GitLab

1. With knowledge both ancient and brand-new (cf. Mt. 13:52), we are contacted us to assess the present obstacles and opportunities postured by scientific and technological advancements, particularly by the recent advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The Christian tradition regards the gift of intelligence as an important aspect of how human beings are developed "in the image of God" (Gen. 1:27). Starting from an essential vision of the human individual and the biblical calling to "till" and "keep" the earth (Gen. 2:15), the Church highlights that this gift of intelligence ought to be revealed through the responsible use of reason and technical abilities in the stewardship of the created world.

2. The Church encourages the development of science, innovation, the arts, and other forms of human undertaking, seeing them as part of the "collaboration of male and lady with God in improving the visible creation." [1] As Sirach affirms, God "gave skill to people, that he may be glorified in his splendid works" (Sir. 38:6). Human abilities and imagination originate from God and, when utilized appropriately, glorify God by showing his knowledge and goodness. Because of this, when we ask ourselves what it indicates to "be human," we can not leave out a factor to consider of our clinical and technological capabilities.

3. It is within this perspective that the present Note addresses the anthropological and ethical difficulties raised by AI-issues that are particularly significant, as one of the objectives of this innovation is to imitate the human intelligence that created it. For instance, unlike lots of other human creations, AI can be trained on the results of human creativity and then produce new "artifacts" with a level of speed and ability that frequently equals or surpasses what humans can do, such as producing text or images identical from human compositions. This raises important issues about AI's prospective function in the growing crisis of truth in the public online forum. Moreover, this technology is developed to find out and make certain choices autonomously, adapting to brand-new situations and offering services not foreseen by its developers, and thus, it raises essential questions about ethical responsibility and human security, with broader ramifications for society as a whole. This brand-new situation has actually triggered many people to assess what it means to be human and the role of humankind in the world.

4. Taking all this into account, there is broad consensus that AI marks a new and substantial phase in humanity's engagement with technology, positioning it at the heart of what Pope Francis has explained as an "epochal change." [2] Its impact is felt globally and in a wide variety of areas, consisting of interpersonal relationships, education, work, art, health care, law, warfare, and worldwide relations. As AI advances quickly toward even higher accomplishments, it is critically crucial to consider its anthropological and ethical ramifications. This includes not just mitigating dangers and avoiding damage but likewise making sure that its applications are utilized to promote human development and the common good.

5. To contribute favorably to the discernment regarding AI, and in action to Pope Francis' call for a restored "wisdom of heart," [3] the Church provides its experience through the anthropological and ethical reflections contained in this Note. Committed to its active function in the worldwide dialogue on these concerns, the Church welcomes those turned over with sending the faith-including moms and dads, instructors, pastors, and bishops-to commit themselves to this crucial topic with care and attention. While this file is meant especially for them, it is also implied to be available to a broader audience, especially those who share the conviction that clinical and technological advances need to be directed towards serving the human individual and the common good. [4]
6. To this end, the file begins by differentiating between concepts of intelligence in AI and in human intelligence. It then checks out the Christian understanding of human intelligence, providing a structure rooted in the Church's philosophical and doctrinal tradition. Finally, the file provides guidelines to guarantee that the advancement and usage of AI maintain human self-respect and promote the essential advancement of the human person and society.

7. The principle of "intelligence" in AI has actually developed gradually, drawing on a variety of ideas from various disciplines. While its origins extend back centuries, a considerable turning point happened in 1956 when the American computer scientist John McCarthy arranged a summer season workshop at Dartmouth University to check out the issue of "Artificial Intelligence," which he defined as "that of making a machine act in manner ins which would be called smart if a human were so behaving." [5] This workshop launched a research program focused on designing makers efficient in carrying out jobs usually related to the human intellect and smart behavior.

8. Since then, AI research has actually advanced quickly, causing the development of complex systems efficient in carrying out extremely advanced tasks. [6] These so-called "narrow AI" systems are normally developed to manage specific and limited functions, such as equating languages, predicting the trajectory of a storm, classifying images, answering concerns, or creating visual content at the user's request. While the definition of "intelligence" in AI research varies, most modern AI systems-particularly those using device learning-rely on analytical inference rather than rational deduction. By evaluating large datasets to recognize patterns, AI can "predict" [7] results and propose brand-new techniques, imitating some cognitive procedures common of human analytical. Such achievements have been made possible through advances in computing technology (consisting of neural networks, without supervision artificial intelligence, and evolutionary algorithms) along with hardware developments (such as specialized processors). Together, these technologies make it possible for AI systems to react to numerous kinds of human input, adapt to new circumstances, and even suggest novel solutions not expected by their original programmers. [8]
9. Due to these fast developments, numerous tasks as soon as managed exclusively by human beings are now entrusted to AI. These systems can augment and even supersede what human beings have the ability to do in numerous fields, especially in specialized areas such as data analysis, image acknowledgment, and medical diagnosis. While each "narrow AI" application is created for a particular job, numerous researchers aim to develop what is called "Artificial General Intelligence" (AGI)-a single system capable of running throughout all cognitive domains and carrying out any job within the scope of human intelligence. Some even argue that AGI might one day attain the state of "superintelligence," going beyond human intellectual capacities, or contribute to "super-longevity" through advances in biotechnology. Others, however, fear that these possibilities, even if theoretical, might one day eclipse the human individual, while still others invite this prospective improvement. [9]
10. Underlying this and many other point of views on the topic is the implicit assumption that the term "intelligence" can be used in the exact same way to refer to both human intelligence and AI. Yet, this does not record the full scope of the principle. In the case of humans, intelligence is a professors that pertains to the person in his or her entirety, whereas in the context of AI, "intelligence" is understood functionally, typically with the anticipation that the activities quality of the human mind can be broken down into digitized steps that devices can duplicate. [10]
11. This functional point of view is exemplified by the "Turing Test," which thinks about a maker "intelligent" if a person can not differentiate its habits from that of a human. [11] However, in this context, the term "behavior" refers just to the efficiency of particular intellectual tasks; it does not represent the complete breadth of human experience, which includes abstraction, feelings, creativity, and the visual, ethical, and spiritual perceptiveness. Nor does it incorporate the complete range of expressions characteristic of the human mind. Instead, when it comes to AI, the "intelligence" of a system is evaluated methodologically, however likewise reductively, based on its capability to produce suitable responses-in this case, those connected with the human intellect-regardless of how those actions are produced.

12. AI's innovative functions provide it advanced capabilities to perform jobs, however not the capability to think. [12] This distinction is crucially essential, as the method "intelligence" is defined inevitably forms how we understand the relationship in between human idea and this innovation. [13] To value this, one should remember the richness of the philosophical tradition and Christian faith, which use a deeper and more detailed understanding of intelligence-an understanding that is main to the Church's mentor on the nature, dignity, and occupation of the human individual. [14]
13. From the dawn of human self-reflection, the mind has actually played a main function in understanding what it suggests to be "human." Aristotle observed that "all individuals by nature desire to understand." [15] This knowledge, with its capability for abstraction that comprehends the nature and significance of things, sets humans apart from the animal world. [16] As theorists, theologians, and psychologists have actually analyzed the precise nature of this intellectual faculty, they have also explored how human beings understand the world and their distinct place within it. Through this expedition, the Christian tradition has pertained to understand the human individual as a being including both body and soul-deeply connected to this world and yet transcending it. [17]
14. In the classical tradition, the principle of intelligence is often understood through the complementary principles of "reason" (ratio) and "intelligence" (intellectus). These are not different faculties but, as Saint Thomas Aquinas explains, they are 2 modes in which the exact same intelligence runs: "The term intellect is presumed from the inward grasp of the fact, while the name reason is drawn from the curious and discursive process." [18] This concise description highlights the two essential and complementary dimensions of human intelligence. Intellectus describes the instinctive grasp of the truth-that is, nabbing it with the "eyes" of the mind-which precedes and premises argumentation itself. Ratio pertains to reasoning appropriate: the discursive, analytical procedure that leads to judgment. Together, intellect and factor form the two facets of the act of intelligere, "the correct operation of the human being as such." [19]
15. Explaining the human person as a "reasonable" being does not lower the person to a particular mode of idea; rather, it recognizes that the capability for intellectual understanding shapes and permeates all aspects of human activity. [20] Whether worked out well or improperly, this capacity is an intrinsic aspect of humanity. In this sense, the "term 'reasonable' incorporates all the capacities of the human person," including those associated to "knowing and understanding, as well as those of willing, caring, selecting, and desiring; it also consists of all corporeal functions closely associated to these abilities." [21] This detailed perspective underscores how, in the human person, created in the "picture of God," reason is integrated in such a way that raises, shapes, and changes both the individual's will and actions. [22]
16. Christian believed considers the intellectual faculties of the human individual within the framework of an important sociology that views the human being as essentially embodied. In the human person, spirit and matter "are not two natures unified, however rather their union forms a single nature." [23] In other words, the soul is not merely the immaterial "part" of the individual contained within the body, nor is the body an outer shell housing an intangible "core." Rather, the whole human individual is at the same time both product and spiritual. This understanding shows the teaching of Sacred Scripture, which sees the human person as a being who lives out relationships with God and others (and therefore, an authentically spiritual dimension) within and through this embodied existence. [24] The extensive meaning of this condition is additional illuminated by the mystery of the Incarnation, through which God himself took on our flesh and "raised it up to a superb self-respect." [25]
17. Although deeply rooted in physical presence, 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 flexibility of the will belong to the soul, by which the human individual "shares in the light of the divine mind." [27] Nevertheless, the human spirit does not exercise its typical mode of understanding without the body. [28] In this method, the intellectual professors of the human individual are an integral part of an anthropology that recognizes that the human individual is a "unity of body and soul." [29] Further aspects of this understanding will be established in what follows.

18. Humans are "ordered by their very nature to social communion," [30] having the capability to know one another, to offer themselves in love, and to get in into communion with others. Accordingly, human intelligence is not a separated professors however is worked out in relationships, finding its fullest expression in dialogue, collaboration, and uniformity. We discover with others, and we find out through others.

19. The relational orientation of the human person is ultimately grounded in the everlasting self-giving of the Triune God, whose love is revealed in production and redemption. [31] The human individual is "called to share, by knowledge and love, in God's own life." [32]
20. This vocation to communion with God is necessarily tied to the call to communion with others. Love of God can not be separated from love for one's next-door neighbor (cf. 1 Jn. 4:20; Mt. 22:37 -39). By the grace of sharing God's life, Christians are likewise called to imitate Christ's outpouring present (cf. 2 Cor. 9:8 -11; Eph. 5:1 -2) by following his command to "enjoy one another, as I have actually loved you" (Jn. 13:34). [33] Love and service, echoing the divine life of self-giving, go beyond self-interest to respond more completely to the human occupation (cf. 1 Jn. 2:9). Much more sublime than understanding lots of things is the commitment to look after one another, for if "I comprehend all secrets and all understanding [...] however do not have love, I am absolutely nothing" (1 Cor. 13:2).

21. Human intelligence is ultimately "God's present made for the assimilation of truth." [34] In the dual sense of intellectus-ratio, it allows the person to check out truths that exceed simple sensory experience or energy, given that "the desire for reality belongs to human nature itself. It is a natural home of human reason to ask why things are as they are." [35] Moving beyond the limits of empirical data, human intelligence can "with real certitude attain to truth itself as knowable." [36] While reality remains just partly known, the desire for fact "spurs reason constantly to go even more; certainly, it is as if factor were overwhelmed to see that it can always surpass what it has already attained." [37] Although Truth in itself transcends the boundaries of human intelligence, it irresistibly attracts it. [38] Drawn by this tourist attraction, the human individual is led to look for "facts of a greater order." [39]
22. This innate drive towards the pursuit of fact is particularly obvious in the clearly human capabilities for semantic understanding and creativity, [40] through which this search unfolds in a "way that is suitable to the social nature and dignity of the human individual." [41] Likewise, a steadfast orientation to the reality is important for charity to be both authentic and universal. [42]
23. The look for truth finds its greatest expression in openness to realities that transcend the physical and produced world. In God, all realities attain their ultimate and original meaning. [43] Entrusting oneself to God is a "fundamental choice that engages the whole person." [44] In this way, the human person becomes totally what he or she is contacted us to be: "the intelligence and the will show their spiritual nature," making it possible for the person "to act in a manner that understands personal liberty to the full." [45]
24. The Christian faith comprehends creation as the complimentary act of the Triune God, who, as Saint Bonaventure of Bagnoregio explains, creates "not to increase his splendor, but to reveal it forth and to communicate it." [46] Since God produces according to his Wisdom (cf. Wis. 9:9; Jer. 10:12), creation is imbued with an intrinsic order that reflects God's plan (cf. Gen. 1; Dan. 2:21 -22; Is. 45:18; Ps. 74:12 -17; 104), [47] within which God has called humans to assume a special role: to cultivate and take care of the world. [48]
25. Shaped by the Divine Craftsman, humans live out their identity as beings made in imago Dei by "keeping" and "tilling" (cf. Gen. 2:15) creation-using their intelligence and skills to take care of and establish development in accord with God's strategy. [49] In this, human intelligence shows the Divine Intelligence that created all things (cf. Gen. 1-2; Jn. 1), [50] continually sustains them, and guides them to their ultimate function in him. [51] Moreover, humans are contacted us to develop their capabilities in science and innovation, for through them, God is glorified (cf. Sir. 38:6). Thus, in a correct relationship with development, humans, on the one hand, use their intelligence and ability to cooperate with God in guiding creation towards the function to which he has actually called it. [52] On the other hand, creation itself, as Saint Bonaventure observes, assists the human mind to "rise gradually to the supreme Principle, who is God." [53]
26. In this context, human intelligence becomes more plainly comprehended as a faculty that forms an integral part of how the entire individual engages with reality. Authentic engagement needs accepting the full scope of one's being: spiritual, cognitive, embodied, and relational.

27. This engagement with reality unfolds in numerous ways, as everyone, in his/her complex individuality [54], seeks to understand the world, relate to others, solve issues, express creativity, and pursue essential well-being through the harmonious interplay of the various dimensions of the individual's intelligence. [55] This includes logical and linguistic abilities however can likewise encompass other modes of interacting with truth. Consider the work of an artisan, who "must know how to determine, in inert matter, a specific type that others can not recognize" [56] and bring it forth through insight and useful ability. Indigenous individuals who live near the earth often possess a profound sense of nature and its cycles. [57] Similarly, a pal who understands the right word to state or a person skilled at handling human relationships exhibits an intelligence that is "the fruit of self-examination, discussion and generous encounter in between individuals." [58] As Pope Francis observes, "in this age of artificial intelligence, we can not forget that poetry and love are required to conserve our humankind." [59]
28. At the heart of the Christian understanding of intelligence is the integration of fact into the ethical and spiritual life of the individual, assisting his/her actions in light of God's goodness and truth. According to God's plan, intelligence, in its max sense, likewise includes the ability to savor what holds true, good, and stunning. As the twentieth-century French poet Paul Claudel revealed, "intelligence is absolutely nothing without pleasure." [60] Similarly, Dante, upon reaching the highest paradise in Paradiso, affirms that the culmination of this intellectual delight is discovered in the "light intellectual loaded with love, love of true excellent filled with joy, pleasure which transcends every sweet taste." [61]
29. An appropriate understanding of human intelligence, for that reason, can not be decreased to the mere acquisition of realities or the capability to carry out specific jobs. Instead, it involves the individual's openness to the supreme concerns of life and shows an orientation towards the True and the Good. [62] As an expression of the magnificent image within the individual, human intelligence has the ability to access the totality of being, utahsyardsale.com considering existence in its fullness, which exceeds what is measurable, and grasping the meaning of what has actually been understood. For followers, this capability consists of, in a specific method, the capability to grow in the knowledge of the secrets of God by using reason to engage ever more profoundly with exposed truths (intellectus fidei). [63] True intelligence is shaped by magnificent love, which "is poured forth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit" (Rom. 5:5). From this, it follows that human intelligence possesses an essential contemplative dimension, an unselfish openness to the True, the Good, and the Beautiful, beyond any practical function.

30. In light of the foregoing conversation, the differences in between human intelligence and current AI systems end up being evident. While AI is an extraordinary technological achievement efficient in imitating certain outputs associated with human intelligence, it runs by performing jobs, attaining goals, or making decisions based upon quantitative data and computational logic. For instance, with its analytical power, AI stands out at integrating information from a variety of fields, modeling complex systems, and cultivating interdisciplinary connections. In this way, it can help specialists work together in solving complex issues that "can not be handled from a single viewpoint or from a single set of interests." [64]
31. However, even as AI procedures and mimics certain expressions of intelligence, it remains essentially confined to a logical-mathematical framework, which enforces inherent constraints. Human intelligence, on the other hand, establishes organically throughout the individual's physical and psychological development, shaped by a myriad of lived experiences in the flesh. Although sophisticated AI systems can "discover" through procedures such as artificial intelligence, this sort of training is basically various from the developmental growth of human intelligence, which is formed by embodied experiences, including sensory input, emotional responses, social interactions, and the unique context of each minute. These components shape and kind people within their individual history.In contrast, AI, lacking a physical body, counts on computational reasoning and learning based on huge datasets that consist of recorded human experiences and knowledge.

32. Consequently, although AI can imitate aspects of human thinking and perform particular jobs with unbelievable speed and efficiency, its computational abilities represent only a fraction of the broader capabilities of the human mind. For example, AI can not presently duplicate moral discernment or the ability to establish genuine relationships. Moreover, human intelligence is located within a personally lived history of intellectual and ethical development that basically shapes the person's point of view, including the physical, emotional, social, moral, and spiritual measurements of life. Since AI can not offer this fullness of understanding, approaches that rely solely on this innovation or treat it as the main methods of interpreting 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 completing practical 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 truth and goodness, its capacities-though relatively limitless-are matchless with the human ability to comprehend truth. So much can be gained from a health problem, a welcome of reconciliation, and even an easy sunset; certainly, many experiences we have as humans open new horizons and use the possibility of attaining brand-new knowledge. No gadget, working entirely with data, can determine up to these and many other experiences present in our lives.

34. Drawing an overly close equivalence in between human intelligence and AI threats catching a functionalist perspective, where people are valued based upon the work they can carry out. However, a person's worth does not depend upon possessing specific skills, cognitive and technological accomplishments, or private success, but on the individual's inherent self-respect, grounded in being created in the image of God. [66] This dignity remains intact in all scenarios, consisting of for those not able to exercise their capabilities, whether it be a coming child, an unconscious person, or an older person who is suffering. [67] It likewise underpins the tradition of human rights (and, in specific, what are now called "neuro-rights"), which represent "an important point of merging in the search for commonalities" [68] and can, therefore, serve as a basic ethical guide in conversations on the responsible development and use of AI.

35. Considering all these points, as Pope Francis observes, "the extremely usage of the word 'intelligence'" in connection with AI "can show deceptive" [69] and dangers neglecting what is most precious in the human person. Due to this, AI must not be seen as an artificial type of human intelligence however as an item of it. [70]
36. Given these considerations, one can ask how AI can be comprehended within God's plan. To answer this, it is essential to remember that techno-scientific activity is not neutral in character however is a human undertaking that engages the humanistic and cultural dimensions of human imagination. [71]
37. Seen as a fruit of the potential inscribed within human intelligence, [72] scientific query and the development of technical skills become part of the "collaboration of male and female with God in improving the noticeable production." [73] At the same time, all scientific and technological achievements are, eventually, gifts from God. [74] Therefore, people should always utilize their abilities in view of the greater purpose for which God has given them. [75]
38. We can gratefully acknowledge how innovation has actually "remedied many evils which used to damage and limit humans," [76] a fact for which we ought to rejoice. Nevertheless, not all technological improvements in themselves represent real human progress. [77] The Church is especially opposed to those applications that threaten the sanctity of life or the dignity of the human individual. [78] Like any human venture, technological development needs to be directed to serve the human person and add to the pursuit of "greater justice, more substantial fraternity, and a more humane order of social relations," which are "more valuable than advances in the technical field." [79] Concerns about the ethical ramifications of technological advancement are shared not just within the Church however also among lots of scientists, technologists, and expert associations, who increasingly require ethical reflection to assist this development in a responsible way.

39. To address these difficulties, it is necessary to highlight the importance of ethical obligation grounded in the dignity and vocation of the human person. This assisting concept also uses to concerns concerning AI. In this context, the ethical measurement handles main significance due to the fact that it is people who design systems and determine the functions for which they are utilized. [80] Between a device and a human being, just the latter is really an ethical agent-a subject of moral responsibility who works out liberty in his/her choices and accepts their repercussions. [81] It is not the machine however the human who remains in relationship with truth and goodness, guided by an ethical conscience that calls the person "to love and to do what is good and to prevent evil," [82] bearing witness to "the authority of fact in referral to the supreme Good to which the human individual is drawn." [83] Likewise, between a maker and a human, only the human can be sufficiently self-aware to the point of listening and following the voice of conscience, critical with vigilance, and looking for the excellent that is possible in every situation. [84] In fact, all of this likewise comes from the individual's workout of intelligence.

40. Like any product of human imagination, AI can be directed towards positive or unfavorable ends. [85] When used in methods that appreciate human dignity and promote the wellness of people and communities, it can contribute positively to the human occupation. Yet, as in all locations where people are called to make decisions, the shadow of evil likewise looms here. Where human flexibility enables for the possibility of selecting what is wrong, the moral assessment of this innovation will require to take into consideration how it is directed and used.

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

42. Therefore, the ends and the methods used in a provided application of AI, in addition to the general vision it includes, should all be evaluated to ensure they appreciate human dignity and promote the common good. [88] As Pope Francis has specified, "the intrinsic dignity of every man and every lady" must be "the essential requirement in assessing emerging technologies; these will show fairly sound to the level that they assist 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 function not only in creating and producing innovation but also in directing its usage in line with the genuine good of the human individual. [90] The obligation for managing this wisely pertains to every level of society, directed by the principle of subsidiarity and other principles of Catholic Social Teaching.

43. The dedication to guaranteeing that AI always supports and promotes the supreme value of the dignity of every human being and the fullness of the human vocation functions as a criterion of discernment for designers, owners, operators, and regulators of AI, in addition to to its users. It remains legitimate for every single application of the innovation at every level of its use.

44. An evaluation of the ramifications of this assisting concept could start by thinking about the value of moral responsibility. Since full moral causality belongs just to individual representatives, not artificial ones, it is important to be able to determine and specify who bears obligation for the processes involved in AI, especially those efficient in learning, correction, and reprogramming. While bottom-up techniques and extremely deep neural networks make it possible for AI to fix complex issues, they make it tough to comprehend the processes that lead to the solutions they adopted. This makes complex accountability because if an AI application produces unwanted results, determining who is accountable becomes hard. To address this problem, attention needs to be offered to the nature of responsibility processes in complex, extremely automated settings, where results may only end up being evident in the medium to long term. For this, it is necessary that supreme duty for decisions made using AI rests with the human decision-makers and that there is accountability for making use of AI at each phase of the decision-making process. [91]
45. In addition to identifying who is accountable, it is vital to identify the goals offered to AI systems. Although these systems may utilize not being watched autonomous learning mechanisms and often follow courses that human beings can not rebuild, they eventually pursue goals that people have appointed to them and are governed by processes developed by their designers and developers. Yet, this presents an obstacle because, as AI models become increasingly capable of independent knowing, the capability to maintain control over them to ensure that such applications serve human purposes may successfully diminish. This raises the crucial concern of how to ensure that AI systems are purchased for the good of individuals and not against them.

46. While responsibility for the ethical usage of AI systems begins with those who develop, produce, manage, and manage such systems, it is likewise shared by those who utilize them. As Pope Francis noted, the machine "makes a technical choice amongst numerous possibilities based either on well-defined criteria or on analytical inferences. People, nevertheless, not only select, however in their hearts are capable of deciding." [92] Those who utilize AI to accomplish a task and follow its outcomes produce a context in which they are eventually accountable for the power they have delegated. Therefore, insofar as AI can assist humans in making choices, the algorithms that govern it should be trustworthy, protected, robust enough to handle inconsistencies, and transparent in their operation to mitigate predispositions and unintentional side impacts. [93] Regulatory structures ought to make sure that all legal entities remain accountable for the use of AI and all its repercussions, with appropriate safeguards for openness, personal privacy, and accountability. [94] Moreover, those using AI must take care not to become extremely depending on it for their decision-making, a trend that increases modern society's already high dependence on innovation.

47. The Church's ethical and social mentor provides resources to help ensure that AI is utilized in a way that maintains human agency. Considerations about justice, for instance, should likewise attend to issues such as cultivating simply social characteristics, maintaining global security, and promoting peace. By working out vigilance, individuals and neighborhoods can recognize ways to utilize AI to benefit humankind while avoiding applications that might deteriorate human self-respect or damage the environment. In this context, the idea of responsibility need to be comprehended not just in its most limited sense but as a "duty for the care for others, which is more than simply accounting for results attained." [95]
48. Therefore, AI, like any innovation, can be part of a conscious and accountable answer to mankind's occupation to the great. However, as formerly gone over, AI needs to be directed by human intelligence to line up with this occupation, ensuring it respects the self-respect of the human individual. Recognizing this "exalted self-respect," the Second Vatican Council affirmed that "the social order and its advancement should inevitably work to the benefit of the human person." [96] Due to this, making use of AI, as Pope Francis said, must be "accompanied by an ethic inspired by a vision of the common excellent, a principles of flexibility, responsibility, and fraternity, efficient in cultivating the full advancement of people in relation to others and to the entire of production." [97]
49. Within this general point of view, some observations follow below to show how the preceding arguments can assist provide an ethical orientation in practical situations, in line with the "wisdom of heart" that Pope Francis has actually proposed. [98] While not extensive, this discussion is provided in service of the discussion that thinks about how AI can be used to maintain the dignity of the human individual and promote the common good. [99]
50. As Pope Francis observed, "the fundamental self-respect of each human and the fraternity that binds us together as members of the one human family need to undergird the development of new technologies and work as unassailable criteria for examining them before they are employed." [100]
51. Viewed through this lens, AI might "introduce important innovations in farming, education and culture, an enhanced level of life for entire countries and peoples, and the growth of human fraternity and social relationship," and thus be "utilized to promote integral human advancement." [101] AI might likewise assist organizations identify those in requirement and counter discrimination and marginalization. These and other comparable applications of this technology could contribute to human development and the typical good. [102]
52. However, while AI holds lots of possibilities for promoting the great, it can also impede or perhaps counter human advancement and the typical good. Pope Francis has actually kept in mind that "evidence to date suggests that digital technologies have actually increased inequality in our world. Not just differences in product wealth, which are also substantial, however likewise differences in access to political and social influence." [103] In this sense, AI could be utilized to perpetuate marginalization and discrimination, develop new kinds of hardship, 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 substantial ethical concerns. Exacerbating this problem is the fundamental nature of AI systems, where no single individual can exercise total oversight over the huge and complex datasets used for computation. This absence of well-defined accountability produces the danger that AI could be controlled for individual or business gain or to direct public opinion for the advantage of a particular industry. Such entities, motivated by their own interests, have the capability to exercise "kinds of control as subtle as they are invasive, creating mechanisms for the adjustment of consciences and of the democratic procedure." [105]
54. Furthermore, there is the threat of AI being used to promote what Pope Francis has actually called the "technocratic paradigm," which views all the world's issues as solvable through technological means alone. [106] In this paradigm, human self-respect and fraternity are often set aside in the name of effectiveness, "as if reality, goodness, and reality automatically stream from technological and economic power as such." [107] Yet, human dignity and the typical good should never be violated for the sake of efficiency, [108] for "technological advancements that do not lead to an improvement in the quality of life of all humankind, but on the contrary, intensify inequalities and conflicts, can never ever count as real development. " [109] Instead, AI needs to be put "at the service of another type of development, one which is healthier, more human, more social, more essential." [110]
55. Attaining this objective needs a deeper reflection on the relationship in between autonomy and obligation. Greater autonomy increases everyone's obligation across different aspects of communal life. For Christians, the structure of this obligation lies in the recognition that all human capacities, consisting of the individual's autonomy, originated from God and are suggested to be used in the service of others. [111] Therefore, instead of simply pursuing economic or technological goals, AI needs to serve "the typical good of the whole human family," which is "the sum total of social conditions that allow individuals, either as groups or as people, to reach their fulfillment more completely and more easily." [112]
56. The Second Vatican Council observed that "by his innermost nature man is a social being; and if he does not participate in relations with others, he can neither live nor develop his presents." [113] This conviction highlights that living in society is intrinsic to the nature and vocation of the human individual. [114] As social beings, we seek relationships that include shared exchange and the pursuit of fact, in the course of which, people "share with each other the reality they have discovered, or believe they have actually discovered, in such a way that they assist one another in the look for truth." [115]
57. Such a quest, together with other elements of human communication, presupposes encounters and mutual exchange in between people shaped by their unique histories, ideas, convictions, and relationships. Nor can we forget that human intelligence is a diverse, complex, and complex reality: private and social, rational and affective, conceptual and symbolic. Pope Francis highlights this dynamic, noting that "together, we can seek the reality in dialogue, in unwinded conversation or in passionate argument. To do so requires perseverance; it entails minutes of silence and suffering, yet it can patiently welcome the broader experience of people and individuals. [...] The procedure of structure fraternity, be it regional or universal, can just be undertaken by spirits that are free and available to genuine encounters." [116]
58. It remains in this context that a person can consider the challenges AI poses to human relationships. Like other technological tools, AI has the prospective to promote connections within the human household. However, it might also hinder a true encounter with reality and, ultimately, lead people to "a deep and melancholic discontentment with interpersonal relations, or a hazardous sense of isolation." [117] Authentic human relationships need the richness of being with others in their pain, their pleas, and their pleasure. [118] Since human intelligence is expressed and enriched also in interpersonal and embodied methods, genuine and spontaneous encounters with others are essential for engaging with reality in its fullness.

59. Because "true wisdom demands an encounter with truth," [119] the rise of AI introduces another obstacle. Since AI can efficiently mimic the products of human intelligence, the ability to know when one is communicating with a human or a device can no longer be considered approved. Generative AI can produce text, speech, images, and other innovative outputs that are typically connected with humans. Yet, it must be understood for what it is: a tool, not an individual. [120] This difference is frequently obscured by the language used by specialists, which tends to anthropomorphize AI and hence blurs the line between human and machine.

60. Anthropomorphizing AI likewise presents particular obstacles for the advancement of kids, potentially encouraging them to establish patterns of interaction that treat human relationships in a transactional manner, as one would connect to a chatbot. Such routines might lead youths to see instructors as mere dispensers of details instead of as coaches who guide and support their intellectual and ethical growth. Genuine relationships, rooted in compassion and an unfaltering dedication to the good of the other, are necessary and irreplaceable in cultivating the complete advancement of the human person.

61. In this context, it is very important to clarify that, despite using anthropomorphic language, no AI application can really experience compassion. Emotions can not be reduced to facial expressions or phrases produced in reaction to triggers; they show the way a person, as a whole, associates with the world and to his/her own life, with the body playing a main function. True compassion requires the ability to listen, acknowledge another's irreducible uniqueness, welcome their otherness, and understand the significance behind even their silences. [121] Unlike the realm of analytical judgment in which AI excels, real empathy belongs to the relational sphere. It includes intuiting and apprehending the lived experiences of another while maintaining the distinction in between self and other. [122] While AI can mimic understanding reactions, it can not reproduce the incomparably individual and relational nature of authentic compassion. [123]
62. Due to the above, it is clear why misrepresenting AI as an individual need to constantly be prevented; doing so for deceptive purposes is a serious ethical infraction that could wear down social trust. Similarly, utilizing AI to trick in other contexts-such as in education or in human relationships, consisting of the sphere of sexuality-is also to be considered unethical and requires careful oversight to avoid damage, maintain openness, and ensure the dignity of all individuals. [124]
63. In an increasingly isolated world, some individuals have turned to AI searching for relationships, simple friendship, or perhaps emotional bonds. However, while human beings are indicated to experience authentic relationships, AI can only replicate them. Nevertheless, such relationships with others are an integral part of how an individual grows to become who he or she is meant to be. If AI is utilized to assist people foster genuine connections in between individuals, it can contribute positively to the full awareness of the individual. Conversely, if we replace relationships with God and with others with interactions with innovation, we risk changing genuine relationality with a lifeless image (cf. Ps. 106:20; Rom. 1:22 -23). Instead of pulling away into artificial worlds, we are called to participate in a dedicated and intentional method with truth, especially by relating to the bad and suffering, consoling those in sorrow, and forging bonds of communion with all.

64. Due to its interdisciplinary nature, AI is being significantly integrated into financial and monetary systems. Significant investments are presently being made not just in the innovation sector but also in energy, financing, and media, especially in the locations of marketing and sales, logistics, technological development, compliance, and danger management. At the same time, AI's applications in these areas have actually also highlighted its ambivalent nature, as a source of incredible chances however likewise extensive risks. A very first real important point in this location concerns the possibility that-due to the concentration of AI applications in the hands of a couple of corporations-only those large business would gain from the value developed by AI instead of the businesses that use it.

65. Other broader elements of AI's effect on the economic-financial sphere must likewise be thoroughly examined, especially concerning the interaction between concrete truth and the digital world. One essential factor to consider in this regard involves the coexistence of varied and alternative forms of economic and banks within a given context. This factor ought to be motivated, as it can bring advantages in how it supports the genuine economy by promoting its development and stability, specifically during times of crisis. Nevertheless, it ought to be worried that digital realities, not limited by any spatial bonds, tend to be more homogeneous and impersonal than communities rooted in a specific location and a specific history, with a typical journey identified by shared worths and hopes, but also by inescapable arguments and divergences. This diversity is an indisputable asset to a neighborhood's economic life. Turning over the economy and finance totally to digital technology would lower this variety and richness. As an outcome, lots of solutions to financial problems that can be reached through natural discussion in between the involved parties may no longer be attainable in a world dominated by treatments and just the look of nearness.

66. Another area where AI is already having a profound effect is the world of work. As in numerous other fields, AI is driving essential improvements throughout numerous professions, with a series of effects. On the one hand, it has the prospective to enhance competence and efficiency, create new jobs, allow employees to concentrate on more ingenious jobs, and open brand-new horizons for creativity and development.

67. However, while AI guarantees to improve productivity by taking over ordinary jobs, it regularly forces workers to adapt to the speed and needs of machines instead of machines being developed to support those who work. As an outcome, contrary to the advertised advantages 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 need to stay up to date with the rate of innovation can erode workers' sense of firm and suppress the ingenious abilities they are expected to bring to their work. [125]
68. AI is presently removing the need for some tasks that were as soon as carried out by human beings. If AI is used to change human employees instead of complement them, there is a "considerable risk of out of proportion advantage for the few at the cost of the impoverishment of lots of." [126] Additionally, as AI ends up being more powerful, there is an involved threat that human labor might lose its value in the financial realm. This is the rational effect of the technocratic paradigm: a world of humankind oppressed to efficiency, where, ultimately, the expense of mankind should be cut. Yet, human lives are inherently important, independent of their financial output. Nevertheless, the "present model," Pope Francis explains, "does not appear to prefer a financial investment in efforts to assist the sluggish, the weak, or the less skilled to find opportunities in life." [127] In light of this, "we can not allow a tool as effective and important as Artificial Intelligence to enhance such a paradigm, however rather, we should make Artificial Intelligence a bulwark against its growth." [128]
69. It is important to bear in mind that "the order of things should be secondary to the order of individuals, and not the other method around." [129] Human work should not only be at the service of earnings however at "the service of the entire human person [...] considering the person's material needs and the requirements of his/her intellectual, ethical, spiritual, and religious life." [130] In this context, the Church recognizes that work is "not only a method of earning one's daily bread" but is also "an essential measurement of social life" and "a means [...] of individual growth, the structure of healthy relationships, self-expression and the exchange of presents. Work provides us a sense of shared obligation for the advancement of the world, and eventually, for our life as a people." [131]
70. Since work is a "part of the significance of life on this earth, a path to growth, human advancement and individual fulfillment," "the objective must not be that technological progress increasingly changes human work, for this would be detrimental to humanity" [132] -rather, it should promote human labor. Seen in this light, AI should assist, not change, human judgment. Similarly, it must never ever degrade creativity or decrease employees to simple "cogs in a device." Therefore, "regard for the self-respect of laborers and the value of employment for the financial well-being of individuals, families, and societies, for task security and just earnings, ought to be a high concern for the worldwide community as these types of technology penetrate more deeply into our work environments." [133]
71. As participants in God's recovery work, health care professionals have the vocation and obligation to be "guardians and servants of human life." [134] Because of this, the health care occupation carries an "intrinsic and indisputable ethical dimension," recognized by the Hippocratic Oath, which obliges physicians and healthcare specialists to devote themselves to having "outright regard for human life and its sacredness." [135] Following the example of the Do-gooder, this dedication is to be brought out by guys and women "who reject the production of a society of exclusion, and act rather as next-door neighbors, raising up and rehabilitating the succumbed to the sake of the typical good." [136]
72. Seen in this light, AI seems to hold tremendous capacity in a range of applications in the medical field, such as assisting the diagnostic work of doctor, assisting in relationships between clients and medical personnel, using brand-new treatments, and expanding access to quality care likewise for those who are separated or marginalized. In these ways, the innovation might boost the "compassionate and caring closeness" [137] that health care companies are called to reach the sick and suffering.

73. However, if AI is used not to enhance however to change the relationship in between patients and health care providers-leaving patients to interact with a maker instead of a human being-it would reduce a most importantly crucial human relational structure to a centralized, impersonal, and unequal structure. Instead of encouraging uniformity with the sick and suffering, such applications of AI would run the risk of getting worse the isolation that often accompanies disease, particularly in the context of a culture where "persons are no longer seen as a paramount worth to be taken care of and respected." [138] This misuse of AI would not align with respect for the dignity of the human individual and solidarity with the suffering.

74. Responsibility for the well-being of clients and the choices that touch upon their lives are at the heart of the healthcare occupation. This accountability requires medical experts to work out all their ability and intelligence in making well-reasoned and fairly grounded choices regarding those delegated to their care, constantly appreciating the inviolable dignity of the patients and the need for informed permission. As an outcome, choices concerning client treatment and the weight of obligation they entail must constantly remain with the human individual and should never be entrusted to AI. [139]
75. In addition, using AI to determine who should get treatment based mainly on economic measures or metrics of efficiency represents an especially troublesome instance of the "technocratic paradigm" that should be rejected. [140] For, "optimizing resources implies using them in an ethical and fraternal method, and not punishing the most fragile." [141] Additionally, AI tools in health care are "exposed to forms of predisposition and discrimination," where "systemic mistakes can easily increase, producing not only oppressions in private cases but also, due to the cause and effect, genuine kinds of social inequality." [142]
76. The combination of AI into healthcare likewise positions the danger of amplifying other existing variations in access to treatment. As healthcare becomes progressively oriented toward avoidance and lifestyle-based techniques, AI-driven services may inadvertently prefer more wealthy populations who currently enjoy much better access to medical resources and quality nutrition. This trend risks reinforcing a "medication for the abundant" model, where those with monetary means gain from innovative preventative tools and individualized health details while others struggle to gain access to even standard services. To prevent such inequities, fair frameworks are needed to guarantee that using AI in health care does not intensify existing health care inequalities but rather serves the common good.

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

78. This method includes a commitment to cultivating the mind, however constantly as a part of the integral development of the individual: "We need to break that concept of education which holds that informing ways filling one's head with ideas. That is the method we educate automatons, cerebral minds, not individuals. Educating is taking a danger 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 indispensable relationship in between instructor and trainee. Teachers do more than communicate knowledge; they design essential human qualities and influence the happiness of discovery. [146] Their presence encourages trainees both through the material they teach and the care they demonstrate for their trainees. This bond fosters trust, good understanding, and the capacity to resolve everyone's distinct dignity and capacity. On the part of the trainee, this can produce a real desire to grow. The physical existence of a teacher produces a relational dynamic that AI can not reproduce, one that deepens engagement and nurtures the trainee's important advancement.

80. In this context, AI provides both opportunities and challenges. If utilized in a sensible way, within the context of an existing teacher-student relationship and purchased to the genuine goals of education, AI can end up being an important instructional resource by improving access to education, using tailored support, and offering immediate feedback to trainees. These advantages could boost the knowing experience, specifically in cases where personalized attention is required, or instructional resources are otherwise limited.

81. Nevertheless, a vital part of education is forming "the intelligence to reason well in all matters, to reach out towards fact, and to grasp it," [147] while helping the "language of the head" to grow harmoniously with the "language of the heart" and the "language of the hands." [148] This is all the more crucial in an age marked by innovation, in which "it is no longer merely a concern of 'utilizing' instruments of communication, however of residing in a highly digitalized culture that has actually had a profound influence on [...] our ability to interact, learn, be informed and get in into relationship with others." [149] However, rather of promoting "a cultivated intelligence," which "brings with it a power and a grace to every work and occupation that it carries out," [150] the extensive use of AI in education could cause the trainees' increased dependence on innovation, deteriorating their capability to carry out some abilities separately and aggravating their dependence on screens. [151]
82. Additionally, while some AI systems are developed to help individuals establish their important thinking abilities and analytical skills, many others simply supply answers rather of triggering trainees to reach answers themselves or write text for themselves. [152] Instead of training young individuals how to accumulate details and produce fast reactions, education should encourage "the responsible use of freedom to deal with problems with common sense and intelligence." [153] Building on this, "education in the use of forms of expert system need to aim above all at promoting crucial thinking. Users of any ages, however especially the young, require to establish a discerning technique to making use of information and content gathered online or produced by synthetic intelligence systems. Schools, universities, and scientific societies are challenged to assist trainees and professionals to comprehend the social and ethical elements of the development and usages of innovation." [154]
83. As Saint John Paul II remembered, "on the planet today, defined by such quick developments in science and innovation, the tasks of a Catholic University assume an ever higher importance and urgency." [155] In a specific way, Catholic universities are prompted to be present as fantastic labs of hope at this crossroads of history. In an inter-disciplinary and cross-disciplinary secret, they are advised to engage "with wisdom and creativity" [156] in mindful research on this phenomenon, assisting to draw out the salutary capacity within the various fields of science and reality, and directing them constantly towards fairly sound applications that plainly serve the cohesion of our societies and the typical great, reaching brand-new frontiers in the discussion in between faith and factor.

84. Moreover, it needs to be kept in mind that current AI programs have been understood to offer prejudiced or produced details, which can lead trainees to rely on incorrect material. This issue "not just risks of legitimizing phony news and enhancing a dominant culture's benefit, but, simply put, it likewise undermines the educational procedure itself." [157] With time, clearer distinctions might emerge in between correct and inappropriate usages of AI in education and research. Yet, a decisive standard is that making use of AI must constantly be transparent and never misrepresented.

85. AI might be utilized as an aid to human self-respect if it assists people comprehend complicated principles or directs them to sound resources that support their look for the fact. [158]
86. However, AI also provides a serious threat of generating manipulated material and incorrect details, which can quickly misguide people due to its resemblance to the fact. Such false information may occur accidentally, as when it comes to AI "hallucination," where a generative AI system yields results that appear genuine but are not. Since generating material that simulates human artifacts is main to AI's functionality, reducing these dangers proves difficult. Yet, the effects of such aberrations and false details can be quite serious. For this factor, all those associated with producing and utilizing AI systems ought to be committed to the truthfulness and precision of the details processed by such systems and distributed to the public.

87. While AI has a hidden capacity to produce false details, a much more unpleasant problem depends on the intentional misuse of AI for manipulation. This can occur when individuals or organizations intentionally produce and spread out false content with the aim to deceive or cause damage, such as "deepfake" images, videos, and audio-referring to an incorrect representation of a person, modified or created by an AI algorithm. The danger of deepfakes is particularly apparent when they are used to target or damage others. While the images or videos themselves may 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 dignity." [159]
88. On a more comprehensive scale, by distorting "our relationship with others and with truth," [160] AI-generated fake media can slowly undermine the foundations of society. This concern needs cautious policy, as misinformation-especially through AI-controlled or affected media-can spread inadvertently, sustaining political polarization and social discontent. When society ends up being indifferent to the reality, various groups build their own variations of "truths," compromising the "mutual ties and shared dependences" [161] that underpin the fabric of social life. As deepfakes trigger individuals to question everything and AI-generated incorrect material erodes rely on what they see and hear, polarization and dispute will only grow. Such widespread deception is no trivial matter; it strikes at the core of humankind, taking apart the foundational trust on which societies are constructed. [162]
89. Countering AI-driven frauds is not just the work of industry experts-it requires the efforts of all individuals of goodwill. "If technology is to serve human dignity and not damage it, and if it is to promote peace instead of violence, then the human neighborhood needs to be proactive in addressing these trends with respect to human self-respect and the promo of the excellent." [163] Those who produce and share AI-generated content should constantly exercise diligence in verifying the fact of what they share and, in all cases, ought to "avoid the sharing of words and images that are degrading of humans, that promote hatred and intolerance, that debase the goodness and intimacy of human sexuality or that make use of the weak and vulnerable." [164] This requires the continuous prudence and careful discernment of all users regarding their activity online. [165]
90. Humans are inherently relational, and the data each person creates in the digital world can be viewed as an objectified expression of this relational nature. Data communicates not only details however likewise individual and relational understanding, which, in an increasingly digitized context, can amount to power over the person. Moreover, while some types of information may pertain to public elements of an individual's life, others might discuss the person's interiority, possibly even their conscience. Seen in this way, personal privacy plays a vital role in safeguarding the borders of an individual's inner life, maintaining their flexibility to associate with others, express themselves, and make decisions without excessive control. This defense is also tied to the defense of religious liberty, as monitoring can likewise be misused to exert control over the lives of followers and how they express their faith.

91. It is proper, for that reason, to deal with the issue of personal privacy from an issue for the legitimate flexibility and inalienable self-respect of the human person "in all scenarios." [166] The Second Vatican Council consisted of the right "to secure personal privacy" among the fundamental rights "essential for living a genuinely human life," a right that ought to be extended to all individuals on account of their "superb self-respect." [167] Furthermore, the Church has also verified the right to the legitimate regard for a private life in the context of affirming the person's right to a good track record, defense of their physical and mental stability, and freedom from damage or excessive invasion [168] -essential parts of the due regard for the intrinsic dignity of the human person. [169]
92. Advances in AI-powered information processing and analysis now make it possible to infer patterns in an individual's habits and thinking from even a percentage of details, making the function of data privacy much more vital as a secure for the dignity and relational nature of the human person. As Pope Francis observed, "while closed and intolerant mindsets towards others are on the increase, ranges are otherwise diminishing or disappearing to the point that the right to personal privacy rarely exists. Everything has ended up being a type of phenomenon to be analyzed and checked, and individuals's lives are now under consistent monitoring." [170]
93. While there can be legitimate and correct ways to utilize AI in keeping with human self-respect and the typical great, utilizing it for security aimed at making use of, restricting others' liberty, or benefitting a few at the cost of the many is unjustifiable. The danger of surveillance overreach need to be kept track of by suitable regulators to make sure openness and public accountability. Those accountable for surveillance must never ever exceed their authority, which must constantly favor the dignity and flexibility of everyone as the essential basis of a simply and gentle society.

94. Furthermore, "essential regard for human self-respect needs that we refuse to enable the individuality of the person to be determined with a set of information." [171] This particularly applies when AI is utilized to examine people or groups based on their behavior, characteristics, or history-a practice called "social scoring": "In social and financial decision-making, we need to be careful about delegating judgments to algorithms that process data, frequently gathered surreptitiously, on an individual's makeup and prior habits. Such data can be infected by social bias and prejudgments. A person's previous habits should not be utilized to reject him or her the chance to change, grow, and contribute to society. We can not enable algorithms to restrict or condition respect for human self-respect, or to leave out compassion, mercy, forgiveness, and above all, the hope that people have the ability to change." [172]
95. AI has numerous promising applications for enhancing our relationship with our "typical home," such as creating models to forecast extreme environment events, proposing engineering services to minimize their impact, managing relief operations, and predicting population shifts. [173] Additionally, AI can support sustainable agriculture, enhance energy use, and provide early caution systems for public health emergency situations. These improvements have the potential to strengthen durability against climate-related difficulties and promote more sustainable development.

96. At the exact same time, existing AI models and the hardware needed to support them take in large amounts of energy and water, significantly adding to CO2 emissions and straining resources. This reality is typically obscured by the method this technology exists in the popular imagination, where words such as "the cloud" [174] can offer the impression that data is kept and processed in an intangible world, removed from the physical world. However, "the cloud" is not a heavenly domain different from the real world; just like all calculating technologies, it relies on physical makers, cable televisions, and energy. The same holds true of the innovation behind AI. As these systems grow in intricacy, especially large language models (LLMs), they need ever-larger datasets, increased computational power, and higher storage facilities. Considering the heavy toll these technologies handle the environment, it is important to develop sustainable options that reduce their impact on our typical home.

97. Even then, as Pope Francis teaches, it is necessary "that we look for services not just in technology but in a change of humanity." [175] A complete and authentic understanding of development recognizes that the value of all created things can not be decreased to their mere energy. Therefore, a completely human technique to the stewardship of the earth rejects the distorted anthropocentrism of the technocratic paradigm, which seeks to "draw out everything possible" from the world, [176] and rejects the "myth of development," which assumes that "ecological issues will fix themselves merely with the application of brand-new technology and with no requirement for ethical factors to consider or deep modification." [177] Such a frame of mind needs to pave the way to a more holistic approach that appreciates the order of development and promotes the important good of the human individual while safeguarding our typical home. [178]
98. The Second Vatican Council and the consistent teaching of the Popes ever since have actually firmly insisted that peace is not merely the absence of war and is not limited to maintaining a balance of powers in between foes. Instead, in the words of Saint Augustine, peace is "the harmony of order." [179] Certainly, peace can not be attained without safeguarding the items of individuals, totally free communication, regard for the self-respect of persons and individuals, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is the work of justice and the impact of charity and can not be attained through force alone; rather, it should be mainly constructed through client diplomacy, the active promo of justice, uniformity, essential human development, and respect for the dignity of all people. [180] In this method, the tools utilized to maintain peace must never ever be permitted to validate oppression, violence, or injustice. Instead, they should always be governed by a "firm decision to regard other individuals and countries, together with their dignity, in addition to the intentional practice of fraternity." [181]
99. While AI's analytical abilities could help countries look for peace and ensure security, the "weaponization of Artificial Intelligence" can likewise be extremely troublesome. Pope Francis has observed that "the ability to perform military operations through remote control systems has led to a reduced understanding of the devastation triggered by those weapon systems and the problem of responsibility for their usage, resulting in an even more cold and removed technique to the immense disaster of war." [182] Moreover, the ease with which self-governing weapons make war more feasible militates against the concept of war as a last option in legitimate self-defense, [183] possibly increasing the instruments of war well beyond the scope of human oversight and speeding up a destabilizing arms race, with devastating effects for human rights. [184]
100. In particular, Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, which can determining and striking targets without direct human intervention, are a "cause for severe ethical concern" due to the fact that they lack the "distinct human capability for ethical judgment and ethical decision-making." [185] For this factor, Pope Francis has urgently required a reconsideration of the development of these weapons and a restriction on their usage, starting with "an effective and concrete commitment to introduce ever higher and proper human control. No device ought to ever pick to take the life of a person." [186]
101. Since it is a small action from machines that can kill autonomously with accuracy to those efficient in massive damage, some AI researchers have revealed issues that such technology presents an "existential danger" by having the possible to act in manner ins which could threaten the survival of whole areas or perhaps of humanity itself. This danger needs severe attention, showing the long-standing concern about innovations that grant war "an unmanageable devastating power over great numbers of innocent civilians," [187] without even sparing children. In this context, the call from Gaudium et Spes to "undertake an examination of war with a completely brand-new mindset" [188] is more urgent than ever.

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

103. Saint John Paul II observed that "humankind now has instruments of unmatched power: we can turn this world into a garden, or minimize it to a pile of rubble." [190] Given this truth, the Church reminds us, in the words of Pope Francis, that "we are free to use our intelligence towards things progressing favorably," or towards "decadence and shared damage." [191] To avoid humanity from spiraling into self-destruction, [192] there need to be a clear stand against all applications of technology that naturally threaten human life and dignity. This dedication requires cautious discernment about using AI, particularly in military defense applications, to ensure that it always appreciates human self-respect and serves the common good. The advancement and release of AI in armaments must undergo the highest levels of ethical analysis, governed by an issue for human self-respect and the sanctity of life. [193]
104. Technology provides amazing tools to manage and develop the world's resources. However, sometimes, humankind is increasingly delivering control of these resources to devices. Within some circles of scientists and futurists, there is optimism about the capacity of artificial general intelligence (AGI), a theoretical kind of AI that would match or exceed human intelligence and produce unimaginable improvements. Some even speculate that AGI could attain superhuman abilities. At the same time, as society drifts away from a connection with the transcendent, some are tempted to turn to AI searching for significance or fulfillment-longings that can only be genuinely pleased in communion with God. [194]
105. However, the presumption of replacing God for an artifact of human making is idolatry, a practice Scripture explicitly warns against (e.g., Ex. 20:4; 32:1 -5; 34:17). Moreover, AI may show even more sexy than standard idols for, unlike idols that "have mouths however do not speak; eyes, but do not see; ears, but do not hear" (Ps. 115:5 -6), AI can "speak," or a minimum of gives the illusion of doing so (cf. Rev. 13:15). Yet, it is crucial to keep in mind that AI is but a pale reflection of humanity-it is crafted by human minds, trained on human-generated product, responsive to human input, and sustained through human labor. AI can not have numerous of the capabilities specific to human life, and it is likewise imperfect. By turning to AI as a perceived "Other" greater than itself, with which to share existence and responsibilities, mankind threats producing a replacement for God. However, it is not AI that is eventually deified and worshipped, but mankind itself-which, in this method, ends up being enslaved to its own work. [195]
106. While AI has the potential to serve mankind and add to the common excellent, it remains a development of human hands, bearing "the imprint of human art and ingenuity" (Acts 17:29). It needs to never ever be ascribed unnecessary worth. As the Book of Wisdom affirms: "For a male made them, and one whose spirit is obtained formed them; for no man can form a god which resembles himself. He is mortal, and what he makes with lawless hands is dead, for he is better than the items he worships considering that he has life, but they never have" (Wis. 15:16 -17).

107. On the other hand, people, "by their interior life, transcend the entire material 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 advises us, that each private discovers the "strange connection in between self-knowledge and openness to others, in between the encounter with one's personal individuality and the willingness to give oneself to others. " [197] Therefore, it is the heart alone that is "efficient in setting our other powers and passions, and our entire person, in a stance of respect and caring obedience before the Lord," [198] who "offers to deal with every one people as a 'Thou,' always and permanently." [199]
108. Considering the different challenges postured by advances in innovation, Pope Francis highlighted the requirement for growth in "human obligation, values, and conscience," proportionate to the growth in the potential that this innovation brings [200] -recognizing that "with an increase in human power comes a broadening of responsibility on the part of individuals and neighborhoods." [201]
109. At the exact same time, the "important and fundamental concern" remains "whether in the context of this progress man, as man, is ending up being genuinely much better, that is to say, more fully grown spiritually, more knowledgeable about the self-respect of his humankind, more accountable, more available to others, specifically the neediest and the weakest, and readier to provide and to aid all." [202]
110. As a result, it is essential to know how to evaluate specific applications of AI in particular contexts to determine whether its use promotes human dignity, the vocation of the human individual, and the common good. As with lots of innovations, the results of the various uses of AI may not constantly be foreseeable from their creation. As these applications and their social effects end up being clearer, suitable actions ought to be made at all levels of society, following the concept of subsidiarity. Individual users, households, civil society, corporations, organizations, federal governments, and international organizations need to work at their appropriate levels to guarantee that AI is utilized for the good of all.

111. A substantial difficulty and opportunity for the common excellent today lies in considering AI within a structure of relational intelligence, which emphasizes the interconnectedness of individuals and communities and highlights our shared duty for promoting the essential well-being of others. The twentieth-century thinker Nicholas Berdyaev observed that people typically blame makers for personal and social issues; nevertheless, "this only humiliates male and does not represent his dignity," for "it is unworthy to move duty from guy to a device." [203] Only the human person can be ethically responsible, and the difficulties of a technological society are eventually spiritual in nature. Therefore, dealing with those obstacles "demands an accumulation of spirituality." [204]
112. A more indicate consider is the call, prompted by the appearance of AI on the world phase, for a restored gratitude of all that is human. Years earlier, the French Catholic author Georges Bernanos alerted that "the risk is not in the reproduction of devices, however in the ever-increasing variety of guys accustomed from their youth to desire only what makers can provide." [205] This difficulty is as real today as it was then, as the fast rate of digitization runs the risk of a "digital reductionism," where non-quantifiable elements of life are set aside and then forgotten or perhaps considered unimportant because they can not be computed in official terms. AI needs to be used just as a tool to complement human intelligence rather than change its richness. [206] Cultivating those elements of human life that transcend computation is vital for maintaining "a genuine mankind" that "appears to stay in the midst of our technological culture, nearly undetected, like a mist permeating gently below a closed door." [207]
113. The vast area of the world's understanding is now available in ways that would have filled previous generations with awe. However, to guarantee that improvements in knowledge do not become humanly or spiritually barren, one need to exceed the mere build-up of information and aim to attain real knowledge. [208]
114. This knowledge is the present that humanity needs most to address the extensive questions and ethical difficulties posed by AI: "Only by adopting a spiritual way of seeing reality, just by recovering a knowledge of the heart, can we challenge and analyze the newness of our time." [209] Such "knowledge of the heart" is "the virtue that allows us to integrate the entire and its parts, our choices and their effects." It "can not be sought from machines," but it "lets itself be found by those who seek it and be seen by those who like it; it expects 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 "enables us to look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, circumstances, occasions and to discover their real meaning." [211]
116. Since a "individual's excellence is determined not by the details or understanding they have, but by the depth of their charity," [212] how we incorporate AI "to consist of the least of our bros and sis, the vulnerable, and those most in need, will be the true step of our humanity." [213] The "wisdom of the heart" can brighten and assist the human-centered usage of this technology to help promote the typical great, care for our "typical home," advance the search for the reality, foster essential human advancement, favor human uniformity and fraternity, and lead humanity to its supreme objective: happiness and complete communion with God. [214]
117. From this point of view of knowledge, believers will have the ability to act as ethical agents capable of utilizing this technology to promote an authentic vision of the human individual and society. [215] This must be finished with the understanding that technological development is part of God's prepare for creation-an activity that we are called to purchase toward the Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ, in the continuous search for the True and the Good.

The Supreme Pontiff, Francis, at the Audience given 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 purchased its publication.

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

Ex audientia pass away 14 ianuarii 2025 Franciscus

Contents

I. Introduction

II. What is Artificial Intelligence?

III. Intelligence in the Philosophical and Theological Tradition

Rationality

Embodiment

Relationality

Relationship with the Truth

Stewardship of the World

An Integral 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 intended to anthropomorphize the device. [8] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3; Id., Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [9] Here, one can see the main positions of the "transhumanists" and the "posthumanists." Transhumanists argue that technological developments will make it possible for human beings to overcome their biological constraints and enhance both their physical and cognitive abilities. Posthumanists, on the other hand, compete that such advances will eventually alter human identity to the degree that humankind itself may no longer be considered truly "human." Both views rest on a fundamentally negative understanding of human corporality, which deals with the body more as an obstacle than as an essential part of the individual's identity and contact us to complete realization. Yet, this negative view of the body is inconsistent with a proper understanding of human dignity. While the Church supports authentic clinical development, it affirms that human self-respect is rooted in "the individual as an inseparable unity of body and soul. " Thus, "dignity is also fundamental in each person's body, which takes part 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 perspective, which decreases the human mind to its functions and presumes that its functions can be totally quantified in physical or mathematical terms. However, even if a future AGI were to appear really intelligent, it would still remain functional in nature. [11] Cf. A.M. Turing, "Computing Machinery and Intelligence," Mind 59 (1950) 443-460. [12] If "believing" is credited to devices, it should be clarified that this describes calculative thinking instead of important thinking. Similarly, if machines are said to run utilizing abstract thought, it should be specified that this is restricted to computational reasoning. On the other hand, by its very nature, human thought is a creative process that avoids shows and transcends constraints. [13] On the foundational 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 conversation of these anthropological and theological foundations, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 43-144. [15] Aristotle, Metaphysics, I. 1, 980 a 21. [16] Cf. Augustine, De Genesi ad litteram III, 20, 30: PL 34, 292: "Man is made in the image of God in relation to that [faculty] by which he is remarkable to the irrational animals. Now, this [faculty] is reason itself, or the 'mind,' or 'intelligence,' whatever other name it may more appropriately be offered"; Id., Enarrationes in Psalmos 54, 3: PL 36, 629: "When considering all that they have, humans discover that they are most distinguished from animals precisely by the reality they have intelligence." This is also reiterated by Saint Thomas Aquinas, who states that "male is the most best of all earthly beings enhanced with movement, and his correct and natural operation is intellection," by which guy abstracts from things and "receives in his mind things really intelligible" (Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 76). [17] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [18] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 49, a. 5, ad 3. Cf. ibid., I, q. 79; II-II, q. 47, a. 3; II-II, q. 49, a. 2. For a modern viewpoint that echoes elements of the classical and medieval distinction between these two modes of cognition, cf. D. Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, New York City 2011. [19] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 76, a. 1, resp. [20] Cf. Irenaeus of Lyon, Adversus Haereses, V, 6, 1: PG 7( 2 ), 1136-1138. [21] Dicastery for pattern-wiki.win 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 truth of things through reflection, experience and dialogue, and pertain to acknowledge because truth, which transcends it, the basis of certain universal ethical needs." [22] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [23] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 365. Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 75, a. 4, resp. [24] Certainly, Sacred Scripture "generally considers the human person as a being who exists in the body and is unthinkable outside of it" (Pontifical Biblical Commission, "Che cosa è l'uomo?" (Sal 8,5): Un itinerario di antropologia biblica [30 September 2019], par. 19). Cf. ibid., pars. 20-21, 43-44, 48. [25] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 22: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1042: Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 7: AAS 100 (2008 ), 863: "Christ did not disdain human bodiliness, but rather totally disclosed its meaning and worth." [26] Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 81. [27] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [28] Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I, q. 89, a. 1, resp.: "to be separated from the body is not in accordance with [the soul's] nature [...] and thus it is unified to the body in order that it may have a presence and an operation appropriate to its nature." [29] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1035. Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 18. [30] International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 56. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 357. [31] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), pars. 5, 8; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 15, 24, 53-54. [32] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 356. Cf. ibid., par. 221. [33] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 13, 26-27. [34] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Donum Veritatis (24 May 1990), 6: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1552. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), par. 109: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1219. Cf. Pseudo-Dionysius, De divinis nominibus, VII, 2: PG 3, 868B-C: "Human souls likewise have reason and with it they circle in discourse around the truth of things. [...] [O] n account of the way in which they can focusing the many 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 can going beyond immediate issues and understanding certain truths that are constant, as real now as in the past. As it peers into humanity, reason finds universal values obtained from that same nature"; ibid., par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034. [38] Cf. B. Pascal, Pensées, no. 267 (ed. Brunschvicg): "The last proceeding of reason is to acknowledge that there is an infinity of things which are beyond it" (en. tr. Pascal's Pensées, E.P. Dutton, New York City 1958, 77). [39] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [40] Our semantic capability enables us to comprehend messages in any type of interaction in a manner that both considers and transcends their product or empirical structures (such as computer code). Here, intelligence ends up being a wisdom that "allows us to take a look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, circumstances, occasions and to uncover 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 enables us to create brand-new material or ideas, mainly by using an original viewpoint on truth. Both capacities depend on the presence 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 commitment to the reality, is much more than individual feeling [...] Certainly, its close relation to truth fosters its universality and maintains it from being 'restricted to a narrow field devoid of relationships.' [...] Charity's openness to truth therefore secures it from 'a fideism that deprives it of its human and universal breadth.'" The internal quotes are from Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), pars. 2-4: AAS 101 (2009 ), 642-643. [43] Cf. International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 7. [44] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, brotato.wiki.spellsandguns.com Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [45] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15. [46] Bonaventure, In II Librum Sententiarum, d. I, p. 2, a. 2, q. 1; as priced quote in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 293. Cf. ibid., par. 294. [47] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 295, 299, 302. Bonaventure likens 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: "people occupy a distinct location in the universe according to the magnificent plan: they delight in the advantage of sharing in the divine governance of visible production. [...] Since male's location as ruler remains in truth an involvement in the divine governance of creation, we mention it here as a type of stewardship." [49] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), pars. 38-39: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1164-1165. [50] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. This concept is also shown in the creation account, where God brings creatures to Adam "to see what he would call them. And whatever [he] called every living creature, that was its name" (Gen. 2:19), an action that demonstrates the active engagement of human intelligence in the stewardship of God's production. Cf. John Chrysostom, Homiliae in Genesim, XIV, 17-21: PG 53, 116-117. [51] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 301. [52] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 302. [53] Bonaventure, Breviloquium 2.12.1. Cf. ibid., 2.11.2. [54] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 236: AAS 105 (2023 ), 1115; Id., Address to Participants in the Meeting of University Chaplains and Pastoral Workers Promoted by the Dicastery for Culture and Education (24 November 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 November 2023, 7. [55] Cf. J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 5.1, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 99-100; Francis, Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [56] Francis, Address to the Members of the National Confederation of Artisans and Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises (CNA) (15 November 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 15 November 2024, 8. [57] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Querida Amazonia (2 February 2020), par. 41: AAS 112 (2020 ), 246; Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 146: AAS 107 (2015 ), 906. [58] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 864. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), pars. 17-24: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47-50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985-987. [59] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 20: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [60] P. Claudel, Conversation sur Jean Racine, Gallimard, Paris 1956, 32: "L'intelligence n'est rien sans la délectation." Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 13: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5: "The mind and the will are put at the service of the greater excellent by noticing and relishing truths." [61] Dante, Paradiso, Canto XXX: "luce intellettüal, piena d'amore;/ amor di vero ben, pien di letizia;/ letizia che trascende ogne dolzore" (en. tr. The Divine Comedy of Dante Alighieri, C.E. Norton, tr., Houghton Mifflin, Boston 1920, 232). [62] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931:" [T] he highest norm of human life is the divine law itself-eternal, unbiased and universal, by which God orders, directs and governs the entire world and the methods of the human community according to a plan conceived in his knowledge and love. God has enabled guy to participate in this law of his so that, under the mild personality of magnificent providence, numerous might be able to get to a deeper and much deeper knowledge of unchangeable truth." Also cf. Id., Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. [63] Cf. First Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius (24 April 1870), ch. 4, DH 3016. [64] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [65] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 891. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 204: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1042. [66] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 11: AAS 83 (1991 ), 807: "God has actually imprinted his own image and similarity on guy (cf. Gen 1:26), conferring upon him an unparalleled self-respect [...] In impact, beyond the rights which man obtains by his own work, there exist rights which do not represent any work he performs, but which circulation from his vital 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 comprehended as a technical term to suggest this innovation, recalling that the expression is also used to designate the field of research study and not only its applications. [71] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 34-35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 51: AAS 83 (1991 ), 856-857. [72] For example, see the encouragement of scientific expedition in Albertus Magnus (De Mineralibus, II, 2, 1) and the gratitude for the mechanical arts in Hugh of St. Victor (Didascalicon, I, 9). These authors, among a long list of other Catholics participated in scientific research and technological exploration, highlight that "faith and science can be united in charity, offered that science is put at the service of the guys and woman of our time and not misused to harm or even destroy them" (Francis, Address to Participants in the 2024 Lemaître Conference of the Vatican Observatory [20 June 2024]: L'Osservatore Romano, 20 June 2024, 8). Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 36: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053-1054; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), pars. 2, 106: AAS 91 (1999 ), 6-7.86 -87. [73] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. [74] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [75] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [76] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 102: AAS 107 (2015 ), 888. [77] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889; Id., Encyclical Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 27: AAS 112 (2020 ), 978; Benedict XVI, Encyclical Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 23: AAS 101 (2009 ), 657-658. [78] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39, 47; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), passim. [79] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par 2293. [80] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2-4. [81] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1749: "Freedom makes guy an ethical subject. When he acts deliberately, man is, so to speak, the daddy of his acts." [82] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1776. [83] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1777. [84] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 1779-1781; Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 463, where the Holy Father motivated efforts "to make sure that innovation remains human-centered, fairly grounded and directed towards the great." [85] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 166: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1026-1027; Id., Address to the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (23 September 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 September 2024, 10. On the role of human firm in picking a larger aim (Ziel) that then informs the particular purpose (Zweck) for which each technological application is developed, cf. F. Dessauer, Streit um die Technik, Herder-Bücherei, Freiburg i. Br. 1959, 70-71. [86] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4: "Technology is born for a purpose and, in its effect on human society, constantly represents a form of order in social relations and an arrangement of power, therefore allowing certain individuals to carry out particular actions while avoiding others from performing various ones. In a more or less explicit method, this constitutive power-dimension of technology constantly includes the worldview of those who developed and developed it." [87] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 309. [88] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [89] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti, pars. 212-213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [90] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 5: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589; Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [91] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "Faced with the marvels of devices, which appear to understand how to select individually, we ought to be extremely clear that decision-making [...] should always be delegated the human individual. We would condemn humankind to a future without hope if we took away people's ability to make decisions about themselves and their lives, by dooming them to depend on the choices of devices." [92] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [93] The term "bias" in this file describes algorithmic bias (methodical and consistent errors in computer system systems that may disproportionately prejudice certain groups in unintended methods) or finding out bias (which will result in training on a prejudiced information set) and not the "bias vector" in neural networks (which is a specification utilized to change the output of "nerve cells" to adjust more precisely to the data). [94] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464, where the Holy Father verified the growth in agreement "on the requirement for development processes to appreciate such values as addition, transparency, security, equity, personal privacy and reliability," and also invited "the efforts of worldwide organizations to manage these innovations so that they promote real progress, contributing, that is, to a better world and an integrally greater quality of life." [95] Francis, Greetings to a Delegation of the "Max Planck Society" (23 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 February 2023, 8. [96] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [97] Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1571. [98] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. For further discussion of the ethical questions raised by AI from a Catholic perspective, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 147-253. [99] On the significance of dialogue in a pluralist society oriented toward a "robust and solid social ethics," see Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 211-214: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [100] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, systemcheck-wiki.de 2. [101] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [102] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [103] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. [104] Cf. Pontifical Council for Social Communications, Ethics in Internet (22 February 2002), par. 10. [105] Francis, Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414; pricing estimate the Final Document of the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops (27 October 2018), par. 24: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1593. Cf. Benedict XVI, Address to the Participants in the International Congress on Natural Moral Law (12 February 2017): AAS 99 (2007 ), 245. [106] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-33: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047-1050. [107] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-21: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047. [108] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 308-309. [109] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [110] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [111] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 101, 103, 111, 115, 167: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1004-1005, 1007-1009, 1027. [112] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047; cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 35: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 123. [113] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 12: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1034. [114] Cf. Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church (2004 ), par. 149. [115] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [116] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [117] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 865. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), pars. 88-89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414. [118] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057. [119] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985. [120] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [121] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [122] Cf. E. Stein, Zum Problem der Einfühlung, Buchdruckerei des Waisenhauses, Halle 1917 (en. tr. On the Problem of Empathy, ICS Publications, Washington D.C. 1989). [123] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057:" [Lots of people] desire their social relationships offered by advanced devices, by screens and systems which can be switched on and off on command. Meanwhile, the Gospel informs us constantly to risk of an in person encounter with others, with their physical presence which challenges us, with their pain and their pleas, with their pleasure which contaminates us in our close and continuous interaction. True faith in the incarnate Son of God is inseparable from self-giving, from subscription in the neighborhood, from service, from reconciliation with others." Also cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 24: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1044-1045. [124] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 1. [125] Cf. Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570; Id, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 18, 124-129: AAS 107 (2015 ), 854.897-899. [126] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [127] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 209: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1107. [128] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4. For Pope Francis' 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 guy' and not man 'for work.' Through this conclusion one appropriately pertains to recognize the pre-eminence of the subjective significance of work over the unbiased one." [132] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 128: AAS 107 (2015 ), 898. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 24: AAS 108 (2016 ), 319-320. [133] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [134] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae (25 March 1995), par. 89: AAS 87 (1995 ), 502. [135] Ibid. [136] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 67: AAS 112 (2020 ), 993; as priced 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 appears, with its painful repercussions, it is that of healthcare. When a sick person is not positioned in the center or their self-respect is ruled out, this generates mindsets that can lead even to speculation on the misery of others. And this is really serious! [...] The application of a service approach to the health care sector, if indiscriminate [...] may 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 using Distance Learning in Ecclesiastical Universities and Faculties, I. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729; Francis, Message for the LXIX World Day of Peace (1 January 2016), 6: AAS 108 (2016 ), 57-58. [145] Francis, Address to Members of the Global Researchers Advancing Catholic Education Project (20 April 2022): AAS 114 (2022 ), 580. [146] Cf. Paul VI, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi (8 December 1975), par. 41: AAS 68 (1976 ), 31, pricing estimate Id., Address to the Members of the "Consilium de Laicis" (2 October 1974): AAS 66 (1974 ), 568: "if [the modern person] does listen to instructors, it is since they are witnesses." [147] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 6.1, London 18733, 125-126. [148] Francis, 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, pricing quote the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, Final Document (27 October 2018), par. 21: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1592. [150] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 7.6, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 167. [151] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 88: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413. [152] In a 2023 policy file about making use of generative AI in education and research, UNESCO notes: "One of the key concerns [of the usage of generative AI (GenAI) in education and research] is whether human beings can potentially deliver basic levels of thinking and skill-acquisition processes to AI and rather focus on higher-order thinking abilities based upon the outputs provided by AI. Writing, for instance, is often connected with the structuring of thinking. With GenAI [...], human beings can now start with a well-structured outline provided by GenAI. Some experts have actually identified making use of GenAI to produce text in this way as 'composing without believing'" (UNESCO, Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research [2023], 37-38). The German-American philosopher Hannah Arendt visualized such a possibility in her 1959 book, The Human Condition, and cautioned: "If it should turn out to be true that knowledge (in the sense of know-how) and believed have parted business for good, then we would certainly become the defenseless slaves, not a lot of our makers as of our knowledge" (Id., The Human Condition, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 20182, 3). [153] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 262: AAS 108 (2016 ), 417. [154] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 7: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3; cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 167: AAS 107 (2015 ), 914. [155] John Paul II, Apostolic Constitution Ex Corde Ecclesiae (15 August 1990), 7: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1479. [156] Francis, Apostolic Constitution Veritatis Gaudium (29 January 2018), 4c: AAS 110 (2018 ), 9-10. [157] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3. [158] For instance, it might assist people gain access to the "array of resources for producing greater knowledge of fact" contained in the works of philosophy (John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio [14 September 1998], par. 3: AAS 91 [1999], 7). Cf. ibid., par. 4: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7-8. [159] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 43. Cf. ibid., pars. 61-62. [160] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [161] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par 25: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053; cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), passim: AAS 112 (2020 ), 969-1074. [162] Cf. Francis., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 414; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 25: AAS 91 (1999 ), 25-26: "People can not be really indifferent to the concern of whether what they know is real or not. [...] It is this that Saint Augustine teaches when he composes: 'I have actually fulfilled many who wanted to deceive, but none who wished to be deceived'"; pricing estimate Augustine, Confessiones, X, 23, 33: PL 32, 794. [163] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), par. 62. [164] Benedict XVI, Message for the XLIII World Day of Social Communications (24 May 2009): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2009, 8. [165] Cf. Dicastery for Communications, Towards Full Presence: A Pastoral Reflection on Engagement with Social Network (28 May 2023), par. 41; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Decree Inter Mirifica (4 December 1963), pars. 4, 8-12: AAS 56 (1964 ), 146, 148-149. [166] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 1, 6, 16, 24. [167] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046. Cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 40: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 127: "no man might with impunity breach that human dignity which God himself treats with fantastic respect"; as priced estimate in John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 9: AAS 83 (1991 ), 804. [168] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2477, 2489; can. 220 CIC; can. 23 CCEO; John Paul II, Address to the Third General Conference of the Latin American Episcopate (28 January 1979), III.1-2: Insegnamenti II/1 (1979 ), 202-203. [169] Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to the Thematic Discussion on Other Disarmament Measures and International Security (24 October 2022): "Maintaining human self-respect in cyberspace obliges States to also appreciate the right to privacy, by protecting residents from intrusive monitoring and enabling them to secure their individual details from unapproved gain access to." [170] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 42: AAS 112 (2020 ), 984. [171] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [172] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465. [173] The 2023 Interim Report of the United Nations AI Advisory Body determined a list of "early promises of AI assisting to attend to climate change" (United Nations AI Advisory Body, Interim Report: Governing AI for Humanity [December 2023], 3). The document observed that, "taken together with predictive systems that can change information into insights and insights into actions, AI-enabled tools might assist develop new strategies and investments to decrease emissions, influence new private sector financial investments in net absolutely no, safeguard biodiversity, and develop broad-based social strength" (ibid.). [174] "The cloud" describes a network of physical servers throughout the world that enables users to store, procedure, and handle their information from another location. [175] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 9: AAS 107 (2015 ), 850. [176] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 106: AAS 107 (2015 ), 890. [177] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 60: AAS 107 (2015 ), 870. [178] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 3, 13: AAS 107 (2015 ), 848.852. [179] Augustine, De Civitate Dei, XIX, 13, 1: PL 41, 640. [180] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 77-82: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1100-1107; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 256-262: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1060-1063; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 38-39; Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2302-2317. [181] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 78: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1101. [182] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [183] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2308-2310. [184] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 80-81: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1105. [185] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "We need to ensure and secure an area for correct human control over the choices made by artificial intelligence programs: human self-respect itself depends on it." [186] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to Working Group II on Emerging Technologies at the UN Disarmament Commission (3 April 2024): "The advancement and usage of deadly self-governing weapons systems (LAWS) that lack the suitable human control would position essential ethical issues, considered that LAWS can never ever be ethically accountable topics capable of abiding by international humanitarian law." [187] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 258: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1061. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [188] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [189] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3: "Nor can we ignore the possibility of advanced weapons winding up in the wrong hands, facilitating, for instance, terrorist attacks or interventions aimed at destabilizing the institutions of legitimate systems of government. In a word, the world does not require new technologies that add to the unfair advancement of commerce and the weapons trade and subsequently wind up promoting the folly of war." [190] John Paul II, Act of Entrustment to Mary for the Jubilee of Bishops (8 October 2000), par. 3: Insegnamenti XXIII/2 (200 ), 565. [191] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 79: AAS 107 (2015 ), 878. [192] Cf. Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 51: AAS 101 (2009 ), 687. [193] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39. [194] Cf. Augustine, Confessiones, I, 1, 1: PL 32, 661. [195] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (30 December 1987), par. 28: AAS 80 (1988 ), 548:" [T] here is a much better understanding today that the mere build-up of items and services [...] is not enough for the awareness of human joy. Nor, in consequence, does the availability of the many real advantages supplied in recent times by science and innovation, including the computer system sciences, bring liberty from every kind of slavery. On the contrary, [...] unless all the considerable body of resources and possible at guy's disposal is guided by an ethical understanding and by an orientation towards the true good of the human race, it quickly turns against guy to oppress him." Cf. ibid., pars. 29, 37: AAS 80 (1988 ), 550-551.563 -564. [196] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [197] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 18: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [198] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 27: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 6. [199] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 25: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5-6. [200] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. R. Guardini, Das Ende der Neuzeit, Würzburg 19659, 87 ff. (en. tr. 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 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 greater knowledge. Wisdom is not born of fast searches on the internet nor is it a mass of unverified data. That is not the method to grow in the encounter with reality." [209] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [210] Ibid. [211] Ibid. [212] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate (19 March 2018), par. 37: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1121. [213] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate (19 March 2018), par. 46: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1123-1124. [214] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [215] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570-1571.