GitLab

1. With knowledge both ancient and brand-new (cf. Mt. 13:52), we are contacted us to review the existing difficulties and chances posed by clinical and technological improvements, especially by the recent development of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The Christian custom relates to the present of intelligence as a necessary aspect of how people are developed "in the image of God" (Gen. 1:27). Beginning with an integral vision of the human individual and the biblical contacting us to "till" and "keep" the earth (Gen. 2:15), the Church highlights that this gift of intelligence ought to be expressed through the responsible use of reason and technical abilities in the stewardship of the developed world.

2. The Church encourages the improvement of science, innovation, the arts, and other kinds of human venture, viewing them as part of the "collaboration of male and lady with God in refining the noticeable development." [1] As Sirach affirms, God "gave skill to human beings, that he may be glorified in his wonderful works" (Sir. 38:6). Human abilities and imagination originate from God and, junkerhq.net when used rightly, glorify God by showing his wisdom and goodness. Due to this, when we ask ourselves what it implies to "be human," we can not exclude a factor to consider of our clinical and technological capabilities.

3. It is within this viewpoint that today Note addresses the anthropological and ethical difficulties raised by AI-issues that are especially significant, as one of the objectives of this technology is to imitate the human intelligence that developed it. For circumstances, unlike numerous other human developments, AI can be trained on the outcomes of human creativity and then create brand-new "artifacts" with a level of speed and ability that frequently rivals or exceeds what human beings can do, such as producing text or images equivalent from human compositions. This raises important issues about AI's prospective role in the growing crisis of truth in the general public online forum. Moreover, this innovation is created to learn and make certain options autonomously, adapting to new situations and supplying services not anticipated by its programmers, and hence, it raises basic questions about ethical responsibility and human safety, with wider implications for society as a whole. This brand-new scenario has prompted many individuals to review what it suggests to be human and the function of mankind worldwide.

4. Taking all this into account, there is broad consensus that AI marks a new and considerable phase in humankind's engagement with innovation, placing it at the heart of what Pope Francis has actually explained as an "epochal modification." [2] Its effect is felt worldwide and in a large range of areas, including interpersonal relationships, education, work, art, health care, law, warfare, and international relations. As AI advances quickly toward even higher accomplishments, it is critically crucial to consider its anthropological and ethical ramifications. This involves not just mitigating risks and avoiding damage however likewise guaranteeing that its applications are utilized to promote human progress and the typical good.

5. To contribute favorably to the discernment relating to AI, and in response to Pope Francis' require a renewed "wisdom of heart," [3] the Church uses its experience through the anthropological and ethical reflections contained in this Note. Committed to its active function in the global dialogue on these concerns, the Church welcomes those entrusted with transferring the faith-including moms and dads, teachers, pastors, and bishops-to commit themselves to this crucial subject with care and attention. While this file is planned specifically for them, it is likewise indicated to be available to a wider audience, especially those who share the conviction that scientific and technological advances ought to be directed toward serving the human person and the typical good. [4]
6. To this end, the document begins by comparing concepts of intelligence in AI and in human intelligence. It then explores the Christian understanding of human intelligence, supplying a structure rooted in the Church's philosophical and doctrinal tradition. Finally, the document provides standards to ensure that the advancement and usage of AI maintain human self-respect and promote the integral development of the human individual and society.

7. The concept of "intelligence" in AI has progressed with time, drawing on a variety of ideas from numerous disciplines. While its origins extend back centuries, a substantial turning point occurred in 1956 when the American computer system 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 device behave in manner ins which would be called intelligent if a human were so acting." [5] This workshop released a research study program focused on designing devices efficient in performing jobs generally related to the human intelligence and smart behavior.

8. Ever since, AI research has advanced quickly, resulting in the development of complex systems efficient in performing extremely advanced tasks. [6] These so-called "narrow AI" systems are typically designed to manage particular and limited functions, such as translating languages, predicting the trajectory of a storm, classifying images, answering questions, or creating visual content at the user's request. While the definition of "intelligence" in AI research study varies, the majority of contemporary AI systems-particularly those using device learning-rely on analytical inference rather than rational reduction. By examining big datasets to identify patterns, AI can "predict" [7] results and propose new methods, imitating some cognitive processes typical of human problem-solving. Such accomplishments have been made possible through advances in calculating technology (consisting of neural networks, without supervision artificial intelligence, and evolutionary algorithms) in addition to hardware innovations (such as specialized processors). Together, these innovations make it possible for AI systems to react to various forms of human input, adjust to brand-new situations, and even suggest unique services not expected by their original developers. [8]
9. Due to these fast improvements, numerous tasks once managed exclusively by human beings are now entrusted to AI. These systems can augment and even supersede what humans have the ability to carry out in many fields, especially in specialized areas such as data analysis, image recognition, and medical diagnosis. While each "narrow AI" application is designed for a particular job, lots of scientists aim to develop what is referred to as "Artificial General Intelligence" (AGI)-a single system capable of running throughout all cognitive domains and performing any task within the scope of human intelligence. Some even argue that AGI might one day attain the state of "superintelligence," exceeding human intellectual capabilities, or contribute to "super-longevity" through advances in biotechnology. Others, nevertheless, fear that these possibilities, even if hypothetical, could one day eclipse the human individual, while still others welcome this possible change. [9]
10. Underlying this and many other viewpoints on the subject is the implicit assumption that the term "intelligence" can be utilized in the very same way to refer to both human intelligence and AI. Yet, this does not capture the full scope of the idea. When it comes to humans, intelligence is a professors that pertains to the individual in his/her entirety, whereas in the context of AI, "intelligence" is comprehended functionally, often with the anticipation that the activities characteristic of the human mind can be broken down into digitized steps that machines can reproduce. [10]
11. This practical point of view is exhibited by the "Turing Test," which thinks about a machine "intelligent" 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 particular intellectual jobs; it does not represent the complete breadth of human experience, that includes abstraction, emotions, imagination, and the visual, ethical, and religious perceptiveness. Nor does it include the full series of expressions particular of the human mind. Instead, in the case of AI, the "intelligence" of a system is evaluated methodologically, however likewise reductively, based upon its capability to produce proper responses-in this case, those related to the human intellect-regardless of how those responses are generated.

12. AI's advanced functions give it sophisticated capabilities to carry out jobs, however not the ability to think. [12] This difference is most importantly crucial, as the method "intelligence" is defined undoubtedly shapes how we understand the relationship between human idea and this innovation. [13] To value this, one should remember the richness of the philosophical custom and Christian faith, which provide a deeper and more detailed understanding of intelligence-an understanding that is main to the Church's mentor on the nature, self-respect, and vocation of the human individual. [14]
13. From the dawn of human self-reflection, the mind has actually played a main role in comprehending what it means to be "human." Aristotle observed that "all people by nature desire to understand." [15] This knowledge, with its capability for abstraction that understands the nature and meaning of things, sets humans apart from the animal world. [16] As thinkers, theologians, and psychologists have taken a look at the exact nature of this intellectual faculty, they have also explored how human beings comprehend the world and their unique location within it. Through this expedition, the Christian tradition has pertained to comprehend the human person as a being including both body and soul-deeply linked to this world and yet transcending it. [17]
14. In the classical custom, the idea of intelligence is frequently understood through the complementary principles of "factor" (ratio) and "intelligence" (intellectus). These are not separate faculties but, as Saint Thomas Aquinas explains, they are two modes in which the exact same intelligence operates: "The term intellect is inferred from the inward grasp of the truth, while the name reason is taken from the inquisitive and discursive procedure." [18] This concise description highlights the two essential and complementary dimensions of human intelligence. Intellectus describes the intuitive grasp of the truth-that is, collaring it with the "eyes" of the mind-which precedes and grounds argumentation itself. Ratio pertains to thinking correct: the discursive, analytical procedure that results in judgment. Together, intellect and reason form the two facets of the act of intelligere, "the appropriate operation of the human being as such." [19]
15. Explaining the human person as a "reasonable" being does not minimize the person to a specific mode of idea; rather, it recognizes that the ability for intellectual understanding shapes and permeates all elements of human activity. [20] Whether worked out well or poorly, this capability is an intrinsic element of humanity. In this sense, the "term 'rational' incorporates all the capabilities of the human individual," including those related to "knowing and understanding, along with those of willing, loving, selecting, and wanting; it also consists of all corporeal functions closely associated to these capabilities." [21] This detailed point of view underscores how, in the human person, created in the "image of God," factor is integrated in such a way that raises, shapes, and transforms both the person's will and actions. [22]
16. Christian thought thinks about the intellectual faculties of the human person within the framework of an important sociology that sees the human being as basically embodied. In the human individual, spirit and matter "are not 2 natures united, but rather their union forms a single nature." [23] To put it simply, the soul is not simply the immaterial "part" of the individual contained within the body, nor is the body an outer shell real estate an intangible "core." Rather, the whole human person is concurrently 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 dimension) within and through this embodied presence. [24] The profound significance of this condition is more lit up by the secret of the Incarnation, through which God himself took on our flesh and "raised it as much as a superb self-respect." [25]
17. Although deeply rooted in bodily existence, the human person transcends the material world through the soul, which is "almost on the horizon of eternity and time." [26] The intellect's capability for transcendence and the self-possessed freedom of the will belong to the soul, by which the human individual "shares in the light of the magnificent mind." [27] Nevertheless, the human spirit does not exercise its typical mode of knowledge without the body. [28] In this way, the intellectual professors of the human person are an important part of a sociology that acknowledges that the human person is a "unity of body and soul." [29] Further elements of this understanding will be developed in what follows.

18. Humans are "ordered by their very nature to social communion," [30] possessing the capability to know one another, to offer themselves in love, and to enter into communion with others. Accordingly, human intelligence is not an isolated professors however is exercised in relationships, finding its maximum expression in dialogue, cooperation, and solidarity. We learn with others, and we discover through others.

19. The relational orientation of the human person is eventually grounded in the everlasting self-giving of the Triune God, whose love is exposed in development and redemption. [31] The human person is "contacted us to share, by knowledge and love, in God's own life." [32]
20. This occupation to communion with God is always connected to the call to communion with others. Love of God can not be separated from love for one's next-door neighbor (cf. 1 Jn. 4:20; Mt. 22:37 -39). By the grace of sharing God's life, Christians are likewise called to imitate Christ's outpouring present (cf. 2 Cor. 9:8 -11; Eph. 5:1 -2) by following his command to "love one another, as I have loved you" (Jn. 13:34). [33] Love and service, echoing the divine life of self-giving, transcend self-interest to react more totally to the human occupation (cf. 1 Jn. 2:9). A lot more superb than knowing lots of things is the commitment to look after one another, for if "I understand all secrets and all understanding [...] but do not have love, I am absolutely nothing" (1 Cor. 13:2).

21. Human intelligence is ultimately "God's present fashioned for the assimilation of reality." [34] In the dual sense of intellectus-ratio, it enables the person to check out truths that go beyond mere sensory experience or energy, given that "the desire for fact becomes part of humanity itself. It is a natural residential or commercial property of human reason to ask why things are as they are." [35] Moving beyond the limits of empirical data, human intelligence can "with authentic certitude attain to truth itself as knowable." [36] While reality remains only partially known, the desire for reality "stimulates factor always to go even more; certainly, it is as if reason were overwhelmed to see that it can always go beyond what it has currently attained." [37] Although Truth in itself goes beyond the boundaries of human intelligence, it irresistibly attracts it. [38] Drawn by this tourist attraction, the human individual is caused look for "facts of a greater order." [39]
22. This innate drive toward the pursuit of truth is especially obvious in the noticeably human capacities for semantic understanding and creativity, [40] through which this search unfolds in a "way that is suitable to the social nature and self-respect of the human person." [41] Likewise, a steadfast orientation to the truth is important for charity to be both genuine and universal. [42]
23. The look for reality finds its greatest expression in openness to truths that go beyond the physical and produced world. In God, all truths attain their supreme and original meaning. [43] Entrusting oneself to God is a "basic choice that engages the entire individual." [44] In this way, the human individual becomes completely what he or she is called to be: "the intellect and the will show their spiritual nature," making it possible for the person "to act in such a way that understands personal flexibility to the full." [45]
24. The Christian faith understands creation as the complimentary act of the Triune God, who, as Saint Bonaventure of Bagnoregio explains, develops "not to increase his glory, however to reveal it forth and to interact it." [46] Since God develops according to his Wisdom (cf. Wis. 9:9; Jer. 10:12), development is imbued with an intrinsic order that shows God's plan (cf. Gen. 1; Dan. 2:21 -22; Is. 45:18; Ps. 74:12 -17; 104), [47] within which God has called people to assume a distinct role: to cultivate and take care of the world. [48]
25. Shaped by the Divine Craftsman, humans live out their identity as beings made in imago Dei by "keeping" and "tilling" (cf. Gen. 2:15) creation-using their intelligence and abilities to care for and establish development in accord with God's plan. [49] In this, human intelligence reflects the Divine Intelligence that developed 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 develop their abilities in science and technology, for through them, God is glorified (cf. Sir. 38:6). Thus, in a correct relationship with production, human beings, on the one hand, utilize their intelligence and ability to cooperate with God in directing production towards the purpose to which he has actually called it. [52] On the other hand, production itself, as Saint Bonaventure observes, assists the human mind to "rise slowly to the supreme Principle, who is God." [53]
26. In this context, human intelligence becomes more plainly understood as a professors that forms an essential part of how the entire individual engages with truth. Authentic engagement requires accepting the complete scope of one's being: spiritual, cognitive, embodied, and relational.

27. This engagement with truth unfolds in numerous ways, as everyone, in his or her diverse individuality [54], looks for to understand the world, associate with others, resolve problems, express imagination, and pursue important well-being through the unified interplay of the numerous dimensions of the person's intelligence. [55] This includes rational and linguistic capabilities but can likewise encompass other modes of communicating with truth. Consider the work of an artisan, who "need to know how to discern, in inert matter, a specific type that others can not acknowledge" [56] and bring it forth through insight and practical skill. Indigenous individuals who live close to the earth typically possess a profound sense of nature and its cycles. [57] Similarly, a good friend who understands the right word to state or an individual skilled at managing human relationships exemplifies an intelligence that is "the fruit of self-examination, discussion and generous encounter in between persons." [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 integration of reality into the moral and spiritual life of the individual, guiding his/her actions in light of God's goodness and fact. According to God's strategy, intelligence, in its fullest sense, also includes the ability to enjoy what is true, good, and gorgeous. As the twentieth-century French poet Paul Claudel revealed, "intelligence is absolutely nothing without pleasure." [60] Similarly, Dante, upon reaching the highest heaven in Paradiso, testifies that the culmination of this intellectual delight is found in the "light intellectual filled with love, love of real good filled with delight, delight which goes beyond every sweet taste." [61]
29. An appropriate understanding of human intelligence, therefore, can not be decreased to the simple acquisition of realities or the ability to perform specific jobs. Instead, it involves the person's openness to the supreme questions 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, contemplating presence in its fullness, which exceeds what is measurable, and grasping the meaning of what has been comprehended. For believers, this capability consists of, in a specific method, the ability to grow in the understanding of the secrets of God by utilizing reason to engage ever more exceptionally with exposed 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 essential contemplative measurement, an unselfish openness to the True, the Good, and the Beautiful, beyond any practical function.

30. Because of the foregoing conversation, the distinctions in between human intelligence and current AI systems become evident. While AI is an amazing technological accomplishment capable of imitating certain outputs related to human intelligence, it runs by carrying out jobs, attaining goals, or making decisions based on quantitative information and computational logic. For instance, with its analytical power, AI excels at integrating data from a variety of fields, modeling complex systems, and fostering interdisciplinary connections. In this method, it can assist specialists work together in solving intricate problems that "can not be handled from a single viewpoint or from a single set of interests." [64]
31. However, even as AI processes and mimics certain expressions of intelligence, it remains basically restricted to a logical-mathematical structure, which enforces fundamental constraints. Human intelligence, on the other hand, develops organically throughout the person's physical and mental development, formed by a myriad of lived experiences in the flesh. Although advanced AI systems can "find out" through procedures such as artificial intelligence, this sort of training is fundamentally various from the developmental growth of human intelligence, which is formed by embodied experiences, including sensory input, psychological reactions, social interactions, and the special context of each moment. These aspects shape and kind individuals within their individual history.In contrast, AI, doing not have a physical body, relies on computational thinking and knowing based upon large datasets that include taped human experiences and knowledge.

32. Consequently, although AI can imitate aspects of human reasoning and perform particular tasks with amazing speed and efficiency, its computational abilities represent just a fraction of the wider capabilities of the human mind. For example, AI can not currently reproduce moral discernment or the capability to develop genuine relationships. Moreover, human intelligence is situated within a personally lived history of intellectual and moral development that fundamentally shapes the person's viewpoint, encompassing the physical, emotional, social, moral, and spiritual measurements of life. Since AI can not use this fullness of understanding, approaches that rely solely on this technology or treat it as the main ways of translating the world can result in "a loss of gratitude for the whole, for the relationships between things, and for the more comprehensive horizon." [65]
33. Human intelligence is not mainly about finishing functional jobs however about understanding and actively engaging with reality 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 fact and goodness, its capacities-though apparently limitless-are incomparable with the human capability to grasp truth. A lot can be gained from a disease, an accept of reconciliation, and even an easy sundown; certainly, lots of experiences we have as human beings open new horizons and offer the possibility of attaining brand-new knowledge. No device, working solely with data, can measure up to these and numerous other experiences present in our lives.

34. Drawing an extremely close equivalence between human intelligence and AI dangers catching a functionalist perspective, where individuals are valued based on the work they can carry out. However, an individual's worth does not depend on having particular abilities, cognitive and technological achievements, or private success, however on the individual's inherent self-respect, grounded in being produced in the image of God. [66] This dignity remains undamaged in all situations, including for those unable to exercise their capabilities, whether it be a coming child, an unconscious individual, or an older person who is suffering. [67] It likewise underpins the custom of human rights (and, in particular, what are now called "neuro-rights"), which represent "an essential point of convergence in the look for common ground" [68] and can, hence, work as a fundamental ethical guide in conversations on the accountable development and usage of AI.

35. Considering all these points, as Pope Francis observes, "the extremely use of the word 'intelligence'" in connection with AI "can show misleading" [69] and threats overlooking what is most valuable in the human person. Because of this, AI needs to not be viewed as an artificial form of human intelligence but as a product of it. [70]
36. Given these factors to consider, one can ask how AI can be understood within God's plan. To answer this, it is necessary to recall that techno-scientific activity is not neutral in character however is a human venture that engages the humanistic and cultural measurements of human imagination. [71]
37. Viewed as a fruit of the possible inscribed within human intelligence, [72] scientific query and the advancement of technical abilities belong to the "cooperation of males and female with God in perfecting the visible creation." [73] At the very same time, all clinical and technological accomplishments are, eventually, gifts from God. [74] Therefore, human beings must always use their abilities in view of the greater purpose for which God has granted them. [75]
38. We can gratefully acknowledge how technology has actually "fixed numerous evils which utilized to damage and restrict human beings," [76] a truth for which we must rejoice. Nevertheless, not all technological advancements in themselves represent real human progress. [77] The Church is particularly opposed to those applications that threaten the sanctity of life or the dignity of the human person. [78] Like any human undertaking, technological development should be directed to serve the human individual 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 just within the Church however likewise amongst lots of scientists, technologists, and professional associations, who significantly call for ethical reflection to guide this advancement in a responsible method.

39. To address these difficulties, it is important to stress the value of ethical duty grounded in the self-respect and occupation of the human individual. This assisting principle likewise uses to concerns worrying AI. In this context, the ethical dimension takes on main importance since it is individuals who create systems and figure out the purposes for which they are used. [80] Between a device and a human, only the latter is genuinely a moral agent-a topic of ethical obligation who exercises flexibility in his or her choices and accepts their repercussions. [81] It is not the device but the human who remains in relationship with truth and goodness, directed by an ethical conscience that calls the individual "to like and to do what is good and to prevent wicked," [82] attesting to "the authority of truth in referral to the supreme Good to which the human person is drawn." [83] Likewise, in between a machine and a human, only the human can be adequately self-aware to the point of listening and following the voice of conscience, critical with prudence, and seeking the great that is possible in every situation. [84] In truth, all of this likewise comes from the person's exercise of intelligence.

40. Like any product of human creativity, AI can be directed towards positive or unfavorable ends. [85] When used in ways that respect human self-respect and promote the well-being of people and neighborhoods, it can contribute favorably to the human occupation. Yet, as in all locations where human beings are called to make decisions, the shadow of evil likewise looms here. Where human flexibility allows for the possibility of picking what is wrong, the moral evaluation of this innovation will need to consider how it is directed and used.

41. At the same time, it is not only the ends that are fairly considerable but likewise the ways employed to attain them. Additionally, the overall vision and understanding of the human person ingrained within these systems are important to consider also. Technological products show the worldview of their developers, owners, users, and regulators, [86] and have the power to "shape the world and engage consciences on the level of worths." [87] On a societal level, some technological developments could also enhance relationships and power dynamics that are inconsistent with a correct understanding of the human individual and society.

42. Therefore, completions and the methods used in an offered application of AI, in addition to the general vision it includes, should all be examined to ensure they appreciate human dignity and promote the common good. [88] As Pope Francis has specified, "the intrinsic dignity of every guy and every woman" need to be "the crucial requirement in examining emerging innovations; these will prove 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 crucial role not just in designing and producing technology however also in directing its usage in line with the authentic good of the human individual. [90] The responsibility for handling this carefully pertains to every level of society, directed by the concept of subsidiarity and other principles of Catholic Social Teaching.

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

44. An evaluation of the implications of this assisting principle could begin by considering the significance of moral duty. Since full moral causality belongs only to individual representatives, not artificial ones, it is essential to be able to recognize and specify who bears responsibility for the procedures associated with AI, particularly those capable of finding out, correction, and reprogramming. While bottom-up techniques and very deep neural networks make it possible for AI to fix complicated issues, they make it hard to comprehend the processes that result in the solutions they embraced. This makes complex accountability given that if an AI application produces unwanted results, identifying who is responsible becomes hard. To resolve this problem, attention requires to be offered to the nature of accountability procedures in complex, extremely automated settings, where results might only become evident in the medium to long term. For this, it is very important that supreme duty for decisions used AI rests with the human decision-makers which there is accountability for using AI at each phase of the decision-making process. [91]
45. In addition to determining who is accountable, it is necessary to recognize the objectives offered to AI systems. Although these systems might use unsupervised self-governing learning mechanisms and in some cases follow paths that people can not reconstruct, they eventually pursue goals that people have actually assigned to them and are governed by processes established by their designers and developers. Yet, this presents an obstacle because, as AI designs become significantly efficient in independent learning, the ability to maintain control over them to ensure that such applications serve human purposes might successfully diminish. This raises the important concern of how to guarantee that AI systems are bought for the good of individuals and not against them.

46. While duty for the ethical usage of AI systems starts with those who develop, produce, manage, and manage such systems, it is likewise shared by those who use them. As Pope Francis kept in mind, the device "makes a technical choice among numerous possibilities based either on well-defined requirements or on analytical inferences. People, nevertheless, not only pick, however in their hearts can deciding." [92] Those who utilize AI to achieve a task and follow its results develop a context in which they are ultimately accountable for the power they have handed over. Therefore, insofar as AI can help human beings in making decisions, the algorithms that govern it needs to be credible, secure, robust enough to manage inconsistencies, and transparent in their operation to mitigate biases and unexpected side results. [93] Regulatory frameworks ought to make sure that all legal entities remain accountable for making use of AI and all its consequences, with proper safeguards for transparency, personal privacy, and accountability. [94] Moreover, those utilizing AI should be cautious not to become overly based on it for their decision-making, a trend that increases contemporary society's already high reliance on technology.

47. The Church's ethical and social mentor offers resources to help make sure that AI is utilized in a manner that maintains human agency. Considerations about justice, for instance, ought to also attend to concerns such as fostering simply social dynamics, maintaining worldwide security, and promoting peace. By working out vigilance, people and neighborhoods can recognize methods to use AI to benefit mankind while preventing applications that could degrade human self-respect or harm the environment. In this context, the idea of obligation ought to be comprehended not only in its most restricted sense but as a "responsibility for the take care of others, which is more than simply representing outcomes attained." [95]
48. Therefore, AI, like any innovation, can be part of a conscious and accountable answer to humankind's vocation to the excellent. However, as formerly talked about, AI should be directed by human intelligence to line up with this occupation, ensuring it appreciates the dignity of the human person. Recognizing this "exalted dignity," the Second Vatican Council affirmed that "the social order and its advancement should usually work to the advantage of the human individual." [96] In light of this, the usage of AI, as Pope Francis said, must be "accompanied by an ethic inspired by a vision of the typical excellent, a principles of freedom, responsibility, and fraternity, capable of fostering the full advancement of individuals in relation to others and to the whole of production." [97]
49. Within this basic point of view, some observations follow listed below to highlight how the preceding arguments can assist supply an ethical orientation in practical scenarios, in line with the "knowledge of heart" that Pope Francis has proposed. [98] While not exhaustive, this discussion is used in service of the dialogue that thinks about how AI can be utilized to maintain the dignity of the human individual and promote the typical good. [99]
50. As Pope Francis observed, "the intrinsic self-respect of each human being and the fraternity that binds us together as members of the one human family should support the advancement of brand-new technologies and serve as unassailable requirements for examining them before they are utilized." [100]
51. Viewed through this lens, AI might "introduce important developments in agriculture, education and culture, an enhanced level of life for entire countries and peoples, and the development of human fraternity and social friendship," and therefore be "utilized to promote important human advancement." [101] AI might likewise assist organizations identify those in need and counter discrimination and marginalization. These and other comparable applications of this technology might add to human advancement and the common good. [102]
52. However, while AI holds lots of possibilities for promoting the excellent, it can also hinder or even counter human development and the common good. Pope Francis has noted that "evidence to date suggests that digital innovations have actually increased inequality in our world. Not just differences in material wealth, which are also considerable, but also distinctions in access to political and social influence." [103] In this sense, AI could be used to perpetuate marginalization and discrimination, create new forms of poverty, widen the "digital divide," and get worse existing social inequalities. [104]
53. Moreover, the concentration of the power over mainstream AI applications in the hands of a few effective business raises considerable ethical concerns. Exacerbating this issue is the fundamental nature of AI systems, where no single person can work out complete oversight over the huge and intricate datasets utilized for computation. This absence of well-defined responsibility creates the risk that AI could be manipulated for individual or corporate gain or to direct public viewpoint for the benefit of a particular market. Such entities, motivated by their own interests, have the capability to exercise "forms of control as subtle as they are intrusive, developing systems for the manipulation of consciences and of the democratic procedure." [105]
54. Furthermore, there is the threat of AI being used to promote what Pope Francis has called the "technocratic paradigm," which views all the world's issues as understandable through technological methods alone. [106] In this paradigm, human self-respect and fraternity are typically reserved in the name of efficiency, "as if truth, goodness, and truth immediately flow from technological and financial power as such." [107] Yet, human dignity and the typical excellent must never be breached for the sake of effectiveness, [108] for "technological developments that do not cause an improvement in the lifestyle of all humanity, but on the contrary, intensify inequalities and disputes, can never count as real 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 important." [110]
55. Attaining this objective needs a deeper reflection on the relationship in between autonomy and obligation. Greater autonomy heightens each individual's obligation throughout different elements of communal life. For Christians, the foundation of this obligation lies in the acknowledgment that all human capacities, consisting of the person's autonomy, come from God and are implied to be utilized in the service of others. [111] Therefore, rather than merely pursuing economic or technological goals, AI should serve "the common good of the whole human family," which is "the amount total of social conditions that allow people, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their satisfaction more totally and more quickly." [112]
56. The Second Vatican Council observed that "by his inner nature guy is a social being; and if he does not get in into relations with others, he can neither live nor develop his gifts." [113] This conviction underscores that living in society is intrinsic to the nature and occupation of the human individual. [114] As social beings, we look for relationships that include shared exchange and the pursuit of fact, in the course of which, individuals "share with each other the fact they have actually discovered, or think they have discovered, in such a way that they assist one another in the search for truth." [115]
57. Such a mission, in addition to other aspects of human communication, presupposes encounters and shared exchange between individuals formed by their distinct histories, ideas, convictions, and relationships. Nor can we forget that human intelligence is a varied, complex, and complex reality: individual and social, logical and affective, conceptual and symbolic. Pope Francis highlights this dynamic, noting that "together, we can look for the reality in dialogue, in relaxed conversation or in passionate dispute. To do so calls for determination; it entails moments of silence and suffering, yet it can patiently accept the broader experience of individuals and individuals. [...] The procedure of structure fraternity, be it local or universal, can only be carried out by spirits that are complimentary and available to genuine encounters." [116]
58. It remains in this context that one can consider the difficulties AI presents to human relationships. Like other technological tools, AI has the possible to cultivate connections within the human household. However, it could likewise impede a real encounter with reality and, ultimately, lead individuals to "a deep and melancholic frustration with interpersonal relations, or a hazardous sense of isolation." [117] Authentic human relationships require the richness of being with others in their pain, their pleas, and their joy. [118] Since human intelligence is expressed and improved also in social and embodied ways, authentic and spontaneous encounters with others are essential for engaging with reality in its fullness.

59. Because "real wisdom requires an encounter with truth," [119] the increase of AI introduces another difficulty. Since AI can effectively imitate the items of human intelligence, the ability to know when one is connecting with a human or a device can no longer be considered given. Generative AI can produce text, speech, images, and other innovative outputs that are typically related to human beings. Yet, it should be understood for what it is: a tool, not a person. [120] This distinction is typically obscured by the language used by professionals, which tends to anthropomorphize AI and thus blurs the line between human and machine.

60. Anthropomorphizing AI likewise poses particular difficulties for the development of kids, possibly motivating them to develop patterns of interaction that deal with human relationships in a transactional way, as one would connect to a chatbot. Such habits might lead youths to see teachers as simple dispensers of details instead of as mentors who guide and support their intellectual and ethical development. Genuine relationships, rooted in empathy and a steadfast commitment to the good of the other, are necessary and irreplaceable in promoting the full advancement of the human individual.

61. In this context, it is necessary to clarify that, in spite of using anthropomorphic language, no AI application can really experience compassion. Emotions can not be decreased to facial expressions or phrases generated in reaction to prompts; they reflect the way an individual, as an entire, relates to the world and to his/her own life, with the body playing a main function. True empathy needs the capability to listen, recognize another's irreducible originality, welcome their otherness, and comprehend the meaning behind even their silences. [121] Unlike the world of analytical judgment in which AI excels, true compassion belongs to the relational sphere. It includes intuiting and collaring the lived experiences of another while maintaining the difference between self and other. [122] While AI can mimic empathetic reactions, it can not reproduce the eminently personal and relational nature of genuine compassion. [123]
62. Because of the above, it is clear why misrepresenting AI as an individual need to constantly be prevented; doing so for deceptive functions is a serious ethical infraction that might deteriorate social trust. Similarly, using AI to trick in other contexts-such as in education or in human relationships, including the sphere of sexuality-is likewise to be considered unethical and needs mindful oversight to avoid damage, maintain openness, and make sure the self-respect of all people. [124]
63. In an increasingly separated world, some individuals have actually turned to AI looking for deep human relationships, simple friendship, and even emotional bonds. However, while human beings are meant to experience authentic relationships, AI can just simulate them. Nevertheless, such relationships with others are an important part of how a person grows to become who she or he is meant to be. If AI is utilized to assist individuals foster genuine connections in between people, it can contribute favorably to the full awareness of the person. Conversely, if we replace relationships with God and with others with interactions with technology, we run the risk of replacing genuine relationality with a lifeless image (cf. Ps. 106:20; Rom. 1:22 -23). Instead of pulling back into artificial worlds, we are contacted us to take part in a dedicated and deliberate way with reality, especially by identifying with the poor and suffering, consoling those in grief, and creating bonds of communion with all.

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

65. Other broader elements of AI's impact on the economic-financial sphere need to likewise be thoroughly taken a look at, especially worrying 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 monetary institutions within an offered context. This element needs to be encouraged, as it can bring benefits in how it supports the genuine economy by cultivating its development and stability, especially during times of crisis. Nevertheless, it must be stressed that digital truths, not limited by any spatial bonds, tend to be more homogeneous and impersonal than neighborhoods rooted in a particular location and a specific history, with a typical journey characterized by shared values and hopes, but also by inevitable disagreements and divergences. This variety is an undeniable possession to a community's economic life. Turning over the economy and financing completely to digital innovation would reduce this range and richness. As an outcome, many options to financial problems that can be reached through natural dialogue in between the involved celebrations might no longer be attainable in a world dominated by procedures and just the look of proximity.

66. Another area where AI is currently having an extensive effect is the world of work. As in lots of other fields, AI is driving fundamental changes across lots of occupations, with a series of results. On the one hand, it has the potential to boost proficiency and efficiency, develop brand-new jobs, enable employees to focus on more ingenious jobs, and open brand-new horizons for imagination and innovation.

67. However, while AI guarantees to improve efficiency by taking control of mundane tasks, it often forces employees to adapt to the speed and needs of machines instead of makers being developed to support those who work. As an outcome, contrary to the marketed benefits of AI, present methods to the technology can paradoxically deskill employees, subject them to automated security, and relegate them to rigid and repeated jobs. The requirement to stay up to date with the rate of technology can deteriorate employees' sense of firm and stifle the ingenious capabilities they are anticipated to give their work. [125]
68. AI is presently removing the need for some tasks that were when carried out by human beings. If AI is used to change human workers instead of match them, there is a "substantial danger of disproportionate benefit for the few at the rate of the impoverishment of many." [126] Additionally, as AI becomes more powerful, there is an associated risk that human labor may lose its value in the financial world. This is the sensible effect of the technocratic paradigm: a world of mankind oppressed to effectiveness, where, ultimately, the cost of humankind need to be cut. Yet, human lives are intrinsically important, independent of their financial output. Nevertheless, the "existing model," Pope Francis explains, "does not appear to favor an investment in efforts to assist the slow, the weak, or the less skilled to discover chances in life." [127] Due to this, "we can not allow a tool as powerful and essential as Artificial Intelligence to reinforce such a paradigm, but rather, we need to make Artificial Intelligence a bulwark against its growth." [128]
69. It is very important to keep in mind that "the order of things must be subordinate to the order of persons, 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 whole human individual [...] taking into account the individual's material needs and the requirements of his or her intellectual, ethical, spiritual, and religious life." [130] In this context, the Church recognizes that work is "not just a method of making one's daily bread" however is also "an essential dimension of social life" and "a method [...] of individual development, the structure of healthy relationships, self-expression and the exchange of presents. Work gives us a sense of shared obligation for the advancement of the world, and ultimately, for our life as an individuals." [131]
70. Since work is a "part of the significance of life on this earth, a course to development, human advancement and individual satisfaction," "the goal should not be that technological progress progressively replaces human work, for this would be damaging to mankind" [132] -rather, it must promote human labor. Seen in this light, AI must help, not replace, human judgment. Similarly, it needs to never break down creativity or minimize workers to mere "cogs in a maker." Therefore, "regard for the dignity of laborers and the importance of work for the economic wellness of people, families, and societies, for task security and simply salaries, ought to be a high priority for the international community as these kinds of innovation penetrate more deeply into our workplaces." [133]
71. As individuals in God's healing work, healthcare specialists have the vocation and responsibility to be "guardians and servants of human life." [134] Because of this, the health care occupation brings an "intrinsic and undeniable ethical measurement," acknowledged by the Hippocratic Oath, which obliges doctors and health care specialists to dedicate themselves to having "absolute regard for human life and its sacredness." [135] Following the example of the Good Samaritan, this dedication is to be brought out by men and females "who turn down the creation of a society of exemption, and act instead as neighbors, raising up and fixing up the fallen for the sake of the typical good." [136]
72. Seen in this light, AI seems to hold enormous potential in a variety of applications in the medical field, such as assisting the diagnostic work of healthcare suppliers, facilitating relationships between clients and medical personnel, offering brand-new treatments, and broadening access to quality care likewise for those who are isolated or marginalized. In these methods, the technology might improve the "caring and caring closeness" [137] that healthcare service providers are called to extend to the ill and suffering.

73. However, if AI is utilized not to boost however to replace the relationship between patients and health care providers-leaving patients to engage with a maker instead of a human being-it would decrease a most importantly important human relational structure to a central, impersonal, and unequal framework. Instead of encouraging uniformity with the ill and suffering, such applications of AI would risk aggravating the isolation that typically accompanies health problem, specifically in the context of a culture where "individuals are no longer seen as a paramount worth to be taken care of and respected." [138] This abuse of AI would not align with regard for the self-respect of the human individual and solidarity with the suffering.

74. Responsibility for the wellness of clients and the decisions that touch upon their lives are at the heart of the health care profession. This responsibility needs medical experts to work out all their skill and intelligence in making well-reasoned and fairly grounded options regarding those turned over to their care, constantly appreciating the inviolable dignity of the patients and the requirement for informed approval. As a result, choices regarding client treatment and the weight of responsibility they entail must always remain with the human person and ought to never ever be handed over to AI. [139]
75. In addition, utilizing AI to determine who must receive treatment based mainly on economic steps or metrics of efficiency represents an especially bothersome instance of the "technocratic paradigm" that should be turned down. [140] For, "optimizing resources implies using them in an ethical and fraternal way, and not punishing the most fragile." [141] Additionally, AI tools in healthcare are "exposed to forms of predisposition and discrimination," where "systemic errors can easily multiply, producing not just injustices in private cases but also, due to the cause and effect, real kinds of social inequality." [142]
76. The combination of AI into health care also positions the threat of enhancing other existing disparities in access to treatment. As healthcare ends up being increasingly oriented toward prevention and lifestyle-based approaches, AI-driven services might accidentally favor more affluent populations who currently take pleasure in much better access to medical resources and quality nutrition. This pattern threats strengthening a "medicine for the abundant" design, where those with monetary means gain from sophisticated preventative tools and customized health details while others struggle to gain access to even standard services. To avoid such inequities, fair frameworks are required to make sure that making use of AI in healthcare does not worsen existing healthcare inequalities but rather serves the typical good.

77. The words of the Second Vatican Council remain fully relevant today: "True education aims to form individuals with a view towards their last end and the good of the society to which they belong." [143] As such, education is "never a mere process of passing on realities and intellectual skills: rather, its aim is to contribute to the individual's holistic formation in its numerous elements (intellectual, cultural, spiritual, and so on), including, for instance, neighborhood life and relations within the academic community," [144] in keeping with the nature and self-respect of the human person.

78. This method includes a commitment to cultivating the mind, however constantly as a part of the essential development of the person: "We need to break that idea of education which holds that informing ways filling one's head with ideas. That is the way we inform automatons, cerebral minds, not individuals. Educating is taking a threat in the stress between the mind, the heart, and the hands." [145]
79. At the center of this work of forming the entire human individual is the important relationship between instructor and trainee. Teachers do more than communicate knowledge; they model important human qualities and motivate the delight of discovery. [146] Their presence motivates trainees both through the content they teach and the care they show for their trainees. This bond promotes trust, good understanding, and the capability to attend to each person's unique dignity and potential. On the part of the trainee, this can produce a real desire to grow. The physical presence of an instructor creates a relational dynamic that AI can not reproduce, one that deepens engagement and nurtures the trainee's important development.

80. In this context, AI provides both opportunities and difficulties. If used in a prudent way, within the context of an existing teacher-student relationship and ordered to the genuine goals of education, AI can become a valuable instructional resource by enhancing access to education, using tailored assistance, and supplying immediate feedback to trainees. These benefits might boost the learning experience, specifically in cases where personalized attention is required, or educational resources are otherwise scarce.

81. Nevertheless, an essential part of education is forming "the intellect to factor well in all matters, to reach out towards fact, and to comprehend it," [147] while assisting the "language of the head" to grow harmoniously with the "language of the heart" and the "language of the hands." [148] This is even more important in an age marked by innovation, in which "it is no longer simply a question of 'utilizing' instruments of interaction, however of living in an extremely digitalized culture that has had a profound influence on [...] our capability to interact, discover, be notified and participate in relationship with others." [149] However, instead of promoting "a cultivated intelligence," which "brings with it a power and a grace to every work and occupation that it carries out," [150] the substantial use of AI in education might lead to the trainees' increased dependence on technology, deteriorating their ability to carry out some abilities separately and aggravating their dependence on screens. [151]
82. Additionally, while some AI systems are created to help people develop their critical believing abilities and problem-solving abilities, lots of others merely offer responses instead of triggering trainees to come to answers themselves or write text for themselves. [152] Instead of training young individuals how to amass details and generate fast responses, education ought to encourage "the accountable use of freedom to deal with issues with common sense and intelligence." [153] Building on this, "education in using forms of expert system should aim above all at promoting critical thinking. Users of all ages, but specifically the young, require to develop a discerning technique to making use of information and content collected online or produced by synthetic intelligence systems. Schools, universities, and scientific societies are challenged to assist trainees and professionals to understand the social and ethical elements of the development and usages of innovation." [154]
83. As Saint John Paul II recalled, "in the world today, defined by such fast developments in science and technology, the tasks of a Catholic University presume an ever greater significance and urgency." [155] In a particular way, Catholic universities are prompted to be present as excellent labs of hope at this crossroads of history. In an inter-disciplinary and cross-disciplinary secret, they are urged to engage "with knowledge and creativity" [156] in mindful research study on this phenomenon, assisting to draw out the salutary capacity within the numerous fields of science and truth, and directing them constantly towards fairly sound applications that plainly serve the cohesion of our societies and the typical great, reaching new frontiers in the dialogue in between faith and reason.

84. Moreover, it ought to be noted that existing AI programs have been known to supply biased or made details, which can lead trainees to trust unreliable material. This problem "not just runs the danger of legitimizing fake news and enhancing a dominant culture's benefit, but, in other words, it likewise undermines the academic procedure itself." [157] With time, clearer differences might emerge between appropriate and improper usages of AI in education and research. Yet, a decisive guideline is that the use of AI need to always be transparent and never misrepresented.

85. AI could be used as an aid to human dignity if it assists individuals understand complex ideas or directs them to sound resources that support their search for the reality. [158]
86. However, AI also provides a major risk of creating controlled content and incorrect details, which can easily misguide individuals due to its similarity to the fact. Such misinformation may take place unintentionally, as in the case of AI "hallucination," where a generative AI system yields results that appear real however are not. Since creating content that simulates human artifacts is main to AI's functionality, reducing these risks shows challenging. Yet, the consequences of such aberrations and false details can be rather grave. For this factor, all those included in producing and utilizing AI systems ought to be dedicated to the truthfulness and accuracy of the details processed by such systems and shared to the general public.

87. While AI has a latent potential to create false details, a much more troubling problem lies in the intentional misuse of AI for manipulation. This can take place when people or organizations intentionally generate and spread out incorrect material with the aim to trick or cause harm, such as "deepfake" images, videos, and audio-referring to an incorrect representation of an individual, edited or produced by an AI algorithm. The danger of deepfakes is especially evident when they are utilized to target or hurt others. While the images or videos themselves might be synthetic, the damage they trigger is real, leaving "deep scars in the hearts of those who suffer it" and "genuine wounds in their human self-respect." [159]
88. On a wider scale, by distorting "our relationship with others and with truth," [160] AI-generated fake media can gradually weaken the foundations of society. This concern needs careful regulation, as misinformation-especially through AI-controlled or influenced media-can spread unintentionally, sustaining political polarization and social unrest. When society becomes indifferent to the fact, numerous groups construct their own of "truths," damaging the "mutual ties and mutual reliances" [161] that underpin the material of social life. As deepfakes cause individuals to question whatever and AI-generated incorrect content erodes trust in what they see and hear, polarization and dispute will only grow. Such extensive deceptiveness is no trivial matter; it strikes at the core of humankind, taking apart the fundamental trust on which societies are constructed. [162]
89. Countering AI-driven falsehoods is not only the work of market experts-it needs the efforts of all individuals of goodwill. "If innovation is to serve human self-respect and not hurt it, and if it is to promote peace instead of violence, then the human neighborhood should be proactive in resolving these trends with regard to human self-respect and the promotion of the excellent." [163] Those who produce and share AI-generated material ought to constantly work out diligence in validating the fact of what they distribute and, in all cases, need to "avoid the sharing of words and images that are deteriorating of humans, that promote hatred and intolerance, that debase the goodness and intimacy of human sexuality or that exploit the weak and susceptible." [164] This requires the ongoing prudence and careful discernment of all users concerning their activity online. [165]
90. Humans are naturally relational, and the data everyone produces in the digital world can be viewed as an objectified expression of this relational nature. Data conveys not just details but also individual and relational knowledge, which, in a progressively digitized context, can total up to power over the individual. Moreover, while some types of information may pertain to public elements of a person's life, others might touch upon the individual's interiority, possibly even their conscience. Seen in this way, privacy plays a necessary role in securing the boundaries of an individual's inner life, maintaining their freedom to associate with others, reveal themselves, and make decisions without undue control. This protection is likewise connected to the defense of religious flexibility, as monitoring can also be misused to apply control over the lives of believers and how they reveal their faith.

91. It is appropriate, for that reason, to attend to the concern of personal privacy from a concern for the genuine freedom and inalienable dignity of the human individual "in all circumstances." [166] The Second Vatican Council consisted of the right "to secure privacy" amongst the basic rights "needed for living a truly human life," a right that needs to be encompassed all people on account of their "superb dignity." [167] Furthermore, the Church has actually likewise affirmed the right to the legitimate respect for a personal life in the context of affirming the person's right to an excellent credibility, defense of their physical and psychological integrity, and flexibility from damage or excessive intrusion [168] -vital components of the due regard for the intrinsic self-respect of the human individual. [169]
92. Advances in AI-powered information processing and analysis now make it possible to presume patterns in an individual's habits and thinking from even a percentage of details, making the role of information privacy even more vital as a protect for the self-respect and relational nature of the human individual. As Pope Francis observed, "while closed and intolerant mindsets towards others are on the increase, distances are otherwise diminishing or disappearing to the point that the right to privacy scarcely exists. Everything has become a type of spectacle to be examined and inspected, and people's lives are now under constant surveillance." [170]
93. While there can be legitimate and correct methods to use AI in keeping with human self-respect and the common excellent, utilizing it for security aimed at making use of, limiting others' liberty, or benefitting a couple of at the expenditure of the numerous is unjustifiable. The danger of security overreach must be kept track of by suitable regulators to guarantee openness and public responsibility. Those accountable for security should never surpass their authority, which should constantly prefer the dignity and freedom of every person as the essential basis of a just and humane society.

94. Furthermore, "basic respect for human self-respect demands that we decline to permit the individuality of the individual to be determined with a set of information." [171] This especially uses when AI is used to evaluate people or groups based on their behavior, attributes, or history-a practice understood as "social scoring": "In social and financial decision-making, we need to beware about delegating judgments to algorithms that process information, typically collected surreptitiously, on an individual's makeup and previous habits. Such information can be polluted by societal prejudices and preconceptions. An individual's previous habits should not be utilized to reject him or her the chance to alter, grow, and contribute to society. We can not allow algorithms to restrict or condition regard for human dignity, or to exclude compassion, mercy, forgiveness, and above all, the hope that individuals are able to alter." [172]
95. AI has numerous appealing applications for improving our relationship with our "common home," such as developing models to forecast extreme climate occasions, proposing engineering solutions to minimize their impact, managing relief operations, and forecasting population shifts. [173] Additionally, AI can support sustainable farming, optimize energy usage, and supply early caution systems for public health emergencies. These improvements have the potential to strengthen strength against climate-related obstacles and promote more sustainable advancement.

96. At the same time, existing AI designs and the hardware needed to support them take in large quantities of energy and water, significantly adding to CO2 emissions and straining resources. This reality 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 kept and processed in an intangible world, removed from the real world. However, "the cloud" is not a heavenly domain separate from the real world; similar to all calculating technologies, it counts on physical devices, cables, and energy. The exact same is true of the technology behind AI. As these systems grow in complexity, especially big language designs (LLMs), they require ever-larger datasets, increased computational power, and higher storage facilities. Considering the heavy toll these technologies take on the environment, it is vital to develop sustainable solutions that minimize their influence on our common home.

97. Even then, as Pope Francis teaches, it is essential "that we search for solutions not just in technology but in a modification of mankind." [175] A complete and genuine understanding of development acknowledges that the value of all created things can not be reduced to their simple energy. Therefore, a totally human technique to the stewardship of the earth rejects the distorted anthropocentrism of the technocratic paradigm, which looks for to "extract everything possible" from the world, [176] and rejects the "myth of development," which assumes that "eco-friendly problems will resolve themselves merely with the application of brand-new innovation and with no need for ethical factors to consider or deep modification." [177] Such a frame of mind needs to pave the way to a more holistic method that respects the order of development and promotes the integral good of the human individual while safeguarding our typical home. [178]
98. The Second Vatican Council and the consistent mentor of the Popes ever since have firmly insisted that peace is not merely the absence of war and is not limited to maintaining a balance of powers in between enemies. Instead, in the words of Saint Augustine, peace is "the harmony of order." [179] Certainly, peace can not be attained without securing the goods of individuals, complimentary interaction, regard for the self-respect of individuals and peoples, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is the work of justice and the impact of charity and can not be attained through force alone; instead, it must be mainly constructed through patient diplomacy, the active promotion of justice, uniformity, integral human advancement, and regard for the self-respect of all people. [180] In this method, the tools used to maintain peace needs to never be permitted to validate injustice, violence, or oppression. Instead, they need to constantly be governed by a "firm decision to respect other people and countries, along with their self-respect, as well as the intentional practice of fraternity." [181]
99. While AI's analytical capabilities might help nations seek peace and make sure security, the "weaponization of Artificial Intelligence" can also be extremely troublesome. Pope Francis has observed that "the ability to conduct military operations through push-button control systems has led to a decreased perception of the destruction triggered by those weapon systems and the burden of duty for their usage, resulting in an even more cold and detached technique to the enormous disaster of war." [182] Moreover, the ease with which self-governing weapons make war more practical militates against the concept of war as a last resort in genuine self-defense, [183] possibly increasing the instruments of war well beyond the scope of human oversight and precipitating a destabilizing arms race, with devastating consequences for human rights. [184]
100. In specific, Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, which are capable of identifying and striking targets without direct human intervention, are a "cause for serious ethical issue" because they lack the "unique human capacity for ethical judgment and ethical decision-making." [185] For this factor, Pope Francis has actually urgently required a reconsideration of the advancement of these weapons and a restriction on their use, beginning with "a reliable and concrete commitment to introduce ever higher and appropriate human control. No device ought to ever choose to take the life of a person." [186]
101. Since it is a little action from makers that can kill autonomously with accuracy to those efficient in massive destruction, some AI researchers have actually revealed issues that such technology presents an "existential danger" by having the possible to act in methods that might threaten the survival of whole regions or even of humankind itself. This danger demands serious attention, showing the long-standing issue about technologies that approve war "an unmanageable destructive power over great numbers of innocent civilians," [187] without even sparing kids. In this context, the call from Gaudium et Spes to "carry out an assessment of war with an entirely new mindset" [188] is more immediate than ever.

102. At the exact same time, while the theoretical dangers of AI should have attention, the more instant and pressing concern depends on how individuals with malicious intents might misuse this technology. [189] Like any tool, AI is an extension of human power, and while its future abilities are unforeseeable, humankind's past actions provide clear cautions. The atrocities devoted throughout history are enough to raise deep issues about the potential abuses of AI.

103. Saint John Paul II observed that "humankind now has instruments of unmatched power: we can turn this world into a garden, or minimize it to a stack of debris." [190] Given this reality, the Church reminds us, in the words of Pope Francis, that "we are totally free to apply our intelligence towards things developing positively," or towards "decadence and mutual damage." [191] To prevent mankind from spiraling into self-destruction, [192] there must be a clear stand against all applications of technology that inherently threaten human life and dignity. This dedication requires cautious discernment about making use of AI, particularly in military defense applications, to make sure that it always respects human self-respect and serves the typical good. The advancement and implementation of AI in weaponries must go through the greatest levels of ethical examination, governed by an issue for human self-respect and the sanctity of life. [193]
104. Technology offers impressive tools to manage and establish the world's resources. However, in some cases, mankind is significantly ceding control of these resources to devices. Within some circles of researchers and futurists, there is optimism about the potential of artificial general intelligence (AGI), a theoretical kind of AI that would match or surpass human intelligence and bring about unthinkable advancements. Some even hypothesize that AGI might attain superhuman abilities. At the very same time, as society wanders away from a connection with the transcendent, some are tempted to turn to AI searching for significance or fulfillment-longings that can only be truly satisfied in communion with God. [194]
105. However, the anticipation 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 might prove a lot more sexy than conventional idols for, unlike idols that "have mouths but do not speak; eyes, but 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 important to bear in mind that AI is but a pale reflection of humanity-it is crafted by human minds, trained on human-generated material, responsive to human input, and sustained through human labor. AI can not have numerous of the abilities specific to human life, and it is also imperfect. By turning to AI as a perceived "Other" greater than itself, with which to share presence and duties, humankind threats producing a substitute for God. However, it is not AI that is eventually deified and worshipped, however humanity itself-which, in this method, ends up being enslaved to its own work. [195]
106. While AI has the potential to serve humanity and add to the common great, it remains a production of human hands, bearing "the imprint of human art and resourcefulness" (Acts 17:29). It needs to never ever be ascribed excessive worth. As the Book of Wisdom affirms: "For a male made them, and one whose spirit is obtained formed them; for no male can form a god which resembles himself. He is mortal, and what he makes with lawless hands is dead, for he is much better than the things he worships because he has life, but they never have" (Wis. 15:16 -17).

107. On the other hand, people, "by their interior life, transcend the whole 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 choose their own fate in the sight of God." [196] It is within the heart, as Pope Francis reminds us, that each individual discovers the "mystical connection in between self-knowledge and openness to others, between the encounter with one's individual individuality and the determination to provide oneself to others. " [197] Therefore, it is the heart alone that is "efficient in setting our other powers and passions, and our entire individual, in a position of reverence and loving obedience before the Lord," [198] who "offers to treat every one of us as a 'Thou,' always and permanently." [199]
108. Considering the various obstacles posed by advances in innovation, Pope Francis emphasized the need for development in "human duty, values, and conscience," proportionate to the growth in the capacity that this innovation brings [200] -recognizing that "with an increase in human power comes a widening of obligation on the part of individuals and neighborhoods." [201]
109. At the very same time, the "vital and essential question" remains "whether in the context of this development male, as man, is becoming genuinely better, that is to say, more fully grown spiritually, more knowledgeable about the dignity of his humanity, more accountable, more available to others, especially the neediest and the weakest, and readier to offer and to aid all." [202]
110. As an outcome, it is important to know how to evaluate private applications of AI in particular contexts to determine whether its use promotes human self-respect, the vocation of the human person, and the common good. As with many technologies, the results of the numerous uses of AI may not constantly be foreseeable from their beginning. 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, households, civil society, corporations, institutions, governments, and worldwide companies need to operate at their proper levels to guarantee that AI is used for the good of all.

111. A considerable difficulty and chance for the common great today lies in thinking about AI within a framework of relational intelligence, which stresses the interconnectedness of people and neighborhoods and highlights our shared responsibility for promoting the essential well-being of others. The twentieth-century philosopher Nicholas Berdyaev observed that people frequently blame makers for personal and social issues; however, "this just embarrasses man and does not correspond to his dignity," for "it is not worthy to transfer obligation from male to a machine." [203] Only the human individual can be morally responsible, and the difficulties of a technological society are ultimately spiritual in nature. Therefore, facing those difficulties "needs an accumulation of spirituality." [204]
112. A further indicate consider is the call, triggered by the appearance of AI on the world stage, for a restored appreciation of all that is human. Years ago, the French Catholic author Georges Bernanos cautioned that "the risk is not in the multiplication of makers, but in the ever-increasing number of guys accustomed from their youth to desire only what machines can provide." [205] This challenge is as real today as it was then, as the quick pace of digitization risks a "digital reductionism," where non-quantifiable aspects of life are reserved and after that forgotten and even deemed irrelevant due to the fact that they can not be calculated in formal terms. AI should be utilized only as a tool to match human intelligence rather than replace its richness. [206] Cultivating those elements of human life that go beyond computation is important for maintaining "an authentic mankind" that "seems to dwell in the middle of our technological culture, practically unnoticed, like a mist permeating gently underneath a closed door." [207]
113. The huge expanse of the world's knowledge is now available in manner ins which would have filled past generations with awe. However, to make sure that improvements in understanding do not end up being humanly or spiritually barren, one should exceed the mere accumulation of information and aim to attain true wisdom. [208]
114. This wisdom is the gift that humankind needs most to resolve the extensive questions and ethical obstacles presented by AI: "Only by adopting a spiritual method of viewing truth, only by recovering a wisdom of the heart, can we challenge and translate the newness of our time." [209] Such "knowledge of the heart" is "the virtue that enables us to integrate the entire and its parts, our choices and their consequences." It "can not be looked for from makers," but it "lets itself be found by those who seek it and be seen by those who love it; it prepares for 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, situations, events and to reveal their real meaning." [211]
116. Since a "person's perfection is measured not by the details or understanding they have, but by the depth of their charity," [212] how we include AI "to include the least of our bros and sis, the vulnerable, and those most in need, will be the real procedure of our mankind." [213] The "knowledge of the heart" can illuminate and assist the human-centered usage of this technology to help promote the common great, care for our "common home," advance the search for the truth, foster important human development, favor human uniformity and fraternity, and lead humankind to its supreme goal: joy and complete communion with God. [214]
117. From this point of view of knowledge, believers will be able to act as moral representatives capable of utilizing this innovation to promote a genuine vision of the human person and society. [215] This must be finished with the understanding that technological progress is part of God's plan for creation-an activity that we are contacted us to buy toward the Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ, in the continual look for the True and the Good.

The Supreme Pontiff, Francis, at the Audience granted on 14 January 2025 to the undersigned Prefects and Secretaries of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Dicastery for Culture and Education, approved this Note and bought 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 Proposal for the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence" (31 August 1955), http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/history/dartmouth/dartmouth.html (accessed: 21 October 2024). [6] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), pars. 2-3: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [7] Terms in this document explaining the outputs or processes of AI are utilized figuratively to explain its operations and are not planned to anthropomorphize the machine. [8] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3; Id., Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [9] Here, one can see the main positions of the "transhumanists" and the "posthumanists." Transhumanists argue that technological advancements will allow humans to conquer their biological constraints and enhance both their physical and cognitive abilities. Posthumanists, on the other hand, compete that such advances will ultimately change human identity to the degree that mankind itself may no longer be considered truly "human." Both views rest on a fundamentally negative understanding of human corporality, which treats the body more as a barrier than as an important part of the person's identity and contact us to full awareness. Yet, this negative view of the body is irregular with an appropriate 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, "dignity is also inherent in everyone's body, which gets involved in its own way in remaining in imago Dei" (Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita [8 April 2024], par. 18). [10] This technique reflects a functionalist viewpoint, which lowers the human mind to its functions and presumes that its functions can be entirely quantified in physical or mathematical terms. However, even if a future AGI were to appear really intelligent, it would still remain practical in nature. [11] Cf. A.M. Turing, "Computing Machinery and Intelligence," Mind 59 (1950) 443-460. [12] If "thinking" is associated to machines, it should be clarified that this refers to calculative thinking rather than critical thinking. Similarly, if makers are said to run utilizing sensible thinking, it needs to be specified that this is restricted to computational logic. On the other hand, by its very nature, human idea is a creative procedure that avoids programming and transcends constraints. [13] On the fundamental role of language in forming understanding, cf. M. Heidegger, Über den Humanismus, Klostermann, Frankfurt am Main 1949 (en. tr. "Letter on Humanism," in Basic Writings: Martin Heidegger, Routledge, London - New York 2010, 141-182). [14] For additional discussion of these anthropological and doctrinal structures, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 43-144. [15] Aristotle, Metaphysics, I. 1, 980 a 21. [16] Cf. Augustine, De Genesi advertisement litteram III, 20, 30: PL 34, 292: "Man is made in the image of God in relation to that [professors] by which he is superior to the illogical animals. Now, this [professors] is reason itself, or the 'mind,' or 'intelligence,' whatever other name it might more appropriately be given"; Id., Enarrationes in Psalmos 54, 3: PL 36, 629: "When thinking about all that they have, humans find that they are most distinguished from animals specifically by the fact they possess intelligence." This is also repeated by Saint Thomas Aquinas, who specifies that "male is the most best of all earthly beings endowed with motion, and his proper and natural operation is intellection," by which man abstracts from things and "receives in his mind things actually intelligible" (Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 76). [17] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [18] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 49, a. 5, advertisement 3. Cf. ibid., I, q. 79; II-II, q. 47, a. 3; II-II, q. 49, a. 2. For a modern viewpoint that echoes aspects of the classical and medieval difference between these 2 modes of cognition, cf. D. Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, New York City 2011. [19] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 76, a. 1, resp. [20] Cf. Irenaeus of Lyon, Adversus Haereses, V, 6, 1: PG 7( 2 ), 1136-1138. [21] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 9. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1045: "The intelligence can examine the reality of things through reflection, experience and dialogue, and pertain to recognize in that reality, which transcends it, the basis of certain universal ethical needs." [22] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [23] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 365. Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 75, a. 4, resp. [24] Certainly, Sacred Scripture "usually thinks about the human individual as a being who exists in the body and is unimaginable beyond it" (Pontifical Biblical Commission, "Che cosa è l'uomo?" (Sal 8,5): Un itinerario di antropologia biblica [30 September 2019], par. 19). Cf. ibid., pars. 20-21, 43-44, 48. [25] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 22: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1042: Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 7: AAS 100 (2008 ), 863: "Christ did not disdain human bodiliness, but rather fully revealed 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 thus it is joined to the body in order that it may have an existence and an operation suitable to its nature." [29] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1035. Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 18. [30] International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 56. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 357. [31] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), pars. 5, 8; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 15, 24, 53-54. [32] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 356. Cf. ibid., par. 221. [33] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 13, 26-27. [34] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Donum Veritatis (24 May 1990), 6: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1552. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), par. 109: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1219. Cf. Pseudo-Dionysius, De divinis nominibus, VII, 2: PG 3, 868B-C: "Human souls likewise possess factor and with it they circle in discourse around the reality of things. [...] [O] n account of the manner in which they are capable of concentrating the lots of into the one, they too, in their own fashion and as far as they can, are worthwhile of conceptions like those of the angels" (en. tr. Pseudo-Dionysius: The Complete Works, Paulist Press, New York - Mahwah 1987, 106-107). [35] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 3: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7. [36] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [37] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 42: AAS 91 (1999 ), 38. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 208: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1043: "the human mind is capable of going beyond immediate issues and understanding certain realities that are imperishable, as true now as in the past. As it peers into humanity, factor finds universal values obtained from that exact same nature"; ibid., par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034. [38] Cf. B. Pascal, Pensées, no. 267 (ed. Brunschvicg): "The last case of factor is to 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 Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [40] Our semantic capability enables us to understand messages in any form of communication in a manner that both considers and transcends their product or empirical structures (such as computer code). Here, intelligence becomes a wisdom that "allows us to take a look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, scenarios, occasions and to reveal their genuine meaning" (Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications [24 January 2024]: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8). Our creativity allows us to produce brand-new material or concepts, mainly by offering an initial viewpoint on reality. Both capabilities depend upon the existence of an individual subjectivity for their complete 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 reality, is far more than personal sensation [...] Certainly, its close relation to reality fosters its universality and maintains it from being 'confined to a narrow field lacking relationships.' [...] Charity's openness to reality thus 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 estimate in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 293. Cf. ibid., par. 294. [47] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 295, 299, 302. Bonaventure compares the universe to "a book reflecting, representing, and explaining its Maker," the Triune God who grants presence to all things (Breviloquium 2.12.1). Cf. Alain de Lille, De Incarnatione Christi, PL 210, 579a: "Omnis mundi creatura quasi liber et pictura nobis est et speculum." [48] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 67: AAS 107 (2015 ), 874; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 6: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589-592; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 57: "humans occupy a distinct location in the universe according to the magnificent plan: they delight in the opportunity of sharing in the divine governance of visible production. [...] Since guy's location as ruler remains in truth a participation in the divine governance of creation, we speak of it here as a form of stewardship." [49] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), pars. 38-39: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1164-1165. [50] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. This concept is likewise shown in the development account, where God brings animals to Adam "to see what he would call them. And whatever [he] called every living animal, that was its name" (Gen. 2:19), an action that shows the active engagement of human intelligence in the stewardship of God's creation. Cf. John Chrysostom, Homiliae in Genesim, XIV, 17-21: PG 53, 116-117. [51] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 301. [52] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 302. [53] Bonaventure, Breviloquium 2.12.1. Cf. ibid., 2.11.2. [54] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 236: AAS 105 (2023 ), 1115; Id., Address to Participants in the Meeting of University Chaplains and Pastoral Workers Promoted by the Dicastery for Culture and Education (24 November 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 November 2023, 7. [55] Cf. J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 5.1, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 99-100; Francis, Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [56] Francis, Address to the Members of the National Confederation of Artisans and Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises (CNA) (15 November 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 15 November 2024, 8. [57] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Querida Amazonia (2 February 2020), par. 41: AAS 112 (2020 ), 246; Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 146: AAS 107 (2015 ), 906. [58] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 864. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), pars. 17-24: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47-50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985-987. [59] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 20: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [60] P. Claudel, Conversation sur Jean Racine, Gallimard, Paris 1956, 32: "L'intelligence n'est rien sans la délectation." Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 13: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5: "The mind and the will are put at the service of the greater good by noticing 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, objective and universal, by which God orders, directs and governs the entire world and the ways of the human neighborhood according to a plan conceived in his knowledge and love. God has actually made it possible for man to participate in this law of his so that, under the mild disposition of divine providence, numerous might have the ability to reach a much deeper and deeper understanding of unchangeable reality." Also cf. Id., Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. [63] Cf. First Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius (24 April 1870), ch. 4, DH 3016. [64] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [65] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 891. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 204: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1042. [66] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 11: AAS 83 (1991 ), 807: "God has inscribed his own image and similarity on man (cf. Gen 1:26), providing upon him a matchless self-respect [...] In result, beyond the rights which man obtains by his own work, there exist rights which do not represent any work he carries out, however which flow from his essential dignity as a person." Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [67] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 8. Cf. ibid., par. 9; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 22. [68] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2024 ), 310. [69] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [70] In this sense, "Artificial Intelligence" is understood as a technical term to indicate this innovation, remembering that the expression is also utilized to designate the discipline and not just 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 exploration in Albertus Magnus (De Mineralibus, II, 2, 1) and the gratitude for the mechanical arts in Hugh of St. Victor (Didascalicon, I, 9). These writers, among a long list of other Catholics participated in clinical research study and technological exploration, illustrate that "faith and science can be unified in charity, offered that science is put at the service of the men and lady 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 man a moral subject. When he acts deliberately, guy is, so to speak, the dad of his acts." [82] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1776. [83] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1777. [84] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 1779-1781; Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 463, where the Holy Father encouraged efforts "to make sure that innovation remains human-centered, fairly grounded and directed toward the good." [85] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 166: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1026-1027; Id., Address to the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (23 September 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 September 2024, 10. On the function of human company in choosing a wider aim (Ziel) that then notifies the specific function (Zweck) for which each technological application is produced, 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 purpose and, in its effect on human society, always represents a kind of order in social relations and a plan of power, thus making it possible for certain people to perform specific actions while avoiding others from carrying out various ones. In a more or less specific way, this constitutive power-dimension of technology always includes the worldview of those who invented 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: "Faced with the marvels of makers, which seem to know how to select individually, we need to be really clear that decision-making [...] must constantly be left to the human person. We would condemn humanity to a future without hope if we removed people's ability to make decisions about themselves and their lives, by dooming them to depend upon the choices of makers." [92] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [93] The term "bias" in this document describes algorithmic bias (organized and constant errors in computer system systems that might disproportionately bias certain groups in unintended methods) or discovering predisposition (which will result in training on a prejudiced data set) and not the "predisposition vector" in neural networks (which is a criterion used to adjust the output of "neurons" to change more precisely to the information). [94] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464, where the Holy Father verified the growth in agreement "on the requirement for development procedures to respect such values as inclusion, transparency, security, equity, privacy and dependability," and likewise welcomed "the efforts of global companies to manage these innovations so that they promote genuine development, contributing, that is, to a better world and an integrally greater quality of life." [95] Francis, Greetings to a Delegation of the "Max Planck Society" (23 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 February 2023, 8. [96] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [97] Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1571. [98] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. For further conversation of the ethical concerns raised by AI from a Catholic viewpoint, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 147-253. [99] On the significance of discussion in a pluralist society oriented towards a "robust and strong social principles," see Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 211-214: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [100] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [101] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [102] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [103] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. [104] Cf. Pontifical Council for Social Communications, Ethics in Internet (22 February 2002), par. 10. [105] Francis, Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414; estimating the Final Document of the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops (27 October 2018), par. 24: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1593. Cf. Benedict XVI, Address to the Participants in the International Congress on Natural Moral Law (12 February 2017): AAS 99 (2007 ), 245. [106] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-33: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047-1050. [107] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-21: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047. [108] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 308-309. [109] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [110] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [111] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 101, 103, 111, 115, 167: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1004-1005, 1007-1009, 1027. [112] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047; cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 35: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 123. [113] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 12: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1034. [114] Cf. Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church (2004 ), par. 149. [115] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [116] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [117] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 865. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), pars. 88-89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414. [118] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057. [119] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985. [120] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [121] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [122] Cf. E. Stein, Zum Problem der Einfühlung, Buchdruckerei des Waisenhauses, Halle 1917 (en. tr. On the Problem of Empathy, ICS Publications, Washington D.C. 1989). [123] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057:" [Many individuals] desire their interpersonal relationships provided by advanced equipment, by screens and systems which can be turned on and off on command. Meanwhile, the Gospel tells us continuously to risk of a face-to-face encounter with others, with their physical presence which challenges us, with their pain and their pleas, with their happiness which contaminates us in our close and constant interaction. True faith in the incarnate Son of God is inseparable from self-giving, from subscription in the community, from service, from reconciliation with others." Also cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 24: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1044-1045. [124] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 1. [125] Cf. Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570; Id, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 18, 124-129: AAS 107 (2015 ), 854.897-899. [126] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [127] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 209: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1107. [128] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4. For Pope Francis' teaching about AI in relationship to the "technocratic paradigm," cf. Id., Encyclical Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 106-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893. [129] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047.; as estimated in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1912. Cf. John XXIII, Encyclical Letter Mater et Magistra (15 May 1961), par. 219: AAS 53 (1961 ), 453. [130] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par 64: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1086. [131] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 162: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1025. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 6: AAS 73 (1981 ), 591: "work is 'for male' and not man 'for work.' Through this conclusion one appropriately pertains to acknowledge the pre-eminence of the subjective significance of work over the objective one." [132] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 128: AAS 107 (2015 ), 898. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 24: AAS 108 (2016 ), 319-320. [133] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [134] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae (25 March 1995), par. 89: AAS 87 (1995 ), 502. [135] Ibid. [136] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 67: AAS 112 (2020 ), 993; as priced estimate in Id., Message for the XXXI World Day of the Sick (11 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 10 January 2023, 8. [137] Francis, Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [138] Francis, Address to the Diplomatic Corps Accredited to the Holy See (11 January 2016): AAS 108 (2016 ), 120. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 18: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975; Id., Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [139] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465; Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [140] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105, 107: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-890; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 18-21: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975-976; Id., Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465. [141] Francis, Address to the Participants at the Meeting Sponsored by the Charity and Health Commission of the Italian Bishops' Conference (10 February 2017): AAS 109 (2017 ), 243. Cf. ibid., 242-243: "If there is a sector in which the throwaway culture is manifest, with its painful effects, it is that of health care. When a sick individual is not positioned in the center or their dignity is not thought about, this triggers attitudes that can lead even to speculation on the bad luck of others. And this is very grave! [...] The application of a business approach to the healthcare sector, if indiscriminate [...] might run the risk of disposing of people." [142] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [143] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729. [144] Congregation for Catholic Education, Instruction on 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 modern person] does listen to teachers, it is because they are witnesses." [147] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 6.1, London 18733, 125-126. [148] Francis, Consulting 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, estimating 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 making use of generative AI in education and research study, UNESCO notes: "One of the essential questions [of using generative AI (GenAI) in education and research] is whether humans can possibly cede 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 instance, is often related to the structuring of thinking. With GenAI [...], humans can now start with a well-structured outline provided by GenAI. Some experts have defined using GenAI to generate text in this method as 'composing without thinking'" (UNESCO, Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research [2023], 37-38). The German-American thinker Hannah Arendt foresaw such a possibility in her 1959 book, The Human Condition, and cautioned: "If it should end up being true that knowledge (in the sense of knowledge) and believed have actually parted business for good, then we would certainly end up being the defenseless slaves, not so much of our devices since our know-how" (Id., The Human Condition, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 20182, 3). [153] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 262: AAS 108 (2016 ), 417. [154] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 7: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3; cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 167: AAS 107 (2015 ), 914. [155] John Paul II, Apostolic Constitution Ex Corde Ecclesiae (15 August 1990), 7: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1479. [156] Francis, Apostolic Constitution Veritatis Gaudium (29 January 2018), 4c: AAS 110 (2018 ), 9-10. [157] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3. [158] For example, it may assist individuals gain access to the "range of resources for generating higher understanding of truth" 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 question of whether what they know holds true or not. [...] It is this that Saint Augustine teaches when he composes: 'I have met many who wanted to deceive, but none who desired to be tricked'"; pricing quote Augustine, Confessiones, X, 23, 33: PL 32, 794. [163] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), par. 62. [164] Benedict XVI, Message for the XLIII World Day of Social Communications (24 May 2009): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2009, 8. [165] Cf. Dicastery for Communications, Towards Full Presence: A Pastoral Reflection on Engagement with Social Network (28 May 2023), par. 41; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Decree Inter Mirifica (4 December 1963), pars. 4, 8-12: AAS 56 (1964 ), 146, 148-149. [166] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 1, 6, 16, 24. [167] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046. Cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 40: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 127: "no male may with impunity break that human self-respect which God himself treats with fantastic 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 privacy, by shielding residents from invasive security 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 identified a list of "early promises of AI assisting to deal with climate change" (United Nations AI Advisory Body, Interim Report: Governing AI for Humanity [December 2023], 3). The file observed that, "taken together with predictive systems that can change data into insights and insights into actions, AI-enabled tools may help develop new methods and investments to lower emissions, influence brand-new private sector investments in net zero, secure biodiversity, and construct broad-based social resilience" (ibid.). [174] "The cloud" refers to a network of physical servers throughout the world that makes it possible for 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 require to make sure and protect an area for appropriate human control over the options made by synthetic intelligence programs: human dignity itself depends on it." [186] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to Working Group II on Emerging Technologies at the UN Disarmament Commission (3 April 2024): "The advancement and usage of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) that do not have the suitable human control would present essential ethical issues, considered that LAWS can never ever be ethically accountable subjects 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 neglect the possibility of advanced weapons winding up in the incorrect hands, helping with, for example, terrorist attacks or interventions aimed at destabilizing the institutions of legitimate systems of government. In a word, the world does not need brand-new technologies that contribute to the unfair development of commerce and the weapons trade and as a result wind up promoting the folly of war." [190] John Paul II, Act of Entrustment to Mary for the Jubilee of Bishops (8 October 2000), par. 3: Insegnamenti XXIII/2 (200 ), 565. [191] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 79: AAS 107 (2015 ), 878. [192] Cf. Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 51: AAS 101 (2009 ), 687. [193] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39. [194] Cf. Augustine, Confessiones, I, 1, 1: PL 32, 661. [195] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (30 December 1987), par. 28: AAS 80 (1988 ), 548:" [T] here is a better understanding today that the simple accumulation of products and services [...] is inadequate for the awareness of human happiness. Nor, in effect, does the availability of the lots of real advantages supplied in recent times by science and technology, consisting of the computer sciences, bring flexibility from every form of slavery. On the contrary, [...] unless all the significant body of resources and possible at male's disposal is assisted by a moral understanding and by an orientation towards the real good of the mankind, it quickly turns against male to oppress him." Cf. ibid., pars. 29, 37: AAS 80 (1988 ), 550-551.563 -564. [196] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [197] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 18: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [198] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 27: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 6. [199] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 25: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5-6. [200] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. R. Guardini, Das Ende der Neuzeit, Würzburg 19659, 87 ff. (en. tr. The End of the Modern World, Wilmington 1998, 82-83). [201] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [202] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptor Hominis (4 March 1979), par. 15: AAS 71 (1979 ), 287-288. [203] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," in C. Mitcham - R. Mackey, eds., Philosophy and Technology: Readings in the Philosophical Problems of Technology, New York City 19832, 212-213. [204] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," 210. [205] G. Bernanos, "La révolution de la liberté" (1944 ), in Id., Le Chemin de la Croix-des-Âmes, Rocher 1987, 829. [206] Cf. Francis, Consulting 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 produce higher wisdom. Wisdom is not born of quick searches on the web nor is it a mass of unproven information. That is not the method to grow in the encounter with fact." [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.