GitLab

1. With wisdom both ancient and brand-new (cf. Mt. 13:52), we are contacted us to show on the existing difficulties and opportunities posed by scientific and technological improvements, particularly by the current development of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The Christian custom concerns the present of intelligence as a vital aspect of how humans are created "in the image of God" (Gen. 1:27). Beginning with an essential vision of the human individual and the scriptural calling to "till" and "keep" the earth (Gen. 2:15), the Church stresses that this present of intelligence must be revealed through the accountable use of reason and technical abilities in the stewardship of the developed world.

2. The Church motivates the development of science, innovation, the arts, and other forms of human endeavor, seeing them as part of the "partnership of males and female with God in perfecting the visible creation." [1] As Sirach verifies, God "offered ability to humans, that he may be glorified in his splendid works" (Sir. 38:6). Human abilities and creativity originate from God and, when utilized appropriately, glorify God by showing his wisdom and goodness. Because of this, when we ask ourselves what it suggests to "be human," we can not leave out a consideration of our clinical and technological abilities.

3. It is within this perspective that today Note addresses the anthropological and ethical challenges raised by AI-issues that are particularly considerable, as one of the goals of this innovation is to mimic the human intelligence that designed it. For example, unlike numerous other human productions, AI can be trained on the results of human imagination and then produce new "artifacts" with a level of speed and ability that typically measures up to or exceeds what humans can do, such as producing text or images equivalent from human structures. This raises crucial concerns about AI's prospective role in the growing crisis of fact in the public forum. Moreover, this technology is developed to discover and make certain choices autonomously, adjusting to brand-new situations and supplying solutions not anticipated by its programmers, and therefore, it raises basic questions about ethical duty and human security, with broader ramifications for society as a whole. This new circumstance has triggered many individuals to assess what it suggests to be human and the role of humanity in the world.

4. Taking all this into account, there is broad agreement that AI marks a brand-new and considerable stage 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 areas, including interpersonal relationships, education, work, art, healthcare, law, warfare, and worldwide relations. As AI advances quickly towards even higher achievements, it is critically crucial to consider its anthropological and ethical implications. This includes not just mitigating risks and preventing damage however also ensuring that its applications are utilized to promote human progress and the common good.

5. To contribute favorably to the discernment concerning AI, and in response to Pope Francis' require a renewed "wisdom of heart," [3] the Church uses its experience through the anthropological and ethical reflections contained in this Note. Committed to its active function in the international dialogue on these issues, the Church invites those delegated with transmitting the faith-including moms and dads, teachers, pastors, and bishops-to devote themselves to this crucial subject with care and attention. While this file is meant specifically for them, it is also meant to be available to a broader audience, especially those who share the conviction that scientific and technological advances must be directed towards serving the human person and the common good. [4]
6. To this end, the file starts by distinguishing in between concepts of intelligence in AI and in human intelligence. It then explores the Christian understanding of human intelligence, providing a structure rooted in the Church's philosophical and theological tradition. Finally, the file provides guidelines to make sure that the advancement and use of AI maintain human dignity and promote the essential advancement of the human person and society.

7. The principle of "intelligence" in AI has developed in time, drawing on a variety of concepts from different disciplines. While its origins extend back centuries, a substantial milestone took place in 1956 when the American computer system researcher John McCarthy arranged a summertime workshop at Dartmouth University to check out the problem of "Artificial Intelligence," which he specified as "that of making a device behave in ways that would be called intelligent if a human were so behaving." [5] This workshop released a research program concentrated on developing machines efficient in performing jobs generally associated with the human intellect and intelligent habits.

8. Ever since, AI research has actually advanced quickly, resulting in the advancement of complex systems capable of performing highly advanced jobs. [6] These so-called "narrow AI" systems are normally designed to manage particular and restricted functions, such as equating languages, predicting the trajectory of a storm, classifying images, addressing questions, or creating visual material at the user's demand. While the meaning of "intelligence" in AI research study differs, most contemporary AI systems-particularly those utilizing device learning-rely on analytical reasoning instead of sensible reduction. By examining large datasets to recognize patterns, AI can "forecast" [7] results and propose new techniques, mimicking some cognitive processes common of human problem-solving. Such accomplishments have actually been made possible through advances in computing innovation (including neural networks, not being watched artificial intelligence, and evolutionary algorithms) along with hardware developments (such as specialized processors). Together, these technologies enable AI systems to react to numerous kinds of human input, adjust to brand-new situations, and even suggest novel services not expected by their original programmers. [8]
9. Due to these rapid developments, many tasks as soon as handled exclusively by human beings are now turned over to AI. These systems can enhance and even supersede what people have the ability to do in numerous fields, particularly in specialized locations such as information analysis, image recognition, and medical diagnosis. While each "narrow AI" application is developed for a particular task, many scientists aim to develop what is known as "Artificial General Intelligence" (AGI)-a single system efficient in running throughout all cognitive domains and carrying out 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 add to "super-longevity" through advances in biotechnology. Others, nevertheless, fear that these possibilities, even if theoretical, might one day eclipse the human person, while still others welcome this potential improvement. [9]
10. Underlying this and lots of other perspectives on the topic is the implicit assumption that the term "intelligence" can be used in the very same way to refer to both human intelligence and AI. Yet, this does not catch the full scope of the principle. In the case of humans, intelligence is a faculty that pertains to the person in his or her entirety, whereas in the context of AI, "intelligence" is comprehended functionally, often with the anticipation that the activities quality of the human mind can be broken down into digitized actions that machines can reproduce. [10]
11. This practical perspective is exhibited by the "Turing Test," which considers a maker "smart" if a person can not identify its behavior from that of a human. [11] However, in this context, the term "behavior" refers just to the efficiency of particular intellectual tasks; it does not represent the complete breadth of human experience, which includes abstraction, emotions, imagination, and the aesthetic, moral, and spiritual perceptiveness. Nor does it encompass the full variety of expressions particular of the human mind. Instead, in the case of AI, the "intelligence" of a system is assessed methodologically, however likewise reductively, based on its ability to produce proper responses-in this case, those related to the human intellect-regardless of how those reactions are created.

12. AI's sophisticated functions give it sophisticated abilities to carry out jobs, but not the ability to believe. [12] This distinction is crucially essential, as the method "intelligence" is specified undoubtedly shapes how we comprehend the relationship in between human idea and this innovation. [13] To value this, one should remember the richness of the philosophical custom and Christian faith, which use a much deeper and more detailed understanding of intelligence-an understanding that is main to the Church's mentor on the nature, self-respect, and vocation of the human person. [14]
13. From the dawn of human self-reflection, the mind has actually played a main role in understanding what it suggests to be "human." Aristotle observed that "all people by nature desire to understand." [15] This knowledge, with its capacity for abstraction that the nature and meaning of things, sets humans apart from the animal world. [16] As theorists, theologians, and psychologists have actually examined the exact nature of this intellectual professors, they have also explored how people comprehend the world and their special location within it. Through this exploration, the Christian tradition has actually pertained to comprehend the human individual as a being including both body and soul-deeply linked to this world and yet transcending it. [17]
14. In the classical tradition, the idea of intelligence is typically understood through the complementary concepts of "factor" (ratio) and "intelligence" (intellectus). These are not separate faculties but, as Saint Thomas Aquinas explains, they are two modes in which the very same intelligence runs: "The term intelligence is presumed from the inward grasp of the fact, while the name factor is drawn from the inquisitive and discursive procedure." [18] This succinct description highlights the two basic and complementary measurements of human intelligence. Intellectus describes the instinctive grasp of the truth-that is, apprehending it with the "eyes" of the mind-which precedes and premises argumentation itself. Ratio pertains to reasoning proper: the discursive, analytical process that causes judgment. Together, intellect and factor form the 2 elements of the act of intelligere, "the appropriate operation of the human being as such." [19]
15. Explaining the human individual as a "reasonable" being does not decrease the individual to a particular mode of thought; rather, it recognizes that the ability for intellectual understanding shapes and permeates all aspects of human activity. [20] Whether worked out well or badly, this capability is an intrinsic aspect of human nature. In this sense, the "term 'rational' encompasses all the capabilities of the human individual," including those related to "understanding and understanding, in addition to those of ready, caring, selecting, and wanting; it likewise includes all corporeal functions carefully related to these capabilities." [21] This detailed point of view highlights how, in the human person, produced in the "picture of God," factor is integrated in a manner that raises, shapes, and transforms both the individual's will and actions. [22]
16. Christian thought considers the intellectual faculties of the human person within the structure of an important anthropology that views the human being as essentially embodied. In the human individual, spirit and matter "are not 2 natures united, however rather their union forms a single nature." [23] To put it simply, the soul is not merely the immaterial "part" of the individual contained within the body, nor is the body an external shell housing an intangible "core." Rather, the whole human person is all at once both product and spiritual. This understanding shows the mentor of Sacred Scripture, which views the human individual as a being who lives out relationships with God and others (and therefore, an authentically spiritual measurement) within and through this embodied existence. [24] The profound significance of this condition is more brightened by the secret of the Incarnation, through which God himself took on our flesh and "raised it approximately a superb dignity." [25]
17. Although deeply rooted in physical existence, the human individual goes beyond the material world through the soul, which is "practically 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 individual "shares in the light of the magnificent mind." [27] Nevertheless, the human spirit does not exercise its normal mode of knowledge without the body. [28] In this way, the intellectual faculties of the human individual are an integral part of a sociology that recognizes that the human person is a "unity of body and soul." [29] Further aspects of this understanding will be developed in what follows.

18. Human beings are "ordered by their very nature to social communion," [30] possessing the capacity to understand one another, to provide themselves in love, and to enter into communion with others. Accordingly, human intelligence is not a separated faculty however is exercised in relationships, finding its fullest expression in discussion, partnership, and uniformity. We discover with others, and we learn through others.

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

21. Human intelligence is eventually "God's present made for the assimilation of truth." [34] In the dual sense of intellectus-ratio, it allows the person to check out truths that exceed mere sensory experience or utility, considering that "the desire for reality is part of humanity itself. It is an innate property of human reason to ask why things are as they are." [35] Moving beyond the limitations of empirical data, human intelligence can "with real certitude attain to truth itself as knowable." [36] While truth remains just partially understood, the desire for truth "stimulates factor constantly to go even more; certainly, it is as if reason were overwhelmed to see that it can constantly exceed what it has already attained." [37] Although Truth in itself transcends the limits of human intelligence, it irresistibly attracts it. [38] Drawn by this destination, the human individual is resulted in seek "truths of a higher order." [39]
22. This natural drive towards the pursuit of fact is especially apparent in the clearly human capabilities for semantic understanding and creativity, [40] through which this search unfolds in a "way that is proper to the social nature and self-respect of the human individual." [41] Likewise, an unfaltering orientation to the reality is vital for charity to be both authentic and universal. [42]
23. The search for reality discovers its highest expression in openness to realities that go beyond the physical and created world. In God, all realities attain their supreme and initial significance. [43] Entrusting oneself to God is a "fundamental decision that engages the entire person." [44] In this method, the human person becomes fully what she or he is contacted us to be: "the intelligence and the will show their spiritual nature," enabling the individual "to act in a manner that realizes personal freedom to the full." [45]
24. The Christian faith comprehends development as the complimentary act of the Triune God, who, as Saint Bonaventure of Bagnoregio explains, develops "not to increase his glory, however to reveal it forth and to interact it." [46] Since God creates according to his Wisdom (cf. Wis. 9:9; Jer. 10:12), creation is imbued with an intrinsic order that shows God's strategy (cf. Gen. 1; Dan. 2:21 -22; Is. 45:18; Ps. 74:12 -17; 104), [47] within which God has actually called humans to assume a special function: to cultivate and take care of the world. [48]
25. Shaped by the Divine Craftsman, humans live out their identity as beings made in imago Dei by "keeping" and "tilling" (cf. Gen. 2:15) creation-using their intelligence and abilities to care for and develop production in accord with God's strategy. [49] In this, human intelligence reflects the Divine Intelligence that developed all things (cf. Gen. 1-2; Jn. 1), [50] constantly sustains them, and guides them to their supreme function in him. [51] Moreover, people are called to develop their abilities in science and innovation, for through them, God is glorified (cf. Sir. 38:6). Thus, in a correct relationship with creation, human beings, on the one hand, use their intelligence and ability to work together with God in directing development toward 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 ends up being more plainly comprehended as a faculty that forms an essential part of how the whole person engages with truth. Authentic engagement requires accepting the full scope of one's being: spiritual, cognitive, embodied, and relational.

27. This engagement with reality unfolds in different ways, as each individual, in his or her multifaceted individuality [54], seeks to comprehend the world, relate to others, resolve issues, reveal imagination, and pursue essential well-being through the unified interplay of the various dimensions of the individual's intelligence. [55] This involves logical and linguistic capabilities but can also encompass other modes of connecting with truth. Consider the work of a craftsmen, who "should know how to discern, in inert matter, a specific form that others can not recognize" [56] and bring it forth through insight and practical ability. Indigenous individuals who live near to the earth often have a profound sense of nature and its cycles. [57] Similarly, a buddy who understands the best word to state or an individual proficient at handling human relationships exemplifies an intelligence that is "the fruit of self-examination, dialogue and generous encounter between individuals." [58] As Pope Francis observes, "in this age of synthetic intelligence, we can not forget that poetry and love are essential to save our mankind." [59]
28. At the heart of the Christian understanding of intelligence is the combination of truth into the moral and spiritual life of the person, directing his/her actions due to God's goodness and truth. According to God's plan, intelligence, in its fullest sense, likewise consists of the capability to enjoy what is true, excellent, and beautiful. As the twentieth-century French poet Paul Claudel expressed, "intelligence is nothing without delight." [60] Similarly, Dante, upon reaching the highest heaven in Paradiso, affirms that the culmination of this intellectual pleasure is found in the "light intellectual complete of love, love of real excellent filled with delight, joy which transcends every sweet taste." [61]
29. A correct understanding of human intelligence, therefore, can not be reduced to the simple acquisition of facts or the capability to perform specific tasks. Instead, it includes the individual's openness to the ultimate questions of life and reflects an orientation toward the True and the Good. [62] As an expression of the magnificent image within the individual, human intelligence has the capability to access the totality of being, pondering presence in its fullness, which goes beyond what is quantifiable, and understanding the meaning of what has actually been understood. For followers, this capability includes, in a particular way, the capability to grow in the understanding of the mysteries of God by utilizing reason to engage ever more profoundly with exposed facts (intellectus fidei). [63] True intelligence is shaped by divine love, which "is poured forth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit" (Rom. 5:5). From this, it follows that human intelligence has a vital contemplative dimension, an unselfish openness to the True, the Good, and the Beautiful, beyond any practical purpose.

30. Because of the foregoing discussion, the differences in between human intelligence and current AI systems become obvious. While AI is an amazing technological accomplishment capable of imitating certain outputs associated with human intelligence, it runs by performing tasks, attaining objectives, or making choices based upon quantitative data and computational reasoning. For example, 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 specialists collaborate in solving intricate problems that "can not be dealt with from a single point of view or from a single set of interests." [64]
31. However, even as AI procedures and replicates certain expressions of intelligence, it remains fundamentally restricted to a logical-mathematical structure, which imposes inherent constraints. Human intelligence, on the other hand, develops organically throughout the person's physical and mental growth, formed by a myriad of lived experiences in the flesh. Although innovative AI systems can "find out" through processes such as artificial intelligence, this sort of training is basically various from the developmental development of human intelligence, which is formed by embodied experiences, consisting of sensory input, psychological reactions, social interactions, and the special context of each minute. These elements shape and form people within their individual history.In contrast, AI, lacking a physical body, depends on computational reasoning and knowing based on huge datasets that consist of recorded human experiences and understanding.

32. Consequently, although AI can imitate aspects of human thinking and carry out specific tasks with extraordinary speed and performance, its computational abilities represent only a portion of the broader capabilities of the human mind. For circumstances, AI can not presently replicate ethical discernment or the ability to develop authentic relationships. Moreover, human intelligence is positioned within a personally lived history of intellectual and ethical development that basically shapes the individual's perspective, incorporating the physical, emotional, social, ethical, and spiritual dimensions of life. Since AI can not use this fullness of understanding, approaches that rely entirely on this technology or treat it as the main means of analyzing the world can result in "a loss of gratitude for the entire, for the relationships in between things, and for the broader horizon." [65]
33. Human intelligence is not mainly about finishing functional tasks but about understanding and actively engaging with truth in all its dimensions; it is also capable of unexpected insights. Since AI lacks the richness of corporeality, relationality, and the openness of the human heart to reality and goodness, its capacities-though apparently limitless-are matchless with the human capability to understand truth. A lot can be gained from an illness, an accept of reconciliation, and even an easy sunset; certainly, lots of experiences we have as people open brand-new horizons and use the possibility of attaining brand-new knowledge. No gadget, working solely with information, can measure up to these and many other experiences present in our lives.

34. Drawing an extremely close equivalence between human intelligence and AI dangers surrendering to a functionalist viewpoint, where individuals are valued based upon the work they can perform. However, a person's worth does not depend on having specific abilities, cognitive and technological achievements, or specific success, but on the individual's intrinsic dignity, grounded in being created in the image of God. [66] This dignity remains undamaged in all circumstances, consisting of for those not able to exercise their abilities, whether it be an unborn kid, an unconscious person, or an older individual who is suffering. [67] It likewise underpins the custom of human rights (and, in particular, what are now called "neuro-rights"), which represent "a crucial point of merging in the search for common ground" [68] and can, thus, work as an essential ethical guide in discussions on the accountable advancement and usage of AI.

35. Considering all these points, as Pope Francis observes, "the very use of the word 'intelligence'" in connection with AI "can prove misleading" [69] and dangers ignoring what is most valuable in the human individual. In light of this, AI should not be seen as a synthetic form of human intelligence but as an item of it. [70]
36. Given these factors to consider, one can ask how AI can be understood within God's strategy. To address this, it is necessary to remember that techno-scientific activity is not neutral in character however is a human endeavor that engages the humanistic and cultural dimensions of human imagination. [71]
37. Seen as a fruit of the possible inscribed within human intelligence, [72] clinical query and the advancement of technical abilities belong to the "partnership of man and woman with God in refining the visible production." [73] At the same time, all scientific and technological achievements are, eventually, gifts from God. [74] Therefore, people must constantly utilize their abilities in view of the greater purpose for which God has actually given them. [75]
38. We can gratefully acknowledge how innovation has "treated many evils which used to hurt and limit human beings," [76] a truth for which we ought to rejoice. Nevertheless, not all technological improvements in themselves represent real human development. [77] The Church is particularly opposed to those applications that threaten the sanctity of life or the self-respect of the human individual. [78] Like any human venture, technological advancement needs to be directed to serve the human individual and add to the pursuit of "greater justice, more substantial fraternity, and a more gentle order of social relations," which are "more valuable than advances in the technical field." [79] Concerns about the ethical ramifications of technological development are shared not just within the Church but also amongst numerous scientists, technologists, and expert associations, who significantly require ethical reflection to assist this advancement in a responsible way.

39. To attend to these challenges, it is necessary to highlight the value of moral duty grounded in the self-respect and occupation of the human individual. This assisting principle also applies to questions concerning AI. In this context, the ethical dimension takes on main value since it is individuals who design systems and figure out the purposes for which they are used. [80] Between a device and a human, just the latter is genuinely an ethical agent-a topic of moral obligation who works out liberty in his or her decisions and accepts their repercussions. [81] It is not the device but the human who remains in relationship with reality and goodness, assisted by a moral conscience that calls the individual "to like and to do what is great and to avoid wicked," [82] attesting to "the authority of truth in referral to the supreme Good to which the human person is drawn." [83] Likewise, in between a device and a human, just the human can be adequately self-aware to the point of listening and following the voice of conscience, critical with prudence, and seeking the good that is possible in every situation. [84] In truth, all of this likewise belongs to the individual's exercise of intelligence.

40. Like any item of human creativity, AI can be directed toward positive or negative ends. [85] When used in manner ins which appreciate human dignity and promote the wellness of individuals and neighborhoods, it can contribute favorably to the human vocation. Yet, as in all locations where human beings are contacted us to make choices, the shadow of evil also looms here. Where human flexibility enables the possibility of choosing what is incorrect, the ethical examination of this technology will need to consider how it is directed and utilized.

41. At the same time, it is not just the ends that are fairly considerable but also the methods employed to attain them. Additionally, the general vision and understanding of the human person ingrained within these systems are very important to think about too. Technological products show the worldview of their designers, owners, users, and regulators, [86] and have the power to "shape the world and engage consciences on the level of worths." [87] On a social level, some technological advancements might likewise enhance relationships and power dynamics that are irregular with an appropriate understanding of the human individual and society.

42. Therefore, completions and the ways used in a provided application of AI, in addition to the general vision it incorporates, must all be assessed to guarantee they appreciate human self-respect and promote the typical good. [88] As Pope Francis has actually specified, "the intrinsic self-respect of every guy and every female" should be "the key criterion in examining emerging technologies; these will prove fairly sound to the level that they assist respect that self-respect and increase its expression at every level of human life," [89] consisting of in the social and economic spheres. In this sense, human intelligence plays a vital function not just in developing and producing technology but likewise in directing its usage in line with the genuine good of the human person. [90] The duty for handling this wisely pertains to every level of society, assisted by the principle of subsidiarity and other principles of Catholic Social Teaching.

43. The commitment to guaranteeing that AI always supports and promotes the supreme worth of the self-respect of every human and the fullness of the human vocation serves as a requirement of discernment for designers, owners, operators, and regulators of AI, in addition to to its users. It remains legitimate for each application of the technology at every level of its usage.

44. An assessment of the implications of this assisting principle might begin by thinking about the importance of moral responsibility. Since complete ethical causality belongs only to personal agents, not synthetic ones, it is crucial to be able to determine and define who bears responsibility for the procedures associated with AI, particularly those efficient in learning, correction, and reprogramming. While bottom-up techniques and really deep neural networks make it possible for AI to solve intricate problems, they make it difficult to comprehend the procedures that result in the options they adopted. This makes complex accountability considering that if an AI application produces undesirable results, determining who is accountable becomes challenging. To address this issue, attention needs to be offered to the nature of accountability procedures in complex, extremely automated settings, where outcomes might only end up being apparent in the medium to long term. For this, it is essential that ultimate duty for choices used AI rests with the human decision-makers which there is responsibility for using AI at each phase of the decision-making procedure. [91]
45. In addition to identifying who is accountable, it is necessary to identify the objectives offered to AI systems. Although these systems may utilize without supervision self-governing learning systems and often follow paths that human beings can not rebuild, they ultimately pursue objectives that people have actually designated to them and are governed by processes established by their designers and programmers. Yet, this presents a challenge because, as AI models end up being increasingly capable of independent learning, the capability to maintain control over them to guarantee that such applications serve human purposes may successfully diminish. This raises the important question of how to make sure that AI systems are purchased for the good of individuals and not against them.

46. While duty for the ethical use of AI systems begins with those who establish, produce, manage, and manage such systems, it is likewise shared by those who utilize them. As Pope Francis kept in mind, the maker "makes a technical choice amongst several possibilities based either on well-defined requirements or on statistical inferences. Humans, nevertheless, not just pick, however in their hearts are capable of deciding." [92] Those who use AI to accomplish a job and follow its outcomes create a context in which they are ultimately accountable for the power they have actually entrusted. Therefore, insofar as AI can assist humans in making decisions, the algorithms that govern it should be trustworthy, secure, robust enough to handle disparities, and transparent in their operation to alleviate biases and unexpected adverse effects. [93] Regulatory structures need to make sure that all legal entities remain responsible for using AI and all its consequences, with suitable safeguards for transparency, personal privacy, and responsibility. [94] Moreover, those utilizing AI must beware not to become extremely dependent on it for their decision-making, a pattern that increases contemporary society's currently high reliance on innovation.

47. The Church's ethical and social teaching supplies resources to assist guarantee that AI is used in a method that maintains human firm. Considerations about justice, for instance, ought to likewise address issues such as cultivating just social characteristics, maintaining worldwide security, and promoting peace. By working out vigilance, people and neighborhoods can recognize ways to utilize AI to benefit mankind while avoiding applications that might deteriorate human dignity or damage the environment. In this context, the idea of duty need to be comprehended not only in its most limited sense but as a "responsibility for the take care of others, which is more than simply accounting for outcomes attained." [95]
48. Therefore, AI, like any innovation, can be part of a conscious and responsible answer to humankind's vocation to the good. However, as formerly talked about, AI must be directed by human intelligence to align with this occupation, ensuring it appreciates the self-respect of the human individual. Recognizing this "exalted dignity," the Second Vatican Council affirmed that "the social order and its development should usually work to the advantage of the human person." [96] Because of this, using AI, as Pope Francis said, must be "accompanied by an ethic influenced by a vision of the common good, a principles of liberty, obligation, and fraternity, efficient in fostering the complete advancement of individuals in relation to others and to the whole of production." [97]
49. Within this general viewpoint, some observations follow below to illustrate how the preceding arguments can help provide an ethical orientation in practical circumstances, in line with the "knowledge of heart" that Pope Francis has actually proposed. [98] While not exhaustive, this conversation is used in service of the dialogue that considers how AI can be used to maintain the self-respect of the human person and promote the common good. [99]
50. As Pope Francis observed, "the inherent dignity of each human and the fraternity that binds us together as members of the one human family need to support the advancement of brand-new technologies and serve as unassailable requirements for assessing them before they are used." [100]
51. Viewed through this lens, AI could "introduce essential developments in farming, education and culture, a better level of life for entire countries and individuals, and the growth of human fraternity and social friendship," and hence be "used to promote important human development." [101] AI could likewise help organizations determine those in need and counter discrimination and marginalization. These and other comparable applications of this technology might contribute to human development and the typical good. [102]
52. However, while AI holds lots of possibilities for promoting the excellent, it can also prevent and even counter human advancement and the common good. Pope Francis has actually kept in mind that "evidence to date recommends that digital technologies have actually increased inequality in our world. Not just differences in product wealth, which are also substantial, but also distinctions in access to political and social influence." [103] In this sense, AI could be used to perpetuate marginalization and discrimination, develop brand-new kinds 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 companies raises considerable ethical concerns. Exacerbating this issue is the fundamental nature of AI systems, where no single individual can work out complete oversight over the vast and complicated datasets used for calculation. This absence of well-defined responsibility creates the threat that AI could be manipulated for individual or business gain or to direct popular opinion for the benefit of a specific industry. Such entities, inspired by their own interests, possess the capacity to exercise "types of control as subtle as they are intrusive, developing mechanisms for the adjustment of consciences and of the democratic process." [105]
54. Furthermore, there is the danger of AI being utilized to promote what Pope Francis has actually called the "technocratic paradigm," which perceives all the world's problems as solvable through technological methods alone. [106] In this paradigm, human self-respect and fraternity are often reserved in the name of effectiveness, "as if truth, goodness, and reality immediately stream from technological and economic power as such." [107] Yet, human self-respect and the typical excellent must never ever be violated for the sake of efficiency, [108] for "technological advancements that do not cause an enhancement in the quality of life of all humankind, however on the contrary, exacerbate inequalities and disputes, can never ever count as real development. " [109] Instead, AI needs to be put "at the service of another type of development, one which is healthier, more human, more social, more integral." [110]
55. Attaining this objective needs a deeper reflection on the relationship between autonomy and obligation. Greater autonomy heightens everyone's responsibility throughout various aspects of common life. For Christians, the structure of this obligation depends on the acknowledgment that all human capabilities, including the individual's autonomy, come from God and are suggested to be used in the service of others. [111] Therefore, instead of merely pursuing economic or technological objectives, AI must serve "the typical good of the entire human family," which is "the amount overall of social conditions that allow individuals, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their satisfaction more totally and more easily." [112]
56. The Second Vatican Council observed that "by his innermost nature guy is a social being; and if he does not get in into relations with others, he can neither live nor develop his presents." [113] This conviction underscores 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 mutual exchange and the pursuit of reality, surgiteams.com in the course of which, people "show each other the truth they have found, or think they have actually found, in such a method that they help one another in the search for reality." [115]
57. Such a quest, together with other aspects of human communication, presupposes encounters and shared exchange between people shaped by their special histories, ideas, convictions, and relationships. Nor can we forget that human intelligence is a diverse, diverse, and complicated reality: specific and social, reasonable and affective, conceptual and symbolic. Pope Francis highlights this dynamic, keeping in mind that "together, we can look for the reality in dialogue, in relaxed conversation or in enthusiastic argument. To do so requires determination; it entails moments of silence and suffering, yet it can patiently welcome the broader experience of individuals and individuals. [...] The procedure of building fraternity, be it local or universal, can just be undertaken by spirits that are totally free and available to genuine encounters." [116]
58. It remains in this context that one can think about the difficulties AI postures to human relationships. Like other technological tools, AI has the prospective to foster connections within the human family. However, it might likewise impede a true encounter with reality and, ultimately, lead people to "a deep and melancholic discontentment with social relations, or a harmful sense of isolation." [117] Authentic human relationships require the richness of being with others in their pain, their pleas, and their joy. [118] Since human intelligence is expressed and enhanced likewise in social and embodied ways, authentic and spontaneous encounters with others are essential for engaging with reality in its fullness.

59. Because "true knowledge demands an encounter with truth," [119] the increase of AI presents another obstacle. Since AI can effectively mimic the products of human intelligence, the capability to understand when one is connecting with a human or a machine can no longer be considered granted. Generative AI can produce text, speech, images, and other advanced outputs that are usually connected with human beings. Yet, it needs to be comprehended for what it is: a tool, not a person. [120] This distinction is frequently obscured by the language utilized by specialists, which tends to anthropomorphize AI and thus blurs the line between human and device.

60. Anthropomorphizing AI likewise postures particular challenges for disgaeawiki.info the advancement of children, possibly motivating them to develop patterns of interaction that deal with human relationships in a transactional manner, as one would connect to a chatbot. Such habits might lead youths to see teachers as mere dispensers of details instead of as coaches who direct and support their intellectual and ethical development. Genuine relationships, rooted in compassion and an unfaltering dedication to the good of the other, are important and irreplaceable in promoting the full development of the human individual.

61. In this context, it is essential to clarify that, despite making use of anthropomorphic language, no AI application can truly experience empathy. Emotions can not be reduced to facial expressions or expressions created in response to prompts; they show the method an individual, as a whole, associates with the world and to his/her own life, with the body playing a main function. True empathy requires the ability to listen, recognize another's irreducible originality, welcome their otherness, and comprehend the significance behind even their silences. [121] Unlike the realm of analytical judgment in which AI excels, true compassion comes from the relational sphere. It involves intuiting and capturing the lived experiences of another while maintaining the distinction between self and other. [122] While AI can replicate empathetic responses, it can not duplicate the eminently individual and relational nature of genuine empathy. [123]
62. Because of the above, it is clear why misrepresenting AI as an individual should always be avoided; doing so for deceitful functions is a severe ethical offense that might erode 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 considered immoral and requires mindful oversight to avoid damage, maintain transparency, and guarantee the self-respect of all people. [124]
63. In a progressively separated world, some individuals have actually turned to AI searching for deep human relationships, simple friendship, or even psychological bonds. However, while human beings are implied to experience genuine relationships, AI can just imitate them. Nevertheless, such relationships with others are an important part of how a person grows to become who she or he is suggested to be. If AI is utilized to assist people foster real connections between individuals, it can contribute positively to the complete realization of the person. Conversely, if we change relationships with God and with others with interactions with technology, we run the risk of replacing genuine relationality with a lifeless image (cf. Ps. 106:20; Rom. 1:22 -23). Instead of retreating into artificial worlds, we are contacted us to participate in a committed and intentional way with truth, specifically by relating to the poor and suffering, consoling those in sadness, and creating bonds of communion with all.

64. Due to its interdisciplinary nature, AI is being increasingly incorporated into financial and financial systems. Significant financial investments are currently being made not just in the technology sector however likewise in energy, finance, and media, particularly in the areas of marketing and sales, logistics, technological development, compliance, and threat management. At the same time, AI's applications in these areas have actually likewise highlighted its ambivalent nature, as a source of remarkable opportunities however also profound dangers. A very first real crucial point in this area worries the possibility that-due to the concentration of AI applications in the hands of a few corporations-only those big companies would gain from the worth created by AI instead of business that use it.

65. Other broader elements of AI's effect on the economic-financial sphere need to likewise be carefully analyzed, particularly concerning the interaction in between concrete reality and the digital world. One important consideration in this regard includes the coexistence of diverse and alternative forms of economic and banks within a given context. This factor needs to be motivated, as it can bring advantages in how it supports the real economy by cultivating its development and stability, specifically throughout times of crisis. Nevertheless, it must be worried that digital realities, not limited by any spatial bonds, tend to be more homogeneous and impersonal than communities rooted in a particular place and a specific history, with a common journey identified by shared values and hopes, however also by inescapable arguments and divergences. This variety is an indisputable property to a community's economic life. Turning over the economy and finance completely to digital technology would minimize this variety and richness. As an outcome, numerous services to economic problems that can be reached through natural dialogue between the involved parties may no longer be attainable in a world dominated by procedures and only the appearance of proximity.

66. Another location where AI is already having a profound impact is the world of work. As in lots of other fields, AI is driving essential improvements throughout numerous professions, with a series of results. On the one hand, it has the potential to improve competence and performance, produce new tasks, enable employees to focus on more innovative tasks, and open brand-new horizons for imagination and development.

67. However, while AI assures to improve productivity by taking over mundane jobs, it regularly forces workers to adjust to the speed and demands of makers instead of machines being created to support those who work. As an outcome, contrary to the marketed advantages of AI, present techniques to the innovation can paradoxically deskill employees, subject them to automated monitoring, and relegate them to stiff and repetitive tasks. The requirement to stay up to date with the speed of innovation can wear down employees' sense of company and stifle the ingenious capabilities they are expected to bring to their work. [125]
68. AI is currently removing the need for some jobs that were once carried out by people. If AI is utilized to change human employees rather than complement them, there is a "significant threat of disproportionate advantage for the couple of at the cost of the impoverishment of numerous." [126] Additionally, as AI becomes more effective, there is an involved risk that human labor might lose its value in the economic realm. This is the logical consequence of the technocratic paradigm: a world of mankind shackled to performance, where, ultimately, the expense of humanity should be cut. Yet, human lives are inherently important, independent of their economic output. Nevertheless, the "current design," Pope Francis explains, "does not appear to favor an investment in efforts to assist the sluggish, the weak, or the less talented to find chances in life." [127] In light of this, "we can not enable a tool as effective and important as Artificial Intelligence to strengthen such a paradigm, but rather, we must make Artificial Intelligence a bulwark against its growth." [128]
69. It is important to bear in mind that "the order of things must be subordinate to the order of persons, and not the other method around." [129] Human work should not only be at the service of revenue however at "the service of the entire human individual [...] taking into consideration the individual's material requirements and the requirements of his or her intellectual, moral, spiritual, and spiritual life." [130] In this context, the Church recognizes that work is "not only a way of making one's daily bread" however is also "an important measurement of social life" and "a method [...] of individual development, the structure of healthy relationships, self-expression and the exchange of gifts. Work offers us a sense of shared obligation for the development of the world, and eventually, for our life as a people." [131]
70. Since work is a "part of the significance of life on this earth, a course to development, human development and personal fulfillment," "the goal must not be that technological progress significantly changes human work, for this would be destructive to mankind" [132] -rather, it ought to promote human labor. Seen in this light, AI ought to help, not change, human judgment. Similarly, it should never ever break down imagination or decrease workers to mere "cogs in a maker." Therefore, "respect for the dignity of workers and the value of employment for the economic well-being of individuals, families, and societies, for task security and just salaries, ought to be a high top priority for the global neighborhood as these kinds of innovation permeate more deeply into our offices." [133]
71. As participants in God's healing work, healthcare professionals have the vocation and obligation to be "guardians and servants of human life." [134] Because of this, the health care occupation carries an "intrinsic and indisputable ethical measurement," acknowledged by the Hippocratic Oath, which requires doctors and health care specialists to devote themselves to having "outright respect for human life and its sacredness." [135] Following the example of the Good Samaritan, this commitment is to be performed by guys and women "who reject the creation of a society of exemption, and act rather as neighbors, raising up and rehabilitating the succumbed to the sake of the typical good." [136]
72. Seen in this light, AI seems to hold enormous capacity in a range of applications in the medical field, such as assisting the diagnostic work of doctor, facilitating relationships between clients and medical personnel, offering brand-new treatments, and broadening access to quality care likewise for those who are isolated or marginalized. In these ways, the innovation might enhance the "compassionate and loving closeness" [137] that health care suppliers are called to extend to the sick and suffering.

73. However, if AI is utilized not to improve however to replace the relationship in between patients and healthcare providers-leaving patients to interact with a device rather than a human being-it would lower a most importantly important human relational structure to a centralized, impersonal, and unequal structure. Instead of encouraging uniformity with the sick and suffering, such applications of AI would risk getting worse the isolation that typically accompanies health problem, especially in the context of a culture where "individuals are no longer viewed as a paramount value to be taken care of and respected." [138] This misuse of AI would not line up with regard for the self-respect of the human individual and solidarity with the suffering.

74. Responsibility for the wellness of clients and the choices that touch upon their lives are at the heart of the health care profession. This accountability needs medical professionals to exercise all their ability and intelligence in making well-reasoned and fairly grounded choices concerning those turned over to their care, always respecting the inviolable dignity of the clients and the need for informed permission. As a result, choices regarding patient treatment and the weight of obligation they entail need to always remain with the human individual and must never ever be delegated to AI. [139]
75. In addition, using AI to identify who must get treatment based mainly on financial measures or metrics of efficiency represents a particularly problematic circumstances of the "technocratic paradigm" that should be declined. [140] For, "enhancing resources means utilizing them in an ethical and fraternal way, and not punishing the most fragile." [141] Additionally, AI tools in health care are "exposed to kinds of predisposition and discrimination," where "systemic mistakes can easily increase, producing not just injustices in private cases however also, due to the cause and effect, genuine kinds of social inequality." [142]
76. The combination of AI into health care also positions the risk of magnifying other existing disparities in access to healthcare. As healthcare ends up being significantly oriented toward prevention and lifestyle-based techniques, AI-driven solutions may inadvertently favor more wealthy populations who already take pleasure in better access to medical resources and quality nutrition. This pattern threats strengthening a "medication for the abundant" model, where those with monetary ways gain from innovative preventative tools and customized health details while others battle to gain access to even standard services. To prevent such injustices, fair frameworks are required to ensure that making use of AI in health care does not aggravate existing health care inequalities however rather serves the typical good.

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

78. This approach includes a commitment to cultivating the mind, but always as a part of the important development of the individual: "We must break that concept of education which holds that educating means filling one's head with concepts. That is the way we inform automatons, cerebral minds, not people. Educating is taking a risk in the stress in between the mind, the heart, and the hands." [145]
79. At the center of this work of forming the entire human person is the indispensable relationship between teacher and trainee. Teachers do more than communicate knowledge; they model vital human qualities and inspire the happiness of discovery. [146] Their presence inspires trainees both through the material they teach and the care they show for their trainees. This bond promotes trust, mutual understanding, and the capability to address each person's special dignity and potential. On the part of the trainee, this can create a real desire to grow. The physical existence of a teacher develops a relational dynamic that AI can not duplicate, one that deepens engagement and nurtures the trainee's important development.

80. In this context, AI presents both chances and obstacles. If used in a prudent manner, within the context of an existing teacher-student relationship and bought to the genuine objectives of education, AI can end up being a valuable academic resource by boosting access to education, using tailored assistance, and supplying instant feedback to trainees. These advantages might improve the learning experience, specifically in cases where personalized attention is needed, or educational resources are otherwise scarce.

81. Nevertheless, a vital part of education is forming "the intelligence to factor well in all matters, to reach out towards reality, and to grasp it," [147] while helping the "language of the head" to grow harmoniously with the "language of the heart" and the "language of the hands." [148] This is all the more essential in an age marked by technology, in which "it is no longer merely a question of 'utilizing' instruments of communication, but of living in an extremely digitalized culture that has had an extensive impact on [...] our capability to communicate, find out, be notified and enter into relationship with others." [149] However, rather of cultivating "a cultivated intelligence," which "brings with it a power and a grace to every work and occupation that it undertakes," [150] the comprehensive usage of AI in education might cause the trainees' increased reliance on technology, deteriorating their capability to carry out some skills separately and intensifying their reliance on screens. [151]
82. Additionally, while some AI systems are created to assist individuals establish their vital thinking capabilities and analytical skills, numerous others simply offer answers rather of triggering trainees to come to answers themselves or write text on their own. [152] Instead of training young people how to generate details and produce fast actions, education should encourage "the responsible use of freedom to face issues with common sense and intelligence." [153] Building on this, "education in making use of types of expert system ought to aim above all at promoting crucial thinking. Users of any ages, however especially the young, need to establish a discerning technique to making use of data and content gathered on the web or produced by expert system systems. Schools, universities, and scientific societies are challenged to help trainees and professionals to understand the social and ethical elements of the advancement and uses of technology." [154]
83. As Saint John Paul II remembered, "in the world today, identified by such fast advancements in science and technology, the jobs of a Catholic University assume an ever greater value and urgency." [155] In a particular way, Catholic universities are prompted to be present as excellent labs of hope at this crossroads of history. In an inter-disciplinary and cross-disciplinary key, they are prompted to engage "with knowledge and imagination" [156] in careful research on this phenomenon, assisting to draw out the salutary capacity within the various fields of science and reality, and assisting them always towards fairly sound applications that plainly serve the cohesion of our societies and the common good, reaching new frontiers in the discussion in between faith and reason.

84. Moreover, it needs to be kept in mind that existing AI programs have been known to provide biased or made details, which can lead trainees to rely on unreliable content. This issue "not just risks of legitimizing fake news and enhancing a dominant culture's benefit, however, simply put, it likewise weakens the instructional process itself." [157] With time, clearer distinctions may emerge in between correct and inappropriate usages of AI in education and research study. Yet, a definitive standard is that using AI should constantly be transparent and never misrepresented.

85. AI might be used as an aid to human dignity if it assists individuals understand complex principles or directs them to sound resources that support their look for the reality. [158]
86. However, AI likewise presents a severe danger of generating controlled content and false details, which can quickly mislead people due to its resemblance to the truth. Such false information might take place unintentionally, as when it comes to AI "hallucination," where a generative AI system yields results that appear genuine but are not. Since producing content that imitates human artifacts is main to AI's functionality, mitigating these threats shows tough. Yet, the consequences of such aberrations and false details can be rather severe. For this factor, all those involved in producing and utilizing AI systems should 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 incorrect details, an even more troubling issue lies in the purposeful abuse of AI for control. This can take place when individuals or organizations deliberately generate and spread incorrect content with the aim to deceive or trigger damage, such as "deepfake" images, videos, and audio-referring to an incorrect representation of an individual, modified or created by an AI algorithm. The danger of deepfakes is especially obvious when they are utilized to target or harm others. While the images or videos themselves might be synthetic, the damage they cause is real, leaving "deep scars in the hearts of those who suffer it" and "real wounds in their human self-respect." [159]
88. On a wider scale, by misshaping "our relationship with others and with reality," [160] AI-generated fake media can slowly undermine the foundations of society. This concern requires cautious guideline, as misinformation-especially through AI-controlled or influenced media-can spread inadvertently, sustaining political polarization and social unrest. When society becomes indifferent to the reality, various groups construct their own versions of "facts," compromising the "reciprocal ties and mutual reliances" [161] that underpin the material of social life. As deepfakes cause individuals to question everything 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 fundamental trust on which societies are built. [162]
89. Countering AI-driven frauds is not only the work of industry experts-it needs the efforts of all people of goodwill. "If technology is to serve human dignity and not damage it, and if it is to promote peace instead of violence, then the human community must be proactive in addressing these trends with regard to human self-respect and the promo of the great." [163] Those who produce and share AI-generated content ought to constantly exercise diligence in confirming the fact of what they share and, in all cases, need to "prevent the sharing of words and images that are deteriorating of people, that promote hatred and intolerance, that debase the goodness and intimacy of human sexuality or that make use of the weak and susceptible." [164] This calls for the continuous prudence and mindful discernment of all users regarding their activity online. [165]
90. Humans are naturally relational, and the data each individual generates in the digital world can be viewed as an objectified expression of this relational nature. Data communicates not just details however also personal and relational understanding, which, in a significantly digitized context, can amount to power over the person. Moreover, while some kinds of information might pertain to public aspects of an individual's life, others may touch upon the individual's interiority, possibly even their conscience. Seen in this way, personal privacy plays a vital function in securing the limits of an individual's inner life, maintaining their flexibility to associate with others, express themselves, and make choices without unnecessary control. This security is likewise tied to the defense of spiritual flexibility, as security can also be misused to apply control over the lives of believers and how they express their faith.

91. It is proper, for that reason, to resolve the concern of privacy from an issue for the genuine liberty and inalienable dignity of the human individual "in all situations." [166] The Second Vatican Council consisted of the right "to protect privacy" amongst the essential rights "needed for living a truly human life," a right that ought to be extended to all individuals on account of their "superb self-respect." [167] Furthermore, the Church has actually likewise affirmed the right to the legitimate regard for a personal life in the context of verifying the person's right to a good credibility, defense of their physical and mental stability, and flexibility from harm or excessive invasion [168] -important parts of the due respect for the intrinsic self-respect of the human person. [169]
92. Advances in AI-powered information processing and analysis now make it possible to infer patterns in a person's habits and believing from even a little amount of details, making the function of data privacy a lot more necessary as a secure for the self-respect and relational nature of the human person. As Pope Francis observed, "while closed and intolerant mindsets towards others are on the rise, distances are otherwise diminishing or vanishing to the point that the right to privacy rarely exists. Everything has ended up being a kind of phenomenon to be taken a look at and inspected, and individuals's lives are now under continuous security." [170]
93. While there can be genuine and appropriate ways to use AI in keeping with human dignity and the common excellent, utilizing it for security aimed at exploiting, limiting others' flexibility, or benefitting a few at the expenditure of the lots of is unjustifiable. The risk of security overreach should be monitored by appropriate regulators to make sure transparency and public responsibility. Those accountable for monitoring ought to never surpass their authority, which need to always favor the self-respect and flexibility of everyone as the necessary basis of a simply and gentle society.

94. Furthermore, "essential regard for human dignity demands that we decline to permit the uniqueness of the individual to be recognized with a set of data." [171] This especially uses when AI is used to assess individuals or groups based upon their habits, attributes, or history-a practice known as "social scoring": "In social and economic decision-making, we must beware about entrusting judgments to algorithms that process information, frequently gathered surreptitiously, on a person's makeup and prior behavior. Such data can be infected by societal prejudices and preconceptions. An individual's past behavior should not be utilized to reject him or her the chance to change, grow, and contribute to society. We can not permit algorithms to restrict or condition regard for human self-respect, or to omit compassion, mercy, forgiveness, and above all, the hope that individuals are able to alter." [172]
95. AI has lots of appealing applications for improving our relationship with our "typical home," such as creating models to anticipate extreme environment events, proposing engineering solutions to reduce their impact, managing relief operations, and predicting population shifts. [173] Additionally, AI can support sustainable farming, enhance energy usage, and supply early caution systems for public health emergency situations. These developments have the potential to strengthen durability against climate-related difficulties and promote more sustainable development.

96. At the same time, current AI designs and the hardware required to support them take in vast amounts of energy and water, significantly contributing to CO2 emissions and straining resources. This reality is frequently obscured by the method this technology exists in the popular imagination, where words such as "the cloud" [174] can give the impression that information is saved and processed in an intangible realm, removed from the physical world. However, "the cloud" is not a heavenly domain different from the physical world; similar to all computing technologies, it counts on physical devices, cables, and energy. The same is true of the technology behind AI. As these systems grow in intricacy, specifically big language models (LLMs), they require ever-larger datasets, increased computational power, and greater storage infrastructure. Considering the heavy toll these technologies handle the environment, it is crucial to develop sustainable options that decrease their effect on our common home.

97. Even then, as Pope Francis teaches, it is important "that we try to find solutions not only in innovation however in a modification of humanity." [175] A complete and authentic understanding of development recognizes that the value of all created things can not be lowered to their mere utility. Therefore, a totally human approach to the stewardship of the earth rejects the distorted anthropocentrism of the technocratic paradigm, which seeks to "extract whatever possible" from the world, [176] and declines the "misconception of progress," which assumes that "environmental issues will resolve themselves merely with the application of brand-new innovation and with no need for ethical factors to consider or deep change." [177] Such a state of mind needs to pave the way to a more holistic technique that respects the order of creation and promotes the important good of the human person while protecting our common home. [178]
98. The Second Vatican Council and the constant teaching of the Popes ever since have actually insisted that peace is not merely the lack of war and is not limited to maintaining a balance of powers between foes. Instead, in the words of Saint Augustine, peace is "the harmony of order." [179] Certainly, peace can not be attained without securing the products of persons, free interaction, regard for the self-respect of persons and individuals, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is the work of justice and the impact of charity and can not be attained through force alone; instead, it should be mainly constructed through patient diplomacy, the active promo of justice, solidarity, important human advancement, and regard for the dignity of all people. [180] In this method, the tools utilized to maintain peace needs to never be enabled to justify injustice, violence, or oppression. Instead, they ought to constantly be governed by a "firm determination to respect other individuals and nations, in addition to their dignity, in addition to the deliberate practice of fraternity." [181]
99. While AI's analytical capabilities might assist countries look for peace and make sure security, the "weaponization of Artificial Intelligence" can likewise be extremely bothersome. Pope Francis has actually observed that "the capability to conduct military operations through remote control systems has resulted in a lessened understanding of the destruction triggered by those weapon systems and the burden of obligation for their usage, resulting in an even more cold and separated method to the immense tragedy of war." [182] Moreover, the ease with which autonomous weapons make war more practical militates against the principle of war as a last resort in legitimate self-defense, [183] possibly increasing the instruments of war well beyond the scope of human oversight and speeding up a destabilizing arms race, with devastating consequences for human rights. [184]
100. In specific, Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, which are capable of recognizing and striking targets without direct human intervention, are a "cause for serious ethical concern" since they do not have the "distinct human capability for moral 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, beginning with "an efficient and concrete dedication to present ever higher and proper human control. No machine ought to ever choose to take the life of a person." [186]
101. Since it is a small action from makers that can eliminate autonomously with accuracy to those capable of massive damage, some AI researchers have actually revealed issues that such technology presents an "existential danger" by having the prospective to act in ways that could threaten the survival of entire regions or even of mankind itself. This threat demands major attention, reflecting the enduring issue about innovations that approve war "an unmanageable harmful power over multitudes of innocent civilians," [187] without even sparing children. In this context, the call from Gaudium et Spes to "undertake an assessment of war with a completely new mindset" [188] is more urgent than ever.

102. At the exact same time, while the theoretical threats of AI deserve attention, the more instant and pressing issue lies in how people with harmful objectives may misuse this technology. [189] Like any tool, AI is an extension of human power, and while its future capabilities are unpredictable, mankind's past actions supply clear cautions. The atrocities dedicated throughout history suffice to raise deep issues about the possible abuses of AI.

103. Saint John Paul II observed that "humankind now has instruments of unprecedented power: we can turn this world into a garden, or minimize it to a pile of rubble." [190] Given this fact, 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 mutual damage." [191] To prevent mankind from spiraling into self-destruction, [192] there must be a clear stand against all applications of technology that naturally threaten human life and self-respect. This dedication requires mindful discernment about using AI, especially in military defense applications, to ensure that it always respects human self-respect and serves the typical good. The development and deployment of AI in weaponries must go through the greatest levels of ethical analysis, governed by a concern for human self-respect and the sanctity of life. [193]
104. Technology offers remarkable tools to manage and develop the world's resources. However, in some cases, mankind is significantly delivering control of these resources to makers. Within some circles of scientists and futurists, there is optimism about the potential of artificial basic intelligence (AGI), a hypothetical kind of AI that would match or exceed human intelligence and produce inconceivable improvements. Some even hypothesize that AGI might attain superhuman abilities. At the same time, as society wanders away from a connection with the transcendent, some are lured to turn to AI looking for significance or fulfillment-longings that can only be genuinely pleased in communion with God. [194]
105. However, the presumption of substituting God for an artifact of human making is idolatry, a practice Scripture explicitly alerts against (e.g., Ex. 20:4; 32:1 -5; 34:17). Moreover, AI might show much more seductive than conventional idols for, unlike idols that "have mouths however do not speak; eyes, but do not see; ears, but do not hear" (Ps. 115:5 -6), AI can "speak," or a minimum of gives the illusion of doing so (cf. Rev. 13:15). Yet, it is vital to keep 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 a number of the abilities particular to human life, and it is likewise imperfect. By turning to AI as a perceived "Other" higher than itself, with which to share existence and obligations, humankind dangers creating an alternative for God. However, it is not AI that is ultimately deified and worshipped, however humankind itself-which, in this way, ends up being enslaved to its own work. [195]
106. While AI has the possible to serve humankind and add to the common good, it remains a production of human hands, bearing "the imprint of human art and ingenuity" (Acts 17:29). It must never ever be ascribed unnecessary worth. As the Book of Wisdom affirms: "For a male made them, and one whose spirit is obtained formed them; for no male can form a god which resembles himself. He is mortal, and what he makes with lawless hands is dead, for he is much better than the items he worships considering that he has life, however they never ever have" (Wis. 15:16 -17).

107. In contrast, people, "by their interior life, 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 reminds us, that each individual finds the "strange connection between self-knowledge and openness to others, between the encounter with one's personal uniqueness and the determination to offer oneself to others. " [197] Therefore, it is the heart alone that is "efficient in setting our other powers and passions, and our entire person, in a position of respect and caring obedience before the Lord," [198] who "provides to treat every one of us as a 'Thou,' always and forever." [199]
108. Considering the numerous obstacles postured by advances in technology, Pope Francis highlighted the need for development in "human responsibility, worths, and conscience," proportionate to the development in the potential that this technology brings [200] -acknowledging that "with a boost in human power comes a broadening of obligation on the part of people and neighborhoods." [201]
109. At the exact same time, the "necessary and basic question" remains "whether in the context of this development guy, as male, is becoming genuinely much better, that is to state, more mature spiritually, more familiar with the dignity of his humanity, more responsible, more available to others, particularly the neediest and the weakest, and readier to offer and to aid all." [202]
110. As a result, it is vital to know how to evaluate specific applications of AI in particular contexts to figure out whether its use promotes human dignity, the vocation of the human individual, and the common good. Just like many innovations, the results of the different uses of AI may not constantly be predictable from their creation. As these applications and their social impacts become clearer, suitable actions must be made at all levels of society, following the principle of subsidiarity. Individual users, households, civil society, corporations, organizations, governments, and international companies must operate at their correct levels to guarantee that AI is used for the good of all.

111. A substantial difficulty and opportunity for the common good today depends on considering AI within a framework of relational intelligence, which stresses the interconnectedness of people and neighborhoods and highlights our shared obligation for cultivating the integral well-being of others. The twentieth-century theorist Nicholas Berdyaev observed that people frequently blame makers for individual and social issues; nevertheless, "this only embarrasses guy and does not correspond to his dignity," for "it is unworthy to move duty from man to a maker." [203] Only the human individual can be ethically accountable, and the difficulties of a technological society are ultimately spiritual in nature. Therefore, dealing with those difficulties "needs an increase of spirituality." [204]
112. A further indicate consider is the call, triggered by the look of AI on the world stage, for a renewed appreciation of all that is human. Years back, the French Catholic author Georges Bernanos warned that "the danger is not in the reproduction of makers, but in the ever-increasing number of males accustomed from their childhood to desire only what devices can provide." [205] This difficulty is as real today as it was then, as the fast speed of digitization runs the risk of a "digital reductionism," where non-quantifiable elements of life are set aside and then forgotten and even deemed irrelevant due to the fact that they can not be calculated in formal terms. AI needs to be used just as a tool to complement human intelligence rather than change its richness. [206] Cultivating those aspects of human life that transcend calculation is important for maintaining "a genuine humankind" that "seems to dwell in the midst of our technological culture, practically unnoticed, like a mist leaking carefully below a closed door." [207]
113. The large expanse of the world's understanding is now available in manner ins which would have filled past generations with awe. However, to guarantee that developments in understanding do not end up being humanly or spiritually barren, one must go beyond the mere accumulation of information and aim to attain real wisdom. [208]
114. This wisdom is the gift that humankind needs most to deal with the extensive concerns and ethical challenges posed by AI: "Only by adopting a spiritual method of seeing truth, just by recuperating a wisdom of the heart, can we confront and interpret the newness of our time." [209] Such "wisdom of the heart" is "the virtue that enables us to incorporate the entire and its parts, our choices and their repercussions." It "can not be looked for from devices," but it "lets itself be discovered by those who seek it and be seen by those who love it; it anticipates those who want it, and it enters search of those who are deserving of it (cf. Wis 6:12 -16)." [210]
115. In a world marked by AI, we require the grace of the Holy Spirit, who "allows us to take a look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, scenarios, occasions and to discover their genuine meaning." [211]
116. Since a "person's perfection is determined not by the details or knowledge they have, but by the depth of their charity," [212] how we include AI "to include the least of our bros and siblings, the susceptible, and those most in requirement, will be the true procedure of our mankind." [213] The "wisdom of the heart" can illuminate and assist the human-centered usage of this innovation to help promote the typical excellent, take care of our "common home," advance the look for the truth, foster essential human development, favor human solidarity and fraternity, and lead humanity to its ultimate objective: happiness and complete communion with God. [214]
117. From this point of view of knowledge, followers will be able to serve as ethical agents capable of using this technology to promote an authentic vision of the human individual and society. [215] This should be done with the understanding that technological progress belongs to God's strategy for creation-an activity that we are called to purchase toward the Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ, in the continuous search for the True and the Good.

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

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

Ex audientia pass away 14 ianuarii 2025 Franciscus

Contents

I. Introduction

II. What is Artificial Intelligence?

III. Intelligence in the Philosophical and Theological Tradition

Rationality

Embodiment

Relationality

Relationship with the Truth

Stewardship of the World

An Important Understanding of Human Intelligence

The Limits of AI

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

Helping Human Freedom and Decision-Making

V. Specific Questions

AI and Society

AI and Human Relationships

AI, the Economy, and Labor

AI and Healthcare

AI and Education

AI, Misinformation, Deepfakes, and Abuse

AI, Privacy, and Surveillance

AI and the Protection of Our Common Home

AI and Warfare

AI and Our Relationship with God

VI. Concluding Reflections

True Wisdom

[1] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. See also Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. [2] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 307. Cf. Id., Christmas Greetings to the Roman Curia (21 December 2019): AAS 112 (2020 ), 43. [3] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [4] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 2293; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [5] J. McCarthy, et al., "A Proposal 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 procedures of AI are used 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 conquer their biological constraints and boost both their physical and cognitive abilities. Posthumanists, on the other hand, compete that such advances will ultimately modify human identity to the level that humankind itself may no longer be thought about really "human." Both views rest on an essentially unfavorable understanding of human corporality, which treats the body more as a challenge than as an essential part of the person's identity and contact us to complete realization. Yet, this unfavorable view of the body is inconsistent with an appropriate understanding of human dignity. While the Church supports authentic clinical development, it affirms that human self-respect is rooted in "the individual as an inseparable unity of body and soul. " Thus, "self-respect is likewise intrinsic in each person's body, which takes part in its own method remaining in imago Dei" (Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita [8 April 2024], par. 18). [10] This method shows a functionalist viewpoint, which reduces the human mind to its functions and presumes that its functions can be totally measured in physical or mathematical terms. However, even if a future AGI were to appear really smart, it would still remain functional in nature. [11] Cf. A.M. Turing, "Computing Machinery and Intelligence," Mind 59 (1950) 443-460. [12] If "thinking" is credited to devices, it needs to be clarified that this describes calculative thinking rather than vital thinking. Similarly, if makers are said to operate using rational thinking, it should be specified that this is limited to computational reasoning. On the other hand, by its very nature, human idea is a creative process that avoids programs and goes beyond constraints. [13] On the foundational role of language in shaping understanding, cf. M. Heidegger, Über den Humanismus, Klostermann, Frankfurt am Main 1949 (en. tr. "Letter on Humanism," in Basic Writings: Martin Heidegger, Routledge, London - New York City 2010, 141-182). [14] For more conversation of these anthropological and doctrinal foundations, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 43-144. [15] Aristotle, Metaphysics, I. 1, 980 a 21. [16] Cf. Augustine, De Genesi ad litteram III, 20, 30: PL 34, 292: "Man is made in the image of God in relation to that [professors] by which he is superior to the illogical animals. Now, this [professors] is factor itself, or the 'mind,' or 'intelligence,' whatever other name it might more appropriately be offered"; Id., Enarrationes in Psalmos 54, 3: PL 36, 629: "When considering all that they have, humans discover that they are most differentiated from animals precisely by the fact they possess intelligence." This is also reiterated by Saint Thomas Aquinas, who states that "guy is the most ideal of all earthly beings enhanced with movement, and his proper and natural operation is intellection," by which male abstracts from things and "gets 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 contemporary perspective that echoes components of the classical and medieval distinction in between these 2 modes of cognition, cf. D. Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, New York City 2011. [19] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 76, a. 1, resp. [20] Cf. Irenaeus of Lyon, Adversus Haereses, V, 6, 1: PG 7( 2 ), 1136-1138. [21] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 9. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1045: "The intelligence can investigate the truth of things through reflection, experience and discussion, and pertain to recognize in that reality, which transcends it, the basis of certain universal ethical demands." [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 "typically considers 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, but rather completely divulged its significance and value." [26] Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 81. [27] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [28] Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I, q. 89, a. 1, resp.: "to be separated from the body is not in accordance with [the soul's] nature [...] and hence it is united to the body in order that it may have a presence and an operation ideal to its nature." [29] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1035. Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 18. [30] International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 56. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 357. [31] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), pars. 5, 8; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 15, 24, 53-54. [32] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 356. Cf. ibid., par. 221. [33] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 13, 26-27. [34] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Donum Veritatis (24 May 1990), 6: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1552. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), par. 109: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1219. Cf. Pseudo-Dionysius, elearnportal.science De divinis nominibus, VII, 2: PG 3, 868B-C: "Human souls also possess reason and with it they circle in discourse around the truth of things. [...] [O] n account of the way in which they are capable of concentrating the lots of into the one, they too, in their own fashion and as far as they can, deserve conceptions like those of the angels" (en. tr. Pseudo-Dionysius: The Complete Works, Paulist Press, New York City - Mahwah 1987, 106-107). [35] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 3: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7. [36] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [37] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 42: AAS 91 (1999 ), 38. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 208: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1043: "the human mind is capable of going beyond immediate concerns and comprehending certain realities that are changeless, as real now as in the past. As it peers into human nature, reason discovers universal values obtained from that same nature"; ibid., par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034. [38] Cf. B. Pascal, Pensées, no. 267 (ed. Brunschvicg): "The last case of factor is to acknowledge that there is an infinity of things which are beyond it" (en. tr. Pascal's Pensées, E.P. Dutton, New York 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 form of interaction in a way that both considers and transcends their product or empirical structures (such as computer code). Here, intelligence becomes a wisdom that "enables us to take a look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, situations, events and to reveal their genuine significance" (Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications [24 January 2024]: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8). Our imagination allows us to generate brand-new material or concepts, mainly by providing an initial viewpoint on reality. Both capabilities depend upon the presence of an individual subjectivity for their full awareness. [41] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. [42] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034: "Charity, when accompanied by a commitment to the truth, is far more than individual feeling [...] Certainly, its close relation to fact promotes its universality and maintains it from being 'confined to a narrow field without relationships.' [...] Charity's openness to fact therefore protects it from 'a fideism that deprives 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 compares the universe to "a book showing, representing, and explaining its Maker," the Triune God who approves presence to all things (Breviloquium 2.12.1). Cf. Alain de Lille, De Incarnatione Christi, PL 210, 579a: "Omnis mundi creatura quasi liber et pictura nobis est et speculum." [48] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 67: AAS 107 (2015 ), 874; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 6: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589-592; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 57: "people occupy an unique location in deep space according to the magnificent plan: they enjoy the benefit of sharing in the divine governance of visible creation. [...] Since male's location as ruler remains in fact a participation in the magnificent governance of development, we mention it here as a kind of stewardship." [49] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), pars. 38-39: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1164-1165. [50] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. This concept is also reflected in the creation 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 production. 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 great by picking up and relishing truths." [61] Dante, Paradiso, Canto XXX: "luce intellettüal, piena d'amore;/ amor di vero ben, pien di letizia;/ letizia che trascende ogne dolzore" (en. tr. The Divine Comedy of Dante Alighieri, C.E. Norton, tr., Houghton Mifflin, Boston 1920, 232). [62] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931:" [T] he highest norm of human life is the divine law itself-eternal, objective and universal, by which God orders, directs and governs the entire world and the methods of the human community according to a plan conceived in his knowledge and love. God has enabled male to take part in this law of his so that, under the gentle disposition of magnificent providence, lots of might have the ability to get here at a deeper and deeper knowledge of unchangeable truth." Also cf. Id., Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. [63] Cf. First Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius (24 April 1870), ch. 4, DH 3016. [64] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [65] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 891. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 204: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1042. [66] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 11: AAS 83 (1991 ), 807: "God has actually inscribed his own image and likeness on man (cf. Gen 1:26), providing upon him a matchless dignity [...] In effect, beyond the rights which man obtains by his own work, there exist rights which do not correspond to any work he carries out, however which flow from his important dignity as an individual." Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [67] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 8. Cf. ibid., par. 9; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 22. [68] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2024 ), 310. [69] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [70] In this sense, "Artificial Intelligence" is understood as a technical term to indicate this technology, remembering that the expression is also used to designate the discipline and not only its applications. [71] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 34-35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 51: AAS 83 (1991 ), 856-857. [72] For example, see the encouragement of 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, amongst a long list of other Catholics engaged in clinical research study and technological exploration, highlight that "faith and science can be unified in charity, supplied that science is put at the service of the men and woman of our time and not misused to damage or perhaps damage them" (Francis, Address to Participants in the 2024 Lemaître Conference of the Vatican Observatory [20 June 2024]: L'Osservatore Romano, 20 June 2024, 8). Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 36: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053-1054; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), pars. 2, 106: AAS 91 (1999 ), 6-7.86 -87. [73] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. [74] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [75] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [76] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 102: AAS 107 (2015 ), 888. [77] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889; Id., Encyclical Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 27: AAS 112 (2020 ), 978; Benedict XVI, Encyclical Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 23: AAS 101 (2009 ), 657-658. [78] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39, 47; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), passim. [79] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par 2293. [80] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2-4. [81] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1749: "Freedom makes guy a moral subject. When he acts intentionally, man is, so to speak, the daddy of his acts." [82] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1776. [83] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1777. [84] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 1779-1781; Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 463, where the Holy Father motivated efforts "to ensure 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 role of human firm in picking a larger aim (Ziel) that then informs the particular purpose (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 function and, in its effect on human society, constantly represents a type of order in social relations and a plan of power, thus enabling certain individuals to carry out particular actions while preventing others from performing various ones. In a basically explicit method, this constitutive power-dimension of technology always consists of the worldview of those who developed and developed it." [87] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 309. [88] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [89] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti, pars. 212-213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [90] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 5: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589; Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [91] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "Confronted with the marvels of makers, which seem to know how to pick separately, we need to be extremely clear that decision-making [...] must constantly be left to the human individual. We would condemn mankind to a future without hope if we took away individuals's capability to make decisions about themselves and their lives, by dooming them to depend upon the choices 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 file describes algorithmic bias (methodical and consistent errors in computer systems that may disproportionately bias certain groups in unintentional ways) or learning predisposition (which will result in training on a prejudiced data set) and not the "bias vector" in neural networks (which is a parameter utilized to change the output of "neurons" to adjust more precisely to the information). [94] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464, where the Holy Father affirmed the development in agreement "on the need for advancement procedures to respect such values as inclusion, openness, security, equity, personal privacy and dependability," and likewise invited "the efforts of global companies to manage these technologies so that they promote authentic progress, contributing, that is, to a better world and an integrally higher quality of life." [95] Francis, Greetings to a Delegation of the "Max Planck Society" (23 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 February 2023, 8. [96] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [97] Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1571. [98] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. For further discussion of the ethical questions 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 discussion in a pluralist society oriented toward a "robust and solid social ethics," see Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 211-214: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [100] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [101] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [102] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [103] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. [104] Cf. Pontifical Council for Social Communications, Ethics in Internet (22 February 2002), par. 10. [105] Francis, Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414; estimating the Final Document of the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops (27 October 2018), par. 24: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1593. Cf. Benedict XVI, Address to the Participants in the International Congress on Natural Moral Law (12 February 2017): AAS 99 (2007 ), 245. [106] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-33: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047-1050. [107] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-21: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047. [108] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 308-309. [109] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [110] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [111] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 101, 103, 111, 115, 167: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1004-1005, 1007-1009, king-wifi.win 1027. [112] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047; cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 35: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 123. [113] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 12: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1034. [114] Cf. Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church (2004 ), par. 149. [115] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [116] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [117] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 865. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), pars. 88-89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414. [118] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057. [119] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985. [120] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [121] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [122] Cf. E. Stein, Zum Problem der Einfühlung, Buchdruckerei des Waisenhauses, Halle 1917 (en. tr. On the Problem of Empathy, ICS Publications, Washington D.C. 1989). [123] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057:" [Many individuals] desire their interpersonal relationships offered by sophisticated devices, by screens and systems which can be switched on and off on command. Meanwhile, the Gospel tells us continuously to risk of a face-to-face encounter with others, with their physical presence which challenges us, with their pain and their pleas, with their happiness which contaminates us in our close and continuous interaction. True faith in the incarnate Son of God is inseparable from self-giving, from membership in the community, from service, from reconciliation with others." Also cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 24: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1044-1045. [124] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 1. [125] Cf. Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570; Id, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 18, 124-129: AAS 107 (2015 ), 854.897-899. [126] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [127] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 209: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1107. [128] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4. For Pope Francis' teaching about AI in relationship to the "technocratic paradigm," cf. Id., Encyclical Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 106-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893. [129] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047.; as estimated 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 man 'for work.' Through this conclusion one appropriately pertains to recognize the pre-eminence of the subjective meaning of work over the objective one." [132] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 128: AAS 107 (2015 ), 898. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 24: AAS 108 (2016 ), 319-320. [133] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [134] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae (25 March 1995), par. 89: AAS 87 (1995 ), 502. [135] Ibid. [136] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 67: AAS 112 (2020 ), 993; as 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 is manifest, with its painful repercussions, it is that of health care. When a sick individual is not positioned in the center or their dignity is not thought about, this generates mindsets that can lead even to speculation on the misery of others. And this is very serious! [...] The application of a company method to the healthcare sector, if indiscriminate [...] may run the risk of discarding people." [142] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [143] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729. [144] Congregation for Catholic Education, Instruction on the Use of Distance Learning in Ecclesiastical Universities and Faculties, I. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, smfsimple.com 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, estimating Id., Address to the Members of the "Consilium de Laicis" (2 October 1974): AAS 66 (1974 ), 568: "if [the modern person] does listen to instructors, it is since they are witnesses." [147] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 6.1, London 18733, 125-126. [148] Francis, Meeting the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [149] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 86: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413, pricing estimate the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, Final Document (27 October 2018), par. 21: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1592. [150] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 7.6, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 167. [151] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 88: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413. [152] In a 2023 policy file about using generative AI in education and research, UNESCO notes: "One of the crucial questions [of using generative AI (GenAI) in education and research study] is whether people can possibly deliver standard levels of thinking and skill-acquisition procedures to AI and rather concentrate on higher-order thinking abilities based on the outputs supplied by AI. Writing, for instance, is typically related to the structuring of thinking. With GenAI [...], humans can now start with a well-structured outline offered by GenAI. Some professionals have actually identified the use of GenAI to create text in this way as 'writing without believing'" (UNESCO, Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research [2023], 37-38). The German-American thinker Hannah Arendt visualized such a possibility in her 1959 book, The Human Condition, and cautioned: "If it must turn out to be true that understanding (in the sense of know-how) and thought have parted company for good, then we would certainly end up being the helpless servants, not a lot of our devices as of our know-how" (Id., The Human Condition, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 20182, 3). [153] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 262: AAS 108 (2016 ), 417. [154] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 7: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3; cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 167: AAS 107 (2015 ), 914. [155] John Paul II, Apostolic Constitution Ex Corde Ecclesiae (15 August 1990), 7: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1479. [156] Francis, Apostolic Constitution Veritatis Gaudium (29 January 2018), 4c: AAS 110 (2018 ), 9-10. [157] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3. [158] For instance, it may help individuals gain access to the "range of resources for creating higher knowledge of fact" contained in the works of approach (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 met lots of who desired to deceive, however none who wished to be deceived'"; pricing estimate Augustine, Confessiones, X, 23, 33: PL 32, 794. [163] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), par. 62. [164] Benedict XVI, Message for the XLIII World Day of Social Communications (24 May 2009): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2009, 8. [165] Cf. Dicastery for Communications, Towards Full Presence: A Pastoral Reflection on Engagement with Social Network (28 May 2023), par. 41; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Decree Inter Mirifica (4 December 1963), pars. 4, 8-12: AAS 56 (1964 ), 146, 148-149. [166] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 1, 6, 16, 24. [167] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046. Cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 40: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 127: "no guy might with impunity breach that human dignity which God himself treats with great respect"; as priced quote in John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 9: AAS 83 (1991 ), 804. [168] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2477, 2489; can. 220 CIC; can. 23 CCEO; John Paul II, Address to the Third General Conference of the Latin American Episcopate (28 January 1979), III.1-2: Insegnamenti II/1 (1979 ), 202-203. [169] Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to the Thematic Discussion on Other Disarmament Measures and International Security (24 October 2022): "Maintaining human dignity in the online world requires States to likewise respect the right to privacy, by protecting residents from invasive security and permitting them to secure their individual 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 recognized a list of "early guarantees of AI assisting to attend to environment modification" (United Nations AI Advisory Body, Interim Report: Governing AI for Humanity [December 2023], 3). The file observed that, "taken together with predictive systems that can change data into insights and insights into actions, AI-enabled tools may assist establish brand-new methods and investments to minimize emissions, affect brand-new personal sector investments in net no, safeguard biodiversity, and construct broad-based social strength" (ibid.). [174] "The cloud" describes a network of physical servers throughout the world that allows users to shop, process, and handle their data remotely. [175] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 9: AAS 107 (2015 ), 850. [176] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 106: AAS 107 (2015 ), 890. [177] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 60: AAS 107 (2015 ), 870. [178] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 3, 13: AAS 107 (2015 ), 848.852. [179] Augustine, De Civitate Dei, XIX, 13, 1: PL 41, 640. [180] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 77-82: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1100-1107; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 256-262: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1060-1063; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 38-39; Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2302-2317. [181] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 78: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1101. [182] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [183] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2308-2310. [184] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 80-81: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1105. [185] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "We require to make sure and protect an area for appropriate 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 usage of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) that lack the appropriate human control would present essential ethical issues, considered that LAWS can never be ethically accountable subjects capable of complying with global humanitarian law." [187] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 258: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1061. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [188] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [189] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3: "Nor can we overlook the possibility of sophisticated weapons winding up in the wrong hands, assisting in, for example, terrorist attacks or interventions aimed at destabilizing the institutions of genuine systems of government. In a word, the world does not require new technologies that contribute to the unfair advancement of commerce and the weapons trade and as a result end up promoting the recklessness of war." [190] John Paul II, Act of Entrustment to Mary for the Jubilee of Bishops (8 October 2000), par. 3: Insegnamenti XXIII/2 (200 ), 565. [191] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 79: AAS 107 (2015 ), 878. [192] Cf. Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 51: AAS 101 (2009 ), 687. [193] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39. [194] Cf. Augustine, Confessiones, I, 1, 1: PL 32, 661. [195] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (30 December 1987), par. 28: AAS 80 (1988 ), 548:" [T] here is a much better understanding today that the mere accumulation of items and services [...] is insufficient for the realization of human happiness. Nor, in effect, does the availability of the lots of genuine benefits supplied in current times by science and innovation, consisting of the computer system sciences, bring freedom from every type of slavery. On the contrary, [...] unless all the substantial body of resources and potential at guy's disposal is guided by a moral understanding and by an orientation towards the true good of the mankind, it easily turns against man to oppress him." Cf. ibid., pars. 29, 37: AAS 80 (1988 ), 550-551.563 -564. [196] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [197] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 18: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [198] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 27: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 6. [199] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 25: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5-6. [200] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. R. Guardini, Das Ende der Neuzeit, Würzburg 19659, 87 ff. (en. tr. 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 knowledge. Wisdom is not born of fast searches on the web nor is it a mass of unproven information. That is not the way to mature in the encounter with reality." [209] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [210] Ibid. [211] Ibid. [212] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate (19 March 2018), wiki.lafabriquedelalogistique.fr 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.