GitLab

1. With knowledge both ancient and new (cf. Mt. 13:52), we are called to assess the current difficulties and opportunities postured by scientific and technological improvements, particularly by the recent advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The Christian tradition regards the gift of intelligence as a vital aspect of how human beings are created "in the image of God" (Gen. 1:27). Beginning with an important vision of the human person and the scriptural calling to "till" and "keep" the earth (Gen. 2:15), the Church emphasizes that this present of intelligence must be expressed through the accountable use of factor and technical abilities in the stewardship of the created world.

2. The Church encourages the development of science, technology, the arts, and other forms of human venture, viewing them as part of the "collaboration of males and female with God in refining the noticeable creation." [1] As Sirach verifies, God "gave skill to humans, that he may be glorified in his magnificent works" (Sir. 38:6). Human abilities and imagination originate from God and, when used appropriately, glorify God by showing his knowledge and goodness. Because of this, when we ask ourselves what it implies to "be human," we can not omit a factor to consider of our clinical and technological abilities.

3. It is within this perspective that today Note addresses the anthropological and ethical obstacles raised by AI-issues that are particularly significant, as one of the goals of this technology is to imitate the human intelligence that created it. For circumstances, unlike lots of other human developments, AI can be trained on the results of human creativity and after that produce new "artifacts" with a level of speed and ability that often equals or exceeds what humans can do, such as producing text or images indistinguishable from human structures. This raises crucial concerns about AI's prospective role in the growing crisis of truth in the public forum. Moreover, this technology is developed to learn and make certain options autonomously, adapting to brand-new scenarios and offering services not foreseen by its developers, and hence, it raises essential concerns about ethical duty and human safety, with more comprehensive ramifications for society as a whole. This new circumstance has triggered many individuals to review what it implies to be human and the role of humankind worldwide.

4. Taking all this into account, there is broad consensus that AI marks a brand-new and considerable phase in humankind's engagement with innovation, putting it at the heart of what Pope Francis has 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 toward even greater accomplishments, it is critically crucial to consider its anthropological and ethical ramifications. This involves not just mitigating threats and preventing damage however also ensuring that its applications are utilized to promote human progress and the common good.

5. To contribute positively to the discernment relating to AI, and in action to Pope Francis' call for a restored "wisdom of heart," [3] the Church uses its experience through the anthropological and ethical reflections contained in this Note. Committed to its active role in the international dialogue on these issues, the Church invites those turned over with sending the faith-including moms and dads, instructors, pastors, and bishops-to devote themselves to this critical topic with care and attention. While this file is meant especially for them, it is likewise indicated to be available to a more comprehensive audience, especially those who share the conviction that clinical and technological advances should be directed towards serving the human individual and the common good. [4]
6. To this end, the file begins by differentiating in between concepts of intelligence in AI and in human intelligence. It then checks out the Christian understanding of human intelligence, offering a structure rooted in the Church's philosophical and doctrinal tradition. Finally, the file offers standards to ensure that the advancement and usage of AI maintain human dignity and promote the important development of the human individual and society.

7. The idea of "intelligence" in AI has developed in time, making use of a series of ideas from numerous disciplines. While its origins extend back centuries, a significant turning point occurred in 1956 when the American computer scientist John McCarthy organized a summer workshop at Dartmouth University to check out the problem of "Artificial Intelligence," which he specified as "that of making a maker act in ways that would be called intelligent if a human were so behaving." [5] This workshop launched a research study program focused on designing devices capable of carrying out tasks generally related to the human intelligence and smart habits.

8. Since then, AI research has advanced rapidly, resulting in the advancement of complex systems capable of carrying out extremely advanced tasks. [6] These so-called "narrow AI" systems are normally designed to deal with specific and restricted functions, such as translating languages, predicting the trajectory of a storm, classifying images, answering concerns, or creating visual material at the user's demand. While the meaning of "intelligence" in AI research varies, the majority of contemporary AI systems-particularly those utilizing device learning-rely on analytical inference rather than rational reduction. By evaluating big datasets to determine patterns, AI can "forecast" [7] outcomes and propose new methods, mimicking some cognitive processes normal of human problem-solving. Such accomplishments have actually been enabled through advances in calculating innovation (including neural networks, unsupervised artificial intelligence, and evolutionary algorithms) in addition to hardware innovations (such as specialized processors). Together, these technologies enable AI systems to respond to various kinds of human input, adjust to brand-new scenarios, and even suggest unique services not expected by their initial programmers. [8]
9. Due to these rapid developments, numerous tasks when managed exclusively by people are now entrusted to AI. These systems can augment and even supersede what people are able to perform in lots of fields, particularly in specialized locations such as data analysis, image acknowledgment, and medical diagnosis. While each "narrow AI" application is created for a particular task, lots of researchers aim to establish what is understood as "Artificial General Intelligence" (AGI)-a single system capable of operating throughout all cognitive domains and performing any job within the scope of human intelligence. Some even argue that AGI could one day attain the state of "superintelligence," surpassing human intellectual capacities, or add to "super-longevity" through advances in biotechnology. Others, nevertheless, fear that these possibilities, even if hypothetical, might one day eclipse the human individual, while still others welcome this possible change. [9]
10. Underlying this and numerous other perspectives on the subject is the implicit presumption that the term "intelligence" can be used in the exact same method to refer to both human intelligence and AI. Yet, this does not catch the complete scope of the concept. When it comes to people, intelligence is a professors that pertains to the person in his/her entirety, whereas in the context of AI, "intelligence" is understood functionally, typically with the anticipation that the activities attribute of the human mind can be broken down into digitized steps that makers can replicate. [10]
11. This functional point of view is exhibited by the "Turing Test," which thinks about a machine "smart" if a person can not distinguish its behavior from that of a human. [11] However, in this context, the term "behavior" refers just to the efficiency of specific intellectual tasks; it does not represent the complete breadth of human experience, that includes abstraction, emotions, creativity, and the visual, ethical, and spiritual sensibilities. Nor does it include the full variety of expressions particular of the human mind. Instead, in the case of AI, the "intelligence" of a system is evaluated methodologically, however also reductively, based on its ability to produce proper responses-in this case, those associated with the human intellect-regardless of how those responses are created.

12. AI's innovative functions offer it advanced abilities to carry out jobs, but not the capability to believe. [12] This difference is crucially essential, as the way "intelligence" is defined inevitably forms how we understand the relationship in between human thought and this technology. [13] To appreciate this, one need to recall 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 teaching on the nature, self-respect, and vocation of the human person. [14]
13. From the dawn of human self-reflection, the mind has played a main role in comprehending what it indicates to be "human." Aristotle observed that "all people by nature desire to understand." [15] This knowledge, with its capacity for abstraction that comprehends the nature and significance of things, sets people apart from the animal world. [16] As philosophers, theologians, and psychologists have examined the precise nature of this intellectual faculty, they have also checked out how humans understand the world and their special location within it. Through this exploration, the Christian custom has actually pertained to understand the human individual as a being consisting of both body and soul-deeply connected to this world and yet transcending it. [17]
14. In the classical custom, the idea of intelligence is often understood through the complementary principles of "reason" (ratio) and "intelligence" (intellectus). These are not separate faculties but, as Saint Thomas Aquinas explains, they are 2 modes in which the exact same intelligence runs: "The term intellect is presumed from the inward grasp of the truth, while the name reason is drawn from the analytical and discursive process." [18] This succinct description highlights the two basic and complementary measurements of human intelligence. Intellectus refers to the user-friendly grasp of the truth-that is, capturing it with the "eyes" of the mind-which precedes and premises argumentation itself. Ratio pertains to thinking proper: the discursive, analytical process that leads to judgment. Together, intelligence and reason form the 2 elements of the act of intelligere, "the appropriate operation of the human being as such." [19]
15. Explaining the human person as a "logical" being does not reduce the person to a specific mode of idea; rather, it recognizes that the ability for intellectual understanding shapes and penetrates all elements of human activity. [20] Whether exercised well or badly, this capability is an intrinsic aspect of human nature. In this sense, the "term 'rational' incorporates all the capacities of the human individual," consisting of those associated to "knowing and understanding, as well as those of ready, caring, choosing, and desiring; it also includes all corporeal functions closely associated to these abilities." [21] This detailed point of view highlights how, in the human individual, produced in the "picture of God," reason is integrated in a way that raises, shapes, and transforms both the individual's will and actions. [22]
16. Christian believed considers the intellectual faculties of the human individual within the structure of an integral sociology that sees the human being as basically embodied. In the human person, spirit and matter "are not two natures unified, but rather their union forms a single nature." [23] In other words, the soul is not simply the immaterial "part" of the person contained within the body, nor is the body an outer shell housing an intangible "core." Rather, the entire human person is at the same time both material and spiritual. This understanding shows the mentor of Sacred Scripture, which sees the human individual as a being who lives out relationships with God and others (and hence, an authentically spiritual measurement) within and through this embodied existence. [24] The profound significance of this condition is additional lit up 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 bodily existence, the human person goes beyond the material world through the soul, which is "almost on the horizon of eternity and time." [26] The intellect's capacity for transcendence and the self-possessed freedom of the will come from 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 understanding without the body. [28] In this way, the intellectual faculties of the human individual are an important part of an anthropology that recognizes that the human person is a "unity of body and soul." [29] Further elements of this understanding will be established in what follows.

18. Humans are "purchased by their very nature to interpersonal communion," [30] having the capacity to know one another, to offer themselves in love, and to get in into communion with others. Accordingly, human intelligence is not an isolated professors however is exercised in relationships, discovering its max expression in dialogue, collaboration, and uniformity. We discover with others, and we find out through others.

19. The relational orientation of the human individual is ultimately grounded in the everlasting self-giving of the Triune God, whose love is exposed in production and redemption. [31] The human individual is "contacted us to share, by understanding and love, in God's own life." [32]
20. This occupation to communion with God is necessarily tied to the call to communion with others. Love of God can not be separated from love for one's next-door neighbor (cf. 1 Jn. 4:20; Mt. 22:37 -39). By the grace of sharing God's life, Christians are likewise called to mimic Christ's outpouring gift (cf. 2 Cor. 9:8 -11; Eph. 5:1 -2) by following his command to "enjoy one another, as I have actually enjoyed you" (Jn. 13:34). [33] Love and service, echoing the divine life of self-giving, go beyond self-interest to react more completely to the human vocation (cf. 1 Jn. 2:9). Even more superb than understanding many things is the dedication to care for one another, for if "I understand all mysteries and all understanding [...] however do not have love, I am nothing" (1 Cor. 13:2).

21. Human intelligence is eventually "God's gift made for the assimilation of fact." [34] In the dual sense of intellectus-ratio, it makes it possible for the person to check out truths that exceed mere sensory experience or utility, since "the desire for fact is part of human nature itself. It is a natural residential or commercial property of human factor to ask why things are as they are." [35] Moving beyond the limits of empirical information, human intelligence can "with real certitude attain to truth itself as knowable." [36] While reality remains only partially understood, the desire for reality "spurs reason constantly to go even more; certainly, it is as if reason were overwhelmed to see that it can always exceed what it has actually already attained." [37] Although Truth in itself goes beyond the boundaries of human intelligence, it irresistibly attracts it. [38] Drawn by this attraction, the human person is resulted in seek "realities of a greater order." [39]
22. This innate drive towards the pursuit of reality is especially obvious in the clearly human capabilities for semantic understanding and imagination, [40] through which this search unfolds in a "manner that is proper to the social nature and self-respect of the human individual." [41] Likewise, an unfaltering orientation to the fact is essential for charity to be both authentic and universal. [42]
23. The search for fact finds its greatest expression in openness to realities that go beyond the physical and created world. In God, all facts attain their ultimate and initial meaning. [43] Entrusting oneself to God is a "basic choice that engages the entire person." [44] In this way, the human individual ends up being totally what he or she is contacted us to be: "the intelligence and the will show their spiritual nature," allowing the individual "to act in such a way that understands individual freedom to the complete." [45]
24. The Christian faith understands development as the complimentary act of the Triune God, who, as Saint Bonaventure of Bagnoregio explains, produces "not to increase his glory, however to show it forth and to communicate it." [46] Since God creates according to his Wisdom (cf. Wis. 9:9; Jer. 10:12), production is imbued with an intrinsic order that reflects God's plan (cf. Gen. 1; Dan. 2:21 -22; Is. 45:18; Ps. 74:12 -17; 104), [47] within which God has called people to assume an unique role: to cultivate and look after the world. [48]
25. Shaped by the Divine Craftsman, human beings live out their identity as beings made in imago Dei by "keeping" and "tilling" (cf. Gen. 2:15) creation-using their intelligence and skills to care for and develop production in accord with God's plan. [49] In this, human intelligence reflects the Divine Intelligence that produced all things (cf. Gen. 1-2; Jn. 1), [50] continuously sustains them, and guides them to their supreme purpose in him. [51] Moreover, humans are contacted us to establish their capabilities in science and innovation, for through them, God is glorified (cf. Sir. 38:6). Thus, in a proper relationship with creation, human beings, on the one hand, use their intelligence and ability to work together with God in directing creation toward the function to which he has actually called it. [52] On the other hand, development itself, as Saint Bonaventure observes, asteroidsathome.net helps the human mind to "rise slowly to the supreme Principle, who is God." [53]
26. In this context, human intelligence becomes more plainly understood as a faculty that forms an integral part of how the whole individual engages with truth. Authentic engagement requires welcoming the complete scope of one's being: spiritual, cognitive, embodied, and relational.

27. This engagement with reality unfolds in various methods, as each person, in his/her diverse individuality [54], seeks to comprehend the world, relate to others, resolve issues, express creativity, and pursue integral well-being through the harmonious interaction of the various dimensions of the individual's intelligence. [55] This includes sensible and linguistic capabilities but can likewise include other modes of interacting with truth. Consider the work of a craftsmen, who "need to know how to discern, in inert matter, a particular form that others can not acknowledge" [56] and bring it forth through insight and practical skill. Indigenous individuals who live near to the earth often possess an extensive sense of nature and its cycles. [57] Similarly, a friend who understands the ideal word to state or wiki.vst.hs-furtwangen.de a person skilled at handling human relationships exhibits an intelligence that is "the fruit of self-examination, discussion and generous encounter between individuals." [58] As Pope Francis observes, "in this age of expert system, we can not forget that poetry and love are necessary to save our humanity." [59]
28. At the heart of the Christian understanding of intelligence is the combination of reality into the ethical and spiritual life of the person, directing his or her actions in light of God's goodness and reality. According to God's plan, intelligence, in its max sense, also includes the ability to relish what holds true, good, and gorgeous. As the twentieth-century French poet Paul Claudel revealed, "intelligence is absolutely nothing without delight." [60] Similarly, Dante, upon reaching the greatest paradise in Paradiso, testifies that the conclusion of this intellectual pleasure is discovered in the "light intellectual full of love, love of real excellent filled with happiness, delight which goes beyond every sweet taste." [61]
29. An appropriate understanding of human intelligence, therefore, can not be reduced to the mere acquisition of facts or the capability to carry out specific tasks. Instead, it includes the person's openness to the ultimate concerns of life and shows an orientation toward the True and the Good. [62] As an expression of the divine image within the individual, human intelligence has the ability to access the totality of being, considering presence in its fullness, which exceeds what is measurable, and comprehending the meaning of what has actually been comprehended. For believers, this capacity consists of, in a specific method, the ability to grow in the understanding of the mysteries of God by utilizing factor to engage ever more profoundly with revealed facts (intellectus fidei). [63] True intelligence is shaped by magnificent love, which "is put forth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit" (Rom. 5:5). From this, it follows that human intelligence has an important contemplative measurement, an unselfish openness to the True, the Good, and the Beautiful, beyond any utilitarian purpose.

30. Due to the foregoing discussion, the distinctions between human intelligence and current AI systems become evident. While AI is a remarkable technological achievement capable of mimicing certain outputs related to human intelligence, it operates by carrying out jobs, attaining goals, or making decisions based on quantitative information and computational reasoning. For example, with its analytical power, AI stands out at incorporating information from a range of fields, modeling complex systems, and cultivating interdisciplinary connections. In this method, it can help professionals collaborate in resolving complicated problems that "can not be dealt with from a single perspective or from a single set of interests." [64]
31. However, even as AI processes and imitates certain expressions of intelligence, it remains essentially confined to a logical-mathematical framework, which imposes intrinsic constraints. Human intelligence, in contrast, develops organically throughout the person's physical and psychological development, formed by a myriad of lived experiences in the flesh. Although sophisticated AI systems can "learn" through procedures such as artificial intelligence, this sort of training is basically various from the developmental growth of human intelligence, which is formed by embodied experiences, consisting of sensory input, psychological actions, social interactions, and the unique context of each minute. These elements shape and form people within their personal history.In contrast, AI, lacking a physical body, relies on computational thinking and learning based on large datasets that consist of taped human experiences and understanding.

32. Consequently, although AI can imitate elements of human reasoning and perform specific tasks with amazing speed and performance, its computational capabilities represent just a portion of the wider capabilities of the human mind. For example, AI can not currently reproduce ethical discernment or the ability to establish authentic relationships. Moreover, human intelligence is located within a personally lived history of intellectual and ethical development that basically shapes the person's point of view, incorporating the physical, emotional, social, ethical, and spiritual dimensions of life. Since AI can not offer this fullness of understanding, approaches that rely entirely on this technology or treat it as the main means of translating the world can result in "a loss of gratitude for the entire, for the relationships between things, and for the wider horizon." [65]
33. Human intelligence is not mainly about completing practical jobs but about understanding and actively engaging with truth in all its measurements; it is likewise capable of surprising insights. Since AI lacks the richness of corporeality, relationality, and the openness of the human heart to reality and goodness, wifidb.science its capacities-though apparently limitless-are matchless with the human capability to grasp truth. So much can be gained from a health problem, an accept of reconciliation, and even a basic sunset; certainly, lots of experiences we have as humans open new horizons and offer the possibility of attaining brand-new knowledge. No device, working exclusively with information, can determine up to these and many other experiences present in our lives.

34. Drawing an excessively close equivalence between human intelligence and AI dangers catching a functionalist viewpoint, where people are valued based upon the work they can perform. However, an individual's worth does not depend on having specific skills, cognitive and technological accomplishments, or individual success, however on the person's intrinsic self-respect, grounded in being created in the image of God. [66] This self-respect remains intact in all circumstances, including for those not able to exercise their capabilities, whether it be a coming kid, an unconscious individual, or an older individual who is suffering. [67] It likewise underpins the tradition of human rights (and, in specific, what are now called "neuro-rights"), which represent "an important point of merging in the search for commonalities" [68] and can, therefore, function as a fundamental ethical guide in conversations on the accountable development and use of AI.

35. Considering all these points, as Pope Francis observes, "the extremely use of the word 'intelligence'" in connection with AI "can prove misleading" [69] and risks ignoring what is most precious in the human person. In light of this, AI ought to not be viewed 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 answer this, it is very important to recall that techno-scientific activity is not neutral in character but is a human endeavor that engages the humanistic and cultural dimensions of human creativity. [71]
37. Viewed as a fruit of the possible inscribed within human intelligence, [72] clinical inquiry and the advancement of technical skills are part of the "partnership of guy and woman with God in improving the visible creation." [73] At the same time, all scientific and technological accomplishments are, eventually, presents from God. [74] Therefore, people should always utilize their abilities in view of the higher function for which God has given them. [75]
38. We can gratefully acknowledge how innovation has actually "fixed countless evils which used to hurt and limit human beings," [76] a truth for which we must rejoice. Nevertheless, not all technological improvements in themselves represent authentic human development. [77] The Church is particularly opposed to those applications that threaten the sanctity of life or the dignity of the human individual. [78] Like any human endeavor, technological advancement should be directed to serve the human person and add to the pursuit of "higher justice, more substantial fraternity, and a more humane order of social relations," which are "better than advances in the technical field." [79] Concerns about the ethical implications of technological advancement are shared not only within the Church however likewise among numerous researchers, technologists, and expert associations, who increasingly require ethical reflection to direct this advancement in an accountable method.

39. To deal with these challenges, it is necessary to highlight the value of moral responsibility grounded in the self-respect and occupation of the human person. This assisting principle likewise uses to concerns concerning AI. In this context, the ethical measurement handles main value due to the fact that it is people who create systems and figure out the functions for which they are utilized. [80] Between a device and a human being, just the latter is really an ethical agent-a topic of moral duty who works out flexibility in his/her decisions and accepts their consequences. [81] It is not the machine but the human who remains in relationship with fact and goodness, assisted by a moral conscience that calls the individual "to enjoy and to do what is good and to avoid evil," [82] attesting to "the authority of truth in referral to the supreme Good to which the human individual is drawn." [83] Likewise, between a machine and a human, just the human can be sufficiently self-aware to the point of listening and following the voice of conscience, critical with prudence, and looking for the good that is possible in every situation. [84] In reality, all of this also belongs to the person's workout of intelligence.

40. Like any product of human imagination, AI can be directed toward positive or negative ends. [85] When utilized in methods that appreciate human dignity and promote the wellness of individuals and neighborhoods, it can contribute favorably to the human occupation. Yet, as in all locations where human beings are contacted us to make choices, the shadow of evil also looms here. Where human freedom enables the possibility of selecting what is incorrect, the moral examination of this innovation will need to take into account how it is directed and used.

41. At the exact same time, it is not just completions that are fairly substantial however likewise the ways utilized to attain them. Additionally, the general vision and understanding of the human person ingrained within these systems are essential to think about too. Technological products reflect the worldview of their designers, owners, users, and regulators, [86] and have the power to "form the world and engage consciences on the level of worths." [87] On a societal level, some technological developments could likewise strengthen relationships and power dynamics that are inconsistent with a correct understanding of the human person and society.

42. Therefore, the ends and the ways utilized in an offered application of AI, in addition to the overall vision it incorporates, should all be evaluated to ensure they respect human dignity and promote the common good. [88] As Pope Francis has actually stated, "the intrinsic self-respect of every male and every female" need to be "the essential requirement in evaluating emerging innovations; these will show fairly sound to the level that they help regard that self-respect and increase its expression at every level of human life," [89] including in the social and economic spheres. In this sense, human intelligence plays a vital role not only in developing and producing technology but likewise in directing its usage in line with the authentic good of the human person. [90] The responsibility for managing this sensibly pertains to every level of society, directed by the concept of subsidiarity and other concepts of Catholic Social Teaching.

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

44. An examination of the implications of this directing principle might start by thinking about the value of ethical obligation. Since complete moral causality belongs just to individual representatives, not synthetic ones, it is important to be able to recognize and define who bears duty for the processes included in AI, particularly those capable of finding out, correction, and reprogramming. While bottom-up techniques and very deep neural networks allow AI to solve intricate problems, they make it tough to comprehend the processes that result in the solutions they adopted. This makes complex responsibility considering that if an AI application produces undesired outcomes, identifying who is accountable becomes hard. To resolve this issue, attention requires to be offered to the nature of accountability procedures in complex, extremely automated settings, where results may only become evident in the medium to long term. For this, it is crucial that ultimate responsibility for choices used AI rests with the human decision-makers which there is responsibility for making use of AI at each phase of the decision-making procedure. [91]
45. In addition to identifying who is responsible, it is vital to identify the goals offered to AI systems. Although these systems might utilize not being watched autonomous learning systems and often follow courses that people can not reconstruct, they ultimately pursue objectives that people have assigned to them and are governed by procedures developed by their designers and developers. Yet, this presents an obstacle since, as AI models become increasingly efficient in independent learning, the capability to maintain control over them to guarantee that such applications serve human purposes may efficiently reduce. This raises the crucial concern of how to ensure that AI systems are bought for the good of individuals and not against them.

46. While responsibility for the ethical use of AI systems starts with those who develop, produce, manage, and oversee such systems, it is also shared by those who utilize them. As Pope Francis noted, the maker "makes a technical option amongst numerous possibilities based either on well-defined requirements or on statistical inferences. Humans, however, not just choose, but in their hearts are capable of deciding." [92] Those who utilize AI to achieve a task and follow its outcomes develop a context in which they are eventually accountable for the power they have actually handed over. Therefore, insofar as AI can help people in making decisions, the algorithms that govern it should be credible, safe, robust enough to manage disparities, and transparent in their operation to mitigate biases and unintended adverse effects. [93] Regulatory frameworks must guarantee that all legal entities remain accountable for using AI and all its repercussions, with suitable safeguards for transparency, privacy, and accountability. [94] Moreover, those using AI must beware not to become excessively reliant on it for their decision-making, a pattern that increases modern society's already high dependence on technology.

47. The Church's moral and social mentor offers resources to help make sure that AI is utilized in a manner that maintains human firm. Considerations about justice, for instance, must also address concerns such as fostering simply social characteristics, maintaining worldwide security, and promoting peace. By exercising prudence, people and communities can discern methods to use AI to benefit mankind while preventing applications that might deteriorate human dignity or harm the environment. In this context, the idea of duty need to be understood not only in its most minimal sense however as a "duty for the care for others, which is more than merely representing outcomes attained." [95]
48. Therefore, AI, like any technology, can be part of a mindful and responsible answer to mankind's vocation to the excellent. However, as formerly gone over, AI must be directed by human intelligence to line up 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 advancement should invariably work to the advantage of the human individual." [96] Due to this, making use of AI, as Pope Francis said, should be "accompanied by an ethic inspired by a vision of the common great, an ethic of liberty, duty, and fraternity, efficient in fostering the full advancement of people in relation to others and to the whole of creation." [97]
49. Within this basic point of view, some observations follow below to show how the preceding arguments can help supply an ethical orientation in practical scenarios, in line with the "wisdom of heart" that Pope Francis has proposed. [98] While not exhaustive, this conversation is offered in service of the discussion 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 intrinsic dignity of each person and the fraternity that binds us together as members of the one human family should support the advancement of new technologies and function as unassailable requirements for examining them before they are utilized." [100]
51. Viewed through this lens, AI could "present important innovations in agriculture, education and culture, an improved level of life for entire countries and individuals, and the development of human fraternity and social relationship," and therefore be "used to promote integral human advancement." [101] AI might likewise assist organizations determine those in requirement and counter discrimination and marginalization. These and other comparable applications of this innovation might contribute to human development and the typical good. [102]
52. However, while AI holds numerous possibilities for promoting the excellent, it can also prevent and even counter human development and the common good. Pope Francis has kept in mind that "proof to date suggests that digital technologies have actually increased inequality in our world. Not just differences in product wealth, which are also significant, however likewise distinctions in access to political and social influence." [103] In this sense, AI could be utilized to perpetuate marginalization and discrimination, develop new forms of poverty, broaden the "digital divide," and worsen existing social inequalities. [104]
53. Moreover, the concentration of the power over mainstream AI applications in the hands of a few powerful business raises significant ethical issues. Exacerbating this issue is the inherent nature of AI systems, where no single person can exercise complete oversight over the large and complex datasets used for computation. This absence of distinct accountability produces the threat that AI could be manipulated for individual or business gain or to direct popular opinion for the benefit of a specific industry. Such entities, motivated by their own interests, possess the capacity to exercise "kinds of control as subtle as they are intrusive, producing systems for the adjustment of consciences and of the democratic procedure." [105]
54. Furthermore, there is the danger of AI being utilized to promote what Pope Francis has actually called the "technocratic paradigm," which perceives all the world's issues as solvable through technological methods alone. [106] In this paradigm, human self-respect and fraternity are often reserved in the name of efficiency, "as if truth, goodness, and truth instantly flow from technological and financial power as such." [107] Yet, human dignity and the typical excellent should never ever be violated for the sake of efficiency, [108] for "technological developments that do not lead to an improvement in the lifestyle of all humanity, however on the contrary, exacerbate inequalities and conflicts, can never count as true progress. " [109] Instead, AI needs to be put "at the service of another kind of development, one which is healthier, more human, more social, more integral." [110]
55. Attaining this goal needs a much deeper reflection on the relationship in between autonomy and duty. Greater autonomy increases everyone's responsibility across various aspects of communal life. For Christians, the foundation of this obligation lies in the recognition that all human capabilities, consisting of the individual's autonomy, originated from God and are indicated to be utilized in the service of others. [111] Therefore, rather than merely pursuing financial or technological objectives, AI ought to serve "the typical good of the entire human household," which is "the sum overall of social conditions that permit individuals, either as groups or as people, to reach their fulfillment more totally and more easily." [112]
56. The Second Vatican Council observed that "by his inner nature man is a social being; and if he does not get in into relations with others, he can neither live nor establish his presents." [113] This conviction highlights that living in society is intrinsic to the nature and vocation of the human individual. [114] As social beings, we seek relationships that involve mutual exchange and the pursuit of fact, in the course of which, people "show each other the fact they have discovered, or believe they have discovered, in such a method that they help one another in the search for fact." [115]
57. Such a quest, together with other aspects of human communication, presupposes encounters and shared exchange in between individuals shaped by their distinct histories, thoughts, convictions, and relationships. Nor can we forget that human intelligence is a diverse, diverse, and intricate truth: private and social, rational and affective, conceptual and symbolic. Pope Francis highlights this dynamic, noting that "together, we can seek the reality in discussion, in relaxed conversation or in enthusiastic dispute. To do so requires perseverance; it entails moments of silence and suffering, yet it can patiently embrace the broader experience of individuals and individuals. [...] The process of building fraternity, be it local or universal, can only be undertaken by spirits that are totally free and available to genuine encounters." [116]
58. It remains in this context that one can think about the obstacles AI positions to human relationships. Like other technological tools, AI has the potential to cultivate connections within the human family. However, it might also hinder a true encounter with truth and, ultimately, lead people to "a deep and melancholic discontentment with interpersonal 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 revealed and improved also in social and embodied ways, authentic and spontaneous encounters with others are important for engaging with reality in its fullness.

59. Because "true wisdom demands an encounter with reality," [119] the rise of AI presents another obstacle. Since AI can effectively imitate the products of human intelligence, the capability to know when one is engaging with a human or a machine can no longer be considered given. Generative AI can produce text, speech, images, and other innovative outputs that are normally related to humans. Yet, it must be comprehended for what it is: a tool, not a person. [120] This difference is often obscured by the language used by specialists, which tends to anthropomorphize AI and thus blurs the line in between human and device.

60. Anthropomorphizing AI likewise presents particular challenges for the development of children, potentially encouraging them to develop patterns of interaction that treat human relationships in a transactional manner, as one would relate to a chatbot. Such routines could lead youths to see teachers as mere dispensers of details instead of as mentors who direct and nurture their intellectual and ethical growth. Genuine relationships, rooted in empathy and an unfaltering dedication to the good of the other, are vital and irreplaceable in cultivating the complete development of the human individual.

61. In this context, it is essential to clarify that, regardless of using anthropomorphic language, no AI application can truly experience compassion. Emotions can not be minimized to facial expressions or phrases generated in reaction to prompts; they reflect the way an individual, as an entire, connects to the world and to his or her own life, with the body playing a main function. True compassion needs the capability to listen, recognize another's irreducible originality, welcome their otherness, and grasp the meaning behind even their silences. [121] Unlike the realm of analytical judgment in which AI excels, real empathy belongs to the relational sphere. It involves intuiting and apprehending the lived experiences of another while maintaining the distinction between self and other. [122] While AI can imitate empathetic responses, it can not duplicate the incomparably individual and relational nature of authentic compassion. [123]
62. Because of the above, it is clear why misrepresenting AI as an individual ought to constantly be avoided; doing so for deceptive functions is a severe ethical infraction that could wear down social trust. Similarly, utilizing AI to deceive in other contexts-such as in education or in human relationships, including the sphere of sexuality-is likewise to be thought about immoral and needs careful oversight to avoid harm, maintain openness, and ensure the self-respect of all people. [124]
63. In a significantly separated world, some individuals have turned to AI in search of deep human relationships, basic companionship, or even emotional 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 he or she is meant to be. If AI is utilized to assist people foster genuine connections between people, it can contribute favorably to the full awareness of the person. Conversely, if we change relationships with God and with others with interactions with technology, we risk changing genuine relationality with a lifeless image (cf. Ps. 106:20; Rom. 1:22 -23). Instead of pulling back into artificial worlds, we are called to engage in a committed and deliberate way with reality, particularly by relating to the bad and suffering, consoling those in sorrow, and forging bonds of communion with all.

64. Due to its interdisciplinary nature, AI is being progressively integrated into economic and monetary systems. Significant financial investments are presently being made not only in the technology sector however likewise in energy, finance, and media, particularly in the areas of marketing and sales, logistics, technological development, compliance, and risk management. At the exact same time, AI's applications in these areas have also highlighted its ambivalent nature, as a source of significant opportunities however also profound dangers. A very first genuine important point in this location concerns the possibility that-due to the concentration of AI applications in the hands of a few corporations-only those big business would gain from the worth created by AI rather than business that use it.

65. Other wider aspects of AI's effect on the economic-financial sphere should likewise be carefully taken a look at, particularly concerning the interaction between concrete truth and the digital world. One essential factor to consider in this regard includes the coexistence of diverse and alternative forms of financial and financial institutions within an offered context. This aspect must be encouraged, as it can bring advantages in how it supports the real economy by fostering its development and stability, particularly throughout times of crisis. Nevertheless, it must be worried that digital truths, not limited by any spatial bonds, tend to be more homogeneous and impersonal than neighborhoods rooted in a specific place and a specific history, with a typical journey characterized by shared worths and hopes, however also by inevitable arguments and divergences. This diversity is an undeniable asset to a community's economic life. Turning over the economy and financing completely to digital technology would reduce this variety and richness. As an outcome, lots of solutions to economic issues that can be reached through natural dialogue in between the involved celebrations may no longer be attainable in a world dominated by treatments and only the look of nearness.

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 fundamental transformations across many occupations, with a variety of impacts. On the one hand, it has the possible to improve proficiency and performance, create new tasks, enable workers to concentrate on more ingenious jobs, and open new horizons for imagination and development.

67. However, while AI assures to boost productivity by taking control of mundane tasks, it regularly forces employees to adapt to the speed and demands of machines instead of machines being developed to support those who work. As a result, contrary to the marketed benefits of AI, existing techniques to the innovation can paradoxically deskill workers, subject them to automated monitoring, and relegate them to stiff and repetitive jobs. The need to stay up to date with the rate of innovation can erode employees' sense of agency and stifle the ingenious abilities they are anticipated to give their work. [125]
68. AI is currently getting rid of the need for some tasks that were as soon as carried out by humans. If AI is utilized to change human workers instead of complement them, there is a "considerable danger of disproportionate benefit for the couple of at the rate of the impoverishment of numerous." [126] Additionally, as AI ends up being more powerful, there is an associated risk that human labor may lose its worth in the financial world. This is the rational consequence of the technocratic paradigm: a world of humanity shackled to performance, where, eventually, the cost of humankind need to be cut. Yet, human lives are fundamentally valuable, independent of their financial output. Nevertheless, the "current model," Pope Francis explains, "does not appear to favor a financial investment in efforts to help the slow, the weak, or the less skilled to discover chances in life." [127] In light of this, "we can not allow a tool as powerful and essential as Artificial Intelligence to strengthen such a paradigm, however rather, we need to make Artificial Intelligence a bulwark against its expansion." [128]
69. It is necessary to remember that "the order of things should be secondary to the order of individuals, and not the other way around." [129] Human work needs to not just be at the service of earnings but at "the service of the entire human individual [...] considering the individual's product needs and the requirements of his or her intellectual, moral, spiritual, and spiritual life." [130] In this context, the Church acknowledges that work is "not only a means of making one's daily bread" however is likewise "an essential measurement of social life" and "a way [...] of personal growth, 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 ultimately, for our life as an individuals." [131]
70. Since work is a "part of the meaning of life on this earth, a course to development, human development and personal satisfaction," "the goal ought to not be that technological development increasingly changes human work, for this would be destructive to humanity" [132] -rather, it must promote human labor. Seen in this light, AI must assist, not replace, human judgment. Similarly, it must never ever degrade creativity or minimize workers to simple "cogs in a maker." Therefore, "respect for the dignity of workers and the value of work for the financial wellness of people, families, and societies, for job security and just incomes, ought to be a high concern for the international community as these types of technology permeate more deeply into our offices." [133]
71. As individuals in God's recovery work, healthcare experts have the vocation and responsibility to be "guardians and servants of human life." [134] Because of this, the health care profession brings an "intrinsic and undeniable ethical measurement," acknowledged by the Hippocratic Oath, which obliges physicians and healthcare experts to dedicate themselves to having "absolute respect for human life and its sacredness." [135] Following the example of the Good Samaritan, this dedication is to be performed by males and females "who decline the creation of a society of exemption, and act instead as next-door neighbors, raising up and rehabilitating the succumbed to the sake of the typical good." [136]
72. Seen in this light, AI seems to hold tremendous capacity in a range of applications in the medical field, such as assisting the diagnostic work of healthcare suppliers, assisting in relationships in between clients and medical staff, using new treatments, and broadening access to quality care likewise for those who are separated or marginalized. In these ways, the technology could enhance the "compassionate and caring closeness" [137] that doctor are contacted us to encompass the ill and suffering.

73. However, if AI is utilized not to improve however to replace the relationship between patients and healthcare providers-leaving clients to engage with a device instead of a human being-it would decrease a most importantly essential human relational structure to a central, impersonal, and unequal framework. Instead of motivating uniformity with the sick and suffering, such applications of AI would run the risk of intensifying the loneliness that typically accompanies disease, particularly in the context of a culture where "persons are no longer seen as a critical value to be cared for and appreciated." [138] This misuse of AI would not align with regard for akropolistravel.com the dignity of the human individual and uniformity with the suffering.

74. Responsibility for the wellness of clients and the decisions that discuss their lives are at the heart of the healthcare profession. This accountability needs physician to exercise all their ability and intelligence in making well-reasoned and fairly grounded choices regarding those turned over to their care, always appreciating the inviolable dignity of the clients and the need for notified authorization. As a result, decisions relating to client treatment and the weight of obligation they entail must always remain with the human person and must never ever be delegated to AI. [139]
75. In addition, utilizing AI to determine who should receive treatment based mainly on economic procedures or metrics of efficiency represents a particularly problematic circumstances of the "technocratic paradigm" that need to be turned down. [140] For, "enhancing resources indicates utilizing them in an ethical and fraternal way, and not punishing the most fragile." [141] Additionally, AI tools in healthcare are "exposed to types of predisposition and discrimination," where "systemic mistakes can quickly multiply, producing not only oppressions in specific cases however likewise, due to the cause and effect, genuine kinds of social inequality." [142]
76. The integration of AI into health care likewise positions the threat of enhancing other existing variations in access to medical care. As health care ends up being increasingly oriented toward avoidance and lifestyle-based methods, AI-driven services may unintentionally prefer more upscale populations who already delight in better access to medical resources and quality nutrition. This trend dangers strengthening a "medication for the rich" model, where those with monetary means gain from sophisticated preventative tools and customized health details while others battle to gain access to even fundamental services. To avoid such inequities, fair frameworks are needed to make sure that using AI in health care does not get worse existing health care inequalities but rather serves the typical good.

77. The words of the Second Vatican Council remain fully pertinent today: "True education aims to form people with a view towards their final end and the good of the society to which they belong." [143] As such, education is "never ever a mere process of handing down facts and intellectual abilities: rather, its aim is to add to the person's holistic development in its numerous aspects (intellectual, cultural, spiritual, etc), including, for instance, community life and relations within the academic community," [144] in keeping with the nature and self-respect of the human individual.

78. This method includes a dedication to cultivating the mind, however constantly as a part of the essential development of the person: "We need to break that concept of education which holds that informing methods filling one's head with concepts. That is the method we inform automatons, cerebral minds, not people. Educating is taking a threat in the tension between the mind, the heart, and the hands." [145]
79. At the center of this work of forming the entire human person is the important relationship in between instructor and trainee. Teachers do more than communicate knowledge; they model important human qualities and motivate the delight of discovery. [146] Their existence motivates trainees both through the content they teach and the care they show for their trainees. This bond promotes trust, good understanding, and the capacity to resolve everyone's special self-respect and capacity. On the part of the trainee, this can create an authentic desire to grow. The physical presence of a teacher creates a relational dynamic that AI can not replicate, one that deepens engagement and supports the trainee's essential development.

80. In this context, AI provides both opportunities and difficulties. If utilized in a prudent manner, within the context of an existing teacher-student relationship and bought to the authentic objectives of education, AI can become an important instructional resource by enhancing access to education, offering tailored support, and providing immediate feedback to trainees. These advantages might enhance the knowing experience, specifically in cases where customized attention is required, or instructional resources are otherwise scarce.

81. Nevertheless, a necessary part of education is forming "the intelligence to reason well in all matters, to connect towards reality, and to grasp it," [147] while assisting the "language of the head" to grow harmoniously with the "language of the heart" and the "language of the hands." [148] This is even more vital in an age marked by innovation, in which "it is no longer merely a question of 'utilizing' instruments of communication, but of living in a highly digitalized culture that has actually had a profound effect on [...] our ability to communicate, learn, be informed and participate in relationship with others." [149] However, rather of fostering "a cultivated intellect," which "brings with it a power and a grace to every work and occupation that it undertakes," [150] the comprehensive use of AI in education could cause the trainees' increased dependence on innovation, deteriorating their ability to perform some abilities individually and intensifying their reliance on screens. [151]
82. Additionally, while some AI systems are designed to help individuals develop their important thinking capabilities and analytical skills, many others merely offer answers instead of prompting trainees to show up at answers themselves or write text on their own. [152] Instead of training youths how to accumulate details and produce fast responses, education needs to motivate "the accountable use of freedom to deal with concerns with common sense and intelligence." [153] Building on this, "education in the usage of types of artificial intelligence should aim above all at promoting critical thinking. Users of all ages, however especially the young, require to establish a discerning technique to the usage of information and content gathered online or produced by synthetic intelligence systems. Schools, universities, and scientific societies are challenged to assist trainees and specialists to comprehend the social and ethical elements of the development and usages of technology." [154]
83. As Saint John Paul II recalled, "on the planet today, defined by such rapid advancements in science and technology, the tasks of a Catholic University assume an ever greater importance and seriousness." [155] In a particular method, Catholic universities are advised to be present as great laboratories of hope at this crossroads of history. In an inter-disciplinary and cross-disciplinary secret, they are urged to engage "with knowledge and imagination" [156] in careful research on this phenomenon, assisting to draw out the salutary potential within the various fields of science and truth, and assisting them always towards fairly sound applications that plainly serve the cohesion of our societies and the typical great, reaching brand-new frontiers in the dialogue in between faith and reason.

84. Moreover, it must be noted that current AI programs have actually been known to provide prejudiced or produced details, which can lead trainees to trust inaccurate content. This problem "not just runs the danger of legitimizing phony news and reinforcing a dominant culture's benefit, however, simply put, it likewise undermines the academic process itself." [157] With time, clearer differences might emerge between appropriate and incorrect usages of AI in education and research. Yet, a decisive guideline is that making use of AI should constantly be transparent and never ever misrepresented.

85. AI might be used as an aid to human self-respect if it helps people comprehend intricate ideas or smfsimple.com directs them to sound resources that support their search for the truth. [158]
86. However, AI likewise presents a serious danger of producing controlled content and false details, which can quickly misinform individuals due to its resemblance to the fact. Such misinformation might occur accidentally, as in the case of AI "hallucination," where a generative AI system yields results that appear genuine however are not. Since creating content that simulates human artifacts is main to AI's functionality, mitigating these risks proves difficult. Yet, the effects of such aberrations and incorrect details can be rather severe. For this reason, all those associated with producing and using AI systems need to be dedicated to the truthfulness and accuracy of the details processed by such systems and disseminated to the public.

87. While AI has a latent potential to generate incorrect details, a much more unpleasant issue depends on the purposeful misuse of AI for control. This can happen when individuals or companies intentionally create and spread out incorrect material with the aim to trick or cause harm, such as "deepfake" images, videos, and audio-referring to an incorrect depiction of a person, modified or produced by an AI algorithm. The risk of deepfakes is especially apparent when they are used to target or damage others. While the images or videos themselves may be artificial, the damage they cause is genuine, leaving "deep scars in the hearts of those who suffer it" and "real wounds in their human self-respect." [159]
88. On a broader scale, by distorting "our relationship with others and with truth," [160] AI-generated fake media can gradually weaken the foundations of society. This issue requires careful regulation, as misinformation-especially through AI-controlled or influenced media-can spread accidentally, sustaining political polarization and social discontent. When society becomes indifferent to the fact, numerous groups construct their own variations of "facts," deteriorating the "reciprocal ties and mutual dependences" [161] that underpin the material of social life. As deepfakes cause individuals to question whatever and AI-generated false content deteriorates trust in what they see and hear, polarization and dispute will just grow. Such widespread deception is no insignificant matter; it strikes at the core of humankind, dismantling the foundational trust on which societies are constructed. [162]
89. Countering AI-driven fallacies is not just the work of industry experts-it needs the efforts of all people of goodwill. "If innovation is to serve human dignity and not damage it, and if it is to promote peace instead of violence, then the human community should be proactive in attending to these patterns with regard to human self-respect and the promo of the great." [163] Those who produce and share AI-generated material must constantly work out diligence in confirming the truth of what they distribute and, in all cases, must "avoid the sharing of words and images that are breaking down of humans, that promote hatred and intolerance, that debase the goodness and intimacy of human sexuality or that exploit the weak and susceptible." [164] This requires the continuous prudence and careful discernment of all users regarding their activity online. [165]
90. Humans are inherently relational, and the data everyone produces in the digital world can be seen as an objectified expression of this relational nature. Data conveys not just details but also individual and relational understanding, which, in an increasingly digitized context, can amount to power over the person. Moreover, while some kinds of data may pertain to public aspects of an individual's life, others may touch upon the person's interiority, perhaps even their conscience. Seen in this way, personal privacy plays a vital function in protecting the boundaries of a person's inner life, maintaining their flexibility to relate to others, express themselves, and make choices without unnecessary control. This security is also tied to the defense of spiritual liberty, as surveillance can also be misused to put in control over the lives of believers and how they express their faith.

91. It is suitable, therefore, to resolve the issue of privacy from an issue for the legitimate freedom and inalienable dignity of the human person "in all scenarios." [166] The Second Vatican Council consisted of the right "to secure privacy" amongst the essential rights "essential for living a truly human life," a right that must be encompassed all individuals on account of their "superb dignity." [167] Furthermore, the Church has actually likewise affirmed the right to the legitimate regard for a private life in the context of affirming the person's right to a great credibility, defense of their physical and psychological stability, and freedom from damage or undue intrusion [168] -necessary parts of the due regard for the intrinsic self-respect of the human person. [169]
92. Advances in AI-powered information processing and analysis now make it possible to presume patterns in a person's habits and thinking from even a percentage of details, making the role of data personal privacy much more imperative as a protect for the dignity and relational nature of the human individual. As Pope Francis observed, "while closed and intolerant attitudes towards others are on the increase, distances are otherwise diminishing or vanishing to the point that the right to personal privacy hardly exists. Everything has become a type of spectacle to be examined and examined, and people's lives are now under constant security." [170]
93. While there can be legitimate and proper ways to utilize AI in keeping with human dignity and the common good, using it for security aimed at exploiting, limiting others' freedom, or benefitting a couple of at the expenditure of the many is unjustifiable. The threat of security overreach should be monitored by proper regulators to make sure transparency and public responsibility. Those accountable for monitoring ought to never ever surpass their authority, which must constantly prefer the self-respect and flexibility of everyone as the essential basis of a just and humane society.

94. Furthermore, "essential respect for human self-respect demands that we refuse to allow the uniqueness of the person to be related to a set of information." [171] This specifically applies when AI is utilized to assess people or groups based on their habits, attributes, or history-a practice called "social scoring": "In social and economic decision-making, we must beware about entrusting judgments to algorithms that process information, frequently gathered surreptitiously, on an individual's makeup and previous behavior. Such data can be polluted by societal bias and prejudgments. A person's previous habits ought to not be utilized to deny him or her the chance to alter, grow, and contribute to society. We can not enable algorithms to limit or condition regard for human dignity, or to leave out empathy, grace, forgiveness, and above all, the hope that people have the ability to alter." [172]
95. AI has many appealing applications for enhancing our relationship with our "common home," such as developing designs to forecast extreme environment events, proposing engineering services to minimize their impact, handling relief operations, and forecasting population shifts. [173] Additionally, AI can support sustainable agriculture, enhance energy use, and provide early warning systems for public health emergencies. These improvements have the potential to enhance resilience against climate-related obstacles and promote more sustainable development.

96. At the same time, existing AI models and the hardware required to support them consume large amounts of energy and water, significantly adding to CO2 emissions and straining resources. This truth is often obscured by the way this innovation exists in the popular creativity, where words such as "the cloud" [174] can offer the impression that information is stored and processed in an intangible world, separated from the physical world. However, "the cloud" is not a heavenly domain separate from the real world; just like all computing technologies, it counts on physical makers, cable televisions, and energy. The same is true of the technology behind AI. As these systems grow in complexity, especially large language designs (LLMs), they require ever-larger datasets, increased computational power, and greater storage facilities. Considering the heavy toll these innovations handle the environment, it is essential to establish sustainable options that lower their impact on our common home.

97. Even then, as Pope Francis teaches, it is vital "that we try to find services not only in technology however in a change of humanity." [175] A total and genuine understanding of development recognizes that the value of all developed things can not be lowered to their mere energy. Therefore, a totally human approach to the stewardship of the earth declines the distorted anthropocentrism of the technocratic paradigm, which seeks to "extract everything possible" from the world, [176] and turns down the "myth of development," which presumes that "environmental problems will fix themselves merely with the application of new technology and with no need for ethical considerations or deep modification." [177] Such a frame of mind must pave the way to a more holistic technique that respects the order of production and promotes the integral good of the human person while safeguarding our typical home. [178]
98. The Second Vatican Council and the constant mentor of the Popes ever since have actually firmly insisted that peace is not simply the absence of war and is not limited to maintaining a balance of powers between foes. Instead, in the words of Saint Augustine, peace is "the serenity of order." [179] Certainly, peace can not be attained without safeguarding the products of individuals, totally free communication, respect for the dignity of individuals and peoples, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is the work of justice and the result of charity and can not be attained through force alone; instead, it should be mainly developed through client diplomacy, the active promotion of justice, solidarity, essential human development, and regard for the self-respect of all individuals. [180] In this way, the tools utilized to maintain peace must never ever be enabled to justify injustice, violence, or injustice. Instead, they need to constantly be governed by a "firm decision to respect other people and nations, in addition to their self-respect, as well as the deliberate practice of fraternity." [181]
99. While AI's analytical capabilities might assist nations seek peace and make sure security, the "weaponization of Artificial Intelligence" can likewise be extremely problematic. Pope Francis has actually observed that "the ability to perform military operations through remote control systems has led to a lessened perception of the devastation triggered by those weapon systems and the concern of responsibility for their use, leading to a much more cold and detached technique to the tremendous disaster of war." [182] Moreover, the ease with which autonomous weapons make war more viable militates against the principle of war as a last option in genuine self-defense, [183] potentially increasing the instruments of war well beyond the scope of human oversight and speeding up a destabilizing arms race, with disastrous effects for human rights. [184]
100. In particular, Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, which are capable of identifying and striking targets without direct human intervention, are a "cause for serious ethical concern" because they do not have the "unique human capacity for moral judgment and ethical decision-making." [185] For this reason, Pope Francis has urgently called for a reconsideration of the development of these weapons and a restriction on their use, starting with "an efficient and concrete dedication to present ever higher and correct human control. No machine ought to ever choose to take the life of a person." [186]
101. Since it is a small action from devices that can kill autonomously with accuracy to those capable of massive damage, some AI scientists have revealed issues that such technology presents an "existential risk" by having the prospective to act in manner ins which might threaten the survival of entire regions and even of humankind itself. This threat demands serious attention, showing the long-standing concern about innovations that grant war "an uncontrollable destructive power over fantastic numbers of innocent civilians," [187] without even sparing children. In this context, the call from Gaudium et Spes to "carry out an assessment of war with an entirely brand-new attitude" [188] is more urgent than ever.

102. At the very same time, while the theoretical dangers of AI are worthy of attention, the more instant and pushing issue lies in how individuals with destructive intentions might abuse this innovation. [189] Like any tool, AI is an extension of human power, and while its future abilities are unpredictable, mankind's past actions offer clear warnings. The atrocities committed throughout history suffice to raise deep issues about the possible abuses of AI.

103. Saint John Paul II observed that "humanity now has instruments of extraordinary power: we can turn this world into a garden, or minimize it to a pile of rubble." [190] Given this fact, the Church advises us, in the words of Pope Francis, that "we are complimentary to apply our intelligence towards things evolving favorably," or toward "decadence and shared damage." [191] To avoid humanity from spiraling into self-destruction, [192] there need to be a clear stand against all applications of technology that naturally threaten human life and dignity. This commitment requires mindful discernment about the use of AI, particularly in military defense applications, to guarantee that it always respects human self-respect and serves the common good. The development and implementation of AI in armaments must go through the greatest levels of ethical scrutiny, governed by a concern for human self-respect and the sanctity of life. [193]
104. Technology uses exceptional tools to supervise and establish the world's resources. However, in many cases, mankind is progressively delivering control of these resources to machines. Within some circles of researchers and futurists, there is optimism about the potential of synthetic basic intelligence (AGI), a hypothetical form of AI that would match or go beyond human intelligence and produce unthinkable developments. Some even speculate that AGI might attain superhuman abilities. At the same time, as society drifts away from a connection with the transcendent, some are tempted to turn to AI looking for meaning or fulfillment-longings that can just be truly pleased in communion with God. [194]
105. However, the presumption of replacing God for an artifact of human making is idolatry, a practice Scripture explicitly warns against (e.g., Ex. 20:4; 32:1 -5; 34:17). Moreover, AI may prove a lot more sexy than conventional idols for, unlike idols that "have mouths however do not speak; eyes, however do not see; ears, but do not hear" (Ps. 115:5 -6), AI can "speak," or a minimum of offers the impression of doing so (cf. Rev. 13:15). Yet, it is vital to bear in mind that AI is however a pale reflection of humanity-it is crafted by human minds, trained on human-generated product, responsive to human input, and sustained through human labor. AI can not have numerous of the abilities particular to human life, and it is also imperfect. By turning to AI as a perceived "Other" higher than itself, with which to share presence and duties, humanity risks developing an alternative to God. However, it is not AI that is eventually deified and worshipped, however humankind itself-which, in this way, ends up being enslaved to its own work. [195]
106. While AI has the potential to serve humankind and contribute to the common good, it remains a creation of human hands, bearing "the imprint of human art and ingenuity" (Acts 17:29). It should never be ascribed excessive worth. As the Book of Wisdom verifies: "For a male made them, and one whose spirit is obtained formed them; for no man can form a god which is like himself. He is mortal, and what he makes with lawless hands is dead, for he is better than the objects he worships since he has life, however they never ever have" (Wis. 15:16 -17).

107. On the other hand, humans, "by their interior life, go beyond the entire product universe; they experience this deep interiority when they enter 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 private finds the "mystical connection in between self-knowledge and openness to others, in between the encounter with one's individual individuality and the determination to offer oneself to others. " [197] Therefore, it is the heart alone that is "capable of setting our other powers and enthusiasms, and our whole individual, in a position of reverence and loving obedience before the Lord," [198] who "offers to deal with every one of us as a 'Thou,' constantly and forever." [199]
108. Considering the numerous obstacles postured by advances in innovation, Pope Francis highlighted the need for growth in "human duty, worths, and conscience," proportionate to the development in the capacity that this technology brings [200] -recognizing that "with a boost in human power comes a broadening of responsibility on the part of people and communities." [201]
109. At the very same time, the "vital and basic question" remains "whether in the context of this development man, as guy, is ending up being really better, that is to state, more fully grown spiritually, more knowledgeable about the self-respect of his humanity, more accountable, more available to others, particularly the neediest and the weakest, and readier to give and to aid all." [202]
110. As an outcome, it is vital to understand how to assess specific applications of AI in specific contexts to identify whether its usage promotes human self-respect, the occupation of the human person, and the typical good. Just like numerous innovations, the results of the various uses of AI might not always be predictable from their inception. As these applications and their social impacts end up being clearer, suitable reactions should be made at all levels of society, following the concept of subsidiarity. Individual users, families, civil society, corporations, institutions, federal governments, and global companies must work at their proper levels to guarantee that AI is utilized for the good of all.

111. A substantial challenge and opportunity for the typical good today depends on thinking about AI within a structure of relational intelligence, which stresses the interconnectedness of individuals and neighborhoods and highlights our shared responsibility for fostering the integral well-being of others. The twentieth-century philosopher Nicholas Berdyaev observed that people often blame machines for individual and social problems; nevertheless, "this only humiliates male and does not correspond to his self-respect," for "it is not worthy to transfer duty from male to a device." [203] Only the human individual can be ethically accountable, and the challenges of a technological society are ultimately spiritual in nature. Therefore, facing those challenges "demands an increase of spirituality." [204]
112. A further indicate think about is the call, prompted by the look of AI on the world phase, for a renewed gratitude of all that is human. Years earlier, the French Catholic author Georges Bernanos cautioned that "the danger is not in the multiplication of devices, but in the ever-increasing variety of guys accustomed from their youth to desire just what makers can provide." [205] This challenge is as real today as it was then, as the fast pace of digitization runs the risk of a "digital reductionism," where non-quantifiable aspects of life are set aside and then forgotten or even considered unimportant because they can not be calculated in official terms. AI ought to be used just as a tool to match human intelligence instead of replace its richness. [206] Cultivating those aspects of human life that go beyond computation is essential for maintaining "a genuine humanity" that "appears to dwell in the midst of our technological culture, nearly unnoticed, like a mist permeating gently below a closed door." [207]
113. The vast expanse of the world's understanding is now available in methods that would have filled past generations with wonder. However, to ensure that improvements in understanding do not end up being humanly or spiritually barren, one need to exceed the mere accumulation of data and aim to attain true wisdom. [208]
114. This wisdom is the gift that humankind needs most to deal with the profound questions and ethical obstacles posed by AI: "Only by embracing a spiritual way of seeing reality, only by recovering a wisdom of the heart, can we challenge and analyze the newness of our time." [209] Such "knowledge of the heart" is "the virtue that allows us to incorporate the entire and its parts, our decisions and their repercussions." It "can not be sought from makers," however it "lets itself be found by those who seek it and be seen by those who enjoy it; it anticipates those who want it, and it enters search of those who deserve it (cf. Wis 6:12 -16)." [210]
115. In a world marked by AI, we need the grace of the Holy Spirit, who "allows us to take a look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, circumstances, events and to uncover their real significance." [211]
116. Since a "individual's excellence is measured not by the details or knowledge they possess, but by the depth of their charity," [212] how we integrate AI "to include the least of our brothers and sis, the susceptible, and those most in requirement, will be the real step of our humankind." [213] The "wisdom of the heart" can brighten and direct the human-centered usage of this technology to help promote the typical good, look after our "typical home," advance the look for the fact, foster integral human advancement, favor human uniformity and fraternity, and lead humankind to its ultimate goal: happiness and complete communion with God. [214]
117. From this perspective of wisdom, believers will have the ability to function as moral representatives capable of utilizing this innovation to promote an authentic vision of the human person and society. [215] This need to be finished with the understanding that technological progress becomes part of God's strategy for creation-an activity that we are contacted us to purchase toward the Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ, in the continual look for the True and the Good.

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

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

Ex audientia die 14 ianuarii 2025 Franciscus

Contents

I. Introduction

II. What is Artificial Intelligence?

III. Intelligence in the Philosophical and Theological Tradition

Rationality

Embodiment

Relationality

Relationship with the Truth

Stewardship of the World

An Important Understanding of Human Intelligence

The Limits of AI

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

Helping Human Freedom and Decision-Making

V. Specific Questions

AI and Society

AI and Human Relationships

AI, the Economy, and Labor

AI and Healthcare

AI and Education

AI, Misinformation, Deepfakes, and Abuse

AI, Privacy, and Surveillance

AI and the Protection of Our Common Home

AI and Warfare

AI and Our Relationship with God

VI. Concluding Reflections

True Wisdom

[1] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. See also Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. [2] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 307. Cf. Id., Christmas Greetings to the Roman Curia (21 December 2019): AAS 112 (2020 ), 43. [3] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [4] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 2293; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [5] J. McCarthy, et al., "A Proposition for the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence" (31 August 1955), http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/history/dartmouth/dartmouth.html (accessed: 21 October 2024). [6] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), pars. 2-3: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [7] Terms in this document explaining the outputs or processes of AI are used figuratively to explain its operations and are not meant to anthropomorphize the device. [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 improvements will make it possible for people to conquer their biological constraints and improve both their physical and cognitive abilities. Posthumanists, on the other hand, contend that such advances will ultimately alter human identity to the level that humankind itself might no longer be thought about truly "human." Both views rest on an essentially unfavorable perception of human corporality, which deals with the body more as a challenge than as an important part of the person's identity and call to complete awareness. Yet, this negative view of the body is inconsistent with a proper understanding of human dignity. While the Church supports real clinical progress, it affirms that human dignity is rooted in "the individual as an inseparable unity of body and soul. " Thus, "self-respect is likewise inherent 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 completely measured in physical or mathematical terms. However, even if a future AGI were to appear genuinely 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 attributed to machines, it should be clarified that this refers to calculative thinking rather than crucial thinking. Similarly, if devices are said to run utilizing logical thinking, it should be defined that this is restricted to computational logic. On the other hand, by its very nature, human idea is an imaginative procedure that avoids programs and transcends constraints. [13] On the fundamental function of language in forming understanding, cf. M. Heidegger, Über den Humanismus, Klostermann, Frankfurt am Main 1949 (en. tr. "Letter on Humanism," in Basic Writings: Martin Heidegger, Routledge, London - New York 2010, 141-182). [14] For more discussion of these anthropological and doctrinal structures, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 43-144. [15] Aristotle, Metaphysics, I. 1, 980 a 21. [16] Cf. Augustine, De Genesi ad litteram III, 20, 30: PL 34, 292: "Man is made in the image of God in relation to that [professors] by which he transcends to the illogical animals. Now, this [professors] is factor itself, or the 'mind,' or 'intelligence,' whatever other name it may more appropriately be offered"; Id., Enarrationes in Psalmos 54, 3: PL 36, 629: "When considering all that they have, human beings discover that they are most differentiated from animals precisely by the fact they possess intelligence." This is likewise restated by Saint Thomas Aquinas, who specifies that "man is the most perfect of all earthly beings enhanced with motion, and his proper and natural operation is intellection," by which man abstracts from things and "receives in his mind things in fact intelligible" (Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 76). [17] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [18] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 49, a. 5, advertisement 3. Cf. ibid., I, q. 79; II-II, q. 47, a. 3; II-II, q. 49, a. 2. For a contemporary perspective that echoes components of the classical and middle ages distinction in between these two modes of cognition, cf. D. Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, New York City 2011. [19] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 76, a. 1, resp. [20] Cf. Irenaeus of Lyon, Adversus Haereses, V, 6, 1: PG 7( 2 ), 1136-1138. [21] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 9. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1045: "The intellect can examine the reality of things through reflection, experience and discussion, and pertain to recognize in that truth, which transcends it, the basis of certain universal ethical needs." [22] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [23] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 365. Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 75, a. 4, resp. [24] Certainly, Sacred Scripture "typically considers the human individual as a being who exists in the body and is unthinkable outside of it" (Pontifical Biblical Commission, "Che cosa è l'uomo?" (Sal 8,5): Un itinerario di antropologia biblica [30 September 2019], par. 19). Cf. ibid., pars. 20-21, 43-44, 48. [25] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 22: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1042: Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 7: AAS 100 (2008 ), 863: "Christ did not disdain human bodiliness, however instead fully disclosed its significance and worth." [26] Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 81. [27] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [28] Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I, q. 89, a. 1, resp.: "to be separated from the body is not in accordance with [the soul's] nature [...] and hence it is joined to the body in order that it might have a presence and an operation ideal to its nature." [29] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1035. Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 18. [30] International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 56. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 357. [31] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), pars. 5, 8; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 15, 24, 53-54. [32] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 356. Cf. ibid., par. 221. [33] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 13, 26-27. [34] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Donum Veritatis (24 May 1990), 6: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1552. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), par. 109: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1219. Cf. Pseudo-Dionysius, De divinis nominibus, VII, 2: PG 3, 868B-C: "Human souls also possess factor and with it they circle in discourse around the fact of things. [...] [O] n account of the manner in which they can concentrating the numerous into the one, they too, in their own style and as far as they can, are worthy of conceptions like those of the angels" (en. tr. Pseudo-Dionysius: The Complete Works, Paulist Press, New York City - Mahwah 1987, 106-107). [35] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 3: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7. [36] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [37] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 42: AAS 91 (1999 ), 38. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 208: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1043: "the human mind can transcending immediate concerns and grasping certain facts that are unvarying, as true now as in the past. As it peers into humanity, factor discovers universal values obtained from that very same nature"; ibid., par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034. [38] Cf. B. Pascal, Pensées, no. 267 (ed. Brunschvicg): "The last proceeding of reason is to recognize that there is an infinity of things which are beyond it" (en. tr. Pascal's Pensées, E.P. Dutton, New York City 1958, 77). [39] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [40] Our semantic capacity permits us to comprehend messages in any kind of communication in a manner that both takes into consideration and transcends their product or empirical structures (such as computer code). Here, intelligence becomes a knowledge that "enables us to look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, scenarios, events and to uncover their real significance" (Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications [24 January 2024]: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8). Our imagination enables us to produce brand-new content or ideas, mainly by using an initial viewpoint on reality. Both capabilities depend upon the existence of a personal subjectivity for their full awareness. [41] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. [42] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034: "Charity, when accompanied by a dedication to the truth, is a lot more than individual sensation [...] Certainly, its close relation to fact promotes its universality and maintains it from being 'confined to a narrow field lacking relationships.' [...] Charity's openness to reality hence protects it from 'a fideism that denies it of its human and universal breadth.'" The internal quotes are from Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), pars. 2-4: AAS 101 (2009 ), 642-643. [43] Cf. International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 7. [44] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [45] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15. [46] Bonaventure, In II Librum Sententiarum, d. I, p. 2, a. 2, q. 1; as priced quote in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 293. Cf. ibid., par. 294. [47] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 295, 299, 302. Bonaventure compares deep space 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: "humans occupy a special place in the universe according to the divine strategy: they enjoy the benefit of sharing in the magnificent governance of visible development. [...] Since man's place as ruler remains in reality a participation in the magnificent governance of creation, we mention it here as a kind of stewardship." [49] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), pars. 38-39: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1164-1165. [50] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. This concept is likewise shown in the production account, where God brings animals to Adam "to see what he would call them. And whatever [he] called every living creature, that was its name" (Gen. 2:19), an action that shows the active engagement of human intelligence in the stewardship of God's development. Cf. John Chrysostom, Homiliae in Genesim, XIV, 17-21: PG 53, 116-117. [51] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 301. [52] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 302. [53] Bonaventure, Breviloquium 2.12.1. Cf. ibid., 2.11.2. [54] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 236: AAS 105 (2023 ), 1115; Id., Address to Participants in the Meeting of University Chaplains and Pastoral Workers Promoted by the Dicastery for Culture and Education (24 November 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 November 2023, 7. [55] Cf. J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 5.1, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 99-100; Francis, Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [56] Francis, Address to the Members of the National Confederation of Artisans and Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises (CNA) (15 November 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 15 November 2024, 8. [57] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Querida Amazonia (2 February 2020), par. 41: AAS 112 (2020 ), 246; Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 146: AAS 107 (2015 ), 906. [58] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 864. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), pars. 17-24: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47-50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985-987. [59] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 20: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [60] P. Claudel, Conversation sur Jean Racine, Gallimard, Paris 1956, 32: "L'intelligence n'est rien sans la délectation." Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 13: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5: "The mind and the will are put at the service of the higher great by picking up and enjoying truths." [61] Dante, Paradiso, Canto XXX: "luce intellettüal, piena d'amore;/ amor di vero ben, pien di letizia;/ letizia che trascende ogne dolzore" (en. tr. The Divine Comedy of Dante Alighieri, C.E. Norton, tr., Houghton Mifflin, Boston 1920, 232). [62] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931:" [T] he greatest standard of human life is the divine law itself-eternal, unbiased and universal, by which God orders, directs and governs the entire world and the ways of the human neighborhood according to a strategy developed in his knowledge and love. God has allowed guy to get involved in this law of his so that, under the mild personality of divine providence, numerous may be able to come to a deeper and deeper understanding of unchangeable fact." Also cf. Id., Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. [63] Cf. First Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius (24 April 1870), ch. 4, DH 3016. [64] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [65] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 891. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 204: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1042. [66] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 11: AAS 83 (1991 ), 807: "God has actually imprinted his own image and similarity on guy (cf. Gen 1:26), providing upon him an incomparable dignity [...] In impact, beyond the rights which man obtains by his own work, there exist rights which do not correspond to any work he carries out, but which circulation from his important self-respect as an individual." Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [67] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 8. Cf. ibid., par. 9; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 22. [68] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2024 ), 310. [69] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [70] In this sense, "Artificial Intelligence" is comprehended as a technical term to suggest this innovation, recalling that the expression is likewise 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 instance, 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, among a long list of other Catholics took part in scientific research study and technological exploration, highlight that "faith and science can be joined in charity, offered that science is put at the service of the males and woman of our time and not misused to damage or perhaps ruin them" (Francis, Address to Participants in the 2024 Lemaître Conference of the Vatican Observatory [20 June 2024]: L'Osservatore Romano, 20 June 2024, 8). Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 36: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053-1054; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), pars. 2, 106: AAS 91 (1999 ), 6-7.86 -87. [73] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. [74] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [75] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [76] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 102: AAS 107 (2015 ), 888. [77] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889; Id., Encyclical Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 27: AAS 112 (2020 ), 978; Benedict XVI, Encyclical Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 23: AAS 101 (2009 ), 657-658. [78] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39, 47; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), passim. [79] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par 2293. [80] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2-4. [81] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1749: "Freedom makes male a moral subject. When he acts deliberately, man is, so to speak, the dad of his acts." [82] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1776. [83] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1777. [84] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 1779-1781; Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 463, where the Holy Father motivated efforts "to make sure that innovation remains human-centered, fairly grounded and directed toward the great." [85] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 166: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1026-1027; Id., Address to the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (23 September 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 September 2024, 10. On the role of human firm in picking a larger aim (Ziel) that then informs the particular function (Zweck) for which each technological application is created, cf. F. Dessauer, Streit um pass away Technik, Herder-Bücherei, Freiburg i. Br. 1959, 70-71. [86] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4: "Technology is born for a function and, in its effect on human society, constantly represents a kind of order in social relations and a plan of power, hence making it possible for certain people to carry out specific actions while preventing others from carrying out different ones. In a more or less specific way, this constitutive power-dimension of technology always consists of the worldview of those who created and established it." [87] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 309. [88] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [89] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti, pars. 212-213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [90] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 5: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589; Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [91] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "Confronted with the marvels of machines, which appear to know how to select independently, we ought to be very clear that decision-making [...] should constantly be left to the human person. We would condemn humanity to a future without hope if we took away people's ability to make decisions about themselves and their lives, by dooming them to depend upon the options of devices." [92] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [93] The term "predisposition" in this document describes algorithmic predisposition (systematic and consistent errors in computer systems that may disproportionately bias certain groups in unintended methods) or finding out predisposition (which will result in training on a prejudiced data set) and not the "predisposition vector" in neural networks (which is a parameter utilized to change the output of "neurons" to adjust more precisely to the data). [94] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464, where the Holy Father affirmed the development in agreement "on the requirement for development processes to appreciate such worths as addition, transparency, security, equity, personal privacy and dependability," and likewise welcomed "the efforts of international organizations to control these technologies so that they promote authentic development, 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 conversation 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 significance of dialogue in a pluralist society oriented towards a "robust and solid social principles," see Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 211-214: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [100] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [101] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [102] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [103] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. [104] Cf. Pontifical Council for Social Communications, Ethics in Internet (22 February 2002), par. 10. [105] Francis, Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414; pricing quote the Final Document of the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops (27 October 2018), par. 24: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1593. Cf. Benedict XVI, Address to the Participants in the International Congress on Natural Moral Law (12 February 2017): AAS 99 (2007 ), 245. [106] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-33: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047-1050. [107] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-21: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047. [108] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 308-309. [109] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [110] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [111] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 101, 103, 111, 115, 167: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1004-1005, 1007-1009, 1027. [112] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047; cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 35: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 123. [113] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 12: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1034. [114] Cf. Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church (2004 ), par. 149. [115] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [116] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [117] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 865. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), pars. 88-89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414. [118] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057. [119] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985. [120] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [121] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [122] Cf. E. Stein, Zum Problem der Einfühlung, Buchdruckerei des Waisenhauses, Halle 1917 (en. tr. On the Problem of Empathy, ICS Publications, Washington D.C. 1989). [123] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057:" [Many individuals] want their social relationships provided by sophisticated devices, by screens and systems which can be switched on and off on command. Meanwhile, the Gospel tells us constantly to run the risk of a face-to-face encounter with others, with their physical presence which challenges us, with their pain and their pleas, with their delight which infects us in our close and continuous interaction. True faith in the incarnate Son of God is inseparable from self-giving, from membership in the neighborhood, from service, from reconciliation with others." Also cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 24: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1044-1045. [124] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 1. [125] Cf. Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570; Id, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 18, 124-129: AAS 107 (2015 ), 854.897-899. [126] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [127] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 209: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1107. [128] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4. For Pope Francis' mentor about AI in relationship to the "technocratic paradigm," cf. Id., Encyclical Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 106-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893. [129] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047.; as priced estimate in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1912. Cf. John XXIII, Encyclical Letter Mater et Magistra (15 May 1961), par. 219: AAS 53 (1961 ), 453. [130] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par 64: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1086. [131] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 162: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1025. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 6: AAS 73 (1981 ), 591: "work is 'for man' and not male 'for work.' Through this conclusion one appropriately pertains to recognize the pre-eminence of the subjective significance of work over the unbiased one." [132] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 128: AAS 107 (2015 ), 898. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 24: AAS 108 (2016 ), 319-320. [133] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [134] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae (25 March 1995), par. 89: AAS 87 (1995 ), 502. [135] Ibid. [136] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 67: AAS 112 (2020 ), 993; as priced quote in Id., Message for the XXXI World Day of the Sick (11 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 10 January 2023, 8. [137] Francis, Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [138] Francis, Address to the Diplomatic Corps Accredited to the Holy See (11 January 2016): AAS 108 (2016 ), 120. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 18: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975; Id., Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [139] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465; Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [140] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105, 107: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-890; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 18-21: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975-976; Id., Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465. [141] Francis, Address to the Participants at the Meeting Sponsored by the Charity and Health Commission of the Italian Bishops' Conference (10 February 2017): AAS 109 (2017 ), 243. Cf. ibid., 242-243: "If there is a sector in which the throwaway culture appears, with its painful repercussions, it is that of healthcare. When an ill person is not placed in the center or their self-respect is not thought about, this generates mindsets that can lead even to speculation on the misery of others. And this is really severe! [...] The application of a company technique to the healthcare sector, if indiscriminate [...] might run the risk of discarding humans." [142] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [143] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729. [144] Congregation for Catholic Education, Instruction on making use of Distance Learning in Ecclesiastical Universities and Faculties, I. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729; Francis, Message for the LXIX World Day of Peace (1 January 2016), 6: AAS 108 (2016 ), 57-58. [145] Francis, Address to Members of the Global Researchers Advancing Catholic Education Project (20 April 2022): AAS 114 (2022 ), 580. [146] Cf. Paul VI, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi (8 December 1975), par. 41: AAS 68 (1976 ), 31, pricing quote Id., Address to the Members of the "Consilium de Laicis" (2 October 1974): AAS 66 (1974 ), 568: "if [the contemporary person] does listen to teachers, it is due to the fact that they are witnesses." [147] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 6.1, London 18733, 125-126. [148] Francis, Meeting with the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [149] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 86: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413, quoting the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, Final Document (27 October 2018), par. 21: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1592. [150] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 7.6, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 167. [151] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 88: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413. [152] In a 2023 policy file about using generative AI in education and research, UNESCO notes: "Among the key concerns [of the use of generative AI (GenAI) in education and research] is whether humans can perhaps deliver fundamental levels of thinking and skill-acquisition procedures to AI and rather concentrate on higher-order thinking abilities based upon the outputs supplied by AI. Writing, for example, is typically connected with the structuring of thinking. With GenAI [...], human beings can now start with a well-structured overview provided by GenAI. Some experts have defined making use of GenAI to create text in this way as 'writing without thinking'" (UNESCO, Guidance for Generative AI in Education and shiapedia.1god.org Research [2023], 37-38). The German-American philosopher Hannah Arendt foresaw such a possibility in her 1959 book, The Human Condition, and cautioned: "If it needs to end up being true that knowledge (in the sense of knowledge) and believed have actually parted business for excellent, then we would certainly end up being the helpless servants, not so much of our machines 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 assist people gain access to the "selection of resources for generating higher knowledge of reality" contained in the works of philosophy (John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio [14 September 1998], par. 3: AAS 91 [1999], 7). Cf. ibid., par. 4: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7-8. [159] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 43. Cf. ibid., pars. 61-62. [160] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [161] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par 25: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053; cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), passim: AAS 112 (2020 ), 969-1074. [162] Cf. Francis., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 414; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 25: AAS 91 (1999 ), 25-26: "People can not be genuinely indifferent to the concern of whether what they know is real or not. [...] It is this that Saint Augustine teaches when he writes: 'I have met many who wanted to trick, however none who wanted to be deceived'"; estimating Augustine, Confessiones, X, 23, 33: PL 32, 794. [163] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), par. 62. [164] Benedict XVI, Message for the XLIII World Day of Social Communications (24 May 2009): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2009, 8. [165] Cf. Dicastery for Communications, Towards Full Presence: A Pastoral Reflection on Engagement with Social Media (28 May 2023), par. 41; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Decree Inter Mirifica (4 December 1963), pars. 4, 8-12: AAS 56 (1964 ), 146, 148-149. [166] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 1, 6, 16, 24. [167] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046. Cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 40: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 127: "no male may with impunity break that human self-respect which God himself treats with terrific reverence"; as estimated 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 obliges States to likewise appreciate the right to personal privacy, by shielding citizens from intrusive monitoring and allowing them to secure their personal details from unauthorized gain access to." [170] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 42: AAS 112 (2020 ), 984. [171] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [172] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465. [173] The 2023 Interim Report of the United Nations AI Advisory Body recognized a list of "early guarantees of AI helping to resolve climate change" (United Nations AI Advisory Body, Interim Report: Governing AI for Humanity [December 2023], 3). The document observed that, "taken together with predictive systems that can change information into insights and insights into actions, AI-enabled tools may help develop brand-new techniques and investments to decrease emissions, affect new economic sector financial investments in net zero, protect biodiversity, and construct broad-based social durability" (ibid.). [174] "The cloud" describes a network of physical servers throughout the world that allows users to store, procedure, and manage their data remotely. [175] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 9: AAS 107 (2015 ), 850. [176] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 106: AAS 107 (2015 ), 890. [177] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 60: AAS 107 (2015 ), 870. [178] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 3, 13: AAS 107 (2015 ), 848.852. [179] Augustine, De Civitate Dei, XIX, 13, 1: PL 41, 640. [180] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 77-82: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1100-1107; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 256-262: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1060-1063; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 38-39; Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2302-2317. [181] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 78: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1101. [182] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [183] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2308-2310. [184] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 80-81: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1105. [185] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "We need to ensure and protect a space for appropriate human control over the options made by expert system 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 self-governing weapons systems (LAWS) that do not have the appropriate human control would pose essential ethical concerns, considered that LAWS can never be morally responsible topics capable of abiding by 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 advanced weapons ending up in the wrong hands, helping with, for instance, terrorist attacks or interventions aimed at destabilizing the institutions of genuine systems of government. In a word, the world does not need brand-new technologies that add to the unfair advancement of commerce and the weapons trade and as a result wind up promoting the recklessness of war." [190] John Paul II, Act of Entrustment to Mary for the Jubilee of Bishops (8 October 2000), par. 3: Insegnamenti XXIII/2 (200 ), 565. [191] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 79: AAS 107 (2015 ), 878. [192] Cf. Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 51: AAS 101 (2009 ), 687. [193] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39. [194] Cf. Augustine, Confessiones, I, 1, 1: PL 32, 661. [195] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (30 December 1987), par. 28: AAS 80 (1988 ), 548:" [T] here is a much better understanding today that the simple build-up of products and services [...] is inadequate for the realization of human happiness. Nor, in consequence, does the availability of the lots of real advantages offered in recent times by science and innovation, consisting of the computer sciences, bring freedom from every form of slavery. On the contrary, [...] unless all the considerable body of resources and potential at male's disposal is directed by a moral understanding and by an orientation towards the real good of the human race, it quickly turns against male to oppress him." Cf. ibid., pars. 29, 37: AAS 80 (1988 ), 550-551.563 -564. [196] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [197] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 18: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [198] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 27: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 6. [199] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 25: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5-6. [200] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. R. Guardini, Das Ende der Neuzeit, Würzburg 19659, 87 ff. (en. tr. Completion of the Modern World, Wilmington 1998, 82-83). [201] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [202] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptor Hominis (4 March 1979), par. 15: AAS 71 (1979 ), 287-288. [203] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," in C. Mitcham - R. Mackey, eds., Philosophy and Technology: Readings in the Philosophical Problems of Technology, New York 19832, 212-213. [204] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," 210. [205] G. Bernanos, "La révolution de la liberté" (1944 ), in Id., Le Chemin de la Croix-des-Âmes, Rocher 1987, 829. [206] Cf. Francis, Meeting with the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023). [207] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [208] Cf. Bonaventure, Hex. XIX, 3; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986: "The flood of details at our fingertips does not make for greater knowledge. Wisdom is not born of quick searches on the web nor is it a mass of unproven data. That is not the method to grow in the encounter with truth." [209] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [210] Ibid. [211] Ibid. [212] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate (19 March 2018), par. 37: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1121. [213] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate (19 March 2018), par. 46: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1123-1124. [214] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [215] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570-1571.