II. What Is Artificial Intelligence

Aus Vokipedia
(Unterschied zwischen Versionen)
Wechseln zu: Navigation, Suche
(Die Seite wurde neu angelegt: „<br>1. With knowledge both ancient and brand-new (cf. Mt. 13:52), we are contacted us to review the current challenges and chances positioned by scientific and…“)
 

Aktuelle Version vom 1. März 2025, 01:15 Uhr


1. With knowledge both ancient and brand-new (cf. Mt. 13:52), we are contacted us to review the current challenges and chances positioned by scientific and technological improvements, particularly by the current development of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The Christian tradition relates to the present of intelligence as an essential element of how people are produced "in the image of God" (Gen. 1:27). Starting from an essential vision of the human individual and the biblical calling to "till" and "keep" the earth (Gen. 2:15), the Church emphasizes that this present of intelligence ought to be expressed through the responsible use of factor and technical abilities in the stewardship of the created world.


2. The Church encourages the development of science, innovation, the arts, and other kinds of human endeavor, viewing them as part of the "collaboration of guy and woman with God in perfecting the visible development." [1] As Sirach verifies, God "offered skill to people, that he may be glorified in his wonderful works" (Sir. 38:6). Human capabilities and imagination come from God and, when utilized rightly, glorify God by showing his knowledge and goodness. Because of this, when we ask ourselves what it indicates to "be human," we can not exclude a factor to consider of our scientific and technological abilities.


3. It is within this viewpoint that today Note addresses the anthropological and ethical difficulties raised by AI-issues that are especially substantial, as one of the goals of this innovation is to mimic the human intelligence that designed it. For circumstances, unlike lots of other human productions, AI can be trained on the results of human imagination and after that create brand-new "artifacts" with a level of speed and ability that often measures up to or exceeds what human beings can do, such as producing text or images identical from human structures. This raises crucial concerns about AI's prospective function in the growing crisis of reality in the public forum. Moreover, this innovation is designed to discover and make certain options autonomously, adjusting to new scenarios and supplying services not visualized by its programmers, and therefore, it raises basic questions about ethical responsibility and human security, with broader implications for society as a whole. This new circumstance has actually prompted many people to show on what it indicates to be human and the role of humanity in the world.


4. Taking all this into account, there is broad consensus that AI marks a brand-new and considerable stage in humankind's engagement with technology, placing it at the heart of what Pope Francis has explained as an "epochal modification." [2] Its effect is felt globally and in a vast array of locations, consisting of interpersonal relationships, education, work, art, health care, law, warfare, and worldwide relations. As AI advances rapidly toward even greater achievements, it is seriously crucial to consider its anthropological and ethical implications. This involves not just mitigating threats and preventing damage however likewise ensuring that its applications are utilized to promote human development and the typical good.


5. To contribute positively to the discernment regarding AI, and in reaction 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 function in the global dialogue on these issues, the Church invites those delegated with sending the faith-including parents, instructors, pastors, and bishops-to devote themselves to this vital subject with care and asteroidsathome.net attention. While this document is meant particularly for them, it is also indicated to be available to a more comprehensive audience, especially those who share the conviction that scientific and technological advances must be directed towards serving the human person and the common good. [4]

6. To this end, the file starts by identifying between concepts of intelligence in AI and in human intelligence. It then checks out the Christian understanding of human intelligence, offering a framework rooted in the Church's philosophical and theological custom. Finally, the file offers guidelines to ensure that the development and usage of AI maintain human dignity and promote the integral development of the human individual and society.


7. The idea of "intelligence" in AI has actually evolved gradually, drawing on a series of ideas from various disciplines. While its origins extend back centuries, a substantial milestone happened in 1956 when the American computer researcher John McCarthy organized a summertime workshop at Dartmouth University to check out the issue of "Artificial Intelligence," which he specified as "that of making a device behave in ways that would be called intelligent if a human were so behaving." [5] This workshop released a research program focused on designing makers efficient in performing jobs normally associated with the human intelligence and intelligent habits.


8. Since then, AI research has advanced rapidly, causing the development of complex systems capable of performing extremely sophisticated jobs. [6] These so-called "narrow AI" systems are typically created to manage specific and restricted functions, such as equating languages, forecasting the trajectory of a storm, classifying images, responding to concerns, or generating visual content at the user's demand. While the meaning of "intelligence" in AI research differs, many contemporary AI systems-particularly those using machine learning-rely on statistical reasoning rather than rational reduction. By analyzing big datasets to recognize patterns, AI can "predict" [7] outcomes and propose brand-new approaches, simulating some cognitive processes normal of human problem-solving. Such accomplishments have been enabled through advances in computing innovation (including neural networks, unsupervised artificial intelligence, and evolutionary algorithms) as well as hardware developments (such as specialized processors). Together, these innovations enable AI systems to react to numerous kinds of human input, adapt to new circumstances, and even recommend novel solutions not expected by their original programmers. [8]

9. Due to these rapid advancements, lots of jobs once handled solely by humans are now entrusted to AI. These systems can enhance or even supersede what people have the ability to carry out in lots of fields, particularly in specialized locations such as information analysis, image recognition, and medical diagnosis. While each "narrow AI" application is created for a particular job, lots of scientists aim to establish what is referred to as "Artificial General Intelligence" (AGI)-a single system capable of operating across all cognitive domains and performing any job within the scope of human intelligence. Some even argue that AGI might 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 individual, while still others welcome this possible change. [9]

10. Underlying this and many other perspectives on the topic is the implicit assumption that the term "intelligence" can be used in the exact same way to describe both human intelligence and AI. Yet, this does not record the complete scope of the idea. When it comes to people, intelligence is a professors that pertains to the individual in his/her totality, whereas in the context of AI, "intelligence" is understood functionally, frequently with the presumption that the activities quality of the human mind can be broken down into digitized actions that machines can reproduce. [10]

11. This functional point of view is exemplified by the "Turing Test," which thinks about a device "smart" if an individual can not identify its habits from that of a human. [11] However, in this context, the term "behavior" refers just to the efficiency of specific intellectual tasks; it does not represent the complete breadth of human experience, which consists of abstraction, feelings, imagination, and the visual, ethical, and religious sensibilities. Nor does it encompass the full range of expressions characteristic of the human mind. Instead, in the case of AI, the "intelligence" of a system is evaluated methodologically, but also reductively, based on its capability to produce suitable responses-in this case, those associated with the human intellect-regardless of how those responses are produced.


12. AI's sophisticated features give it sophisticated abilities to carry out jobs, however not the ability to think. [12] This difference is most importantly crucial, as the way "intelligence" is specified undoubtedly forms how we understand the relationship between human thought and this technology. [13] To appreciate this, one need to remember the richness of the philosophical tradition and Christian faith, which offer a deeper and more detailed understanding of intelligence-an understanding that is main to the Church's mentor on the nature, dignity, and vocation of the human person. [14]

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

14. In the classical tradition, the concept of intelligence is frequently understood through the complementary concepts of "reason" (ratio) and "intellect" (intellectus). These are not different faculties but, as Saint Thomas Aquinas explains, they are 2 modes in which the same intelligence operates: "The term intellect is inferred from the inward grasp of the truth, while the name factor is drawn from the analytical and discursive procedure." [18] This succinct description highlights the two basic and complementary dimensions of human intelligence. Intellectus refers to the user-friendly grasp of the truth-that is, collaring it with the "eyes" of the mind-which precedes and premises argumentation itself. Ratio pertains to thinking appropriate: the discursive, analytical process that leads to judgment. Together, intellect and reason form the 2 aspects of the act of intelligere, "the appropriate operation of the human being as such." [19]

15. Explaining the human individual as a "logical" being does not decrease 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 improperly, this capacity is an intrinsic aspect of human nature. In this sense, the "term 'rational' encompasses all the capabilities of the human individual," consisting of those related to "knowing and understanding, along with those of prepared, loving, selecting, and desiring; it also consists of all corporeal functions carefully related to these capabilities." [21] This detailed perspective underscores how, in the human individual, developed in the "image of God," reason is incorporated in a manner that raises, shapes, and changes both the individual's will and actions. [22]

16. Christian thought thinks about the intellectual professors of the human individual within the structure of an essential anthropology that views the human being as essentially embodied. In the human person, spirit and matter "are not 2 natures joined, but rather their union forms a single nature." [23] In other words, the soul is not simply the immaterial "part" of the person contained within the body, nor is the body an outer shell housing an intangible "core." Rather, the entire human individual is simultaneously both material and spiritual. This understanding reflects the teaching of Sacred Scripture, which sees the human person as a being who lives out relationships with God and others (and thus, an authentically spiritual measurement) within and through this embodied presence. [24] The extensive meaning of this condition is further illuminated by the secret of the Incarnation, through which God himself took on our flesh and "raised it approximately a sublime dignity." [25]

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


18. Humans are "bought by their very nature to interpersonal communion," [30] possessing the capacity to know one another, to give themselves in love, and to participate in communion with others. Accordingly, human intelligence is not a separated faculty however is exercised in relationships, finding its fullest expression in discussion, collaboration, 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 exposed in production and redemption. [31] The human individual is "contacted us to share, by knowledge 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 next-door neighbor (cf. 1 Jn. 4:20; Mt. 22:37 -39). By the grace of sharing God's life, Christians are likewise called to mimic Christ's outpouring present (cf. 2 Cor. 9:8 -11; Eph. 5:1 -2) by following his command to "enjoy one another, as I have actually liked you" (Jn. 13:34). [33] Love and service, echoing the magnificent life of self-giving, go beyond self-interest to respond more fully to the human vocation (cf. 1 Jn. 2:9). A lot more superb than knowing numerous things is the dedication to take care of one another, for if "I comprehend all mysteries and all understanding [...] however do not have love, I am nothing" (1 Cor. 13:2).


21. Human intelligence is eventually "God's gift fashioned for the assimilation of reality." [34] In the double sense of intellectus-ratio, it makes it possible for the individual to check out truths that surpass mere sensory experience or utility, since "the desire for fact becomes part of humanity itself. It is an inherent home of human factor to ask why things are as they are." [35] Moving beyond the limitations of empirical data, human intelligence can "with real certitude attain to truth itself as knowable." [36] While truth remains only partly understood, the desire for truth "spurs reason always to go even more; certainly, it is as if factor were overwhelmed to see that it can always go beyond what it has actually already attained." [37] Although Truth in itself goes beyond the borders of human intelligence, it irresistibly attracts it. [38] Drawn by this destination, the human individual is resulted in look for "facts of a higher order." [39]

22. This inherent drive towards the pursuit of truth is particularly apparent in the definitely human capacities for semantic understanding and imagination, [40] through which this search unfolds in a "manner that is appropriate to the social nature and self-respect of the human individual." [41] Likewise, an unfaltering orientation to the truth is necessary for charity to be both genuine and universal. [42]

23. The search for reality discovers its highest expression in openness to truths that go beyond the physical and produced world. In God, all truths attain their ultimate and original meaning. [43] Entrusting oneself to God is a "basic decision that engages the entire individual." [44] In this method, the human individual ends up being fully what he or she is contacted us to be: "the intelligence and the will display their spiritual nature," allowing the person "to act in a way that realizes individual flexibility to the full." [45]

24. The Christian faith comprehends production as the complimentary act of the Triune God, who, as Saint Bonaventure of Bagnoregio explains, produces "not to increase his splendor, but to show it forth and to interact it." [46] Since God develops according to his Wisdom (cf. Wis. 9:9; Jer. 10:12), creation is imbued with an intrinsic order that reflects God's strategy (cf. Gen. 1; Dan. 2:21 -22; Is. 45:18; Ps. 74:12 -17; 104), [47] within which God has actually called human beings to assume an unique 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 abilities to take care of and develop creation in accord with God's strategy. [49] In this, human intelligence shows the Divine Intelligence that produced all things (cf. Gen. 1-2; Jn. 1), [50] constantly sustains them, and guides them to their ultimate function in him. [51] Moreover, human beings are contacted us to establish their abilities in science and innovation, for through them, God is glorified (cf. Sir. 38:6). Thus, in a proper relationship with creation, humans, on the one hand, utilize their intelligence and skill to cooperate with God in assisting creation towards the function to which he has called it. [52] On the other hand, development itself, as Saint Bonaventure observes, assists the human mind to "ascend slowly to the supreme Principle, who is God." [53]

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


27. This engagement with reality unfolds in different ways, as everyone, in his/her multifaceted uniqueness [54], seeks to understand the world, connect to others, fix issues, reveal imagination, and pursue essential wellness through the harmonious interplay of the numerous dimensions of the person's intelligence. [55] This involves rational and linguistic capabilities however can also incorporate other modes of interacting with reality. Consider the work of a craftsmen, who "need to know 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 peoples who live close to the earth frequently possess a profound sense of nature and its cycles. [57] Similarly, a pal who knows the ideal word to state or an individual skilled at handling human relationships exemplifies an intelligence that is "the fruit of self-examination, discussion and generous encounter in between persons." [58] As Pope Francis observes, "in this age of expert system, we can not forget that poetry and love are necessary to save our humanity." [59]

28. At the heart of the Christian understanding of intelligence is the combination of truth into the ethical and spiritual life of the person, assisting his/her actions due to God's goodness and truth. According to God's plan, intelligence, in its fullest sense, also consists of the capability to savor what holds true, good, and lovely. As the twentieth-century French poet Paul Claudel revealed, "intelligence is absolutely nothing without delight." [60] Similarly, Dante, upon reaching the greatest heaven in Paradiso, affirms that the culmination of this intellectual delight is discovered in the "light intellectual loaded with love, love of true good filled with happiness, joy which transcends every sweet taste." [61]

29. An appropriate understanding of human intelligence, for that reason, can not be reduced to the mere acquisition of facts or the capability to carry out particular jobs. Instead, it includes the individual's openness to the ultimate questions of life and reflects an orientation toward the True and the Good. [62] As an expression of the magnificent image within the individual, human intelligence has the ability to access the totality of being, considering presence in its fullness, which surpasses what is quantifiable, and comprehending the meaning of what has actually been understood. For believers, this capability consists of, in a specific method, the capability to grow in the knowledge of the mysteries of God by utilizing reason to engage ever more profoundly with revealed realities (intellectus fidei). [63] True intelligence is shaped by magnificent love, which "is put forth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit" (Rom. 5:5). From this, it follows that human intelligence has an important contemplative measurement, an unselfish openness to the True, the Good, and the Beautiful, beyond any utilitarian function.


30. Due to the foregoing discussion, the differences between human intelligence and existing AI systems become evident. While AI is an amazing technological accomplishment capable of imitating certain outputs connected with human intelligence, it operates by performing tasks, attaining goals, or making choices based upon quantitative data and computational logic. For example, with its analytical power, AI excels at incorporating data from a variety of fields, modeling complex systems, and promoting interdisciplinary connections. In this way, it can help experts team up in fixing complex issues that "can not be handled from a single point of view or from a single set of interests." [64]

31. However, even as AI procedures and simulates certain expressions of intelligence, it remains fundamentally confined to a logical-mathematical framework, which imposes intrinsic constraints. Human intelligence, on the other hand, establishes organically throughout the person's physical and psychological development, shaped by a myriad of lived experiences in the flesh. Although advanced AI systems can "find out" through procedures such as artificial intelligence, this sort of training is fundamentally different from the developmental development of human intelligence, which is formed by embodied experiences, consisting of sensory input, emotional actions, social interactions, and the distinct context of each moment. These components shape and kind people within their individual history.In contrast, AI, doing not have a physical body, counts on computational reasoning and knowing based upon vast datasets that consist of recorded human experiences and understanding.


32. Consequently, although AI can replicate elements of human reasoning and perform specific jobs with incredible speed and effectiveness, its computational abilities represent just a fraction of the more comprehensive capabilities of the human mind. For instance, AI can not presently replicate moral discernment or the capability to establish genuine relationships. Moreover, human intelligence is positioned within a personally lived history of intellectual and ethical development that essentially shapes the person's point of view, incorporating the physical, emotional, social, ethical, and spiritual dimensions of life. Since AI can not offer this fullness of understanding, approaches that rely exclusively on this innovation or treat it as the main means of interpreting the world can cause "a loss of gratitude for the entire, for the relationships between things, and for the wider horizon." [65]

33. Human intelligence is not mainly about completing functional tasks but about understanding and actively engaging with truth in all its dimensions; it is likewise efficient in unexpected 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 apparently limitless-are matchless with the human ability to grasp reality. So much can be gained from an illness, an embrace of reconciliation, and even a simple sundown; certainly, many experiences we have as people open new horizons and provide the possibility of attaining brand-new wisdom. No device, working exclusively with data, can determine up to these and many other experiences present in our lives.


34. Drawing an extremely close equivalence between human intelligence and AI risks catching a functionalist perspective, where individuals are valued based on the work they can perform. However, an individual's worth does not depend upon having particular abilities, cognitive and technological achievements, or private success, but on the individual's fundamental dignity, grounded in being produced in the image of God. [66] This self-respect remains intact in all scenarios, consisting of for those unable to exercise their capabilities, whether it be an unborn kid, an unconscious individual, or an older person who is suffering. [67] It also underpins the custom of human rights (and, in specific, what are now called "neuro-rights"), which represent "an important point of merging in the look for typical ground" [68] and can, hence, function as a basic ethical guide in discussions on the accountable advancement and use of AI.


35. Considering all these points, as Pope Francis observes, "the really use of the word 'intelligence'" in connection with AI "can prove deceptive" [69] and dangers ignoring what is most valuable in the human person. Because of this, AI should not be viewed as an artificial form of human intelligence but as a product of it. [70]

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

37. Seen as a fruit of the prospective inscribed within human intelligence, [72] clinical query and the development of technical abilities belong to the "collaboration of males and female with God in perfecting the visible development." [73] At the very same time, all clinical and technological achievements are, ultimately, presents from God. [74] Therefore, people need to constantly utilize their capabilities in view of the higher purpose for which God has given them. [75]

38. We can gratefully acknowledge how innovation has actually "remedied countless evils which used to damage and restrict people," [76] a reality for which we need to rejoice. Nevertheless, not all technological advancements in themselves represent authentic human development. [77] The Church is particularly opposed to those applications that threaten the sanctity of life or the dignity of the human person. [78] Like any human venture, technological advancement should be directed to serve the human individual and contribute 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 advancement are shared not just within the Church but also amongst numerous scientists, technologists, and expert associations, who progressively call for ethical reflection to assist this development in an accountable method.


39. To deal with these obstacles, it is important to stress the significance of ethical obligation grounded in the self-respect and occupation of the human individual. This guiding concept also uses to concerns worrying AI. In this context, the ethical dimension handles main value since it is individuals who develop systems and identify the functions for which they are utilized. [80] Between a device and a person, only the latter is truly an ethical agent-a subject of ethical responsibility who exercises flexibility in his/her choices and accepts their effects. [81] It is not the machine but the human who remains in relationship with truth and goodness, assisted by an ethical conscience that calls the person "to like and to do what is excellent and to prevent evil," [82] bearing witness to "the authority of fact in reference to the supreme Good to which the human individual is drawn." [83] Likewise, between a device and a human, only the human can be sufficiently self-aware to the point of listening and following the voice of conscience, critical with prudence, and looking for the good that is possible in every situation. [84] In reality, all of this also belongs to the person's workout of intelligence.


40. Like any product of human imagination, AI can be directed toward favorable or negative ends. [85] When utilized in manner ins which appreciate human self-respect and promote the well-being of individuals and communities, it can contribute favorably to the human vocation. Yet, as in all areas where humans are called to make choices, the shadow of evil likewise looms here. Where human flexibility enables for the possibility of choosing what is incorrect, the ethical evaluation of this innovation will require to take into account how it is directed and utilized.


41. At the exact same time, it is not just completions that are fairly significant however also the methods employed to attain them. Additionally, the total vision and understanding of the human person ingrained within these systems are essential to consider as well. Technological items 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 societal level, some technological advancements could likewise enhance relationships and power dynamics that are inconsistent with a correct understanding of the human person and society.


42. Therefore, the ends and the methods used in a provided application of AI, as well as the general vision it incorporates, should all be evaluated to guarantee they appreciate human self-respect and promote the common good. [88] As Pope Francis has stated, "the intrinsic dignity of every male and every female" must be "the essential criterion in examining emerging technologies; these will prove fairly sound to the level that they help regard that self-respect and increase its expression at every level of human life," [89] including in the social and economic spheres. In this sense, human intelligence plays an important role not only in developing and producing technology however likewise in directing its usage in line with the authentic good of the human person. [90] The obligation for handling this sensibly pertains to every level of society, assisted 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 value of the dignity of every human and the fullness of the human occupation serves as a criterion of discernment for developers, owners, operators, and regulators of AI, as well as to its users. It remains valid for every application of the technology at every level of its use.


44. An evaluation of the implications of this directing concept could start by thinking about the importance of ethical obligation. Since complete ethical causality belongs just to personal agents, not artificial ones, it is vital to be able to identify and specify who bears obligation for the procedures included in AI, especially those capable of discovering, correction, and sitiosecuador.com reprogramming. While bottom-up techniques and very deep neural networks make it possible for AI to fix intricate problems, they make it tough to understand the procedures that lead to the options they adopted. This makes complex accountability because if an AI application produces undesired outcomes, determining who is responsible becomes tough. To resolve this problem, attention needs to be provided to the nature of responsibility processes in complex, highly automated settings, where outcomes may just end up being apparent in the medium to long term. For this, it is necessary that supreme responsibility for decisions used AI rests with the human decision-makers which there is responsibility for making use of AI at each stage of the decision-making procedure. [91]

45. In addition to determining who is responsible, it is vital to determine the goals provided to AI systems. Although these systems might utilize without supervision autonomous knowing mechanisms and sometimes follow paths that human beings can not reconstruct, they ultimately pursue objectives that human beings have assigned to them and are governed by processes established by their designers and programmers. Yet, this provides an obstacle since, as AI models end up being increasingly efficient in independent knowing, the capability to maintain control over them to make sure that such applications serve human functions might effectively reduce. This raises the vital concern of how to guarantee that AI systems are bought for the good of people and not against them.


46. While obligation for the ethical usage of AI systems begins with those who develop, produce, manage, and manage such systems, it is also shared by those who use them. As Pope Francis kept in mind, the maker "makes a technical choice amongst several possibilities based either on distinct requirements or on statistical reasonings. People, nevertheless, not just pick, however in their hearts can choosing." [92] Those who use AI to achieve a task and follow its outcomes produce a context in which they are eventually accountable for the power they have actually handed over. Therefore, insofar as AI can assist people in making decisions, the algorithms that govern it needs to be reliable, safe and secure, robust enough to deal with inconsistencies, and transparent in their operation to reduce predispositions and unintentional negative effects. [93] Regulatory structures ought to ensure that all legal entities remain accountable for the usage of AI and all its consequences, with appropriate safeguards for openness, personal privacy, and responsibility. [94] Moreover, those utilizing AI must take care not to end up being excessively based on it for their decision-making, a pattern that increases contemporary society's already high dependence on innovation.


47. The Church's ethical and social teaching provides resources to help ensure that AI is utilized in a manner that maintains human firm. Considerations about justice, for instance, must also resolve concerns such as promoting simply social characteristics, maintaining global security, and promoting peace. By exercising vigilance, people and neighborhoods can determine methods to use AI to benefit humanity while preventing applications that could degrade human self-respect or harm the environment. In this context, the concept of responsibility must be understood not only in its most restricted sense but as a "responsibility for the look after others, which is more than simply accounting for outcomes attained." [95]

48. Therefore, AI, like any innovation, can be part of a conscious and responsible answer to mankind's occupation to the good. However, as formerly talked about, AI should be directed by human intelligence to align with this vocation, ensuring it respects the self-respect of the human individual. Recognizing this "exalted dignity," the Second Vatican Council verified that "the social order and its advancement should invariably work to the benefit of the human individual." [96] In light of this, making use of AI, as Pope Francis said, should be "accompanied by an ethic inspired by a vision of the typical excellent, a principles of liberty, obligation, and fraternity, capable of cultivating the complete development of people in relation to others and to the entire of production." [97]

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

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

51. Viewed through this lens, AI could "introduce crucial developments in farming, education and culture, a better level of life for entire nations and individuals, and the development of human fraternity and social relationship," and thus be "utilized to promote essential human advancement." [101] AI could also help organizations identify those in need and counter discrimination and marginalization. These and other similar applications of this innovation could add to human advancement and the typical good. [102]

52. However, while AI holds numerous possibilities for promoting the great, it can likewise impede and even counter human advancement and the common good. Pope Francis has kept in mind that "evidence to date recommends that digital innovations have increased inequality in our world. Not simply distinctions in material wealth, which are also significant, but also distinctions in access to political and social influence." [103] In this sense, AI might be used to perpetuate marginalization and discrimination, develop brand-new kinds of hardship, 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 effective business raises significant ethical concerns. Exacerbating this issue is the fundamental nature of AI systems, where no single person can work out complete oversight over the huge and complicated datasets utilized for calculation. This lack of distinct accountability creates the danger that AI might be manipulated for individual or business gain or to direct popular opinion for the advantage of a particular industry. Such entities, inspired by their own interests, have the capacity to exercise "forms of control as subtle as they are invasive, creating mechanisms for the adjustment of consciences and of the democratic process." [105]

54. Furthermore, there is the threat of AI being utilized to promote what Pope Francis has actually 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 reserved in the name of efficiency, "as if reality, goodness, and reality automatically stream from technological and financial power as such." [107] Yet, human self-respect and the common great needs to never be violated for the sake of effectiveness, [108] for "technological advancements that do not lead to an improvement in the lifestyle of all humanity, but on the contrary, intensify inequalities and conflicts, can never count as true development. " [109] Instead, AI should 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 requires a deeper reflection on the relationship between autonomy and responsibility. Greater autonomy heightens each person's obligation across various aspects of communal life. For Christians, the foundation of this obligation depends on the acknowledgment that all human capacities, consisting of the person's autonomy, come from God and are meant to be utilized in the service of others. [111] Therefore, instead of merely pursuing economic or technological goals, AI ought to serve "the common good of the whole human family," which is "the amount overall of social conditions that permit people, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their satisfaction more fully and more easily." [112]

56. The Second Vatican Council observed that "by his innermost nature man is a social being; and if he does not enter into relations with others, he can neither live nor develop his presents." [113] This conviction highlights that residing in society is intrinsic to the nature and occupation of the human individual. [114] As social beings, we seek relationships that involve shared exchange and the pursuit of fact, in the course of which, individuals "show each other the truth they have found, or think they have actually found, in such a method that they help one another in the search for truth." [115]

57. Such a mission, along with other elements of human communication, presupposes encounters and shared exchange between people formed by their unique histories, ideas, convictions, and relationships. Nor can we forget that human intelligence is a varied, complex, and complicated reality: private and social, logical and affective, conceptual and symbolic. Pope Francis highlights this vibrant, keeping in mind that "together, we can seek the truth in dialogue, in relaxed discussion or in enthusiastic argument. To do so requires perseverance; it entails moments of silence and suffering, yet it can patiently accept the wider experience of people and individuals. [...] The procedure of building fraternity, be it regional or universal, can only be carried out by spirits that are complimentary and available to genuine encounters." [116]

58. It remains in this context that one can consider the obstacles AI positions to human relationships. Like other technological tools, AI has the potential to within the human family. However, it could likewise hinder a true encounter with truth and, eventually, lead individuals to "a deep and melancholic discontentment with interpersonal relations, or a hazardous sense of isolation." [117] Authentic human relationships require the richness of being with others in their pain, their pleas, and their happiness. [118] Since human intelligence is revealed and enriched likewise in social and embodied methods, authentic and spontaneous encounters with others are important for engaging with reality in its fullness.


59. Because "real knowledge requires an encounter with reality," [119] the rise of AI introduces another difficulty. Since AI can successfully imitate the products of human intelligence, the ability to know when one is engaging with a human or a device can no longer be considered approved. Generative AI can produce text, speech, images, and other innovative outputs that are generally connected with human beings. Yet, it needs to be understood for what it is: a tool, not an individual. [120] This distinction is frequently obscured by the language utilized by professionals, which tends to anthropomorphize AI and thus blurs the line between human and maker.


60. Anthropomorphizing AI likewise presents particular challenges for the advancement of kids, possibly motivating them to develop patterns of interaction that deal with human relationships in a transactional manner, as one would connect to a chatbot. Such practices might lead young individuals to see instructors as simple dispensers of details rather than as coaches who direct and nurture their intellectual and ethical development. Genuine relationships, rooted in empathy and an unfaltering commitment to the good of the other, are essential and irreplaceable in fostering the full advancement of the human person.


61. In this context, it is necessary to clarify that, in spite of making use of anthropomorphic language, no AI application can genuinely experience empathy. Emotions can not be reduced to facial expressions or phrases produced in action to prompts; they show the method a person, as an entire, associates with the world and to his or her own life, with the body playing a main role. True empathy needs the capability to listen, acknowledge another's irreducible individuality, invite their otherness, and grasp the meaning behind even their silences. [121] Unlike the realm of analytical judgment in which AI excels, real compassion belongs to the relational sphere. It involves intuiting and collaring the lived experiences of another while maintaining the difference in between self and other. [122] While AI can imitate understanding responses, it can not reproduce the incomparably personal and relational nature of authentic compassion. [123]

62. Due to the above, it is clear why misrepresenting AI as a person must constantly be prevented; doing so for deceitful functions is a grave ethical violation that could 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 also to be thought about unethical and needs cautious oversight to prevent harm, maintain openness, and guarantee the dignity of all people. [124]

63. In an increasingly isolated world, some people have actually turned to AI looking for deep human relationships, basic friendship, or even psychological bonds. However, while people are implied to experience genuine relationships, AI can only imitate them. Nevertheless, such relationships with others are an important part of how a person grows to become who he or she is implied to be. If AI is utilized to help people foster real connections between people, it can contribute favorably to the full awareness of the individual. Conversely, if we replace relationships with God and with others with interactions with innovation, we risk replacing genuine relationality with a lifeless image (cf. Ps. 106:20; Rom. 1:22 -23). Instead of pulling back into synthetic worlds, we are contacted us to take part in a dedicated and intentional method with truth, specifically by identifying with the bad and suffering, consoling those in grief, and creating bonds of communion with all.


64. Due to its interdisciplinary nature, AI is being increasingly incorporated into financial and monetary systems. Significant investments are currently being made not only in the innovation sector however likewise in energy, financing, and media, particularly in the locations of marketing and sales, logistics, technological innovation, compliance, and risk management. At the very same time, AI's applications in these locations have likewise highlighted its ambivalent nature, as a source of significant opportunities but also extensive risks. A first genuine crucial point in this area worries the possibility that-due to the concentration of AI applications in the hands of a few corporations-only those large companies would gain from the value produced by AI rather than business that use it.


65. Other broader aspects of AI's effect on the economic-financial sphere need to also be carefully examined, especially worrying the interaction in between concrete truth and the digital world. One essential consideration in this regard includes the coexistence of varied and alternative kinds of economic and banks within a given context. This factor needs to be encouraged, as it can bring advantages in how it supports the real economy by fostering its advancement and stability, especially throughout times of crisis. Nevertheless, it needs to be stressed that digital truths, not limited by any spatial bonds, tend to be more homogeneous and impersonal than neighborhoods rooted in a specific place and a specific history, with a typical journey defined by shared values and hopes, however also by inescapable disagreements and pediascape.science divergences. This diversity is an undeniable asset to a neighborhood's financial life. Turning over the economy and finance completely to digital innovation would minimize this variety and richness. As an outcome, many services to economic problems that can be reached through natural dialogue between the included parties may no longer be attainable in a world dominated by treatments and just the appearance of nearness.


66. Another location where AI is currently having an extensive impact is the world of work. As in many other fields, AI is driving essential improvements throughout lots of occupations, with a range of results. On the one hand, it has the possible to enhance expertise and efficiency, produce new tasks, enable workers to focus on more ingenious tasks, and open new horizons for imagination and innovation.


67. However, while AI assures to enhance productivity by taking over ordinary jobs, it often requires employees to adjust to the speed and needs of devices rather than makers being designed to support those who work. As an outcome, contrary to the advertised advantages of AI, existing approaches to the innovation can paradoxically deskill employees, subject them to automated security, and relegate them to rigid and repeated tasks. The need to keep up with the rate of innovation can deteriorate employees' sense of firm and stifle the ingenious abilities they are expected to bring to their work. [125]

68. AI is presently removing the requirement for some tasks that were when carried out by humans. If AI is utilized to change human employees rather than complement them, there is a "considerable danger of out of proportion advantage for the few at the price of the impoverishment of many." [126] Additionally, as AI becomes more powerful, there is an associated threat that human labor may lose its worth in the financial world. This is the sensible consequence of the technocratic paradigm: a world of humanity enslaved to effectiveness, where, ultimately, the expense of mankind should be cut. Yet, human lives are fundamentally valuable, independent of their financial output. Nevertheless, the "current model," Pope Francis explains, "does not appear to prefer an investment in efforts to assist the sluggish, the weak, or the less skilled to find opportunities in life." [127] Due to this, "we can not enable a tool as effective and indispensable as Artificial Intelligence to strengthen such a paradigm, however rather, we need to make Artificial Intelligence a bulwark against its growth." [128]

69. It is essential to keep in mind that "the order of things must be secondary to the order of persons, and not the other way around." [129] Human work should not just be at the service of earnings but at "the service of the whole human individual [...] considering the individual's material requirements and the requirements of his or her intellectual, ethical, spiritual, and religious life." [130] In this context, the Church recognizes that work is "not just a way of earning one's daily bread" but is likewise "a vital measurement of social life" and "a way [...] of individual growth, the building of healthy relationships, self-expression and the exchange of gifts. Work provides us a sense of shared obligation for the advancement of the world, and eventually, for our life as an individuals." [131]

70. Since work is a "part of the significance of life on this earth, a course to development, human advancement and personal fulfillment," "the objective must not be that technological development increasingly changes human work, for this would be harmful to humankind" [132] -rather, it ought to promote human labor. Seen in this light, AI should help, not change, human judgment. Similarly, it should never ever break down creativity or reduce employees to simple "cogs in a device." Therefore, "respect for the self-respect of workers and the value of employment for the financial well-being of individuals, families, and societies, for task security and simply salaries, should be a high concern for the worldwide community as these forms of innovation penetrate more deeply into our work environments." [133]

71. As individuals in God's recovery work, health care experts have the vocation and responsibility to be "guardians and servants of human life." [134] Because of this, the healthcare profession brings an "intrinsic and indisputable ethical dimension," acknowledged by the Hippocratic Oath, which obliges doctors and health care specialists to commit themselves to having "absolute respect for human life and its sacredness." [135] Following the example of the Do-gooder, this commitment is to be carried out by males and females "who turn down the production of a society of exclusion, and act instead as neighbors, raising up and rehabilitating the succumbed to the sake of the common good." [136]

72. Seen in this light, AI appears to hold tremendous capacity in a range of applications in the medical field, such as assisting the diagnostic work of health care service providers, facilitating relationships in between clients and medical personnel, providing brand-new treatments, and broadening access to quality care also for those who are isolated or marginalized. In these methods, the technology might improve the "caring and loving nearness" [137] that doctor are called to encompass the sick and suffering.


73. However, if AI is utilized not to enhance however to replace the relationship in between patients and health care providers-leaving patients to engage with a device instead of a human being-it would decrease a crucially essential human relational structure to a central, impersonal, and unequal framework. Instead of motivating uniformity with the ill and suffering, such applications of AI would run the risk of intensifying the loneliness that typically accompanies health problem, particularly in the context of a culture where "persons are no longer viewed as a critical worth to be taken care of and appreciated." [138] This abuse of AI would not align with respect for the dignity of the human person and uniformity with the suffering.


74. Responsibility for the well-being of patients and the choices that touch upon their lives are at the heart of the health care occupation. This accountability needs physician to work out all their skill and intelligence in making well-reasoned and fairly grounded options relating to those delegated to their care, always appreciating the inviolable dignity of the clients and the need for informed authorization. As an outcome, choices concerning client treatment and the weight of obligation they entail must always remain with the human person and needs to never be handed over to AI. [139]

75. In addition, utilizing AI to identify who need to get treatment based mainly on economic measures or metrics of efficiency represents a particularly problematic circumstances of the "technocratic paradigm" that should be declined. [140] For, "enhancing resources implies using them in an ethical and fraternal method, and not punishing the most delicate." [141] Additionally, AI tools in healthcare are "exposed to types of predisposition and discrimination," where "systemic mistakes can easily multiply, producing not just injustices in individual cases however likewise, due to the cause and effect, genuine types of social inequality." [142]

76. The integration of AI into healthcare also presents the danger of enhancing other existing variations in access to treatment. As health care becomes increasingly oriented toward avoidance and lifestyle-based methods, AI-driven options might inadvertently prefer more wealthy populations who already take pleasure in much better access to medical resources and quality nutrition. This trend threats strengthening a "medicine for the rich" model, where those with financial means gain from innovative preventative tools and personalized health details while others struggle to gain access to even standard services. To prevent such inequities, fair frameworks are needed to ensure that the use of AI in health care does not intensify existing healthcare inequalities but rather serves the typical good.


77. The words of the Second Vatican Council remain completely relevant today: "True education aims to form individuals 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 process of handing down truths and intellectual abilities: rather, its aim is to contribute to the person's holistic formation in its numerous elements (intellectual, cultural, spiritual, etc), including, for instance, community life and relations within the academic community," [144] in keeping with the nature and self-respect of the human individual.


78. This technique includes a dedication to cultivating the mind, but constantly as a part of the integral advancement of the person: "We need to break that concept of education which holds that educating means filling one's head with concepts. That is the way we inform automatons, cerebral minds, not individuals. Educating is taking a danger in the tension in between the mind, the heart, and the hands." [145]

79. At the center of this work of forming the entire human individual is the indispensable relationship between instructor and trainee. Teachers do more than convey understanding; they design vital human qualities and influence the pleasure of discovery. [146] Their existence motivates trainees both through the material they teach and the care they show for their trainees. This bond promotes trust, shared understanding, and the capacity to attend to everyone's distinct dignity and capacity. On the part of the trainee, this can produce a real desire to grow. The physical presence of an instructor creates a relational dynamic that AI can not duplicate, one that deepens engagement and nurtures the trainee's integral development.


80. In this context, AI provides both opportunities and challenges. If used in a sensible manner, within the context of an existing teacher-student relationship and bought to the genuine goals of education, AI can become an important instructional resource by boosting access to education, offering tailored support, and offering immediate feedback to trainees. These advantages could boost the knowing experience, especially in cases where individualized attention is needed, or academic resources are otherwise scarce.


81. Nevertheless, a crucial part of education is forming "the intelligence to reason well in all matters, to reach out towards truth, 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 essential in an age marked by technology, in which "it is no longer simply a concern of 'using' instruments of interaction, but of living in a highly digitalized culture that has had a profound influence on [...] our ability to communicate, discover, be informed and participate in relationship with others." [149] However, instead of cultivating "a cultivated intelligence," which "brings with it a power and a grace to every work and profession that it carries out," [150] the extensive usage of AI in education could lead to the trainees' increased dependence on innovation, deteriorating their capability to perform some abilities separately and intensifying their reliance on screens. [151]

82. Additionally, while some AI systems are developed to help individuals develop their vital thinking capabilities and problem-solving abilities, many others simply provide answers instead of triggering trainees to show up at responses themselves or compose text for themselves. [152] Instead of training youths how to collect details and produce fast reactions, education needs to encourage "the accountable use of flexibility to face problems with common sense and intelligence." [153] Building on this, "education in making use of kinds of synthetic intelligence must aim above all at promoting vital thinking. Users of all ages, but especially the young, need to establish a discerning technique to the usage of data and content gathered online or produced by synthetic intelligence systems. Schools, universities, and scientific societies are challenged to assist trainees and specialists to grasp the social and ethical aspects of the advancement and uses of innovation." [154]

83. As Saint John Paul II remembered, "on the planet today, defined by such rapid developments in science and innovation, the jobs of a Catholic University assume an ever greater significance and seriousness." [155] In a particular method, Catholic universities are advised to be present as fantastic laboratories of hope at this crossroads of history. In an inter-disciplinary and cross-disciplinary secret, they are prompted to engage "with wisdom and creativity" [156] in cautious research study on this phenomenon, assisting to extract the salutary potential within the various fields of science and truth, and guiding them constantly towards fairly sound applications that plainly serve the cohesion of our societies and the common great, reaching brand-new frontiers in the discussion between faith and reason.


84. Moreover, it needs to be noted that current AI programs have actually been known to offer biased or fabricated details, which can lead trainees to rely on incorrect content. This problem "not only runs the danger of legitimizing fake news and reinforcing a dominant culture's advantage, however, in brief, it likewise weakens the academic process itself." [157] With time, clearer differences might emerge between appropriate and incorrect usages of AI in education and research study. Yet, a definitive guideline is that using AI should always be transparent and never ever misrepresented.


85. AI might be utilized as an aid to human self-respect if it assists people comprehend intricate principles or directs them to sound resources that support their look for the fact. [158]

86. However, AI also provides a serious threat of producing manipulated content and incorrect details, which can quickly misguide people due to its similarity to the reality. Such false information might happen unintentionally, as in the case of AI "hallucination," where a generative AI system yields results that appear real but are not. Since producing content that imitates human artifacts is main to AI's functionality, mitigating these threats proves difficult. Yet, the effects of such aberrations and false details can be quite grave. For this factor, all those included in producing and using AI systems ought to be devoted to the truthfulness and precision of the details processed by such systems and disseminated to the general public.


87. While AI has a latent potential to create false details, a much more troubling issue lies in the intentional abuse of AI for adjustment. This can happen when individuals or organizations intentionally create and spread out false content with the aim to trick or trigger harm, such as "deepfake" images, videos, and audio-referring to a false representation of a person, edited or produced by an AI algorithm. The threat of deepfakes is particularly apparent when they are used to target or harm others. While the images or videos themselves may be artificial, the damage they trigger is real, leaving "deep scars in the hearts of those who suffer it" and "genuine injuries in their human self-respect." [159]

88. On a wider scale, by distorting "our relationship with others and with reality," [160] AI-generated phony media can slowly weaken the structures of society. This concern needs mindful policy, as misinformation-especially through AI-controlled or affected media-can spread unintentionally, sustaining political polarization and social unrest. When society ends up being indifferent to the reality, different groups construct their own variations of "truths," deteriorating the "mutual ties and mutual reliances" [161] that underpin the fabric of social life. As deepfakes cause individuals to question whatever and AI-generated incorrect material deteriorates rely on what they see and hear, polarization and dispute will only grow. Such widespread deceptiveness is no insignificant matter; it strikes at the core of humanity, dismantling the foundational trust on which societies are built. [162]

89. Countering AI-driven falsehoods is not just the work of market experts-it requires the efforts of all individuals of goodwill. "If innovation is to serve human dignity and not harm it, and if it is to promote peace rather than violence, then the human community needs to be proactive in addressing these patterns with regard to human self-respect and the promo of the great." [163] Those who produce and share AI-generated material ought to always exercise diligence in validating the reality of what they distribute and, in all cases, ought to "avoid the sharing of words and images that are deteriorating of people, that promote hatred and intolerance, that debase the goodness and intimacy of human sexuality or that make use of the weak and susceptible." [164] This calls for the ongoing prudence and cautious discernment of all users concerning their activity online. [165]

90. Humans are naturally relational, and the information everyone creates in the digital world can be viewed as an objectified expression of this relational nature. Data communicates not just details however also personal and relational understanding, which, in an increasingly digitized context, can amount to power over the person. Moreover, while some types of data may pertain to public elements of an individual's life, others may touch upon the individual's interiority, perhaps even their conscience. Seen in this way, privacy plays an essential function in securing the limits of an individual's inner life, maintaining their liberty to connect to others, express themselves, and make choices without excessive control. This protection is likewise connected to the defense of religious flexibility, as security can likewise be misused to put in control over the lives of followers and how they express their faith.


91. It is proper, for that reason, to deal with the concern of personal privacy from a concern for the genuine freedom and inalienable self-respect of the human individual "in all scenarios." [166] The Second Vatican Council included the right "to secure privacy" among the fundamental rights "necessary for living a truly human life," a right that needs to be encompassed all individuals on account of their "sublime dignity." [167] Furthermore, bybio.co the Church has also affirmed the right to the genuine respect for a private life in the context of verifying the individual's right to a good credibility, defense of their physical and mental integrity, and freedom from damage or excessive invasion [168] -essential parts of the due regard for the intrinsic dignity 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 behavior and believing from even a small amount of details, making the function of data personal privacy much more crucial as a safeguard for the dignity and relational nature of the human person. As Pope Francis observed, "while closed and intolerant mindsets towards others are on the increase, distances are otherwise shrinking or disappearing to the point that the right to personal privacy hardly exists. Everything has actually become a kind of phenomenon to be examined and checked, and people's lives are now under continuous security." [170]

93. While there can be genuine and correct ways to use AI in keeping with human dignity and the common excellent, using it for monitoring aimed at making use of, restricting others' flexibility, or benefitting a couple of at the expense of the lots of is unjustifiable. The threat of monitoring overreach need to be monitored by appropriate regulators to make sure transparency and public accountability. Those accountable for monitoring must never ever surpass their authority, which must constantly prefer the self-respect and freedom of every person as the vital basis of a just and gentle society.


94. Furthermore, "essential respect for human self-respect demands that we decline to enable the uniqueness of the person to be related to a set of information." [171] This especially uses when AI is utilized to evaluate individuals or groups based on their habits, qualities, or history-a practice called "social scoring": "In social and economic decision-making, we must beware about entrusting judgments to algorithms that process data, typically gathered surreptitiously, on an individual's makeup and prior behavior. Such data can be polluted by societal bias and prejudgments. A person's previous behavior should not be used to deny him or her the opportunity to change, grow, and add to society. We can not enable algorithms to limit or condition regard for human dignity, or to exclude compassion, grace, forgiveness, and above all, the hope that people have the ability to alter." [172]

95. AI has numerous promising applications for enhancing our relationship with our "typical home," such as producing designs to anticipate severe environment occasions, proposing engineering options to minimize their effect, managing relief operations, and forecasting population shifts. [173] Additionally, AI can support sustainable agriculture, enhance energy usage, and offer early caution systems for public health emergency situations. These advancements have the prospective to strengthen durability against climate-related challenges and promote more sustainable advancement.


96. At the very same time, existing AI models and the hardware needed to support them consume vast amounts of energy and water, significantly adding to CO2 emissions and straining resources. This truth is often obscured by the method this innovation is provided in the popular creativity, where words such as "the cloud" [174] can provide the impression that data is kept and processed in an intangible realm, separated from the physical world. However, "the cloud" is not an ethereal domain different from the physical world; just like all computing innovations, it relies on physical devices, cables, and energy. The exact same holds true of the innovation behind AI. As these systems grow in intricacy, especially big language designs (LLMs), they require ever-larger datasets, increased computational power, and greater storage infrastructure. Considering the heavy toll these technologies handle the environment, it is essential to establish sustainable solutions that reduce their influence on our common home.


97. Even then, kenpoguy.com as Pope Francis teaches, it is vital "that we try to find solutions not just in technology however in a change of mankind." [175] A complete and genuine understanding of development acknowledges that the value of all produced things can not be lowered to their simple utility. Therefore, a fully human approach to the stewardship of the earth declines the distorted anthropocentrism of the technocratic paradigm, which seeks to "draw out whatever possible" from the world, [176] and turns down the "misconception of progress," which presumes that "environmental issues will fix themselves simply with the application of brand-new innovation and without any need for ethical considerations or deep change." [177] Such a frame of mind should give way to a more holistic method that appreciates the order of development and promotes the integral good of the human individual while protecting our typical home. [178]

98. The Second Vatican Council and the constant teaching of the Popes ever since have actually insisted that peace is not simply the lack of war and is not limited to maintaining a balance of powers in 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, totally free communication, regard for the self-respect of persons and peoples, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is the work of justice and the effect of charity and can not be attained through force alone; instead, it needs to be mainly built through patient diplomacy, the active promotion of justice, uniformity, important human advancement, and respect for the dignity of all people. [180] In this method, the tools used to maintain peace needs to never be allowed to validate injustice, violence, or injustice. Instead, they must constantly be governed by a "firm decision to respect other individuals and nations, along with their dignity, as well as the intentional practice of fraternity." [181]

99. While AI's analytical capabilities could help nations seek peace and ensure security, the "weaponization of Artificial Intelligence" can likewise be extremely bothersome. Pope Francis has observed that "the ability to carry out military operations through remote control systems has led to a reduced perception of the destruction caused by those weapon systems and the concern of obligation for their usage, leading to an even more cold and removed method to the immense disaster of war." [182] Moreover, the ease with which self-governing weapons make war more practical militates against the principle of war as a last option in genuine self-defense, [183] possibly increasing the instruments of war well beyond the scope of human oversight and precipitating a destabilizing arms race, with catastrophic consequences for human rights. [184]

100. In specific, Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, which are capable of determining and striking targets without direct human intervention, are a "cause for grave ethical issue" due to the fact that they do not have the "unique human capability for ethical judgment and ethical decision-making." [185] For this factor, Pope Francis has actually urgently called for a reconsideration of the development of these weapons and a prohibition on their usage, beginning with "a reliable and concrete commitment to present ever greater and correct human control. No machine should ever choose to take the life of a human being." [186]

101. Since it is a little step from machines that can eliminate autonomously with precision to those efficient in large-scale damage, some AI scientists have revealed issues that such innovation positions an "existential threat" by having the potential to act in ways that could threaten the survival of entire areas or perhaps of humankind itself. This threat demands severe attention, reflecting the long-standing issue about technologies that give war "an uncontrollable harmful power over multitudes of innocent civilians," [187] without even sparing kids. In this context, the call from Gaudium et Spes to "carry out an evaluation of war with a totally new mindset" [188] is more urgent than ever.


102. At the same time, while the theoretical risks of AI deserve attention, the more instant and pressing issue lies in how individuals with malicious intents might misuse this innovation. [189] Like any tool, AI is an extension of human power, and while its future abilities are unpredictable, humanity's past actions offer clear cautions. The atrocities devoted throughout history suffice to raise deep concerns about the possible abuses of AI.


103. Saint John Paul II observed that "mankind now has instruments of unmatched power: we can turn this world into a garden, or decrease it to a stack of debris." [190] Given this fact, the Church advises us, in the words of Pope Francis, that "we are free to use our intelligence towards things evolving positively," or towards "decadence and mutual damage." [191] To avoid mankind from spiraling into self-destruction, [192] there should be a clear stand against all applications of technology that inherently threaten human life and self-respect. This commitment needs cautious discernment about making use of AI, especially in military defense applications, to ensure that it constantly respects human self-respect and serves the typical good. The advancement and release of AI in armaments should undergo the highest levels of ethical scrutiny, governed by a concern for human self-respect and the sanctity of life. [193]

104. Technology offers remarkable tools to oversee and develop the world's resources. However, in some cases, humankind is progressively ceding control of these resources to machines. Within some circles of researchers and futurists, there is optimism about the potential of synthetic basic intelligence (AGI), a hypothetical form of AI that would match or exceed human intelligence and cause unthinkable developments. Some even speculate that AGI might attain superhuman abilities. At the very same time, as society wanders away from a connection with the transcendent, some are tempted to turn to AI searching for significance or fulfillment-longings that can just be genuinely pleased in communion with God. [194]

105. However, the anticipation of substituting God for an artifact of human making is idolatry, a practice Scripture clearly alerts against (e.g., Ex. 20:4; 32:1 -5; 34:17). Moreover, AI may prove even more sexy than traditional idols for, unlike idols that "have mouths however do not speak; eyes, however do not see; ears, but do not hear" (Ps. 115:5 -6), AI can "speak," or a minimum of offers the illusion of doing so (cf. Rev. 13:15). Yet, it is essential to bear in mind that AI is but a pale reflection of humanity-it is crafted by human minds, trained on human-generated material, responsive to human input, and sustained through human labor. AI can not have a number of the capabilities specific to human life, and it is also fallible. By turning to AI as a viewed "Other" higher than itself, with which to share presence and obligations, humankind risks producing a replacement for God. However, it is not AI that is eventually deified and worshipped, but mankind itself-which, in this way, becomes enslaved to its own work. [195]

106. While AI has the possible to serve mankind and contribute to the common 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 undue worth. As the Book of Wisdom verifies: "For a male made them, and one whose spirit is obtained formed them; for no male can form a god which is like himself. He is mortal, and what he makes with lawless hands is dead, for he is much better than the items he worships considering that he has life, however they never ever have" (Wis. 15:16 -17).


107. In contrast, people, "by their interior life, transcend the entire material universe; they experience this deep interiority when they enter into their own heart, where God, who probes the heart, awaits them, and where they choose their own destiny in the sight of God." [196] It is within the heart, as Pope Francis advises us, that each specific discovers the "strange connection in between self-knowledge and openness to others, in between the encounter with one's individual uniqueness and the determination to give oneself to others. " [197] Therefore, it is the heart alone that is "capable of setting our other powers and enthusiasms, and our whole individual, in a stance of reverence and loving obedience before the Lord," [198] who "provides to deal with each one people as a 'Thou,' constantly and forever." [199]

108. Considering the various difficulties presented by advances in innovation, Pope Francis stressed the requirement for growth in "human obligation, worths, and conscience," proportionate to the development in the potential that this technology brings [200] -acknowledging that "with a boost in human power comes an expanding of responsibility on the part of individuals and communities." [201]

109. At the exact same time, the "important and fundamental concern" remains "whether in the context of this progress guy, as guy, is ending up being genuinely better, that is to state, more mature spiritually, more knowledgeable about the dignity of his humankind, more responsible, more available to others, especially the neediest and the weakest, and readier to provide and to aid all." [202]

110. As an outcome, it is vital to know how to evaluate individual applications of AI in particular contexts to figure out whether its usage promotes human self-respect, the occupation of the human individual, and the typical good. As with numerous technologies, the impacts of the numerous usages of AI may not always be predictable from their beginning. As these applications and their social effects end up being clearer, suitable actions should be made at all levels of society, following the concept of subsidiarity. Individual users, families, civil society, corporations, organizations, federal governments, and international organizations should work at their proper levels to ensure that AI is utilized for the good of all.


111. A significant obstacle and chance for the typical good today depends on considering AI within a framework of relational intelligence, which highlights the interconnectedness of people and neighborhoods and highlights our shared obligation for promoting the essential well-being of others. The twentieth-century philosopher Nicholas Berdyaev observed that individuals often blame machines for individual and social issues; nevertheless, "this just humiliates male and does not correspond to his dignity," for "it is not worthy to move obligation from man to a machine." [203] Only the human person can be ethically accountable, and the obstacles of a technological society are eventually spiritual in nature. Therefore, facing those challenges "needs an increase of spirituality." [204]

112. A further indicate consider is the call, prompted by the appearance of AI on the world stage, for a restored appreciation of all that is human. Years ago, the French Catholic author Georges Bernanos alerted that "the danger is not in the reproduction of makers, however in the ever-increasing number of men accustomed from their youth to desire just what makers can provide." [205] This difficulty is as real today as it was then, as the fast rate of digitization runs the risk of a "digital reductionism," where non-quantifiable elements of life are set aside and after that forgotten or even deemed irrelevant because they can not be calculated in official terms. AI should be utilized just as a tool to match human intelligence instead of replace its richness. [206] Cultivating those aspects of human life that go beyond computation is crucial for maintaining "an authentic mankind" that "appears to dwell in the middle of our technological culture, nearly unnoticed, like a mist permeating gently underneath a closed door." [207]

113. The vast expanse of the world's knowledge is now available in ways that would have filled past generations with awe. However, to ensure that developments in understanding do not become humanly or spiritually barren, one must surpass the simple accumulation of data and aim to attain real knowledge. [208]

114. This knowledge is the present that humankind requires most to address the extensive questions and ethical obstacles postured by AI: "Only by embracing a spiritual way of seeing reality, only by recovering a knowledge of the heart, can we confront and translate the newness of our time." [209] Such "wisdom of the heart" is "the virtue that enables us to incorporate the entire and its parts, our choices and their effects." It "can not be sought from devices," however it "lets itself be found by those who seek it and be seen by those who like it; it prepares for those who desire it, and it goes in search of those who are worthwhile of it (cf. Wis 6:12 -16)." [210]

115. In a world marked by AI, we need the grace of the Holy Spirit, who "enables us to look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, scenarios, events and to reveal their genuine significance." [211]

116. Since a "individual's perfection is measured not by the details or understanding they possess, but by the depth of their charity," [212] how we include AI "to include the least of our siblings and sis, the susceptible, and those most in need, will be the real step of our humankind." [213] The "knowledge of the heart" can brighten and guide the human-centered use of this innovation to help promote the typical good, look after our "common home," advance the look for the truth, foster integral human development, prefer human solidarity and fraternity, and lead humanity to its supreme objective: joy and full communion with God. [214]

117. From this point of view of wisdom, believers will be able to serve as ethical agents efficient in using this technology to promote a genuine vision of the human individual and society. [215] This need to be finished with the understanding that technological development is part of God's strategy for creation-an activity that we are called to buy toward the Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ, in the consistent search for the True and the Good.


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


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


Ex audientia die 14 ianuarii 2025
Franciscus


Contents


I. Introduction


II. What is Artificial Intelligence?


III. Intelligence in the Philosophical and Theological Tradition


Rationality


Embodiment


Relationality


Relationship with the Truth


Stewardship of the World


An Essential Understanding of Human Intelligence


The Limits of AI


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


Helping Human Freedom and Decision-Making


V. Specific Questions


AI and Society


AI and Human Relationships


AI, the Economy, and Labor


AI and Healthcare


AI and Education


AI, Misinformation, Deepfakes, and Abuse


AI, Privacy, and Surveillance


AI and the Protection of Our Common Home


AI and Warfare


AI and Our Relationship with God


VI. Concluding Reflections


True Wisdom


[1] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. See also Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053.
[2] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 307. Cf. Id., Christmas Greetings to the Roman Curia (21 December 2019): AAS 112 (2020 ), 43.
[3] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8.
[4] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 2293; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053.
[5] J. McCarthy, et al., "A Proposition for the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence" (31 August 1955), http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/history/dartmouth/dartmouth.html (accessed: 21 October 2024).
[6] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), pars. 2-3: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2.
[7] Terms in this file explaining the outputs or processes of AI are utilized figuratively to explain its operations and are not intended to anthropomorphize the maker.
[8] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3; Id., Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2.
[9] Here, one can see the main positions of the "transhumanists" and the "posthumanists." Transhumanists argue that technological advancements will enable people to conquer their biological constraints and boost both their physical and cognitive capabilities. Posthumanists, on the other hand, contend that such advances will eventually modify human identity to the extent that humankind itself might no longer be considered genuinely "human." Both views rest on a basically unfavorable understanding of human corporality, which deals with the body more as a barrier than as an important part of the person's identity and call to complete awareness. Yet, this negative view of the body is inconsistent with a correct understanding of human self-respect. While the Church supports genuine clinical development, it affirms that human dignity is rooted in "the individual as an inseparable unity of body and soul. " Thus, "dignity is also fundamental in everyone's body, which takes part in its own way in remaining in imago Dei" (Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita [8 April 2024], par. 18).
[10] This approach shows a functionalist point of view, which minimizes the human mind to its functions and presumes that its functions can be entirely quantified in physical or mathematical terms. However, even if a future AGI were to appear genuinely intelligent, it would still remain functional in nature.
[11] Cf. A.M. Turing, "Computing Machinery and Intelligence," Mind 59 (1950) 443-460.
[12] If "thinking" is attributed to devices, it should be clarified that this describes calculative thinking instead of vital thinking. Similarly, if machines are said to operate utilizing logical thinking, it must be specified that this is limited to computational reasoning. On the other hand, by its very nature, human thought is a creative procedure that avoids shows and transcends constraints.
[13] On the fundamental function of language in forming understanding, cf. M. Heidegger, Über den Humanismus, Klostermann, Frankfurt am Main 1949 (en. tr. "Letter on Humanism," in Basic Writings: Martin Heidegger, Routledge, London - New York 2010, 141-182).
[14] For further 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 advertisement litteram III, 20, 30: PL 34, 292: "Man is made in the image of God in relation to that [faculty] by which he is remarkable to the irrational animals. Now, this [faculty] is factor itself, or the 'mind,' or 'intelligence,' whatever other name it might more appropriately be given"; Id., Enarrationes in Psalmos 54, 3: PL 36, 629: "When considering all that they have, human beings find that they are most identified from animals specifically by the reality they have intelligence." This is likewise repeated by Saint Thomas Aquinas, who states that "male is the most ideal of all earthly beings endowed with movement, and his appropriate and natural operation is intellection," by which man abstracts from things and "gets 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, passfun.awardspace.us a. 3; II-II, q. 49, a. 2. For a contemporary point of view that echoes components of the classical and middle ages distinction between these two modes of cognition, cf. D. Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, New York 2011.
[19] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 76, a. 1, resp.
[20] Cf. Irenaeus of Lyon, Adversus Haereses, V, 6, 1: PG 7( 2 ), 1136-1138.
[21] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 9. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1045: "The intellect can examine the truth of things through reflection, experience and discussion, and pertain to recognize because truth, which transcends it, the basis of certain universal ethical needs."
[22] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492.
[23] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 365. Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 75, a. 4, resp.
[24] Certainly, Sacred Scripture "generally considers the human person as a being who exists in the body and is unthinkable beyond it" (Pontifical Biblical Commission, "Che cosa è l'uomo?" (Sal 8,5): Un itinerario di antropologia biblica [30 September 2019], par. 19). Cf. ibid., pars. 20-21, 43-44, 48.
[25] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 22: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1042: Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 7: AAS 100 (2008 ), 863: "Christ did not disdain human bodiliness, however instead totally revealed its meaning and worth."
[26] Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 81.
[27] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036.
[28] Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I, q. 89, a. 1, resp.: "to be separated from the body is not in accordance with [the soul's] nature [...] and thus it is united to the body in order that it might have a presence and an operation appropriate to its nature."
[29] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1035. Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 18.
[30] International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 56. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 357.
[31] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), pars. 5, 8; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 15, 24, 53-54.
[32] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 356. Cf. ibid., par. 221.
[33] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 13, 26-27.
[34] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Donum Veritatis (24 May 1990), 6: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1552. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), par. 109: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1219. Cf. Pseudo-Dionysius, De divinis nominibus, VII, 2: PG 3, 868B-C: "Human souls likewise possess factor and with it they circle in discourse around the reality of things. [...] [O] n account of the way in which they are capable of focusing the many into the one, they too, in their own style and as far as they can, are worthy of conceptions like those of the angels" (en. tr. Pseudo-Dionysius: The Complete Works, Paulist Press, New York - Mahwah 1987, 106-107).
[35] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 3: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7.
[36] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036.
[37] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 42: AAS 91 (1999 ), 38. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 208: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1043: "the human mind can transcending immediate concerns and comprehending certain truths that are changeless, as true now as in the past. As it peers into human nature, reason finds universal values obtained from that same nature"; ibid., par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034.
[38] Cf. B. Pascal, Pensées, no. 267 (ed. Brunschvicg): "The last proceeding of reason is to recognize that there is an infinity of things which are beyond it" (en. tr. Pascal's Pensées, E.P. Dutton, New York City 1958, 77).
[39] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492.
[40] Our semantic capability enables us to comprehend messages in any type of communication in a way that both takes into consideration and transcends their material or empirical structures (such as computer system code). Here, intelligence ends up being a knowledge that "allows us to take a look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, circumstances, occasions and to reveal their genuine meaning" (Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications [24 January 2024]: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8). Our creativity enables us to generate new content or concepts, mainly by using an original perspective on reality. Both capacities depend upon the existence of an individual subjectivity for their full realization.
[41] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931.
[42] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034: "Charity, when accompanied by a commitment to the truth, is far more than individual feeling [...] Certainly, its close relation to fact cultivates 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 quoted in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 293. Cf. ibid., par. 294.
[47] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 295, 299, 302. Bonaventure likens deep space to "a book showing, representing, and explaining its Maker," the Triune God who approves existence to all things (Breviloquium 2.12.1). Cf. Alain de Lille, De Incarnatione Christi, PL 210, 579a: "Omnis mundi creatura quasi liber et pictura nobis est et speculum."
[48] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 67: AAS 107 (2015 ), 874; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 6: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589-592; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 57: "humans occupy a special location in deep space according to the divine plan: they enjoy the benefit of sharing in the divine governance of visible development. [...] Since man's place as ruler remains in fact a participation in the magnificent governance of production, we speak of it here as a kind of stewardship."
[49] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), pars. 38-39: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1164-1165.
[50] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. This concept is likewise shown in the development account, where God brings animals to Adam "to see what he would call them. And whatever [he] called every living creature, 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 higher good by noticing and enjoying truths."
[61] Dante, Paradiso, Canto XXX: "luce intellettüal, piena d'amore;/ amor di vero ben, pien di letizia;/ letizia che trascende ogne dolzore" (en. tr. The Divine Comedy of Dante Alighieri, C.E. Norton, tr., Houghton Mifflin, Boston 1920, 232).
[62] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931:" [T] he highest norm of human life is the divine law itself-eternal, objective and universal, by which God orders, directs and governs the entire world and the ways of the human neighborhood according to a strategy conceived in his wisdom and love. God has made it possible for guy to take part in this law of his so that, under the gentle disposition of magnificent providence, numerous may have the ability to show up at a much deeper and deeper knowledge of unchangeable fact." Also cf. Id., Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037.
[63] Cf. First Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius (24 April 1870), ch. 4, DH 3016.
[64] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892.
[65] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 891. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 204: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1042.
[66] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 11: AAS 83 (1991 ), 807: "God has inscribed his own image and likeness on male (cf. Gen 1:26), giving upon him an incomparable self-respect [...] In effect, beyond the rights which man obtains by his own work, there exist rights which do not correspond to any work he performs, but which circulation from his essential dignity as an individual." 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 research 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 instance, see the encouragement of clinical expedition in Albertus Magnus (De Mineralibus, II, setiathome.berkeley.edu 2, 1) and the gratitude for the mechanical arts in Hugh of St. Victor (Didascalicon, I, 9). These writers, 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 men and female of our time and not misused to damage 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 guy an ethical topic. When he acts intentionally, guy is, so to speak, the father of his acts."
[82] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1776.
[83] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1777.
[84] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 1779-1781; Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 463, where the Holy Father motivated efforts "to guarantee that technology remains human-centered, fairly grounded and directed toward the 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 company in selecting a broader aim (Ziel) that then informs the particular purpose (Zweck) for which each technological application is produced, cf. F. Dessauer, Streit um die Technik, Herder-Bücherei, Freiburg i. Br. 1959, 70-71.
[86] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4: "Technology is born for a purpose and, in its influence on human society, always represents a form of order in social relations and a plan of power, thus enabling certain individuals to perform particular actions while avoiding others from carrying out various ones. In a more or less explicit way, this constitutive power-dimension of technology always includes the worldview of those who developed and developed it."
[87] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 309.
[88] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4.
[89] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti, pars. 212-213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045.
[90] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 5: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589; Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4.
[91] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "Confronted with the marvels of devices, which seem to know how to pick individually, we should be extremely clear that decision-making [...] should always be left to the human individual. We would condemn mankind to a future without hope if we took away people's ability to make choices about themselves and their lives, by dooming them to depend on the choices of devices."
[92] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2.
[93] The term "predisposition" in this document describes algorithmic bias (organized and consistent mistakes in computer systems that might disproportionately bias certain groups in unintended methods) or finding out bias (which will lead to training on a prejudiced data set) and not the "predisposition vector" in neural networks (which is a specification used to change the output of "nerve cells" to adjust more properly to the information).
[94] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464, where the Holy Father affirmed the growth in consensus "on the requirement for development processes to appreciate such values as addition, openness, security, equity, privacy and reliability," and likewise invited "the efforts of worldwide organizations to control these innovations so that they promote authentic progress, contributing, that is, to a better world and an integrally higher quality of life."
[95] Francis, Greetings to a Delegation of the "Max Planck Society" (23 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 February 2023, 8.
[96] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047.
[97] Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1571.
[98] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. For additional 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 discussion in a pluralist society oriented towards a "robust and solid social principles," see Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 211-214: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045.
[100] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2.
[101] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047.
[102] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893.
[103] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464.
[104] Cf. Pontifical Council for Social Communications, Ethics in Internet (22 February 2002), par. 10.
[105] Francis, Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414; pricing 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 individuals] desire their interpersonal relationships offered by sophisticated equipment, by screens and systems which can be switched on and off on command. Meanwhile, the Gospel informs us continuously to run the threat of a face-to-face encounter with others, with their physical existence which challenges us, with their pain and their pleas, with their joy which contaminates 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' mentor 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 male' and not male 'for work.' Through this conclusion one rightly pertains to recognize the pre-eminence of the subjective significance of work over the objective one."
[132] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 128: AAS 107 (2015 ), 898. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 24: AAS 108 (2016 ), 319-320.
[133] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3.
[134] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae (25 March 1995), par. 89: AAS 87 (1995 ), 502.
[135] Ibid.
[136] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 67: AAS 112 (2020 ), 993; as quoted in Id., Message for the XXXI World Day of the Sick (11 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 10 January 2023, 8.
[137] Francis, Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12.
[138] Francis, Address to the Diplomatic Corps Accredited to the Holy See (11 January 2016): AAS 108 (2016 ), 120. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 18: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975; Id., Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12.
[139] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465; Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2.
[140] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105, 107: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-890; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 18-21: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975-976; Id., Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465.
[141] Francis, Address to the Participants at the Meeting Sponsored by the Charity and Health Commission of the Italian Bishops' Conference (10 February 2017): AAS 109 (2017 ), 243. Cf. ibid., 242-243: "If there is a sector in which the throwaway culture is manifest, with its painful repercussions, it is that of health care. When an ill person is not put in the center or their self-respect is ruled out, this provides increase to attitudes that can lead even to speculation on the bad luck of others. And this is extremely serious! [...] The application of a business technique to the health care sector, if indiscriminate [...] might run the risk of disposing of humans."
[142] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3.
[143] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729.
[144] Congregation for 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 teachers, it is because they are witnesses."
[147] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 6.1, London 18733, 125-126.
[148] Francis, Consulting With the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316.
[149] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 86: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413, pricing quote the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, Final Document (27 October 2018), par. 21: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1592.
[150] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 7.6, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 167.
[151] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 88: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413.
[152] In a 2023 policy file about using generative AI in education and research, UNESCO notes: "One of the crucial questions [of using generative AI (GenAI) in education and research] is whether humans can potentially cede standard levels of thinking and skill-acquisition processes to AI and rather focus on higher-order thinking abilities based on the outputs provided by AI. Writing, for instance, is often related to the structuring of thinking. With GenAI [...], humans can now begin with a well-structured outline provided by GenAI. Some experts have actually defined using GenAI to create text in this method as 'composing without thinking'" (UNESCO, Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research [2023], 37-38). The German-American thinker Hannah Arendt foresaw such a possibility in her 1959 book, The Human Condition, and warned: "If it needs to turn out to be true that understanding (in the sense of know-how) and thought have actually parted company for excellent, then we would certainly become the helpless servants, not so much of our makers as of 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 instance, it might help people gain access to the "range of resources for generating higher knowledge of truth" contained in the works of philosophy (John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio [14 September 1998], par. 3: AAS 91 [1999], 7). Cf. ibid., par. 4: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7-8.
[159] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 43. Cf. ibid., pars. 61-62.
[160] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8.
[161] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par 25: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053; cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), passim: AAS 112 (2020 ), 969-1074.
[162] Cf. Francis., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 414; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 25: AAS 91 (1999 ), 25-26: "People can not be genuinely indifferent to the question of whether what they know holds true or not. [...] It is this that Saint Augustine teaches when he composes: 'I have actually satisfied numerous who wanted to deceive, however none who wished to be deceived'"; 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 Network (28 May 2023), par. 41; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Decree Inter Mirifica (4 December 1963), pars. 4, 8-12: AAS 56 (1964 ), 146, 148-149.
[166] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 1, 6, 16, 24.
[167] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046. Cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 40: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 127: "no man may with impunity violate that human dignity which God himself treats with great reverence"; as quoted in John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 9: AAS 83 (1991 ), 804.
[168] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2477, 2489; can. 220 CIC; can. 23 CCEO; John Paul II, Address to the Third General Conference of the Latin American Episcopate (28 January 1979), III.1-2: Insegnamenti II/1 (1979 ), 202-203.
[169] Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to the Thematic Discussion on Other Disarmament Measures and International Security (24 October 2022): "Maintaining human self-respect in the online world obliges States to also appreciate the right to personal privacy, by protecting citizens from intrusive monitoring and allowing them to safeguard their personal details from unauthorized gain access to."
[170] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 42: AAS 112 (2020 ), 984.
[171] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3.
[172] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465. [173] The 2023 Interim Report of the United Nations AI Advisory Body recognized a list of "early pledges of AI assisting to address climate change" (United Nations AI Advisory Body, Interim Report: Governing AI for Humanity [December 2023], 3). The document observed that, "taken together with predictive systems that can transform information into insights and insights into actions, AI-enabled tools may help establish new techniques and financial investments to reduce emissions, affect brand-new private sector investments in net zero, safeguard biodiversity, and build broad-based social resilience" (ibid.).
[174] "The cloud" describes a network of physical servers throughout the world that allows users to shop, process, and manage their information remotely.
[175] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 9: AAS 107 (2015 ), 850.
[176] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 106: AAS 107 (2015 ), 890.
[177] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 60: AAS 107 (2015 ), 870.
[178] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 3, 13: AAS 107 (2015 ), 848.852.
[179] Augustine, De Civitate Dei, XIX, 13, 1: PL 41, 640.
[180] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 77-82: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1100-1107; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 256-262: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1060-1063; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 38-39; Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2302-2317.
[181] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 78: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1101.
[182] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3.
[183] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2308-2310.
[184] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 80-81: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1105.
[185] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "We require to guarantee and safeguard a space for appropriate human control over the options made by synthetic intelligence programs: human self-respect itself depends on it."
[186] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to Working Group II on Emerging Technologies at the UN Disarmament Commission (3 April 2024): "The development and use of lethal self-governing weapons systems (LAWS) that do not have the suitable human control would present basic ethical concerns, considered that LAWS can never ever be morally responsible topics efficient in adhering to global humanitarian law."
[187] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 258: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1061. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104.
[188] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104.
[189] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3: "Nor can we disregard the possibility of sophisticated weapons ending up in the wrong hands, facilitating, for circumstances, terrorist attacks or interventions aimed at destabilizing the institutions of legitimate systems of government. In a word, the world does not need new technologies that add to the unfair development of commerce and the weapons trade and subsequently wind up promoting the recklessness of war."
[190] John Paul II, Act of Entrustment to Mary for the Jubilee of Bishops (8 October 2000), par. 3: Insegnamenti XXIII/2 (200 ), 565.
[191] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 79: AAS 107 (2015 ), 878.
[192] Cf. Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 51: AAS 101 (2009 ), 687.
[193] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39.
[194] Cf. Augustine, Confessiones, I, 1, 1: PL 32, 661.
[195] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (30 December 1987), par. 28: AAS 80 (1988 ), 548:" [T] here is a much better understanding today that the simple accumulation of products and services [...] is not enough for the awareness of human happiness. Nor, in consequence, does the availability of the numerous genuine benefits supplied in recent times by science and technology, consisting of the computer sciences, bring freedom from every kind of slavery. On the contrary, [...] unless all the significant body of resources and possible at man's disposal is directed by an ethical understanding and by an orientation towards the true good of the human race, it quickly turns against man to oppress him." Cf. ibid., pars. 29, 37: AAS 80 (1988 ), 550-551.563 -564.
[196] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036.
[197] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 18: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5.
[198] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 27: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 6.
[199] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 25: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5-6.
[200] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. R. Guardini, Das Ende der Neuzeit, Würzburg 19659, 87 ff. (en. tr. Completion of the Modern World, Wilmington 1998, 82-83).
[201] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053.
[202] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptor Hominis (4 March 1979), par. 15: AAS 71 (1979 ), 287-288.
[203] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," in C. Mitcham - R. Mackey, eds., Philosophy and Technology: Readings in the Philosophical Problems of Technology, New York City 19832, 212-213.
[204] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," 210.
[205] G. Bernanos, "La révolution de la liberté" (1944 ), in Id., Le Chemin de la Croix-des-Âmes, Rocher 1987, 829.
[206] Cf. Francis, Meeting with the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023).
[207] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893.
[208] Cf. Bonaventure, Hex. XIX, 3; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986: "The flood of details at our fingertips does not produce higher knowledge. Wisdom is not born of quick searches on the web nor is it a mass of unverified data. That is not the way to develop in the encounter with reality."
[209] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8.
[210] Ibid.
[211] Ibid.
[212] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate (19 March 2018), par. 37: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1121.
[213] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate (19 March 2018), par. 46: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1123-1124.
[214] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893.
[215] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570-1571.

Meine Werkzeuge
Namensräume

Varianten
Aktionen
Navigation
Werkzeuge