II. What Is Artificial Intelligence

1. With knowledge both ancient and brand-new (cf. Mt. 13:52), we are contacted us to review the current challenges and opportunities postured by clinical and technological developments, particularly by the recent development of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The Christian custom relates to the present of intelligence as an essential element of how people are created "in the image of God" (Gen. 1:27). Starting from an essential vision of the human person and the scriptural contacting us to "till" and "keep" the earth (Gen. 2:15), the Church emphasizes that this present of intelligence must be expressed through the accountable usage of reason and technical capabilities in the stewardship of the produced world.


2. The Church motivates the improvement of science, innovation, the arts, and other forms of human endeavor, seeing them as part of the "collaboration of man and lady with God in refining the noticeable development." [1] As Sirach verifies, God "gave skill to human beings, that he may be glorified in his magnificent works" (Sir. 38:6). Human abilities and imagination originate from God and, when used appropriately, glorify God by showing 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 capabilities.


3. It is within this perspective that today Note addresses the anthropological and ethical challenges raised by AI-issues that are especially significant, as one of the goals of this technology is to mimic the human intelligence that developed it. For example, unlike numerous other human productions, AI can be trained on the outcomes of human imagination and after that create new "artifacts" with a level of speed and ability that typically rivals or exceeds what human beings can do, such as producing text or images equivalent from human compositions. This raises vital issues about AI's prospective role in the growing crisis of truth in the public forum. Moreover, this technology is created to discover and make certain options autonomously, adapting to new circumstances and providing services not predicted by its developers, and thus, it raises basic concerns about ethical duty and human security, with more comprehensive implications for society as a whole. This brand-new situation has actually triggered many individuals to assess what it indicates to be human and the role of mankind worldwide.


4. Taking all this into account, there is broad consensus that AI marks a brand-new and wiki.rolandradio.net considerable stage in mankind's engagement with innovation, positioning it at the heart of what Pope Francis has explained as an "epochal modification." [2] Its impact is felt globally and in a vast array of areas, including interpersonal relationships, education, work, art, healthcare, law, warfare, and worldwide relations. As AI advances quickly toward even higher accomplishments, it is critically essential to consider its anthropological and ethical implications. This involves not just mitigating risks and preventing damage however also making sure that its applications are utilized to promote human progress and the common good.


5. To contribute positively to the discernment relating to AI, and in action to Pope Francis' require a restored "wisdom 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 discussion on these problems, the Church welcomes those delegated with sending the faith-including parents, teachers, pastors, and bishops-to commit themselves to this crucial topic with care and attention. While this file is planned especially for them, it is likewise meant to be available to a more comprehensive audience, particularly those who share the conviction that clinical and technological advances must be directed towards serving the human person and the typical good. [4]

6. To this end, the document begins by comparing principles of intelligence in AI and in human intelligence. It then explores the Christian understanding of human intelligence, offering a framework rooted in the Church's philosophical and doctrinal tradition. Finally, the document provides standards to guarantee that the advancement and use of AI maintain human dignity and promote the integral development of the human individual and society.


7. The principle of "intelligence" in AI has developed over time, making use of a variety of ideas from different disciplines. While its origins extend back centuries, a considerable turning point took place in 1956 when the American computer system researcher John McCarthy arranged a summertime workshop at Dartmouth University to check out the issue of "Artificial Intelligence," which he defined as "that of making a maker act in methods that would be called smart if a human were so acting." [5] This workshop introduced a research study program concentrated on designing devices capable of performing tasks generally connected with the human intelligence and intelligent habits.


8. Ever since, AI research study has actually advanced rapidly, leading to the development of complex systems efficient in carrying out extremely advanced jobs. [6] These so-called "narrow AI" systems are generally developed to handle specific and limited functions, such as equating languages, predicting the trajectory of a storm, classifying images, responding to questions, or generating visual material at the user's demand. While the meaning of "intelligence" in AI research differs, many contemporary AI systems-particularly those using device learning-rely on statistical inference instead of logical reduction. By examining large datasets to determine patterns, AI can "predict" [7] results and propose new methods, simulating some cognitive processes typical of human problem-solving. Such achievements have been made possible through advances in calculating technology (including neural networks, unsupervised artificial intelligence, and evolutionary algorithms) in addition to hardware innovations (such as specialized processors). Together, these technologies make it possible for AI systems to react to various forms of human input, adapt to brand-new scenarios, and even suggest novel solutions not expected by their original developers. [8]

9. Due to these rapid advancements, lots of jobs as soon as managed specifically by people are now entrusted to AI. These systems can enhance or perhaps supersede what people are able to do in lots of fields, particularly in specialized areas such as information analysis, image recognition, and medical diagnosis. While each "narrow AI" application is designed for a specific job, lots of scientists aim to develop what is understood as "Artificial General Intelligence" (AGI)-a single system capable of running across all cognitive domains and carrying out any job within the scope of human intelligence. Some even argue that AGI could one day attain the state of "superintelligence," surpassing human intellectual capabilities, or add to "super-longevity" through advances in biotechnology. Others, nevertheless, fear that these possibilities, even if hypothetical, might one day eclipse the human person, while still others welcome this potential change. [9]

10. Underlying this and numerous other viewpoints on the subject is the implicit assumption that the term "intelligence" can be utilized in the exact same method to refer to both human intelligence and AI. Yet, this does not record the complete scope of the concept. In the case of humans, intelligence is a professors that pertains to the individual in his or her entirety, whereas in the context of AI, "intelligence" is comprehended functionally, typically with the presumption that the activities quality of the human mind can be broken down into digitized steps that devices can duplicate. [10]

11. This practical point of view is exemplified by the "Turing Test," which considers a maker "smart" if a person can not distinguish its behavior from that of a human. [11] However, in this context, the term "habits" refers only to the performance of specific intellectual tasks; it does not represent the full breadth of human experience, that includes abstraction, emotions, creativity, and the aesthetic, moral, and religious perceptiveness. Nor does it encompass the complete variety of expressions particular of the human mind. Instead, in the case of AI, the "intelligence" of a system is examined methodologically, however likewise reductively, based on its ability to produce proper responses-in this case, those associated with the human intellect-regardless of how those reactions are created.


12. AI's innovative functions provide it sophisticated abilities to perform jobs, but not the capability to think. [12] This difference is crucially important, as the way "intelligence" is defined inevitably shapes how we comprehend the relationship between human idea and this technology. [13] To value this, one must recall the richness of the philosophical custom and Christian faith, which use a much deeper and more detailed understanding of intelligence-an understanding that is main to the Church's teaching on the nature, self-respect, and vocation of the human person. [14]

13. From the dawn of human self-reflection, the mind has played a main role in understanding what it suggests to be "human." Aristotle observed that "all individuals by nature desire to know." [15] This knowledge, with its capacity for abstraction that comprehends the nature and significance of things, sets human beings apart from the animal world. [16] As philosophers, theologians, and psychologists have analyzed the precise nature of this intellectual faculty, they have actually likewise checked out how humans understand the world and their distinct location within it. Through this exploration, the Christian tradition has actually pertained to comprehend the human individual as a being including both body and soul-deeply connected to this world and yet transcending it. [17]

14. In the classical tradition, the concept of intelligence is typically comprehended through the complementary concepts of "factor" (ratio) and "intellect" (intellectus). These are not different faculties however, as Saint Thomas Aquinas explains, they are 2 modes in which the very same intelligence operates: "The term intellect is presumed from the inward grasp of the reality, while the name reason is drawn from the inquisitive and discursive process." [18] This succinct description highlights the two fundamental and complementary dimensions of human intelligence. Intellectus describes the instinctive grasp of the truth-that is, capturing it with the "eyes" of the mind-which precedes and grounds argumentation itself. Ratio pertains to reasoning correct: the discursive, analytical process that leads to judgment. Together, intellect and factor form the two elements of the act of intelligere, "the proper operation of the human being as such." [19]

15. Explaining the human person as a "logical" being does not lower the person to a specific mode of thought; rather, it recognizes that the ability for intellectual understanding shapes and permeates all aspects of human activity. [20] Whether exercised well or poorly, this capacity is an intrinsic aspect of humanity. In this sense, the "term 'reasonable' includes all the capabilities of the human individual," consisting of those associated to "understanding and comprehending, along with those of prepared, caring, choosing, and desiring; it likewise includes all corporeal functions closely related to these abilities." [21] This detailed perspective underscores how, in the human person, developed in the "image of God," factor is integrated in such a way that raises, shapes, and changes both the individual's will and actions. [22]

16. Christian believed considers the intellectual faculties of the human individual within the framework of an essential anthropology that sees the human being as basically embodied. In the human person, spirit and matter "are not two natures unified, however rather their union forms a single nature." [23] Simply put, the soul is not merely the immaterial "part" of the individual contained within the body, nor is the body an external shell real estate an intangible "core." Rather, the whole human person is at the same time both material and spiritual. This understanding shows the mentor of Sacred Scripture, which sees the human individual as a being who lives out relationships with God and others (and thus, an authentically spiritual measurement) within and through this embodied existence. [24] The profound meaning of this condition is more lit up by the secret of the Incarnation, through which God himself took on our flesh and "raised it as much as a sublime self-respect." [25]

17. Although deeply rooted in physical presence, the human individual goes beyond the material world through the soul, which is "almost on the horizon of eternity and time." [26] The intelligence's capability for transcendence and the self-possessed flexibility of the will belong to the soul, by which the human individual "shares in the light of the 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 an anthropology that recognizes that the human individual is a "unity of body and soul." [29] Further aspects of this understanding will be established in what follows.


18. Human beings are "bought by their very nature to social communion," [30] having the capacity to understand one another, to give themselves in love, and to participate in communion with others. Accordingly, human intelligence is not an isolated professors but is exercised in relationships, discovering its max expression in dialogue, cooperation, and uniformity. We learn with others, and we discover through others.


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

20. This vocation 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 neighbor (cf. 1 Jn. 4:20; Mt. 22:37 -39). By the grace of sharing God's life, Christians are likewise contacted us to imitate Christ's outpouring gift (cf. 2 Cor. 9:8 -11; Eph. 5:1 -2) by following his command to "enjoy one another, as I have liked you" (Jn. 13:34). [33] Love and service, echoing the divine life of self-giving, transcend self-interest to respond more fully to the human occupation (cf. 1 Jn. 2:9). A lot more superb than understanding many things is the dedication to take care of one another, for if "I understand all secrets and all knowledge [...] however do not have love, I am nothing" (1 Cor. 13:2).


21. Human intelligence is eventually "God's present made for the assimilation of truth." [34] In the dual sense of intellectus-ratio, it allows the person to explore truths that exceed simple sensory experience or energy, because "the desire for truth belongs to human nature itself. It is an inherent residential or commercial property of human reason to ask why things are as they are." [35] Moving beyond the limits of empirical data, can "with real certitude attain to truth itself as knowable." [36] While truth remains just partly understood, the desire for reality "stimulates reason always to go even more; certainly, it is as if factor were overwhelmed to see that it can constantly go beyond what it has actually currently 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 caused seek "realities of a greater order." [39]

22. This natural drive toward the pursuit of fact is particularly evident in the distinctly human capabilities for semantic understanding and imagination, [40] through which this search unfolds in a "way that is appropriate to the social nature and self-respect of the human individual." [41] Likewise, an unfaltering orientation to the reality is essential for charity to be both authentic and universal. [42]

23. The look for truth finds its highest expression in openness to truths that go beyond the physical and developed world. In God, all truths attain their supreme and original significance. [43] Entrusting oneself to God is a "basic choice that engages the whole person." [44] In this method, the human person ends up being fully what she or he is contacted us to be: "the intelligence and the will show their spiritual nature," allowing the individual "to act in a manner that understands personal liberty to the complete." [45]

24. The Christian faith comprehends development as the totally free act of the Triune God, who, as Saint Bonaventure of Bagnoregio explains, creates "not to increase his splendor, however to reveal it forth and to communicate it." [46] Since God creates according to his Wisdom (cf. Wis. 9:9; Jer. 10:12), production is imbued with an intrinsic order that reflects God's plan (cf. Gen. 1; Dan. 2:21 -22; Is. 45:18; Ps. 74:12 -17; 104), [47] within which God has actually called humans to assume a special role: to cultivate and look after the world. [48]

25. Shaped by the Divine Craftsman, human beings live out their identity as beings made in imago Dei by "keeping" and "tilling" (cf. Gen. 2:15) creation-using their intelligence and skills to take care of and establish production in accord with God's strategy. [49] In this, human intelligence reflects the Divine Intelligence that developed all things (cf. Gen. 1-2; Jn. 1), [50] constantly sustains them, and guides them to their supreme function in him. [51] Moreover, humans are called to establish their capabilities in science and innovation, for through them, God is glorified (cf. Sir. 38:6). Thus, in a correct relationship with production, human beings, on the one hand, utilize their intelligence and ability to cooperate with God in guiding production toward the purpose to which he has actually called it. [52] On the other hand, creation itself, as Saint Bonaventure observes, assists the human mind to "ascend gradually to the supreme Principle, who is God." [53]

26. In this context, human intelligence ends up being more plainly comprehended as a faculty that forms an important part of how the entire person engages with truth. Authentic engagement requires welcoming the full scope of one's being: spiritual, cognitive, embodied, and relational.


27. This engagement with truth unfolds in numerous methods, as everyone, in his/her diverse uniqueness [54], looks for to understand the world, relate to others, resolve problems, reveal creativity, and pursue essential wellness through the unified interaction of the numerous dimensions of the individual's intelligence. [55] This includes logical and linguistic capabilities but can likewise incorporate other modes of interacting with truth. Consider the work of an artisan, who "need to understand how to determine, in inert matter, a specific type that others can not recognize" [56] and bring it forth through insight and useful ability. Indigenous individuals who live near to the earth frequently have a profound sense of nature and its cycles. [57] Similarly, a pal who understands the best word to say or a person skilled at handling human relationships exhibits an intelligence that is "the fruit of self-examination, discussion and generous encounter in between individuals." [58] As Pope Francis observes, "in this age of artificial intelligence, we can not forget that poetry and love are needed to conserve our mankind." [59]

28. At the heart of the Christian understanding of intelligence is the combination of reality into the ethical and spiritual life of the individual, directing his/her actions because of God's goodness and fact. According to God's strategy, intelligence, in its maximum sense, likewise includes the ability to relish what holds true, great, and lovely. As the twentieth-century French poet Paul Claudel revealed, "intelligence is nothing without delight." [60] Similarly, Dante, upon reaching the greatest paradise in Paradiso, testifies that the conclusion of this intellectual delight is found in the "light intellectual loaded with love, love of true good filled with delight, joy which transcends every sweetness." [61]

29. An appropriate understanding of human intelligence, for that reason, can not be minimized to the simple acquisition of truths or the ability to perform particular tasks. Instead, it involves the individual's openness to the ultimate concerns of life and shows an orientation towards the True and the Good. [62] As an expression of the divine image within the individual, human intelligence has the ability to access the totality of being, contemplating presence in its fullness, which goes beyond what is quantifiable, and comprehending the meaning of what has been comprehended. For believers, this capacity consists of, in a specific method, the capability to grow in the understanding of the mysteries of God by utilizing factor to engage ever more exceptionally with exposed realities (intellectus fidei). [63] True intelligence is formed by magnificent love, which "is poured forth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit" (Rom. 5:5). From this, it follows that human intelligence possesses an essential contemplative dimension, an unselfish openness to the True, the Good, and the Beautiful, beyond any utilitarian function.


30. Due to the foregoing conversation, the distinctions between human intelligence and present AI systems end up being obvious. While AI is an amazing technological achievement capable of imitating certain outputs related to human intelligence, it operates by performing tasks, attaining objectives, or making decisions based upon quantitative data and computational reasoning. For example, with its analytical power, AI stands out at incorporating data from a range of fields, modeling complex systems, and cultivating interdisciplinary connections. In this way, it can assist experts collaborate in fixing complicated problems that "can not be handled from a single viewpoint or from a single set of interests." [64]

31. However, even as AI processes and simulates certain expressions of intelligence, it remains basically confined to a logical-mathematical structure, which enforces intrinsic constraints. Human intelligence, on the other hand, establishes naturally throughout the person's physical and psychological development, formed by a myriad of lived experiences in the flesh. Although innovative AI systems can "find out" through procedures such as artificial intelligence, this sort of training is basically various from the developmental development of human intelligence, which is formed by embodied experiences, including sensory input, psychological actions, social interactions, and the unique context of each minute. These elements shape and kind people within their individual history.In contrast, AI, lacking a physical body, depends on computational reasoning and learning based upon huge datasets that consist of taped human experiences and knowledge.


32. Consequently, although AI can mimic aspects of human reasoning and perform specific tasks with amazing speed and effectiveness, its computational capabilities represent just a portion of the broader capacities of the human mind. For circumstances, AI can not presently duplicate moral discernment or the capability to develop authentic relationships. Moreover, human intelligence is situated within a personally lived history of intellectual and ethical development that essentially forms the person's viewpoint, including the physical, psychological, social, moral, and spiritual measurements of life. Since AI can not use this fullness of understanding, approaches that rely exclusively on this innovation or treat it as the main means of analyzing the world can cause "a loss of appreciation for the whole, for the relationships in between things, and for the more comprehensive horizon." [65]

33. Human intelligence is not mainly about finishing practical tasks however about understanding and actively engaging with truth in all its dimensions; it is likewise capable of surprising insights. Since AI does not have the richness of corporeality, relationality, and the openness of the human heart to fact and goodness, its capacities-though relatively limitless-are incomparable with the human ability to comprehend reality. A lot can be gained from a disease, a welcome of reconciliation, and even an easy sunset; certainly, many experiences we have as humans open brand-new horizons and offer the possibility of attaining brand-new knowledge. No device, working solely with data, can measure up to these and many other experiences present in our lives.


34. Drawing an extremely close equivalence between human intelligence and AI dangers catching a functionalist point of view, where individuals are valued based on the work they can perform. However, an individual's worth does not depend on possessing particular abilities, cognitive and technological achievements, or individual success, however on the person's inherent dignity, grounded in being developed in the image of God. [66] This dignity remains intact in all scenarios, consisting of for those unable to exercise their capabilities, whether it be an unborn kid, an unconscious person, or an older individual who is suffering. [67] It likewise underpins the custom of human rights (and, in particular, what are now called "neuro-rights"), which represent "an essential point of merging in the search for commonalities" [68] and can, thus, work as an essential ethical guide in discussions on the responsible development and use of AI.


35. Considering all these points, as Pope Francis observes, "the very usage of the word 'intelligence'" in connection with AI "can show misleading" [69] and dangers overlooking what is most valuable in the human individual. In light of this, AI ought to not be viewed as an artificial kind of human intelligence however as an item of it. [70]

36. Given these factors to consider, one can ask how AI can be understood within God's plan. To address this, it is necessary to recall that techno-scientific activity is not neutral in character but is a human undertaking that engages the humanistic and cultural measurements of human imagination. [71]

37. Viewed as a fruit of the prospective inscribed within human intelligence, [72] scientific query and the development of technical skills become part of the "partnership of males and female with God in improving the visible creation." [73] At the very same time, all scientific and technological accomplishments are, eventually, presents from God. [74] Therefore, people need to constantly utilize their capabilities in view of the greater function for which God has approved them. [75]

38. We can gratefully acknowledge how innovation has "corrected numerous evils which used to hurt and restrict people," [76] a reality for which we ought to rejoice. Nevertheless, not all technological advancements in themselves represent genuine human development. [77] The Church is especially opposed to those applications that threaten the sanctity of life or the self-respect of the human person. [78] Like any human undertaking, technological development must be directed to serve the human person and add to the pursuit of "higher justice, more comprehensive fraternity, and a more gentle order of social relations," which are "more valuable than advances in the technical field." [79] Concerns about the ethical implications of technological development are shared not just within the Church but likewise among numerous scientists, technologists, and expert associations, who progressively require ethical reflection to assist this development in an accountable way.


39. To attend to these difficulties, it is necessary to highlight the importance of ethical responsibility grounded in the dignity and occupation of the human individual. This guiding concept likewise uses to questions worrying AI. In this context, the ethical measurement handles main importance because it is people who design systems and identify the purposes for which they are used. [80] Between a device and a human, just the latter is really a moral agent-a subject of ethical duty who exercises liberty in his/her decisions and accepts their repercussions. [81] It is not the device but the human who remains in relationship with truth and goodness, guided by an ethical conscience that calls the person "to like and to do what is good and to avoid evil," [82] attesting to "the authority of fact in referral to the supreme Good to which the human individual is drawn." [83] Likewise, in between a machine and a human, just the human can be adequately self-aware to the point of listening and following the voice of conscience, discerning with vigilance, and seeking the good that is possible in every circumstance. [84] In reality, all of this also belongs to the person's workout of intelligence.


40. Like any product of human creativity, AI can be directed towards favorable or unfavorable ends. [85] When utilized in ways that respect human self-respect and promote the wellness of people and neighborhoods, it can contribute positively to the human vocation. Yet, as in all areas where people are contacted us to make decisions, the shadow of evil likewise looms here. Where human flexibility enables the possibility of selecting what is wrong, the moral evaluation of this technology will need to consider how it is directed and utilized.


41. At the exact same time, it is not just completions that are fairly significant 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 consider also. Technological products show the worldview of their developers, owners, users, and regulators, [86] and have the power to "form the world and engage consciences on the level of worths." [87] On a social level, some technological advancements might also reinforce relationships and power characteristics that are irregular with an appropriate understanding of the human person and society.


42. Therefore, completions and the means used in an offered application of AI, in addition to the total vision it integrates, should all be examined to guarantee they appreciate human dignity and promote the common good. [88] As Pope Francis has actually specified, "the intrinsic self-respect of every man and every lady" must be "the essential requirement in examining emerging technologies; these will prove fairly sound to the degree that they help regard that self-respect and increase its expression at every level of human life," [89] consisting of in the social and economic spheres. In this sense, human intelligence plays a vital role not just in creating and producing technology however likewise in directing its use in line with the authentic good of the human person. [90] The obligation for managing this carefully pertains to every level of society, directed by the principle of subsidiarity and other principles of Catholic Social Teaching.


43. The commitment to ensuring that AI always supports and promotes the supreme worth of the dignity of every human being and the fullness of the human occupation functions as a requirement of discernment for developers, owners, operators, and regulators of AI, as well as to its users. It remains valid for every application of the innovation at every level of its use.


44. An assessment of the ramifications of this assisting concept could start by considering the importance of moral responsibility. Since complete moral causality belongs just to individual agents, not synthetic ones, it is important to be able to identify and specify who bears obligation for the procedures included in AI, particularly those efficient in finding out, correction, and reprogramming. While bottom-up techniques and very deep neural networks enable AI to solve complicated issues, they make it hard to understand the processes that cause the services they adopted. This complicates responsibility considering that if an AI application produces unwanted results, determining who is responsible becomes tough. To address this issue, attention requires to be offered to the nature of accountability processes in complex, extremely automated settings, where outcomes may just end up being obvious in the medium to long term. For this, it is very important that supreme obligation for choices used AI rests with the human decision-makers and that there is responsibility for the usage of AI at each stage of the decision-making procedure. [91]

45. In addition to determining who is responsible, it is important to determine the goals offered to AI systems. Although these systems may use not being watched autonomous knowing systems and sometimes follow courses that people can not reconstruct, they eventually pursue objectives that people have designated to them and are governed by procedures developed by their designers and programmers. Yet, this presents a difficulty due to the fact that, as AI designs become progressively capable of independent learning, the capability to maintain control over them to make sure that such applications serve human purposes may efficiently reduce. This raises the crucial question of how to ensure that AI systems are purchased for the good of individuals and not against them.


46. While obligation for the ethical usage of AI systems starts with those who establish, produce, handle, and supervise such systems, it is likewise shared by those who use them. As Pope Francis noted, the device "makes a technical option amongst several possibilities based either on well-defined criteria or on statistical inferences. People, however, not only select, but in their hearts can deciding." [92] Those who use AI to accomplish a task and follow its results create a context in which they are eventually responsible for the power they have actually entrusted. Therefore, insofar as AI can assist humans in making choices, the algorithms that govern it needs to be reliable, protected, robust enough to handle inconsistencies, and transparent in their operation to alleviate predispositions and unintended negative effects. [93] Regulatory frameworks should ensure that all legal entities remain accountable for using AI and all its repercussions, with proper safeguards for openness, privacy, and responsibility. [94] Moreover, those using AI needs to beware not to become excessively reliant on it for their decision-making, a trend that increases modern society's currently high reliance on innovation.


47. The Church's ethical and social teaching provides resources to assist make sure that AI is utilized in a manner that maintains human company. Considerations about justice, for instance, must also attend to issues such as cultivating simply social dynamics, maintaining global security, and promoting peace. By exercising prudence, people and neighborhoods can determine methods to use AI to benefit humanity while avoiding applications that might break down human self-respect or harm the environment. In this context, the concept of responsibility ought to be understood not only in its most restricted sense but as a "duty for the look after others, which is more than just accounting for outcomes attained." [95]

48. Therefore, AI, like any technology, can be part of a conscious and accountable answer to mankind's occupation to the good. However, as previously talked about, AI should be directed by human intelligence to align with this occupation, guaranteeing it appreciates the dignity of the human individual. Recognizing this "exalted self-respect," the Second Vatican Council verified that "the social order and its development need to inevitably work to the benefit of the human individual." [96] Because of this, the usage of AI, as Pope Francis said, should be "accompanied by an ethic motivated by a vision of the common good, a principles of freedom, responsibility, and fraternity, efficient in cultivating the complete development of individuals in relation to others and to the whole of creation." [97]

49. Within this basic point of view, some observations follow listed below to illustrate how the preceding arguments can help supply an ethical orientation in useful circumstances, in line with the "knowledge of heart" that Pope Francis has actually proposed. [98] While not exhaustive, this conversation is provided in service of the dialogue that thinks about how AI can be utilized to maintain the self-respect of the human person and promote the common good. [99]

50. As Pope Francis observed, "the inherent dignity of each human being and the fraternity that binds us together as members of the one human family should support the development of brand-new technologies and serve as unassailable requirements for assessing them before they are used." [100]

51. Viewed through this lens, AI might "present important innovations in farming, education and culture, a better level of life for entire nations and peoples, and the growth of human fraternity and social friendship," and hence be "utilized to promote important human advancement." [101] AI might likewise help organizations determine those in need and counter discrimination and marginalization. These and other similar applications of this innovation might add to human advancement and the common good. [102]

52. However, while AI holds numerous possibilities for promoting the great, it can likewise impede or even counter human development and the typical good. Pope Francis has actually noted that "proof to date suggests that digital technologies have increased inequality in our world. Not simply differences in product wealth, which are likewise considerable, but also distinctions in access to political and social impact." [103] In this sense, AI might be utilized to perpetuate marginalization and discrimination, produce brand-new types of poverty, widen the "digital divide," and intensify existing social inequalities. [104]

53. Moreover, the concentration of the power over mainstream AI applications in the hands of a few powerful business raises significant ethical issues. Exacerbating this problem is the fundamental nature of AI systems, where no single person can exercise total oversight over the huge and complex datasets utilized for computation. This absence of well-defined responsibility creates the risk that AI might be controlled for personal or business gain or to direct public viewpoint for the benefit of a specific market. Such entities, encouraged by their own interests, have the capability to exercise "kinds of control as subtle as they are invasive, developing mechanisms for the manipulation of consciences and of the democratic procedure." [105]

54. Furthermore, there is the danger of AI being utilized to promote what Pope Francis has called the "technocratic paradigm," which views all the world's issues as understandable through technological means alone. [106] In this paradigm, human self-respect and fraternity are typically set aside in the name of effectiveness, "as if truth, goodness, and fact instantly flow from technological and financial power as such." [107] Yet, human dignity and the common good needs to never be broken for the sake of effectiveness, [108] for "technological advancements that do not lead to an enhancement in the quality of life of all humankind, but on the contrary, aggravate inequalities and disputes, can never ever count as real development. " [109] Instead, AI must be put "at the service of another type of progress, one which is healthier, more human, more social, more important." [110]

55. Attaining this goal needs a deeper reflection on the relationship in between autonomy and obligation. Greater autonomy increases everyone's obligation across different aspects of communal life. For Christians, the structure of this obligation depends on the recognition that all human capabilities, consisting of the individual's autonomy, come from God and are indicated to be utilized in the service of others. [111] Therefore, rather than simply pursuing economic or technological objectives, AI ought to serve "the common good of the whole human household," which is "the amount overall of social conditions that enable people, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their satisfaction more completely and more easily." [112]

56. The Second Vatican Council observed that "by his inner nature man is a social being; and if he does not get in into 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 occupation of the human person. [114] As social beings, we look for relationships that include mutual exchange and the pursuit of reality, in the course of which, people "show each other the reality they have actually found, or believe they have discovered, in such a method that they help one another in the look for fact." [115]

57. Such a quest, along with other elements of human communication, presupposes encounters and mutual exchange between people formed by their special histories, thoughts, convictions, and relationships. Nor can we forget that human intelligence is a varied, multifaceted, and intricate reality: specific and social, reasonable and affective, conceptual and symbolic. Pope Francis highlights this dynamic, keeping in mind that "together, we can look for the truth in dialogue, in relaxed conversation or in enthusiastic dispute. To do so requires determination; it entails moments of silence and suffering, yet it can patiently accept the more comprehensive experience of people and peoples. [...] The process of building fraternity, be it local or universal, can just be carried out by spirits that are complimentary and available to authentic encounters." [116]

58. It remains in this context that one can think about the difficulties AI presents to human relationships. Like other technological tools, AI has the possible to foster connections within the human family. However, it might likewise prevent a real encounter with truth and, eventually, lead people to "a deep and melancholic frustration with social relations, or a damaging sense of isolation." [117] Authentic human relationships need the richness of being with others in their pain, their pleas, and their delight. [118] Since human intelligence is expressed and enriched likewise in interpersonal 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 truth," [119] the increase of AI presents another difficulty. Since AI can efficiently imitate the items of human intelligence, the capability to know when one is communicating with a human or a machine can no longer be taken for given. Generative AI can produce text, speech, images, and other advanced outputs that are usually connected with human beings. Yet, it must be comprehended for what it is: a tool, not a person. [120] This distinction is typically obscured by the language utilized by practitioners, which tends to anthropomorphize AI and hence blurs the line between human and machine.


60. Anthropomorphizing AI likewise poses particular difficulties for the development of kids, possibly encouraging them to develop patterns of interaction that treat human relationships in a transactional manner, as one would associate with a chatbot. Such habits might lead youths to see teachers as mere dispensers of details rather than as mentors who direct and support their intellectual and ethical development. Genuine relationships, rooted in compassion and a steadfast dedication to the good of the other, are essential and irreplaceable in promoting the complete development of the human person.


61. In this context, it is very important to clarify that, despite the usage of anthropomorphic language, no AI application can genuinely experience empathy. Emotions can not be decreased to facial expressions or phrases produced in action to triggers; they show the method a person, as an entire, relates to the world and to his/her own life, with the body playing a main function. True empathy needs the ability to listen, recognize another's irreducible originality, invite their otherness, and comprehend the meaning behind even their silences. [121] Unlike the world of analytical judgment in which AI excels, real empathy comes from the relational sphere. It includes intuiting and nabbing the lived experiences of another while maintaining the distinction between self and other. [122] While AI can simulate understanding actions, it can not replicate the incomparably individual and relational nature of authentic compassion. [123]

62. Due to the above, it is clear why misrepresenting AI as an individual need to always be avoided; doing so for deceptive purposes is a severe ethical infraction that might wear down social trust. Similarly, utilizing AI to trick in other contexts-such as in education or in human relationships, consisting of the sphere of sexuality-is likewise to be thought about immoral and needs careful oversight to prevent harm, maintain openness, and ensure the self-respect of all people. [124]

63. In an increasingly separated world, some people have turned to AI looking for deep human relationships, basic companionship, and even psychological bonds. However, while humans are suggested to experience genuine relationships, AI can only mimic them. Nevertheless, such relationships with others are an integral part of how a person grows to become who he or she is meant to be. If AI is used to help individuals foster real connections in between individuals, it can contribute positively to the complete awareness of the person. Conversely, if we change relationships with God and with others with interactions with technology, we risk replacing authentic relationality with a lifeless image (cf. Ps. 106:20; Rom. 1:22 -23). Instead of retreating into artificial worlds, we are contacted us to participate in a dedicated and intentional way with reality, specifically by relating to the bad and suffering, consoling those in sadness, and forging bonds of communion with all.


64. Due to its interdisciplinary nature, AI is being progressively integrated into financial and financial systems. Significant investments are presently being made not only in the technology sector however also in energy, finance, and media, especially in the locations of marketing and sales, logistics, technological development, compliance, and threat management. At the same time, AI's applications in these locations have actually likewise highlighted its ambivalent nature, as a source of remarkable chances however likewise profound risks. A first genuine crucial point in this area concerns the possibility that-due to the concentration of AI applications in the hands of a couple of corporations-only those large business would gain from the value created by AI rather than the services that utilize it.


65. Other wider aspects of AI's influence on the economic-financial sphere need to likewise be carefully analyzed, especially concerning the interaction between concrete reality and the digital world. One essential factor to consider in this regard involves the coexistence of varied and alternative forms of economic and monetary institutions within a provided context. This aspect must be encouraged, as it can bring advantages in how it supports the genuine economy by promoting its development and stability, especially throughout times of crisis. Nevertheless, it ought to be stressed that digital realities, not limited by any spatial bonds, tend to be more uniform and impersonal than communities rooted in a particular location and a specific history, with a typical journey defined by shared worths and hopes, but likewise by inescapable arguments and divergences. This variety is an indisputable property to a community's financial life. Turning over the economy and finance totally to digital innovation would decrease this range and richness. As a result, many services to economic issues that can be reached through natural dialogue between the included parties might no longer be attainable in a world controlled by treatments and just the look of proximity.


66. Another location where AI is currently having a profound effect is the world of work. As in numerous other fields, AI is driving fundamental improvements across many professions, with a series of results. On the one hand, it has the possible to enhance competence and efficiency, produce brand-new tasks, make it possible for workers to focus on more innovative jobs, and open new horizons for creativity and development.


67. However, while AI assures to increase efficiency by taking control of mundane jobs, it often forces employees to adapt to the speed and demands of devices rather than machines being created to support those who work. As a result, contrary to the marketed benefits of AI, current methods to the technology can paradoxically deskill employees, subject them to automated surveillance, and relegate them to stiff and recurring jobs. The requirement to stay up to date with the rate of technology can erode employees' sense of firm and stifle the ingenious abilities they are anticipated to bring to their work. [125]

68. AI is presently eliminating the need for some tasks that were once performed by people. If AI is used to change human workers instead of complement them, there is a "considerable threat of disproportionate benefit for the couple of at the cost of the impoverishment of numerous." [126] Additionally, as AI becomes more powerful, there is an involved risk that human labor may lose its value in the financial realm. This is the rational repercussion of the technocratic paradigm: a world of humankind shackled to efficiency, where, ultimately, the cost of humankind should be cut. Yet, human lives are intrinsically important, independent of their economic output. Nevertheless, the "present model," Pope Francis explains, "does not appear to favor an investment in efforts to assist the slow, the weak, or the less skilled to discover opportunities in life." [127] Because of this, "we can not permit a tool as effective and important as Artificial Intelligence to reinforce such a paradigm, however 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 secondary to the order of persons, and not the other method around." [129] Human work must not just be at the service of profit however at "the service of the whole human person [...] taking into consideration the person's material needs and the requirements of his/her intellectual, ethical, spiritual, and spiritual life." [130] In this context, the Church recognizes that work is "not only a way of earning one's daily bread" but is also "an important measurement of social life" and "a method [...] of individual growth, the building of healthy relationships, self-expression and the exchange of gifts. Work offers us a sense of shared duty for the development of the world, and eventually, for our life as an individuals." [131]

70. Since work is a "part of the meaning of life on this earth, a course to growth, human advancement and individual fulfillment," "the goal ought to not be that technological progress significantly changes human work, for this would be harmful to mankind" [132] -rather, it ought to promote human labor. Seen in this light, AI needs to help, not replace, human judgment. Similarly, it should never ever degrade creativity or decrease employees to simple "cogs in a machine." Therefore, "regard for the self-respect of laborers and the value of employment for the financial well-being of individuals, families, and societies, for job security and simply wages, ought to be a high concern for the worldwide neighborhood as these forms of innovation penetrate more deeply into our work environments." [133]

71. As participants in God's healing work, health care professionals have the vocation and duty to be "guardians and servants of human life." [134] Because of this, the health care profession carries an "intrinsic and indisputable ethical measurement," acknowledged by the Hippocratic Oath, which obliges physicians and health care specialists to dedicate themselves to having "outright regard for human life and its sacredness." [135] Following the example of the Good Samaritan, this commitment is to be performed by guys and females "who decline the creation of a society of exclusion, and act instead as next-door neighbors, raising up and restoring the succumbed to the sake of the common good." [136]

72. Seen in this light, AI seems to hold tremendous capacity in a range of applications in the medical field, such as assisting the diagnostic work of doctor, helping with relationships in between clients and medical staff, using brand-new treatments, and broadening access to quality care likewise for those who are separated or marginalized. In these ways, the technology might improve the "compassionate and loving closeness" [137] that healthcare companies are contacted us to extend to the sick and suffering.


73. However, if AI is utilized not to improve however to replace the relationship in between patients and healthcare providers-leaving clients to interact with a machine instead of a human being-it would lower a crucially crucial human relational structure to a centralized, impersonal, and unequal structure. Instead of encouraging solidarity with the ill and suffering, such applications of AI would run the risk of getting worse the solitude that often accompanies disease, specifically in the context of a culture where "persons are no longer seen as a critical value to be looked after and respected." [138] This abuse of AI would not line up with regard for the self-respect of the human person and uniformity with the suffering.


74. Responsibility for the well-being of patients and the choices that discuss their lives are at the heart of the health care profession. This responsibility requires doctor to exercise all their ability and intelligence in making well-reasoned and fairly grounded options concerning those entrusted to their care, constantly appreciating the inviolable self-respect of the clients and the need for notified approval. As an outcome, choices regarding client treatment and the weight of responsibility they entail should constantly remain with the human person and drapia.org ought to never be entrusted to AI. [139]

75. In addition, using AI to determine who need to receive treatment based mainly on financial measures or metrics of effectiveness represents an especially problematic circumstances of the "technocratic paradigm" that should be declined. [140] For, "optimizing resources implies utilizing them in an ethical and fraternal method, and not punishing the most vulnerable." [141] Additionally, AI tools in health care are "exposed to types of bias and discrimination," where "systemic errors can quickly multiply, producing not only oppressions in specific cases but likewise, due to the cause and effect, real kinds of social inequality." [142]

76. The combination of AI into health care also positions the danger of magnifying other existing variations in access to medical care. As health care becomes progressively oriented toward avoidance and lifestyle-based techniques, AI-driven solutions may inadvertently favor more wealthy populations who already enjoy better access to medical resources and quality nutrition. This trend dangers strengthening a "medicine for the rich" model, where those with monetary means gain from innovative preventative tools and individualized health details while others battle to gain access to even basic services. To prevent such inequities, fair structures are required to guarantee that using AI in healthcare does not get worse existing healthcare inequalities however rather serves the typical good.


77. The words of the Second Vatican Council remain fully relevant today: "True education aims to form people with a view toward their last end and the good of the society to which they belong." [143] As such, education is "never a simple procedure of handing down facts and intellectual abilities: rather, its aim is to contribute to the person's holistic development in its different aspects (intellectual, cultural, spiritual, and so on), consisting of, for example, community life and relations within the academic neighborhood," [144] in keeping with the nature and self-respect of the human individual.


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

79. At the center of this work of forming the entire human individual is the indispensable relationship in between instructor and trainee. Teachers do more than convey knowledge; they model necessary human qualities and influence the delight of discovery. [146] Their existence inspires trainees both through the content they teach and the care they show for their trainees. This bond fosters trust, mutual understanding, and the capability to attend to each person's unique self-respect and potential. On the part of the trainee, this can create a real desire to grow. The physical existence of an instructor develops a relational dynamic that AI can not duplicate, one that deepens engagement and supports the trainee's essential development.


80. In this context, AI provides both chances and difficulties. If used in a prudent way, within the context of an existing teacher-student relationship and purchased to the authentic goals of education, AI can become a valuable instructional resource by boosting access to education, offering tailored support, and supplying immediate feedback to trainees. These advantages could improve the learning experience, especially in cases where personalized attention is required, or educational resources are otherwise scarce.


81. Nevertheless, a necessary part of education is forming "the intellect to factor well in all matters, to reach out towards reality, and to grasp it," [147] while assisting the "language of the head" to grow harmoniously with the "language of the heart" and the "language of the hands." [148] This is even more vital in an age marked by technology, in which "it is no longer merely a concern of 'using' instruments of interaction, but of residing in an extremely digitalized culture that has actually had an extensive effect on [...] our ability to communicate, learn, be informed and participate in relationship with others." [149] However, instead of fostering "a cultivated intelligence," which "brings with it a power and a grace to every work and profession that it undertakes," [150] the substantial use of AI in education could result in the trainees' increased dependence on technology, deteriorating their capability to carry out some skills individually and worsening their dependence on screens. [151]

82. Additionally, while some AI systems are designed to help individuals establish their crucial believing capabilities and analytical skills, numerous others simply offer answers instead of triggering trainees to come to answers themselves or write text for themselves. [152] Instead of training youths how to accumulate details and produce quick responses, education must motivate "the responsible use of flexibility to face concerns with common sense and intelligence." [153] Building on this, "education in using types of artificial intelligence ought to aim above all at promoting vital thinking. Users of all ages, however especially the young, require to develop a discerning approach to the use of information and content gathered online or produced by artificial intelligence systems. Schools, universities, and clinical societies are challenged to help trainees and professionals to grasp the social and ethical aspects of the development and usages of innovation." [154]

83. As Saint John Paul II recalled, "on the planet today, defined by such rapid advancements in science and technology, the tasks of a Catholic University assume an ever higher value and urgency." [155] In a particular way, Catholic universities are urged to be present as fantastic labs of hope at this crossroads of history. In an inter-disciplinary and cross-disciplinary key, they are advised to engage "with knowledge and creativity" [156] in mindful research study on this phenomenon, helping to draw out the salutary capacity within the numerous fields of science and reality, and guiding them constantly towards fairly sound applications that plainly serve the cohesion of our societies and the common good, reaching new frontiers in the discussion between faith and reason.


84. Moreover, it should be kept in mind that present AI programs have been understood to provide biased or made details, which can lead trainees to rely on unreliable material. This problem "not only runs the threat of legitimizing phony news and strengthening a dominant culture's benefit, however, in other words, it also undermines the instructional procedure itself." [157] With time, clearer distinctions might emerge in between correct and incorrect uses of AI in education and research study. Yet, a definitive guideline is that the usage of AI must always be transparent and never misrepresented.


85. AI might be used as an aid to human dignity if it helps people comprehend intricate ideas or directs them to sound resources that support their search for the truth. [158]

86. However, AI likewise presents a major threat of producing manipulated content and false details, which can easily misinform people due to its similarity to the fact. Such false information may take place unintentionally, as when it comes to AI "hallucination," where a generative AI system yields results that appear real but are not. Since creating content that imitates human artifacts is main to AI's functionality, mitigating these threats proves tough. Yet, the repercussions of such aberrations and false details can be rather serious. For this reason, all those included in producing and using AI systems ought to be dedicated to the truthfulness and accuracy of the details processed by such systems and distributed to the general public.


87. While AI has a hidden potential to generate false details, a a lot more troubling issue lies in the purposeful abuse of AI for adjustment. This can happen when people or companies intentionally create and spread false material with the aim to trick or cause harm, such as "deepfake" images, videos, and audio-referring to a false depiction of a person, modified or produced by an AI algorithm. The risk of deepfakes is particularly evident when they are utilized to target or damage others. While the images or videos themselves may be artificial, the damage they trigger is genuine, leaving "deep scars in the hearts of those who suffer it" and "real wounds in their human self-respect." [159]

88. On a broader scale, by misshaping "our relationship with others and with truth," [160] AI-generated fake media can gradually weaken the foundations of society. This concern needs mindful regulation, as misinformation-especially through AI-controlled or affected media-can spread unintentionally, sustaining political polarization and social discontent. When society becomes indifferent to the truth, various groups build their own versions of "truths," deteriorating the "mutual ties and shared dependences" [161] that underpin the material of social life. As deepfakes trigger people to question whatever and AI-generated incorrect content wears down rely on what they see and hear, polarization and dispute will just grow. Such widespread deception is no minor matter; it strikes at the core of humanity, taking apart the foundational trust on which societies are constructed. [162]

89. Countering AI-driven frauds is not just the work of market experts-it needs the efforts of all people of goodwill. "If innovation is to serve human dignity and not hurt it, and if it is to promote peace rather than violence, then the human neighborhood needs to be proactive in attending to these patterns with respect to human self-respect and the promo of the good." [163] Those who produce and share AI-generated material should always work out diligence in confirming the fact of what they share and, in all cases, should "avoid the sharing of words and images that are degrading of humans, that promote hatred and intolerance, that debase the goodness and intimacy of human sexuality or that exploit the weak and vulnerable." [164] This requires the ongoing prudence and cautious discernment of all users concerning their activity online. [165]

90. Humans are naturally relational, and the data each person generates in the digital world can be seen as an objectified expression of this relational nature. Data communicates not just details but also individual and relational understanding, which, in a progressively digitized context, can amount to power over the person. Moreover, while some types of data might pertain to public aspects of a person's life, others might discuss the person's interiority, perhaps even their conscience. Seen in this method, privacy plays a necessary role in protecting the borders of an individual's inner life, maintaining their flexibility to connect to others, express themselves, and make decisions without undue control. This defense is also connected to the defense of spiritual freedom, as security can likewise be misused to put in control over the lives of followers and how they reveal their faith.


91. It is proper, for that reason, to resolve the concern of privacy from a concern for the legitimate flexibility and inalienable dignity of the human individual "in all situations." [166] The Second Vatican Council included the right "to safeguard personal privacy" amongst the fundamental rights "required for living a really human life," a right that needs to be encompassed all individuals on account of their "sublime self-respect." [167] Furthermore, the Church has likewise verified the right to the legitimate respect for a personal life in the context of affirming the individual's right to an excellent track record, defense of their physical and mental integrity, and liberty from harm or excessive invasion [168] -essential parts of the due respect for the intrinsic self-respect of the human individual. [169]

92. Advances in AI-powered data processing and analysis now make it possible to infer patterns in a person's habits and believing from even a percentage of details, making the role of data privacy even more imperative as a safeguard for the self-respect and relational nature of the human individual. As Pope Francis observed, "while closed and intolerant attitudes towards others are on the increase, distances are otherwise diminishing or vanishing to the point that the right to privacy scarcely exists. Everything has become a sort of spectacle to be analyzed and examined, and people's lives are now under constant monitoring." [170]

93. While there can be genuine and correct methods to use AI in keeping with human dignity and the common excellent, using it for monitoring aimed at exploiting, limiting others' freedom, or benefitting a few at the expenditure of the lots of is unjustifiable. The risk of security overreach should be kept an eye on by suitable regulators to ensure openness and public accountability. Those responsible for security needs to never ever surpass their authority, which should always prefer the dignity and freedom of everyone as the essential basis of a simply and gentle society.


94. Furthermore, "basic regard for human dignity needs that we decline to allow the originality of the individual to be determined with a set of data." [171] This especially applies when AI is used to assess people or groups based on their habits, characteristics, or history-a practice referred to as "social scoring": "In social and economic decision-making, we ought to beware about handing over judgments to algorithms that process information, often collected surreptitiously, on an individual's makeup and previous habits. Such data can be polluted by social bias and prejudgments. An individual's past habits need to not be utilized to reject him or her the opportunity to alter, grow, and add to society. We can not allow algorithms to limit or condition respect for human self-respect, or to exclude compassion, mercy, forgiveness, and above all, the hope that individuals have the ability to change." [172]

95. AI has numerous appealing applications for enhancing our relationship with our "common home," such as developing designs to forecast extreme environment events, proposing engineering solutions to decrease their effect, managing relief operations, and forecasting population shifts. [173] Additionally, AI can support sustainable agriculture, enhance energy use, and offer early caution systems for public health emergency situations. These improvements have the prospective to reinforce durability against climate-related obstacles and promote more sustainable advancement.


96. At the very same time, existing AI models and the hardware needed to support them consume vast quantities of energy and water, substantially adding to CO2 emissions and straining resources. This reality is often obscured by the way this innovation exists in the popular creativity, where words such as "the cloud" [174] can provide the impression that data is stored and processed in an intangible world, removed from the real world. However, "the cloud" is not a heavenly domain separate from the real world; similar to all calculating technologies, it counts on physical devices, cables, and energy. The same holds true of the innovation behind AI. As these systems grow in intricacy, specifically large language designs (LLMs), they need ever-larger datasets, increased computational power, and greater storage infrastructure. Considering the heavy toll these innovations take on the environment, it is important to develop sustainable solutions that decrease their effect on our typical home.


97. Even then, as Pope Francis teaches, it is necessary "that we search for solutions not just in technology however in a modification of mankind." [175] A complete and genuine understanding of development recognizes that the value of all produced things can not be lowered to their mere energy. Therefore, a fully human approach to the stewardship of the earth turns down the distorted anthropocentrism of the technocratic paradigm, which looks for to "extract whatever possible" from the world, [176] and turns down the "myth of development," which presumes that "eco-friendly issues will solve themselves simply with the application of new technology and with no need for ethical considerations or deep change." [177] Such a state of mind must pave the way to a more holistic approach that appreciates the order of production and promotes the essential good of the human person while safeguarding our typical home. [178]

98. The Second Vatican Council and the consistent teaching of the Popes ever since have insisted that peace is not simply the lack of war and is not restricted to maintaining a balance of powers between enemies. Instead, in the words of Saint Augustine, peace is "the harmony of order." [179] Certainly, peace can not be attained without securing the goods of individuals, complimentary interaction, regard for the self-respect of persons and individuals, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is the work of justice and the effect of charity and can not be attained through force alone; instead, it should be mainly developed through client diplomacy, the active promotion of justice, uniformity, important human development, and regard for the dignity of all people. [180] In this way, the tools utilized to maintain peace should never ever be allowed to validate injustice, violence, or injustice. Instead, they should constantly be governed by a "firm determination to respect other people and nations, in addition to their dignity, as well as the purposeful practice of fraternity." [181]

99. While AI's analytical abilities might assist nations look for peace and ensure security, the "weaponization of Artificial Intelligence" can also be highly problematic. Pope Francis has actually observed that "the capability to carry out military operations through remote control systems has actually led to a lessened perception of the destruction triggered by those weapon systems and the concern of duty for their use, resulting in a a lot more cold and removed technique to the enormous tragedy of war." [182] Moreover, the ease with which autonomous weapons make war more viable militates against the concept of war as a last option in genuine self-defense, [183] possibly increasing the instruments of war well beyond the scope of human oversight and speeding up a destabilizing arms race, with disastrous consequences 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 concern" due to the fact that they lack the "unique human capacity for ethical judgment and ethical decision-making." [185] For this reason, Pope Francis has urgently required a reconsideration of the advancement of these weapons and a prohibition on their usage, starting with "an efficient and concrete commitment to introduce ever higher and proper human control. No machine must ever choose to take the life of a human." [186]

101. Since it is a little step from machines that can eliminate autonomously with precision to those efficient in large-scale destruction, some AI researchers have expressed concerns that such innovation presents an "existential risk" by having the prospective to act in manner ins which might threaten the survival of whole areas and even of mankind itself. This risk demands severe attention, reflecting the long-standing issue about innovations that approve war "an uncontrollable harmful power over fantastic numbers of innocent civilians," [187] without even sparing kids. In this context, the call from Gaudium et Spes to "undertake an assessment of war with an entirely brand-new attitude" [188] is more urgent than ever.


102. At the same time, while the theoretical risks of AI are worthy of attention, the more instant and pressing issue lies in how people with malicious intentions might abuse this innovation. [189] Like any tool, AI is an extension of human power, and while its future capabilities are unforeseeable, humankind's previous actions provide clear cautions. The atrocities dedicated throughout history are enough to raise deep concerns about the potential abuses of AI.


103. Saint John Paul II observed that "humanity now has instruments of extraordinary power: we can turn this world into a garden, or reduce it to a pile of debris." [190] Given this truth, the Church advises us, in the words of Pope Francis, that "we are totally free to apply our intelligence towards things developing favorably," or towards "decadence and shared damage." [191] To prevent mankind from spiraling into self-destruction, [192] there need to be a clear stand against all applications of technology that inherently threaten human life and self-respect. This commitment requires careful discernment about making use of AI, particularly in military defense applications, to ensure that it always appreciates human dignity and serves the typical good. The advancement and deployment of AI in armaments must go through the greatest levels of ethical analysis, governed by an issue for human self-respect and the sanctity of life. [193]

104. Technology offers remarkable tools to supervise and develop the world's resources. However, in some cases, humanity is increasingly ceding control of these resources to makers. Within some circles of scientists and futurists, there is optimism about the capacity of artificial general intelligence (AGI), a theoretical kind of AI that would match or go beyond human intelligence and bring about unthinkable improvements. Some even speculate that AGI might attain superhuman abilities. At the very same time, as society drifts away from a connection with the transcendent, some are lured to turn to AI looking for meaning or fulfillment-longings that can only be truly pleased in communion with God. [194]

105. However, the anticipation of replacing God for an artifact of human making is idolatry, a practice Scripture clearly alerts against (e.g., Ex. 20:4; 32:1 -5; 34:17). Moreover, AI may prove a lot more sexy than traditional idols for, unlike idols that "have mouths however do not speak; eyes, however do not see; ears, however do not hear" (Ps. 115:5 -6), AI can "speak," or at least offers the impression of doing so (cf. Rev. 13:15). Yet, it is crucial to keep in mind that AI is but a pale reflection of humanity-it is crafted by human minds, trained on human-generated product, responsive to human input, and sustained through human labor. AI can not have much of the capabilities specific to human life, and it is also imperfect. By turning to AI as a viewed "Other" greater than itself, with which to share existence and obligations, humankind threats developing an alternative to God. However, it is not AI that is eventually deified and worshipped, but humankind itself-which, in this way, becomes enslaved to its own work. [195]

106. While AI has the possible to serve humankind and add to the typical great, it remains a development of human hands, bearing "the imprint of human art and ingenuity" (Acts 17:29). It must never ever be ascribed unnecessary worth. As the Book of Wisdom affirms: "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 better than the objects he worships since he has life, however they never have" (Wis. 15:16 -17).


107. In contrast, humans, "by their interior life, go beyond the whole product universe; they experience this deep interiority when they participate in their own heart, where God, who probes the heart, awaits them, and where they choose their own destiny in the sight of God." [196] It is within the heart, as Pope Francis reminds us, that each individual finds the "mysterious connection in between self-knowledge and openness to others, between the encounter with one's individual individuality and the desire to give oneself to others. " [197] Therefore, it is the heart alone that is "efficient in setting our other powers and enthusiasms, and our whole individual, in a stance of respect and caring obedience before the Lord," [198] who "provides to deal with every one of us as a 'Thou,' always and permanently." [199]

108. Considering the various challenges presented by advances in technology, Pope Francis emphasized the need for growth in "human responsibility, values, and conscience," proportionate to the growth in the potential that this technology brings [200] -acknowledging that "with an increase in human power comes a widening of obligation on the part of individuals and neighborhoods." [201]

109. At the very same time, the "important and basic question" remains "whether in the context of this progress man, as male, is becoming truly better, that is to state, more fully grown spiritually, more knowledgeable about the dignity of his humanity, more accountable, more available to others, particularly the neediest and the weakest, and readier to give and to aid all." [202]

110. As a result, it is essential to understand how to assess individual applications of AI in specific contexts to identify whether its use promotes human dignity, the occupation of the human individual, and the typical good. Similar to many innovations, the effects of the various uses of AI might not always be predictable from their inception. As these applications and their social impacts end up being clearer, proper reactions should be made at all levels of society, following the principle of subsidiarity. Individual users, households, civil society, corporations, organizations, governments, and worldwide organizations ought to work at their appropriate levels to guarantee that AI is utilized for the good of all.


111. A substantial challenge and opportunity for the typical good today depends on considering AI within a framework of relational intelligence, which stresses the interconnectedness of individuals and neighborhoods and highlights our shared responsibility for fostering the important well-being of others. The twentieth-century philosopher Nicholas Berdyaev observed that people typically blame makers for individual and social issues; however, "this only embarrasses man and does not correspond to his self-respect," for "it is unworthy to move obligation from guy to a device." [203] Only the human person can be ethically responsible, and the difficulties of a technological society are eventually spiritual in nature. Therefore, dealing with those obstacles "needs an intensification of spirituality." [204]

112. A more point to think about is the call, triggered by the look of AI on the world phase, for a renewed appreciation of all that is human. Years back, the French Catholic author Georges Bernanos alerted that "the risk is not in the multiplication of devices, however in the ever-increasing variety of males accustomed from their childhood to desire only what devices can offer." [205] This difficulty is as true today as it was then, as the quick pace of digitization risks a "digital reductionism," where non-quantifiable aspects of life are reserved and then forgotten and even considered unimportant because they can not be computed in formal terms. AI should be used just as a tool to match human intelligence instead of replace its richness. [206] Cultivating those elements of human life that transcend calculation is essential for maintaining "a genuine humanity" that "appears to stay in the middle of our technological culture, almost unnoticed, like a mist leaking carefully underneath a closed door." [207]

113. The vast expanse of the world's knowledge is now available in ways that would have filled previous generations with awe. However, to make sure that advancements in understanding do not end up being humanly or spiritually barren, one need to go beyond the simple accumulation of information and aim to attain true wisdom. [208]

114. This knowledge is the present that humankind requires most to attend to the extensive concerns and ethical challenges positioned by AI: "Only by embracing a spiritual way of seeing reality, just by recuperating 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 consequences." It "can not be sought from devices," but it "lets itself be discovered by those who seek it and be seen by those who like it; it expects those who want it, and it goes in search of those who deserve it (cf. Wis 6:12 -16)." [210]

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

116. Since a "person's perfection is measured not by the details or knowledge they possess, however by the depth of their charity," [212] how we integrate AI "to consist of the least of our siblings and sisters, the susceptible, and those most in need, will be the real procedure of our humanity." [213] The "wisdom of the heart" can light up and guide the human-centered use of this technology to assist promote the typical great, take care of our "typical home," advance the search for the truth, foster integral human development, favor human solidarity and fraternity, and lead mankind to its supreme goal: happiness and full communion with God. [214]

117. From this point of view of wisdom, believers will be able to function as ethical representatives capable of utilizing this technology to promote a genuine vision of the human person and society. [215] This need to be made with the understanding that technological development becomes part of God's prepare for creation-an activity that we are contacted us to order towards the Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ, in the consistent look for the True and the Good.


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


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


Ex audientia pass away 14 ianuarii 2025
Franciscus


Contents


I. Introduction


II. What is Artificial Intelligence?


III. Intelligence in the Philosophical and Theological Tradition


Rationality


Embodiment


Relationality


Relationship with the Truth


Stewardship of the World


An Essential Understanding of Human Intelligence


The Limits of AI


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


Helping Human Freedom and Decision-Making


V. Specific Questions


AI and Society


AI and Human Relationships


AI, the Economy, and Labor


AI and Healthcare


AI and Education


AI, Misinformation, Deepfakes, and Abuse


AI, Privacy, and Surveillance


AI and the Protection of Our Common Home


AI and Warfare


AI and Our Relationship with God


VI. Concluding Reflections


True Wisdom


[1] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. See 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 Proposition for the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence" (31 August 1955), http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/history/dartmouth/dartmouth.html (accessed: 21 October 2024).
[6] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), pars. 2-3: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2.
[7] Terms in this file explaining the outputs or procedures of AI are utilized figuratively to explain its operations and are not meant to anthropomorphize the maker.
[8] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3; Id., Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2.
[9] Here, one can see the main positions of the "transhumanists" and the "posthumanists." Transhumanists argue that technological advancements will make it possible for human beings to overcome their biological constraints and improve both their physical and cognitive abilities. Posthumanists, on the other hand, contend that such advances will ultimately change human identity to the degree that humankind itself may no longer be thought about genuinely "human." Both views rest on a basically negative perception of human corporality, which deals with the body more as a barrier than as an important part of the person's identity and contact us to full awareness. Yet, this negative view of the body is inconsistent with a correct understanding of human dignity. While the Church supports authentic scientific development, it verifies that human dignity is rooted in "the individual as an inseparable unity of body and soul. " Thus, "self-respect is likewise fundamental in each person's body, which takes part in its own method remaining in imago Dei" (Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita [8 April 2024], par. 18).
[10] This technique shows a functionalist viewpoint, which lowers the human mind to its functions and presumes that its functions can be completely measured in physical or mathematical terms. However, even if a future AGI were to appear genuinely intelligent, it would still remain practical in nature.
[11] Cf. A.M. Turing, "Computing Machinery and Intelligence," Mind 59 (1950) 443-460.
[12] If "believing" is credited to devices, it needs to be clarified that this describes calculative thinking rather than critical thinking. Similarly, if machines are said to operate utilizing logical thinking, it needs to be specified that this is restricted to computational logic. On the other hand, by its very nature, human idea is an imaginative procedure that eludes programs and transcends constraints.
[13] On the fundamental function of language in shaping understanding, cf. M. Heidegger, Über den Humanismus, Klostermann, Frankfurt am Main 1949 (en. tr. "Letter on Humanism," in Basic Writings: Martin Heidegger, Routledge, London - New York City 2010, 141-182).
[14] For more discussion of these anthropological and theological structures, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 43-144.
[15] Aristotle, Metaphysics, I. 1, 980 a 21.
[16] Cf. Augustine, De Genesi ad litteram III, 20, 30: PL 34, 292: "Man is made in the image of God in relation to that [professors] by which he transcends to the illogical animals. Now, this [professors] is factor itself, or the 'mind,' or 'intelligence,' whatever other name it may more appropriately be offered"; Id., Enarrationes in Psalmos 54, 3: PL 36, 629: "When thinking about all that they have, human beings discover that they are most distinguished from animals precisely by the truth they possess intelligence." This is also repeated by Saint Thomas Aquinas, who mentions that "man is the most perfect of all earthly beings enhanced with motion, and his correct and natural operation is intellection," by which guy abstracts from things and "receives in his mind things actually intelligible" (Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 76).
[17] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036.
[18] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 49, a. 5, ad 3. Cf. ibid., I, q. 79; II-II, q. 47, a. 3; II-II, q. 49, a. 2. For a modern perspective that echoes aspects of the classical and medieval difference in between these 2 modes of cognition, cf. D. Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, New York 2011.
[19] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 76, a. 1, resp.
[20] Cf. Irenaeus of Lyon, Adversus Haereses, V, 6, 1: PG 7( 2 ), 1136-1138.
[21] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 9. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1045: "The intelligence can examine the reality of things through reflection, experience and dialogue, and pertain to acknowledge in that reality, which transcends it, the basis of certain universal moral needs."
[22] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492.
[23] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 365. Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 75, a. 4, resp.
[24] Certainly, Sacred Scripture "generally considers the human person as a being who exists in the body and is unimaginable 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 fully divulged its meaning and value."
[26] Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 81.
[27] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036.
[28] Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I, q. 89, a. 1, resp.: "to be separated from the body is not in accordance with [the soul's] nature [...] and for this reason it is unified to the body in order that it may have a presence and an operation ideal to its nature."
[29] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1035. Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 18.
[30] International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 56. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 357.
[31] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), pars. 5, 8; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 15, 24, 53-54.
[32] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 356. Cf. ibid., par. 221.
[33] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 13, 26-27.
[34] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Donum Veritatis (24 May 1990), 6: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1552. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), par. 109: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1219. Cf. Pseudo-Dionysius, De divinis nominibus, VII, 2: PG 3, 868B-C: "Human souls likewise possess factor and with it they circle in discourse around the truth of things. [...] [O] n account of the manner in which they are capable of focusing the numerous into the one, they too, in their own fashion and as far as they can, deserve conceptions like those of the angels" (en. tr. Pseudo-Dionysius: The Complete Works, Paulist Press, New York City - Mahwah 1987, 106-107).
[35] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 3: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7.
[36] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036.
[37] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 42: AAS 91 (1999 ), 38. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 208: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1043: "the human mind is capable of going beyond immediate concerns and understanding certain truths that are changeless, as real now as in the past. As it peers into humanity, factor finds universal values 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 form of communication in a manner that both takes into account and transcends their product or empirical structures (such as computer code). Here, intelligence ends up being a knowledge that "allows us to take a look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, scenarios, occasions 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 allows us to produce brand-new content or concepts, mainly by using an initial viewpoint on reality. Both capabilities depend upon the existence of a personal subjectivity for their full realization.
[41] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931.
[42] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034: "Charity, when accompanied by a commitment to the fact, is a lot more than individual feeling [...] Certainly, its close relation to truth fosters its universality and maintains it from being 'confined to a narrow field without relationships.' [...] Charity's openness to fact therefore protects it from 'a fideism that denies it of its human and universal breadth.'" The internal quotes are from Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), pars. 2-4: AAS 101 (2009 ), 642-643.
[43] Cf. International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 7.
[44] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492.
[45] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15.
[46] Bonaventure, In II Librum Sententiarum, d. I, p. 2, a. 2, q. 1; as priced estimate in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 293. Cf. ibid., par. 294.
[47] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 295, 299, 302. Bonaventure likens the universe to "a book 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: "people occupy an unique place in deep space according to the magnificent strategy: they enjoy the advantage of sharing in the magnificent governance of noticeable production. [...] Since male's location as ruler remains in truth a participation in the magnificent governance of development, we speak of it here as a form 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 production account, where God brings animals to Adam "to see what he would call them. And whatever [he] called every living animal, that was its name" (Gen. 2:19), an action that shows the active engagement of human intelligence in the stewardship of God's creation. 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 greater good by picking up and appreciating truths."
[61] Dante, Paradiso, Canto XXX: "luce intellettüal, piena d'amore;/ amor di vero ben, pien di letizia;/ letizia che trascende ogne dolzore" (en. tr. The Divine Comedy of Dante Alighieri, C.E. Norton, tr., Houghton Mifflin, Boston 1920, 232).
[62] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931:" [T] he greatest norm of human life is the divine law itself-eternal, unbiased and universal, by which God orders, directs and governs the whole world and the methods of the human community according to a strategy conceived in his wisdom and love. God has made it possible for man to take part in this law of his so that, under the gentle personality of divine providence, numerous may be able to come to a much deeper and deeper knowledge of unchangeable reality." Also cf. Id., Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037.
[63] Cf. First Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius (24 April 1870), ch. 4, DH 3016.
[64] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892.
[65] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 891. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 204: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1042.
[66] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 11: AAS 83 (1991 ), 807: "God has imprinted his own image and similarity on guy (cf. Gen 1:26), providing upon him an unparalleled dignity [...] In result, beyond the rights which man obtains by his own work, there exist rights which do not correspond to any work he performs, but which flow from his necessary self-respect 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 understood as a technical term to indicate this technology, remembering that the expression is also utilized to designate the field of study and not only its applications.
[71] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 34-35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 51: AAS 83 (1991 ), 856-857.
[72] For example, see the encouragement of scientific exploration in Albertus Magnus (De Mineralibus, II, 2, 1) and the appreciation for the mechanical arts in Hugh of St. Victor (Didascalicon, I, 9). These authors, among a long list of other Catholics participated in clinical research and technological expedition, illustrate that "faith and science can be united in charity, provided that science is put at the service of the guys and woman of our time and not misused to hurt and even ruin 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 a moral topic. When he acts deliberately, man is, so to speak, the father of his acts."
[82] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1776.
[83] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1777.
[84] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 1779-1781; Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 463, where the Holy Father encouraged efforts "to make sure that innovation remains human-centered, fairly grounded and directed toward the great."
[85] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 166: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1026-1027; Id., Address to the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (23 September 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 September 2024, 10. On the function of human agency in selecting a broader aim (Ziel) that then informs the particular function (Zweck) for which each technological application is created, cf. F. Dessauer, Streit um pass away Technik, Herder-Bücherei, Freiburg i. Br. 1959, 70-71.
[86] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4: "Technology is born for a function and, in its influence on human society, constantly represents a kind of order in social relations and an arrangement of power, thus making it possible for certain people to perform particular actions while avoiding others from carrying out various ones. In a basically explicit way, this constitutive power-dimension of innovation always includes the worldview of those who developed and developed it."
[87] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 309.
[88] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4.
[89] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti, pars. 212-213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045.
[90] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 5: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589; Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4.
[91] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "Faced with the marvels of makers, which seem to understand how to select individually, we need to be really clear that decision-making [...] must always be left to the human person. We would condemn humanity to a future without hope if we removed people's capability to make decisions about themselves and their lives, by dooming them to depend upon the options of devices."
[92] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2.
[93] The term "predisposition" in this file describes algorithmic predisposition (organized and consistent errors in computer systems that may disproportionately bias certain groups in unintended methods) or finding out bias (which will lead to training on a biased information set) and not the "bias vector" in neural networks (which is a criterion utilized to change the output of "nerve cells" to change more properly to the 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 respect such values as addition, openness, security, equity, personal privacy and dependability," and also welcomed "the efforts of global organizations to manage these technologies so that they promote genuine development, 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 conversation of the ethical concerns raised by AI from a Catholic perspective, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 147-253.
[99] On the importance of dialogue in a pluralist society oriented towards a "robust and solid social ethics," see Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 211-214: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045.
[100] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2.
[101] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047.
[102] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893.
[103] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464.
[104] Cf. Pontifical Council for Social Communications, Ethics in Internet (22 February 2002), par. 10.
[105] Francis, Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414; pricing quote the Final Document of the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops (27 October 2018), par. 24: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1593. Cf. Benedict XVI, Address to the Participants in the International Congress on Natural Moral Law (12 February 2017): AAS 99 (2007 ), 245.
[106] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-33: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047-1050.
[107] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-21: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047.
[108] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 308-309.
[109] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2.
[110] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892.
[111] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 101, 103, 111, 115, 167: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1004-1005, 1007-1009, 1027.
[112] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047; cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 35: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 123.
[113] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 12: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1034.
[114] Cf. Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church (2004 ), par. 149.
[115] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987.
[116] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987.
[117] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 865. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), pars. 88-89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414.
[118] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057.
[119] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985.
[120] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2.
[121] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987.
[122] Cf. E. Stein, Zum Problem der Einfühlung, Buchdruckerei des Waisenhauses, Halle 1917 (en. tr. On the Problem of Empathy, ICS Publications, Washington D.C. 1989).
[123] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057:" [Many people] desire their interpersonal relationships provided by advanced devices, by screens and systems which can be turned on and off on command. Meanwhile, the Gospel informs us constantly to risk of an in person encounter with others, with their physical presence 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 significance 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 priced estimate 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 effects, it is that of health care. When a sick person is not placed in the center or their self-respect is not considered, this triggers mindsets that can lead even to speculation on the misfortune of others. And this is really severe! [...] The application of a business technique to the healthcare sector, if indiscriminate [...] might run the risk of discarding human beings."
[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 using 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, pricing quote Id., Address to the Members of the "Consilium de Laicis" (2 October 1974): AAS 66 (1974 ), 568: "if [the contemporary individual] does listen to instructors, 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, pricing estimate the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, Final Document (27 October 2018), par. 21: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1592.
[150] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 7.6, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 167.
[151] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 88: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413.
[152] In a 2023 policy file about the use of generative AI in education and research study, UNESCO notes: "Among the key concerns [of making use of generative AI (GenAI) in education and research study] is whether people can potentially cede fundamental levels of thinking and skill-acquisition procedures to AI and rather concentrate on higher-order thinking abilities based on the outputs provided by AI. Writing, for example, is often associated with the structuring of thinking. With GenAI [...], people can now start with a well-structured summary offered by GenAI. Some professionals have defined using GenAI to produce text in this way as 'composing without thinking'" (UNESCO, Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research [2023], 37-38). The German-American theorist Hannah Arendt predicted such a possibility in her 1959 book, The Human Condition, and warned: "If it needs to turn out to be true that knowledge (in the sense of knowledge) and believed have parted company for good, then we would certainly end up being the powerless servants, not a lot of our devices since our knowledge" (Id., The Human Condition, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 20182, 3).
[153] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 262: AAS 108 (2016 ), 417.
[154] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 7: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3; cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 167: AAS 107 (2015 ), 914.
[155] John Paul II, Apostolic Constitution Ex Corde Ecclesiae (15 August 1990), 7: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1479.
[156] Francis, Apostolic Constitution Veritatis Gaudium (29 January 2018), 4c: AAS 110 (2018 ), 9-10.
[157] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3.
[158] For example, it may assist individuals gain access to the "range of resources for creating higher understanding of truth" contained in the works of viewpoint (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 truly indifferent to the concern of whether what they know is real or not. [...] It is this that Saint Augustine teaches when he writes: 'I have actually satisfied lots of who desired to deceive, however none who wanted to be tricked'"; quoting Augustine, Confessiones, X, 23, 33: PL 32, 794.
[163] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), par. 62.
[164] Benedict XVI, Message for the XLIII World Day of Social Communications (24 May 2009): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2009, 8.
[165] Cf. Dicastery for Communications, Towards Full Presence: A Pastoral Reflection on Engagement with Social Media (28 May 2023), par. 41; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Decree Inter Mirifica (4 December 1963), pars. 4, 8-12: AAS 56 (1964 ), 146, 148-149.
[166] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 1, 6, 16, 24.
[167] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046. Cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 40: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 127: "no male might with impunity breach that human self-respect which God himself treats with terrific respect"; as priced quote 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 the online world obliges States to likewise respect the right to personal privacy, by protecting people from invasive monitoring and enabling 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 recognized a list of "early pledges of AI assisting to resolve climate change" (United Nations AI Advisory Body, Interim Report: Governing AI for Humanity [December 2023], 3). The file observed that, "taken together with predictive systems that can change data into insights and insights into actions, AI-enabled tools may assist develop brand-new methods and investments to lower emissions, influence brand-new personal sector investments in net zero, protect biodiversity, and construct broad-based social resilience" (ibid.).
[174] "The cloud" refers to a network of physical servers throughout the world that enables users to shop, procedure, and handle their data remotely.
[175] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 9: AAS 107 (2015 ), 850.
[176] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 106: AAS 107 (2015 ), 890.
[177] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 60: AAS 107 (2015 ), 870.
[178] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 3, 13: AAS 107 (2015 ), 848.852.
[179] Augustine, De Civitate Dei, 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 need to make sure and secure a space for appropriate human control over the options made by expert system programs: human dignity itself depends on it."
[186] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to Working Group II on Emerging Technologies at the UN Disarmament Commission (3 April 2024): "The advancement and usage of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) that do not have the appropriate human control would position essential ethical issues, considered that LAWS can never be morally accountable subjects capable of abiding by 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 overlook the possibility of sophisticated weapons winding up in the wrong hands, facilitating, for instance, terrorist attacks or interventions aimed at destabilizing the institutions of genuine systems of federal government. In a word, the world does not require new innovations that add to the unfair development of commerce and the weapons trade and as a result end up promoting the folly of war."
[190] John Paul II, Act of Entrustment to Mary for the Jubilee of Bishops (8 October 2000), par. 3: Insegnamenti XXIII/2 (200 ), 565.
[191] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 79: AAS 107 (2015 ), 878.
[192] Cf. Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 51: AAS 101 (2009 ), 687.
[193] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39.
[194] Cf. Augustine, Confessiones, I, 1, 1: PL 32, 661.
[195] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (30 December 1987), par. 28: AAS 80 (1988 ), 548:" [T] here is a better understanding today that the simple accumulation of products and services [...] is not enough for the realization of human joy. Nor, in effect, does the availability of the many real advantages supplied in current times by science and innovation, consisting of the computer technology, bring liberty from every type of slavery. On the contrary, [...] unless all the significant body of resources and possible at guy's disposal is directed by a moral understanding and by an orientation towards the real good of the mankind, it quickly turns against male to oppress him." Cf. ibid., pars. 29, 37: AAS 80 (1988 ), 550-551.563 -564.
[196] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036.
[197] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 18: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5.
[198] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 27: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 6.
[199] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 25: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5-6.
[200] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. R. Guardini, Das Ende der Neuzeit, Würzburg 19659, 87 ff. (en. tr. The End of the Modern World, Wilmington 1998, 82-83).
[201] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053.
[202] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptor Hominis (4 March 1979), par. 15: AAS 71 (1979 ), 287-288.
[203] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," in C. Mitcham - R. Mackey, eds., Philosophy and Technology: Readings in the Philosophical Problems of Technology, New York City 19832, 212-213.
[204] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," 210.
[205] G. Bernanos, "La révolution de la liberté" (1944 ), in Id., Le Chemin de la Croix-des-Âmes, Rocher 1987, 829.
[206] Cf. Francis, Meeting with the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, forum.altaycoins.com 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 produce greater wisdom. Wisdom is not born of fast searches on the web nor is it a mass of unverified information. That is not the method to develop 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.