GitLab

1. With knowledge both ancient and new (cf. Mt. 13:52), we are contacted us to show on the present challenges and opportunities posed by clinical and technological developments, especially by the recent development of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The Christian tradition concerns the present of intelligence as a vital element of how human beings are developed "in the image of God" (Gen. 1:27). Beginning with an essential vision of the human person and the biblical calling to "till" and "keep" the earth (Gen. 2:15), the Church emphasizes that this present of intelligence ought to be expressed through the accountable use of factor and technical abilities in the stewardship of the produced world.

2. The Church motivates the advancement of science, innovation, the arts, and other types of human venture, seeing them as part of the "partnership of man and woman with God in improving the visible production." [1] As Sirach affirms, God "gave skill to humans, that he might be glorified in his marvelous works" (Sir. 38:6). Human abilities and imagination originate from God and, when utilized appropriately, glorify God by reflecting his knowledge and goodness. Because of this, when we ask ourselves what it indicates to "be human," we can not omit a factor to consider of our clinical and technological abilities.

3. It is within this perspective that the present Note addresses the anthropological and ethical challenges raised by AI-issues that are particularly significant, as one of the objectives of this technology is to imitate the human intelligence that designed it. For example, unlike lots of other human creations, AI can be trained on the outcomes of human imagination and then create new "artifacts" with a level of speed and ability that often measures up to or exceeds what humans can do, such as producing text or images equivalent from human structures. This raises crucial issues about AI's possible role in the growing crisis of truth in the public forum. Moreover, this technology is developed to learn and make certain options autonomously, adapting to brand-new situations and offering services not anticipated by its programmers, and hence, it raises fundamental concerns about ethical duty and human safety, with more comprehensive implications for society as a whole. This brand-new scenario has prompted many individuals to assess what it suggests 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 phase in mankind's engagement with innovation, placing it at the heart of what Pope Francis has explained as an "epochal modification." [2] Its effect is felt internationally and in a wide variety of locations, including social relationships, education, work, art, healthcare, law, warfare, and worldwide relations. As AI advances rapidly towards even higher achievements, it is seriously essential to consider its anthropological and ethical implications. This involves not only mitigating dangers and preventing damage but likewise making sure that its applications are utilized to promote human development and the common good.

5. To contribute favorably to the discernment concerning AI, and in action to Pope Francis' require a renewed "wisdom of heart," [3] the Church provides its experience through the anthropological and ethical reflections contained in this Note. Committed to its active role in the worldwide dialogue on these problems, the Church welcomes those delegated with transferring the faith-including parents, teachers, pastors, and bishops-to devote themselves to this vital topic with care and attention. While this file is planned specifically for them, it is also meant to be available to a wider audience, especially those who share the conviction that scientific and technological advances ought to be directed toward serving the human individual and the common good. [4]
6. To this end, the document begins by comparing principles of intelligence in AI and in human intelligence. It then checks out the Christian understanding of human intelligence, providing a framework rooted in the Church's philosophical and doctrinal custom. Finally, the document uses standards to make sure that the development and usage of AI maintain human self-respect and promote the integral development of the human individual and society.

7. The principle of "intelligence" in AI has progressed gradually, making use of a variety of ideas from numerous disciplines. While its origins extend back centuries, a substantial milestone happened in 1956 when the American computer scientist John McCarthy organized a summertime workshop at Dartmouth University to explore the issue of "Artificial Intelligence," which he defined as "that of making a device behave in manner ins which would be called intelligent if a human were so behaving." [5] This workshop introduced a research study program focused on creating machines efficient in carrying out jobs generally associated with the human intellect and smart behavior.

8. Ever since, AI research study has advanced quickly, leading to the advancement of complex systems efficient in carrying out extremely sophisticated jobs. [6] These so-called "narrow AI" systems are generally developed to handle particular and restricted functions, such as translating languages, anticipating the trajectory of a storm, classifying images, answering concerns, or generating visual material at the user's demand. While the meaning of "intelligence" in AI research study varies, many contemporary AI systems-particularly those using maker learning-rely on analytical inference rather than rational deduction. By analyzing large datasets to determine patterns, AI can "anticipate" [7] outcomes and propose brand-new methods, simulating some cognitive procedures typical of human analytical. Such achievements have actually been enabled through advances in computing innovation (consisting of neural networks, not being watched artificial intelligence, and evolutionary algorithms) as well as hardware innovations (such as specialized processors). Together, these innovations make it possible for AI systems to react to numerous types of human input, adapt to brand-new scenarios, and even recommend unique options not prepared for by their initial developers. [8]
9. Due to these quick improvements, lots of tasks once handled solely by human beings are now turned over to AI. These systems can enhance or even supersede what humans are able to do in numerous fields, particularly in specialized areas such as information analysis, image acknowledgment, and medical diagnosis. While each "narrow AI" application is created for a specific job, lots of researchers aim to develop what is referred to as "Artificial General Intelligence" (AGI)-a single system efficient in running throughout 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," surpassing human intellectual capacities, or add to "super-longevity" through advances in biotechnology. Others, however, fear that these possibilities, even if hypothetical, could one day eclipse the human individual, while still others welcome this possible transformation. [9]
10. Underlying this and numerous other perspectives on the topic is the implicit presumption that the term "intelligence" can be utilized in the very same way to describe both human intelligence and AI. Yet, this does not catch the complete scope of the principle. In the case of people, intelligence is a faculty that pertains to the person in his/her whole, 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 devices can replicate. [10]
11. This functional point of view is exhibited by the "Turing Test," which thinks about a maker "intelligent" if an individual can not differentiate its behavior from that of a human. [11] However, in this context, the term "behavior" refers just to the efficiency of specific intellectual jobs; it does not account for the full breadth of human experience, that includes abstraction, feelings, creativity, and the aesthetic, ethical, and spiritual perceptiveness. Nor does it incorporate the complete series of expressions characteristic of the human mind. Instead, in the case of AI, the "intelligence" of a system is examined methodologically, however also reductively, based upon its ability to produce appropriate responses-in this case, those related to the human intellect-regardless of how those actions are created.

12. AI's sophisticated functions give it advanced capabilities to perform tasks, but not the capability to believe. [12] This difference is most importantly crucial, as the way "intelligence" is defined inevitably shapes how we comprehend the relationship between human idea and this innovation. [13] To value this, one should 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 teaching on the nature, self-respect, and vocation of the human person. [14]
13. From the dawn of human self-reflection, the mind has played a main role in comprehending what it means to be "human." Aristotle observed that "all people by nature desire to know." [15] This understanding, with its capability for abstraction that understands the nature and meaning of things, sets human beings apart from the animal world. [16] As philosophers, theologians, and psychologists have actually analyzed the specific nature of this intellectual faculty, they have likewise explored how human beings comprehend the world and their special place within it. Through this expedition, the Christian tradition has pertained to comprehend the human person as a being consisting of both body and soul-deeply connected to this world and yet transcending it. [17]
14. In the classical tradition, the principle of intelligence is frequently comprehended through the complementary ideas of "factor" (ratio) and "intelligence" (intellectus). These are not different professors but, as Saint Thomas Aquinas explains, they are two modes in which the same intelligence runs: "The term intelligence is presumed from the inward grasp of the truth, while the name factor is taken from the curious and discursive process." [18] This concise description highlights the 2 fundamental and complementary measurements of human intelligence. Intellectus describes the instinctive grasp of the truth-that is, apprehending it with the "eyes" of the mind-which precedes and premises argumentation itself. Ratio pertains to thinking appropriate: the discursive, analytical process that causes judgment. Together, intellect and factor form the 2 facets of the act of intelligere, "the correct operation of the human being as such." [19]
15. Explaining the human individual as a "logical" being does not minimize the person to a particular mode of idea; rather, it recognizes that the ability for intellectual understanding shapes and penetrates all elements of human activity. [20] Whether worked out well or badly, this capability is an intrinsic aspect of humanity. In this sense, the "term 'reasonable' encompasses all the capacities of the human individual," including those related to "understanding and understanding, as well as those of prepared, loving, selecting, and wanting; it also consists of all corporeal functions closely associated to these capabilities." [21] This detailed point of view underscores how, in the human person, produced in the "image of God," reason is incorporated in a manner that raises, shapes, and changes both the person's will and actions. [22]
16. Christian thought considers the intellectual professors of the human individual within the framework of an important sociology that sees the human being as essentially embodied. In the human individual, spirit and matter "are not two natures unified, but rather their union forms a single nature." [23] In other words, the soul is not simply the immaterial "part" of the individual contained within the body, nor is the body an external shell housing an intangible "core." Rather, the whole human person is at the same time both product and spiritual. This understanding shows the teaching of Sacred Scripture, which views the human individual as a being who lives out relationships with God and others (and therefore, an authentically spiritual measurement) within and through this embodied existence. [24] The profound meaning of this condition is additional illuminated by the mystery of the Incarnation, through which God himself handled our flesh and "raised it as much as a superb self-respect." [25]
17. Although deeply rooted in bodily presence, the human individual transcends the material world through the soul, which is "practically on the horizon of eternity and time." [26] The intelligence's capacity for transcendence and the self-possessed liberty of the will come from the soul, by which the human person "shares in the light of the magnificent mind." [27] Nevertheless, the human spirit does not exercise its typical mode of knowledge without the body. [28] In this method, the intellectual faculties of the human person are an essential part of an anthropology that recognizes that the human person is a "unity of body and soul." [29] Further elements of this understanding will be developed in what follows.

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

19. The relational orientation of the human individual is eventually grounded in the eternal self-giving of the Triune God, whose love is revealed in creation and redemption. [31] The human individual is "contacted us to share, by understanding and love, in God's own life." [32]
20. This occupation to communion with God is always tied to the call to communion with others. Love of God can not be separated from love for one's next-door neighbor (cf. 1 Jn. 4:20; Mt. 22:37 -39). By the grace of sharing God's life, Christians are also contacted us to imitate Christ's outpouring gift (cf. 2 Cor. 9:8 -11; Eph. 5:1 -2) by following his command to "enjoy one another, as I have enjoyed you" (Jn. 13:34). [33] Love and service, echoing the magnificent life of self-giving, go beyond self-interest to react more completely to the human vocation (cf. 1 Jn. 2:9). A lot more superb than knowing numerous things is the dedication to look after one another, for if "I comprehend all secrets and all understanding [...] but do not have love, I am absolutely nothing" (1 Cor. 13:2).

21. Human intelligence is eventually "God's gift fashioned for the assimilation of truth." [34] In the dual sense of intellectus-ratio, it enables the person to check out truths that exceed mere sensory experience or energy, given that "the desire for reality belongs to humanity itself. It is an inherent property of human factor to ask why things are as they are." [35] Moving beyond the limitations of empirical information, human intelligence can "with authentic certitude attain to truth itself as knowable." [36] While reality remains just partially understood, the desire for truth "stimulates reason always to go even more; certainly, it is as if reason were overwhelmed to see that it can constantly go beyond what it has currently attained." [37] Although Truth in itself goes beyond the borders of human intelligence, it irresistibly attracts it. [38] Drawn by this destination, the human individual is caused seek "facts of a greater order." [39]
22. This inherent drive towards the pursuit of truth is particularly apparent in the definitely human capacities for semantic understanding and imagination, [40] through which this search unfolds in a "way that is appropriate to the social nature and self-respect of the human person." [41] Likewise, an unfaltering orientation to the truth is necessary for charity to be both genuine and universal. [42]
23. The look for fact finds its greatest expression in openness to realities that go beyond the physical and produced world. In God, all realities attain their ultimate and original significance. [43] Entrusting oneself to God is a "basic decision that engages the whole person." [44] In this method, the human person ends up being totally what she or he is contacted us to be: "the intelligence and the will display their spiritual nature," enabling the individual "to act in such a way that realizes personal liberty to the complete." [45]
24. The Christian faith understands production as the complimentary act of the Triune God, who, as Saint Bonaventure of Bagnoregio explains, creates "not to increase his splendor, but to show it forth and to communicate it." [46] Since God develops according to his Wisdom (cf. Wis. 9:9; Jer. 10:12), creation is imbued with an intrinsic order that shows God's plan (cf. Gen. 1; Dan. 2:21 -22; Is. 45:18; Ps. 74:12 -17; 104), [47] within which God has actually called people to presume a special role: to cultivate and take care of 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 skills to care for and establish creation in accord with God's strategy. [49] In this, human intelligence shows the Divine Intelligence that produced all things (cf. Gen. 1-2; Jn. 1), [50] continually sustains them, and guides them to their ultimate purpose in him. [51] Moreover, people are contacted us to establish their capabilities in science and technology, for through them, God is glorified (cf. Sir. 38:6). Thus, in a correct relationship with creation, human beings, on the one hand, utilize their intelligence and skill to work together with God in guiding creation toward the purpose to which he has actually called it. [52] On the other hand, production itself, as Saint Bonaventure observes, assists the human mind to "ascend slowly to the supreme Principle, who is God." [53]
26. In this context, human intelligence ends up being more plainly comprehended as a faculty that forms an important part of how the entire individual engages with truth. Authentic engagement needs accepting the complete scope of one's being: spiritual, cognitive, embodied, and relational.

27. This engagement with reality unfolds in various ways, as each individual, in his or her multifaceted uniqueness [54], seeks to understand the world, associate with others, solve problems, reveal imagination, and pursue essential wellness through the harmonious interplay of the different dimensions of the person's intelligence. [55] This includes logical and linguistic capabilities but can likewise encompass other modes of interacting with truth. Consider the work of a craftsmen, who "need to understand how to determine, in inert matter, a specific type that others can not acknowledge" [56] and bring it forth through insight and useful skill. Indigenous individuals who live close to the earth often have a profound sense of nature and its cycles. [57] Similarly, a pal who understands the best word to state or an individual proficient at managing human relationships exhibits an intelligence that is "the fruit of self-examination, discussion and generous encounter between persons." [58] As Pope Francis observes, "in this age of artificial intelligence, we can not forget that poetry and love are required to save our humanity." [59]
28. At the heart of the Christian understanding of intelligence is the combination of reality into the ethical and spiritual life of the individual, directing his or her actions due to God's goodness and fact. According to God's plan, intelligence, in its max sense, also includes the capability to relish what is real, good, and stunning. As the twentieth-century French poet Paul Claudel expressed, "intelligence is nothing without pleasure." [60] Similarly, Dante, upon reaching the highest heaven in Paradiso, testifies that the conclusion of this intellectual pleasure is found in the "light intellectual complete of love, love of true excellent filled with happiness, joy which goes beyond every sweetness." [61]
29. A correct understanding of human intelligence, for that reason, can not be lowered to the simple acquisition of facts or the ability to perform specific tasks. Instead, it includes the person's openness to the ultimate concerns of life and reflects an orientation towards the True and the Good. [62] As an expression of the magnificent image within the person, human intelligence has the capability to access the totality of being, pondering presence in its fullness, which surpasses what is measurable, and comprehending the significance of what has actually been understood. For believers, this capacity includes, in a specific method, the capability to grow in the understanding of the mysteries of God by using factor to engage ever more exceptionally with revealed realities (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 possesses a necessary contemplative measurement, an unselfish openness to the True, the Good, and the Beautiful, beyond any practical function.

30. Due to the foregoing conversation, the distinctions in between human intelligence and current AI systems end up being apparent. While AI is an amazing technological achievement efficient in imitating certain outputs connected with human intelligence, it runs by carrying out tasks, attaining objectives, or making choices based on quantitative information and computational logic. For instance, with its analytical power, AI excels at incorporating data from a variety of fields, modeling complex systems, and promoting interdisciplinary connections. In this way, it can assist specialists collaborate in resolving complicated issues that "can not be handled from a single perspective or from a single set of interests." [64]
31. However, even as AI processes and mimics certain expressions of intelligence, it remains basically restricted to a logical-mathematical structure, which imposes fundamental constraints. Human intelligence, in contrast, develops organically throughout the person's physical and psychological development, formed by a myriad of lived experiences in the flesh. Although advanced AI systems can "find out" through processes such as artificial intelligence, this sort of training is essentially different 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 moment. These components shape and form individuals within their personal history.In contrast, AI, lacking a physical body, counts on computational reasoning and knowing based on vast datasets that include taped human experiences and understanding.

32. Consequently, although AI can imitate aspects of human thinking and perform particular jobs with extraordinary speed and effectiveness, its computational capabilities represent only a fraction of the more comprehensive capabilities of the human mind. For example, AI can not currently reproduce moral discernment or the ability to establish genuine relationships. Moreover, human intelligence is situated within a personally lived history of intellectual and ethical development that basically shapes the person's point of view, including the physical, emotional, social, moral, and spiritual dimensions of life. Since AI can not use this fullness of understanding, approaches that rely solely on this technology or treat it as the main means of interpreting the world can result in "a loss of appreciation for the entire, for the relationships in between things, and for the more comprehensive horizon." [65]
33. Human intelligence is not mainly about finishing practical tasks however about understanding and actively engaging with truth in all its measurements; it is also efficient in surprising insights. Since AI lacks the richness of corporeality, relationality, and the openness of the human heart to reality and goodness, its capacities-though seemingly limitless-are incomparable with the human capability to comprehend reality. A lot can be gained from a disease, an embrace of reconciliation, and even an easy sunset; certainly, lots of experiences we have as people open brand-new horizons and offer the possibility of attaining brand-new wisdom. No gadget, working entirely 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 threats catching a functionalist viewpoint, where individuals are valued based upon the work they can perform. However, a person's worth does not depend on having particular skills, cognitive and technological achievements, or specific success, but on the individual's inherent self-respect, grounded in being created in the image of God. [66] This self-respect remains intact in all situations, including for those unable to exercise their capabilities, whether it be an unborn child, an unconscious individual, or an older person who is suffering. [67] It also underpins the custom of human rights (and, in particular, what are now called "neuro-rights"), which represent "an important point of convergence in the search for commonalities" [68] and can, thus, work as an essential ethical guide in discussions on the accountable development and use of AI.

35. Considering all these points, as Pope Francis observes, "the very use of the word 'intelligence'" in connection with AI "can show deceptive" [69] and threats overlooking what is most valuable in the human person. Because of this, AI should not be viewed as an artificial form of human intelligence but as a product of it. [70]
36. Given these factors to consider, one can ask how AI can be comprehended within God's plan. To answer this, it is essential to remember that techno-scientific activity is not neutral in character but is a human venture that engages the humanistic and cultural dimensions of human imagination. [71]
37. Viewed as a fruit of the prospective inscribed within human intelligence, [72] clinical questions and the development of technical abilities become part of the "collaboration of male and female with God in refining the noticeable production." [73] At the exact same time, all scientific and technological achievements are, eventually, gifts from God. [74] Therefore, people should constantly use their capabilities in view of the greater function for which God has given them. [75]
38. We can gratefully acknowledge how technology has "corrected countless evils which used to harm and limit people," [76] a fact for which we need to rejoice. Nevertheless, not all technological advancements in themselves represent genuine human development. [77] The Church is especially opposed to those applications that threaten the sanctity of life or the dignity of the human individual. [78] Like any human venture, technological development needs to be directed to serve the human individual and add to the pursuit of "higher justice, more extensive fraternity, and a more gentle order of social relations," which are "better than advances in the technical field." [79] Concerns about the ethical ramifications of technological advancement are shared not only within the Church however also amongst numerous scientists, technologists, and expert associations, who increasingly require ethical reflection to direct this development in a responsible method.

39. To address these obstacles, it is important to highlight the significance of moral duty grounded in the self-respect and vocation of the human individual. This directing principle likewise uses to questions concerning AI. In this context, the ethical dimension handles main significance because it is people who develop systems and determine the functions for which they are used. [80] Between a machine and a human being, just the latter is really a moral agent-a topic of ethical responsibility who exercises freedom in his or her choices and accepts their consequences. [81] It is not the device but the human who remains in relationship with reality and goodness, guided by a moral conscience that calls the person "to like and to do what is good and to prevent wicked," [82] attesting to "the authority of truth in recommendation to the supreme Good to which the human person is drawn." [83] Likewise, between a machine and a human, just the human can be sufficiently self-aware to the point of listening and following the voice of conscience, critical with prudence, and looking for the great that is possible in every circumstance. [84] In truth, all of this likewise belongs to the individual's workout of intelligence.

40. Like any product of human imagination, AI can be directed towards positive or negative ends. [85] When used in manner ins which appreciate human dignity and promote the wellness of people and neighborhoods, it can contribute favorably to the human vocation. Yet, as in all locations where humans are called to make choices, the shadow of evil likewise looms here. Where human flexibility enables the possibility of selecting what is incorrect, the ethical evaluation of this technology will require to take into consideration how it is directed and utilized.

41. At the same time, it is not only the ends that are fairly significant but likewise the ways used to attain them. Additionally, the total vision and understanding of the human person ingrained within these systems are crucial to consider too. Technological items reflect 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 developments could also reinforce relationships and power dynamics that are inconsistent with an appropriate understanding of the human person and society.

42. Therefore, the ends and the methods used in a provided application of AI, as well as the total vision it incorporates, need to all be evaluated to ensure they appreciate human dignity and promote the common good. [88] As Pope Francis has mentioned, "the intrinsic dignity of every man and every female" should be "the key criterion in examining emerging technologies; these will show fairly sound to the extent that they help respect that self-respect and increase its expression at every level of human life," [89] including in the social and financial spheres. In this sense, human intelligence plays an essential role not just in creating and producing technology but also in directing its usage in line with the genuine good of the human person. [90] The responsibility for handling this wisely pertains to every level of society, directed by the principle of subsidiarity and other principles of Catholic Social Teaching.

43. The dedication to guaranteeing that AI always supports and promotes the supreme value of the dignity of every person and the fullness of the human occupation works as a criterion of discernment for developers, owners, operators, and regulators of AI, along with to its users. It remains valid for every application of the technology at every level of its usage.

44. An assessment of the implications of this directing principle could start by considering the importance of ethical duty. Since complete moral causality belongs just to individual agents, not synthetic ones, it is essential to be able to identify and specify who bears duty for the procedures included in AI, especially those capable of learning, correction, and reprogramming. While bottom-up techniques and very deep neural networks allow AI to fix complicated issues, they make it difficult to understand the processes that lead to the options they embraced. This makes complex accountability since if an AI application produces undesirable outcomes, determining who is accountable ends up being hard. To address this problem, attention requires to be offered to the nature of accountability procedures in complex, highly automated settings, where outcomes might just end up being apparent in the medium to long term. For this, it is essential that ultimate responsibility for choices made utilizing AI rests with the human decision-makers and that there is accountability for the use of AI at each stage of the decision-making process. [91]
45. In addition to determining who is responsible, it is vital to determine the objectives given to AI systems. Although these systems may utilize without supervision autonomous learning mechanisms and often follow courses that humans can not rebuild, they ultimately pursue goals that people have actually assigned to them and are governed by procedures established by their designers and programmers. Yet, this presents a difficulty because, as AI designs become significantly capable of independent knowing, the ability to maintain control over them to guarantee that such applications serve human functions might successfully decrease. This raises the crucial question of how to ensure that AI systems are purchased for the good of people and not against them.

46. While duty for the ethical usage of AI systems starts with those who develop, produce, handle, and supervise such systems, it is likewise shared by those who utilize them. As Pope Francis noted, the device "makes a technical option among several possibilities based either on well-defined criteria or on analytical reasonings. Human beings, nevertheless, not just choose, but in their hearts can choosing." [92] Those who utilize AI to achieve a job and follow its outcomes create a context in which they are eventually responsible for the power they have entrusted. Therefore, insofar as AI can assist humans 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 unintentional adverse effects. [93] Regulatory frameworks should guarantee that all legal entities remain accountable for using AI and all its consequences, with appropriate safeguards for transparency, personal privacy, and accountability. [94] Moreover, those utilizing AI must beware not to end up being overly depending on it for their decision-making, a trend that increases contemporary society's currently high dependence on innovation.

47. The Church's ethical and social mentor offers resources to assist guarantee that AI is utilized in such a way that maintains human agency. Considerations about justice, for example, need to also address issues such as fostering simply social dynamics, maintaining international security, and promoting peace. By working out prudence, individuals and neighborhoods can determine methods to utilize AI to benefit humankind while preventing applications that might degrade human self-respect or harm the environment. In this context, the concept of duty ought to be comprehended not only in its most restricted sense however as a "duty for the take care of others, which is more than just accounting for outcomes attained." [95]
48. Therefore, AI, like any technology, can be part of a conscious and accountable answer to humanity's occupation to the excellent. However, as formerly talked about, AI needs to be directed by human intelligence to align with this vocation, ensuring it appreciates the dignity of the human person. Recognizing this "exalted dignity," the Second Vatican Council affirmed that "the social order and its development need to invariably work to the advantage of the human individual." [96] In light of this, the usage of AI, as Pope Francis said, should be "accompanied by an ethic motivated by a vision of the common excellent, an ethic of liberty, obligation, and fraternity, capable of promoting the complete development of people in relation to others and to the entire of production." [97]
49. Within this general point of view, some observations follow listed below to illustrate how the preceding arguments can help provide an ethical orientation in useful situations, in line with the "wisdom of heart" that Pope Francis has proposed. [98] While not exhaustive, this discussion is offered in service of the dialogue that thinks about how AI can be used to maintain the self-respect of the human person and promote the common good. [99]
50. As Pope Francis observed, "the fundamental self-respect of each human and the fraternity that binds us together as members of the one human family need to undergird the advancement of new innovations and function as unassailable requirements for evaluating them before they are utilized." [100]
51. Viewed through this lens, AI could "present important developments in agriculture, education and culture, a better level of life for whole countries and peoples, and the growth of human fraternity and social relationship," and thus be "used to promote essential human advancement." [101] AI might also help organizations identify those in need and counter discrimination and marginalization. These and other similar applications of this technology could contribute to human development and the common good. [102]
52. However, while AI holds lots of possibilities for promoting the great, it can likewise hinder or perhaps counter human advancement and the typical good. Pope Francis has actually kept in mind that "proof to date recommends that digital technologies have actually increased inequality in our world. Not just differences in material wealth, which are also considerable, however also distinctions in access to political and social impact." [103] In this sense, AI could be utilized to perpetuate marginalization and discrimination, develop brand-new types of poverty, widen the "digital divide," and aggravate existing social inequalities. [104]
53. Moreover, the concentration of the power over mainstream AI applications in the hands of a couple of powerful companies raises significant ethical concerns. Exacerbating this issue is the fundamental nature of AI systems, where no single individual can exercise total oversight over the huge and intricate datasets used for computation. This absence of well-defined accountability produces the threat that AI could be manipulated for individual or business gain or to direct popular opinion for the benefit of a specific market. Such entities, inspired by their own interests, have the capability to exercise "kinds of control as subtle as they are invasive, creating mechanisms for the adjustment of consciences and of the democratic procedure." [105]
54. Furthermore, there is the risk of AI being utilized to promote what Pope Francis has called the "technocratic paradigm," which perceives all the world's issues as solvable through technological methods alone. [106] In this paradigm, human dignity and fraternity are frequently set aside in the name of performance, "as if truth, goodness, and truth automatically stream from technological and financial power as such." [107] Yet, human dignity and the typical excellent needs to never ever be breached for the sake of efficiency, [108] for "technological advancements that do not cause an improvement in the quality of life of all humanity, however on the contrary, worsen inequalities and conflicts, can never count as real development. " [109] Instead, AI should be put "at the service of another type of progress, one which is healthier, more human, more social, more integral." [110]
55. Attaining this goal needs a deeper reflection on the relationship between autonomy and responsibility. Greater autonomy heightens everyone's responsibility across different elements of common life. For Christians, the structure of this responsibility depends on the acknowledgment that all human capacities, consisting of the person's autonomy, originated from God and are indicated to be in the service of others. [111] Therefore, rather than merely pursuing financial or technological objectives, AI needs to serve "the typical good of the entire human family," which is "the sum total of social conditions that allow individuals, either as groups or as people, to reach their satisfaction more totally and more quickly." [112]
56. The Second Vatican Council observed that "by his inner nature man is a social being; and if he does not participate in relations with others, he can neither live nor develop his presents." [113] This conviction highlights that residing in society is intrinsic to the nature and vocation of the human person. [114] As social beings, we seek relationships that involve mutual exchange and the pursuit of reality, in the course of which, individuals "show each other the fact they have actually discovered, or think they have actually discovered, in such a method that they assist one another in the search for fact." [115]
57. Such a mission, in addition to other elements of human communication, presupposes encounters and shared exchange in between individuals formed by their unique histories, ideas, convictions, and relationships. Nor can we forget that human intelligence is a diverse, diverse, and complex truth: individual and social, logical and affective, conceptual and symbolic. Pope Francis underscores this vibrant, keeping in mind that "together, we can look for the fact in dialogue, in unwinded conversation or in passionate debate. To do so requires determination; it entails minutes of silence and suffering, yet it can patiently embrace the wider experience of individuals and individuals. [...] The process of structure fraternity, be it regional or universal, can just be undertaken by spirits that are free and available to authentic encounters." [116]
58. It remains in this context that one can think about the difficulties AI postures to human relationships. Like other technological tools, AI has the prospective to promote connections within the human family. However, it might likewise prevent a true encounter with reality and, ultimately, lead individuals to "a deep and melancholic frustration with interpersonal relations, or a hazardous sense of isolation." [117] Authentic human relationships require the richness of being with others in their pain, their pleas, and their pleasure. [118] Since human intelligence is revealed and enriched likewise in social and embodied methods, authentic and spontaneous encounters with others are essential for engaging with reality in its fullness.

59. Because "true wisdom requires an encounter with reality," [119] the increase of AI introduces another difficulty. Since AI can successfully mimic the products of human intelligence, the capability to understand when one is communicating with a human or a maker can no longer be taken for approved. Generative AI can produce text, speech, images, and other sophisticated outputs that are typically associated with humans. Yet, it should be comprehended for what it is: a tool, not an individual. [120] This difference is frequently obscured by the language utilized by practitioners, which tends to anthropomorphize AI and hence blurs the line between human and maker.

60. Anthropomorphizing AI also poses particular obstacles for the development of kids, possibly motivating them to establish patterns of interaction that deal with human relationships in a transactional manner, as one would associate with a chatbot. Such practices could lead young individuals to see teachers as simple dispensers of details instead of as coaches who direct and support their intellectual and moral growth. Genuine relationships, rooted in compassion and a steadfast commitment to the good of the other, are vital and irreplaceable in promoting the complete advancement of the human person.

61. In this context, it is very important to clarify that, despite the use of anthropomorphic language, no AI application can genuinely experience empathy. Emotions can not be lowered to facial expressions or phrases created in action to triggers; they reflect the method a person, as a whole, associates with the world and to his/her own life, with the body playing a main role. True compassion requires the capability to listen, acknowledge another's irreducible uniqueness, invite their otherness, and grasp the meaning behind even their silences. [121] Unlike the realm of analytical judgment in which AI stands out, true empathy comes from the relational sphere. It includes intuiting and capturing the lived experiences of another while maintaining the difference in between self and other. [122] While AI can mimic empathetic responses, it can not duplicate the incomparably personal and relational nature of genuine empathy. [123]
62. Because of the above, it is clear why misrepresenting AI as an individual need to constantly be prevented; doing so for deceitful functions is a grave ethical infraction that could deteriorate social trust. Similarly, using AI to trick in other contexts-such as in education or in human relationships, including the sphere of sexuality-is also to be thought about unethical and requires careful oversight to prevent harm, maintain transparency, and ensure the self-respect of all people. [124]
63. In an increasingly separated world, some individuals have turned to AI looking for deep human relationships, easy friendship, and even psychological bonds. However, while humans are implied to experience authentic relationships, AI can only mimic them. Nevertheless, such relationships with others are an integral part of how a person grows to become who she or he is meant to be. If AI is utilized to assist people foster real connections between people, it can contribute positively to the full realization of the person. Conversely, if we replace relationships with God and with others with interactions with technology, we run the risk of changing genuine relationality with a lifeless image (cf. Ps. 106:20; Rom. 1:22 -23). Instead of pulling away into synthetic worlds, we are called to engage in a committed and intentional method with reality, particularly by relating to the poor and suffering, consoling those in sorrow, and forging bonds of communion with all.

64. Due to its interdisciplinary nature, AI is being increasingly incorporated into economic and monetary systems. Significant financial investments are presently being made not just in the innovation sector but likewise in energy, finance, and media, especially in the areas of marketing and sales, logistics, technological development, compliance, and threat management. At the same time, AI's applications in these areas have also highlighted its ambivalent nature, as a source of significant opportunities but likewise profound risks. A first real vital 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 companies would gain from the value created by AI instead of the services that use it.

65. Other wider elements of AI's effect on the economic-financial sphere should also be thoroughly examined, particularly concerning the interaction between concrete truth and the digital world. One important factor to consider in this regard involves the coexistence of varied and alternative forms of economic and financial organizations within an offered context. This element should be encouraged, as it can bring benefits in how it supports the genuine economy by cultivating its development and stability, specifically throughout times of crisis. Nevertheless, it needs to be stressed that digital realities, not restricted by any spatial bonds, tend to be more homogeneous and impersonal than communities rooted in a specific place and a particular history, with a common journey defined by shared worths and hopes, however likewise by inescapable disputes and divergences. This variety is an undeniable asset to a community's economic life. Turning over the economy and financing entirely to digital innovation would lower this range and richness. As a result, numerous options to financial issues that can be reached through natural dialogue between the included parties may no longer be attainable in a world controlled by treatments and just the look of nearness.

66. Another area where AI is already having a profound impact is the world of work. As in numerous other fields, AI is driving basic changes throughout numerous occupations, with a variety of impacts. On the one hand, it has the possible to boost competence and efficiency, develop brand-new jobs, allow workers to focus on more ingenious jobs, and open brand-new horizons for imagination and innovation.

67. However, while AI guarantees to enhance productivity by taking over mundane jobs, it frequently forces workers to adapt to the speed and needs of makers instead of devices being created to support those who work. As a result, contrary to the marketed benefits of AI, existing approaches to the technology can paradoxically deskill employees, subject them to automated monitoring, and relegate them to stiff and recurring jobs. The need to stay up to date with the speed of innovation can deteriorate employees' sense of agency and stifle the innovative capabilities they are anticipated to give their work. [125]
68. AI is presently getting rid of the need for some tasks that were once performed by people. If AI is used to change human employees instead of match them, there is a "significant danger of disproportionate advantage for the couple of at the cost of the impoverishment of lots of." [126] Additionally, as AI becomes more powerful, there is an involved threat that human labor may lose its worth in the financial realm. This is the sensible repercussion of the technocratic paradigm: a world of humanity enslaved to efficiency, where, ultimately, the cost of humanity should be cut. Yet, human lives are intrinsically important, independent of their economic output. Nevertheless, the "current design," Pope Francis explains, "does not appear to favor an investment in efforts to help the slow, the weak, or the less talented to discover chances in life." [127] Because of this, "we can not permit a tool as powerful and indispensable as Artificial Intelligence to strengthen such a paradigm, however rather, we should make Artificial Intelligence a bulwark against its expansion." [128]
69. It is crucial to keep in mind that "the order of things should be subordinate to the order of individuals, and not the other method around." [129] Human work needs to not only be at the service of revenue but at "the service of the entire human person [...] taking into account the person's material needs and the requirements of his/her intellectual, ethical, spiritual, and religious life." [130] In this context, the Church acknowledges that work is "not only a way of making one's daily bread" but is likewise "a vital measurement of social life" and "a method [...] of personal growth, the structure of healthy relationships, self-expression and the exchange of gifts. Work gives us a sense of shared obligation for the development of the world, and ultimately, for our life as a people." [131]
70. Since work is a "part of the significance of life on this earth, a course to growth, human advancement and personal fulfillment," "the objective should not be that technological development increasingly replaces human work, for this would be damaging to humanity" [132] -rather, it should promote human labor. Seen in this light, AI should help, not replace, human judgment. Similarly, it must never degrade creativity or minimize workers to mere "cogs in a machine." Therefore, "regard for the dignity of laborers and the importance of employment for the financial wellness of people, households, and societies, for task security and simply wages, ought to be a high concern for the international community as these kinds of innovation penetrate more deeply into our offices." [133]
71. As individuals in God's recovery work, healthcare professionals have the vocation and duty to be "guardians and servants of human life." [134] Because of this, the healthcare profession carries an "intrinsic and undeniable ethical dimension," recognized by the Hippocratic Oath, which obliges physicians and health care professionals to dedicate themselves to having "absolute regard for human life and its sacredness." [135] Following the example of the Do-gooder, this dedication is to be performed by guys and ladies "who reject the development of a society of exclusion, and act rather as neighbors, raising up and restoring the succumbed to the sake of the typical good." [136]
72. Seen in this light, AI seems to hold tremendous potential in a variety of applications in the medical field, such as assisting the diagnostic work of healthcare providers, helping with relationships in between clients and medical staff, providing brand-new treatments, and expanding access to quality care also for those who are isolated or marginalized. In these methods, the technology could improve the "caring and loving closeness" [137] that healthcare suppliers are called to encompass the sick and suffering.

73. However, if AI is used not to enhance however to replace the relationship between patients and health care providers-leaving patients to engage with a device rather than a human being-it would decrease a crucially essential human relational structure to a central, impersonal, and unequal framework. Instead of motivating solidarity with the ill and suffering, such applications of AI would run the risk of intensifying the solitude that typically accompanies health problem, specifically in the context of a culture where "persons are no longer viewed as a vital value to be cared for and appreciated." [138] This abuse of AI would not line up with respect for the dignity of the human person and solidarity with the suffering.

74. Responsibility for the wellness of patients and the decisions that discuss their lives are at the heart of the health care profession. This responsibility requires medical professionals to work out all their ability and intelligence in making well-reasoned and fairly grounded options concerning those turned over to their care, always appreciating the inviolable self-respect of the clients and the need for notified consent. As a result, choices regarding patient treatment and the weight of duty they entail need to always remain with the human individual and needs to never be entrusted to AI. [139]
75. In addition, utilizing AI to identify who ought to get treatment based mainly on financial procedures or metrics of effectiveness represents an especially bothersome circumstances of the "technocratic paradigm" that should be declined. [140] For, "enhancing resources suggests utilizing them in an ethical and fraternal way, and not punishing the most vulnerable." [141] Additionally, AI tools in health care are "exposed to types of predisposition and discrimination," where "systemic mistakes can easily increase, producing not just oppressions in specific cases however also, due to the cause and effect, genuine types of social inequality." [142]
76. The integration of AI into healthcare also postures the danger of magnifying other existing variations in access to medical care. As health care becomes increasingly oriented toward avoidance and lifestyle-based techniques, AI-driven services may unintentionally prefer more affluent populations who already take pleasure in much better access to medical resources and quality nutrition. This pattern threats strengthening a "medication for the rich" design, where those with monetary methods gain from advanced preventative tools and personalized health details while others struggle to gain access to even basic services. To prevent such inequities, fair structures are required to make sure that using AI in health care does not worsen existing healthcare inequalities but rather serves the common good.

77. The words of the Second Vatican Council remain completely relevant today: "True education aims to form individuals with a view towards 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 realities and intellectual abilities: rather, its aim is to add to the individual's holistic development in its various aspects (intellectual, cultural, spiritual, and so on), consisting of, for example, neighborhood life and relations within the academic community," [144] in keeping with the nature and self-respect of the human person.

78. This technique involves a dedication to cultivating the mind, but constantly as a part of the essential development of the person: "We need to break that idea of education which holds that educating methods filling one's head with concepts. That is the way we inform robots, cerebral minds, not individuals. Educating is taking a threat in the tension between the mind, the heart, and the hands." [145]
79. At the center of this work of forming the entire human person is the vital relationship in between instructor and trainee. Teachers do more than convey knowledge; they model vital human qualities and motivate the happiness of discovery. [146] Their presence motivates trainees both through the material they teach and the care they show for their trainees. This bond fosters trust, shared understanding, and the capability to resolve each individual's distinct dignity and capacity. On the part of the trainee, this can generate an authentic desire to grow. The physical presence of a teacher creates a relational dynamic that AI can not reproduce, one that deepens engagement and supports the trainee's important development.

80. In this context, AI provides both opportunities and challenges. If utilized in a prudent way, within the context of an existing teacher-student relationship and purchased to the genuine goals of education, AI can end up being an important academic resource by improving access to education, using tailored support, and supplying instant feedback to trainees. These advantages could boost the learning experience, particularly in cases where customized attention is required, or academic resources are otherwise scarce.

81. Nevertheless, a vital part of education is forming "the intelligence to reason well in all matters, to connect towards fact, and to understand it," [147] while assisting the "language of the head" to grow harmoniously with the "language of the heart" and the "language of the hands." [148] This is all the more vital in an age marked by technology, in which "it is no longer merely a concern of 'using' instruments of interaction, but of residing in a highly digitalized culture that has had an extensive effect on [...] our capability to communicate, discover, be notified and get in into relationship with others." [149] However, rather of promoting "a cultivated intelligence," which "brings with it a power and a grace to every work and profession that it carries out," [150] the extensive usage of AI in education might result in the trainees' increased dependence on innovation, eroding their capability to perform some skills independently and intensifying their reliance on screens. [151]
82. Additionally, while some AI systems are designed to assist individuals develop their vital thinking capabilities and analytical abilities, numerous others merely provide responses rather of prompting trainees to arrive at answers themselves or compose text on their own. [152] Instead of training youths how to collect details and create fast actions, education must motivate "the responsible use of liberty to deal with problems with common sense and intelligence." [153] Building on this, "education in using types of synthetic intelligence must aim above all at promoting crucial thinking. Users of all ages, but particularly the young, require to establish a discerning approach to the use of information and content gathered on the internet or produced by synthetic intelligence systems. Schools, universities, and clinical societies are challenged to help trainees and specialists to comprehend the social and ethical aspects of the development and usages of technology." [154]
83. As Saint John Paul II recalled, "in the world today, identified by such rapid advancements in science and innovation, the tasks of a Catholic University presume an ever greater value and seriousness." [155] In a specific method, Catholic universities are prompted to be present as excellent labs of hope at this crossroads of history. In an inter-disciplinary and cross-disciplinary secret, they are urged to engage "with wisdom and creativity" [156] in cautious research study on this phenomenon, helping to draw out the salutary potential within the various fields of science and reality, and directing them constantly towards fairly sound applications that plainly serve the cohesion of our societies and the common great, reaching brand-new frontiers in the discussion between faith and reason.

84. Moreover, it should be noted that present AI programs have been understood to provide biased or made details, which can lead trainees to trust incorrect material. This issue "not just runs the threat of legitimizing fake news and enhancing a dominant culture's benefit, but, simply put, it likewise weakens the academic procedure itself." [157] With time, clearer differences may emerge between correct and inappropriate uses of AI in education and research study. Yet, a definitive standard is that using AI ought to always be transparent and never ever misrepresented.

85. AI might be utilized as an aid to human dignity if it assists individuals understand complex principles or directs them to sound resources that support their search for the reality. [158]
86. However, AI also provides a serious danger of producing manipulated content and false details, which can easily mislead individuals due to its similarity to the truth. Such false information might take place accidentally, as when it comes to AI "hallucination," where a generative AI system yields results that appear genuine but are not. Since producing content that simulates human artifacts is main to AI's performance, mitigating these threats shows difficult. Yet, the consequences of such aberrations and incorrect details can be rather severe. For this factor, all those included in producing and using AI systems should be devoted to the truthfulness and precision of the details processed by such systems and disseminated to the public.

87. While AI has a latent potential to produce false details, a a lot more unpleasant issue depends on the intentional abuse of AI for control. This can take place when people or organizations deliberately produce and disgaeawiki.info spread out incorrect material with the aim to deceive or trigger damage, such as "deepfake" images, videos, and audio-referring to an incorrect representation of a person, edited or generated by an AI algorithm. The risk of deepfakes is especially obvious when they are utilized to target or damage others. While the images or videos themselves might be artificial, the damage they trigger is genuine, leaving "deep scars in the hearts of those who suffer it" and "real wounds in their human self-respect." [159]
88. On a broader scale, by misshaping "our relationship with others and with truth," [160] AI-generated fake media can slowly undermine the structures of society. This problem requires cautious regulation, as misinformation-especially through AI-controlled or influenced media-can spread unintentionally, sustaining political polarization and social unrest. When society becomes indifferent to the reality, various groups build their own variations of "truths," deteriorating the "reciprocal ties and mutual dependences" [161] that underpin the fabric of social life. As deepfakes cause people to question everything and AI-generated false content deteriorates rely on what they see and hear, polarization and dispute will only grow. Such prevalent deception is no insignificant matter; it strikes at the core of humanity, dismantling the foundational trust on which societies are constructed. [162]
89. Countering AI-driven fallacies is not only the work of market experts-it requires the efforts of all people of goodwill. "If technology is to serve human dignity and not damage it, and if it is to promote peace rather than violence, then the human neighborhood must be proactive in resolving these trends with regard to human dignity and the promo of the great." [163] Those who produce and share AI-generated material needs to constantly exercise diligence in verifying the truth of what they share and, in all cases, must "prevent the sharing of words and images that are breaking down of humans, that promote hatred and intolerance, that debase the goodness and intimacy of human sexuality or that exploit the weak and vulnerable." [164] This calls for the continuous prudence and cautious discernment of all users concerning their activity online. [165]
90. Humans are naturally relational, and the data each individual produces in the digital world can be viewed as an objectified expression of this relational nature. Data communicates not just details but likewise individual and relational knowledge, which, in a progressively digitized context, can amount to power over the person. Moreover, while some types of information may pertain to public aspects of a person's life, others might discuss the individual's interiority, possibly even their conscience. Seen in this method, privacy plays an essential role in safeguarding the borders of an individual's inner life, maintaining their freedom to associate with others, express themselves, and make choices without undue control. This protection is also connected to the defense of religious flexibility, as monitoring can likewise be misused to apply control over the lives of followers and how they reveal their faith.

91. It is appropriate, therefore, to deal with the issue of personal privacy from an issue for the genuine freedom and inalienable self-respect of the human person "in all situations." [166] The Second Vatican Council included the right "to secure privacy" amongst the fundamental rights "needed for living a truly human life," a right that ought to be extended to all people on account of their "sublime dignity." [167] Furthermore, the Church has likewise verified the right to the legitimate regard for a private life in the context of verifying the individual's right to a good reputation, defense of their physical and mental stability, and flexibility from harm or undue intrusion [168] -important elements of the due regard for the intrinsic dignity of the human person. [169]
92. Advances in AI-powered information processing and analysis now make it possible to presume patterns in an individual's habits and believing from even a small amount of details, making the function of information personal privacy much more crucial as a protect for the self-respect and relational nature of the human individual. As Pope Francis observed, "while closed and intolerant mindsets towards others are on the rise, distances are otherwise diminishing or vanishing to the point that the right to personal privacy scarcely exists. Everything has actually ended up being a kind of spectacle to be examined and examined, and individuals's lives are now under continuous security." [170]
93. While there can be legitimate and correct methods to utilize AI in keeping with human self-respect and the common good, using it for surveillance aimed at making use of, limiting others' freedom, or benefitting a few at the expense of the lots of is unjustifiable. The danger of security overreach need to be monitored by proper regulators to guarantee transparency and public accountability. Those responsible for monitoring must never surpass their authority, which must constantly favor the self-respect and freedom of every person as the necessary basis of a simply and humane society.

94. Furthermore, "basic respect for human dignity demands that we decline to permit the originality of the individual to be identified with a set of data." [171] This especially uses when AI is used to assess people or groups based on their behavior, qualities, or history-a practice known as "social scoring": "In social and economic decision-making, we must beware about entrusting judgments to algorithms that process information, typically gathered surreptitiously, on an individual's makeup and prior behavior. Such data can be contaminated by social prejudices and preconceptions. An individual's past habits should not be used to reject him or her the chance to change, grow, and contribute to society. We can not permit algorithms to restrict or condition respect for human dignity, or to omit compassion, grace, forgiveness, and above all, the hope that individuals are able to alter." [172]
95. AI has many promising applications for improving our relationship with our "typical home," such as producing models to anticipate severe climate events, proposing engineering solutions to reduce their effect, managing relief operations, and forecasting population shifts. [173] Additionally, AI can support sustainable agriculture, optimize energy usage, and provide early warning systems for public health emergency situations. These advancements have the possible to strengthen strength against climate-related challenges and promote more sustainable development.

96. At the exact same time, existing AI designs and the hardware required to support them take in vast amounts of energy and water, significantly contributing to CO2 emissions and straining resources. This reality is frequently obscured by the way this technology exists in the popular creativity, where words such as "the cloud" [174] can provide the impression that information is kept and processed in an intangible world, detached from the real world. However, "the cloud" is not a heavenly domain separate from the real world; similar to all computing innovations, it counts on physical machines, cables, and energy. The exact same is real of the innovation behind AI. As these systems grow in complexity, specifically big language designs (LLMs), they need ever-larger datasets, increased computational power, and higher storage infrastructure. Considering the heavy toll these innovations handle the environment, it is vital to establish sustainable options that lower their impact on our common home.

97. Even then, as Pope Francis teaches, it is vital "that we try to find solutions not only in innovation however in a change of humankind." [175] A complete and genuine understanding of development acknowledges that the value of all produced things can not be reduced to their mere utility. Therefore, a completely human method to the stewardship of the earth rejects the distorted anthropocentrism of the technocratic paradigm, which looks for to "draw out everything possible" from the world, [176] and turns down the "myth of progress," which presumes that "ecological problems will resolve themselves just with the application of new technology and without any need for ethical factors to consider or deep change." [177] Such a state of mind must pave the way to a more holistic method that appreciates the order of production and promotes the essential good of the human person while protecting our typical home. [178]
98. The Second Vatican Council and the constant mentor of the Popes given that then have firmly insisted that peace is not merely the absence of war and is not limited to maintaining a balance of powers in between enemies. Instead, in the words of Saint Augustine, peace is "the harmony of order." [179] Certainly, peace can not be attained without protecting the goods of individuals, totally free communication, regard for the dignity of persons and peoples, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is the work of justice and the effect of charity and can not be attained through force alone; rather, it should be mainly constructed through patient diplomacy, the active promotion of justice, solidarity, essential human development, and regard for the dignity of all people. [180] In this method, the tools used to maintain peace ought to never ever be permitted to justify injustice, violence, or oppression. Instead, they need to constantly be governed by a "firm decision to respect other individuals and countries, along with their self-respect, in addition to the purposeful practice of fraternity." [181]
99. While AI's analytical capabilities might help nations seek peace and make sure security, the "weaponization of Artificial Intelligence" can also be extremely troublesome. Pope Francis has observed that "the capability to perform military operations through push-button control systems has led to a decreased perception of the destruction triggered by those weapon systems and the burden of duty for their use, resulting in a much more cold and separated method to the enormous tragedy of war." [182] Moreover, the ease with which autonomous weapons make war more practical militates against the principle of war as a last resort 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 repercussions for human rights. [184]
100. In specific, Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, which can recognizing and striking targets without direct human intervention, are a "cause for severe ethical issue" because they lack the "unique human capacity for moral judgment and ethical decision-making." [185] For this factor, Pope Francis has actually urgently required a reconsideration of the advancement of these weapons and a prohibition on their usage, starting with "an effective and concrete commitment to introduce ever greater and correct human control. No device needs to ever choose to take the life of a human being." [186]
101. Since it is a little action from machines that can eliminate autonomously with accuracy to those capable of massive damage, some AI researchers have revealed issues that such innovation poses an "existential threat" by having the potential to act in manner ins which could threaten the survival of whole areas and even of mankind itself. This risk demands serious attention, reflecting the enduring concern about technologies that approve war "an unmanageable damaging power over fantastic numbers of innocent civilians," [187] without even sparing children. In this context, the call from Gaudium et Spes to "undertake an evaluation of war with an entirely new attitude" [188] is more urgent than ever.

102. At the same time, while the theoretical risks of AI deserve attention, the more immediate and pressing issue depends on how individuals with malicious intents might misuse this technology. [189] Like any tool, AI is an extension of human power, and while its future capabilities are unforeseeable, humankind's previous actions provide clear warnings. The atrocities committed throughout history suffice to raise deep issues about the prospective abuses of AI.

103. Saint John Paul II observed that "mankind now has instruments of unmatched power: we can turn this world into a garden, or minimize it to a pile of debris." [190] Given this reality, the Church reminds us, in the words of Pope Francis, that "we are free to use our intelligence towards things evolving positively," or toward "decadence and shared damage." [191] To avoid humankind from spiraling into self-destruction, [192] there should be a clear stand against all applications of technology that inherently threaten human life and self-respect. This dedication requires careful discernment about the use of AI, particularly in military defense applications, to ensure that it constantly respects human dignity and serves the common good. The advancement and implementation of AI in weaponries ought to go through the highest levels of ethical examination, governed by a concern for human self-respect and the sanctity of life. [193]
104. Technology offers remarkable tools to manage and establish the world's resources. However, in some cases, mankind is significantly delivering control of these resources to machines. Within some circles of scientists and futurists, there is optimism about the capacity of artificial basic intelligence (AGI), a hypothetical kind of AI that would match or exceed human intelligence and bring about unimaginable improvements. Some even hypothesize that AGI might attain superhuman capabilities. At the very same time, as society wanders away from a connection with the transcendent, some are tempted to turn to AI looking for meaning or fulfillment-longings that can only be really satisfied in communion with God. [194]
105. However, the presumption of replacing God for an artifact of human making is idolatry, a practice Scripture clearly warns against (e.g., Ex. 20:4; 32:1 -5; 34:17). Moreover, AI might show much more sexy than conventional idols for, unlike idols that "have mouths however do not speak; eyes, but do not see; ears, but do not hear" (Ps. 115:5 -6), AI can "speak," or at least offers the illusion of doing so (cf. Rev. 13:15). Yet, it is vital to bear in mind that AI is however a pale reflection of humanity-it is crafted by human minds, trained on human-generated material, responsive to human input, and sustained through human labor. AI can not possess many of the capabilities particular to human life, and it is also fallible. By turning to AI as a perceived "Other" greater than itself, with which to share presence and duties, mankind threats developing a replacement for God. However, it is not AI that is eventually deified and worshipped, but humanity itself-which, in this method, becomes enslaved to its own work. [195]
106. While AI has the potential to serve mankind and add to the common excellent, it remains a creation of human hands, bearing "the imprint of human art and resourcefulness" (Acts 17:29). It should never be ascribed excessive worth. As the Book of Wisdom affirms: "For a male made them, and one whose spirit is obtained formed them; for no male can form a god which resembles himself. He is mortal, and what he makes with lawless hands is dead, for he is much better than the objects he worships because he has life, but they never ever have" (Wis. 15:16 -17).

107. In contrast, human beings, "by their interior life, transcend the whole material universe; they experience this deep interiority when they get in into their own heart, where God, who probes the heart, awaits them, and where they decide their own fate in the sight of God." [196] It is within the heart, as Pope Francis advises us, that each private finds the "mystical connection in between self-knowledge and openness to others, between the encounter with one's personal uniqueness and the willingness to offer oneself to others. " [197] Therefore, it is the heart alone that is "capable of setting our other powers and enthusiasms, and our whole person, in a position of reverence and caring obedience before the Lord," [198] who "offers to deal with every one people as a 'Thou,' always and forever." [199]
108. Considering the different obstacles positioned by advances in innovation, Pope Francis emphasized the requirement for growth in "human responsibility, values, and conscience," proportionate to the development in the potential that this technology 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 "essential and basic concern" remains "whether in the context of this development male, as guy, is becoming really better, that is to state, more fully grown spiritually, more aware of the self-respect of his humankind, more accountable, more available to others, specifically the neediest and the weakest, and readier to provide and to aid all." [202]
110. As a result, it is crucial to know how to evaluate specific applications of AI in particular contexts to determine whether its use promotes human self-respect, the vocation of the human individual, and the typical good. Similar to many technologies, the results of the different usages of AI may not constantly be predictable from their creation. As these applications and their social effects become clearer, suitable actions ought to be made at all levels of society, following the concept of subsidiarity. Individual users, households, civil society, corporations, institutions, governments, and worldwide companies should work at their correct levels to guarantee that AI is utilized for the good of all.

111. A significant obstacle and opportunity for the common excellent today depends on considering AI within a framework of relational intelligence, which stresses the interconnectedness of people and communities and highlights our shared obligation for fostering the essential wellness of others. The twentieth-century philosopher Nicholas Berdyaev observed that people often blame devices for personal and social problems; nevertheless, "this only humiliates man and does not correspond to his self-respect," for "it is not worthy to move responsibility from guy to a device." [203] Only the human person can be ethically accountable, and the challenges of a technological society are ultimately spiritual in nature. Therefore, dealing with those challenges "demands an increase of spirituality." [204]
112. A more indicate consider is the call, prompted by the appearance of AI on the world phase, for a renewed appreciation of all that is human. Years ago, the French Catholic author Georges Bernanos warned that "the threat is not in the multiplication of devices, but in the ever-increasing number of men accustomed from their youth to desire just what makers can give." [205] This challenge is as true today as it was then, as the quick pace of digitization risks a "digital reductionism," where non-quantifiable elements of life are reserved and after that forgotten and even deemed unimportant because they can not be calculated in official terms. AI should be utilized just as a tool to complement human intelligence rather than change its richness. [206] Cultivating those aspects of human life that go beyond calculation is vital for maintaining "an authentic humankind" that "seems to dwell in the midst of our technological culture, practically unnoticed, like a mist leaking carefully underneath a closed door." [207]
113. The huge expanse of the world's understanding is now available in manner ins which would have filled past generations with wonder. However, to make sure that advancements in knowledge do not become humanly or spiritually barren, one should go beyond the simple build-up of data and aim to attain true knowledge. [208]
114. This knowledge is the present that humanity requires most to resolve the extensive questions and ethical difficulties positioned by AI: "Only by embracing a spiritual way of viewing reality, only by recuperating a knowledge of the heart, can we challenge and translate the newness of our time." [209] Such "knowledge of the heart" is "the virtue that allows us to incorporate the whole and its parts, our decisions and their repercussions." It "can not be looked for from machines," but it "lets itself be discovered by those who seek it and be seen by those who love it; it anticipates those who want it, and it enters search of those who deserve it (cf. Wis 6:12 -16)." [210]
115. In a world marked by AI, we need the grace of the Holy Spirit, who "allows us to take a look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, circumstances, events and to uncover their genuine meaning." [211]
116. Since a "person's perfection is measured not by the details or knowledge they possess, however by the depth of their charity," [212] how we incorporate AI "to consist of the least of our bros and sis, the susceptible, and those most in need, will be the real step of our humanity." [213] The "wisdom of the heart" can illuminate and direct the human-centered usage of this technology to assist promote the common great, take care of our "typical home," advance the search for the reality, foster important human development, prefer human uniformity and fraternity, and lead humankind to its ultimate objective: joy and complete communion with God. [214]
117. From this viewpoint of wisdom, followers will be able to serve as ethical representatives capable of utilizing this innovation to promote a genuine vision of the human person and society. [215] This must be done with the understanding that technological development becomes part of God's prepare for creation-an activity that we are called to order toward the Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ, in the continual search for the True and the Good.

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

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

Ex audientia pass away 14 ianuarii 2025 Franciscus

Contents

I. Introduction

II. What is Artificial Intelligence?

III. Intelligence in the Philosophical and Theological Tradition

Rationality

Embodiment

Relationality

Relationship with the Truth

Stewardship of the World

An Important Understanding of Human Intelligence

The Limits of AI

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

Helping Human Freedom and Decision-Making

V. Specific Questions

AI and Society

AI and Human Relationships

AI, the Economy, and Labor

AI and Healthcare

AI and Education

AI, Misinformation, Deepfakes, and Abuse

AI, Privacy, and Surveillance

AI and the Protection of Our Common Home

AI and Warfare

AI and Our Relationship with God

VI. Concluding Reflections

True Wisdom

[1] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. See also Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. [2] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 307. Cf. Id., Christmas Greetings to the Roman Curia (21 December 2019): AAS 112 (2020 ), 43. [3] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [4] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 2293; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [5] J. McCarthy, et al., "A Proposition for the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence" (31 August 1955), http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/history/dartmouth/dartmouth.html (accessed: 21 October 2024). [6] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), pars. 2-3: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [7] Terms in this file explaining the outputs or procedures of AI are used figuratively to explain its operations and are not intended to anthropomorphize the machine. [8] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3; Id., Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [9] Here, one can see the main positions of the "transhumanists" and the "posthumanists." Transhumanists argue that technological developments will enable people to conquer their biological constraints and enhance both their physical and cognitive abilities. Posthumanists, on the other hand, contend that such advances will ultimately change human identity to the degree that mankind itself may no longer be thought about genuinely "human." Both views rest on a fundamentally unfavorable perception of human corporality, which deals with the body more as an obstacle than as an important part of the person's identity and contact us to complete awareness. Yet, this negative view of the body is irregular with a proper understanding of human dignity. While the Church supports authentic scientific progress, it verifies that human self-respect is rooted in "the individual as an inseparable unity of body and soul. " Thus, "self-respect is likewise intrinsic in each individual's body, which takes part in its own method in remaining in imago Dei" (Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita [8 April 2024], par. 18). [10] This approach shows a functionalist viewpoint, which lowers the human mind to its functions and assumes that its functions can be completely quantified in physical or mathematical terms. However, even if a future AGI were to appear genuinely intelligent, it would still remain practical in nature. [11] Cf. A.M. Turing, "Computing Machinery and Intelligence," Mind 59 (1950) 443-460. [12] If "thinking" is credited to devices, it must be clarified that this describes calculative thinking rather than crucial thinking. Similarly, if makers are said to operate utilizing sensible thinking, it needs to be defined that this is limited to computational reasoning. On the other hand, by its very nature, human thought is an innovative process that avoids shows and goes beyond constraints. [13] On the fundamental function of language in shaping understanding, cf. M. Heidegger, Über den Humanismus, Klostermann, Frankfurt am Main 1949 (en. tr. "Letter on Humanism," in Basic Writings: Martin Heidegger, Routledge, London - New York 2010, 141-182). [14] For further discussion of these anthropological and doctrinal structures, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 43-144. [15] Aristotle, Metaphysics, I. 1, 980 a 21. [16] Cf. Augustine, De Genesi advertisement litteram III, 20, 30: PL 34, 292: "Man is made in the image of God in relation to that [faculty] by which he transcends to the irrational animals. Now, this [faculty] is factor itself, or the 'mind,' or 'intelligence,' whatever other name it may more appropriately be offered"; Id., Enarrationes in Psalmos 54, 3: PL 36, 629: "When considering all that they have, people find that they are most distinguished from animals specifically by the reality they possess intelligence." This is also repeated by Saint Thomas Aquinas, who specifies that "man is the most perfect of all earthly beings endowed with movement, and his correct and natural operation is intellection," by which guy abstracts from things and "gets in his mind things really intelligible" (Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 76). [17] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [18] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 49, a. 5, advertisement 3. Cf. ibid., I, q. 79; II-II, q. 47, a. 3; II-II, q. 49, a. 2. For a contemporary perspective that echoes aspects of the classical and middle ages difference between these two modes of cognition, cf. D. Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, New York City 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 "normally considers 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, however rather fully divulged 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 hence it is united to the body in order that it might have a presence and an operation suitable 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 can transcending immediate concerns and understanding certain realities that are unchanging, as real now as in the past. As it peers into humanity, reason discovers universal values obtained from that same nature"; ibid., par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034. [38] Cf. B. Pascal, Pensées, no. 267 (ed. Brunschvicg): "The last proceeding of 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 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 allows us to understand messages in any kind of communication in a way that both considers and transcends their product or empirical structures (such as computer code). Here, intelligence becomes a wisdom that "allows us to look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, situations, events and to reveal 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 allows us to produce new material or concepts, mainly by providing an original perspective on truth. Both capacities depend on the existence of a personal subjectivity for their full realization. [41] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. [42] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034: "Charity, when accompanied by a commitment to the reality, is a lot more than personal sensation [...] Certainly, its close relation to truth cultivates its universality and maintains it from being 'restricted to a narrow field lacking relationships.' [...] Charity's openness to fact hence safeguards it from 'a fideism that denies it of its human and universal breadth.'" The internal quotes are from Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), pars. 2-4: AAS 101 (2009 ), 642-643. [43] Cf. International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 7. [44] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [45] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15. [46] Bonaventure, In II Librum Sententiarum, d. I, p. 2, a. 2, q. 1; as priced 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 compares the universe to "a book showing, representing, and explaining its Maker," the Triune God who grants presence to all things (Breviloquium 2.12.1). Cf. Alain de Lille, De Incarnatione Christi, PL 210, 579a: "Omnis mundi creatura quasi liber et pictura nobis est et speculum." [48] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 67: AAS 107 (2015 ), 874; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 6: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589-592; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 57: "human beings occupy a distinct location in deep space according to the magnificent strategy: they enjoy the opportunity of sharing in the divine governance of noticeable production. [...] Since guy's place as ruler remains in fact an involvement in the magnificent governance of development, we mention it here as a form of stewardship." [49] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), pars. 38-39: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1164-1165. [50] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. This concept is likewise reflected in the creation account, where God brings creatures to Adam "to see what he would call them. And whatever [he] called every living animal, that was its name" (Gen. 2:19), an action that shows the active engagement of human intelligence in the stewardship of God's creation. Cf. John Chrysostom, Homiliae in Genesim, XIV, 17-21: PG 53, 116-117. [51] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 301. [52] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 302. [53] Bonaventure, Breviloquium 2.12.1. Cf. ibid., 2.11.2. [54] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 236: AAS 105 (2023 ), 1115; Id., Address to Participants in the Meeting of University Chaplains and Pastoral Workers Promoted by the Dicastery for Culture and Education (24 November 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 November 2023, 7. [55] Cf. J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 5.1, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 99-100; Francis, Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [56] Francis, Address to the Members of the National Confederation of Artisans and Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises (CNA) (15 November 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 15 November 2024, 8. [57] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Querida Amazonia (2 February 2020), par. 41: AAS 112 (2020 ), 246; Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 146: AAS 107 (2015 ), 906. [58] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 864. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), pars. 17-24: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47-50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985-987. [59] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 20: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [60] P. Claudel, Conversation sur Jean Racine, Gallimard, Paris 1956, 32: "L'intelligence n'est rien sans la délectation." Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 13: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5: "The mind and the will are put at the service of the greater great by sensing and appreciating truths." [61] Dante, Paradiso, Canto XXX: "luce intellettüal, piena d'amore;/ amor di vero ben, pien di letizia;/ letizia che trascende ogne dolzore" (en. tr. The Divine Comedy of Dante Alighieri, C.E. Norton, tr., Houghton Mifflin, Boston 1920, 232). [62] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931:" [T] he greatest norm of human life is the magnificent law itself-eternal, unbiased and universal, by which God orders, directs and governs the entire world and the methods of the human community according to a plan developed in his knowledge and love. God has allowed male to take part in this law of his so that, under the mild disposition of divine providence, many may be able to reach a much deeper and deeper understanding of unchangeable truth." 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 actually inscribed his own image and likeness on guy (cf. Gen 1:26), conferring upon him an incomparable dignity [...] In impact, 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 essential self-respect as a person." Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [67] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 8. Cf. ibid., par. 9; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 22. [68] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2024 ), 310. [69] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [70] In this sense, "Artificial Intelligence" is understood as a technical term to indicate this technology, remembering that the expression is also utilized to designate the 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 instance, see the support 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, among a long list of other Catholics participated in clinical research and technological exploration, highlight that "faith and science can be unified in charity, offered that science is put at the service of the men and female of our time and not misused to damage or perhaps ruin them" (Francis, Address to Participants in the 2024 Lemaître Conference of the Vatican Observatory [20 June 2024]: L'Osservatore Romano, 20 June 2024, 8). Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 36: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053-1054; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), pars. 2, 106: AAS 91 (1999 ), 6-7.86 -87. [73] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. [74] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [75] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [76] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 102: AAS 107 (2015 ), 888. [77] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889; Id., Encyclical Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 27: AAS 112 (2020 ), 978; Benedict XVI, Encyclical Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 23: AAS 101 (2009 ), 657-658. [78] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39, 47; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), passim. [79] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par 2293. [80] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2-4. [81] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1749: "Freedom makes guy an ethical subject. When he acts deliberately, man is, so to speak, the dad of his acts." [82] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1776. [83] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1777. [84] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 1779-1781; Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 463, where the Holy Father encouraged efforts "to guarantee that technology remains human-centered, fairly grounded and directed toward the excellent." [85] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 166: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1026-1027; Id., Address to the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (23 September 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 September 2024, 10. On the role of human company in choosing a larger aim (Ziel) that then notifies the specific function (Zweck) for which each technological application is produced, cf. F. Dessauer, Streit um die Technik, Herder-Bücherei, Freiburg i. Br. 1959, 70-71. [86] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4: "Technology is born for a purpose and, in its impact on human society, constantly represents a form of order in social relations and a plan of power, hence allowing certain people to carry out specific actions while preventing others from carrying out different ones. In a basically specific way, this constitutive power-dimension of technology always includes the worldview of those who created and established it." [87] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 309. [88] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [89] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti, pars. 212-213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [90] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 5: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589; Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [91] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "Confronted with the marvels of makers, which appear to understand how to choose independently, we need to be really clear that decision-making [...] need to always be left to the human person. We would condemn humankind to a future without hope if we removed individuals's capability to make choices about themselves and their lives, by dooming them to depend upon the choices 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 document describes algorithmic bias (methodical and constant errors in computer system systems that may disproportionately bias certain groups in unintentional methods) or learning bias (which will result in training on a prejudiced information set) and not the "bias vector" in neural networks (which is a criterion used to adjust the output of "nerve cells" to change more accurately to the information). [94] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464, where the Holy Father verified the development in agreement "on the need for advancement procedures to respect such worths as addition, openness, security, equity, privacy and dependability," and likewise welcomed "the efforts of international organizations to manage these technologies so that they promote authentic progress, contributing, that is, to a better world and an integrally greater quality of life." [95] Francis, Greetings to a Delegation of the "Max Planck Society" (23 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 February 2023, 8. [96] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [97] Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1571. [98] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. For additional 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 value of dialogue in a pluralist society oriented towards a "robust and solid social ethics," see Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 211-214: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [100] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [101] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [102] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [103] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. [104] Cf. Pontifical Council for Social Communications, Ethics in Internet (22 February 2002), par. 10. [105] Francis, Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414; pricing quote the Final Document of the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops (27 October 2018), par. 24: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1593. Cf. Benedict XVI, Address to the Participants in the International Congress on Natural Moral Law (12 February 2017): AAS 99 (2007 ), 245. [106] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-33: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047-1050. [107] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-21: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047. [108] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 308-309. [109] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [110] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [111] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 101, 103, 111, 115, 167: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1004-1005, 1007-1009, 1027. [112] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047; cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 35: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 123. [113] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 12: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1034. [114] Cf. Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church (2004 ), par. 149. [115] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [116] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [117] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 865. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), pars. 88-89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414. [118] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057. [119] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985. [120] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [121] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [122] Cf. E. Stein, Zum Problem der Einfühlung, Buchdruckerei des Waisenhauses, Halle 1917 (en. tr. On the Problem of Empathy, ICS Publications, Washington D.C. 1989). [123] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057:" [Many individuals] want their social relationships offered by advanced devices, by screens and systems which can be turned on and off on command. Meanwhile, the Gospel tells us constantly to run the danger of an in person encounter with others, with their physical existence which challenges us, with their pain and their pleas, with their joy which infects us in our close and constant interaction. True faith in the incarnate Son of God is inseparable from self-giving, from subscription in the community, from service, from reconciliation with others." Also cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 24: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1044-1045. [124] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 1. [125] Cf. Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570; Id, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 18, 124-129: AAS 107 (2015 ), 854.897-899. [126] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [127] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 209: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1107. [128] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4. For Pope Francis' teaching about AI in relationship to the "technocratic paradigm," cf. Id., Encyclical Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 106-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893. [129] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047.; as priced 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 guy' and not guy 'for work.' Through this conclusion one appropriately pertains to acknowledge the pre-eminence of the subjective meaning of work over the objective one." [132] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 128: AAS 107 (2015 ), 898. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 24: AAS 108 (2016 ), 319-320. [133] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [134] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae (25 March 1995), par. 89: AAS 87 (1995 ), 502. [135] Ibid. [136] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 67: AAS 112 (2020 ), 993; as priced quote in Id., Message for the XXXI World Day of the Sick (11 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 10 January 2023, 8. [137] Francis, Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [138] Francis, Address to the Diplomatic Corps Accredited to the Holy See (11 January 2016): AAS 108 (2016 ), 120. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 18: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975; Id., Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [139] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465; Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [140] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105, 107: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-890; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 18-21: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975-976; Id., Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465. [141] Francis, Address to the Participants at the Meeting Sponsored by the Charity and Health Commission of the Italian Bishops' Conference (10 February 2017): AAS 109 (2017 ), 243. Cf. ibid., 242-243: "If there is a sector in which the throwaway culture appears, with its painful consequences, it is that of health care. When an ill individual is not put in the center or their dignity is ruled out, this gives rise to attitudes that can lead even to speculation on the misfortune of others. And this is very grave! [...] The application of a service technique to the healthcare sector, if indiscriminate [...] may risk disposing of 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 using Distance Learning in Ecclesiastical Universities and Faculties, I. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729; Francis, Message for the LXIX World Day of Peace (1 January 2016), 6: AAS 108 (2016 ), 57-58. [145] Francis, Address to Members of the Global Researchers Advancing Catholic Education Project (20 April 2022): AAS 114 (2022 ), 580. [146] Cf. Paul VI, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi (8 December 1975), par. 41: AAS 68 (1976 ), 31, pricing estimate Id., Address to the Members of the "Consilium de Laicis" (2 October 1974): AAS 66 (1974 ), 568: "if [the contemporary individual] does listen to instructors, it is due to the fact that they are witnesses." [147] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 6.1, London 18733, 125-126. [148] Francis, Meeting the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [149] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 86: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413, quoting the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, Final Document (27 October 2018), par. 21: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1592. [150] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 7.6, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 167. [151] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 88: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413. [152] In a 2023 policy document about the use of generative AI in education and research study, UNESCO notes: "One of the essential questions [of making use of generative AI (GenAI) in education and research] is whether human beings can possibly deliver standard levels of thinking and skill-acquisition processes to AI and rather concentrate on higher-order thinking abilities based upon the outputs supplied by AI. Writing, for example, is frequently connected with the structuring of thinking. With GenAI [...], human beings can now start with a well-structured overview offered by GenAI. Some specialists have identified using GenAI to produce text in this method as 'composing without thinking'" (UNESCO, Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research [2023], 37-38). The German-American theorist Hannah Arendt visualized such a possibility in her 1959 book, The Human Condition, and cautioned: "If it needs to end up being real that knowledge (in the sense of knowledge) and believed have parted business for good, then we would certainly end up being the powerless servants, not a lot of our machines since our know-how" (Id., The Human Condition, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 20182, 3). [153] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 262: AAS 108 (2016 ), 417. [154] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 7: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3; cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 167: AAS 107 (2015 ), 914. [155] John Paul II, Apostolic Constitution Ex Corde Ecclesiae (15 August 1990), 7: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1479. [156] Francis, Apostolic Constitution Veritatis Gaudium (29 January 2018), 4c: AAS 110 (2018 ), 9-10. [157] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3. [158] For instance, it may help people gain access to the "range of resources for generating higher understanding of fact" 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 concern of whether what they understand is true or not. [...] It is this that Saint Augustine teaches when he writes: 'I have met numerous who wanted to deceive, however none who wished to be deceived'"; 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 Network (28 May 2023), par. 41; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Decree Inter Mirifica (4 December 1963), pars. 4, 8-12: AAS 56 (1964 ), 146, 148-149. [166] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 1, 6, 16, 24. [167] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046. Cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 40: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 127: "no guy may with impunity break that human dignity which God himself treats with fantastic 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 self-respect in the online world obliges States to likewise appreciate the right to personal privacy, by protecting residents from invasive surveillance and permitting them to secure 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 determined a list of "early pledges of AI helping to resolve 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 information into insights and insights into actions, AI-enabled tools might assist develop new methods and investments to lower emissions, influence brand-new economic sector investments in net no, protect biodiversity, and build broad-based social strength" (ibid.). [174] "The cloud" describes a network of physical servers throughout the world that enables users to shop, procedure, and manage their data remotely. [175] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 9: AAS 107 (2015 ), 850. [176] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 106: AAS 107 (2015 ), 890. [177] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 60: AAS 107 (2015 ), 870. [178] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 3, 13: AAS 107 (2015 ), 848.852. [179] Augustine, De Civitate Dei, XIX, 13, 1: PL 41, 640. [180] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 77-82: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1100-1107; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 256-262: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1060-1063; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 38-39; Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2302-2317. [181] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 78: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1101. [182] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [183] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2308-2310. [184] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 80-81: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1105. [185] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "We need to ensure and secure a space for proper human control over the choices made by synthetic intelligence programs: human self-respect itself depends on it." [186] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to Working Group II on Emerging Technologies at the UN Disarmament Commission (3 April 2024): "The development and usage of lethal self-governing weapons systems (LAWS) that lack the suitable human control would present basic ethical issues, considered that LAWS can never ever be ethically accountable topics capable of complying with international humanitarian law." [187] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 258: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1061. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [188] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [189] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3: "Nor can we disregard the possibility of sophisticated weapons winding up in the incorrect hands, assisting in, for instance, terrorist attacks or interventions aimed at destabilizing the organizations of genuine systems of federal government. In a word, the world does not need brand-new innovations that add to the unfair development of commerce and the weapons trade and subsequently wind up promoting the folly of war." [190] John Paul II, Act of Entrustment to Mary for the Jubilee of Bishops (8 October 2000), par. 3: Insegnamenti XXIII/2 (200 ), 565. [191] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 79: AAS 107 (2015 ), 878. [192] Cf. Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 51: AAS 101 (2009 ), 687. [193] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39. [194] Cf. Augustine, Confessiones, I, 1, 1: PL 32, 661. [195] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (30 December 1987), par. 28: AAS 80 (1988 ), 548:" [T] here is a better understanding today that the mere accumulation of items and services [...] is not enough for the awareness of human joy. Nor, in effect, does the availability of the numerous real advantages provided in current times by science and innovation, including the computer sciences, bring flexibility from every type of slavery. On the contrary, [...] unless all the significant body of resources and potential at man's disposal is guided by a moral understanding and by an orientation towards the true good of the mankind, it easily turns against guy 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 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 higher wisdom. Wisdom is not born of fast searches on the internet nor is it a mass of unproven 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.