GitLab

1. With wisdom both ancient and new (cf. Mt. 13:52), we are called to show on the present obstacles and chances posed by scientific and technological advancements, especially by the recent development of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The Christian tradition relates to the gift of intelligence as an important element of how human beings are created "in the image of God" (Gen. 1:27). Starting from an essential vision of the human individual and the biblical contacting us to "till" and "keep" the earth (Gen. 2:15), the Church stresses that this gift of intelligence ought to be revealed through the accountable use of reason and technical abilities in the stewardship of the created world.

2. The Church encourages the development of science, innovation, the arts, and other types of human venture, viewing them as part of the "cooperation of guy and woman with God in improving the noticeable creation." [1] As Sirach verifies, God "gave ability to human beings, that he might be glorified in his wonderful works" (Sir. 38:6). Human abilities and creativity originate from God and, when used appropriately, glorify God by reflecting his wisdom and goodness. Due to this, when we ask ourselves what it indicates to "be human," we can not leave out a consideration of our scientific and technological abilities.

3. It is within this viewpoint that today Note addresses the anthropological and ethical difficulties raised by AI-issues that are especially considerable, as one of the objectives of this technology is to imitate the human intelligence that created it. For circumstances, unlike numerous other human productions, AI can be trained on the outcomes of human creativity and then produce brand-new "artifacts" with a level of speed and skill that typically rivals or surpasses what human beings can do, such as producing text or images identical from human structures. This raises important issues about AI's possible role in the growing crisis of fact in the public forum. Moreover, this innovation is designed to discover and make certain options autonomously, adjusting to brand-new scenarios and supplying options not foreseen by its developers, and thus, it raises basic concerns about ethical obligation and human safety, with more comprehensive implications for society as a whole. This brand-new circumstance has prompted many people to review what it suggests to be human and the role of humanity on the planet.

4. Taking all this into account, there is broad agreement that AI marks a brand-new and significant phase in mankind's engagement with innovation, putting it at the heart of what Pope Francis has actually explained as an "epochal modification." [2] Its effect is felt globally and in a large range of locations, including social relationships, education, work, art, healthcare, law, warfare, and worldwide relations. As AI advances rapidly towards even higher accomplishments, it is critically essential to consider its anthropological and ethical implications. This includes not only mitigating dangers and preventing harm but also ensuring that its applications are utilized to promote human progress and the common good.

5. To contribute favorably to the discernment regarding AI, and in reaction to Pope Francis' require a restored "wisdom of heart," [3] the Church offers its experience through the anthropological and ethical reflections contained in this Note. Committed to its active role in the international discussion on these issues, the Church invites those delegated with transferring the faith-including moms and dads, teachers, pastors, and bishops-to devote themselves to this important topic with care and attention. While this file is meant especially for them, it is also suggested to be available to a wider audience, particularly those who share the conviction that scientific and technological advances need to be directed toward serving the human individual and the common good. [4]
6. To this end, the file starts by comparing concepts of intelligence in AI and in human intelligence. It then checks out the Christian understanding of human intelligence, providing a structure rooted in the Church's philosophical and theological tradition. Finally, the document offers standards to guarantee that the advancement and use of AI maintain human self-respect and promote the essential advancement of the human person and society.

7. The concept of "intelligence" in AI has progressed gradually, drawing on a variety of concepts from numerous disciplines. While its origins extend back centuries, a substantial milestone took place in 1956 when the American computer researcher John McCarthy organized a summer workshop at Dartmouth University to explore the problem of "Artificial Intelligence," which he specified as "that of making a machine behave in manner ins which would be called intelligent if a human were so acting." [5] This workshop introduced a research program focused on developing makers capable of carrying out jobs generally associated with the human intelligence and smart habits.

8. Since then, AI research study has advanced rapidly, leading to the advancement of complex systems efficient in performing highly sophisticated tasks. [6] These so-called "narrow AI" systems are normally created to manage specific and restricted functions, such as equating languages, predicting the trajectory of a storm, categorizing images, responding to questions, or producing visual content at the user's demand. While the meaning of "intelligence" in AI research study varies, most contemporary AI systems-particularly those utilizing device learning-rely on analytical inference rather than logical deduction. By examining large datasets to identify patterns, AI can "forecast" [7] outcomes and propose new techniques, imitating some cognitive procedures typical of human analytical. Such achievements have actually been made possible through advances in computing innovation (consisting of neural networks, without supervision artificial intelligence, and evolutionary algorithms) along with hardware innovations (such as specialized processors). Together, these technologies make it possible for AI systems to respond to numerous kinds of human input, adjust to new circumstances, and even recommend novel services not expected by their original developers. [8]
9. Due to these fast improvements, numerous jobs when managed exclusively by humans are now delegated to AI. These systems can augment or even supersede what humans have the ability to do in numerous fields, especially in specialized locations such as information analysis, image recognition, and medical diagnosis. While each "narrow AI" application is developed for a specific job, numerous scientists aim to establish what is referred to as "Artificial General Intelligence" (AGI)-a single system capable of operating across all cognitive domains and performing any task within the scope of human intelligence. Some even argue that AGI might one day attain the state of "superintelligence," exceeding human intellectual capabilities, or contribute to "super-longevity" through advances in biotechnology. Others, nevertheless, fear that these possibilities, even if theoretical, could one day eclipse the human person, while still others welcome this prospective change. [9]
10. Underlying this and numerous other viewpoints on the subject is the implicit presumption that the term "intelligence" can be used in the exact same method to refer to both human intelligence and AI. Yet, this does not record the complete scope of the idea. When it comes to humans, intelligence is a professors that pertains to the individual in his/her totality, whereas in the context of AI, "intelligence" is comprehended functionally, typically with the anticipation that the activities attribute of the human mind can be broken down into digitized actions that makers can replicate. [10]
11. This practical point of view is exhibited by the "Turing Test," which thinks about a device "intelligent" if a person can not identify its behavior from that of a human. [11] However, in this context, the term "behavior" refers only to the performance of specific intellectual jobs; it does not account for the full breadth of human experience, which consists of abstraction, emotions, creativity, and the visual, ethical, and spiritual perceptiveness. Nor does it encompass the complete series of expressions particular of the human mind. Instead, in the case of AI, the "intelligence" of a system is examined methodologically, but likewise reductively, based upon its ability to produce appropriate responses-in this case, those related to the human intellect-regardless of how those actions are generated.

12. AI's sophisticated features offer it sophisticated abilities to perform jobs, however not the ability to think. [12] This difference is most importantly crucial, as the way "intelligence" is defined inevitably forms how we comprehend the relationship between human thought and this technology. [13] To value this, one should remember the richness of the philosophical custom and Christian faith, which provide a deeper and more detailed understanding of intelligence-an understanding that is main to the Church's mentor on the nature, dignity, and occupation of the human person. [14]
13. From the dawn of human self-reflection, the mind has actually played a main role in comprehending what it indicates to be "human." Aristotle observed that "all people by nature desire to understand." [15] This knowledge, with its capability for abstraction that understands the nature and significance of things, sets people apart from the animal world. [16] As theorists, theologians, and psychologists have analyzed the specific nature of this intellectual faculty, they have actually also explored how human beings comprehend the world and their unique place within it. Through this exploration, the Christian custom has actually pertained to understand 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 custom, the principle of intelligence is often comprehended through the complementary concepts of "reason" (ratio) and "intellect" (intellectus). These are not separate professors however, as Saint Thomas Aquinas explains, they are two modes in which the exact same intelligence operates: "The term intelligence is inferred from the inward grasp of the fact, while the name factor is drawn from the curious and discursive process." [18] This concise description highlights the two fundamental and complementary measurements of human intelligence. Intellectus describes the intuitive grasp of the truth-that is, capturing it with the "eyes" of the mind-which precedes and premises argumentation itself. Ratio pertains to thinking proper: the discursive, analytical process that causes judgment. Together, intelligence and factor form the 2 elements 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 decrease the person to a specific mode of thought; rather, it acknowledges that the ability for intellectual understanding shapes and penetrates all elements of human activity. [20] Whether worked out well or poorly, this capability is an intrinsic aspect of human nature. In this sense, the "term 'rational' includes all the capacities of the human individual," including those related to "knowing and understanding, as well as those of willing, loving, choosing, and desiring; it likewise consists of all corporeal functions closely related to these capabilities." [21] This detailed perspective highlights how, in the human individual, produced in the "image of God," reason is incorporated in such a way that raises, shapes, and changes both the individual's will and actions. [22]
16. Christian thought considers the intellectual faculties of the human individual within the structure of an integral anthropology that views the human being as basically embodied. In the human individual, spirit and matter "are not two natures joined, but rather their union forms a single nature." [23] To put it simply, the soul is not simply the immaterial "part" of the person contained within the body, nor is the body an outer shell housing an intangible "core." Rather, the whole human individual is all at once both product and spiritual. This understanding reflects the teaching of Sacred Scripture, which views the human person as a being who lives out relationships with God and others (and therefore, an authentically spiritual measurement) within and through this embodied presence. [24] The extensive significance of this condition is additional lit up by the secret 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 existence, the human person transcends the material world through the soul, which is "almost on the horizon of eternity and time." [26] The intelligence's capability for transcendence and the self-possessed freedom of the will belong to the soul, by which the human person "shares in the light of the magnificent mind." [27] Nevertheless, the human spirit does not exercise its regular mode of knowledge without the body. [28] In this method, the intellectual professors of the human person are an important part of a sociology that acknowledges that the human individual is a "unity of body and soul." [29] Further elements of this understanding will be developed in what follows.

18. Human beings are "purchased by their very nature to interpersonal communion," [30] having the capability to know one another, to provide themselves in love, and to participate in communion with others. Accordingly, human intelligence is not an isolated faculty but is exercised in relationships, discovering its fullest expression in dialogue, collaboration, and uniformity. We find out with others, and we find out 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 production and redemption. [31] The human individual is "called to share, by understanding and love, in God's own life." [32]
20. This occupation to communion with God is always connected 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 called to mimic Christ's outpouring present (cf. 2 Cor. 9:8 -11; Eph. 5:1 -2) by following his command to "love one another, as I have enjoyed you" (Jn. 13:34). [33] Love and service, echoing the magnificent life of self-giving, go beyond self-interest to respond more completely to the human occupation (cf. 1 Jn. 2:9). Much more sublime than understanding lots of things is the commitment to care for one another, for if "I comprehend all mysteries and all knowledge [...] but do not have love, I am absolutely nothing" (1 Cor. 13:2).

21. Human intelligence is ultimately "God's present fashioned for the assimilation of truth." [34] In the double sense of intellectus-ratio, it makes it possible for the individual to check out realities that exceed simple sensory experience or utility, considering that "the desire for truth is part of humanity itself. It is a natural home of human factor to ask why things are as they are." [35] Moving beyond the limits of empirical data, human intelligence can "with real certitude attain to reality itself as knowable." [36] While truth remains just partially understood, the desire for reality "spurs factor always to go even more; certainly, it is as if factor were overwhelmed to see that it can constantly surpass what it has actually already attained." [37] Although Truth in itself transcends the borders of human intelligence, it irresistibly attracts it. [38] Drawn by this tourist attraction, the human individual is led to look for "facts of a greater order." [39]
22. This inherent drive towards the pursuit of fact is especially obvious in the clearly human capabilities for semantic understanding and creativity, [40] through which this search unfolds in a "manner that is suitable to the social nature and self-respect of the human person." [41] Likewise, a steadfast orientation to the reality is important for charity to be both authentic and universal. [42]
23. The look for truth finds its highest expression in openness to truths that go beyond the physical and produced world. In God, all facts attain their ultimate and original meaning. [43] Entrusting oneself to God is a "fundamental decision that engages the entire individual." [44] In this way, the human person becomes totally what she or he is called to be: "the intelligence and the will display their spiritual nature," making it possible for the individual "to act in a manner that understands personal freedom to the complete." [45]
24. The Christian faith comprehends creation as the free act of the Triune God, who, as Saint Bonaventure of Bagnoregio explains, creates "not to increase his splendor, but to show it forth and to interact it." [46] Since God produces according to his Wisdom (cf. Wis. 9:9; Jer. 10:12), development 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 called humans to presume a special function: to cultivate and care for 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 take care of and establish creation in accord with God's strategy. [49] In this, human intelligence shows the Divine Intelligence that created all things (cf. Gen. 1-2; Jn. 1), [50] constantly sustains them, and guides them to their supreme purpose in him. [51] Moreover, humans are called to establish their abilities in science and innovation, for through them, God is glorified (cf. Sir. 38:6). Thus, in an appropriate relationship with production, humans, on the one hand, use their intelligence and skill to work together with God in directing creation towards the purpose to which he has called it. [52] On the other hand, production itself, as Saint Bonaventure observes, helps the human mind to "rise gradually to the supreme Principle, who is God." [53]
26. In this context, human intelligence becomes more plainly comprehended as a professors that forms an essential part of how the entire person engages with truth. Authentic engagement requires welcoming the complete scope of one's being: spiritual, cognitive, embodied, and relational.

27. This engagement with truth unfolds in different methods, as each individual, in his or her diverse uniqueness [54], seeks to understand the world, connect to others, fix issues, express creativity, and pursue essential wellness through the harmonious interplay of the numerous dimensions of the person's intelligence. [55] This involves sensible and linguistic abilities however can likewise encompass other modes of engaging with truth. Consider the work of a craftsmen, who "must understand how to determine, in inert matter, a particular form that others can not acknowledge" [56] and bring it forth through insight and practical skill. Indigenous peoples who live near to the earth typically have a profound sense of nature and its cycles. [57] Similarly, a pal who knows the right word to state or an individual proficient at handling 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 expert system, we can not forget that poetry and love are required to conserve our humankind." [59]
28. At the heart of the Christian understanding of intelligence is the integration of truth into the ethical and spiritual life of the individual, guiding his or her actions in light of God's goodness and truth. According to God's strategy, intelligence, in its fullest sense, likewise consists of the ability to savor mediawiki1263.00web.net what is true, good, and gorgeous. As the twentieth-century French poet Paul Claudel revealed, "intelligence is absolutely nothing without delight." [60] Similarly, Dante, upon reaching the highest heaven in Paradiso, testifies that the culmination of this intellectual delight is discovered in the "light intellectual loaded with love, love of real great filled with happiness, happiness which transcends every sweet taste." [61]
29. A correct understanding of human intelligence, for that reason, can not be reduced to the mere acquisition of realities or the capability to carry out specific tasks. Instead, it involves the individual's openness to the supreme concerns of life and shows an orientation toward 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, contemplating presence in its fullness, which exceeds what is measurable, and comprehending the significance of what has actually been understood. For believers, this capacity consists of, in a particular method, the capability to grow in the understanding of the secrets of God by utilizing factor to engage ever more exceptionally with revealed facts (intellectus fidei). [63] True intelligence is formed by magnificent love, which "is put forth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit" (Rom. 5:5). From this, it follows that human intelligence possesses an essential reflective 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 present AI systems end up being apparent. While AI is an amazing technological achievement efficient in imitating certain outputs associated with human intelligence, it runs by carrying out jobs, attaining objectives, or making choices based on quantitative data and computational logic. For instance, with its analytical power, AI excels at integrating data from a range of fields, modeling complex systems, and cultivating interdisciplinary connections. In this method, it can assist experts team up in resolving intricate issues that "can not be handled from a single perspective or from a single set of interests." [64]
31. However, even as AI procedures and imitates certain expressions of intelligence, it remains basically confined to a logical-mathematical structure, which enforces inherent constraints. Human intelligence, in contrast, develops organically throughout the individual's physical and mental growth, 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 basically various from the developmental growth of human intelligence, which is shaped by embodied experiences, consisting of sensory input, emotional reactions, social interactions, and the special context of each minute. These components shape and kind people within their individual history.In contrast, AI, lacking a physical body, counts on computational reasoning and learning based upon vast datasets that include recorded human experiences and understanding.

32. Consequently, although AI can mimic elements of human thinking and carry out specific jobs with incredible speed and efficiency, its computational capabilities represent just a portion of the more comprehensive capacities of the human mind. For example, AI can not presently duplicate moral discernment or the ability to develop authentic relationships. Moreover, human intelligence is positioned within a personally lived history of intellectual and moral formation that essentially forms the person's point of view, including the physical, emotional, social, moral, and spiritual measurements of life. Since AI can not use this fullness of understanding, approaches that rely exclusively on this innovation or treat it as the main methods of analyzing the world can lead to "a loss of appreciation for the entire, for the relationships between things, and for the broader horizon." [65]
33. Human intelligence is not mainly about finishing practical tasks but about understanding and actively engaging with truth in all its measurements; it is likewise efficient in unexpected insights. Since AI lacks the richness of corporeality, relationality, and the openness of the human heart to truth and goodness, its capacities-though relatively limitless-are unparalleled with the human ability to comprehend truth. So much can be gained from a disease, an embrace of reconciliation, and even a simple sundown; certainly, lots of experiences we have as people open brand-new horizons and provide the possibility of attaining brand-new knowledge. No gadget, working entirely with data, can determine up to these and many other experiences present in our lives.

34. Drawing an excessively close equivalence between human intelligence and AI threats catching a functionalist perspective, where individuals are valued based on the work they can perform. However, an individual's worth does not depend upon having particular abilities, cognitive and technological accomplishments, or individual success, however on the individual's intrinsic dignity, grounded in being developed in the image of God. [66] This dignity remains intact in all situations, consisting of for those unable to exercise their abilities, whether it be an unborn child, an unconscious individual, or an older person who is suffering. [67] It also underpins the tradition of human rights (and, in specific, what are now called "neuro-rights"), which represent "an important point of merging in the search for commonalities" [68] and can, thus, work as an essential ethical guide in discussions on the accountable development and usage of AI.

35. Considering all these points, as Pope Francis observes, "the extremely use of the word 'intelligence'" in connection with AI "can prove misleading" [69] and risks neglecting what is most valuable in the human person. In light of this, AI must not be viewed as an artificial kind of human intelligence however as an item of it. [70]
36. Given these factors to consider, one can ask how AI can be comprehended within God's plan. To address this, it is crucial to recall that techno-scientific activity is not neutral in character but is a human undertaking that engages the humanistic and cultural measurements of human imagination. [71]
37. Seen as a fruit of the potential inscribed within human intelligence, [72] scientific inquiry and the advancement of technical abilities are part of the "collaboration of males and female with God in perfecting the visible production." [73] At the same time, all scientific and technological accomplishments are, eventually, gifts from God. [74] Therefore, human beings need to constantly use their capabilities in view of the greater purpose for which God has approved them. [75]
38. We can gratefully acknowledge how technology has "corrected countless evils which utilized to harm and restrict people," [76] a reality for which we need to rejoice. Nevertheless, not all technological developments in themselves represent genuine human progress. [77] The Church is particularly opposed to those applications that threaten the sanctity of life or the dignity of the human person. [78] Like any human undertaking, technological advancement must be directed to serve the human person and contribute to the pursuit of "higher justice, more substantial fraternity, and a more gentle order of social relations," which are "more important than advances in the technical field." [79] Concerns about the ethical ramifications of technological advancement are shared not just within the Church but likewise amongst lots of researchers, technologists, and expert associations, who significantly require ethical reflection to direct this development in a responsible method.

39. To attend to these difficulties, it is vital to highlight the value of ethical obligation grounded in the self-respect and occupation of the human individual. This directing principle also uses to questions concerning AI. In this context, the ethical measurement takes on main significance since it is individuals who create systems and figure out the purposes for which they are utilized. [80] Between a machine and a human being, only the latter is really a moral agent-a subject of moral responsibility who works out flexibility in his/her decisions and accepts their repercussions. [81] It is not the machine but the human who remains in relationship with fact and goodness, guided by a moral conscience that calls the individual "to like and to do what is good and to prevent evil," [82] attesting to "the authority of fact in recommendation to the supreme Good to which the human person is drawn." [83] Likewise, in between a maker 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 seeking the great that is possible in every scenario. [84] In truth, all of this also comes from the person's exercise of intelligence.

40. Like any product of human imagination, AI can be directed toward positive or unfavorable ends. [85] When used in manner ins which respect human dignity and promote the well-being of people and communities, it can contribute positively to the human occupation. Yet, as in all areas where humans are called to make decisions, the shadow of evil also looms here. Where human flexibility enables the possibility of selecting what is incorrect, the ethical evaluation of this technology will need to consider how it is directed and utilized.

41. At the same time, it is not only the ends that are fairly considerable but likewise the methods used to attain them. Additionally, the total vision and understanding of the human person ingrained within these systems are essential to consider also. Technological items show the worldview of their developers, owners, users, and regulators, [86] and have the power to "form the world and engage consciences on the level of worths." [87] On a societal level, some technological developments might likewise enhance relationships and power dynamics that are irregular with a proper understanding of the human person and society.

42. Therefore, the ends and the ways utilized in a provided application of AI, along with the total vision it incorporates, need to all be assessed to ensure they respect human dignity and promote the common good. [88] As Pope Francis has actually specified, "the intrinsic self-respect of every male and every female" should be "the crucial criterion in evaluating emerging technologies; these will prove fairly sound to the level that they assist respect that dignity and increase its expression at every level of human life," [89] consisting of in the social and economic spheres. In this sense, human intelligence plays a vital function not just in designing and producing innovation however likewise in directing its usage in line with the genuine good of the human person. [90] The obligation for handling this sensibly pertains to every level of society, guided by the concept of subsidiarity and other concepts of Catholic Social Teaching.

43. The commitment to guaranteeing that AI always supports and promotes the supreme worth of the dignity of every person and the fullness of the human vocation works as a criterion of discernment for developers, owners, operators, and regulators of AI, in addition to to its users. It remains legitimate for every single application of the innovation at every level of its usage.

44. An evaluation of the implications of this assisting concept could begin by considering the importance of moral duty. Since full ethical causality belongs only to individual agents, not synthetic ones, it is vital to be able to recognize and specify who bears obligation for the processes involved in AI, particularly those capable of finding out, correction, and reprogramming. While bottom-up approaches and extremely deep neural networks allow AI to solve intricate problems, they make it tough to understand the procedures that lead to the solutions they adopted. This complicates accountability since if an AI application produces undesired results, determining who is accountable becomes tough. To resolve this issue, attention requires to be offered to the nature of responsibility processes in complex, highly automated settings, where outcomes may just end up being obvious in the medium to long term. For this, it is essential that ultimate obligation for decisions made utilizing AI rests with the human decision-makers which there is accountability for the usage of AI at each phase of the decision-making process. [91]
45. In addition to determining who is responsible, it is essential to determine the goals given to AI systems. Although these systems may use unsupervised autonomous knowing systems and in some cases follow courses that people can not reconstruct, they ultimately pursue goals that people have appointed to them and are governed by processes established by their designers and programmers. Yet, this presents a challenge due to the fact that, as AI models become significantly capable of independent knowing, the capability to maintain control over them to make sure that such applications serve human purposes may efficiently decrease. This raises the vital concern of how to guarantee that AI systems are bought for the good of people and not against them.

46. While duty for the ethical usage of AI systems starts with those who develop, produce, handle, and oversee such systems, it is likewise shared by those who use them. As Pope Francis kept in mind, the machine "makes a technical choice among several possibilities based either on distinct criteria or on analytical inferences. Humans, nevertheless, not just select, however in their hearts are capable of deciding." [92] Those who utilize AI to accomplish a job and follow its outcomes produce a context in which they are ultimately accountable for the power they have entrusted. Therefore, insofar as AI can help human beings in making decisions, the algorithms that govern it ought to be reliable, safe, robust enough to handle inconsistencies, and transparent in their operation to reduce predispositions and unintended adverse effects. [93] Regulatory structures must make sure that all legal entities remain accountable for using AI and all its effects, with appropriate safeguards for openness, privacy, and responsibility. [94] Moreover, those using AI needs to take care not to end up being extremely based on it for their decision-making, a trend that increases contemporary society's currently high reliance on technology.

47. The Church's ethical and social mentor supplies resources to help make sure that AI is utilized in a method that maintains human company. Considerations about justice, for example, need to likewise attend to concerns such as cultivating simply social dynamics, maintaining global security, and promoting peace. By exercising vigilance, people and communities can recognize ways to use AI to benefit mankind while avoiding applications that could degrade human self-respect or harm the environment. In this context, the concept of responsibility must be understood not only in its most limited sense but as a "responsibility for the look after others, which is more than merely accounting for results attained." [95]
48. Therefore, AI, like any technology, can be part of a conscious and responsible answer to mankind's vocation to the good. However, as formerly talked about, AI should be directed by human intelligence to line up with this occupation, ensuring it appreciates the self-respect of the human person. Recognizing this "exalted self-respect," the Second Vatican Council verified that "the social order and its advancement must invariably work to the advantage of the human individual." [96] Due to this, making use of AI, as Pope Francis said, need to be "accompanied by an ethic inspired by a vision of the common great, an ethic of freedom, obligation, and fraternity, capable of promoting the complete development of individuals in relation to others and to the whole of development." [97]
49. Within this basic viewpoint, some observations follow below to show how the preceding arguments can help offer an ethical orientation in useful scenarios, in line with the "wisdom of heart" that Pope Francis has actually proposed. [98] While not exhaustive, this conversation is used in service of the discussion that thinks about how AI can be utilized to maintain the dignity of the human person and promote the typical good. [99]
50. As Pope Francis observed, "the inherent dignity of each human and the fraternity that binds us together as members of the one human family must undergird the advancement of brand-new technologies and serve as unassailable requirements for examining them before they are utilized." [100]
51. Viewed through this lens, AI could "introduce important innovations in farming, education and culture, an improved level of life for whole nations and individuals, and the growth of human fraternity and social friendship," and thus be "utilized to promote integral human advancement." [101] AI could also help organizations determine those in need and counter discrimination and marginalization. These and other comparable applications of this technology might add to human development and the typical good. [102]
52. However, while AI holds many possibilities for promoting the excellent, it can also hinder or perhaps counter human development and the common good. Pope Francis has kept in mind that "evidence to date recommends that digital technologies have increased inequality in our world. Not simply differences in material wealth, which are also considerable, but also distinctions in access to political and social influence." [103] In this sense, AI might be utilized to perpetuate marginalization and discrimination, create new forms of hardship, expand 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 few effective business raises significant ethical issues. Exacerbating this problem is the fundamental nature of AI systems, where no single person can work out total oversight over the huge and complex datasets used for calculation. This lack of well-defined accountability develops the threat that AI might be controlled for individual or corporate gain or to direct public viewpoint for the benefit of a particular industry. Such entities, motivated by their own interests, have the capability to exercise "kinds of control as subtle as they are invasive, developing systems for the adjustment of consciences and of the democratic process." [105]
54. Furthermore, there is the threat of AI being utilized to promote what Pope Francis has actually called the "technocratic paradigm," which views all the world's issues as understandable through technological ways alone. [106] In this paradigm, human dignity and fraternity are often set aside in the name of efficiency, "as if reality, goodness, and fact instantly stream from technological and financial power as such." [107] Yet, human dignity and the common great should never ever be breached for the sake of efficiency, [108] for "technological developments that do not result in an improvement in the lifestyle of all humankind, but on the contrary, aggravate inequalities and disputes, can never count as real development. " [109] Instead, AI needs to be put "at the service of another type of progress, one which is healthier, more human, more social, more essential." [110]
55. Attaining this objective needs a much deeper reflection on the relationship in between autonomy and responsibility. Greater autonomy heightens everyone's duty throughout numerous elements of common life. For Christians, the structure of this obligation depends on the acknowledgment that all human capacities, including the individual's autonomy, originated from God and are implied to be used in the service of others. [111] Therefore, rather than simply pursuing economic or technological goals, AI should serve "the typical good of the whole human household," which is "the amount overall of social conditions that allow people, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their fulfillment more completely and more quickly." [112]
56. The Second Vatican Council observed that "by his inner nature male is a social being; and if he does not participate in relations with others, he can neither live nor develop his presents." [113] This conviction highlights that living in society is intrinsic to the nature and occupation of the human person. [114] As social beings, we look for relationships that involve shared exchange and the pursuit of reality, in the course of which, individuals "share with each other the truth they have actually discovered, or think they have found, in such a way that they help one another in the look for fact." [115]
57. Such a mission, together with other elements of human interaction, presupposes encounters and mutual exchange between individuals formed by their special histories, ideas, convictions, and relationships. Nor can we forget that human intelligence is a varied, diverse, and intricate truth: individual and social, reasonable and affective, conceptual and symbolic. Pope Francis underscores this dynamic, keeping in mind that "together, we can seek the fact in discussion, in relaxed conversation or in passionate argument. To do so calls for perseverance; it entails moments of silence and suffering, yet it can patiently welcome the broader experience of individuals and peoples. [...] The process of building fraternity, be it regional or universal, can only be undertaken by spirits that are totally free and available to genuine encounters." [116]
58. It remains in this context that a person can think about the obstacles AI postures to human relationships. Like other technological tools, AI has the prospective to cultivate connections within the human household. However, it could likewise prevent a real encounter with reality and, eventually, lead individuals to "a deep and melancholic discontentment with interpersonal relations, or a harmful sense of seclusion." [117] Authentic human relationships require the richness of being with others in their pain, their pleas, and their happiness. [118] Since human intelligence is revealed and improved also in interpersonal and embodied ways, genuine and spontaneous encounters with others are important for engaging with reality in its fullness.

59. Because "true wisdom demands an encounter with reality," [119] the rise of AI introduces another obstacle. Since AI can successfully mimic the items of human intelligence, the capability to know when one is interacting with a human or a maker can no longer be considered granted. Generative AI can produce text, speech, images, and other advanced outputs that are normally connected with humans. Yet, it needs to be comprehended for what it is: a tool, not an individual. [120] This distinction is typically obscured by the language utilized by practitioners, which tends to anthropomorphize AI and thus blurs the line between human and maker.

60. Anthropomorphizing AI also positions particular difficulties for the advancement of children, possibly encouraging them to establish patterns of interaction that treat human relationships in a transactional manner, as one would associate with a chatbot. Such practices might lead young people to see instructors as mere dispensers of details instead of as mentors who assist and support their intellectual and moral growth. Genuine relationships, rooted in empathy and an unfaltering dedication to the good of the other, are necessary and irreplaceable in promoting the full development of the human individual.

61. In this context, it is important to clarify that, regardless of the use of anthropomorphic language, no AI application can genuinely experience compassion. Emotions can not be minimized to facial expressions or expressions produced in response to prompts; they show the way a person, as a whole, connects to the world and to his or her own life, with the body playing a main role. True compassion requires the ability to listen, recognize another's irreducible uniqueness, welcome their otherness, and comprehend the significance behind even their silences. [121] Unlike the realm of analytical judgment in which AI excels, real empathy belongs to the relational sphere. It includes intuiting and collaring the lived experiences of another while maintaining the distinction between self and other. [122] While AI can imitate empathetic actions, it can not reproduce the incomparably personal and relational nature of authentic empathy. [123]
62. Due to the above, it is clear why misrepresenting AI as an individual ought to always be avoided; doing so for deceptive purposes is a serious ethical infraction that could wear down social trust. Similarly, using AI to deceive in other contexts-such as in education or in human relationships, including the sphere of sexuality-is likewise to be thought about unethical and requires cautious oversight to avoid damage, maintain openness, and guarantee the self-respect of all people. [124]
63. In a significantly separated world, some people have actually turned to AI looking for deep human relationships, easy companionship, or even psychological bonds. However, while people are implied to experience genuine relationships, AI can just replicate them. Nevertheless, such relationships with others are an important part of how an individual grows to become who she or he is indicated to be. If AI is utilized to help people foster genuine connections between individuals, it can contribute favorably to the full awareness of the person. Conversely, if we change relationships with God and with others with interactions with innovation, we risk changing genuine relationality with a lifeless image (cf. Ps. 106:20; Rom. 1:22 -23). Instead of retreating into synthetic worlds, we are contacted us to take part in a committed and deliberate way with reality, particularly by relating to the bad and suffering, consoling those in sadness, and forging bonds of communion with all.

64. Due to its interdisciplinary nature, AI is being significantly integrated into economic and financial systems. Significant financial investments are currently being made not just in the innovation sector but likewise in energy, finance, and media, particularly in the locations of marketing and sales, logistics, technological innovation, compliance, and risk management. At the exact same time, AI's applications in these locations have actually likewise highlighted its ambivalent nature, as a source of significant chances but also profound dangers. A first real vital point in this location worries the possibility that-due to the concentration of AI applications in the hands of a few corporations-only those big companies would gain from the value created by AI instead of the services that utilize it.

65. Other broader elements of AI's effect on the economic-financial sphere should likewise be carefully examined, especially concerning the interaction between concrete reality and the digital world. One essential consideration in this regard includes the coexistence of varied and alternative forms of financial and banks within a given context. This factor must be encouraged, akropolistravel.com as it can bring advantages in how it supports the real economy by promoting its advancement and stability, especially during times of crisis. Nevertheless, it needs to be stressed that digital truths, not limited by any spatial bonds, tend to be more homogeneous and impersonal than communities rooted in a specific place and a particular history, with a common journey characterized by shared worths and hopes, but also by unavoidable disputes and divergences. This diversity is an indisputable possession to a community's financial life. Turning over the economy and financing entirely to digital innovation would minimize this range and richness. As a result, numerous options to economic problems that can be reached through natural dialogue in between the included celebrations might no longer be attainable in a world dominated by procedures and only the appearance of proximity.

66. Another area where AI is already having an extensive effect is the world of work. As in lots of other fields, AI is driving fundamental changes throughout numerous occupations, with a series of effects. On the one hand, it has the possible to improve knowledge and efficiency, create brand-new tasks, allow workers to focus on more ingenious tasks, and open new horizons for creativity and innovation.

67. However, while AI guarantees to improve performance by taking over mundane tasks, it frequently forces workers to adjust to the speed and needs of makers instead of devices being developed to support those who work. As a result, contrary to the advertised benefits of AI, present approaches to the innovation can paradoxically deskill workers, subject them to automated surveillance, and relegate them to stiff and repeated jobs. The need to stay up to date with the pace of technology can erode workers' sense of company and suppress the ingenious capabilities they are expected to bring to their work. [125]
68. AI is currently removing the requirement for some tasks that were as soon as carried out by people. If AI is used to replace human employees instead of complement them, there is a "considerable danger of out of proportion benefit for the couple of at the cost of the impoverishment of numerous." [126] Additionally, as AI becomes more powerful, there is an associated danger that human labor might lose its worth in the financial realm. This is the rational consequence of the technocratic paradigm: a world of mankind oppressed to performance, where, eventually, the cost of humanity should be cut. Yet, human lives are intrinsically valuable, independent of their economic output. Nevertheless, the "existing design," Pope Francis explains, "does not appear to prefer an investment in efforts to help the sluggish, the weak, or the less skilled to find chances in life." [127] Due to this, "we can not allow a tool as powerful and important as Artificial Intelligence to enhance such a paradigm, but rather, we need to make Artificial Intelligence a bulwark against its expansion." [128]
69. It is essential to remember that "the order of things should be secondary to the order of persons, and not the other method around." [129] Human work must not only be at the service of earnings but at "the service of the entire human individual [...] considering the person's material needs and the requirements of his or her intellectual, moral, spiritual, and spiritual life." [130] In this context, the Church acknowledges that work is "not just a means of earning one's daily bread" however 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 presents. Work offers us a sense of shared responsibility for the development of the world, and ultimately, for our life as an individuals." [131]
70. Since work is a "part of the meaning of life on this earth, a path to growth, human advancement and personal fulfillment," "the goal must not be that technological development progressively changes human work, for this would be destructive to humankind" [132] -rather, it must promote human labor. Seen in this light, AI must assist, not change, human judgment. Similarly, it needs to never break down creativity or reduce employees to mere "cogs in a device." Therefore, "regard for the self-respect of laborers and the value of work for the economic well-being of individuals, families, and societies, for task security and just incomes, should be a high top priority for the worldwide community as these forms of technology penetrate more deeply into our offices." [133]
71. As participants in God's healing work, healthcare specialists have the occupation and obligation to be "guardians and servants of human life." [134] Because of this, the health care occupation brings an "intrinsic and indisputable ethical dimension," acknowledged by the Hippocratic Oath, which requires doctors and health care specialists to dedicate themselves to having "outright respect for human life and its sacredness." [135] Following the example of the Good Samaritan, this commitment is to be brought out by males and females "who reject the production of a society of exemption, and act rather as next-door neighbors, raising up and rehabilitating the succumbed to the sake of the typical good." [136]
72. Seen in this light, AI appears to hold enormous potential in a range of applications in the medical field, such as assisting the diagnostic work of healthcare suppliers, assisting in relationships in between clients and medical staff, using brand-new treatments, and broadening access to quality care likewise for those who are isolated or marginalized. In these ways, the technology might enhance the "thoughtful and caring nearness" [137] that health care suppliers are called to reach the ill and suffering.

73. However, if AI is used not to boost but to change the relationship in between clients and health care providers-leaving patients to communicate with a machine rather than a human being-it would lower a most importantly crucial human relational structure to a central, impersonal, chessdatabase.science and unequal structure. Instead of motivating uniformity with the sick and suffering, such applications of AI would run the risk of getting worse the isolation that often accompanies disease, especially in the context of a culture where "individuals are no longer seen as a paramount value to be looked after and appreciated." [138] This abuse of AI would not line up with respect for the self-respect of the human individual and uniformity with the suffering.

74. Responsibility for the wellness of clients and the decisions that discuss their lives are at the heart of the healthcare profession. This accountability needs medical specialists to exercise all their ability and intelligence in making well-reasoned and fairly grounded choices regarding those turned over to their care, constantly respecting the inviolable dignity of the patients and the requirement for informed permission. As a result, decisions concerning patient treatment and the weight of duty they entail must constantly remain with the human person and must never be delegated to AI. [139]
75. In addition, utilizing AI to identify who should get treatment based mainly on financial steps or metrics of performance represents an especially problematic circumstances of the "technocratic paradigm" that should be declined. [140] For, "enhancing resources suggests using them in an ethical and fraternal way, and not punishing the most delicate." [141] Additionally, AI tools in healthcare are "exposed to kinds of bias and discrimination," where "systemic errors can quickly multiply, producing not just injustices in individual cases but also, due to the domino impact, genuine types of social inequality." [142]
76. The integration of AI into healthcare likewise presents the risk of amplifying other existing disparities in access to medical care. As health care becomes significantly oriented towards avoidance and lifestyle-based methods, AI-driven options might accidentally favor more affluent populations who currently take pleasure in much better access to medical resources and quality nutrition. This pattern risks reinforcing a "medicine for the rich" design, where those with financial means gain from advanced preventative tools and personalized health details while others battle to gain access to even basic services. To prevent such injustices, fair frameworks are needed to guarantee that making use of AI in health care does not intensify existing healthcare inequalities but rather serves the common good.

77. The words of the Second Vatican Council remain completely appropriate today: "True education aims to form individuals with a view towards their last end and the good of the society to which they belong." [143] As such, education is "never a mere procedure of handing down realities and intellectual skills: rather, its aim is to contribute to the person's holistic formation in its numerous aspects (intellectual, cultural, spiritual, etc), including, for instance, community life and relations within the academic community," [144] in keeping with the nature and dignity of the human person.

78. This approach includes a commitment to cultivating the mind, but constantly as a part of the integral development of the person: "We should break that idea of education which holds that informing methods filling one's head with concepts. That is the way we inform robots, cerebral minds, not people. Educating is taking a threat in the tension in between the mind, the heart, and the hands." [145]
79. At the center of this work of forming the whole human individual is the vital relationship between teacher and trainee. Teachers do more than convey knowledge; they design necessary human qualities and inspire the pleasure of discovery. [146] Their presence encourages trainees both through the content they teach and the care they show for their trainees. This bond promotes trust, good understanding, and the capacity to deal with everyone's distinct self-respect and potential. On the part of the trainee, this can generate a real desire to grow. The physical existence of an instructor develops a relational dynamic that AI can not duplicate, one that deepens engagement and supports the trainee's important advancement.

80. In this context, AI presents both chances and obstacles. If utilized in a prudent way, within the context of an existing teacher-student relationship and bought to the genuine objectives of education, AI can end up being an important educational resource by improving access to education, using tailored support, and providing immediate feedback to trainees. These advantages might enhance the knowing experience, specifically in cases where customized attention is needed, or academic resources are otherwise scarce.

81. Nevertheless, a crucial part of education is forming "the intellect to factor well in all matters, to reach out towards truth, and to comprehend it," [147] while assisting the "language of the head" to grow harmoniously with the "language of the heart" and the "language of the hands." [148] This is even more vital in an age marked by technology, in which "it is no longer simply a question of 'using' instruments of communication, but of residing in a highly digitalized culture that has had a profound influence on [...] our ability to interact, discover, be informed and get in into relationship with others." [149] However, rather of fostering "a cultivated intellect," which "brings with it a power and a grace to every work and occupation that it carries out," [150] the extensive use of AI in education could cause the trainees' increased reliance on innovation, deteriorating their capability to perform some skills individually and aggravating their dependence on screens. [151]
82. Additionally, while some AI systems are created to help individuals develop their vital thinking capabilities and problem-solving skills, lots of others simply supply responses rather of triggering trainees to come to answers themselves or write text on their own. [152] Instead of training young individuals how to amass details and produce fast reactions, education should encourage "the responsible usage of flexibility to face problems with good sense and intelligence." [153] Building on this, "education in making use of forms of artificial intelligence must aim above all at promoting critical thinking. Users of all ages, but particularly the young, need to develop a critical approach to the use of data and content gathered on the web or produced by synthetic intelligence systems. Schools, universities, and scientific societies are challenged to assist trainees and professionals to comprehend the social and ethical elements of the development and uses of innovation." [154]
83. As Saint John Paul II recalled, "worldwide today, characterized by such quick advancements in science and technology, the jobs of a Catholic University assume an ever higher significance and urgency." [155] In a particular method, Catholic universities are urged to be present as great laboratories of hope at this crossroads of history. In an inter-disciplinary and cross-disciplinary secret, they are urged to engage "with wisdom and imagination" [156] in cautious research study on this phenomenon, assisting to draw out the salutary capacity within the various fields of science and truth, and guiding them always towards fairly sound applications that plainly serve the cohesion of our societies and the common good, reaching new frontiers in the discussion between faith and factor.

84. Moreover, it needs to be noted that present AI programs have actually been understood to supply prejudiced or fabricated details, which can lead trainees to trust inaccurate content. This problem "not just runs the risk of legitimizing fake news and enhancing a dominant culture's benefit, but, in brief, it also weakens the academic process itself." [157] With time, clearer distinctions may emerge in between appropriate and incorrect usages of AI in education and research study. Yet, a definitive guideline is that making use of AI ought to constantly be transparent and never misrepresented.

85. AI could be utilized as an aid to human self-respect if it assists people understand intricate principles or directs them to sound resources that support their look for the reality. [158]
86. However, AI also provides a serious threat of creating controlled material and false details, which can quickly misguide people due to its resemblance to the truth. Such misinformation might happen inadvertently, as in the case of AI "hallucination," where a generative AI system yields results that appear real however are not. Since producing material that mimics human artifacts is main to AI's functionality, mitigating these threats shows tough. Yet, the consequences of such aberrations and incorrect details can be quite serious. For this reason, all those associated with producing and utilizing AI systems need to be committed to the truthfulness and accuracy of the details processed by such systems and distributed to the general public.

87. While AI has a hidden capacity to generate false details, a much more troubling issue depends on the deliberate abuse of AI for manipulation. This can occur when people or organizations purposefully create and spread false material with the aim to trick or trigger damage, such as "deepfake" images, videos, and audio-referring to a false representation of a person, edited or generated by an AI algorithm. The threat of deepfakes is especially apparent when they are utilized to target or harm others. While the images or videos themselves may be synthetic, the damage they cause is real, leaving "deep scars in the hearts of those who suffer it" and "real injuries in their human self-respect." [159]
88. On a more comprehensive scale, by misshaping "our relationship with others and with reality," [160] AI-generated fake media can gradually weaken the foundations of society. This problem needs cautious regulation, as misinformation-especially through AI-controlled or influenced media-can spread unintentionally, sustaining political polarization and social discontent. When society becomes indifferent to the fact, numerous groups construct their own variations of "truths," weakening the "reciprocal ties and shared dependences" [161] that underpin the material of social life. As deepfakes trigger individuals to question whatever and AI-generated false content deteriorates trust in what they see and hear, polarization and conflict will just grow. Such prevalent deceptiveness is no minor matter; it strikes at the core of humanity, taking apart the foundational trust on which societies are developed. [162]
89. Countering AI-driven frauds is not only the work of industry experts-it requires the efforts of all people of goodwill. "If technology is to serve human self-respect and not harm it, and if it is to promote peace instead of violence, then the human community needs to be proactive in resolving these patterns with regard to human self-respect and the promotion of the good." [163] Those who produce and share AI-generated content should always work out diligence in verifying the truth of what they share and, in all cases, must "avoid the sharing of words and images that are breaking down of human beings, that promote hatred and intolerance, that debase the goodness and intimacy of human sexuality or that exploit the weak and susceptible." [164] This requires the continuous prudence and mindful discernment of all users concerning their activity online. [165]
90. Humans are inherently relational, and the data each person generates in the digital world can be viewed as an objectified expression of this relational nature. Data communicates not just details however likewise individual and relational understanding, which, in an increasingly digitized context, can amount to power over the person. Moreover, while some kinds of information may pertain to public elements of a person's life, others might discuss the individual's interiority, maybe even their conscience. Seen in this method, privacy plays an essential role in safeguarding the boundaries of an individual's inner life, maintaining their freedom to associate with others, reveal themselves, and make choices without unnecessary control. This protection is likewise connected to the defense of religious liberty, as monitoring can likewise be misused to apply control over the lives of believers and how they reveal their faith.

91. It is suitable, therefore, to address the issue of personal privacy from a concern for the genuine freedom and inalienable self-respect of the human person "in all circumstances." [166] The Second Vatican Council consisted of the right "to safeguard privacy" among the fundamental rights "needed for living a really human life," a right that ought to be reached all individuals on account of their "superb self-respect." [167] Furthermore, the Church has likewise verified the right to the legitimate respect for a personal life in the context of affirming the individual's right to a great credibility, defense of their physical and psychological integrity, and flexibility from damage or unnecessary intrusion [168] -important components of the due respect for the intrinsic dignity of the human individual. [169]
92. Advances in AI-powered information processing and analysis now make it possible to presume patterns in an individual's behavior and thinking from even a percentage of details, making the function of information privacy a lot more vital as a safeguard for the dignity and relational nature of the human individual. As Pope Francis observed, "while closed and intolerant attitudes towards others are on the increase, ranges are otherwise diminishing or disappearing to the point that the right to personal privacy hardly exists. Everything has become a sort of spectacle to be examined and inspected, and individuals's lives are now under continuous surveillance." [170]
93. While there can be genuine and correct methods to use AI in keeping with human dignity and the common great, utilizing it for security aimed at exploiting, limiting others' freedom, or benefitting a few at the expense of the lots of is unjustifiable. The danger of security overreach need to be kept track of by suitable regulators to ensure transparency and public accountability. Those responsible for security needs to never exceed their authority, which must constantly favor the self-respect and liberty of everyone as the necessary basis of a just and humane society.

94. Furthermore, "basic respect for human dignity needs that we refuse to enable the originality of the person to be determined with a set of information." [171] This particularly applies when AI is utilized to evaluate people or groups based upon their behavior, attributes, or history-a practice understood as "social scoring": "In social and financial decision-making, we ought to beware about entrusting judgments to algorithms that process data, typically collected surreptitiously, on a person's makeup and previous habits. Such data can be contaminated by societal bias and prejudgments. A person's previous behavior must not be used to reject him or her the opportunity to change, grow, and contribute to society. We can not enable algorithms to restrict or condition regard for human dignity, or to omit compassion, grace, forgiveness, and above all, the hope that people are able to change." [172]
95. AI has lots of promising applications for enhancing our relationship with our "common home," such as creating designs to anticipate extreme climate occasions, proposing engineering options to decrease their effect, handling relief operations, and forecasting population shifts. [173] Additionally, AI can support sustainable agriculture, enhance energy usage, and supply early caution systems for public health emergencies. These developments have the prospective to reinforce durability against climate-related difficulties and promote more sustainable advancement.

96. At the same time, existing AI models and the hardware required to support them take in huge amounts of energy and water, substantially contributing to CO2 emissions and straining resources. This truth is typically obscured by the method this innovation is provided in the popular imagination, where words such as "the cloud" [174] can offer the impression that information is stored and processed in an intangible world, separated from the real world. However, "the cloud" is not a heavenly domain different from the physical world; just like all computing technologies, it counts on physical machines, cable televisions, and energy. The exact same holds true of the technology behind AI. As these systems grow in complexity, specifically big language designs (LLMs), they require ever-larger datasets, increased computational power, and greater storage infrastructure. Considering the heavy toll these innovations handle the environment, it is vital to establish sustainable services that lower their influence on our common home.

97. Even then, as Pope Francis teaches, it is important "that we try to find options not only in technology however in a change of humankind." [175] A complete and authentic understanding of production recognizes that the worth of all created things can not be reduced to their simple energy. Therefore, a fully human approach to the stewardship of the earth turns down the distorted anthropocentrism of the technocratic paradigm, which seeks to "extract everything possible" from the world, [176] and rejects the "myth of progress," which presumes that "ecological issues will resolve themselves just with the application of brand-new technology and with no need for ethical considerations or deep modification." [177] Such a mindset needs to offer way to a more holistic approach that appreciates the order of development and promotes the integral good of the human person while safeguarding our typical home. [178]
98. The Second Vatican Council and the consistent mentor of the Popes because then have actually insisted that peace is not simply the lack of war and is not limited to maintaining a balance of powers between enemies. Instead, in the words of Saint Augustine, peace is "the tranquility of order." [179] Certainly, peace can not be attained without securing the products of persons, free interaction, regard for the dignity of individuals and peoples, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is the work of justice and the result of charity and can not be attained through force alone; instead, it needs to be mainly developed through client diplomacy, the active promo of justice, uniformity, integral human development, and respect for the dignity of all people. [180] In this way, the tools utilized to maintain peace must never ever be permitted to justify oppression, violence, or oppression. Instead, they should constantly be governed by a "firm decision to regard other individuals and countries, together with their dignity, in addition to the deliberate practice of fraternity." [181]
99. While AI's analytical capabilities could help nations seek peace and ensure security, the "weaponization of Artificial Intelligence" can also be highly troublesome. Pope Francis has observed that "the ability to conduct military operations through push-button control systems has resulted in a minimized perception of the devastation triggered by those weapon systems and the problem of duty for their use, resulting in a much more cold and separated approach to the tremendous disaster of war." [182] Moreover, the ease with which self-governing weapons make war more feasible 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 speeding up a destabilizing arms race, with disastrous consequences for human rights. [184]
100. In specific, Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, which are capable of identifying and fraternityofshadows.com striking targets without direct human intervention, are a "cause for grave ethical concern" due to the fact that they do not have the "distinct human capacity for ethical judgment and ethical decision-making." [185] For this factor, Pope Francis has urgently required a reconsideration of the development of these weapons and a prohibition on their use, starting with "a reliable and concrete commitment to introduce ever greater and appropriate human control. No machine should ever select to take the life of a human being." [186]
101. Since it is a little step from devices that can eliminate autonomously with accuracy to those capable of massive damage, some AI researchers have revealed issues that such innovation positions an "existential risk" by having the potential to act in manner ins which could threaten the survival of entire regions or perhaps of mankind itself. This risk demands major attention, reflecting the enduring concern about technologies that give war "an uncontrollable harmful power over multitudes of innocent civilians," [187] without even sparing children. In this context, the call from Gaudium et Spes to "carry out an examination of war with a totally brand-new mindset" [188] is more immediate than ever.

102. At the same time, while the theoretical risks of AI should have attention, the more instant and pushing concern depends on how individuals with destructive intentions might abuse this technology. [189] Like any tool, AI is an extension of human power, and while its future abilities are unpredictable, humanity's past actions provide clear warnings. The atrocities committed throughout history are sufficient to raise deep concerns about the possible abuses of AI.

103. Saint John Paul II observed that "humankind now has instruments of extraordinary power: we can turn this world into a garden, or lower it to a pile of rubble." [190] Given this truth, the Church reminds us, in the words of Pope Francis, that "we are free to use our intelligence towards things progressing favorably," or toward "decadence and shared destruction." [191] To prevent humankind from spiraling into self-destruction, [192] there should be a clear stand against all applications of technology that naturally threaten human life and self-respect. This commitment needs mindful discernment about making use of AI, particularly in military defense applications, to make sure that it always appreciates human self-respect and serves the common good. The advancement and release of AI in armaments ought to go through the highest levels of ethical analysis, governed by an issue for human self-respect and the sanctity of life. [193]
104. Technology uses exceptional tools to supervise and develop the world's resources. However, in some cases, humankind is significantly delivering control of these resources to makers. Within some circles of scientists and futurists, there is optimism about the potential of synthetic basic intelligence (AGI), a theoretical form of AI that would match or go beyond human intelligence and produce unthinkable advancements. Some even hypothesize that AGI could attain superhuman abilities. At the same time, as society wanders away from a connection with the transcendent, some are tempted to turn to AI in search of meaning or fulfillment-longings that can only be genuinely pleased in communion with God. [194]
105. However, the presumption of replacing God for an artifact of human making is idolatry, a practice Scripture clearly warns against (e.g., Ex. 20:4; 32:1 -5; 34:17). Moreover, AI might prove much more sexy than traditional idols for, unlike idols that "have mouths but do not speak; eyes, but do not see; ears, however do not hear" (Ps. 115:5 -6), AI can "speak," or at least provides the illusion of doing so (cf. Rev. 13:15). Yet, it is crucial 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 likewise fallible. By turning to AI as a perceived "Other" higher than itself, with which to share existence and duties, humanity risks 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 possible to serve humanity and contribute to the common excellent, it remains a creation of human hands, bearing "the imprint of human art and ingenuity" (Acts 17:29). It must never ever be ascribed unnecessary worth. As the Book of Wisdom verifies: "For a guy made them, and one whose spirit is obtained formed them; for no guy 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, however they never ever have" (Wis. 15:16 -17).

107. On the other hand, people, "by their interior life, go beyond 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 destiny in the sight of God." [196] It is within the heart, as Pope Francis advises us, that each individual finds the "mystical connection between self-knowledge and openness to others, in between the encounter with one's individual originality and the desire to provide oneself to others. " [197] Therefore, it is the heart alone that is "efficient in setting our other powers and passions, and our entire individual, in a stance of respect and caring obedience before the Lord," [198] who "provides to deal with each one people as a 'Thou,' constantly and permanently." [199]
108. Considering the various challenges presented by advances in innovation, Pope Francis emphasized the requirement for development in "human obligation, values, and conscience," proportionate to the development in the capacity that this innovation brings [200] -acknowledging that "with a boost in human power comes an expanding of responsibility on the part of individuals and neighborhoods." [201]
109. At the very same time, the "vital and fundamental concern" remains "whether in the context of this progress guy, as man, is becoming genuinely much better, that is to state, more fully grown spiritually, more knowledgeable about the dignity 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 important to understand how to examine specific applications of AI in specific contexts to determine whether its usage promotes human self-respect, the vocation of the human person, and the common good. Just like numerous technologies, the effects of the various usages of AI may not constantly be foreseeable from their inception. As these applications and their social impacts become clearer, appropriate responses need to be made at all levels of society, following the principle of subsidiarity. Individual users, families, civil society, corporations, institutions, governments, and worldwide companies should work at their proper levels to make sure that AI is utilized for the good of all.

111. A considerable difficulty and chance for the typical excellent today lies in thinking about AI within a structure of relational intelligence, which stresses the interconnectedness of people and communities and highlights our shared responsibility for promoting the integral wellness of others. The twentieth-century theorist Nicholas Berdyaev observed that people typically blame makers for personal and social problems; nevertheless, "this only embarrasses guy and does not correspond to his self-respect," for "it is unworthy to move duty from male to a machine." [203] Only the human person can be morally responsible, and the difficulties of a technological society are eventually spiritual in nature. Therefore, facing those obstacles "demands a surge of spirituality." [204]
112. An additional indicate consider is the call, prompted by the look of AI on the world stage, for a restored appreciation of all that is human. Years ago, the French Catholic author Georges Bernanos warned that "the threat is not in the reproduction of machines, but in the ever-increasing number of males accustomed from their youth to desire just what makers can offer." [205] This challenge is as true today as it was then, as the fast speed of digitization risks a "digital reductionism," where non-quantifiable elements of life are set aside and after that forgotten or perhaps considered unimportant since they can not be calculated in formal terms. AI ought to be utilized just as a tool to match human intelligence instead of replace its richness. [206] Cultivating those aspects of human life that go beyond computation is essential for maintaining "an authentic humanity" that "appears to dwell in the middle of our technological culture, almost unnoticed, like a mist permeating gently underneath a closed door." [207]
113. The huge stretch of the world's understanding is now available in manner ins which would have filled past generations with awe. However, to guarantee that improvements in understanding do not end up being humanly or spiritually barren, one need to go beyond the mere build-up of information and aim to attain real knowledge. [208]
114. This wisdom is the present that mankind requires most to deal with the profound questions and ethical obstacles presented by AI: "Only by adopting a spiritual method of seeing reality, just by recovering a wisdom of the heart, can we face and interpret the newness of our time." [209] Such "knowledge of the heart" is "the virtue that allows us to incorporate the entire and its parts, our decisions and their effects." It "can not be looked for from makers," but it "lets itself be found by those who seek it and be seen by those who enjoy it; it anticipates those who desire it, and it goes in search of those who deserve it (cf. Wis 6:12 -16)." [210]
115. In a world marked by AI, we need the grace of the Holy Spirit, who "enables us to look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, circumstances, occasions and to discover their real meaning." [211]
116. Since a "person's perfection is determined not by the details or understanding they possess, but by the depth of their charity," [212] how we include AI "to consist of the least of our brothers and siblings, the susceptible, and those most in need, will be the real procedure of our humankind." [213] The "knowledge of the heart" can light up and assist the human-centered use of this technology to assist promote the typical great, care for our "typical home," advance the look for the truth, foster important human development, prefer human uniformity and fraternity, and lead humanity to its supreme objective: happiness and complete communion with God. [214]
117. From this perspective of wisdom, followers will have the ability to serve as moral representatives capable of utilizing this innovation to promote an authentic vision of the human individual and society. [215] This ought to be made with the understanding that technological development becomes part of God's prepare for creation-an activity that we are called to purchase toward the Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ, in the continuous look for the True and the Good.

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

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

Ex audientia 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 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 document explaining the outputs or processes of AI are utilized figuratively to explain its operations and are not intended to anthropomorphize the maker. [8] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3; Id., Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [9] Here, one can see the main positions of the "transhumanists" and the "posthumanists." Transhumanists argue that technological advancements will make it possible for human beings to overcome their biological constraints and wiki.rrtn.org boost both their physical and cognitive abilities. Posthumanists, on the other hand, compete that such advances will eventually alter human identity to the degree that humankind itself might no longer be considered genuinely "human." Both views rest on a basically unfavorable perception of human corporality, which deals with the body more as a challenge than as an important part of the individual's identity and call to complete awareness. Yet, this unfavorable view of the body is irregular with a proper understanding of human self-respect. While the Church supports real clinical progress, it affirms that human dignity is rooted in "the person as an inseparable unity of body and soul. " Thus, "self-respect is also intrinsic in everyone's body, which takes part in its own method remaining in imago Dei" (Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita [8 April 2024], par. 18). [10] This method reflects a functionalist viewpoint, which decreases the human mind to its functions and presumes that its functions can be entirely quantified in physical or mathematical terms. However, even if a future AGI were to appear genuinely intelligent, it would still remain practical in nature. [11] Cf. A.M. Turing, "Computing Machinery and Intelligence," Mind 59 (1950) 443-460. [12] If "believing" is attributed to makers, it should be clarified that this describes calculative thinking rather than crucial thinking. Similarly, if machines are said to operate utilizing sensible thinking, it needs to be specified that this is limited to computational reasoning. On the other hand, by its very nature, human idea is an innovative procedure that eludes programs and transcends constraints. [13] On the foundational role of language in shaping understanding, cf. M. Heidegger, Über den Humanismus, Klostermann, setiathome.berkeley.edu Frankfurt am Main 1949 (en. tr. "Letter on Humanism," in Basic Writings: Martin Heidegger, Routledge, London - New York 2010, 141-182). [14] For further discussion of these anthropological and theological foundations, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 43-144. [15] Aristotle, Metaphysics, I. 1, 980 a 21. [16] Cf. Augustine, De Genesi advertisement litteram III, 20, 30: PL 34, 292: "Man is made in the image of God in relation to that [professors] by which he is exceptional to the illogical animals. Now, this [professors] is reason itself, or the 'mind,' or 'intelligence,' whatever other name it may more suitably be given"; Id., Enarrationes in Psalmos 54, 3: PL 36, 629: "When considering all that they have, humans discover that they are most differentiated from animals specifically by the reality they possess intelligence." This is also restated by Saint Thomas Aquinas, who mentions that "guy is the most ideal of all earthly beings enhanced with movement, and his correct and natural operation is intellection," by which man abstracts from things and "receives in his mind things in fact intelligible" (Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 76). [17] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [18] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 49, a. 5, advertisement 3. Cf. ibid., I, q. 79; II-II, q. 47, a. 3; II-II, q. 49, a. 2. For a modern point of view that echoes aspects of the classical and middle ages difference in between these 2 modes of cognition, cf. D. Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, New York 2011. [19] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 76, a. 1, resp. [20] Cf. Irenaeus of Lyon, Adversus Haereses, V, 6, 1: PG 7( 2 ), 1136-1138. [21] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 9. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1045: "The intelligence can investigate the reality of things through reflection, experience and discussion, and pertain to recognize in that reality, which transcends it, the basis of certain universal ethical needs." [22] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [23] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 365. Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 75, a. 4, resp. [24] Certainly, Sacred Scripture "usually thinks about the human person 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 instead totally disclosed its significance 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 unified to the body in order that it might have a presence and an operation ideal to its nature." [29] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1035. Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 18. [30] International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 56. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 357. [31] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), pars. 5, 8; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 15, 24, 53-54. [32] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 356. Cf. ibid., par. 221. [33] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 13, 26-27. [34] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Donum Veritatis (24 May 1990), 6: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1552. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), par. 109: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1219. Cf. Pseudo-Dionysius, De divinis nominibus, VII, 2: PG 3, 868B-C: "Human souls also possess factor and with it they circle in discourse around the fact of things. [...] [O] n account of the manner in which they are capable of concentrating the many into the one, they too, in their own style and as far as they can, deserve conceptions like those of the angels" (en. tr. Pseudo-Dionysius: The Complete Works, Paulist Press, New York - Mahwah 1987, 106-107). [35] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 3: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7. [36] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [37] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 42: AAS 91 (1999 ), 38. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 208: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1043: "the human mind can transcending immediate issues and comprehending certain realities that are imperishable, as real now as in the past. As it peers into humanity, reason discovers universal worths obtained from that exact 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 City 1958, 77). [39] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [40] Our semantic capability allows us to comprehend messages in any kind of interaction in a manner that both takes into consideration and transcends their material or empirical structures (such as computer system code). Here, intelligence becomes a wisdom that "allows us to look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, scenarios, 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 enables us to produce brand-new material or concepts, mainly by offering an initial viewpoint on truth. Both capabilities depend on the existence of a personal subjectivity for their full awareness. [41] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. [42] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034: "Charity, when accompanied by a dedication to the truth, is much more than personal sensation [...] Certainly, its close relation to reality fosters its universality and maintains it from being 'confined to a narrow field lacking relationships.' [...] Charity's openness to reality therefore secures 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 estimated in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 293. Cf. ibid., par. 294. [47] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 295, 299, 302. Bonaventure likens the universe to "a book showing, representing, and explaining its Maker," the Triune God who approves existence to all things (Breviloquium 2.12.1). Cf. Alain de Lille, De Incarnatione Christi, PL 210, 579a: "Omnis mundi creatura quasi liber et pictura nobis est et speculum." [48] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 67: AAS 107 (2015 ), 874; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 6: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589-592; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 57: "humans occupy an unique location in deep space according to the magnificent plan: they enjoy the privilege of sharing in the divine governance of visible production. [...] Since guy's place as ruler remains in fact a participation in the divine governance of development, we mention it here as a type of stewardship." [49] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), pars. 38-39: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1164-1165. [50] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. This idea is also reflected in the production account, where God brings animals to Adam "to see what he would call them. And whatever [he] called every living animal, that was its name" (Gen. 2:19), an action that shows the active engagement of human intelligence in the stewardship of God's creation. Cf. John Chrysostom, Homiliae in Genesim, XIV, 17-21: PG 53, 116-117. [51] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 301. [52] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 302. [53] Bonaventure, Breviloquium 2.12.1. Cf. ibid., 2.11.2. [54] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 236: AAS 105 (2023 ), 1115; Id., Address to Participants in the Meeting of University Chaplains and Pastoral Workers Promoted by the Dicastery for Culture and Education (24 November 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 November 2023, 7. [55] Cf. J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 5.1, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 99-100; Francis, Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [56] Francis, Address to the Members of the National Confederation of Artisans and Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises (CNA) (15 November 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 15 November 2024, 8. [57] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Querida Amazonia (2 February 2020), par. 41: AAS 112 (2020 ), 246; Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 146: AAS 107 (2015 ), 906. [58] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 864. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), pars. 17-24: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47-50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985-987. [59] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 20: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [60] P. Claudel, Conversation sur Jean Racine, Gallimard, Paris 1956, 32: "L'intelligence n'est rien sans la délectation." Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 13: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5: "The mind and the will are put at the service of the higher good by picking up and appreciating realities." [61] Dante, Paradiso, Canto XXX: "luce intellettüal, piena d'amore;/ amor di vero ben, pien di letizia;/ letizia che trascende ogne dolzore" (en. tr. The Divine Comedy of Dante Alighieri, C.E. Norton, tr., Houghton Mifflin, Boston 1920, 232). [62] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931:" [T] he highest standard of human life is the divine law itself-eternal, objective and universal, by which God orders, directs and governs the entire world and the ways of the human community according to a strategy conceived in his knowledge and love. God has made it possible for male to take part in this law of his so that, under the mild disposition of divine providence, numerous might be able to get here at a deeper and deeper understanding of unchangeable fact." Also cf. Id., Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. [63] Cf. First Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius (24 April 1870), ch. 4, DH 3016. [64] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [65] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 891. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 204: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1042. [66] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 11: AAS 83 (1991 ), 807: "God has actually inscribed his own image and likeness on male (cf. Gen 1:26), giving upon him an unparalleled self-respect [...] In effect, beyond the rights which man obtains by his own work, there exist rights which do not represent any work he carries out, but which flow from his important self-respect as an individual." Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [67] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 8. Cf. ibid., par. 9; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 22. [68] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2024 ), 310. [69] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [70] In this sense, "Artificial Intelligence" is comprehended as a technical term to indicate this innovation, recalling that the expression is also used to designate the field of research study and not only its applications. [71] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 34-35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 51: AAS 83 (1991 ), 856-857. [72] For instance, see the support of scientific expedition in Albertus Magnus (De Mineralibus, II, 2, 1) and the gratitude for the mechanical arts in Hugh of St. Victor (Didascalicon, I, 9). These authors, among a long list of other Catholics participated in clinical research and technological expedition, illustrate that "faith and science can be united in charity, supplied that science is put at the service of the males and lady of our time and not misused to hurt and even ruin them" (Francis, Address to Participants in the 2024 Lemaître Conference of the Vatican Observatory [20 June 2024]: L'Osservatore Romano, 20 June 2024, 8). Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 36: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053-1054; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), pars. 2, 106: AAS 91 (1999 ), 6-7.86 -87. [73] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. [74] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [75] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [76] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 102: AAS 107 (2015 ), 888. [77] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889; Id., Encyclical Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 27: AAS 112 (2020 ), 978; Benedict XVI, Encyclical Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 23: AAS 101 (2009 ), 657-658. [78] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39, 47; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), passim. [79] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par 2293. [80] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2-4. [81] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1749: "Freedom makes guy a moral topic. When he acts deliberately, man is, so to speak, the father of his acts." [82] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1776. [83] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1777. [84] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 1779-1781; Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 463, where the Holy Father encouraged efforts "to make sure that innovation remains human-centered, fairly grounded and directed towards the good." [85] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 166: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1026-1027; Id., Address to the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (23 September 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 September 2024, 10. On the function of human company in selecting a wider aim (Ziel) that then informs the specific function (Zweck) for which each technological application is developed, cf. F. Dessauer, Streit um die Technik, Herder-Bücherei, Freiburg i. Br. 1959, 70-71. [86] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4: "Technology is born for a purpose and, in its influence on human society, constantly represents a type of order in social relations and an arrangement of power, therefore allowing certain people to perform particular actions while preventing others from performing different ones. In a basically specific way, this constitutive power-dimension of technology constantly includes the worldview of those who developed and developed it." [87] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 309. [88] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [89] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti, pars. 212-213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [90] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 5: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589; Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [91] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "Faced with the marvels of machines, which appear to understand how to choose separately, we must be really clear that decision-making [...] need to constantly be delegated the human individual. 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 options of machines." [92] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [93] The term "predisposition" in this document describes algorithmic bias (systematic and consistent mistakes in computer systems that may disproportionately bias certain groups in unexpected ways) or finding out predisposition (which will lead to training on a biased information set) and not the "predisposition vector" in neural networks (which is a criterion used to change the output of "nerve cells" to change more precisely to the data). [94] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464, where the Holy Father affirmed the growth in consensus "on the need for development processes to respect such worths as inclusion, transparency, security, equity, personal privacy and dependability," and also welcomed "the efforts of international organizations to manage these technologies so that they promote authentic development, contributing, that is, to a much better world and an integrally greater quality of life." [95] Francis, Greetings to a Delegation of the "Max Planck Society" (23 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 February 2023, 8. [96] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [97] Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1571. [98] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. For further discussion of the ethical concerns raised by AI from a Catholic viewpoint, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 147-253. [99] On the value of dialogue in a pluralist society oriented towards a "robust and strong social principles," see Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 211-214: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [100] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [101] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [102] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [103] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. [104] Cf. Pontifical Council for Social Communications, Ethics in Internet (22 February 2002), par. 10. [105] Francis, Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414; pricing estimate 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 switched on and off on command. Meanwhile, the Gospel informs us continuously to risk of an in person encounter with others, with their physical existence which challenges us, with their pain and their pleas, with their joy which contaminates us in our close and constant interaction. True faith in the incarnate Son of God is inseparable from self-giving, from membership in the neighborhood, from service, from reconciliation with others." Also cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 24: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1044-1045. [124] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 1. [125] Cf. Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570; Id, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 18, 124-129: AAS 107 (2015 ), 854.897-899. [126] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [127] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 209: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1107. [128] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4. For Pope Francis' mentor about AI in relationship to the "technocratic paradigm," cf. Id., Encyclical Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 106-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893. [129] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047.; as quoted in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1912. Cf. John XXIII, Encyclical Letter Mater et Magistra (15 May 1961), par. 219: AAS 53 (1961 ), 453. [130] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par 64: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1086. [131] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 162: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1025. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 6: AAS 73 (1981 ), 591: "work is 'for male' and not guy 'for work.' Through this conclusion one appropriately pertains to recognize the pre-eminence of the subjective significance of work over the unbiased one." [132] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 128: AAS 107 (2015 ), 898. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 24: AAS 108 (2016 ), 319-320. [133] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [134] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae (25 March 1995), par. 89: AAS 87 (1995 ), 502. [135] Ibid. [136] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 67: AAS 112 (2020 ), 993; as estimated in Id., Message for the XXXI World Day of the Sick (11 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 10 January 2023, 8. [137] Francis, Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [138] Francis, Address to the Diplomatic Corps Accredited to the Holy See (11 January 2016): AAS 108 (2016 ), 120. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 18: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975; Id., Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [139] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465; Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [140] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105, 107: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-890; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 18-21: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975-976; Id., Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465. [141] Francis, Address to the Participants at the Meeting Sponsored by the Charity and Health Commission of the Italian Bishops' Conference (10 February 2017): AAS 109 (2017 ), 243. Cf. ibid., 242-243: "If there is a sector in which the throwaway culture appears, with its painful effects, it is that of healthcare. When an ill person is not put in the center or their self-respect is ruled out, this generates attitudes that can lead even to speculation on the bad luck of others. And this is very severe! [...] The application of a service technique to the health care sector, if indiscriminate [...] might risk discarding people." [142] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [143] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729. [144] Congregation for Catholic Education, Instruction on the Use of Distance Learning in Ecclesiastical Universities and Faculties, I. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729; Francis, Message for the LXIX World Day of Peace (1 January 2016), 6: AAS 108 (2016 ), 57-58. [145] Francis, Address to Members of the Global Researchers Advancing Catholic Education Project (20 April 2022): AAS 114 (2022 ), 580. [146] Cf. Paul VI, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi (8 December 1975), par. 41: AAS 68 (1976 ), 31, pricing estimate Id., Address to the Members of the "Consilium de Laicis" (2 October 1974): AAS 66 (1974 ), 568: "if [the contemporary person] does listen to instructors, it is due to the fact that they are witnesses." [147] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 6.1, London 18733, 125-126. [148] Francis, Meeting with the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [149] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 86: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413, pricing quote the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, Final Document (27 October 2018), par. 21: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1592. [150] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 7.6, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 167. [151] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 88: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413. [152] In a 2023 policy document about making use of generative AI in education and research, UNESCO notes: "Among the crucial questions [of the usage of generative AI (GenAI) in education and research] is whether human beings can perhaps deliver standard levels of thinking and skill-acquisition processes to AI and rather focus on higher-order thinking abilities based upon the outputs provided by AI. Writing, for example, is frequently connected with the structuring of thinking. With GenAI [...], people can now begin with a well-structured overview offered by GenAI. Some professionals have actually identified making use of GenAI to create text in this way as 'composing without believing'" (UNESCO, Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research [2023], 37-38). The German-American thinker Hannah Arendt visualized such a possibility in her 1959 book, The Human Condition, and cautioned: "If it ought to turn out to be real that knowledge (in the sense of know-how) and believed have actually parted business for good, then we would certainly become the defenseless slaves, not a lot of our machines since our knowledge" (Id., The Human Condition, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 20182, 3). [153] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 262: AAS 108 (2016 ), 417. [154] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 7: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3; cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 167: AAS 107 (2015 ), 914. [155] John Paul II, Apostolic Constitution Ex Corde Ecclesiae (15 August 1990), 7: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1479. [156] Francis, Apostolic Constitution Veritatis Gaudium (29 January 2018), 4c: AAS 110 (2018 ), 9-10. [157] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3. [158] For instance, it may assist people gain access to the "variety of resources for creating 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 question of whether what they understand holds true or not. [...] It is this that Saint Augustine teaches when he composes: 'I have fulfilled numerous who wished to deceive, however none who desired to be tricked'"; pricing estimate Augustine, Confessiones, X, 23, 33: PL 32, 794. [163] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), par. 62. [164] Benedict XVI, Message for the XLIII World Day of Social Communications (24 May 2009): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2009, 8. [165] Cf. Dicastery for Communications, Towards Full Presence: A Pastoral Reflection on Engagement with Social Media (28 May 2023), par. 41; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Decree Inter Mirifica (4 December 1963), pars. 4, 8-12: AAS 56 (1964 ), 146, 148-149. [166] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 1, 6, 16, 24. [167] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046. Cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 40: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 127: "no man may with impunity breach that human dignity which God himself treats with great respect"; as quoted in John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 9: AAS 83 (1991 ), 804. [168] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2477, 2489; can. 220 CIC; can. 23 CCEO; John Paul II, Address to the Third General Conference of the Latin American Episcopate (28 January 1979), III.1-2: Insegnamenti II/1 (1979 ), 202-203. [169] Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to the Thematic Discussion on Other Disarmament Measures and International Security (24 October 2022): "Maintaining human self-respect in the online world obliges States to also respect the right to privacy, by protecting residents from invasive surveillance and enabling them to protect their personal details from unapproved gain access to." [170] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 42: AAS 112 (2020 ), 984. [171] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [172] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465. [173] The 2023 Interim Report of the United Nations AI Advisory Body identified a list of "early pledges of AI helping to attend to climate change" (United Nations AI Advisory Body, Interim Report: Governing AI for Humanity [December 2023], 3). The document observed that, "taken together with predictive systems that can change information into insights and insights into actions, AI-enabled tools may help develop brand-new methods and investments to lower emissions, influence new private sector financial investments in net absolutely no, safeguard biodiversity, and develop broad-based social durability" (ibid.). [174] "The cloud" describes a network of physical servers throughout the world that enables users to shop, process, and manage their information from another location. [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: morphomics.science PL 41, 640. [180] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 77-82: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1100-1107; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 256-262: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1060-1063; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 38-39; Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2302-2317. [181] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 78: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1101. [182] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [183] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2308-2310. [184] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 80-81: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1105. [185] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "We need to guarantee and protect a space for correct human control over the choices made by synthetic intelligence programs: human dignity itself depends on it." [186] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to Working Group II on Emerging Technologies at the UN Disarmament Commission (3 April 2024): "The advancement and use of deadly autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) that lack the suitable human control would posture basic ethical concerns, offered that LAWS can never be ethically responsible subjects capable of adhering to worldwide humanitarian law." [187] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 258: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1061. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [188] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [189] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3: "Nor can we ignore 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 government. In a word, the world does not require new technologies that contribute to the unfair development of commerce and the weapons trade and consequently wind up promoting the recklessness of war." [190] John Paul II, Act of Entrustment to Mary for the Jubilee of Bishops (8 October 2000), par. 3: Insegnamenti XXIII/2 (200 ), 565. [191] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 79: AAS 107 (2015 ), 878. [192] Cf. Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 51: AAS 101 (2009 ), 687. [193] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39. [194] Cf. Augustine, Confessiones, I, 1, 1: PL 32, 661. [195] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (30 December 1987), par. 28: AAS 80 (1988 ), 548:" [T] here is a better understanding today that the simple accumulation of products and services [...] is insufficient for the awareness of human happiness. Nor, in effect, does the availability of the many genuine advantages offered in recent times by science and technology, including the computer technology, bring freedom from every kind of slavery. On the contrary, [...] unless all the substantial body of resources and potential at male's disposal is assisted by an ethical understanding and by an orientation towards the real good of the mankind, it quickly turns against male to oppress him." Cf. ibid., pars. 29, 37: AAS 80 (1988 ), 550-551.563 -564. [196] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [197] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 18: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [198] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 27: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 6. [199] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 25: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5-6. [200] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. R. Guardini, Das Ende der Neuzeit, Würzburg 19659, 87 ff. (en. tr. The End of the Modern World, Wilmington 1998, 82-83). [201] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [202] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptor Hominis (4 March 1979), par. 15: AAS 71 (1979 ), 287-288. [203] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," in C. Mitcham - R. Mackey, eds., Philosophy and Technology: Readings in the Philosophical Problems of Technology, New York City 19832, 212-213. [204] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," 210. [205] G. Bernanos, "La révolution de la liberté" (1944 ), in Id., Le Chemin de la Croix-des-Âmes, Rocher 1987, 829. [206] Cf. Francis, Meeting with the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023). [207] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [208] Cf. Bonaventure, Hex. XIX, 3; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986: "The flood of details at our fingertips does not make for greater wisdom. Wisdom is not born of fast searches on the internet nor is it a mass of unproven data. That is not the way to grow in the encounter with truth." [209] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [210] Ibid. [211] Ibid. [212] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate (19 March 2018), par. 37: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1121. [213] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate (19 March 2018), par. 46: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1123-1124. [214] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [215] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570-1571.