI that is ultimately deified and worshipped, however mankind itself-which, in this way, ends up being enslaved to its own work. [195]

106. While AI has the prospective to serve humanity and add to the common excellent, it remains a development of human hands, bearing "the imprint of human art and ingenuity" (Acts 17:29). It must never ever be ascribed undue worth. As the Book of Wisdom verifies: "For a man made them, and one whose spirit is obtained formed them; for no male can form a god which resembles himself. He is mortal, and what he makes with lawless hands is dead, for he is much better than the objects he worships since he has life, however they never ever have" (Wis. 15:16 -17).


107. In contrast, humans, "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 decide their own destiny in the sight of God." [196] It is within the heart, as Pope Francis reminds us, that each private finds the "mystical connection between self-knowledge and openness to others, between the encounter with one's personal individuality and the desire to offer oneself to others. " [197] Therefore, it is the heart alone that is "capable of setting our other powers and passions, and our whole person, in a position of reverence and loving obedience before the Lord," [198] who "offers to deal with every one people as a 'Thou,' always and permanently." [199]

108. Considering the different challenges presented by advances in technology, Pope Francis emphasized the requirement for development in "human duty, values, and conscience," proportionate to the growth in the capacity that this innovation brings [200] -recognizing that "with an increase in human power comes an expanding of obligation on the part of people and communities." [201]

109. At the exact same time, the "important and basic question" remains "whether in the context of this development man, as male, is ending up being truly better, that is to say, more fully grown spiritually, more familiar with the self-respect 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 know how to evaluate private applications of AI in particular contexts to identify whether its use promotes human dignity, the vocation of the human person, and the common good. Similar to numerous technologies, the effects of the various uses of AI may not constantly be foreseeable from their creation. As these applications and their social impacts become clearer, appropriate responses ought to be made at all levels of society, following the concept of subsidiarity. Individual users, families, civil society, corporations, institutions, federal governments, and global organizations need to operate at their appropriate levels to make sure that AI is used for the good of all.


111. A significant difficulty and opportunity for the common excellent today lies in considering AI within a structure of relational intelligence, which highlights the interconnectedness of individuals and neighborhoods and highlights our shared responsibility for cultivating the integral wellness of others. The twentieth-century philosopher Nicholas Berdyaev observed that people often blame makers for personal and social problems; however, "this only humiliates male and does not represent his dignity," for "it is not worthy to transfer duty from male to a machine." [203] Only the human individual can be morally responsible, and the challenges of a technological society are eventually spiritual in nature. Therefore, dealing with those difficulties "demands a surge of spirituality." [204]

112. A more point to consider is the call, prompted by the appearance of AI on the world phase, for a renewed gratitude of all that is human. Years ago, the French Catholic author Georges Bernanos alerted that "the risk is not in the multiplication of machines, however in the ever-increasing number of guys accustomed from their childhood to desire just what machines can give." [205] This difficulty is as true today as it was then, as the rapid speed of digitization runs the risk of a "digital reductionism," where non-quantifiable aspects of life are set aside and then forgotten or even deemed unimportant due to the fact that they can not be calculated in formal terms. AI needs to be used only as a tool to match human intelligence rather than replace its richness. [206] Cultivating those elements of human life that transcend computation is important for maintaining "an authentic mankind" that "seems to dwell in the middle of our technological culture, nearly unnoticed, like a mist seeping gently below a closed door." [207]

113. The large area of the world's knowledge is now available in ways that would have filled previous generations with awe. However, to make sure that developments in knowledge do not end up being humanly or spiritually barren, one need to surpass the mere accumulation of data and aim to attain real wisdom. [208]

114. This knowledge is the gift that humanity needs most to deal with the profound concerns and ethical obstacles positioned by AI: "Only by adopting a spiritual way of seeing truth, only by recovering a knowledge of the heart, can we challenge and analyze the newness of our time." [209] Such "knowledge of the heart" is "the virtue that allows us to integrate the entire and its parts, our choices and their effects." It "can not be sought from machines," but it "lets itself be discovered by those who seek it and be seen by those who love it; it anticipates those who prefer it, and it goes in search of those who are deserving of it (cf. Wis 6:12 -16)." [210]

115. In a world marked by AI, we require the grace of the Holy Spirit, who "allows us to look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, situations, events and to uncover their real significance." [211]

116. Since a "individual's perfection is determined not by the details or knowledge they have, however by the depth of their charity," [212] how we incorporate AI "to include the least of our siblings and sisters, the vulnerable, and those most in need, will be the real measure of our mankind." [213] The "knowledge of the heart" can light up and guide the human-centered use of this technology to assist promote the common excellent, look after our "common home," advance the search for the fact, foster essential human advancement, prefer human solidarity and fraternity, and lead humankind to its ultimate goal: happiness and full communion with God. [214]

117. From this point of view of knowledge, believers will have the ability to act as ethical representatives capable of utilizing this technology to promote an authentic vision of the human individual and society. [215] This need to be made with the understanding that technological development belongs to God's plan for creation-an activity that we are contacted us to purchase towards the Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ, in the continuous look for the True and the Good.


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


Given in 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 Integral 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 likewise 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 Proposal for the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence" (31 August 1955), http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/history/dartmouth/dartmouth.html (accessed: 21 October 2024).
[6] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), pars. 2-3: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2.
[7] Terms in this file explaining the outputs or processes of AI are used figuratively to explain its operations and are not intended to anthropomorphize the maker.
[8] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3; Id., Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2.
[9] Here, forum.kepri.bawaslu.go.id one can see the main positions of the "transhumanists" and the "posthumanists." Transhumanists argue that technological advancements will make it possible for humans to overcome their biological constraints and boost both their physical and cognitive abilities. Posthumanists, on the other hand, compete that such advances will ultimately alter human identity to the extent that humanity itself might no longer be considered truly "human." Both views rest on a fundamentally unfavorable perception of human corporality, which deals with the body more as a barrier than as an integral part of the person's identity and call to full realization. Yet, this unfavorable view of the body is inconsistent with a proper understanding of human self-respect. While the Church supports real scientific progress, it affirms that human dignity is rooted in "the person as an inseparable unity of body and soul. " Thus, "self-respect is also intrinsic in each individual's body, which takes part in its own way in remaining in imago Dei" (Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita [8 April 2024], par. 18).
[10] This approach reflects 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 smart, 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 attributed to machines, it must be clarified that this describes calculative thinking instead of critical thinking. Similarly, if machines are said to operate utilizing logical thinking, it needs to be specified that this is limited to computational logic. On the other hand, by its very nature, human thought is a creative procedure that eludes programming and goes beyond constraints.
[13] On the fundamental 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 more discussion of these anthropological and doctrinal foundations, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 43-144.
[15] Aristotle, Metaphysics, I. 1, 980 a 21.
[16] Cf. Augustine, De Genesi advertisement litteram III, 20, 30: PL 34, 292: "Man is made in the image of God in relation to that [faculty] by which he transcends to the illogical animals. Now, this [faculty] is reason itself, or the 'mind,' or 'intelligence,' whatever other name it may more suitably be offered"; Id., Enarrationes in Psalmos 54, 3: PL 36, 629: "When thinking about all that they have, humans find that they are most identified from animals exactly by the fact they possess intelligence." This is also reiterated by Saint Thomas Aquinas, who specifies that "guy is the most perfect of all earthly beings enhanced with motion, and his proper and natural operation is intellection," by which man abstracts from things and "receives in his mind things in fact intelligible" (Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 76).
[17] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036.
[18] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 49, a. 5, ad 3. Cf. ibid., I, q. 79; II-II, q. 47, a. 3; II-II, q. 49, a. 2. For a contemporary perspective that echoes components of the classical and medieval distinction between these two 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 intellect can examine the reality of things through reflection, experience and discussion, and pertain to acknowledge in that reality, which transcends it, the basis of certain universal ethical 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 "typically 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, but rather totally disclosed its significance 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 thus it is united to the body in order that it might have a presence and an operation appropriate to its nature."
[29] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1035. Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 18.
[30] International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 56. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 357.
[31] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), pars. 5, 8; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 15, 24, 53-54.
[32] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 356. Cf. ibid., par. 221.
[33] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 13, 26-27.
[34] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Donum Veritatis (24 May 1990), 6: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1552. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), par. 109: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1219. Cf. Pseudo-Dionysius, De divinis nominibus, VII, 2: PG 3, 868B-C: "Human souls also have factor and with it they circle in discourse around the fact of things. [...] [O] n account of the manner in which they are capable of concentrating the many into the one, they too, in their own style and as far as they can, are worthwhile of 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 understanding certain realities that are imperishable, as real now as in the past. As it peers into human nature, reason discovers universal worths obtained from that very 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 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 capability enables us to comprehend messages in any type of interaction in a way that both takes into account and transcends their product or empirical structures (such as computer code). Here, intelligence becomes a knowledge that "enables us to take a look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, scenarios, events and to uncover their genuine meaning" (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 material or ideas, mainly by using an initial perspective on reality. Both capabilities depend on the presence of a personal subjectivity for their full awareness.
[41] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931.
[42] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034: "Charity, when accompanied by a commitment to the reality, is much more than personal sensation [...] Certainly, its close relation to truth fosters its universality and maintains it from being 'confined to a narrow field devoid of relationships.' [...] Charity's openness to truth hence safeguards 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 presence to all things (Breviloquium 2.12.1). Cf. Alain de Lille, De Incarnatione Christi, PL 210, 579a: "Omnis mundi creatura quasi liber et pictura nobis est et speculum."
[48] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 67: AAS 107 (2015 ), 874; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 6: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589-592; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 57: "human beings occupy a special location in the universe according to the magnificent plan: they delight in the opportunity of sharing in the magnificent governance of visible production. [...] Since guy's place as ruler remains in fact an involvement in the magnificent governance of creation, we speak of it here as a kind 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 likewise shown 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 development. 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 sensing and appreciating truths."
[61] Dante, Paradiso, Canto XXX: "luce intellettüal, piena d'amore;/ amor di vero ben, pien di letizia;/ letizia che trascende ogne dolzore" (en. tr. The Divine Comedy of Dante Alighieri, C.E. Norton, tr., Houghton Mifflin, Boston 1920, 232).
[62] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931:" [T] he greatest norm of human life is the magnificent law itself-eternal, objective and universal, by which God orders, directs and governs the entire world and the ways of the human community according to a plan developed in his knowledge and love. God has enabled male to take part in this law of his so that, under the gentle disposition of divine providence, lots of may be able to get here at a deeper and much deeper understanding of unchangeable reality." Also cf. Id., Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037.
[63] Cf. First Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius (24 April 1870), ch. 4, DH 3016.
[64] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892.
[65] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 891. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 204: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1042.
[66] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 11: AAS 83 (1991 ), 807: "God has imprinted his own image and likeness on guy (cf. Gen 1:26), conferring upon him an incomparable dignity [...] In result, beyond the rights which man obtains by his own work, there exist rights which do not correspond to any work he carries out, but which circulation from his essential dignity as a person." Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4.
[67] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 8. Cf. ibid., par. 9; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 22.
[68] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2024 ), 310.
[69] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8.
[70] In this sense, "Artificial Intelligence" is comprehended as a technical term to indicate this technology, remembering that the expression is likewise utilized 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 motivation of scientific expedition in Albertus Magnus (De Mineralibus, II, 2, 1) and the appreciation for the mechanical arts in Hugh of St. Victor (Didascalicon, I, 9). These authors, amongst a long list of other Catholics took part in clinical research study and technological expedition, show that "faith and science can be joined in charity, offered that science is put at the service of the men and lady of our time and not misused to harm 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 man an ethical subject. When he acts deliberately, male is, so to speak, the father of his acts."
[82] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1776.
[83] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1777.
[84] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 1779-1781; Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 463, where the Holy Father motivated efforts "to guarantee that technology remains human-centered, fairly grounded and directed toward 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 role of human agency in picking a broader aim (Ziel) that then informs the particular function (Zweck) for which each technological application is developed, 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 purpose and, in its influence on human society, always represents a form of order in social relations and an arrangement of power, thus enabling certain people to perform particular actions while preventing others from carrying out various ones. In a more or less specific way, this constitutive power-dimension of innovation constantly consists of the worldview of those who invented 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: "Faced with the marvels of machines, which seem to know how to choose separately, we must be extremely clear that decision-making [...] must constantly be left to the human person. We would condemn humankind to a future without hope if we removed people's capability to make choices about themselves and their lives, by dooming them to depend upon the options of machines."
[92] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2.
[93] The term "bias" in this file refers to algorithmic bias (organized and consistent mistakes in computer system systems that might disproportionately bias certain groups in unexpected ways) or finding out bias (which will result in training on a prejudiced data set) and not the "predisposition vector" in neural networks (which is a parameter utilized to adjust the output of "neurons" to change more properly to the data).
[94] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464, where the Holy Father verified the growth in consensus "on the requirement for advancement procedures to appreciate such values as inclusion, openness, security, equity, personal privacy and dependability," and also invited "the efforts of global companies to manage these innovations so that they promote real progress, contributing, that is, to a better world and an integrally greater 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 further discussion of the ethical questions raised by AI from a Catholic perspective, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 147-253.
[99] On the value of dialogue in a pluralist society oriented towards a "robust and strong social principles," see Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 211-214: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045.
[100] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2.
[101] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047.
[102] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893.
[103] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464.
[104] Cf. Pontifical Council for Social Communications, Ethics in Internet (22 February 2002), par. 10.
[105] Francis, Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414; estimating 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] desire their social relationships supplied by sophisticated devices, by screens and systems which can be turned on and off on command. Meanwhile, the Gospel informs us continuously to risk of an in person encounter with others, with their physical existence which challenges us, with their pain and their pleas, with their happiness which infects us in our close and continuous interaction. True faith in the incarnate Son of God is inseparable from self-giving, from subscription in the community, from service, from reconciliation with others." Also cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 24: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1044-1045.
[124] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 1.
[125] Cf. Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570; Id, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 18, 124-129: AAS 107 (2015 ), 854.897-899.
[126] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3.
[127] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 209: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1107.
[128] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4. For Pope Francis' teaching about AI in relationship to the "technocratic paradigm," cf. Id., Encyclical Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 106-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893.
[129] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047.; as priced quote 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 guy' and not male 'for work.' Through this conclusion one appropriately pertains to recognize the pre-eminence of the subjective meaning of work over the unbiased 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 quoted 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 is manifest, with its painful repercussions, it is that of health care. When an ill individual is not put in the center or their self-respect is not thought about, this triggers mindsets that can lead even to speculation on the misery of others. And this is really severe! [...] The application of an organization technique to the healthcare sector, if indiscriminate [...] might run the risk of discarding people."
[142] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3.
[143] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729.
[144] Congregation for Catholic Education, Instruction on the Use of Distance Learning in Ecclesiastical Universities and Faculties, I. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729; Francis, Message for the LXIX World Day of Peace (1 January 2016), 6: AAS 108 (2016 ), 57-58.
[145] Francis, Address to Members of the Global Researchers Advancing Catholic Education Project (20 April 2022): AAS 114 (2022 ), 580.
[146] Cf. Paul VI, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi (8 December 1975), par. 41: AAS 68 (1976 ), 31, estimating Id., Address to the Members of the "Consilium de Laicis" (2 October 1974): AAS 66 (1974 ), 568: "if [the contemporary individual] does listen to teachers, it is due to the fact that 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, quoting 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 file about using generative AI in education and research, UNESCO notes: "One of the essential questions [of the usage of generative AI (GenAI) in education and research study] is whether human beings can perhaps cede basic levels of thinking and skill-acquisition processes to AI and rather focus on higher-order thinking abilities based on the outputs provided by AI. Writing, for instance, is frequently related to the structuring of thinking. With GenAI [...], humans can now begin with a well-structured summary offered by GenAI. Some professionals have actually defined making use of GenAI to produce text in this method as 'writing without thinking'" (UNESCO, Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research [2023], 37-38). The German-American thinker Hannah Arendt anticipated such a possibility in her 1959 book, The Human Condition, and warned: "If it should end up being true that understanding (in the sense of knowledge) and thought have parted company for good, then we would certainly end up being the defenseless slaves, not a lot of our makers since 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 help individuals gain access to the "selection of resources for generating higher understanding of reality" 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 question of whether what they know is real or not. [...] It is this that Saint Augustine teaches when he composes: 'I have actually fulfilled numerous who wished to deceive, however none who desired 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 ), akropolistravel.com 127: "no man may with impunity violate that human dignity which God himself treats with terrific respect"; 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 self-respect in cyberspace obliges States to also respect the right to personal privacy, by shielding citizens from invasive monitoring and permitting them to safeguard their individual 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 identified a list of "early pledges of AI assisting to resolve environment 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 change information into insights and insights into actions, AI-enabled tools might assist develop brand-new methods and financial investments to decrease emissions, influence brand-new personal sector investments in net absolutely no, protect biodiversity, and build broad-based social strength" (ibid.).
[174] "The cloud" describes a network of physical servers throughout the world that enables users to shop, process, and handle their information remotely.
[175] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 9: AAS 107 (2015 ), 850.
[176] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 106: AAS 107 (2015 ), 890.
[177] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 60: AAS 107 (2015 ), 870.
[178] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 3, 13: AAS 107 (2015 ), 848.852.
[179] Augustine, De Civitate Dei, 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 secure 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 deadly self-governing weapons systems (LAWS) that lack the appropriate human control would position fundamental ethical concerns, considered that LAWS can never ever be ethically accountable subjects efficient in adhering to global humanitarian law."
[187] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 258: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1061. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104.
[188] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104.
[189] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3: "Nor can we ignore the possibility of sophisticated weapons ending up in the incorrect hands, helping with, for circumstances, terrorist attacks or interventions aimed at destabilizing the institutions of legitimate systems of federal government. In a word, the world does not need brand-new innovations that contribute to the unfair advancement of commerce and the weapons trade and as a result end up promoting the recklessness of war."
[190] John Paul II, Act of Entrustment to Mary for the Jubilee of Bishops (8 October 2000), par. 3: Insegnamenti XXIII/2 (200 ), 565.
[191] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 79: AAS 107 (2015 ), 878.
[192] Cf. Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 51: AAS 101 (2009 ), 687.
[193] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39.
[194] Cf. Augustine, Confessiones, I, 1, 1: PL 32, 661.
[195] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (30 December 1987), par. 28: AAS 80 (1988 ), 548:" [T] here is a much better understanding today that the simple build-up of products and services [...] is not enough for the awareness of human joy. Nor, in consequence, does the availability of the numerous real benefits provided in current times by science and innovation, consisting of the computer technology, bring liberty from every kind of slavery. On the contrary, [...] unless all the considerable body of resources and prospective at man's disposal is guided by a moral understanding and by an orientation towards the true 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, Consulting With the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023).
[207] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893.
[208] Cf. Bonaventure, Hex. XIX, 3; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986: "The flood of details at our fingertips does not make for higher knowledge. Wisdom is not born of quick searches on the internet nor is it a mass of unproven data. That is not the way 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.