GitLab

1. With knowledge both ancient and new (cf. Mt. 13:52), we are called to show on the existing obstacles and chances posed by clinical and technological improvements, particularly by the current advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The Christian custom concerns the present of intelligence as a necessary element of how humans are produced "in the image of God" (Gen. 1:27). Starting from an essential vision of the human individual and the scriptural calling to "till" and "keep" the earth (Gen. 2:15), the Church highlights that this present of intelligence ought to be expressed through the accountable usage of factor and technical abilities in the stewardship of the created world.

2. The Church motivates the improvement of science, technology, the arts, and other types of human undertaking, seeing them as part of the "partnership of males and female with God in improving the noticeable creation." [1] As Sirach verifies, God "provided skill to human beings, that he might 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 means to "be human," we can not exclude a factor to consider of our clinical and technological capabilities.

3. It is within this viewpoint that today Note addresses the anthropological and ethical challenges raised by AI-issues that are especially significant, as one of the objectives of this innovation is to imitate the human intelligence that created it. For example, unlike numerous other human productions, AI can be trained on the results of human creativity and then create new "artifacts" with a level of speed and ability that typically rivals or exceeds what people can do, such as producing text or images equivalent from human structures. This raises important concerns about AI's prospective function in the growing crisis of reality in the public online forum. Moreover, this technology is created to discover and make certain options autonomously, adjusting to new circumstances and offering solutions not foreseen by its developers, and hence, it raises essential questions about ethical responsibility and human security, with more comprehensive ramifications for society as a whole. This new scenario has triggered many individuals to reflect on what it means to be human and the function of humanity on the planet.

4. Taking all this into account, there is broad agreement that AI marks a new and considerable phase in humanity's engagement with innovation, putting it at the heart of what Pope Francis has explained as an "epochal change." [2] Its impact is felt globally and in a vast array of locations, including interpersonal relationships, hikvisiondb.webcam education, work, art, healthcare, law, warfare, and worldwide relations. As AI advances quickly towards even greater accomplishments, it is seriously crucial to consider its anthropological and ethical ramifications. This includes not just mitigating risks and preventing damage however likewise guaranteeing that its applications are used to promote human progress and the common good.

5. To contribute favorably to the discernment relating to AI, and in reaction to Pope Francis' require a restored "wisdom of heart," [3] the Church uses its experience through the anthropological and ethical reflections contained in this Note. Committed to its active role in the global discussion on these concerns, the Church invites those delegated with sending the faith-including parents, instructors, pastors, and bishops-to devote themselves to this important topic with care and attention. While this file is intended specifically for them, it is also suggested to be available to a wider audience, particularly those who share the conviction that scientific and technological advances need to be directed toward serving the human person and the typical good. [4]
6. To this end, the file begins by comparing concepts of intelligence in AI and in human intelligence. It then explores the Christian understanding of human intelligence, supplying a framework rooted in the Church's philosophical and doctrinal tradition. Finally, the document uses standards to make sure that the advancement and usage of AI maintain human dignity and promote the essential development of the human individual and society.

7. The principle of "intelligence" in AI has developed with time, drawing on a variety of concepts from various disciplines. While its origins extend back centuries, a considerable milestone occurred in 1956 when the American computer system researcher John McCarthy arranged a summer season workshop at Dartmouth University to explore the problem of "Artificial Intelligence," which he specified as "that of making a device act in methods that would be called intelligent if a human were so acting." [5] This workshop introduced a research program concentrated on developing makers efficient in performing tasks usually connected with the human intellect and intelligent behavior.

8. Since then, AI research study has actually advanced rapidly, resulting in the development of complex systems efficient in performing highly sophisticated tasks. [6] These so-called "narrow AI" systems are generally developed to handle specific and limited functions, such as translating languages, predicting the trajectory of a storm, classifying images, addressing concerns, or producing visual content at the user's request. While the definition of "intelligence" in AI research study differs, a lot of contemporary AI systems-particularly those using machine learning-rely on analytical reasoning instead of logical deduction. By analyzing big datasets to identify patterns, AI can "forecast" [7] outcomes and propose brand-new methods, imitating some cognitive processes typical of human analytical. Such accomplishments have actually been made possible through advances in computing innovation (consisting of neural networks, not being watched artificial intelligence, and evolutionary algorithms) along with hardware innovations (such as specialized processors). Together, these technologies make it possible for AI systems to react to various kinds of human input, adapt to brand-new circumstances, and even suggest unique options not expected by their original developers. [8]
9. Due to these quick advancements, lots of tasks when managed solely by human beings are now entrusted to AI. These systems can enhance or even supersede what human beings are able to do in numerous fields, especially in specialized locations such as information analysis, image recognition, and medical diagnosis. While each "narrow AI" application is designed for a particular job, many researchers aim to develop what is called "Artificial General Intelligence" (AGI)-a single system efficient in running across all cognitive domains and performing any task within the scope of human intelligence. Some even argue that AGI could one day attain the state of "superintelligence," going beyond human intellectual capabilities, or contribute to "super-longevity" through advances in biotechnology. Others, nevertheless, fear that these possibilities, even if hypothetical, might one day eclipse the human individual, while still others welcome this prospective improvement. [9]
10. Underlying this and numerous other perspectives on the subject is the implicit presumption that the term "intelligence" can be used in the exact same method to refer to both human intelligence and AI. Yet, this does not catch the complete scope of the principle. When it comes to humans, intelligence is a professors that pertains to the person in his/her whole, whereas in the context of AI, "intelligence" is understood functionally, often with the anticipation that the activities attribute of the human mind can be broken down into digitized actions that makers can reproduce. [10]
11. This functional viewpoint is exemplified by the "Turing Test," which thinks about a device "intelligent" if a person can not differentiate its habits from that of a human. [11] However, in this context, the term "behavior" refers only to the efficiency of particular intellectual jobs; it does not account for the full breadth of human experience, which includes abstraction, feelings, creativity, and the visual, moral, and spiritual perceptiveness. Nor does it incorporate the full variety of expressions particular of the human mind. Instead, when it comes to AI, the "intelligence" of a system is evaluated methodologically, but likewise reductively, based on its ability to produce suitable responses-in this case, those associated with the human intellect-regardless of how those responses are generated.

12. AI's innovative features offer it advanced capabilities to perform jobs, but not the ability to think. [12] This distinction is most importantly essential, as the method "intelligence" is defined undoubtedly forms how we comprehend the relationship between human idea and this innovation. [13] To appreciate this, one must recall the richness of the philosophical tradition and Christian faith, which offer a deeper and more detailed understanding of intelligence-an understanding that is main to the Church's teaching 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 comprehending what it implies to be "human." Aristotle observed that "all people by nature desire to know." [15] This understanding, with its capacity for abstraction that grasps the nature and meaning of things, sets humans apart from the animal world. [16] As theorists, theologians, and psychologists have examined the precise nature of this intellectual professors, they have also explored how humans comprehend the world and their special location within it. Through this exploration, the Christian custom has actually pertained to comprehend the human person as a being including both body and soul-deeply connected to this world and yet transcending it. [17]
14. In the classical custom, the principle of intelligence is frequently comprehended through the complementary ideas of "factor" (ratio) and "intelligence" (intellectus). These are not different professors however, as Saint Thomas Aquinas explains, they are 2 modes in which the exact same intelligence operates: "The term intellect is inferred from the inward grasp of the truth, while the name reason is taken from the inquisitive and discursive procedure." [18] This succinct description highlights the 2 essential and complementary measurements of human intelligence. Intellectus refers to the instinctive grasp of the truth-that is, collaring it with the "eyes" of the mind-which precedes and grounds argumentation itself. Ratio pertains to reasoning proper: the discursive, analytical procedure that causes judgment. Together, intellect and reason form the 2 aspects of the act of intelligere, "the proper operation of the human being as such." [19]
15. Explaining the human individual as a "reasonable" being does not reduce the individual to a particular mode of idea; rather, it recognizes that the ability for intellectual understanding shapes and penetrates all aspects of human activity. [20] Whether exercised well or inadequately, this capacity is an intrinsic element of human nature. In this sense, the "term 'logical' encompasses all the capabilities of the human individual," including those associated to "understanding and understanding, as well as those of prepared, loving, selecting, and wanting; it also consists of all corporeal functions carefully associated to these abilities." [21] This detailed perspective highlights how, in the human individual, developed in the "picture of God," factor is integrated in a way that raises, shapes, and transforms both the individual's will and actions. [22]
16. Christian believed considers the intellectual professors of the human person within the framework of an essential sociology that views the human being as basically 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 person is simultaneously 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 hence, an authentically spiritual measurement) within and through this embodied existence. [24] The extensive meaning of this condition is additional brightened by the secret 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 existence, the human person transcends the material world through the soul, which is "almost on the horizon of eternity and time." [26] The intellect's capability for transcendence and the self-possessed flexibility of the will come from the soul, by which the human individual "shares in the light of the magnificent mind." [27] Nevertheless, the human spirit does not exercise its typical mode of understanding without the body. [28] In this way, the intellectual professors of the human individual are an integral part of an anthropology that acknowledges that the human person is a "unity of body and soul." [29] Further aspects of this understanding will be established in what follows.

18. Human beings are "purchased by their very nature to interpersonal communion," [30] having the capacity to know one another, to offer themselves in love, and to participate in communion with others. Accordingly, human intelligence is not an isolated faculty however is worked out in relationships, finding its max expression in discussion, partnership, and solidarity. We learn with others, and we find out through others.

19. The relational orientation of the human individual is eventually grounded in the eternal self-giving of the Triune God, whose love is exposed in development and redemption. [31] The human individual is "contacted us 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 contacted us to mimic Christ's outpouring gift (cf. 2 Cor. 9:8 -11; Eph. 5:1 -2) by following his command to "like one another, as I have enjoyed you" (Jn. 13:34). [33] Love and service, echoing the magnificent life of self-giving, transcend self-interest to respond more completely to the human occupation (cf. 1 Jn. 2:9). Even more sublime than knowing many things is the dedication to care for one another, for if "I understand all secrets and all knowledge [...] but do not have love, I am nothing" (1 Cor. 13:2).

21. Human intelligence is ultimately "God's present made for the assimilation of fact." [34] In the dual sense of intellectus-ratio, it allows the person to check out realities that go beyond mere sensory experience or energy, considering that "the desire for reality is part of humanity itself. It is a natural home of human reason to ask why things are as they are." [35] Moving beyond the limits of empirical information, human intelligence can "with real certitude attain to truth itself as knowable." [36] While reality remains only partially understood, the desire for reality "spurs reason always to go further; certainly, it is as if factor were overwhelmed to see that it can always surpass what it has actually currently attained." [37] Although Truth in itself transcends the limits of human intelligence, it irresistibly attracts it. [38] Drawn by this tourist attraction, the human individual is caused look for "truths of a higher order." [39]
22. This inherent drive towards the pursuit of reality is particularly evident in the distinctly human capacities for semantic understanding and imagination, [40] through which this search unfolds in a "manner that is suitable to the social nature and dignity of the human individual." [41] Likewise, a steadfast orientation to the fact is essential for charity to be both genuine and universal. [42]
23. The search for fact discovers its highest expression in openness to truths that transcend the physical and developed world. In God, all realities attain their ultimate and initial significance. [43] Entrusting oneself to God is a "essential decision that engages the whole person." [44] In this way, the human person becomes fully what he or she is contacted us to be: "the intelligence and the will show their spiritual nature," allowing the person "to act in a manner that realizes personal flexibility to the full." [45]
24. The Christian faith comprehends creation as the totally free act of the Triune God, who, as Saint Bonaventure of Bagnoregio explains, creates "not to increase his splendor, however to reveal it forth and to interact it." [46] Since God creates according to his Wisdom (cf. Wis. 9:9; Jer. 10:12), development is imbued with an intrinsic order that reflects God's strategy (cf. Gen. 1; Dan. 2:21 -22; Is. 45:18; Ps. 74:12 -17; 104), [47] within which God has actually called people to assume a special role: to cultivate and look after the world. [48]
25. Shaped by the Divine Craftsman, humans live out their identity as beings made in imago Dei by "keeping" and "tilling" (cf. Gen. 2:15) creation-using their intelligence and skills to take care of and establish creation in accord with God's plan. [49] In this, human intelligence reflects the Divine Intelligence that developed all things (cf. Gen. 1-2; Jn. 1), [50] constantly sustains them, and guides them to their ultimate purpose in him. [51] Moreover, people are contacted us to establish their capabilities in science and innovation, for through them, God is glorified (cf. Sir. 38:6). Thus, in an appropriate relationship with creation, human beings, on the one hand, use their intelligence and ability to work together with God in directing development towards the purpose to which he has actually called it. [52] On the other hand, creation itself, as Saint Bonaventure observes, assists the human mind to "ascend slowly to the supreme Principle, who is God." [53]
26. In this context, human intelligence becomes more plainly understood as a faculty that forms an important part of how the entire individual engages with truth. Authentic engagement requires accepting the full scope of one's being: spiritual, cognitive, embodied, and relational.

27. This engagement with reality unfolds in different methods, as each individual, in his/her diverse individuality [54], looks for to comprehend the world, associate with others, fix problems, express imagination, and pursue essential well-being through the unified interplay of the numerous dimensions of the person's intelligence. [55] This includes sensible and linguistic abilities however can likewise encompass other modes of interacting with reality. Consider the work of a craftsmen, who "must know how to discern, in inert matter, a particular form that others can not recognize" [56] and bring it forth through insight and practical ability. Indigenous individuals who live near to the earth often have an extensive sense of nature and its cycles. [57] Similarly, a good friend who understands the right word to say or an individual skilled at managing 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 expert system, we can not forget that poetry and love are essential to conserve our mankind." [59]
28. At the heart of the Christian understanding of intelligence is the integration of fact into the moral and spiritual life of the individual, assisting his or her actions due to God's goodness and truth. According to God's plan, intelligence, in its fullest sense, also consists of the ability to enjoy what holds true, great, and gorgeous. As the twentieth-century French poet Paul Claudel expressed, "intelligence is absolutely nothing without delight." [60] Similarly, Dante, upon reaching the greatest heaven in Paradiso, testifies that the conclusion of this intellectual pleasure is found in the "light intellectual complete of love, love of real great filled with happiness, pleasure which goes beyond every sweetness." [61]
29. A proper understanding of human intelligence, for that reason, can not be decreased to the simple acquisition of truths or the capability to perform particular tasks. Instead, it includes the person's openness to the supreme concerns of life and shows an orientation toward the True and the Good. [62] As an expression of the magnificent image within the individual, human intelligence has the ability to access the totality of being, considering presence in its fullness, which goes beyond what is measurable, and grasping the meaning of what has actually been comprehended. For followers, this capability includes, in a specific method, the ability to grow in the understanding of the mysteries of God by utilizing factor to engage ever more profoundly with exposed facts (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 purpose.

30. In light of the foregoing discussion, the differences in between human intelligence and present AI systems end up being evident. While AI is a remarkable technological achievement efficient in imitating certain outputs related to human intelligence, it runs by performing tasks, attaining objectives, or making choices based upon quantitative data and computational reasoning. For instance, with its analytical power, AI excels at integrating data from a range of fields, modeling complex systems, and cultivating interdisciplinary connections. In this method, it can assist experts work together in resolving complex issues that "can not be dealt with from a single perspective or from a single set of interests." [64]
31. However, even as AI procedures and simulates certain expressions of intelligence, it remains fundamentally confined to a logical-mathematical framework, which enforces intrinsic constraints. Human intelligence, on the other hand, establishes naturally throughout the person's physical and mental growth, formed by a myriad of lived experiences in the flesh. Although innovative AI systems can "find out" through procedures such as artificial intelligence, this sort of training is basically different from the developmental growth of human intelligence, which is shaped by embodied experiences, consisting of sensory input, psychological responses, social interactions, and the unique context of each moment. These elements shape and form people within their personal history.In contrast, AI, doing not have a physique, counts on computational thinking and knowing based on large datasets that include taped human experiences and knowledge.

32. Consequently, although AI can replicate aspects of human reasoning and carry out specific tasks with unbelievable speed and efficiency, its computational abilities represent just a fraction of the more comprehensive capacities of the human mind. For instance, AI can not presently reproduce moral discernment or the capability to establish authentic relationships. Moreover, human intelligence is positioned within a personally lived history of intellectual and ethical development that essentially forms the individual's perspective, incorporating the physical, emotional, social, moral, and spiritual measurements of life. Since AI can not offer this fullness of understanding, approaches that rely entirely on this innovation or treat it as the main ways of analyzing the world can lead to "a loss of appreciation for the whole, for the relationships in between things, and for the broader horizon." [65]
33. Human intelligence is not mainly about finishing practical jobs however about understanding and actively engaging with reality in all its measurements; it is likewise capable of unexpected insights. Since AI lacks the richness of corporeality, relationality, and the openness of the human heart to truth and goodness, its capacities-though seemingly limitless-are incomparable with the human capability to grasp reality. So much can be gained from a disease, an accept of reconciliation, and even a basic sunset; certainly, many experiences we have as human beings open brand-new horizons and use the possibility of attaining new wisdom. No gadget, working exclusively with data, can measure up to these and numerous other experiences present in our lives.

34. Drawing an overly close equivalence between human intelligence and AI risks catching a functionalist viewpoint, where people are valued based upon the work they can carry out. However, an individual's worth does not depend on possessing specific skills, cognitive and technological achievements, or private success, but on the person's intrinsic dignity, grounded in being created in the image of God. [66] This self-respect remains undamaged in all situations, including for those unable to exercise their capabilities, whether it be a coming child, an unconscious individual, or an older person who is suffering. [67] It likewise underpins the custom of human rights (and, in particular, what are now called "neuro-rights"), which represent "an essential point of merging in the look for commonalities" [68] and can, thus, serve as an essential ethical guide in discussions 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 risks overlooking what is most valuable in the human person. Due to this, AI needs to not be seen as an artificial type of human intelligence but as a product of it. [70]
36. Given these factors to consider, one can ask how AI can be understood within God's strategy. To address this, it is very important to recall that techno-scientific activity is not neutral in character however is a human endeavor that engages the humanistic and cultural measurements of human creativity. [71]
37. Seen as a fruit of the prospective inscribed within human intelligence, [72] scientific inquiry and the development of technical skills become part of the "cooperation of male and woman with God in perfecting the visible production." [73] At the same time, all clinical and technological accomplishments are, ultimately, presents from God. [74] Therefore, human beings should constantly use their abilities in view of the greater function for which God has actually given them. [75]
38. We can gratefully acknowledge how technology has "fixed many evils which used to hurt and limit humans," [76] a truth for which we need to rejoice. Nevertheless, not all technological improvements in themselves represent genuine human development. [77] The Church is particularly opposed to those applications that threaten the sanctity of life or the dignity of the human individual. [78] Like any human venture, technological development must be directed to serve the human individual and add to the pursuit of "higher justice, more substantial fraternity, and a more gentle order of social relations," which are "better than advances in the technical field." [79] Concerns about the ethical implications of technological development are shared not only within the Church but also among lots of researchers, technologists, and professional associations, who significantly require ethical reflection to guide this development in an accountable method.

39. To resolve these difficulties, it is necessary to highlight the value of ethical duty grounded in the dignity and occupation of the human individual. This assisting concept also uses to concerns concerning AI. In this context, the ethical measurement takes on main value due to the fact that it is individuals who create systems and identify the functions for which they are utilized. [80] Between a device and a human being, only the latter is genuinely a moral agent-a topic of moral obligation who exercises liberty in his or her decisions and accepts their repercussions. [81] It is not the maker however the human who remains in relationship with truth and goodness, directed by a moral conscience that calls the person "to enjoy and to do what is excellent and to avoid evil," [82] bearing witness to "the authority of truth in reference to the supreme Good to which the human individual is drawn." [83] Likewise, in between a machine and a human, only the human can be adequately self-aware to the point of listening and following the voice of conscience, discerning with vigilance, and looking for the excellent that is possible in every situation. [84] In truth, all of this likewise comes from the individual's exercise of intelligence.

40. Like any item of human creativity, AI can be directed toward positive or unfavorable ends. [85] When used in manner ins which appreciate human dignity and promote the well-being of individuals and neighborhoods, it can contribute positively to the human occupation. Yet, as in all locations where humans are contacted us to make decisions, the shadow of evil likewise looms here. Where human flexibility permits the possibility of selecting what is wrong, the moral examination of this technology will need to consider how it is directed and used.

41. At the same time, it is not just completions that are fairly substantial however likewise the means employed to attain them. Additionally, the total vision and understanding of the human person 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 "shape the world and engage consciences on the level of values." [87] On a societal level, some technological advancements could also reinforce relationships and power dynamics that are irregular with an appropriate understanding of the human individual and society.

42. Therefore, completions and the means used in an offered application of AI, as well as the general vision it incorporates, need to all be assessed to guarantee they respect human self-respect and promote the typical good. [88] As Pope Francis has actually mentioned, "the intrinsic self-respect of every male and every female" need to be "the essential criterion in evaluating emerging technologies; these will prove fairly sound to the degree that they help regard that dignity and increase its expression at every level of human life," [89] consisting of in the social and economic spheres. In this sense, human intelligence plays a vital role not only in developing and producing innovation but also in directing its usage in line with the genuine good of the human individual. [90] The duty for managing this wisely pertains to every level of society, guided by the principle of subsidiarity and other principles of Catholic Social Teaching.

43. The dedication to making sure that AI constantly supports and promotes the supreme worth of the dignity of every person and the fullness of the human vocation serves as a requirement of discernment for designers, owners, operators, and regulators of AI, as well as to its users. It remains valid for every single application of the innovation at every level of its usage.

44. An assessment of the implications of this assisting principle might start by thinking about the importance of moral obligation. Since complete ethical causality belongs just to individual representatives, not artificial ones, it is crucial to be able to determine and define who bears obligation for the procedures involved in AI, particularly those efficient in learning, correction, and reprogramming. While bottom-up techniques and very deep neural networks enable AI to resolve intricate issues, they make it hard to understand the processes that lead to the solutions they adopted. This complicates accountability considering that if an AI application produces undesired results, determining who is accountable becomes challenging. To resolve this issue, attention requires to be offered to the nature of accountability processes in complex, highly automated settings, where outcomes might just end up being obvious in the medium to long term. For this, it is very important that supreme duty for choices used AI rests with the human decision-makers which there is responsibility for the usage of AI at each stage of the decision-making procedure. [91]
45. In addition to determining who is accountable, it is important to recognize the goals offered to AI systems. Although these systems may use unsupervised self-governing learning mechanisms and often follow courses that humans can not reconstruct, they eventually pursue objectives that human beings have assigned to them and are governed by processes developed by their designers and developers. Yet, this provides a difficulty because, as AI designs become significantly efficient in independent learning, the capability to maintain control over them to ensure that such applications serve human functions may effectively decrease. This raises the crucial concern of how to ensure that AI systems are purchased for the good of people and not against them.

46. While responsibility for the ethical usage of AI systems starts with those who develop, produce, handle, and manage such systems, it is also shared by those who use them. As Pope Francis noted, the machine "makes a technical option among a number of possibilities based either on well-defined requirements or on analytical inferences. People, however, not just pick, but in their hearts can choosing." [92] Those who use AI to achieve a task and follow its results develop a context in which they are ultimately responsible for the power they have entrusted. Therefore, insofar as AI can help humans in making choices, the algorithms that govern it should be trustworthy, protected, robust enough to deal with inconsistencies, and transparent in their operation to alleviate biases and unintended negative effects. [93] Regulatory frameworks need to make sure that all legal entities remain liable for the usage of AI and all its effects, with proper safeguards for transparency, personal privacy, and responsibility. [94] Moreover, those utilizing AI ought to be mindful not to end up being overly reliant on it for their decision-making, a pattern that increases contemporary society's already high dependence on technology.

47. The Church's ethical and social mentor supplies resources to help guarantee that AI is used in a manner that maintains human company. Considerations about justice, for example, ought to likewise deal with concerns such as promoting simply social characteristics, maintaining global security, and promoting peace. By working out prudence, people and neighborhoods can discern ways to utilize AI to benefit humanity while preventing applications that might break down human dignity or damage the environment. In this context, the principle of duty need to be comprehended not only in its most minimal sense but as a "obligation for the take care of others, which is more than just accounting for results attained." [95]
48. Therefore, AI, like any innovation, can be part of a conscious and responsible answer to humankind's occupation to the good. However, as previously gone over, AI needs to be directed by human intelligence to line up with this vocation, guaranteeing it respects the dignity of the human person. Recognizing this "exalted dignity," the Second Vatican Council verified that "the social order and its development should usually work to the advantage of the human individual." [96] In light of this, the use of AI, as Pope Francis said, must be "accompanied by an ethic inspired by a vision of the common good, an ethic of liberty, responsibility, and fraternity, efficient in fostering the complete development of people in relation to others and to the entire of development." [97]
49. Within this basic viewpoint, some observations follow below to illustrate how the preceding arguments can assist offer an ethical orientation in practical circumstances, in line with the "knowledge of heart" that Pope Francis has proposed. [98] While not extensive, this discussion is offered in service of the dialogue that thinks about how AI can be used to maintain the self-respect of the human person and promote the common good. [99]
50. As Pope Francis observed, "the fundamental self-respect of each person and the fraternity that binds us together as members of the one human household should undergird the development of brand-new innovations and function as unassailable requirements for examining them before they are used." [100]
51. Viewed through this lens, AI could "present important innovations in farming, education and culture, an improved level of life for whole nations and peoples, and the growth of human fraternity and social friendship," and hence be "utilized to promote integral human development." [101] AI could likewise help organizations recognize those in need and counter discrimination and marginalization. These and other similar applications of this innovation could contribute to human advancement and the typical good. [102]
52. However, while AI holds lots of possibilities for promoting the great, it can also hinder and even counter human advancement and the typical good. Pope Francis has noted that "proof to date recommends that digital technologies have increased inequality in our world. Not simply distinctions in product wealth, which are also substantial, however also distinctions in access to political and social impact." [103] In this sense, AI could be used to perpetuate marginalization and discrimination, create brand-new types of hardship, broaden the "digital divide," and aggravate existing social inequalities. [104]
53. Moreover, the concentration of the power over mainstream AI applications in the hands of a few effective companies raises significant ethical issues. Exacerbating this issue is the fundamental nature of AI systems, where no single person can exercise total oversight over the huge and intricate datasets used for calculation. This lack of distinct accountability produces the threat that AI could be manipulated for individual or business gain or to direct popular opinion for the benefit of a specific industry. Such entities, motivated by their own interests, have the capability to exercise "types of control as subtle as they are intrusive, creating mechanisms for the adjustment of consciences and of the democratic procedure." [105]
54. Furthermore, there is the danger of AI being utilized to promote what Pope Francis has called the "technocratic paradigm," which perceives all the world's issues as solvable through technological means alone. [106] In this paradigm, human dignity and fraternity are often set aside in the name of effectiveness, "as if truth, goodness, and fact immediately stream from technological and financial power as such." [107] Yet, human dignity and the common great must never be violated for the sake of efficiency, [108] for "technological developments that do not result in an enhancement in the lifestyle of all humanity, however on the contrary, intensify inequalities and disputes, can never count as real development. " [109] Instead, AI needs to be put "at the service of another kind of development, one which is healthier, more human, more social, more important." [110]
55. Attaining this goal needs a much deeper reflection on the relationship between autonomy and obligation. Greater autonomy heightens everyone's obligation throughout numerous elements of communal life. For Christians, the foundation of this duty depends on the acknowledgment that all human capacities, including the person's autonomy, come from God and are meant to be utilized in the service of others. [111] Therefore, instead of merely pursuing financial or technological objectives, AI needs to serve "the typical good of the whole human household," which is "the sum total of social conditions that enable individuals, either as groups or as people, to reach their satisfaction more completely and more quickly." [112]
56. The Second Vatican Council observed that "by his inner nature man is a social being; and if he does not get in into relations with others, he can neither live nor develop his gifts." [113] This conviction underscores that residing in society is intrinsic to the nature and vocation of the human person. [114] As social beings, we look for relationships that involve mutual exchange and the pursuit of truth, in the course of which, people "share with each other the fact they have discovered, or believe they have found, in such a way that they help one another in the search for reality." [115]
57. Such a mission, in addition to other aspects of human interaction, presupposes encounters and mutual exchange in between people formed by their unique histories, thoughts, convictions, and relationships. Nor can we forget that human intelligence is a varied, multifaceted, and complex reality: individual and social, logical and affective, conceptual and symbolic. Pope Francis underscores this vibrant, noting that "together, we can look for the reality in dialogue, in unwinded discussion or in passionate debate. To do so calls for determination; it entails minutes of silence and suffering, yet it can patiently accept the more comprehensive experience of individuals and individuals. [...] The process of building fraternity, be it regional or universal, can just be undertaken by spirits that are totally free and available to authentic encounters." [116]
58. It remains in this context that a person can think about the obstacles AI positions to human relationships. Like other technological tools, AI has the possible to foster connections within the human household. However, it could also prevent a true encounter with truth and, eventually, lead individuals to "a deep and melancholic frustration with social relations, or a hazardous sense of seclusion." [117] Authentic human relationships require the richness of being with others in their pain, their pleas, and their happiness. [118] Since human intelligence is revealed and enhanced also in social and embodied methods, genuine and spontaneous encounters with others are important for engaging with truth in its fullness.

59. Because "true wisdom requires an encounter with reality," [119] the increase of AI introduces another difficulty. Since AI can successfully mimic the items of human intelligence, the ability to know when one is connecting with a human or a machine can no longer be considered given. Generative AI can produce text, speech, images, and other sophisticated outputs that are usually associated with people. Yet, it needs to be understood for what it is: a tool, not a person. [120] This distinction is frequently obscured by the language utilized by specialists, which tends to anthropomorphize AI and therefore blurs the line in between human and machine.

60. Anthropomorphizing AI likewise poses specific challenges for the advancement of children, possibly motivating them to establish patterns of interaction that treat human relationships in a transactional way, as one would connect to a chatbot. Such habits could lead young individuals to see instructors as simple dispensers of details rather than as mentors who assist and support their intellectual and moral development. Genuine relationships, rooted in compassion and a steadfast commitment to the good of the other, are necessary and irreplaceable in promoting the complete advancement of the human person.

61. In this context, it is very important to clarify that, regardless of using anthropomorphic language, no AI application can really experience compassion. Emotions can not be lowered to facial expressions or expressions generated in response to triggers; they show the method an individual, as an entire, relates to the world and to his or her own life, with the body playing a main function. True empathy requires the capability to listen, acknowledge another's irreducible originality, invite their otherness, and grasp the significance behind even their silences. [121] Unlike the world of analytical judgment in which AI stands out, true empathy belongs to the relational sphere. It involves intuiting and collaring the lived experiences of another while maintaining the difference in between self and other. [122] While AI can replicate compassionate responses, it can not replicate the eminently individual and relational nature of authentic compassion. [123]
62. In light of the above, it is clear why misrepresenting AI as an individual ought to constantly be avoided; doing so for deceptive purposes is a grave ethical offense that could deteriorate 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 likewise to be considered immoral and requires careful oversight to prevent harm, maintain transparency, and ensure the dignity of all people. [124]
63. In a significantly isolated world, some individuals have actually turned to AI in search of deep human relationships, simple friendship, and even psychological bonds. However, while people 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 she or he is implied to be. If AI is utilized to assist people foster real connections between individuals, it can contribute favorably to the full realization of the individual. Conversely, if we change relationships with God and with others with interactions with technology, we risk replacing authentic relationality with a lifeless image (cf. Ps. 106:20; Rom. 1:22 -23). Instead of pulling away into artificial worlds, we are contacted us to take part in a committed and deliberate way with truth, particularly by identifying with the bad and suffering, consoling those in sorrow, and creating bonds of communion with all.

64. Due to its interdisciplinary nature, AI is being progressively incorporated into financial and financial systems. Significant financial investments are currently being made not only in the technology sector however also in energy, financing, and media, especially in the locations of marketing and sales, logistics, technological innovation, compliance, and danger management. At the very same time, AI's applications in these locations have actually likewise highlighted its ambivalent nature, as a source of significant opportunities however likewise profound risks. A first genuine crucial point in this area worries 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 worth developed by AI instead of business that utilize it.

65. Other more comprehensive elements of AI's effect on the economic-financial sphere need to also be carefully examined, especially concerning the interaction in between concrete reality and the digital world. One crucial factor to consider in this regard includes the coexistence of varied and alternative forms of financial and financial organizations within a provided context. This element needs to be motivated, as it can bring benefits in how it supports the real economy by promoting its advancement and stability, especially during times of crisis. Nevertheless, it needs to be worried that digital realities, not limited by any spatial bonds, tend to be more uniform and impersonal than neighborhoods rooted in a specific location and a particular history, with a typical journey characterized by shared worths and hopes, but likewise by inescapable disagreements and divergences. This variety is an indisputable possession to a neighborhood's financial life. Turning over the economy and finance entirely to digital innovation would minimize this variety and richness. As an outcome, lots of solutions to economic issues that can be reached through natural dialogue between the included celebrations may no longer be attainable in a world controlled by treatments and only the appearance of proximity.

66. Another location where AI is currently having an extensive impact is the world of work. As in lots of other fields, AI is driving essential changes throughout numerous professions, with a series of impacts. On the one hand, it has the prospective to boost competence and performance, create brand-new jobs, allow employees to concentrate on more innovative jobs, and open brand-new horizons for creativity and development.

67. However, while AI guarantees to enhance efficiency by taking over ordinary tasks, it often forces workers to adjust to the speed and demands of devices instead of machines being created to support those who work. As an outcome, contrary to the advertised benefits of AI, present methods to the technology can paradoxically deskill workers, subject them to automated monitoring, and relegate them to rigid and repetitive jobs. The need to stay up to date with the pace of innovation can erode employees' sense of agency and stifle the innovative abilities they are anticipated to give their work. [125]
68. AI is presently removing the requirement for some jobs that were when performed by people. If AI is utilized to replace human workers rather than complement them, there is a "significant danger of disproportionate benefit for the couple of at the price of the impoverishment of numerous." [126] Additionally, as AI ends up being more effective, there is an associated risk that human labor might lose its worth in the financial realm. This is the sensible consequence of the technocratic paradigm: a world of humanity shackled to effectiveness, where, eventually, the cost of mankind should be cut. Yet, human lives are intrinsically valuable, independent of their financial output. Nevertheless, the "existing model," Pope Francis explains, "does not appear to prefer a financial investment in efforts to assist the sluggish, the weak, or the less talented to discover chances in life." [127] Due to this, "we can not allow a tool as effective and indispensable as Artificial Intelligence to enhance such a paradigm, however rather, we should make Artificial Intelligence a bulwark against its growth." [128]
69. It is necessary to keep in mind that "the order of things should be secondary to the order of persons, and not the other way around." [129] Human work should not just be at the service of profit but at "the service of the entire human person [...] taking into account the person's material needs and the requirements of his or her intellectual, moral, 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 likewise "an essential measurement of social life" and "a way [...] of individual growth, the building of healthy relationships, self-expression and the exchange of presents. Work provides us a sense of shared duty for the advancement of the world, and eventually, for our life as an individuals." [131]
70. Since work is a "part of the significance of life on this earth, a course to development, human development and personal fulfillment," "the goal needs to not be that technological development increasingly changes human work, for this would be detrimental to humanity" [132] -rather, it should promote human labor. Seen in this light, AI must help, not replace, human judgment. Similarly, it should never ever break down imagination or lower employees to simple "cogs in a device." Therefore, "respect for the self-respect of workers and the importance of work for the financial wellness of individuals, households, and societies, for task security and just earnings, ought to be a high concern for the international community as these types of innovation permeate more deeply into our offices." [133]
71. As individuals in God's healing work, healthcare professionals have the vocation and responsibility to be "guardians and servants of human life." [134] Because of this, the health care profession brings an "intrinsic and indisputable ethical measurement," acknowledged by the Hippocratic Oath, which obliges physicians and health care professionals to commit themselves to having "absolute respect for human life and its sacredness." [135] Following the example of the Good Samaritan, this dedication is to be performed by males and females "who decline the production of a society of exemption, and act rather as next-door neighbors, raising up and restoring the fallen for the sake of the common good." [136]
72. Seen in this light, AI appears to hold enormous capacity in a range of applications in the medical field, such as assisting the diagnostic work of health care service providers, facilitating relationships between clients and medical staff, providing brand-new treatments, and expanding access to quality care also for those who are separated or marginalized. In these methods, the technology could improve the "compassionate and caring closeness" [137] that healthcare suppliers are called to reach the ill and suffering.

73. However, if AI is utilized not to boost however to replace the relationship between patients and health care providers-leaving patients to connect with a machine instead of a human being-it would reduce a crucially crucial human relational structure to a centralized, impersonal, and unequal structure. Instead of encouraging solidarity with the ill and suffering, such applications of AI would run the risk of worsening the isolation that frequently accompanies disease, specifically in the context of a culture where "persons are no longer seen as a critical value to be looked after and appreciated." [138] This abuse of AI would not line up with regard for the dignity of the human person and solidarity with the suffering.

74. Responsibility for the well-being of clients and the choices that discuss their lives are at the heart of the health care occupation. This accountability requires physician to exercise all their ability and intelligence in making well-reasoned and fairly grounded choices concerning those entrusted to their care, always respecting the inviolable dignity of the patients and the requirement for notified permission. As a result, choices regarding client treatment and the weight of duty they entail must constantly remain with the human individual and should never ever be delegated to AI. [139]
75. In addition, using AI to determine who ought to get treatment based mainly on economic measures or metrics of effectiveness represents a particularly troublesome circumstances of the "technocratic paradigm" that should be turned down. [140] For, "optimizing resources means using them in an ethical and fraternal way, and not penalizing the most fragile." [141] Additionally, AI tools in health care are "exposed to types of predisposition and discrimination," where "systemic errors can easily multiply, producing not just oppressions in specific cases but likewise, due to the domino impact, real kinds of social inequality." [142]
76. The combination of AI into health care also positions the danger of amplifying other existing disparities in access to medical care. As healthcare becomes significantly oriented toward prevention and lifestyle-based approaches, AI-driven solutions may inadvertently prefer more affluent populations who currently enjoy much better access to medical resources and quality nutrition. This trend dangers reinforcing a "medication for the abundant" model, where those with financial ways gain from innovative preventative tools and customized health details while others struggle to gain access to even fundamental services. To avoid such inequities, fair frameworks are needed to guarantee that making use of AI in healthcare does not aggravate existing health care inequalities however rather serves the typical good.

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

78. This approach involves a commitment to cultivating the mind, however constantly as a part of the important development of the person: "We need to break that concept of education which holds that educating ways filling one's head with concepts. That is the way we educate automatons, cerebral minds, not people. Educating is taking a danger in the tension in between the mind, the heart, and the hands." [145]
79. At the center of this work of forming the entire human individual is the important relationship between teacher and trainee. Teachers do more than communicate knowledge; they design important human qualities and motivate the delight of discovery. [146] Their existence motivates trainees both through the content they teach and the care they demonstrate for their trainees. This bond cultivates trust, good understanding, and the capability to resolve each person's unique dignity and potential. On the part of the trainee, this can produce a real desire to grow. The physical presence of a teacher produces a relational dynamic that AI can not duplicate, one that deepens engagement and supports the trainee's important development.

80. In this context, AI presents both opportunities and difficulties. If utilized in a sensible way, within the context of an existing teacher-student relationship and ordered to the authentic objectives of education, AI can end up being an important academic resource by improving access to education, providing tailored assistance, and supplying instant feedback to trainees. These advantages might enhance the learning experience, particularly in cases where customized attention is needed, or instructional resources are otherwise scarce.

81. Nevertheless, a crucial part of education is forming "the intellect to factor well in all matters, to connect towards truth, and to understand 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 simply a question of 'utilizing' instruments of interaction, but of living in a highly digitalized culture that has had a profound effect on [...] our ability to communicate, discover, be informed and enter into relationship with others." [149] However, rather of fostering "a cultivated intelligence," which "brings with it a power and a grace to every work and profession that it carries out," [150] the extensive usage of AI in education might cause the trainees' increased dependence on innovation, eroding their capability to perform some abilities independently and worsening their reliance on screens. [151]
82. Additionally, while some AI systems are created to help people establish their critical believing abilities and problem-solving skills, numerous others simply provide responses rather of triggering trainees to get here at answers themselves or compose text for themselves. [152] Instead of training young individuals how to generate details and generate fast reactions, education should motivate "the responsible usage of liberty to face issues with good sense and intelligence." [153] Building on this, "education in using forms of expert system should aim above all at promoting important thinking. Users of all ages, however particularly the young, require to develop a discerning approach to using data and content gathered on the web or produced by expert system systems. Schools, universities, and clinical societies are challenged to help trainees and specialists to understand the social and ethical elements of the advancement and uses of technology." [154]
83. As Saint John Paul II recalled, "in the world today, defined by such fast developments in science and technology, the tasks of a Catholic University presume an ever higher significance and urgency." [155] In a particular method, Catholic universities are advised to be present as excellent labs of hope at this crossroads of history. In an inter-disciplinary and cross-disciplinary key, they are urged to engage "with knowledge and imagination" [156] in cautious research study on this phenomenon, helping to extract the salutary potential within the different fields of science and reality, and guiding them always towards fairly sound applications that plainly serve the cohesion of our societies and the common excellent, reaching new frontiers in the discussion between faith and factor.

84. Moreover, it needs to be noted that current AI programs have actually been known to supply biased or fabricated details, which can lead trainees to rely on unreliable content. This issue "not just risks of legitimizing phony news and strengthening a dominant culture's benefit, but, in other words, it also undermines the academic process itself." [157] With time, clearer distinctions might emerge between appropriate and inappropriate usages of AI in education and research study. Yet, a definitive guideline is that the usage of AI ought to constantly be transparent and never ever misrepresented.

85. AI could be utilized as an aid to human self-respect if it assists individuals understand intricate concepts or directs them to sound resources that support their search for the truth. [158]
86. However, AI likewise presents a major danger of producing controlled material and incorrect details, which can quickly deceive people due to its similarity to the fact. Such false information might happen inadvertently, as in the case of AI "hallucination," where a generative AI system yields results that appear real however are not. Since creating content that mimics human artifacts is main to AI's performance, reducing these risks shows difficult. Yet, the effects of such aberrations and false details can be quite grave. For this reason, all those associated with producing and utilizing AI systems must be devoted to the truthfulness and accuracy of the details processed by such systems and distributed to the public.

87. While AI has a latent potential to generate false details, a a lot more unpleasant problem depends on the intentional abuse of AI for control. This can take place when individuals or organizations purposefully create and spread out false content with the aim to deceive or trigger harm, such as "deepfake" images, videos, and audio-referring to an incorrect representation of an individual, edited or created by an AI algorithm. The danger of deepfakes is particularly obvious when they are utilized to target or damage others. While the images or videos themselves may be synthetic, the damage they cause is genuine, leaving "deep scars in the hearts of those who suffer it" and "genuine wounds in their human self-respect." [159]
88. On a wider scale, by misshaping "our relationship with others and with reality," [160] AI-generated phony media can gradually undermine the structures of society. This concern requires careful policy, as misinformation-especially through AI-controlled or influenced media-can spread accidentally, sustaining political polarization and social discontent. When society ends up being indifferent to the fact, numerous groups build their own versions of "truths," compromising the "reciprocal ties and shared dependencies" [161] that underpin the fabric of social life. As deepfakes cause people to question whatever and AI-generated false content erodes rely on what they see and hear, polarization and dispute will just grow. Such extensive deceptiveness is no unimportant matter; it strikes at the core of humankind, dismantling the fundamental trust on which societies are developed. [162]
89. Countering AI-driven falsehoods is not just the work of industry experts-it needs the efforts of all people of goodwill. "If innovation is to serve human dignity and not harm it, and if it is to promote peace instead of violence, then the human community needs to be proactive in attending to these patterns with regard to human dignity and the promotion of the excellent." [163] Those who produce and share AI-generated content should constantly work out diligence in confirming the truth of what they share and, in all cases, need to "avoid the sharing of words and images that are deteriorating of humans, that promote hatred and intolerance, that debase the goodness and intimacy of human sexuality or that exploit the weak and susceptible." [164] This calls for the continuous vigilance and cautious 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 just details however also individual and relational understanding, which, in an increasingly digitized context, can total up to power over the individual. Moreover, while some kinds of data might pertain to public aspects of an individual's life, others might discuss the individual's interiority, possibly even their conscience. Seen in this way, personal privacy plays an essential role in safeguarding the limits of a person's inner life, maintaining their liberty to connect to others, reveal themselves, and make choices without excessive control. This protection is likewise tied to the defense of spiritual freedom, as security can also be misused to put in control over the lives of believers and how they express their faith.

91. It is appropriate, for that reason, to resolve the concern of personal privacy from a concern for the genuine flexibility and inalienable dignity of the human person "in all circumstances." [166] The Second Vatican Council included the right "to protect privacy" amongst the fundamental rights "required for living a truly human life," a right that must be encompassed all people on account of their "superb self-respect." [167] Furthermore, the Church has also affirmed the right to the legitimate respect for a personal life in the context of affirming the person's right to an excellent track record, defense of their physical and mental stability, and flexibility from damage or undue intrusion [168] -vital parts of the due regard for the intrinsic self-respect of the human person. [169]
92. Advances in AI-powered information processing and analysis now make it possible to infer patterns in a person's behavior and thinking from even a small quantity of details, making the role of data privacy a lot more important as a safeguard for the self-respect and relational nature of the human individual. As Pope Francis observed, "while closed and intolerant attitudes towards others are on the rise, ranges are otherwise shrinking or vanishing to the point that the right to privacy hardly exists. Everything has become a sort of phenomenon to be analyzed and examined, and individuals's lives are now under consistent monitoring." [170]
93. While there can be genuine and proper methods to use AI in keeping with human self-respect and the typical great, utilizing it for surveillance aimed at exploiting, restricting others' liberty, or benefitting a couple of at the cost of the lots of is unjustifiable. The danger of security overreach should be monitored by suitable regulators to make sure openness and public accountability. Those accountable for surveillance should never ever surpass their authority, which should always favor the dignity and liberty of every individual as the vital basis of a just and gentle society.

94. Furthermore, "essential regard for human self-respect needs that we decline to enable the originality of the individual to be related to a set of data." [171] This particularly applies when AI is used to examine individuals or groups based upon their habits, attributes, or history-a practice understood as "social scoring": "In social and financial decision-making, we should be mindful about delegating judgments to algorithms that process data, often gathered surreptitiously, on a person's makeup and prior behavior. Such data can be infected by social bias and preconceptions. A person's previous habits ought to not be used to reject him or her the chance to change, grow, and add to society. We can not permit algorithms to restrict or condition respect for human dignity, or to exclude empathy, mercy, forgiveness, and above all, the hope that people have the ability to alter." [172]
95. AI has numerous promising applications for improving our relationship with our "typical home," such as creating designs to forecast severe environment occasions, proposing engineering solutions to lower their impact, managing relief operations, and forecasting population shifts. [173] Additionally, AI can support sustainable agriculture, optimize energy use, and supply early caution systems for public health emergency situations. These improvements have the possible to enhance strength against climate-related difficulties and promote more sustainable advancement.

96. At the same time, existing AI models and the hardware needed to support them take in vast amounts of energy and water, considerably contributing to CO2 emissions and straining resources. This truth is often obscured by the way this technology exists in the popular creativity, where words such as "the cloud" [174] can offer the impression that data is stored and processed in an intangible world, detached from the real world. However, "the cloud" is not an ethereal domain separate from the physical world; just like all computing technologies, it counts on physical devices, cables, and energy. The same holds true of the technology behind AI. As these systems grow in intricacy, specifically large language models (LLMs), they require ever-larger datasets, increased computational power, and higher storage infrastructure. Considering the heavy toll these innovations handle the environment, it is crucial to develop sustainable options that lower their effect on our typical home.

97. Even then, as Pope Francis teaches, it is important "that we try to find options not only in innovation but in a modification of humanity." [175] A complete and genuine understanding of production recognizes that the worth of all created things can not be lowered to their simple utility. Therefore, a fully human technique to the stewardship of the earth turns down the distorted anthropocentrism of the technocratic paradigm, which seeks to "extract everything possible" from the world, [176] and rejects the "misconception of development," which assumes that "ecological problems will fix themselves merely with the application of new technology and without any requirement for ethical considerations or deep modification." [177] Such a frame of mind must pave the way to a more holistic approach that respects the order of production and promotes the integral good of the human individual while protecting our typical home. [178]
98. The Second Vatican Council and the constant teaching of the Popes ever since have actually insisted that peace is not simply the lack of war and is not restricted to maintaining a balance of powers in between adversaries. Instead, in the words of Saint Augustine, peace is "the harmony of order." [179] Certainly, peace can not be attained without protecting the items of individuals, complimentary interaction, respect for the dignity of persons and peoples, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is the work of justice and the impact of charity and can not be attained through force alone; rather, it should be mainly developed through patient diplomacy, the active promo of justice, uniformity, integral human development, and respect for the dignity of all individuals. [180] In this method, the tools used to maintain peace needs to never ever be allowed to justify oppression, violence, or oppression. Instead, they should always be governed by a "firm decision to respect other individuals and countries, together with their dignity, in addition to the deliberate practice of fraternity." [181]
99. While AI's analytical capabilities could assist countries look for peace and guarantee security, the "weaponization of Artificial Intelligence" can likewise be extremely problematic. Pope Francis has actually observed that "the ability to perform military operations through remote control systems has actually led to a minimized understanding of the devastation brought on by those weapon systems and the burden of duty for their usage, leading to a much more cold and detached method to the immense disaster of war." [182] Moreover, the ease with which self-governing weapons make war more practical militates against the principle of war as a last resort in legitimate self-defense, [183] potentially increasing the instruments of war well beyond the scope of human oversight and speeding up a destabilizing arms race, with devastating repercussions for human rights. [184]
100. In specific, Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, which can recognizing and striking targets without direct human intervention, are a "cause for severe ethical issue" because they lack the "distinct human capacity for moral judgment and ethical decision-making." [185] For this factor, Pope Francis has actually urgently required a reconsideration of the advancement of these weapons and a restriction on their use, starting with "a reliable and concrete commitment to introduce ever higher and correct human control. No maker must ever choose to take the life of a human." [186]
101. Since it is a little step from makers that can eliminate autonomously with accuracy to those efficient in massive destruction, some AI researchers have expressed concerns that such technology positions an "existential threat" by having the possible to act in methods that might threaten the survival of whole regions or perhaps of humankind itself. This danger needs severe attention, reflecting the long-standing concern about innovations that approve war "an uncontrollable damaging power over varieties of innocent civilians," [187] without even sparing children. In this context, the call from Gaudium et Spes to "carry out an examination of war with an entirely brand-new mindset" [188] is more urgent than ever.

102. At the very same time, while the theoretical risks of AI deserve attention, the more immediate and pressing issue depends on how individuals with malicious objectives might abuse this innovation. [189] Like any tool, AI is an extension of human power, and while its future abilities are unpredictable, humankind's past actions supply clear cautions. The atrocities committed throughout history suffice to raise deep concerns about the possible abuses of AI.

103. Saint John Paul II observed that "humankind now has instruments of unprecedented power: we can turn this world into a garden, or reduce it to a stack of rubble." [190] Given this reality, the Church reminds us, in the words of Pope Francis, that "we are totally free to apply our intelligence towards things developing favorably," or towards "decadence and shared damage." [191] To prevent humankind from spiraling into self-destruction, [192] there should be a clear stand against all applications of innovation that inherently threaten human life and self-respect. This commitment needs careful discernment about the use of AI, especially in military defense applications, to ensure that it constantly appreciates human self-respect and serves the common good. The development and release of AI in armaments should be subject to the greatest levels of ethical examination, governed by an issue for human dignity and the sanctity of life. [193]
104. Technology provides remarkable tools to supervise and establish the world's resources. However, in many cases, humanity is progressively delivering control of these resources to machines. Within some circles of researchers and futurists, there is optimism about the potential of synthetic basic intelligence (AGI), a hypothetical kind of AI that would match or exceed human intelligence and produce inconceivable advancements. Some even speculate that AGI might attain superhuman capabilities. At the exact same time, as society drifts away from a connection with the transcendent, some are tempted to turn to AI in search of meaning or fulfillment-longings that can just be truly pleased in communion with God. [194]
105. However, the anticipation of replacing God for an artifact of human making is idolatry, a practice Scripture clearly alerts against (e.g., Ex. 20:4; 32:1 -5; 34:17). Moreover, AI might show much more sexy than traditional idols for, unlike idols that "have mouths but do not speak; eyes, but do not see; ears, however do not hear" (Ps. 115:5 -6), AI can "speak," or a minimum of offers the impression of doing so (cf. Rev. 13:15). Yet, it is essential to keep in mind that AI is but a pale reflection of humanity-it is crafted by human minds, trained on human-generated material, responsive to human input, and sustained through human labor. AI can not possess a number of the capabilities specific to human life, and it is also fallible. By turning to AI as a perceived "Other" higher than itself, with which to share presence and obligations, mankind risks producing an alternative to God. However, it is not AI that is eventually deified and worshipped, however humanity itself-which, in this method, ends up being enslaved to its own work. [195]
106. While AI has the possible to serve humanity and contribute to the common excellent, it remains a production of human hands, bearing "the imprint of human art and ingenuity" (Acts 17:29). It should never be ascribed excessive worth. As the Book of Wisdom verifies: "For a man made them, and one whose spirit is obtained formed them; for no man can form a god which is like himself. He is mortal, and what he makes with lawless hands is dead, for he is better than the things he worships because he has life, but they never ever have" (Wis. 15:16 -17).

107. On the other hand, humans, "by their interior life, transcend the entire product universe; they experience this deep interiority when they participate in their own heart, where God, who probes the heart, awaits them, and where they decide their own destiny in the sight of God." [196] It is within the heart, as Pope Francis reminds us, that each individual finds the "mysterious connection in between self-knowledge and openness to others, between the encounter with one's personal uniqueness and the desire to give oneself to others. " [197] Therefore, it is the heart alone that is "efficient in setting our other powers and enthusiasms, and our entire individual, in a position of reverence and caring obedience before the Lord," [198] who "offers to deal with every one of us as a 'Thou,' always and permanently." [199]
108. Considering the various obstacles presented by advances in innovation, Pope Francis highlighted the requirement for development in "human responsibility, values, and conscience," proportionate to the development in the capacity that this innovation brings [200] -acknowledging that "with a boost in human power comes a broadening of obligation on the part of people and communities." [201]
109. At the very same time, the "vital and basic question" remains "whether in the context of this progress male, as guy, is becoming truly much better, that is to state, more mature spiritually, more mindful of the self-respect of his humankind, more accountable, more available to others, specifically the neediest and the weakest, and readier to offer and to aid all." [202]
110. As an outcome, it is vital to know how to evaluate specific applications of AI in specific contexts to identify whether its usage promotes human self-respect, the occupation of the human individual, and the typical good. As with lots of innovations, the effects of the different uses of AI might not always be foreseeable from their creation. As these applications and their social effects end up being clearer, proper actions should be made at all levels of society, following the principle of subsidiarity. Individual users, households, civil society, corporations, institutions, governments, and international companies should operate at their proper levels to ensure that AI is utilized for the good of all.

111. A substantial obstacle and opportunity for the typical excellent today lies in thinking about AI within a structure of relational intelligence, which highlights the interconnectedness of people and neighborhoods and highlights our shared duty for promoting the essential wellness of others. The twentieth-century theorist Nicholas Berdyaev observed that individuals typically blame machines for individual and social issues; nevertheless, "this just humiliates man and does not represent his self-respect," for "it is not worthy to move duty from man to a machine." [203] Only the human person can be morally responsible, and the challenges of a technological society are ultimately spiritual in nature. Therefore, facing those difficulties "needs an augmentation of spirituality." [204]
112. A more indicate consider is the call, prompted by the look 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 threat is not in the reproduction of machines, however in the ever-increasing number of men accustomed from their youth to desire only what machines can give." [205] This challenge is as true today as it was then, as the rapid rate of digitization runs the risk of a "digital reductionism," where non-quantifiable elements of life are reserved and then forgotten or even considered irrelevant due to the fact that they can not be calculated in formal terms. AI needs to be utilized only as a tool to complement human intelligence instead of replace its richness. [206] Cultivating those elements of human life that go beyond computation is crucial for maintaining "a genuine mankind" that "seems to stay in the midst of our technological culture, nearly undetected, like a mist permeating gently underneath a closed door." [207]
113. The huge expanse of the world's understanding is now available in methods that would have filled previous generations with wonder. However, to make sure that advancements in knowledge do not become humanly or spiritually barren, one should go beyond the simple build-up of data and aim to attain true knowledge. [208]
114. This wisdom is the present that humanity requires most to resolve the profound concerns and ethical difficulties posed by AI: "Only by embracing a spiritual way of viewing reality, just by recuperating a knowledge of the heart, can we confront and analyze the newness of our time." [209] Such "wisdom of the heart" is "the virtue that enables us to integrate the entire and its parts, our decisions and their consequences." It "can not be looked for from devices," but it "lets itself be discovered by those who seek it and be seen by those who love it; it anticipates those who desire it, and it goes in search of those who deserve it (cf. Wis 6:12 -16)." [210]
115. In a world marked by AI, we need the grace of the Holy Spirit, who "allows us to look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, scenarios, occasions and to uncover their real significance." [211]
116. Since a "person's excellence is determined not by the details or understanding they have, but by the depth of their charity," [212] how we integrate AI "to include the least of our brothers and sis, the susceptible, and those most in need, will be the true step of our mankind." [213] The "knowledge of the heart" can light up and direct the human-centered usage of this innovation to help promote the typical great, care for our "typical home," advance the search for the truth, foster integral human advancement, prefer human solidarity and fraternity, and lead mankind to its supreme goal: joy and full communion with God. [214]
117. From this perspective of knowledge, believers will be able to act as ethical agents efficient in using this technology to promote a genuine vision of the human person and society. [215] This should be finished with the understanding that technological development is part of God's prepare for creation-an activity that we are called to purchase towards the Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ, in the consistent 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 bought its publication.

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

Ex audientia die 14 ianuarii 2025 Franciscus

Contents

I. Introduction

II. What is Artificial Intelligence?

III. Intelligence in the Philosophical and Theological Tradition

Rationality

Embodiment

Relationality

Relationship with the Truth

Stewardship of the World

An Essential 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 likewise 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 file explaining the outputs or processes of AI are utilized figuratively to explain its operations and are not planned to anthropomorphize the device. [8] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3; Id., Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [9] Here, one can see the main positions of the "transhumanists" and the "posthumanists." Transhumanists argue that technological improvements will allow people to conquer their biological constraints and enhance both their physical and cognitive abilities. Posthumanists, on the other hand, contend that such advances will ultimately modify human identity to the extent that mankind itself may no longer be thought about truly "human." Both views rest on a fundamentally negative perception of human corporality, which deals with the body more as a challenge than as an essential part of the person's identity and call to complete realization. Yet, this negative view of the body is irregular with an appropriate understanding of human dignity. While the Church supports genuine scientific progress, 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 everyone's body, which takes part in its own method in remaining in imago Dei" (Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita [8 April 2024], par. 18). [10] This method shows a functionalist viewpoint, which reduces the human mind to its functions and assumes that its functions can be entirely measured in physical or mathematical terms. However, even if a future AGI were to appear really smart, it would still remain functional in nature. [11] Cf. A.M. Turing, "Computing Machinery and Intelligence," Mind 59 (1950) 443-460. [12] If "believing" is credited to devices, it should be clarified that this describes calculative thinking instead of crucial thinking. Similarly, if machines are said to operate utilizing logical thinking, it must be defined that this is restricted to computational reasoning. On the other hand, by its very nature, human thought is a creative process that eludes programming and goes beyond constraints. [13] On the fundamental role of language in forming understanding, cf. M. Heidegger, Über den Humanismus, Klostermann, Frankfurt am Main 1949 (en. tr. "Letter on Humanism," in Basic Writings: Martin Heidegger, Routledge, London - New York City 2010, 141-182). [14] For further discussion of these anthropological and theological foundations, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 43-144. [15] Aristotle, Metaphysics, I. 1, 980 a 21. [16] Cf. Augustine, De Genesi ad litteram III, 20, 30: PL 34, 292: "Man is made in the image of God in relation to that [professors] by which he is superior to the irrational animals. Now, this [professors] is factor itself, or the 'mind,' or 'intelligence,' whatever other name it might more appropriately be given"; Id., Enarrationes in Psalmos 54, 3: PL 36, 629: "When thinking about all that they have, people find that they are most identified from animals specifically by the reality they have intelligence." This is likewise repeated by Saint Thomas Aquinas, who specifies that "male is the most best of all earthly beings endowed with motion, and his proper and natural operation is intellection," by which man abstracts from things and "gets 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, advertisement 3. Cf. ibid., I, q. 79; II-II, q. 47, a. 3; II-II, q. 49, a. 2. For a modern point of view that echoes aspects of the classical and medieval difference in between these two modes of cognition, cf. D. Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, New York 2011. [19] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 76, a. 1, resp. [20] Cf. Irenaeus of Lyon, Adversus Haereses, V, 6, 1: PG 7( 2 ), 1136-1138. [21] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 9. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1045: "The intelligence can investigate the truth of things through reflection, experience and discussion, and pertain to recognize 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 "typically thinks about the human individual as a being who exists in the body and is unimaginable beyond it" (Pontifical Biblical Commission, "Che cosa è l'uomo?" (Sal 8,5): Un itinerario di antropologia biblica [30 September 2019], par. 19). Cf. ibid., pars. 20-21, 43-44, 48. [25] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 22: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1042: Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 7: AAS 100 (2008 ), 863: "Christ did not disdain human bodiliness, however instead totally divulged its significance and worth." [26] Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 81. [27] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [28] Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I, q. 89, a. 1, resp.: "to be separated from the body is not in accordance with [the soul's] nature [...] and for this reason it is unified to the body in order that it may have a presence and an operation ideal to its nature." [29] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1035. Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 18. [30] International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 56. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 357. [31] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), pars. 5, 8; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 15, 24, 53-54. [32] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 356. Cf. ibid., par. 221. [33] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 13, 26-27. [34] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Donum Veritatis (24 May 1990), 6: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1552. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), par. 109: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1219. Cf. Pseudo-Dionysius, 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 are capable of concentrating the many into the one, they too, in their own style and as far as they can, deserve conceptions like those of the angels" (en. tr. Pseudo-Dionysius: The Complete Works, Paulist Press, New York - Mahwah 1987, 106-107). [35] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 3: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7. [36] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [37] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 42: AAS 91 (1999 ), 38. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 208: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1043: "the human mind can transcending instant issues and understanding certain truths that are imperishable, as true now as in the past. As it peers into human nature, reason discovers universal values obtained from that exact same nature"; ibid., par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034. [38] Cf. B. Pascal, Pensées, no. 267 (ed. Brunschvicg): "The last proceeding of factor is to acknowledge that there is an infinity of things which are beyond it" (en. tr. Pascal's Pensées, E.P. Dutton, New York 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 capacity allows us to comprehend messages in any kind of communication in a way that both takes into consideration and transcends their material or empirical structures (such as computer system code). Here, intelligence becomes a knowledge that "allows us to look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, circumstances, occasions and to discover their real 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 providing an original perspective on reality. Both capacities depend upon the existence of an individual subjectivity for their full realization. [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 personal feeling [...] Certainly, its close relation to truth fosters its universality and maintains it from being 'confined to a narrow field lacking relationships.' [...] Charity's openness to fact thus safeguards it from 'a fideism that denies it of its human and universal breadth.'" The internal quotes are from Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), pars. 2-4: AAS 101 (2009 ), 642-643. [43] Cf. International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 7. [44] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [45] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15. [46] Bonaventure, In II Librum Sententiarum, d. I, p. 2, a. 2, q. 1; as estimated in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 293. Cf. ibid., par. 294. [47] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 295, 299, 302. Bonaventure compares the universe to "a book showing, representing, and explaining its Maker," the Triune God who grants existence to all things (Breviloquium 2.12.1). Cf. Alain de Lille, De Incarnatione Christi, PL 210, 579a: "Omnis mundi creatura quasi liber et pictura nobis est et speculum." [48] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 67: AAS 107 (2015 ), 874; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 6: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589-592; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 57: "humans occupy an unique location in deep space according to the magnificent strategy: they enjoy the advantage of sharing in the magnificent governance of noticeable development. [...] Since man's place as ruler remains in reality an involvement in the divine governance of production, we speak of it here as a form of stewardship." [49] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), pars. 38-39: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1164-1165. [50] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. This idea is likewise reflected in the development account, where God brings animals to Adam "to see what he would call them. And whatever [he] called every living animal, that was its name" (Gen. 2:19), an action that demonstrates the active engagement of human intelligence in the stewardship of God's creation. Cf. John Chrysostom, Homiliae in Genesim, XIV, 17-21: PG 53, 116-117. [51] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 301. [52] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 302. [53] Bonaventure, Breviloquium 2.12.1. Cf. ibid., 2.11.2. [54] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 236: AAS 105 (2023 ), 1115; Id., Address to Participants in the Meeting of University Chaplains and Pastoral Workers Promoted by the Dicastery for Culture and Education (24 November 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 November 2023, 7. [55] Cf. J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 5.1, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 99-100; Francis, Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [56] Francis, Address to the Members of the National Confederation of Artisans and Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises (CNA) (15 November 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 15 November 2024, 8. [57] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Querida Amazonia (2 February 2020), par. 41: AAS 112 (2020 ), 246; Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 146: AAS 107 (2015 ), 906. [58] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 864. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), pars. 17-24: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47-50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985-987. [59] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 20: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [60] P. Claudel, Conversation sur Jean Racine, Gallimard, Paris 1956, 32: "L'intelligence n'est rien sans la délectation." Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 13: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5: "The mind and the will are put at the service of the higher excellent by sensing and enjoying facts." [61] Dante, Paradiso, Canto XXX: "luce intellettüal, piena d'amore;/ amor di vero ben, pien di letizia;/ letizia che trascende ogne dolzore" (en. tr. The Divine Comedy of Dante Alighieri, C.E. Norton, tr., Houghton Mifflin, Boston 1920, 232). [62] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931:" [T] he highest standard of human life is the magnificent 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 actually made it possible for male to take part in this law of his so that, under the mild personality of divine providence, many might be able to get to a much deeper and much deeper understanding of unchangeable reality." Also cf. Id., Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. [63] Cf. First Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius (24 April 1870), ch. 4, DH 3016. [64] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [65] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 891. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 204: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1042. [66] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 11: AAS 83 (1991 ), 807: "God has actually imprinted his own image and likeness on man (cf. Gen 1:26), providing upon him an incomparable dignity [...] In impact, beyond the rights which man obtains by his own work, there exist rights which do not correspond to any work he performs, however which flow from his necessary dignity as an individual." Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [67] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 8. Cf. ibid., par. 9; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 22. [68] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2024 ), 310. [69] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [70] In this sense, "Artificial Intelligence" is understood as a technical term to show this innovation, recalling that the expression is also utilized to designate the discipline and not just its applications. [71] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 34-35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 51: AAS 83 (1991 ), 856-857. [72] For instance, see the encouragement of clinical exploration in Albertus Magnus (De Mineralibus, II, 2, 1) and the appreciation for the mechanical arts in Hugh of St. Victor (Didascalicon, I, 9). These authors, amongst a long list of other Catholics engaged in scientific research study and technological exploration, show that "faith and science can be united in charity, supplied that science is put at the service of the men and woman of our time and not misused to damage and 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 man an ethical topic. When he acts deliberately, guy 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 encouraged efforts "to make sure that innovation remains human-centered, fairly grounded and directed towards the excellent." [85] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 166: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1026-1027; Id., Address to the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (23 September 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 September 2024, 10. On the function of human agency in picking a wider aim (Ziel) that then notifies the particular function (Zweck) for which each technological application is created, cf. F. Dessauer, Streit um pass away Technik, Herder-Bücherei, Freiburg i. Br. 1959, 70-71. [86] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4: "Technology is born for a function and, in its effect on human society, constantly represents a kind of order in social relations and an arrangement of power, therefore making it possible for certain individuals to carry out particular actions while preventing others from carrying out various ones. In a basically specific way, this constitutive power-dimension of innovation constantly consists of the worldview of those who invented and established it." [87] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 309. [88] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [89] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti, pars. 212-213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [90] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 5: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589; Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [91] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "Faced with the marvels of devices, which seem to understand how to select independently, we need to be very clear that decision-making [...] should always be left to the human person. We would condemn humankind to a future without hope if we took away individuals's capability to make decisions about themselves and their lives, by dooming them to depend upon the options of devices." [92] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [93] The term "bias" in this document describes algorithmic predisposition (methodical and consistent errors in computer system systems that might disproportionately prejudice certain groups in unexpected ways) or learning bias (which will result in training on a biased information set) and not the "bias vector" in neural networks (which is a specification used to adjust 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 consensus "on the need for advancement procedures to appreciate such values as addition, transparency, security, equity, privacy and dependability," and likewise welcomed "the efforts of worldwide organizations to manage these technologies so that they promote real development, contributing, that is, to a much better world and an integrally higher quality of life." [95] Francis, Greetings to a Delegation of the "Max Planck Society" (23 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 February 2023, 8. [96] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [97] Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1571. [98] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. For further conversation of the ethical questions raised by AI from a Catholic viewpoint, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 147-253. [99] On the importance of discussion in a pluralist society oriented toward a "robust and strong social principles," see Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 211-214: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [100] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [101] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [102] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [103] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. [104] Cf. Pontifical Council for Social Communications, Ethics in Internet (22 February 2002), par. 10. [105] Francis, Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414; pricing quote the Final Document of the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops (27 October 2018), par. 24: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1593. Cf. Benedict XVI, Address to the Participants in the International Congress on Natural Moral Law (12 February 2017): AAS 99 (2007 ), 245. [106] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-33: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047-1050. [107] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-21: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047. [108] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 308-309. [109] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [110] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [111] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 101, 103, 111, 115, 167: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1004-1005, 1007-1009, 1027. [112] Second Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047; cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 35: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 123. [113] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 12: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1034. [114] Cf. Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church (2004 ), par. 149. [115] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [116] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [117] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 865. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), pars. 88-89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414. [118] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057. [119] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985. [120] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [121] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [122] Cf. E. Stein, Zum Problem der Einfühlung, Buchdruckerei des Waisenhauses, Halle 1917 (en. tr. On the Problem of Empathy, ICS Publications, Washington D.C. 1989). [123] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057:" [Many individuals] want their interpersonal relationships supplied by sophisticated devices, by screens and systems which can be switched on and off on command. Meanwhile, the Gospel tells us constantly to run the danger of an in person encounter with others, with their physical presence which challenges us, with their pain and their pleas, with their pleasure which infects us in our close and continuous interaction. True faith in the incarnate Son of God is inseparable from self-giving, from subscription in the community, from service, from reconciliation with others." Also cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 24: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1044-1045. [124] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 1. [125] Cf. Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570; Id, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 18, 124-129: AAS 107 (2015 ), 854.897-899. [126] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [127] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 209: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1107. [128] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4. For Pope Francis' mentor about AI in relationship to the "technocratic paradigm," cf. Id., Encyclical Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 106-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893. [129] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047.; as quoted in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1912. Cf. John XXIII, Encyclical Letter Mater et Magistra (15 May 1961), par. 219: AAS 53 (1961 ), 453. [130] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par 64: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1086. [131] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 162: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1025. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 6: AAS 73 (1981 ), 591: "work is 'for guy' and not guy 'for work.' Through this conclusion one rightly pertains to acknowledge 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 quoted in Id., Message for the XXXI World Day of the Sick (11 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 10 January 2023, 8. [137] Francis, Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [138] Francis, Address to the Diplomatic Corps Accredited to the Holy See (11 January 2016): AAS 108 (2016 ), 120. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 18: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975; Id., Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [139] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465; Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [140] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105, 107: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-890; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 18-21: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975-976; Id., Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465. [141] Francis, Address to the Participants at the Meeting Sponsored by the Charity and Health Commission of the Italian Bishops' Conference (10 February 2017): AAS 109 (2017 ), 243. Cf. ibid., 242-243: "If there is a sector in which the throwaway culture is manifest, with its painful consequences, it is that of healthcare. When an ill individual is not placed in the center or their self-respect is not thought about, this triggers mindsets that can lead even to speculation on the misfortune of others. And this is extremely severe! [...] The application of a service technique to the health care sector, if indiscriminate [...] might risk disposing of human beings." [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, ratemywifey.com Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729. [144] Congregation for Catholic Education, Instruction on the Use of Distance Learning in Ecclesiastical Universities and Faculties, I. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729; Francis, Message for the LXIX World Day of Peace (1 January 2016), 6: AAS 108 (2016 ), 57-58. [145] Francis, Address to Members of the Global Researchers Advancing Catholic Education Project (20 April 2022): AAS 114 (2022 ), 580. [146] Cf. Paul VI, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi (8 December 1975), par. 41: AAS 68 (1976 ), 31, quoting 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 because they are witnesses." [147] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 6.1, London 18733, 125-126. [148] Francis, Meeting with the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [149] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 86: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413, pricing estimate the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, Final Document (27 October 2018), par. 21: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1592. [150] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 7.6, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 167. [151] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 88: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413. [152] In a 2023 policy file about the usage of generative AI in education and research, UNESCO notes: "Among the key questions [of making use of generative AI (GenAI) in education and research] is whether humans can potentially deliver fundamental levels of thinking and skill-acquisition processes to AI and rather focus on higher-order thinking skills based on the outputs supplied by AI. Writing, for instance, is often connected with the structuring of thinking. With GenAI [...], humans can now begin with a well-structured outline provided by GenAI. Some professionals have actually characterized using GenAI to generate text in this way as 'composing without believing'" (UNESCO, Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research [2023], 37-38). The German-American theorist Hannah Arendt anticipated such a possibility in her 1959 book, The Human Condition, and warned: "If it ought to end up being real that understanding (in the sense of know-how) and thought have actually parted company for excellent, then we would certainly end up being the powerless servants, not a lot of our machines 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 example, it might help people gain access to the "range of resources for producing higher understanding of reality" contained in the works of viewpoint (John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio [14 September 1998], par. 3: AAS 91 [1999], 7). Cf. ibid., par. 4: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7-8. [159] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 43. Cf. ibid., pars. 61-62. [160] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [161] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par 25: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053; cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), passim: AAS 112 (2020 ), 969-1074. [162] Cf. Francis., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 414; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 25: AAS 91 (1999 ), 25-26: "People can not be genuinely indifferent to the concern of whether what they understand is real or not. [...] It is this that Saint Augustine teaches when he writes: 'I have fulfilled numerous who wished to trick, however none who wished to be deceived'"; pricing estimate Augustine, Confessiones, X, 23, 33: PL 32, 794. [163] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), par. 62. [164] Benedict XVI, Message for the XLIII World Day of Social Communications (24 May 2009): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2009, 8. [165] Cf. Dicastery for Communications, Towards Full Presence: A Pastoral Reflection on Engagement with Social Media (28 May 2023), par. 41; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Decree Inter Mirifica (4 December 1963), pars. 4, 8-12: AAS 56 (1964 ), 146, 148-149. [166] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 1, 6, 16, 24. [167] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046. Cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 40: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 127: "no guy may with impunity breach that human dignity which God himself treats with excellent respect"; as estimated in John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 9: AAS 83 (1991 ), 804. [168] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2477, 2489; can. 220 CIC; can. 23 CCEO; John Paul II, Address to the Third General Conference of the Latin American Episcopate (28 January 1979), III.1-2: Insegnamenti II/1 (1979 ), 202-203. [169] Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to the Thematic Discussion on Other Disarmament Measures and International Security (24 October 2022): "Maintaining human self-respect in the online world requires States to likewise respect the right to personal privacy, by shielding people from intrusive surveillance and allowing them to safeguard their personal details from unauthorized gain access to." [170] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 42: AAS 112 (2020 ), 984. [171] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [172] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465. [173] The 2023 Interim Report of the United Nations AI Advisory Body determined a list of "early pledges of AI assisting to deal with environment modification" (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 help establish new strategies and financial investments to reduce emissions, influence brand-new private sector financial investments in net no, protect biodiversity, and construct broad-based social strength" (ibid.). [174] "The cloud" refers to a network of physical servers throughout the world that allows users to shop, process, and manage their data remotely. [175] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 9: AAS 107 (2015 ), 850. [176] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 106: AAS 107 (2015 ), 890. [177] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 60: AAS 107 (2015 ), 870. [178] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 3, 13: AAS 107 (2015 ), 848.852. [179] Augustine, De Civitate Dei, XIX, 13, 1: PL 41, 640. [180] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 77-82: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1100-1107; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 256-262: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1060-1063; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 38-39; Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2302-2317. [181] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 78: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1101. [182] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [183] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2308-2310. [184] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 80-81: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1105. [185] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "We require to guarantee and safeguard an area for proper human control over the choices made by synthetic intelligence programs: human dignity itself depends on it." [186] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to Working Group II on Emerging Technologies at the UN Disarmament Commission (3 April 2024): "The advancement and use of lethal self-governing weapons systems (LAWS) that do not have the appropriate human control would posture basic ethical issues, considered that LAWS can never ever be morally responsible subjects capable of abiding by worldwide humanitarian law." [187] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 258: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1061. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [188] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [189] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3: "Nor can we neglect the possibility of sophisticated weapons winding up in the incorrect hands, helping with, for example, terrorist attacks or interventions aimed at destabilizing the organizations of legitimate systems of government. In a word, the world does not need brand-new technologies that contribute to the unfair development of commerce and the weapons trade and as a result end up promoting the recklessness of war." [190] John Paul II, Act of Entrustment to Mary for the Jubilee of Bishops (8 October 2000), par. 3: Insegnamenti XXIII/2 (200 ), 565. [191] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 79: AAS 107 (2015 ), 878. [192] Cf. Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 51: AAS 101 (2009 ), 687. [193] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39. [194] Cf. Augustine, Confessiones, I, 1, 1: PL 32, 661. [195] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (30 December 1987), par. 28: AAS 80 (1988 ), 548:" [T] here is a better understanding today that the simple accumulation of products and services [...] is inadequate for the realization of human joy. Nor, in repercussion, does the availability of the many real advantages offered in current times by science and technology, consisting of the computer technology, bring flexibility from every kind of slavery. On the contrary, [...] unless all the significant body of resources and prospective at guy's disposal is assisted by a moral understanding and by an orientation towards the real good of the mankind, it easily turns against male to oppress him." Cf. ibid., pars. 29, 37: AAS 80 (1988 ), 550-551.563 -564. [196] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [197] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 18: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [198] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 27: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 6. [199] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 25: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5-6. [200] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. R. Guardini, Das Ende der Neuzeit, Würzburg 19659, 87 ff. (en. tr. Completion of the Modern World, Wilmington 1998, 82-83). [201] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [202] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptor Hominis (4 March 1979), par. 15: AAS 71 (1979 ), 287-288. [203] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," in C. Mitcham - R. Mackey, eds., Philosophy and Technology: Readings in the Philosophical Problems of Technology, New York 19832, 212-213. [204] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," 210. [205] G. Bernanos, "La révolution de la liberté" (1944 ), in Id., Le Chemin de la Croix-des-Âmes, Rocher 1987, 829. [206] Cf. Francis, Meeting the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023). [207] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [208] Cf. Bonaventure, Hex. XIX, 3; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986: "The flood of details at our fingertips does not produce higher knowledge. Wisdom is not born of fast searches on the web nor is it a mass of unproven information. That is not the method to mature in the encounter with fact." [209] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [210] Ibid. [211] Ibid. [212] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate (19 March 2018), par. 37: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1121. [213] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate (19 March 2018), par. 46: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1123-1124. [214] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [215] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570-1571.