GitLab

1. With knowledge both ancient and brand-new (cf. Mt. 13:52), we are called to review the current difficulties and chances positioned by clinical and technological developments, particularly by the recent development of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The Christian custom regards the present of intelligence as an essential aspect of how human beings are produced "in the image of God" (Gen. 1:27). Starting from an important vision of the human person and the scriptural contacting us to "till" and "keep" the earth (Gen. 2:15), the Church stresses that this gift of intelligence ought to be expressed through the responsible use of factor and technical capabilities in the stewardship of the created world.

2. The Church encourages the advancement of science, innovation, the arts, and other kinds of human endeavor, viewing them as part of the "partnership of males and female with God in improving the visible creation." [1] As Sirach verifies, God "gave skill to people, that he may be glorified in his magnificent works" (Sir. 38:6). Human capabilities and creativity originate from God and, when used rightly, glorify God by reflecting his knowledge and goodness. Due to this, when we ask ourselves what it indicates to "be human," we can not leave out a consideration of our clinical and technological capabilities.

3. It is within this viewpoint that today Note addresses the anthropological and ethical challenges raised by AI-issues that are particularly significant, as one of the objectives of this innovation is to mimic the human intelligence that created it. For example, unlike numerous other human developments, AI can be trained on the results of human imagination and then produce new "artifacts" with a level of speed and ability that frequently rivals or surpasses what people can do, such as producing text or images identical from human structures. This raises vital issues about AI's possible function in the growing crisis of fact in the general public online forum. Moreover, this technology is developed to find out and make certain options autonomously, adjusting to brand-new scenarios and offering solutions not anticipated by its programmers, and thus, it raises essential concerns about ethical responsibility and human safety, with wider implications for society as a whole. This brand-new scenario has actually triggered lots of people to assess what it means to be human and the role of mankind in the world.

4. Taking all this into account, there is broad agreement that AI marks a brand-new and substantial stage in humankind's engagement with technology, positioning it at the heart of what Pope Francis has explained as an "epochal change." [2] Its effect is felt globally and in a large range of locations, consisting of social relationships, education, work, art, healthcare, law, warfare, and global relations. As AI advances quickly toward even greater accomplishments, it is critically essential to consider its anthropological and ethical implications. This involves not only mitigating risks and avoiding damage however also guaranteeing that its applications are utilized to promote human progress and the typical good.

5. To contribute favorably to the discernment relating to AI, and in response to Pope Francis' call for a renewed "wisdom of heart," [3] the Church uses its experience through the anthropological and ethical reflections contained in this Note. Committed to its active function in the worldwide dialogue on these concerns, the Church welcomes those entrusted with transmitting the faith-including parents, teachers, pastors, and bishops-to devote themselves to this vital topic with care and attention. While this document is meant particularly for them, it is likewise indicated to be available to a more comprehensive audience, especially those who share the conviction that scientific and technological advances need to be directed toward serving the human person and the typical good. [4]
6. To this end, the file begins by comparing ideas of intelligence in AI and in human intelligence. It then checks out the Christian understanding of human intelligence, supplying a structure rooted in the Church's philosophical and doctrinal tradition. Finally, the file provides standards to ensure that the advancement and use of AI maintain human dignity and promote the important development of the human person and society.

7. The idea of "intelligence" in AI has developed gradually, drawing on a variety of ideas from numerous disciplines. While its origins extend back centuries, a significant turning point happened in 1956 when the American computer scientist John McCarthy arranged a summer workshop at Dartmouth University to explore the issue of "Artificial Intelligence," which he specified as "that of making a maker act in manner ins which would be called intelligent if a human were so behaving." [5] This workshop released a research program focused on designing devices capable of performing jobs usually connected with the human intellect and smart behavior.

8. Ever since, AI research study has actually advanced rapidly, causing the development of complex systems capable of carrying out extremely sophisticated jobs. [6] These so-called "narrow AI" systems are generally designed to manage particular and limited functions, such as translating languages, anticipating the trajectory of a storm, categorizing images, answering concerns, or creating visual material at the user's request. While the definition of "intelligence" in AI research study differs, the majority of modern AI systems-particularly those using maker learning-rely on analytical inference rather than logical deduction. By examining big datasets to determine patterns, AI can "anticipate" [7] results and propose brand-new approaches, simulating some cognitive procedures typical of human problem-solving. Such accomplishments have actually been enabled through advances in calculating technology (consisting of neural networks, without supervision artificial intelligence, and evolutionary algorithms) as well as hardware developments (such as specialized processors). Together, these technologies enable AI systems to react to various types of human input, adapt to new circumstances, and even recommend unique services not anticipated by their initial programmers. [8]
9. Due to these quick improvements, many jobs when managed solely by humans are now delegated to AI. These systems can enhance and even supersede what human beings have the ability to perform in lots of fields, especially in specialized locations such as data analysis, image recognition, and medical diagnosis. While each "narrow AI" application is created for a particular task, lots of researchers aim to establish what is called "Artificial General Intelligence" (AGI)-a single system capable of operating across all cognitive domains and carrying out any job within the scope of human intelligence. Some even argue that AGI might one day attain the state of "superintelligence," going beyond human intellectual capacities, or contribute to "super-longevity" through advances in biotechnology. Others, nevertheless, fear that these possibilities, even if hypothetical, might one day eclipse the human person, while still others welcome this potential improvement. [9]
10. Underlying this and lots of other viewpoints on the subject is the implicit assumption that the term "intelligence" can be used in the exact same method to refer to both human intelligence and AI. Yet, this does not record the complete scope of the principle. When it comes to people, intelligence is a faculty that pertains to the individual in his/her entirety, whereas in the context of AI, "intelligence" is comprehended functionally, frequently with the presumption that the activities attribute of the human mind can be broken down into digitized actions that machines can reproduce. [10]
11. This practical perspective is exhibited by the "Turing Test," which considers a machine "intelligent" if an individual can not differentiate its behavior from that of a human. [11] However, in this context, the term "behavior" refers only to the performance of specific intellectual jobs; it does not account for the full breadth of human experience, that includes abstraction, emotions, imagination, and the aesthetic, moral, and religious sensibilities. Nor does it encompass the complete variety of expressions characteristic of the human mind. Instead, in the case of AI, the "intelligence" of a system is evaluated methodologically, however likewise reductively, based on its capability to produce appropriate responses-in this case, those connected with the human intellect-regardless of how those actions are produced.

12. AI's advanced functions provide it sophisticated abilities to carry out tasks, but not the ability to believe. [12] This difference is crucially essential, as the way "intelligence" is defined inevitably shapes how we comprehend the relationship between human thought and this technology. [13] To appreciate this, one must remember the richness of the philosophical tradition and Christian faith, which provide a deeper and more detailed understanding of intelligence-an understanding that is main to the Church's mentor on the nature, dignity, and vocation of the human person. [14]
13. From the dawn of human self-reflection, the mind has played a main function in understanding what it indicates to be "human." Aristotle observed that "all individuals by nature desire to know." [15] This understanding, with its capability for abstraction that grasps the nature and meaning of things, sets human beings apart from the animal world. [16] As philosophers, theologians, and psychologists have taken a look at the precise nature of this intellectual faculty, they have actually likewise explored how humans comprehend the world and their unique location within it. Through this exploration, the Christian tradition has pertained to understand the human individual as a being consisting of both body and soul-deeply linked to this world and yet transcending it. [17]
14. In the classical custom, the principle of intelligence is typically understood through the complementary ideas of "factor" (ratio) and "intellect" (intellectus). These are not different professors but, as Saint Thomas Aquinas explains, they are two modes in which the exact same intelligence runs: "The term intellect is inferred from the inward grasp of the truth, while the name factor is drawn from the inquisitive and discursive procedure." [18] This succinct description highlights the two fundamental and complementary measurements of human intelligence. Intellectus describes the intuitive grasp of the truth-that is, apprehending it with the "eyes" of the mind-which precedes and grounds argumentation itself. Ratio pertains to reasoning proper: the discursive, analytical procedure that results in judgment. Together, intelligence and factor form the two elements of the act of intelligere, "the appropriate operation of the human being as such." [19]
15. Explaining the human individual as a "reasonable" being does not minimize the individual to a specific mode of idea; rather, it recognizes that the ability for intellectual understanding shapes and permeates all aspects of human activity. [20] Whether worked out well or badly, this capacity is an intrinsic aspect of humanity. In this sense, the "term 'logical' incorporates all the capacities of the human person," consisting of those related to "knowing and comprehending, in addition to those of willing, loving, picking, and preferring; it likewise consists of all corporeal functions carefully associated to these capabilities." [21] This detailed viewpoint highlights how, in the human person, developed in the "picture of God," factor is incorporated in such a way that raises, shapes, and changes both the person's will and actions. [22]
16. Christian believed thinks about the intellectual faculties of the human person within the structure of an essential anthropology that views the human being as essentially embodied. In the human individual, spirit and matter "are not 2 natures united, however rather their union forms a single nature." [23] In other words, the soul is not merely 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 person is simultaneously both material and spiritual. This understanding reflects the mentor of Sacred Scripture, which views the human person as a being who lives out relationships with God and others (and hence, an authentically spiritual measurement) within and through this embodied presence. [24] The profound significance of this condition is more brightened by the mystery of the Incarnation, through which God himself handled our flesh and "raised it up to a superb self-respect." [25]
17. Although deeply rooted in bodily existence, the human individual goes beyond the material world through the soul, which is "nearly on the horizon of eternity and time." [26] The intelligence's capacity for transcendence and the self-possessed freedom of the will belong to the soul, by which the human person "shares in the light of the divine mind." [27] Nevertheless, the human spirit does not exercise its typical mode of knowledge without the body. [28] In this method, the intellectual professors of the human individual are an integral 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 established in what follows.

18. Humans are "bought by their very nature to social communion," [30] possessing the capacity to understand one another, to provide themselves in love, and to enter into communion with others. Accordingly, human intelligence is not a separated professors however is exercised in relationships, finding its maximum expression in discussion, collaboration, and uniformity. We find out with others, and we find out through others.

19. The relational orientation of the human individual is ultimately grounded in the eternal self-giving of the Triune God, whose love is revealed in production and redemption. [31] The human individual is "called 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 neighbor (cf. 1 Jn. 4:20; Mt. 22:37 -39). By the grace of sharing God's life, Christians are likewise called to imitate Christ's outpouring gift (cf. 2 Cor. 9:8 -11; Eph. 5:1 -2) by following his command to "love one another, as I have loved you" (Jn. 13:34). [33] Love and service, echoing the divine life of self-giving, transcend self-interest to respond more fully to the human vocation (cf. 1 Jn. 2:9). Even more superb than knowing lots of things is the commitment to look after one another, for if "I understand all secrets and all understanding [...] however do not have love, I am nothing" (1 Cor. 13:2).

21. Human intelligence is ultimately "God's gift made for the assimilation of reality." [34] In the dual sense of intellectus-ratio, it allows the individual to check out realities that go beyond simple sensory experience or utility, since "the desire for truth becomes part of humanity itself. It is an innate property of human reason to ask why things are as they are." [35] Moving beyond the limits of empirical data, human intelligence can "with genuine certitude attain to truth itself as knowable." [36] While truth remains only partly understood, the desire for fact "spurs reason constantly to go further; certainly, it is as if factor were overwhelmed to see that it can constantly go beyond what it has already attained." [37] Although Truth in itself transcends the borders of human intelligence, it irresistibly attracts it. [38] Drawn by this attraction, the human individual is caused look for "facts of a higher order." [39]
22. This innate drive toward the pursuit of reality is particularly evident in the distinctly human capacities for semantic understanding and imagination, [40] through which this search unfolds in a "manner that is proper to the social nature and self-respect of the human individual." [41] Likewise, a steadfast orientation to the reality is important for charity to be both authentic and universal. [42]
23. The look for reality discovers its greatest expression in openness to truths that transcend the physical and created world. In God, all realities attain their ultimate and original significance. [43] Entrusting oneself to God is a "essential choice that engages the entire individual." [44] In this method, the human individual becomes fully what she or he is contacted us to be: "the intelligence and the will display their spiritual nature," making it possible for the individual "to act in such a way that recognizes individual liberty to the complete." [45]
24. The Christian faith comprehends creation as the free act of the Triune God, who, as Saint Bonaventure of Bagnoregio explains, creates "not to increase his splendor, however to show it forth and to interact it." [46] Since God produces according to his Wisdom (cf. Wis. 9:9; Jer. 10:12), production 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 people to presume a special role: to cultivate and look after the world. [48]
25. Shaped by the Divine Craftsman, humans live out their identity as beings made in imago Dei by "keeping" and "tilling" (cf. Gen. 2:15) creation-using their intelligence and abilities to care for and establish creation in accord with God's strategy. [49] In this, human intelligence reflects the Divine Intelligence that developed all things (cf. Gen. 1-2; Jn. 1), [50] continuously sustains them, and fakenews.win guides them to their supreme function in him. [51] Moreover, human beings are called to develop their abilities in science and innovation, for through them, God is glorified (cf. Sir. 38:6). Thus, in a proper relationship with creation, people, on the one hand, utilize their intelligence and ability to comply with God in assisting creation towards the purpose to which he has actually called it. [52] On the other hand, development itself, as Saint Bonaventure observes, assists the human mind to "rise slowly to the supreme Principle, who is God." [53]
26. In this context, human intelligence ends up being more plainly understood as a professors that forms an important part of how the entire person engages with truth. Authentic engagement needs embracing the full scope of one's being: spiritual, cognitive, embodied, and relational.

27. This engagement with truth unfolds in different methods, as everyone, in his or her multifaceted individuality [54], seeks to comprehend the world, connect to others, fix issues, reveal creativity, and pursue essential well-being through the unified interaction of the various measurements of the person's intelligence. [55] This involves rational and linguistic abilities however can likewise include other modes of connecting with reality. Consider the work of a craftsmen, who "need to understand how to determine, in inert matter, a specific form that others can not acknowledge" [56] and bring it forth through insight and useful ability. Indigenous peoples who live near to the earth often have an extensive sense of nature and its cycles. [57] Similarly, a friend who understands the ideal word to state or a person proficient at handling human relationships exemplifies an intelligence that is "the fruit of self-examination, discussion and generous encounter between individuals." [58] As Pope Francis observes, "in this age of expert system, we can not forget that poetry and love are required to conserve our humankind." [59]
28. At the heart of the Christian understanding of intelligence is the integration of truth into the moral and spiritual life of the individual, guiding his or her actions due to God's goodness and truth. According to God's strategy, intelligence, in its maximum sense, likewise consists of the ability to enjoy what is true, excellent, and lovely. As the twentieth-century French poet Paul Claudel revealed, "intelligence is absolutely nothing without delight." [60] Similarly, Dante, upon reaching the highest paradise in Paradiso, affirms that the conclusion of this intellectual pleasure is found in the "light intellectual full of love, love of real great filled with delight, happiness which transcends every sweet taste." [61]
29. A correct understanding of human intelligence, for that reason, can not be decreased to the mere acquisition of truths or the capability to perform particular jobs. Instead, it involves the individual's openness to the ultimate concerns of life and shows an orientation towards the True and the Good. [62] As an expression of the magnificent image within the person, human intelligence has the ability to access the totality of being, pondering presence in its fullness, which exceeds what is measurable, and grasping the meaning of what has actually been comprehended. For believers, this capability includes, in a specific method, the capability to grow in the understanding of the mysteries of God by utilizing reason to engage ever more exceptionally with exposed facts (intellectus fidei). [63] True intelligence is shaped by divine love, which "is put forth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit" (Rom. 5:5). From this, it follows that human intelligence has a vital contemplative dimension, an unselfish openness to the True, the Good, and the Beautiful, beyond any practical function.

30. In light of the foregoing discussion, the differences between human intelligence and present AI systems end up being obvious. While AI is an extraordinary technological accomplishment efficient in imitating certain outputs related to human intelligence, it runs by performing jobs, attaining goals, or making choices based upon quantitative data and computational logic. For instance, with its analytical power, AI stands out at incorporating data from a variety of fields, modeling complex systems, and fostering interdisciplinary connections. In this way, it can assist professionals team up in solving complicated problems that "can not be handled from a single perspective or from a single set of interests." [64]
31. However, even as AI processes and replicates certain expressions of intelligence, it remains basically confined to a logical-mathematical framework, which enforces intrinsic constraints. Human intelligence, in contrast, develops organically throughout the person's physical and psychological development, shaped by a myriad of lived experiences in the flesh. Although sophisticated AI systems can "learn" through procedures such as artificial intelligence, this sort of training is basically various from the developmental development of human intelligence, which is formed by embodied experiences, consisting of sensory input, emotional responses, social interactions, and the special context of each minute. These aspects shape and type people within their personal history.In contrast, AI, lacking a physical body, relies on computational thinking and knowing based on large datasets that consist of tape-recorded human experiences and understanding.

32. Consequently, although AI can replicate aspects of human reasoning and carry out particular jobs with incredible speed and effectiveness, its computational capabilities represent only a portion of the broader capabilities of the human mind. For example, AI can not currently duplicate moral discernment or the ability to develop authentic relationships. Moreover, human intelligence is situated within a personally lived history of intellectual and moral formation that basically shapes the person's point of view, encompassing the physical, emotional, social, ethical, and spiritual measurements of life. Since AI can not offer this fullness of understanding, approaches that rely entirely on this innovation or treat it as the main methods of analyzing the world can result in "a loss of appreciation for the whole, for the relationships in between things, and for the broader horizon." [65]
33. Human intelligence is not mainly about finishing practical jobs but about understanding and actively engaging with truth in all its measurements; it is likewise capable of unexpected insights. Since AI lacks the richness of corporeality, relationality, and the openness of the human heart to truth and goodness, its capacities-though apparently limitless-are unparalleled with the human ability to understand reality. So much can be gained from a disease, an accept of reconciliation, and even a basic sunset; certainly, numerous experiences we have as people open new horizons and use the possibility of attaining new knowledge. No device, working exclusively with information, can determine up to these and numerous other experiences present in our lives.

34. Drawing an excessively close equivalence between human intelligence and AI risks succumbing to a functionalist point of view, where people are valued based on the work they can carry out. However, an individual's worth does not depend upon having specific skills, cognitive and technological achievements, or specific success, however on the person's inherent self-respect, grounded in being created in the image of God. [66] This self-respect remains undamaged in all circumstances, including for those unable to exercise their abilities, whether it be an unborn child, an unconscious person, or an older individual who is suffering. [67] It likewise underpins the custom of human rights (and, in specific, what are now called "neuro-rights"), which represent "an essential point of merging in the look for commonalities" [68] and can, thus, function as an essential ethical guide in conversations on the accountable advancement and usage of AI.

35. Considering all these points, as Pope Francis observes, "the really use of the word 'intelligence'" in connection with AI "can show deceptive" [69] and risks overlooking what is most precious in the human individual. Because of this, AI ought to not be viewed as a synthetic type of human intelligence but as a product of it. [70]
36. Given these factors to consider, one can ask how AI can be understood within God's strategy. To address this, it is very important to recall that techno-scientific activity is not neutral in character but is a human endeavor that engages the humanistic and cultural measurements of human imagination. [71]
37. Viewed as a fruit of the prospective engraved within human intelligence, [72] clinical inquiry and the advancement of technical skills belong to the "cooperation of man and lady with God in improving the noticeable development." [73] At the exact same time, all scientific and technological achievements are, ultimately, presents from God. [74] Therefore, people should always utilize their capabilities in view of the greater purpose for which God has actually approved them. [75]
38. We can gratefully acknowledge how innovation has actually "corrected numerous evils which used to harm and restrict people," [76] a reality for which we should rejoice. Nevertheless, not all technological advancements in themselves represent authentic human progress. [77] The Church is particularly opposed to those applications that threaten the sanctity of life or the self-respect of the human individual. [78] Like any human endeavor, technological advancement needs to be directed to serve the human person and add to the pursuit of "higher justice, more substantial fraternity, and a more gentle order of social relations," which are "more valuable than advances in the technical field." [79] Concerns about the ethical implications of technological development are shared not only within the Church but also amongst many scientists, technologists, and professional associations, who significantly call for ethical reflection to direct this advancement in an accountable method.

39. To address these obstacles, it is necessary to highlight the value of moral responsibility grounded in the self-respect and occupation of the human individual. This directing concept also applies to concerns concerning AI. In this context, the ethical measurement handles main significance due to the fact that it is individuals who design systems and figure out the functions for which they are used. [80] Between a device and a person, just the latter is truly an ethical agent-a subject of moral duty who exercises liberty in his or her decisions and accepts their consequences. [81] It is not the machine but the human who remains in relationship with reality 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 recommendation 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 seeking the good that is possible in every situation. [84] In reality, all of this likewise belongs to the individual's exercise of intelligence.

40. Like any item of human imagination, AI can be directed towards favorable or negative ends. [85] When used in methods that respect human self-respect and promote the well-being of individuals and communities, it can contribute favorably to the human occupation. Yet, as in all areas where people are called to make choices, the shadow of evil likewise looms here. Where human freedom enables the possibility of choosing what is wrong, the moral assessment of this technology will require to take into account how it is directed and utilized.

41. At the very same time, it is not only completions that are fairly considerable however likewise the ways used to attain them. Additionally, the overall vision and understanding of the human person ingrained within these systems are necessary to consider as well. Technological items show the worldview of their designers, owners, users, and regulators, [86] and have the power to "form the world and engage consciences on the level of worths." [87] On a social level, some technological advancements could also reinforce relationships and power characteristics that are inconsistent with an appropriate understanding of the human person and society.

42. Therefore, completions and the means utilized in a given application of AI, along with the general vision it integrates, must all be assessed to guarantee they respect human dignity and promote the typical good. [88] As Pope Francis has actually specified, "the intrinsic self-respect of every male and every female" must be "the crucial requirement in assessing emerging technologies; these will show fairly sound to the degree that they assist respect that self-respect and increase its expression at every level of human life," [89] consisting of in the social and financial spheres. In this sense, human intelligence plays an important role not just in creating and producing technology however likewise in directing its usage in line with the genuine good of the human person. [90] The duty for handling this wisely pertains to every level of society, assisted by the principle of subsidiarity and other concepts of Catholic Social Teaching.

43. The dedication to making sure that AI constantly supports and promotes the supreme worth of the dignity of every human being and the fullness of the human vocation functions as a requirement of discernment for designers, owners, operators, and regulators of AI, as well as to its users. It remains legitimate for every single application of the innovation at every level of its use.

44. An assessment of the implications of this directing principle might start by considering the significance of ethical obligation. Since complete moral causality belongs only to individual agents, not artificial ones, it is crucial to be able to recognize and specify who bears obligation for the procedures involved in AI, particularly those capable of finding out, correction, and reprogramming. While bottom-up methods and extremely deep neural networks make it possible for AI to fix intricate issues, they make it tough to understand the procedures that result in the services they adopted. This makes complex accountability since if an AI application produces undesired results, identifying who is responsible becomes tough. To address this problem, attention needs to be given to the nature of accountability procedures in complex, extremely automated settings, where outcomes may just become obvious in the medium to long term. For this, it is important that supreme obligation for decisions used AI rests with the human decision-makers which there is accountability for making use of AI at each phase of the decision-making process. [91]
45. In addition to determining who is accountable, it is vital to recognize the goals offered to AI systems. Although these systems may utilize without supervision autonomous learning mechanisms and sometimes follow paths that people can not rebuild, they eventually pursue goals that humans have actually appointed to them and are governed by procedures established by their designers and programmers. Yet, this provides a difficulty due to the fact that, as AI designs become significantly capable of independent learning, the capability to maintain control over them to guarantee that such applications serve human purposes might efficiently reduce. This raises the crucial question of how to make sure that AI systems are bought for the good of people and not against them.

46. While duty for the ethical use of AI systems starts with those who develop, produce, manage, and manage such systems, it is also shared by those who utilize them. As Pope Francis kept in mind, the device "makes a technical choice amongst numerous possibilities based either on well-defined requirements or on analytical reasonings. People, nevertheless, not only choose, however in their hearts are capable of choosing." [92] Those who utilize AI to achieve a task and follow its results produce a context in which they are eventually accountable for the power they have actually delegated. Therefore, insofar as AI can help people in making decisions, the algorithms that govern it should be credible, safe, robust enough to manage disparities, and transparent in their operation to reduce biases and unexpected adverse effects. [93] Regulatory frameworks need to make sure that all legal entities remain accountable for using AI and all its consequences, with suitable safeguards for transparency, personal privacy, and responsibility. [94] Moreover, those utilizing AI must beware not to become extremely reliant on it for their decision-making, a pattern that increases contemporary society's currently high reliance on technology.

47. The Church's ethical and social mentor supplies resources to help guarantee that AI is used in such a way that maintains human agency. Considerations about justice, for example, should likewise address problems such as promoting just social characteristics, maintaining international security, and promoting peace. By exercising vigilance, people and neighborhoods can recognize methods to use AI to benefit humankind while avoiding applications that might deteriorate human self-respect or damage the environment. In this context, the concept of obligation need to be understood not just in its most restricted sense but as a "responsibility for the care for others, which is more than simply accounting for results attained." [95]
48. Therefore, AI, like any technology, can be part of a conscious and accountable response to humankind's vocation to the excellent. However, as formerly discussed, AI needs to be directed by human intelligence to line up with this occupation, guaranteeing it appreciates the self-respect of the human individual. Recognizing this "exalted dignity," the Second Vatican Council affirmed that "the social order and its advancement need to inevitably work to the advantage of the human individual." [96] Because of this, the use of AI, as Pope Francis said, need to be "accompanied by an ethic influenced by a vision of the typical great, an ethic of freedom, obligation, and fraternity, capable of cultivating the full development of individuals in relation to others and to the whole of creation." [97]
49. Within this basic point of view, some observations follow below to highlight how the preceding arguments can assist offer an ethical orientation in useful situations, in line with the "knowledge of heart" that Pope Francis has proposed. [98] While not extensive, this discussion is offered in service of the discussion that thinks about how AI can be used to maintain the dignity of the human individual and promote the common good. [99]
50. As Pope Francis observed, "the fundamental self-respect of each person and the fraternity that binds us together as members of the one human household should undergird the advancement of new technologies and act as unassailable requirements for assessing them before they are used." [100]
51. Viewed through this lens, AI could "introduce important innovations in farming, education and culture, an enhanced level of life for whole countries and individuals, and the growth of human fraternity and social friendship," and therefore be "used to promote integral human advancement." [101] AI could also help organizations identify those in requirement and counter discrimination and marginalization. These and other comparable applications of this technology could contribute to human advancement and the common good. [102]
52. However, while AI holds numerous possibilities for promoting the excellent, it can likewise prevent and even counter human advancement and the common good. Pope Francis has actually noted that "evidence to date recommends that digital innovations have increased inequality in our world. Not simply differences in product wealth, which are likewise considerable, but also differences in access to political and social influence." [103] In this sense, AI could be utilized to perpetuate marginalization and discrimination, create new forms of poverty, widen the "digital divide," and get worse existing social inequalities. [104]
53. Moreover, the concentration of the power over mainstream AI applications in the hands of a couple of powerful companies raises significant ethical concerns. Exacerbating this issue is the intrinsic nature of AI systems, where no single individual can work out complete oversight over the huge and intricate datasets used for calculation. This absence of well-defined responsibility produces the risk that AI might be controlled for personal or corporate gain or to direct popular opinion for the benefit of a particular market. Such entities, encouraged by their own interests, have the capability to work out "kinds of control as subtle as they are intrusive, creating mechanisms for the adjustment of consciences and of the democratic procedure." [105]
54. Furthermore, there is the danger of AI being utilized to promote what Pope Francis has actually called the "technocratic paradigm," which perceives all the world's problems as solvable through technological ways alone. [106] In this paradigm, human dignity and fraternity are typically set aside in the name of performance, "as if reality, goodness, and fact immediately flow from technological and economic power as such." [107] Yet, human dignity and the common great needs to never ever be breached for the sake of efficiency, [108] for "technological advancements that do not lead to an enhancement in the quality of life of all humanity, but on the contrary, worsen inequalities and disputes, can never count as true development. " [109] Instead, AI needs to be put "at the service of another kind of progress, one which is healthier, more human, more social, more integral." [110]
55. Attaining this goal needs a deeper reflection on the relationship in between autonomy and obligation. Greater autonomy increases everyone's duty throughout various aspects of common life. For Christians, the foundation of this responsibility lies in the recognition that all human capabilities, consisting of the individual's autonomy, come from God and are meant to be used in the service of others. [111] Therefore, rather than simply pursuing financial or technological goals, AI should serve "the common good of the entire human household," which is "the amount overall of social conditions that enable people, either as groups or as people, to reach their fulfillment more totally and more quickly." [112]
56. The Second Vatican Council observed that "by his inner nature male is a social being; and if he does not enter into relations with others, he can neither live nor establish his gifts." [113] This conviction underscores that living in society is intrinsic to the nature and occupation of the human person. [114] As social beings, we seek relationships that include shared exchange and the pursuit of truth, in the course of which, individuals "share with each other the fact they have actually found, or think they have found, in such a way that they assist one another in the look for fact." [115]
57. Such a quest, together with other elements of human communication, presupposes encounters and mutual exchange in between individuals shaped by their special histories, ideas, convictions, and relationships. Nor can we forget that human intelligence is a diverse, diverse, and intricate reality: specific and social, rational and affective, conceptual and symbolic. Pope Francis underscores this dynamic, noting that "together, we can seek the fact in discussion, in unwinded discussion or in passionate argument. To do so calls for determination; it entails moments of silence and suffering, yet it can patiently accept the broader experience of individuals and individuals. [...] The process of structure fraternity, be it local or universal, can only be undertaken by spirits that are free and available to genuine encounters." [116]
58. It remains in this context that one can think about the challenges AI poses to human relationships. Like other technological tools, AI has the prospective to foster connections within the human household. However, it could likewise prevent a real encounter with truth and, ultimately, lead people to "a deep and melancholic frustration with interpersonal relations, or a hazardous sense of seclusion." [117] Authentic human relationships require the richness of being with others in their pain, their pleas, and their delight. [118] Since human intelligence is revealed and enriched likewise in social and embodied ways, genuine and spontaneous encounters with others are essential for engaging with reality in its fullness.

59. Because "real knowledge requires an encounter with truth," [119] the increase of AI introduces another challenge. Since AI can effectively imitate the products of human intelligence, the capability to know when one is engaging with a human or a machine can no longer be taken for approved. Generative AI can produce text, speech, images, and other sophisticated outputs that are typically connected with human beings. Yet, it needs to be comprehended for what it is: a tool, not a person. [120] This difference is frequently obscured by the language used by specialists, which tends to anthropomorphize AI and therefore blurs the line in between human and machine.

60. Anthropomorphizing AI likewise poses particular challenges for the development of kids, potentially motivating them to establish patterns of interaction that treat human relationships in a transactional manner, as one would associate with a chatbot. Such routines might lead young people to see teachers as mere dispensers of details instead of as mentors who assist and nurture their intellectual and ethical growth. Genuine relationships, rooted in empathy and a steadfast dedication to the good of the other, are important and irreplaceable in fostering the complete advancement of the human individual.

61. In this context, it is essential to clarify that, in spite of the use of anthropomorphic language, no AI application can really experience empathy. Emotions can not be minimized to facial expressions or phrases produced in reaction to prompts; they show the way an individual, as a whole, connects to the world and to his/her own life, with the body playing a main role. True empathy requires the ability to listen, acknowledge another's irreducible individuality, invite their otherness, and understand the significance behind even their silences. [121] Unlike the realm of analytical judgment in which AI stands out, real compassion comes from 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 replicate understanding responses, it can not replicate the incomparably personal and relational nature of authentic compassion. [123]
62. Because of the above, it is clear why misrepresenting AI as an individual should always be avoided; doing so for fraudulent purposes is a severe ethical offense that could wear down social trust. Similarly, using AI to deceive in other contexts-such as in education or in human relationships, consisting of the sphere of sexuality-is also to be thought about immoral and requires cautious oversight to prevent damage, maintain openness, and make sure the self-respect of all individuals. [124]
63. In an increasingly isolated world, some individuals have turned to AI searching for deep human relationships, simple companionship, or perhaps emotional bonds. However, while people are implied to experience authentic relationships, AI can only simulate them. Nevertheless, such relationships with others are an integral part of how a person grows to become who he or she is indicated to be. If AI is used to help individuals foster genuine connections in between people, it can contribute favorably to the complete awareness of the individual. Conversely, if we replace relationships with God and with others with interactions with technology, we run the risk of replacing authentic relationality with a lifeless image (cf. Ps. 106:20; Rom. 1:22 -23). Instead of retreating into synthetic worlds, we are contacted us to participate in a dedicated and deliberate way with truth, particularly by relating to the poor and suffering, consoling those in grief, and creating bonds of communion with all.

64. Due to its interdisciplinary nature, AI is being significantly integrated into financial and monetary systems. Significant financial investments are currently being made not only in the innovation sector but likewise in energy, finance, and media, especially in the locations of marketing and sales, logistics, technological development, compliance, and threat management. At the same time, AI's applications in these locations have also highlighted its ambivalent nature, as a source of significant chances but likewise profound dangers. A very first genuine crucial point in this location worries the possibility that-due to the concentration of AI applications in the hands of a couple of corporations-only those large business would gain from the worth created by AI rather than business that use it.

65. Other more comprehensive elements of AI's effect on the economic-financial sphere must also be thoroughly taken a look at, especially concerning the interaction between concrete reality and the digital world. One crucial consideration in this regard involves the coexistence of diverse and alternative types of financial and monetary organizations within a provided context. This aspect needs to be motivated, as it can bring advantages in how it supports the real economy by fostering its development and stability, especially throughout times of crisis. Nevertheless, it ought to be stressed that digital truths, not limited by any spatial bonds, tend to be more uniform and impersonal than neighborhoods rooted in a specific place and a specific history, with a typical journey defined by shared values and hopes, however likewise by inescapable disputes and divergences. This variety is an indisputable asset to a neighborhood's economic life. Turning over the economy and finance totally to digital innovation would decrease this variety and richness. As an outcome, lots of solutions to financial issues that can be reached through natural dialogue between the involved parties may no longer be attainable in a world controlled by procedures and only the appearance of proximity.

66. Another location where AI is currently having a profound impact is the world of work. As in lots of other fields, AI is driving fundamental changes across many professions, with a variety of results. On the one hand, it has the potential to enhance knowledge and efficiency, create new jobs, enable employees to focus on more innovative jobs, and open brand-new horizons for creativity and innovation.

67. However, while AI guarantees to enhance efficiency by taking control of ordinary tasks, it regularly requires workers to adjust to the speed and demands of devices rather than devices being designed to support those who work. As a result, contrary to the advertised advantages of AI, existing approaches to the technology can paradoxically deskill employees, subject them to automated surveillance, and relegate them to stiff and repeated tasks. The requirement to keep up with the pace of innovation can erode workers' sense of firm and stifle the ingenious capabilities they are anticipated to bring to their work. [125]
68. AI is currently eliminating the requirement for some jobs that were as soon as performed by people. If AI is used to replace human employees instead of match them, there is a "substantial threat of out of proportion advantage for the few at the price of the impoverishment of many." [126] Additionally, as AI becomes more effective, there is an involved threat that human labor may lose its worth in the financial realm. This is the rational repercussion of the technocratic paradigm: a world of humankind enslaved to performance, where, eventually, the expense of mankind need to be cut. Yet, human lives are intrinsically valuable, independent of their financial output. Nevertheless, the "present design," Pope Francis explains, "does not appear to prefer a financial investment in efforts to assist the slow, the weak, or the less skilled to find opportunities in life." [127] Because of this, "we can not enable a tool as powerful and vital as Artificial Intelligence to enhance such a paradigm, but rather, we need to make Artificial Intelligence a bulwark against its growth." [128]
69. It is very important to keep in mind that "the order of things need to be secondary to the order of individuals, and not the other method around." [129] Human work should not just be at the service of earnings but at "the service of the whole human person [...] considering the person's product requirements and the requirements of his or her intellectual, moral, spiritual, and religious life." [130] In this context, the Church recognizes that work is "not only a way of making one's daily bread" however is also "an essential measurement of social life" and "a method [...] of individual growth, the building of healthy relationships, self-expression and the exchange of presents. Work provides us a sense of shared obligation for the development of the world, and eventually, for our life as a people." [131]
70. Since work is a "part of the meaning of life on this earth, a course to development, human development and personal satisfaction," "the objective ought to not be that technological development progressively changes human work, for this would be harmful to humankind" [132] -rather, it ought to promote human labor. Seen in this light, AI must assist, not change, human judgment. Similarly, it should never ever break down imagination or minimize workers to mere "cogs in a device." Therefore, "regard for the self-respect of laborers and the importance of employment for the economic wellness of people, households, and societies, for task security and just wages, ought to be a high top priority for the international neighborhood as these kinds of innovation penetrate more deeply into our workplaces." [133]
71. As individuals in God's healing work, healthcare specialists have the occupation and obligation to be "guardians and servants of human life." [134] Because of this, the health care profession carries an "intrinsic and undeniable ethical dimension," acknowledged by the Hippocratic Oath, which obliges physicians and healthcare professionals to commit themselves to having "absolute respect for human life and its sacredness." [135] Following the example of the Do-gooder, this dedication is to be carried out by men and ladies "who decline the production of a society of exclusion, and act rather as next-door neighbors, raising up and restoring the succumbed to the sake of the common good." [136]
72. Seen in this light, AI appears to hold immense capacity in a range of applications in the medical field, such as helping the diagnostic work of doctor, facilitating relationships in between patients and medical staff, providing new treatments, and broadening access to quality care also for those who are separated or marginalized. In these methods, the technology might enhance the "caring and loving nearness" [137] that health care companies are called to encompass the sick and suffering.

73. However, if AI is used not to boost however to replace the relationship between patients and healthcare providers-leaving patients to engage with a maker rather than a human being-it would reduce a crucially crucial human relational structure to a centralized, impersonal, and unequal framework. Instead of motivating uniformity with the ill and suffering, such applications of AI would risk intensifying the solitude that frequently accompanies disease, specifically in the context of a culture where "individuals are no longer viewed as a paramount value to be cared for and appreciated." [138] This abuse of AI would not align with regard for the self-respect of the human person and uniformity with the suffering.

74. Responsibility for the wellness of clients and the decisions that touch upon their lives are at the heart of the healthcare profession. This responsibility 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, constantly appreciating the inviolable dignity of the clients and the requirement for notified consent. As an outcome, choices regarding patient treatment and the weight of duty they entail need to always remain with the human individual and should never ever be handed over to AI. [139]
75. In addition, using AI to determine who need to receive treatment based mainly on financial steps or metrics of efficiency represents a particularly troublesome circumstances of the "technocratic paradigm" that should be turned down. [140] For, "enhancing resources implies using them in an ethical and fraternal way, and not punishing the most delicate." [141] Additionally, AI tools in health care are "exposed to kinds of bias and discrimination," where "systemic mistakes can quickly increase, producing not just injustices in individual cases but likewise, due to the cause and effect, genuine kinds of social inequality." [142]
76. The combination of AI into healthcare also postures the danger of amplifying other existing disparities in access to medical care. As health care ends up being progressively oriented toward avoidance and lifestyle-based approaches, AI-driven services may accidentally prefer more affluent populations who already take pleasure in much better access to medical resources and quality nutrition. This trend risks reinforcing a "medication for the abundant" model, where those with monetary means gain from innovative preventative tools and individualized health details while others battle to gain access to even fundamental services. To prevent such inequities, fair frameworks are needed to make sure that the usage of AI in health care does not intensify existing health care inequalities but rather serves the common good.

77. The words of the Second Vatican Council remain totally appropriate today: "True education aims to form individuals with a view toward their final end and the good of the society to which they belong." [143] As such, education is "never ever a mere procedure of handing down facts and intellectual skills: rather, its aim is to contribute to the person's holistic formation in its various aspects (intellectual, cultural, spiritual, etc), consisting of, 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 approach involves a commitment to cultivating the mind, but constantly as a part of the essential development of the person: "We should break that concept of education which holds that educating means filling one's head with concepts. That is the way we educate automatons, cerebral minds, not individuals. Educating is taking a danger in the tension in between the mind, the heart, and the hands." [145]
79. At the center of this work of forming the entire human individual is the important relationship between instructor and trainee. Teachers do more than convey knowledge; they design necessary human qualities and influence the delight of discovery. [146] Their presence encourages trainees both through the material they teach and the care they show for their trainees. This bond cultivates trust, good understanding, and the capability to address each individual's unique self-respect and potential. On the part of the trainee, this can produce a genuine desire to grow. The physical existence of an instructor develops a relational dynamic that AI can not duplicate, one that deepens engagement and supports the trainee's important advancement.

80. In this context, AI provides both opportunities and obstacles. If utilized in a sensible way, within the context of an existing teacher-student relationship and bought to the authentic goals of education, AI can become a valuable educational resource by improving access to education, providing tailored assistance, and supplying instant feedback to trainees. These benefits might boost the knowing experience, particularly in cases where individualized attention is required, or instructional resources are otherwise limited.

81. Nevertheless, a vital part of education is forming "the intelligence to reason well in all matters, to reach out towards truth, and to comprehend it," [147] while assisting the "language of the head" to grow harmoniously with the "language of the heart" and the "language of the hands." [148] This is all the more vital in an age marked by innovation, in which "it is no longer merely a concern of 'using' instruments of communication, but of residing in a highly digitalized culture that has had a profound influence on [...] our ability to communicate, find out, be notified and participate in relationship with others." [149] However, rather of promoting "a cultivated intellect," which "brings with it a power and a grace to every work and occupation that it undertakes," [150] the extensive use of AI in education could lead to the trainees' increased dependence on innovation, eroding their ability to perform some skills independently and worsening their dependence on screens. [151]
82. Additionally, while some AI systems are developed to assist individuals establish their important believing abilities and problem-solving abilities, lots of others simply supply answers instead of triggering trainees to show up at answers themselves or write text for themselves. [152] Instead of training youths how to accumulate details and create quick actions, education ought to encourage "the accountable use of freedom to deal with issues with good sense and intelligence." [153] Building on this, "education in using types of artificial intelligence ought to aim above all at promoting important thinking. Users of any ages, however especially the young, need to establish a critical technique to the usage of information and content collected on the web or produced by expert system systems. Schools, universities, and scientific societies are challenged to assist trainees and specialists to comprehend the social and ethical elements of the development and usages of innovation." [154]
83. As Saint John Paul II recalled, "on the planet today, characterized by such rapid advancements in science and innovation, the jobs of a Catholic University presume an ever higher importance and urgency." [155] In a specific method, Catholic universities are prompted to be present as great labs of hope at this crossroads of history. In an inter-disciplinary and cross-disciplinary secret, they are prompted to engage "with wisdom and imagination" [156] in cautious research on this phenomenon, assisting to draw out the salutary capacity within the numerous fields of science and truth, and guiding them always towards fairly sound applications that plainly serve the cohesion of our societies and the typical great, reaching brand-new frontiers in the dialogue between faith and reason.

84. Moreover, it must be noted that existing AI programs have been known to supply biased or made details, which can lead trainees to trust unreliable content. This problem "not just risks of legitimizing phony news and strengthening a dominant culture's advantage, however, in other words, it also undermines the instructional procedure itself." [157] With time, clearer distinctions may emerge between proper and inappropriate usages of AI in education and research. Yet, a definitive guideline is that the usage of AI should always be transparent and never misrepresented.

85. AI could be utilized as an aid to human dignity if it assists individuals comprehend complex principles or directs them to sound resources that support their look for the fact. [158]
86. However, AI also presents a major risk of generating controlled content and false details, which can easily mislead people due to its similarity to the reality. Such false information may happen accidentally, as in the case of AI "hallucination," where a generative AI system yields results that appear genuine however are not. Since generating material that mimics human artifacts is main to AI's performance, reducing these dangers proves challenging. Yet, the effects of such aberrations and false details can be quite grave. For this factor, all those involved in producing and using AI systems ought to be dedicated to the truthfulness and accuracy of the details processed by such systems and distributed to the general public.

87. While AI has a latent capacity to produce false details, a much more unpleasant problem lies in the intentional abuse of AI for control. This can occur when individuals or companies intentionally generate and spread out incorrect material with the aim to trick or trigger damage, such as "deepfake" images, videos, and audio-referring to a false depiction of an individual, modified or generated by an AI algorithm. The threat of deepfakes is especially apparent when they are used to target or harm others. While the images or videos themselves may be artificial, the damage they trigger is genuine, leaving "deep scars in the hearts of those who suffer it" and "genuine injuries in their human dignity." [159]
88. On a wider scale, by misshaping "our relationship with others and with truth," [160] AI-generated fake media can slowly undermine the foundations of society. This issue requires mindful regulation, as misinformation-especially through AI-controlled or influenced media-can spread accidentally, sustaining political polarization and social discontent. When society becomes indifferent to the reality, various groups construct their own versions of "realities," damaging the "reciprocal ties and mutual reliances" [161] that underpin the fabric of social life. As deepfakes trigger individuals to question whatever and AI-generated incorrect content deteriorates trust in what they see and hear, polarization and dispute will only grow. Such prevalent deceptiveness is no trivial matter; it strikes at the core of humankind, dismantling the fundamental trust on which societies are built. [162]
89. Countering AI-driven fallacies is not only the work of industry experts-it needs the efforts of all people of goodwill. "If innovation is to serve human self-respect and not hurt it, and if it is to promote peace instead of violence, then the human neighborhood should be proactive in attending to these patterns with regard to human dignity and the promotion of the good." [163] Those who produce and share AI-generated material should always work out diligence in validating the truth of what they disseminate and, in all cases, must "prevent the sharing of words and images that are deteriorating of humans, that promote hatred and intolerance, that debase the goodness and intimacy of human sexuality or that make use of the weak and susceptible." [164] This calls for the continuous vigilance and cautious discernment of all users regarding their activity online. [165]
90. Humans are inherently relational, and the information everyone generates in the digital world can be seen as an objectified expression of this relational nature. Data conveys not just details however also individual and relational knowledge, which, in a progressively digitized context, can total up to power over the individual. Moreover, while some kinds of information might pertain to public elements of an individual's life, others might discuss the individual's interiority, perhaps even their conscience. Seen in this method, personal privacy plays a vital role in safeguarding the borders of a person's inner life, maintaining their liberty to relate to others, express themselves, and make choices without undue control. This protection is also tied to the defense of religious freedom, as surveillance can also be misused to put in control over the lives of believers and how they express their faith.

91. It is suitable, therefore, to address the issue of privacy from a concern for the genuine liberty and inalienable dignity of the human person "in all scenarios." [166] The Second Vatican Council included the right "to protect privacy" among the essential rights "required for living a truly human life," a right that ought to be reached all people on account of their "superb self-respect." [167] Furthermore, the Church has also verified the right to the legitimate regard for a personal life in the context of verifying the person's right to a good track record, defense of their physical and psychological integrity, and flexibility from harm or excessive invasion [168] -necessary components 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 presume patterns in an individual's habits and thinking from even a small amount of details, making the function of data personal privacy even more vital 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 rise, ranges are otherwise diminishing or disappearing to the point that the right to personal privacy hardly exists. Everything has become a type of phenomenon to be taken a look at and checked, and people's lives are now under continuous surveillance." [170]
93. While there can be legitimate and correct methods to use AI in keeping with human self-respect and the common great, using it for surveillance aimed at exploiting, restricting others' flexibility, or benefitting a couple of at the expenditure of the many is unjustifiable. The risk of monitoring overreach should be monitored by proper regulators to ensure transparency and public accountability. Those accountable for surveillance needs to never surpass their authority, which must always favor the self-respect and liberty of everyone as the important basis of a simply and gentle society.

94. Furthermore, "basic regard for human dignity needs that we refuse to permit the uniqueness of the individual to be recognized with a set of information." [171] This particularly applies when AI is utilized to evaluate individuals or groups based upon their habits, characteristics, or history-a practice called "social scoring": "In social and economic decision-making, we need to beware about delegating judgments to algorithms that process information, frequently collected surreptitiously, on a person's makeup and previous behavior. Such information can be polluted by social prejudices and prejudgments. An individual's past behavior need to not be utilized to reject him or her the chance to alter, grow, and add to society. We can not allow algorithms to restrict or condition regard for human dignity, or to exclude compassion, mercy, forgiveness, and above all, the hope that people are able to change." [172]
95. AI has many promising applications for enhancing our relationship with our "typical home," such as producing designs to anticipate severe environment occasions, proposing engineering services to reduce their effect, managing relief operations, and anticipating population shifts. [173] Additionally, AI can support sustainable farming, enhance energy usage, and provide early warning systems for public health emergencies. These improvements have the prospective to reinforce durability against climate-related obstacles and promote more sustainable development.

96. At the exact same time, current AI designs and the hardware required to support them take in large amounts of energy and water, considerably adding to CO2 emissions and straining resources. This truth is frequently obscured by the way this innovation is presented in the popular creativity, where words such as "the cloud" [174] can provide the impression that information is stored and processed in an intangible realm, removed from the real world. However, "the cloud" is not an ethereal domain separate from the real world; as with all calculating technologies, it relies on physical devices, cables, and energy. The very same holds true of the innovation behind AI. As these systems grow in intricacy, specifically large language designs (LLMs), they need ever-larger datasets, increased computational power, and higher storage infrastructure. Considering the heavy toll these technologies handle the environment, it is vital to develop sustainable solutions that minimize their effect on our typical home.

97. Even then, as Pope Francis teaches, it is vital "that we search for solutions not just in innovation however in a modification of mankind." [175] A complete and genuine understanding of development acknowledges that the worth of all developed things can not be minimized to their mere utility. Therefore, a fully human method to the stewardship of the earth declines the distorted anthropocentrism of the technocratic paradigm, which seeks to "extract everything possible" from the world, [176] and declines the "myth of development," which assumes that "ecological issues will resolve themselves simply with the application of brand-new innovation and with no requirement for ethical factors to consider or deep change." [177] Such a mindset must provide way to a more holistic technique that appreciates the order of development and promotes the essential good of the human individual while protecting our common home. [178]
98. The Second Vatican Council and the consistent teaching of the Popes because then have insisted that peace is not simply the lack of war and is not limited to maintaining a balance of powers between enemies. Instead, in the words of Saint Augustine, peace is "the harmony of order." [179] Certainly, peace can not be attained without protecting the items of individuals, complimentary interaction, respect for the dignity of persons and peoples, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is the work of justice and the impact of charity and can not be attained through force alone; rather, it must be mainly developed through client diplomacy, the active promo of justice, solidarity, integral human advancement, and respect for the dignity of all individuals. [180] In this way, the tools used to maintain peace ought to never ever be permitted to validate injustice, violence, or injustice. Instead, they should constantly be governed by a "firm decision to respect other individuals and countries, in addition to their dignity, along with the intentional practice of fraternity." [181]
99. While AI's analytical abilities could assist nations look for peace and guarantee security, the "weaponization of Artificial Intelligence" can also be highly problematic. Pope Francis has actually observed that "the capability to carry out military operations through remote control systems has caused a lessened understanding of the destruction caused by those weapon systems and the concern of duty for their usage, leading to a much more cold and removed approach to the tremendous disaster of war." [182] Moreover, the ease with which self-governing weapons make war more practical militates against the concept of war as a last option in genuine self-defense, [183] potentially increasing the instruments of war well beyond the scope of human oversight and precipitating a destabilizing arms race, with disastrous consequences for human rights. [184]
100. In specific, Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, which are capable of identifying and striking targets without direct human intervention, are a "cause for grave ethical issue" due to the fact that they do not have the "distinct human capability for ethical judgment and ethical decision-making." [185] For this reason, Pope Francis has actually urgently called for a reconsideration of the development of these weapons and a prohibition on their use, beginning with "a reliable and concrete commitment to present ever higher and proper human control. No device ought to ever select to take the life of a person." [186]
101. Since it is a little action from makers that can kill autonomously with accuracy to those efficient in massive destruction, some AI researchers have actually expressed issues that such technology postures an "existential risk" by having the prospective to act in methods that could threaten the survival of whole regions or perhaps of mankind itself. This danger demands major attention, reflecting the long-standing concern about innovations that approve war "an unmanageable destructive power over fantastic numbers of innocent civilians," [187] without even sparing kids. In this context, the call from Gaudium et Spes to "undertake an evaluation of war with a totally new attitude" [188] is more urgent than ever.

102. At the very same time, while the theoretical dangers of AI are worthy of attention, the more instant and pushing concern lies in how individuals with destructive intents might abuse this technology. [189] Like any tool, AI is an extension of human power, and while its future capabilities are unforeseeable, mankind's previous actions supply clear cautions. The atrocities dedicated throughout history suffice to raise deep issues about the prospective abuses of AI.

103. Saint John Paul II observed that "humankind now has instruments of unmatched power: we can turn this world into a garden, or minimize it to a stack of rubble." [190] Given this reality, the Church reminds us, in the words of Pope Francis, that "we are totally free to use our intelligence towards things developing positively," or towards "decadence and mutual destruction." [191] To prevent humankind from spiraling into self-destruction, [192] there should be a clear stand against all applications of technology that naturally threaten human life and dignity. This commitment requires careful discernment about using AI, particularly in military defense applications, to ensure that it constantly appreciates human self-respect and serves the common good. The advancement and deployment of AI in armaments must be subject to the highest levels of ethical scrutiny, governed by a concern for human self-respect and the sanctity of life. [193]
104. Technology provides exceptional tools to manage and establish the world's resources. However, in some cases, mankind is progressively ceding control of these resources to devices. Within some circles of scientists and futurists, there is optimism about the potential of artificial basic intelligence (AGI), a hypothetical form of AI that would match or go beyond human intelligence and produce unthinkable advancements. Some even speculate that AGI might attain superhuman capabilities. At the same time, as society wanders away from a connection with the transcendent, some are tempted to turn to AI looking for significance or fulfillment-longings that can just be truly pleased in communion with God. [194]
105. However, the presumption of replacing God for an artifact of human making is idolatry, a practice Scripture clearly warns against (e.g., Ex. 20:4; 32:1 -5; 34:17). Moreover, AI might show even more sexy than conventional idols for, unlike idols that "have mouths however do not speak; eyes, however do not see; ears, however do not hear" (Ps. 115:5 -6), AI can "speak," or a minimum of provides the impression of doing so (cf. Rev. 13:15). Yet, it is vital 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 possess numerous of the abilities particular to human life, and it is likewise imperfect. By turning to AI as a perceived "Other" higher than itself, with which to share existence and obligations, mankind threats producing an alternative for God. However, it is not AI that is eventually deified and worshipped, but humankind itself-which, in this way, becomes enslaved to its own work. [195]
106. While AI has the potential to serve humankind and add to the common great, it remains a production of human hands, bearing "the imprint of human art and ingenuity" (Acts 17:29). It should never be ascribed excessive worth. As the Book of Wisdom verifies: "For a guy made them, and one whose spirit is obtained formed them; for no guy can form a god which is like himself. He is mortal, and what he makes with lawless hands is dead, for he is better than the items he worships because he has life, however they never have" (Wis. 15:16 -17).

107. In contrast, people, "by their interior life, go beyond the entire material universe; they experience this deep interiority when they participate in their own heart, where God, who probes the heart, awaits them, and where they decide their own destiny in the sight of God." [196] It is within the heart, as Pope Francis advises us, that each individual finds the "mystical connection in between self-knowledge and openness to others, between the encounter with one's personal uniqueness and the desire to give oneself to others. " [197] Therefore, it is the heart alone that is "efficient in setting our other powers and passions, and our whole individual, in a position of reverence and loving obedience before the Lord," [198] who "uses to treat each one of us as a 'Thou,' constantly and permanently." [199]
108. Considering the numerous challenges posed by advances in technology, Pope Francis stressed the need for development in "human responsibility, worths, and conscience," proportionate to the development in the potential that this innovation brings [200] -recognizing that "with an increase in human power comes a broadening of duty on the part of individuals and neighborhoods." [201]
109. At the exact same time, the "necessary and essential question" remains "whether in the context of this progress guy, as male, is becoming really much better, that is to state, more fully grown spiritually, more knowledgeable about the dignity of his mankind, more responsible, more available to others, especially the neediest and the weakest, and readier to offer and to aid all." [202]
110. As an outcome, it is crucial to understand how to examine specific applications of AI in specific contexts to identify whether its usage promotes human dignity, the occupation of the human person, and the typical good. Just like many innovations, the effects of the numerous uses of AI may not always be predictable from their beginning. As these applications and their social impacts become clearer, proper reactions ought to be made at all levels of society, following the concept of subsidiarity. Individual users, households, civil society, corporations, organizations, federal governments, and worldwide companies need to work at their appropriate levels to make sure that AI is used for the good of all.

111. A significant difficulty and opportunity for the typical excellent today lies in considering AI within a structure of relational intelligence, which stresses the interconnectedness of individuals and communities and highlights our shared duty for promoting the integral wellness of others. The twentieth-century philosopher Nicholas Berdyaev observed that individuals frequently blame devices for personal and social issues; nevertheless, "this only embarrasses man and does not correspond to his dignity," for "it is not worthy to transfer duty from man to a machine." [203] Only the human person can be morally accountable, and the challenges of a technological society are eventually spiritual in nature. Therefore, facing those challenges "needs an accumulation of spirituality." [204]
112. A further point to think about is the call, prompted by the appearance of AI on the world stage, for a restored gratitude of all that is human. Years earlier, the French Catholic author Georges Bernanos warned that "the danger is not in the reproduction of makers, but in the ever-increasing number of males accustomed from their youth to desire just what makers can provide." [205] This challenge is as real today as it was then, as the fast rate of digitization risks a "digital reductionism," where non-quantifiable elements of life are reserved and then forgotten or even considered irrelevant due to the fact that they can not be computed in official terms. AI should be utilized just as a tool to match human intelligence instead of replace its richness. [206] Cultivating those elements of human life that go beyond computation is important for maintaining "an authentic humanity" that "appears to dwell in the middle of our technological culture, practically unnoticed, like a mist leaking carefully beneath a closed door." [207]
113. The vast expanse of the world's knowledge is now available in manner ins which would have filled past generations with awe. However, to ensure that improvements in understanding do not end up being humanly or spiritually barren, one must exceed the mere build-up of data and aim to attain true wisdom. [208]
114. This knowledge is the present that humanity needs most to deal with the profound questions and ethical difficulties postured by AI: "Only by adopting a spiritual method of seeing reality, just by recuperating a wisdom of the heart, can we confront and interpret the newness of our time." [209] Such "knowledge of the heart" is "the virtue that enables us to incorporate the entire and its parts, our choices and their effects." It "can not be looked for from machines," but it "lets itself be found by those who seek it and be seen by those who like it; it anticipates those who prefer it, and it enters search of those who are worthy of it (cf. Wis 6:12 -16)." [210]
115. In a world marked by AI, we need the grace of the Holy Spirit, who "allows us to take a look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, situations, events and to uncover their real significance." [211]
116. Since a "individual's perfection is determined not by the details or understanding they have, however by the depth of their charity," [212] how we incorporate AI "to consist of the least of our bros and siblings, the vulnerable, and those most in need, will be the real step of our humankind." [213] The "knowledge of the heart" can brighten and direct the human-centered usage of this technology to assist promote the common good, care for our "typical home," advance the search for the reality, foster essential human development, favor human solidarity and fraternity, and lead mankind to its ultimate goal: joy and full communion with God. [214]
117. From this point of view of knowledge, believers will be able to serve as moral agents capable of using this innovation to promote a genuine vision of the human person and society. [215] This need to be done with the understanding that technological progress belongs to God's plan for creation-an activity that we are contacted us to buy toward the Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ, in the continual search for the True and the Good.

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

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

Ex audientia 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 Important Understanding of Human Intelligence

The Limits of AI

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

Helping Human Freedom and Decision-Making

V. Specific Questions

AI and Society

AI and Human Relationships

AI, the Economy, and Labor

AI and Healthcare

AI and Education

AI, Misinformation, Deepfakes, and Abuse

AI, Privacy, and Surveillance

AI and the Protection of Our Common Home

AI and Warfare

AI and Our Relationship with God

VI. Concluding Reflections

True Wisdom

[1] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. See likewise Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. [2] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 307. Cf. Id., Christmas Greetings to the Roman Curia (21 December 2019): AAS 112 (2020 ), 43. [3] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [4] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 2293; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [5] J. McCarthy, et al., "A Proposition for the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence" (31 August 1955), http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/history/dartmouth/dartmouth.html (accessed: 21 October 2024). [6] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), pars. 2-3: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [7] Terms in this document explaining the outputs or processes of AI are utilized figuratively to explain its operations and are not meant to anthropomorphize the machine. [8] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3; Id., Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [9] Here, one can see the main positions of the "transhumanists" and the "posthumanists." Transhumanists argue that technological advancements will enable human beings to overcome their biological constraints and boost both their physical and cognitive capabilities. Posthumanists, on the other hand, contend that such advances will eventually change human identity to the degree that mankind itself may no longer be considered genuinely "human." Both views rest on a basically negative perception of human corporality, which treats the body more as a challenge than as an essential part of the individual's identity and contact us to complete awareness. Yet, this negative view of the body is irregular with a proper understanding of human self-respect. While the Church supports authentic clinical development, it affirms that human self-respect is rooted in "the individual as an inseparable unity of body and soul. " Thus, "self-respect is also fundamental in each person's body, which gets involved 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 method reflects a functionalist point of view, which reduces the human mind to its functions and assumes that its functions can be totally quantified in physical or mathematical terms. However, even if a future AGI were to appear truly smart, it would still remain practical in nature. [11] Cf. A.M. Turing, "Computing Machinery and Intelligence," Mind 59 (1950) 443-460. [12] If "thinking" is associated to devices, it should be clarified that this refers to calculative thinking rather than crucial thinking. Similarly, if devices are said to operate using rational thinking, it must be defined that this is limited to computational reasoning. On the other hand, by its very nature, human thought is a creative procedure that avoids programs and goes beyond constraints. [13] On the foundational role of language in forming understanding, cf. M. Heidegger, Über den Humanismus, Klostermann, Frankfurt am Main 1949 (en. tr. "Letter on Humanism," in Basic Writings: Martin Heidegger, Routledge, London - New York 2010, 141-182). [14] For additional discussion of these anthropological and doctrinal foundations, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 43-144. [15] Aristotle, Metaphysics, I. 1, 980 a 21. [16] Cf. Augustine, De Genesi ad litteram III, 20, 30: PL 34, 292: "Man is made in the image of God in relation to that [professors] by which he is superior to the illogical animals. Now, this [professors] is factor itself, or the 'mind,' or 'intelligence,' whatever other name it might more appropriately be provided"; Id., Enarrationes in Psalmos 54, 3: PL 36, 629: "When considering all that they have, people find that they are most distinguished from animals precisely by the reality they have intelligence." This is likewise repeated by Saint Thomas Aquinas, who specifies that "guy is the most best of all earthly beings endowed with movement, and his appropriate and natural operation is intellection," by which guy abstracts from things and "receives in his mind things in fact intelligible" (Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 76). [17] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [18] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 49, a. 5, advertisement 3. Cf. ibid., I, q. 79; II-II, q. 47, a. 3; II-II, q. 49, a. 2. For a modern perspective that echoes aspects of the classical and middle ages difference between these 2 modes of cognition, cf. D. Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, New York 2011. [19] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 76, a. 1, resp. [20] Cf. Irenaeus of Lyon, Adversus Haereses, V, 6, 1: PG 7( 2 ), 1136-1138. [21] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 9. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1045: "The intellect can examine the truth of things through reflection, experience and dialogue, and pertain to recognize in that truth, which transcends it, the basis of certain universal moral needs." [22] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [23] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 365. Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 75, a. 4, resp. [24] Certainly, Sacred Scripture "generally thinks about the human individual as a being who exists in the body and is unimaginable 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, but instead completely disclosed 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 joined to the body in order that it may have a presence and an operation ideal to its nature." [29] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1035. Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 18. [30] International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 56. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 357. [31] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), pars. 5, 8; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 15, 24, 53-54. [32] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 356. Cf. ibid., par. 221. [33] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 13, 26-27. [34] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Donum Veritatis (24 May 1990), 6: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1552. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), par. 109: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1219. Cf. Pseudo-Dionysius, De divinis nominibus, VII, 2: PG 3, 868B-C: "Human souls likewise have reason and with it they circle in discourse around the reality of things. [...] [O] n account of the manner in which they are capable of concentrating the lots of into the one, they too, in their own fashion and as far as they can, deserve conceptions like those of the angels" (en. tr. Pseudo-Dionysius: The Complete Works, Paulist Press, New York City - Mahwah 1987, 106-107). [35] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 3: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7. [36] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [37] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 42: AAS 91 (1999 ), 38. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 208: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1043: "the human mind is capable of transcending immediate issues and grasping certain realities that are unchanging, as true now as in the past. As it peers into humanity, reason discovers universal worths obtained from that same nature"; ibid., par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034. [38] Cf. B. Pascal, Pensées, no. 267 (ed. Brunschvicg): "The last case of factor is to acknowledge that there is an infinity of things which are beyond it" (en. tr. Pascal's Pensées, E.P. Dutton, New York City 1958, 77). [39] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [40] Our semantic capacity permits us to comprehend messages in any kind of interaction in a manner that both takes into account and transcends their material or empirical structures (such as computer code). Here, intelligence ends up being a knowledge that "allows us to take a look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, scenarios, occasions and to uncover their real significance" (Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications [24 January 2024]: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8). Our imagination enables us to create brand-new material or concepts, mainly by providing an initial perspective on reality. Both capabilities depend upon the presence of an individual subjectivity for their full awareness. [41] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. [42] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034: "Charity, when accompanied by a commitment to the reality, is a lot more than personal sensation [...] Certainly, its close relation to fact cultivates its universality and maintains it from being 'restricted to a narrow field without relationships.' [...] Charity's openness to truth therefore safeguards it from 'a fideism that deprives it of its human and universal breadth.'" The internal quotes are from Benedict XVI, Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), pars. 2-4: AAS 101 (2009 ), 642-643. [43] Cf. International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 7. [44] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [45] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15. [46] Bonaventure, In II Librum Sententiarum, d. I, p. 2, a. 2, q. 1; as priced quote in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 293. Cf. ibid., par. 294. [47] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 295, 299, 302. Bonaventure likens the universe to "a book reflecting, representing, and explaining its Maker," the Triune God who approves existence to all things (Breviloquium 2.12.1). Cf. Alain de Lille, De Incarnatione Christi, PL 210, 579a: "Omnis mundi creatura quasi liber et pictura nobis est et speculum." [48] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 67: AAS 107 (2015 ), 874; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 6: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589-592; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 57: "people occupy an unique location in the universe according to the magnificent strategy: they delight in the privilege of sharing in the divine governance of visible development. [...] Since guy's location as ruler remains in fact a participation in the magnificent governance of production, we mention 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 creatures 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 development. Cf. John Chrysostom, Homiliae in Genesim, XIV, 17-21: PG 53, 116-117. [51] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 301. [52] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 302. [53] Bonaventure, Breviloquium 2.12.1. Cf. ibid., 2.11.2. [54] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 236: AAS 105 (2023 ), 1115; Id., Address to Participants in the Meeting of University Chaplains and Pastoral Workers Promoted by the Dicastery for Culture and Education (24 November 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 November 2023, 7. [55] Cf. J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 5.1, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 99-100; Francis, Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [56] Francis, Address to the Members of the National Confederation of Artisans and Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises (CNA) (15 November 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 15 November 2024, 8. [57] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Querida Amazonia (2 February 2020), par. 41: AAS 112 (2020 ), 246; Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 146: AAS 107 (2015 ), 906. [58] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 864. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), pars. 17-24: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47-50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985-987. [59] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 20: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [60] P. Claudel, Conversation sur Jean Racine, Gallimard, Paris 1956, 32: "L'intelligence n'est rien sans la délectation." Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 13: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5: "The mind and the will are put at the service of the higher good by noticing and appreciating truths." [61] Dante, Paradiso, Canto XXX: "luce intellettüal, piena d'amore;/ amor di vero ben, pien di letizia;/ letizia che trascende ogne dolzore" (en. tr. The Divine Comedy of Dante Alighieri, C.E. Norton, tr., Houghton Mifflin, Boston 1920, 232). [62] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931:" [T] he highest norm of human life is the magnificent law itself-eternal, objective and universal, by which God orders, directs and governs the entire world and the methods of the human community according to a plan conceived in his knowledge and love. God has actually made it possible for man to take part in this law of his so that, under the gentle personality of divine providence, lots of might be able to show up at a deeper and deeper knowledge of unchangeable reality." Also cf. Id., Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. [63] Cf. First Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius (24 April 1870), ch. 4, DH 3016. [64] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [65] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 891. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 204: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1042. [66] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 11: AAS 83 (1991 ), 807: "God has imprinted his own image and similarity on male (cf. Gen 1:26), giving upon him a matchless dignity [...] In effect, beyond the rights which man obtains by his own work, there exist rights which do not correspond to any work he performs, but which flow from his vital self-respect 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, recalling that the expression is likewise utilized to designate the discipline and not only its applications. [71] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 34-35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 51: AAS 83 (1991 ), 856-857. [72] For example, see the encouragement of clinical expedition in Albertus Magnus (De Mineralibus, II, 2, 1) and the appreciation for the mechanical arts in Hugh of St. Victor (Didascalicon, I, 9). These authors, amongst a long list of other Catholics engaged in scientific research study and technological expedition, show that "faith and science can be joined in charity, offered that science is put at the service of the men and female of our time and not misused to hurt or perhaps damage them" (Francis, Address to Participants in the 2024 Lemaître Conference of the Vatican Observatory [20 June 2024]: L'Osservatore Romano, 20 June 2024, 8). Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 36: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053-1054; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), pars. 2, 106: AAS 91 (1999 ), 6-7.86 -87. [73] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. [74] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [75] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [76] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 102: AAS 107 (2015 ), 888. [77] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889; Id., Encyclical Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 27: AAS 112 (2020 ), 978; Benedict XVI, Encyclical Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 23: AAS 101 (2009 ), 657-658. [78] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39, 47; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), passim. [79] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par 2293. [80] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2-4. [81] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1749: "Freedom makes man an ethical subject. When he acts intentionally, male is, so to speak, the daddy of his acts." [82] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1776. [83] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1777. [84] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 1779-1781; Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 463, where the Holy Father motivated efforts "to make sure that innovation remains human-centered, fairly grounded and directed toward the excellent." [85] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 166: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1026-1027; Id., Address to the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (23 September 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 September 2024, 10. On the function of human agency in choosing a broader aim (Ziel) that then notifies the particular function (Zweck) for which each technological application is created, cf. F. Dessauer, Streit um pass away Technik, Herder-Bücherei, Freiburg i. Br. 1959, 70-71. [86] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4: "Technology is born for a function and, in its influence on human society, always represents a kind of order in social relations and an arrangement of power, hence allowing certain people to perform specific actions while avoiding others from performing various ones. In a basically explicit method, this constitutive power-dimension of technology constantly includes the worldview of those who developed and developed it." [87] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 309. [88] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [89] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti, pars. 212-213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [90] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 5: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589; Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [91] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "Faced with the marvels of devices, which seem to know how to select independently, we should be extremely clear that decision-making [...] need to constantly be left to the human individual. We would condemn humanity to a future without hope if we took away individuals's ability to make choices about themselves and their lives, by dooming them to depend on the options of makers." [92] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [93] The term "predisposition" in this file refers to algorithmic bias (systematic and consistent mistakes in computer systems that may disproportionately bias certain groups in unintended methods) or finding out bias (which will result in training on a prejudiced information set) and not the "bias vector" in neural networks (which is a parameter used to adjust 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 verified the growth in agreement "on the need for advancement procedures to respect such worths as inclusion, transparency, security, equity, privacy and reliability," and also invited "the efforts of global organizations to regulate these innovations so that they promote authentic development, contributing, that is, to a better world and an integrally greater quality of life." [95] Francis, Greetings to a Delegation of the "Max Planck Society" (23 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 February 2023, 8. [96] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [97] Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1571. [98] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. For more conversation of the ethical questions raised by AI from a Catholic point of view, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 147-253. [99] On the significance of discussion in a pluralist society oriented toward a "robust and solid social principles," see Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 211-214: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [100] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [101] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [102] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [103] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. [104] Cf. Pontifical Council for Social Communications, Ethics in Internet (22 February 2002), par. 10. [105] Francis, Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414; estimating the Final Document of the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops (27 October 2018), par. 24: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1593. Cf. Benedict XVI, Address to the Participants in the International Congress on Natural Moral Law (12 February 2017): AAS 99 (2007 ), 245. [106] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-33: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047-1050. [107] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-21: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047. [108] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 308-309. [109] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [110] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [111] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 101, 103, 111, 115, 167: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1004-1005, 1007-1009, 1027. [112] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047; cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 35: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 123. [113] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 12: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1034. [114] Cf. Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church (2004 ), par. 149. [115] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [116] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [117] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 865. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), pars. 88-89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414. [118] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057. [119] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985. [120] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [121] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [122] Cf. E. Stein, Zum Problem der Einfühlung, Buchdruckerei des Waisenhauses, Halle 1917 (en. tr. On the Problem of Empathy, ICS Publications, Washington D.C. 1989). [123] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057:" [Many individuals] desire their interpersonal relationships provided by sophisticated equipment, by screens and systems which can be turned on and off on command. Meanwhile, the Gospel tells us continuously to risk of an in person encounter with others, with their physical existence which challenges us, with their pain and their pleas, with their delight which infects us in our close and continuous interaction. True faith in the incarnate Son of God is inseparable from self-giving, from subscription in the neighborhood, 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 estimate in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1912. Cf. John XXIII, Encyclical Letter Mater et Magistra (15 May 1961), par. 219: AAS 53 (1961 ), 453. [130] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par 64: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1086. [131] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 162: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1025. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 6: AAS 73 (1981 ), 591: "work is 'for man' and not male 'for work.' Through this conclusion one rightly pertains to acknowledge the pre-eminence of the subjective significance of work over the unbiased one." [132] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 128: AAS 107 (2015 ), 898. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 24: AAS 108 (2016 ), 319-320. [133] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [134] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae (25 March 1995), par. 89: AAS 87 (1995 ), 502. [135] Ibid. [136] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 67: AAS 112 (2020 ), 993; as 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 appears, with its painful effects, it is that of healthcare. When an ill individual is not put in the center or their dignity is not thought about, this generates attitudes that can lead even to speculation on the misfortune of others. And this is extremely severe! [...] The application of an organization technique to the healthcare sector, if indiscriminate [...] may run the risk of discarding people." [142] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [143] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729. [144] Congregation for Catholic Education, Instruction on making use of Distance Learning in Ecclesiastical Universities and Faculties, I. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729; Francis, Message for the LXIX World Day of Peace (1 January 2016), 6: AAS 108 (2016 ), 57-58. [145] Francis, Address to Members of the Global Researchers Advancing Catholic Education Project (20 April 2022): AAS 114 (2022 ), 580. [146] Cf. Paul VI, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi (8 December 1975), par. 41: AAS 68 (1976 ), 31, pricing estimate Id., Address to the Members of the "Consilium de Laicis" (2 October 1974): AAS 66 (1974 ), 568: "if [the modern person] 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, Meeting with the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [149] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 86: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413, pricing estimate the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, Final Document (27 October 2018), par. 21: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1592. [150] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 7.6, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 167. [151] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 88: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413. [152] In a 2023 policy document about using generative AI in education and research study, UNESCO notes: "Among the essential concerns [of the use of generative AI (GenAI) in education and research study] is whether human beings can perhaps cede fundamental levels of thinking and skill-acquisition procedures to AI and rather focus on higher-order thinking skills based on the outputs offered by AI. Writing, for instance, is often related to the structuring of thinking. With GenAI [...], people can now begin with a well-structured summary provided by GenAI. Some professionals have identified the use of GenAI to generate text in this way as 'writing without believing'" (UNESCO, Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research [2023], 37-38). The German-American thinker Hannah Arendt anticipated such a possibility in her 1959 book, The Human Condition, and cautioned: "If it must turn out to be real that knowledge (in the sense of knowledge) and thought have parted business for great, then we would certainly become the defenseless servants, not a lot of our devices since our knowledge" (Id., The Human Condition, University of Chicago Press, nerdgaming.science Chicago 20182, 3). [153] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 262: AAS 108 (2016 ), 417. [154] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 7: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3; cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 167: AAS 107 (2015 ), 914. [155] John Paul II, Apostolic Constitution Ex Corde Ecclesiae (15 August 1990), 7: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1479. [156] Francis, Apostolic Constitution Veritatis Gaudium (29 January 2018), 4c: AAS 110 (2018 ), 9-10. [157] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3. [158] For example, it may assist individuals gain access to the "selection of resources for generating greater understanding of reality" 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 truly indifferent to the question of whether what they know is true or not. [...] It is this that Saint Augustine teaches when he writes: 'I have actually met numerous who wished to deceive, but none who wanted to be tricked'"; pricing estimate Augustine, Confessiones, X, 23, 33: PL 32, 794. [163] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), par. 62. [164] Benedict XVI, Message for the XLIII World Day of Social Communications (24 May 2009): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2009, 8. [165] Cf. Dicastery for Communications, Towards Full Presence: A Pastoral Reflection on Engagement with Social Media (28 May 2023), par. 41; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Decree Inter Mirifica (4 December 1963), pars. 4, 8-12: AAS 56 (1964 ), 146, 148-149. [166] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 1, 6, 16, 24. [167] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046. Cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 40: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 127: "no man may with impunity breach that human dignity which God himself treats with terrific respect"; as priced estimate in John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 9: AAS 83 (1991 ), 804. [168] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2477, 2489; can. 220 CIC; can. 23 CCEO; John Paul II, Address to the Third General Conference of the Latin American Episcopate (28 January 1979), III.1-2: Insegnamenti II/1 (1979 ), 202-203. [169] Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to the Thematic Discussion on Other Disarmament Measures and International Security (24 October 2022): "Maintaining human dignity in cyberspace obliges States to likewise appreciate the right to personal privacy, by shielding citizens from invasive surveillance and enabling them to safeguard their personal details from unapproved gain access to." [170] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 42: AAS 112 (2020 ), 984. [171] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [172] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465. [173] The 2023 Interim Report of the United Nations AI Advisory Body identified a list of "early promises of AI helping to deal with environment change" (United Nations AI Advisory Body, Interim Report: Governing AI for Humanity [December 2023], 3). The file observed that, "taken together with predictive systems that can change data into insights and insights into actions, AI-enabled tools might help develop new techniques and financial investments to reduce emissions, affect brand-new private sector financial investments in net absolutely no, protect biodiversity, and develop broad-based social strength" (ibid.). [174] "The cloud" describes a network of physical servers throughout the world that makes it possible for users to store, 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 need to guarantee and secure an area for appropriate human control over the options made by expert system programs: human self-respect itself depends on it." [186] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to Working Group II on Emerging Technologies at the UN Disarmament Commission (3 April 2024): "The advancement and use of deadly autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) that do not have the appropriate human control would present basic ethical concerns, considered that LAWS can never ever be ethically accountable subjects efficient in complying with worldwide humanitarian law." [187] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 258: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1061. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [188] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [189] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3: "Nor can we neglect the possibility of advanced weapons ending up in the incorrect hands, helping with, for circumstances, terrorist attacks or interventions aimed at destabilizing the institutions of legitimate systems of federal government. In a word, the world does not require brand-new innovations that contribute to the unfair advancement of commerce and the weapons trade and as a result end up promoting the folly of war." [190] John Paul II, Act of Entrustment to Mary for the Jubilee of Bishops (8 October 2000), par. 3: Insegnamenti XXIII/2 (200 ), 565. [191] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 79: AAS 107 (2015 ), 878. [192] Cf. Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 51: AAS 101 (2009 ), 687. [193] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39. [194] Cf. Augustine, Confessiones, I, 1, 1: PL 32, 661. [195] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (30 December 1987), par. 28: AAS 80 (1988 ), 548:" [T] here is a better understanding today that the mere build-up of items and services [...] is not enough for the realization of human joy. Nor, in effect, does the availability of the lots of real benefits provided in current times by science and technology, consisting of the computer system sciences, bring liberty from every type of slavery. On the contrary, [...] unless all the considerable body of resources and potential at man's disposal is directed by a moral understanding and by an orientation towards the real good of the 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 make for greater knowledge. Wisdom is not born of quick searches on the internet nor is it a mass of unverified information. That is not the method to grow 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.