1. With wisdom both ancient and new (cf. Mt. 13:52), we are contacted us to show on the existing difficulties and chances posed by clinical and technological advancements, especially by the recent advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The Christian custom concerns the gift of intelligence as an essential aspect of how people are produced "in the image of God" (Gen. 1:27). Beginning with an important vision of the human person and the scriptural calling to "till" and "keep" the earth (Gen. 2:15), the Church highlights that this gift of intelligence must be revealed through the accountable usage of reason and technical abilities in the stewardship of the produced world.

2. The Church encourages the advancement of science, innovation, the arts, and other kinds of human venture, viewing them as part of the "cooperation of males and female with God in refining the visible production." [1] As Sirach verifies, God "provided skill to humans, that he might be glorified in his marvelous works" (Sir. 38:6). Human abilities and creativity come from God and, when used appropriately, glorify God by showing his knowledge and goodness. Because of this, when we ask ourselves what it indicates to "be human," we can not exclude a consideration 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 substantial, as one of the objectives of this innovation is to mimic the human intelligence that designed it. For instance, unlike numerous other human productions, AI can be trained on the results of human imagination and after that generate brand-new "artifacts" with a level of speed and skill that often rivals or exceeds what humans can do, such as producing text or images equivalent from human compositions. This raises critical concerns about AI's possible role in the growing crisis of fact in the public forum. Moreover, this innovation is developed to learn and make certain options autonomously, adjusting to new circumstances and providing solutions not visualized by its programmers, and thus, it raises basic questions about ethical obligation and human security, with wider implications for society as a whole. This brand-new circumstance has prompted many individuals to review what it means to be human and the role of humankind on the planet.

4. Taking all this into account, there is broad agreement that AI marks a brand-new and significant stage in humankind's engagement with technology, putting it at the heart of what Pope Francis has actually explained as an "epochal modification." [2] Its effect is felt globally and in a broad variety of locations, consisting of social relationships, education, work, art, health care, law, warfare, and worldwide relations. As AI advances quickly toward even greater achievements, it is seriously essential to consider its anthropological and ethical ramifications. This involves not just mitigating threats and avoiding damage but also guaranteeing that its applications are used to promote human development and the typical good.

5. To contribute favorably to the discernment concerning AI, and in action to Pope Francis' call for a renewed "knowledge of heart," [3] the Church offers its experience through the anthropological and ethical reflections contained in this Note. Committed to its active role in the international dialogue on these concerns, the Church welcomes those turned over with transmitting the faith-including moms and dads, teachers, pastors, and bishops-to commit themselves to this vital subject with care and attention. While this document is planned specifically for them, it is also indicated to be available to a broader audience, particularly those who share the conviction that clinical and technological advances must be directed toward serving the human individual and the typical good. [4]
6. To this end, the document begins by comparing ideas of intelligence in AI and in human intelligence. It then checks out the Christian understanding of human intelligence, supplying a structure rooted in the Church's philosophical and theological custom. Finally, the document offers standards to make sure that the development and use of AI maintain human dignity and promote the important advancement of the human person and society.

7. The principle of "intelligence" in AI has actually developed gradually, drawing on a variety of ideas from numerous disciplines. While its origins extend back centuries, a considerable milestone occurred in 1956 when the American computer system researcher John McCarthy organized a summertime workshop at Dartmouth University to check out the problem of "Artificial Intelligence," which he specified as "that of making a maker behave in manner ins which would be called intelligent if a human were so behaving." [5] This workshop released a research study program focused on developing machines efficient in performing tasks normally connected with the human intelligence and smart behavior.

8. Ever since, AI research has advanced quickly, resulting in the advancement of complex systems capable of performing extremely advanced jobs. [6] These so-called "narrow AI" systems are typically designed to manage specific and minimal functions, such as translating languages, forecasting the trajectory of a storm, categorizing images, addressing concerns, or creating visual material at the user's demand. While the meaning of "intelligence" in AI research differs, many modern AI systems-particularly those using machine learning-rely on statistical reasoning rather than sensible reduction. By examining large datasets to determine patterns, AI can "predict" [7] results and propose brand-new approaches, imitating some cognitive processes common of human analytical. Such accomplishments have actually been enabled through advances in computing innovation (consisting of neural networks, without supervision artificial intelligence, and evolutionary algorithms) as well as hardware developments (such as specialized processors). Together, these innovations allow AI systems to respond to different kinds of human input, adjust to new situations, and even suggest unique services not anticipated by their original programmers. [8]
9. Due to these rapid developments, numerous jobs as soon as managed solely by people are now entrusted to AI. These systems can augment and even supersede what humans have the ability to do in lots of fields, particularly in specialized areas such as information analysis, image acknowledgment, and medical diagnosis. While each "narrow AI" application is developed for a specific task, lots of researchers aim to develop what is referred to as "Artificial General Intelligence" (AGI)-a single system efficient in operating across all cognitive domains and carrying out any job within the scope of human intelligence. Some even argue that AGI could one day attain the state of "superintelligence," exceeding human intellectual capabilities, or add to "super-longevity" through advances in biotechnology. Others, however, fear that these possibilities, even if hypothetical, might one day eclipse the human person, while still others invite this prospective improvement. [9]
10. Underlying this and numerous other perspectives on the topic is the implicit assumption that the term "intelligence" can be used in the very same method to describe both human intelligence and AI. Yet, this does not catch the complete scope of the principle. In the case of human beings, intelligence is a professors that pertains to the individual in his or her entirety, whereas in the context of AI, "intelligence" is comprehended functionally, often with the presumption that the activities attribute of the human mind can be broken down into digitized actions that makers can duplicate. [10]
11. This functional perspective is exemplified by the "Turing Test," which considers a device "smart" if a person can not identify its habits from that of a human. [11] However, in this context, the term "behavior" refers only to the performance of particular intellectual jobs; it does not represent the complete breadth of human experience, that includes abstraction, feelings, imagination, and the aesthetic, moral, and religious sensibilities. 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 examined methodologically, but likewise reductively, based on its capability to produce proper responses-in this case, those connected with the human intellect-regardless of how those responses are generated.

12. AI's innovative functions give it advanced abilities to carry out jobs, however not the ability to believe. [12] This difference is crucially crucial, as the way "intelligence" is defined inevitably forms how we comprehend the relationship in between human idea and this technology. [13] To value this, one must remember the richness of the philosophical custom and Christian faith, which provide a deeper and more detailed understanding of intelligence-an understanding that is main to the Church's mentor on the nature, dignity, and occupation of the human person. [14]
13. From the dawn of human self-reflection, the mind has played a main function in comprehending what it means to be "human." Aristotle observed that "all people by nature desire to know." [15] This knowledge, with its capability for abstraction that grasps the nature and significance of things, sets people apart from the animal world. [16] As philosophers, theologians, and psychologists have actually taken a look at the specific nature of this intellectual professors, they have actually likewise checked out how humans understand the world and their unique location within it. Through this exploration, the Christian custom has actually pertained to comprehend the human individual as a being including both body and soul-deeply linked to this world and yet transcending it. [17]
14. In the classical tradition, the idea of intelligence is typically understood through the complementary concepts of "reason" (ratio) and "intellect" (intellectus). These are not different faculties 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 reality, while the name reason is taken from the analytical and discursive procedure." [18] This concise description highlights the two essential and complementary dimensions of human intelligence. Intellectus describes the instinctive grasp of the truth-that is, collaring it with the "eyes" of the mind-which precedes and premises argumentation itself. Ratio pertains to thinking appropriate: the discursive, analytical procedure that leads to judgment. Together, intellect and factor form the two elements of the act of intelligere, "the correct operation of the human being as such." [19]
15. Explaining the human person as a "logical" being does not lower the individual to a specific mode of idea; rather, it recognizes that the capability for intellectual understanding shapes and permeates all elements of human activity. [20] Whether worked out well or poorly, this capacity is an intrinsic element of humanity. In this sense, the "term 'rational' encompasses all the capabilities of the human individual," consisting of those related to "understanding and comprehending, in addition to those of willing, loving, choosing, and preferring; it likewise includes all corporeal functions closely related to these abilities." [21] This detailed viewpoint highlights how, in the human individual, developed in the "image of God," factor is incorporated in a way that raises, shapes, and changes both the individual's will and actions. [22]
16. Christian thought considers the intellectual professors of the human person within the structure of an integral sociology that views the human being as basically embodied. In the human person, spirit and matter "are not two natures united, however rather their union forms a single nature." [23] Simply put, the soul is not simply the immaterial "part" of the person contained within the body, nor is the body an external shell real estate an intangible "core." Rather, the entire human individual is at the same time both material and spiritual. This understanding reflects the mentor of Sacred Scripture, which sees the human individual as a being who lives out relationships with God and others (and hence, an authentically spiritual measurement) within and through this embodied existence. [24] The extensive significance of this condition is more lit up by the secret of the Incarnation, through which God himself took on our flesh and "raised it approximately a sublime dignity." [25]
17. Although deeply rooted in physical existence, the human individual goes beyond the material world through the soul, which is "practically on the horizon of eternity and time." [26] The intelligence's capacity for transcendence and the self-possessed freedom of the will come from the soul, by which the human person "shares in the light of the magnificent mind." [27] Nevertheless, the human spirit does not exercise its regular mode of understanding without the body. [28] In this way, the intellectual professors of the human person are an essential part of a sociology that recognizes that the human individual is a "unity of body and soul." [29] Further aspects of this understanding will be developed in what follows.

18. People are "purchased by their very nature to interpersonal communion," [30] having the capacity to know one another, to provide themselves in love, and to participate in communion with others. Accordingly, human intelligence is not a separated faculty but is worked out in relationships, finding its max expression in discussion, cooperation, and solidarity. We discover with others, and we discover through others.

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

21. Human intelligence is ultimately "God's present made for the assimilation of truth." [34] In the double sense of intellectus-ratio, it allows the individual to explore realities that surpass mere sensory experience or energy, considering that "the desire for fact belongs to human nature itself. It is an innate home of human factor to ask why things are as they are." [35] Moving beyond the limitations of empirical information, human intelligence can "with real certitude attain to reality itself as knowable." [36] While truth remains only partially understood, the desire for fact "stimulates factor constantly to go further; certainly, it is as if reason were overwhelmed to see that it can constantly surpass what it has actually already attained." [37] Although Truth in itself goes beyond the boundaries of human intelligence, it irresistibly attracts it. [38] Drawn by this tourist attraction, the human person is led to seek "realities of a greater order." [39]
22. This inherent drive toward the pursuit of truth is especially apparent in the definitely human capacities for semantic understanding and creativity, [40] through which this search unfolds in a "manner that is appropriate to the social nature and dignity of the human person." [41] Likewise, a steadfast orientation to the fact is essential for charity to be both genuine and universal. [42]
23. The look for reality discovers its highest expression in openness to truths that transcend the physical and produced world. In God, all truths attain their ultimate and original significance. [43] Entrusting oneself to God is a "fundamental choice that engages the entire person." [44] In this method, the human person becomes totally what he or she is contacted us to be: "the intelligence and the will show their spiritual nature," allowing the individual "to act in such a way that understands individual freedom to the complete." [45]
24. The Christian faith understands creation as the complimentary act of the Triune God, who, as Saint Bonaventure of Bagnoregio explains, develops "not to increase his magnificence, however to reveal it forth and to communicate it." [46] Since God develops according to his Wisdom (cf. Wis. 9:9; Jer. 10:12), creation is imbued with an intrinsic order that shows God's plan (cf. Gen. 1; Dan. 2:21 -22; Is. 45:18; Ps. 74:12 -17; 104), [47] within which God has actually called people to presume a distinct role: to cultivate and take care of the world. [48]
25. Shaped by the Divine Craftsman, people live out their identity as beings made in imago Dei by "keeping" and "tilling" (cf. Gen. 2:15) creation-using their intelligence and skills to take care of and establish development in accord with God's strategy. [49] In this, human intelligence shows the Divine Intelligence that created all things (cf. Gen. 1-2; Jn. 1), [50] constantly sustains them, and guides them to their supreme function in him. [51] Moreover, people are contacted us to establish their abilities in science and technology, for through them, God is glorified (cf. Sir. 38:6). Thus, in an appropriate relationship with production, human beings, on the one hand, utilize their intelligence and skill to cooperate with God in guiding development toward the function to which he has called it. [52] On the other hand, development itself, as Saint Bonaventure observes, assists the human mind to "ascend gradually to the supreme Principle, who is God." [53]
26. In this context, human intelligence ends up being more plainly comprehended as a faculty that forms an important part of how the entire individual engages with reality. Authentic engagement needs welcoming the full scope of one's being: spiritual, cognitive, embodied, and relational.

27. This engagement with reality unfolds in various ways, as each individual, in his or her complex individuality [54], seeks to understand the world, associate with others, resolve problems, reveal creativity, and pursue important wellness through the unified interaction of the numerous dimensions of the individual's intelligence. [55] This includes sensible and linguistic abilities but can likewise include other modes of interacting with reality. Consider the work of a craftsmen, who "need to know how to determine, in inert matter, a particular form that others can not recognize" [56] and bring it forth through insight and practical ability. Indigenous peoples who live near to the earth often possess an extensive sense of nature and its cycles. [57] Similarly, a buddy who knows the best word to state or an individual adept at handling human relationships exemplifies an intelligence that is "the fruit of self-examination, dialogue and generous encounter between individuals." [58] As Pope Francis observes, "in this age of expert system, we can not forget that poetry and love are required to conserve our humankind." [59]
28. At the heart of the Christian understanding of intelligence is the combination of reality into the moral and spiritual life of the individual, directing his or her actions because of God's goodness and reality. According to God's strategy, intelligence, in its max sense, likewise consists of the ability to appreciate what holds true, good, and lovely. As the twentieth-century French poet Paul Claudel revealed, "intelligence is nothing without pleasure." [60] Similarly, Dante, upon reaching the greatest heaven in Paradiso, testifies that the culmination of this intellectual pleasure is found in the "light intellectual loaded with love, love of real excellent filled with happiness, joy which transcends every sweet taste." [61]
29. A correct understanding of human intelligence, therefore, can not be minimized to the simple acquisition of realities or the ability to carry out particular jobs. Instead, it includes the person's openness to the supreme questions of life and shows an orientation towards the True and the Good. [62] As an expression of the magnificent image within the person, human intelligence has the ability to access the totality of being, pondering presence in its fullness, which exceeds what is measurable, and grasping the meaning of what has actually been understood. For followers, this capability includes, in a specific method, the capability to grow in the understanding of the mysteries of God by using reason to engage ever more profoundly with revealed truths (intellectus fidei). [63] True intelligence is formed by divine 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 reflective measurement, an unselfish openness to the True, the Good, and the Beautiful, beyond any utilitarian purpose.

30. In light of the foregoing conversation, the distinctions in between human intelligence and present AI systems become evident. While AI is an amazing technological accomplishment efficient in mimicing certain outputs associated with human intelligence, it runs by performing tasks, attaining objectives, or making decisions based on quantitative data and computational reasoning. For example, with its analytical power, AI stands out at integrating information from a range of fields, modeling complex systems, and cultivating interdisciplinary connections. In this way, it can assist specialists collaborate in resolving complicated issues that "can not be dealt with from a single point of view or from a single set of interests." [64]
31. However, even as AI processes and replicates certain expressions of intelligence, it remains basically restricted to a logical-mathematical framework, which imposes intrinsic constraints. Human intelligence, in contrast, establishes organically throughout the person's physical and mental development, shaped by a myriad of lived experiences in the flesh. Although sophisticated AI systems can "learn" through processes such as artificial intelligence, this sort of training is essentially different from the developmental growth of human intelligence, which is shaped by embodied experiences, consisting of sensory input, psychological reactions, social interactions, and the distinct context of each moment. These aspects shape and kind people within their individual history.In contrast, AI, doing not have a physical body, relies on computational thinking and knowing based on vast datasets that consist of taped human experiences and understanding.

32. Consequently, although AI can replicate aspects of human reasoning and perform particular tasks with extraordinary speed and performance, its computational capabilities represent only a portion of the more comprehensive capabilities of the human mind. For circumstances, AI can not currently replicate moral discernment or the ability to develop genuine relationships. Moreover, human intelligence is situated within a personally lived history of intellectual and ethical formation that essentially shapes the individual's viewpoint, encompassing the physical, psychological, social, ethical, and spiritual dimensions of life. Since AI can not use this fullness of understanding, approaches that rely exclusively on this innovation or treat it as the main means of translating the world can result in "a loss of gratitude for the entire, for the relationships in between things, and for the wider horizon." [65]
33. Human intelligence is not mainly about completing functional jobs however about understanding and actively engaging with reality in all its measurements; it is also efficient in unexpected insights. Since AI does not have the richness of corporeality, relationality, and the openness of the human heart to fact and goodness, its capacities-though seemingly limitless-are incomparable with the human capability to understand reality. So much can be gained from an illness, an accept of reconciliation, and even a basic sundown; certainly, numerous experiences we have as human beings open brand-new horizons and use the possibility of attaining brand-new knowledge. No gadget, working exclusively with information, can determine up to these and numerous other experiences present in our lives.

34. Drawing an overly close equivalence in between human intelligence and AI dangers succumbing to a functionalist viewpoint, where people are valued based upon the work they can perform. However, an individual's worth does not depend on having specific skills, cognitive and technological achievements, or specific success, but on the person's inherent self-respect, grounded in being created in the image of God. [66] This dignity remains undamaged in all scenarios, consisting of for those not able to exercise their capabilities, whether it be an unborn child, an unconscious individual, or an older person who is suffering. [67] It also underpins the tradition of human rights (and, in specific, what are now called "neuro-rights"), which represent "an essential point of merging in the look for commonalities" [68] and can, therefore, work as an essential ethical guide in discussions on the responsible advancement and use of AI.

35. Considering all these points, as Pope Francis observes, "the very use of the word 'intelligence'" in connection with AI "can prove deceptive" [69] and risks ignoring what is most valuable in the human individual. Due to this, AI should not be seen as a synthetic type of human intelligence however as an item of it. [70]
36. Given these factors to consider, one can ask how AI can be comprehended within God's strategy. To answer this, it is very important to recall that techno-scientific activity is not neutral in character however is a human venture that engages the humanistic and cultural dimensions of human creativity. [71]
37. Viewed as a fruit of the possible engraved within human intelligence, [72] scientific inquiry and the advancement of technical skills belong to the "partnership of males and female with God in improving the noticeable development." [73] At the exact same time, all scientific and technological achievements are, eventually, presents from God. [74] Therefore, humans should constantly use their capabilities in view of the higher function for which God has actually given them. [75]
38. We can gratefully acknowledge how innovation has actually "corrected numerous evils which utilized to damage and limit people," [76] a reality for which we must rejoice. Nevertheless, not all technological developments in themselves represent genuine human progress. [77] The Church is especially opposed to those applications that threaten the sanctity of life or the self-respect of the human person. [78] Like any human venture, technological advancement must be directed to serve the human individual and add to the pursuit of "higher justice, more comprehensive fraternity, and a more gentle order of social relations," which are "more important than advances in the technical field." [79] Concerns about the ethical implications of technological development are shared not just within the Church however likewise among lots of researchers, technologists, and professional associations, who progressively require ethical reflection to assist this advancement in an accountable way.

39. To attend to these challenges, it is necessary to highlight the importance of moral obligation grounded in the dignity and vocation of the human person. This assisting principle likewise uses to questions worrying AI. In this context, the ethical dimension takes on main significance due to the fact that it is people who develop systems and determine the purposes for which they are used. [80] Between a maker and a person, just the latter is genuinely a moral agent-a subject of moral duty who exercises liberty in his or her decisions and accepts their effects. [81] It is not the maker but the human who remains in relationship with fact and goodness, directed by a moral conscience that calls the person "to enjoy and to do what is good and to prevent evil," [82] attesting to "the authority of reality in recommendation to the supreme Good to which the human individual is drawn." [83] Likewise, in between a maker and a human, only the human can be adequately self-aware to the point of listening and following the voice of conscience, critical with prudence, and looking for the great that is possible in every scenario. [84] In reality, all of this likewise comes from the individual's exercise of intelligence.

40. Like any product of human creativity, AI can be directed towards favorable or unfavorable ends. [85] When used in ways that appreciate human self-respect and promote the wellness of individuals and neighborhoods, it can contribute positively to the human vocation. Yet, as in all areas where humans are called to make choices, the shadow of evil also looms here. Where human flexibility permits the possibility of picking what is incorrect, the moral evaluation of this innovation will require to consider how it is directed and used.

41. At the same time, it is not just the ends that are fairly substantial but likewise the methods used to attain them. Additionally, the total vision and understanding of the human person ingrained within these systems are essential to think about also. Technological products reflect the worldview of their designers, owners, users, and regulators, [86] and have the power to "shape the world and engage consciences on the level of worths." [87] On a societal level, some technological developments might likewise enhance relationships and power characteristics that are inconsistent with a proper understanding of the human individual and society.

42. Therefore, completions and the means used in a given application of AI, in addition to the total vision it includes, need to all be assessed to ensure they appreciate human dignity and promote the typical good. [88] As Pope Francis has actually specified, "the intrinsic self-respect of every guy and every woman" need to be "the key requirement in examining emerging technologies; these will prove fairly sound to the extent that they assist regard that dignity and increase its expression at every level of human life," [89] consisting of in the social and financial spheres. In this sense, human intelligence plays a crucial function not just in creating and producing technology but likewise in directing its use in line with the authentic good of the human person. [90] The obligation for handling this carefully pertains to every level of society, guided by the principle of subsidiarity and other concepts of Catholic Social Teaching.

43. The dedication to guaranteeing that AI constantly supports and promotes the supreme value of the self-respect of every human being and the fullness of the human vocation serves as a criterion of discernment for developers, owners, operators, and regulators of AI, in addition to to its users. It remains legitimate for each application of the innovation at every level of its usage.

44. An assessment of the implications of this assisting concept might begin by thinking about the value of moral obligation. Since complete moral causality belongs just to individual agents, not artificial ones, it is essential to be able to recognize and define who bears duty for the procedures associated with AI, particularly those capable of finding out, correction, and reprogramming. While bottom-up approaches and very deep neural networks enable AI to solve complicated problems, they make it difficult to understand the processes that lead to the options they embraced. This complicates accountability considering that if an AI application produces unwanted results, identifying who is accountable ends up being hard. To address this issue, attention requires to be offered to the nature of responsibility processes in complex, extremely automated settings, where results may only become obvious in the medium to long term. For this, it is very important that ultimate obligation for decisions used AI rests with the human decision-makers and that there is responsibility for making use of AI at each phase of the decision-making procedure. [91]
45. In addition to determining who is responsible, it is necessary to determine the objectives offered to AI systems. Although these systems might use without supervision autonomous learning mechanisms and often follow courses that people can not rebuild, they ultimately pursue objectives that people have actually appointed to them and are governed by processes developed by their designers and developers. Yet, this presents an obstacle because, as AI designs end up being increasingly efficient in independent knowing, the capability to maintain control over them to make sure that such applications serve human purposes may efficiently diminish. This raises the vital concern of how to make sure that AI systems are purchased for the good of people and not against them.

46. While responsibility for the ethical use of AI systems starts with those who establish, produce, handle, and oversee such systems, it is also shared by those who use them. As Pope Francis kept in mind, the maker "makes a technical option among several possibilities based either on distinct criteria or on analytical inferences. People, nevertheless, not only pick, but in their hearts can choosing." [92] Those who use AI to accomplish a task and follow its results produce a context in which they are eventually accountable for the power they have handed over. Therefore, insofar as AI can help people in making choices, the algorithms that govern it ought to be reliable, safe and secure, robust enough to deal with disparities, and transparent in their operation to alleviate biases and unexpected side effects. [93] Regulatory structures need to ensure that all legal entities remain liable for using AI and all its repercussions, with proper safeguards for openness, personal privacy, and accountability. [94] Moreover, those using AI needs to beware not to become excessively dependent on it for their decision-making, a trend that increases modern society's already high dependence on innovation.

47. The Church's moral and social mentor supplies resources to assist ensure that AI is used in a manner that maintains human agency. Considerations about justice, for instance, should also deal with concerns such as promoting just social dynamics, maintaining global security, and promoting peace. By exercising vigilance, individuals and communities can determine ways to utilize AI to benefit mankind while avoiding applications that could deteriorate human self-respect or harm the environment. In this context, the idea of duty should be understood not just in its most minimal sense however as a "duty for the look after others, which is more than just accounting for outcomes attained." [95]
48. Therefore, AI, like any technology, can be part of a conscious and responsible answer to humankind's occupation to the great. However, as formerly talked about, AI should be directed by human intelligence to line up with this vocation, ensuring it appreciates the dignity of the human person. Recognizing this "exalted dignity," the Second Vatican Council verified that "the social order and its advancement must invariably work to the advantage of the human person." [96] Due to this, the use of AI, as Pope Francis said, must be "accompanied by an ethic inspired by a vision of the typical good, an ethic of freedom, obligation, and fraternity, efficient in cultivating the complete development of people in relation to others and to the whole of development." [97]
49. Within this general viewpoint, some observations follow listed below to illustrate how the preceding arguments can assist provide an ethical orientation in useful circumstances, in line with the "knowledge of heart" that Pope Francis has proposed. [98] While not exhaustive, this discussion is provided in service of the dialogue that considers how AI can be utilized to maintain the self-respect of the human individual and promote the common good. [99]
50. As Pope Francis observed, "the inherent dignity of each human being and the fraternity that binds us together as members of the one human household should undergird the advancement of brand-new technologies and function as unassailable criteria for examining them before they are utilized." [100]
51. Viewed through this lens, AI might "introduce crucial innovations in agriculture, education and culture, an improved level of life for entire nations and individuals, and the growth of human fraternity and social friendship," and hence be "utilized to promote important human development." [101] AI might likewise assist companies recognize those in requirement and counter discrimination and marginalization. These and other comparable applications of this innovation could contribute to human development and the typical good. [102]
52. However, while AI holds numerous possibilities for promoting the great, it can also hinder and even counter human advancement and the typical good. Pope Francis has kept in mind that "proof to date suggests that digital innovations have actually increased inequality in our world. Not just differences in product wealth, which are likewise significant, but likewise differences in access to political and social impact." [103] In this sense, AI might be utilized to perpetuate marginalization and discrimination, create brand-new kinds of hardship, widen the "digital divide," and get worse existing social inequalities. [104]
53. Moreover, the concentration of the power over mainstream AI applications in the hands of a few effective business raises significant ethical issues. Exacerbating this problem is the fundamental nature of AI systems, where no single person can work out complete oversight over the large and intricate datasets used for calculation. This absence of well-defined accountability creates the danger that AI might be manipulated for individual or business gain or to direct popular opinion for the benefit of a specific market. Such entities, motivated by their own interests, have the capacity to exercise "forms of control as subtle as they are intrusive, creating mechanisms for the manipulation of consciences and of the democratic process." [105]
54. Furthermore, wiki.rrtn.org there is the threat 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 self-respect and fraternity are often set aside in the name of effectiveness, "as if reality, goodness, and fact instantly flow from technological and economic power as such." [107] Yet, human dignity and the common great must never ever be violated for the sake of efficiency, [108] for "technological developments that do not result in an improvement in the lifestyle of all humankind, but on the contrary, aggravate inequalities and conflicts, can never count as real progress. " [109] Instead, AI should be put "at the service of another type of progress, one which is healthier, more human, more social, more essential." [110]
55. Attaining this goal requires a deeper reflection on the relationship between autonomy and obligation. Greater autonomy heightens each person's obligation across different aspects of common life. For Christians, the structure of this responsibility lies in the acknowledgment that all human capabilities, including the person's autonomy, originated from God and are meant to be used in the service of others. [111] Therefore, instead of merely pursuing financial or technological objectives, AI ought to serve "the typical good of the entire human household," which is "the amount overall of social conditions that permit individuals, either as groups or as people, to reach their fulfillment 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 participate in relations with others, he can neither live nor establish his presents." [113] This conviction underscores that living in society is intrinsic to the nature and vocation of the human individual. [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 think they have discovered, in such a method that they help one another in the search for fact." [115]
57. Such a mission, together with other aspects of human interaction, presupposes encounters and mutual exchange between individuals shaped by their special histories, thoughts, convictions, and relationships. Nor can we forget that human intelligence is a varied, complex, and complex truth: specific and social, logical and affective, conceptual and symbolic. Pope Francis highlights this dynamic, noting that "together, we can look for the truth in discussion, in relaxed discussion or in passionate debate. To do so requires determination; it entails moments of silence and suffering, yet it can patiently accept the more comprehensive experience of people and peoples. [...] The process of building fraternity, be it local or universal, can just be carried out by spirits that are totally free and available to authentic encounters." [116]
58. It remains in this context that one can consider the obstacles AI poses to human relationships. Like other technological tools, AI has the prospective to promote connections within the human family. However, it might likewise impede a true encounter with reality and, eventually, lead people to "a deep and melancholic frustration with social relations, or a damaging sense of seclusion." [117] Authentic human relationships need the richness of being with others in their pain, their pleas, and their delight. [118] Since human intelligence is expressed and improved also in social and embodied methods, genuine and spontaneous encounters with others are essential for engaging with reality in its fullness.

59. Because "real knowledge demands an encounter with reality," [119] the increase of AI introduces another difficulty. Since AI can successfully imitate the products of human intelligence, the capability to know when one is connecting with a human or a maker can no longer be considered approved. Generative AI can produce text, speech, images, and other sophisticated outputs that are normally connected with human beings. Yet, it should be understood for what it is: a tool, not an individual. [120] This distinction is often obscured by the language used by professionals, which tends to anthropomorphize AI and therefore blurs the line in between human and machine.

60. Anthropomorphizing AI likewise poses specific difficulties for the development of children, potentially encouraging them to establish patterns of interaction that deal with human relationships in a transactional way, as one would relate to a chatbot. Such routines might lead youths to see instructors as mere dispensers of details instead of as coaches who guide and support their intellectual and ethical growth. Genuine relationships, rooted in empathy and an unfaltering dedication to the good of the other, are important and irreplaceable in cultivating the complete development of the human individual.

61. In this context, it is essential to clarify that, regardless of making use of anthropomorphic language, no AI application can really experience empathy. Emotions can not be lowered to facial expressions or expressions created in response to triggers; they reflect the method a person, as a whole, 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 individuality, welcome their otherness, and grasp the meaning behind even their silences. [121] Unlike the world of analytical judgment in which AI excels, true compassion comes from the relational sphere. It includes intuiting and nabbing the lived experiences of another while maintaining the difference between self and other. [122] While AI can imitate empathetic reactions, it can not duplicate the incomparably individual and relational nature of genuine empathy. [123]
62. Because of the above, it is clear why misrepresenting AI as a person ought to constantly be prevented; doing so for fraudulent functions is a grave ethical offense that could wear down social trust. Similarly, utilizing AI to trick in other contexts-such as in education or in human relationships, including the sphere of sexuality-is likewise to be thought about unethical and needs cautious oversight to prevent harm, maintain transparency, and guarantee the self-respect of all individuals. [124]
63. In a significantly separated world, some people have turned to AI searching for deep human relationships, basic friendship, or perhaps psychological bonds. However, while people are implied to experience authentic relationships, AI can only mimic them. Nevertheless, such relationships with others are an important part of how an individual grows to become who he or she is implied to be. If AI is used to help individuals foster authentic 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 run the risk of replacing authentic relationality with a lifeless image (cf. Ps. 106:20; Rom. 1:22 -23). Instead of pulling away into artificial worlds, we are called to engage in a committed and deliberate way with truth, particularly by relating to the bad and suffering, consoling those in sadness, and creating bonds of communion with all.

64. Due to its interdisciplinary nature, AI is being progressively integrated into financial and financial systems. Significant investments are presently being made not just in the innovation sector however likewise in energy, finance, and media, particularly in the areas of marketing and sales, logistics, technological innovation, compliance, and danger management. At the same time, AI's applications in these locations have likewise highlighted its ambivalent nature, as a source of remarkable chances however also extensive risks. A very first real crucial point in this area worries the possibility that-due to the concentration of AI applications in the hands of a couple of corporations-only those big companies would gain from the value produced by AI rather than business that use it.

65. Other broader elements of AI's influence on the economic-financial sphere need to also be thoroughly taken a look at, particularly worrying the interaction in between concrete reality and the digital world. One essential consideration in this regard involves the coexistence of diverse and alternative kinds of financial and financial institutions within a provided context. This element ought to be encouraged, as it can bring advantages in how it supports the genuine economy by promoting its development and stability, specifically during times of crisis. Nevertheless, it should be stressed that digital realities, not limited by any spatial bonds, tend to be more homogeneous and impersonal than neighborhoods rooted in a particular location and a particular history, with a typical journey identified by shared values and hopes, however likewise by unavoidable arguments and divergences. This diversity is an undeniable property to a community's economic life. Turning over the economy and financing completely to digital technology would reduce this variety and richness. As a result, many options to economic problems that can be reached through natural dialogue in between the included parties might no longer be attainable in a world controlled by procedures and just the appearance of nearness.

66. Another location where AI is already having a profound effect is the world of work. As in numerous other fields, AI is driving basic improvements across many professions, with a variety of impacts. On the one hand, it has the possible to boost knowledge and performance, develop brand-new jobs, enable workers to concentrate on more innovative jobs, and open new horizons for imagination and development.

67. However, while AI promises to boost productivity by taking over ordinary jobs, it regularly forces workers to adapt to the speed and demands of makers rather than makers being created to support those who work. As a result, contrary to the marketed benefits of AI, present techniques to the technology can paradoxically deskill employees, subject them to automated security, and relegate them to stiff and repeated tasks. The need to stay up to date with the rate of innovation can deteriorate employees' sense of firm and suppress the innovative capabilities they are expected to give their work. [125]
68. AI is currently eliminating the need for some jobs that were once performed by people. If AI is used to change human employees instead of match them, there is a "considerable risk of out of proportion advantage for the few at the cost of the impoverishment of lots of." [126] Additionally, as AI becomes more effective, there is an involved threat that human labor might lose its worth in the economic world. This is the rational consequence of the technocratic paradigm: a world of mankind shackled to efficiency, where, ultimately, the cost of humankind must be cut. Yet, human lives are intrinsically valuable, independent of their financial output. Nevertheless, the "current design," Pope Francis explains, "does not appear to favor an investment in efforts to assist the sluggish, the weak, or the less skilled to discover opportunities in life." [127] Due to this, "we can not allow a tool as powerful and indispensable as Artificial Intelligence to reinforce such a paradigm, but rather, we need to make Artificial Intelligence a bulwark against its growth." [128]
69. It is very important to remember that "the order of things should be subordinate to the order of individuals, and not the other method around." [129] Human work must not only be at the service of earnings however at "the service of the entire human person [...] considering the person's product requirements and the requirements of his/her intellectual, moral, spiritual, and religious life." [130] In this context, the Church acknowledges that work is "not only a way of making one's daily bread" but is also "an essential measurement of social life" and "a means [...] of personal development, the structure of healthy relationships, self-expression and the exchange of presents. Work provides us a sense of shared responsibility for the advancement of the world, and ultimately, for our life as a people." [131]
70. Since work is a "part of the meaning of life on this earth, a course to development, human advancement and personal fulfillment," "the objective must not be that technological development progressively changes human work, for this would be harmful to humankind" [132] -rather, it must promote human labor. Seen in this light, AI needs to help, not replace, human judgment. Similarly, it needs to never ever degrade imagination or lower employees to simple "cogs in a maker." Therefore, "regard for the self-respect of laborers and the significance of work for the economic well-being of individuals, families, and societies, for task security and just salaries, should be a high priority for the international neighborhood as these types of technology permeate more deeply into our work environments." [133]
71. As individuals in God's healing work, health care experts have the occupation and obligation to be "guardians and servants of human life." [134] Because of this, the health care occupation brings an "intrinsic and indisputable ethical dimension," acknowledged by the Hippocratic Oath, which requires doctors and health care experts to dedicate themselves to having "outright respect for human life and its sacredness." [135] Following the example of the Good Samaritan, this commitment is to be performed by males and females "who decline the development of a society of exemption, and act instead as next-door neighbors, raising up and rehabilitating the fallen for the sake of the common good." [136]
72. Seen in this light, AI seems to hold enormous capacity in a range of applications in the medical field, such as helping the diagnostic work of doctor, assisting in relationships between clients and medical personnel, using brand-new treatments, and expanding access to quality care likewise for those who are separated or marginalized. In these methods, the technology might improve the "thoughtful and loving nearness" [137] that healthcare suppliers are called to extend to the sick and suffering.

73. However, if AI is utilized not to enhance however to replace the relationship between patients and health care providers-leaving clients to communicate with a maker instead of a human being-it would reduce a crucially important human relational structure to a central, impersonal, and unequal framework. Instead of motivating solidarity with the ill and suffering, such applications of AI would run the risk of worsening the loneliness that frequently accompanies health problem, especially in the context of a culture where "individuals are no longer viewed as a paramount worth to be cared for and respected." [138] This abuse of AI would not line up with regard for the self-respect of the human person and solidarity with the suffering.

74. Responsibility for the wellness of patients and the decisions that discuss their lives are at the heart of the health care profession. This responsibility requires medical specialists to exercise all their ability and intelligence in making well-reasoned and fairly grounded options concerning those turned over to their care, constantly respecting the inviolable dignity of the patients and the requirement for informed permission. As a result, decisions concerning patient treatment and the weight of responsibility they entail must constantly remain with the human individual and should never be entrusted to AI. [139]
75. In addition, utilizing AI to identify who must get treatment based mainly on economic steps or metrics of efficiency represents an especially problematic circumstances of the "technocratic paradigm" that should be rejected. [140] For, "optimizing resources implies using them in an ethical and fraternal way, and not punishing the most fragile." [141] Additionally, AI tools in healthcare are "exposed to forms of predisposition and discrimination," where "systemic errors can easily multiply, producing not just oppressions in individual cases however also, due to the domino impact, genuine kinds of social inequality." [142]
76. The combination of AI into health care also poses the threat of enhancing other existing disparities in access to treatment. As health care becomes progressively oriented towards prevention and lifestyle-based methods, AI-driven services may accidentally favor more upscale populations who already take pleasure in better access to medical resources and quality nutrition. This pattern threats reinforcing a "medicine for the rich" model, where those with monetary ways gain from innovative preventative tools and customized health details while others battle to gain access to even basic services. To avoid such inequities, fair structures are required to make sure that making use of AI in health care does not aggravate existing health care inequalities but rather serves the typical good.

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

78. This technique involves a commitment to cultivating the mind, but always as a part of the important development of the person: "We must break that idea of education which holds that educating means filling one's head with concepts. That is the method we educate robots, cerebral minds, not individuals. Educating is taking a risk in the stress between the mind, the heart, and the hands." [145]
79. At the center of this work of forming the entire human person is the indispensable relationship between teacher and trainee. Teachers do more than communicate understanding; they design necessary human qualities and motivate the delight of discovery. [146] Their existence motivates trainees both through the material they teach and the care they show for their trainees. This bond fosters trust, shared understanding, and the capability to address everyone's unique dignity and capacity. On the part of the trainee, this can generate a genuine desire to grow. The physical existence of an instructor produces a relational dynamic that AI can not reproduce, one that deepens engagement and nurtures the trainee's important advancement.

80. In this context, AI provides both opportunities and difficulties. If utilized in a sensible way, within the context of an existing teacher-student relationship and bought to the authentic goals of education, AI can become an important educational resource by improving access to education, offering tailored support, and supplying instant feedback to trainees. These advantages might enhance the learning experience, especially in cases where individualized attention is required, or academic resources are otherwise limited.

81. Nevertheless, a crucial part of education is forming "the intelligence to reason well in all matters, to reach out towards fact, 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 vital in an age marked by innovation, in which "it is no longer merely a question of 'using' instruments of communication, however of residing in an extremely digitalized culture that has had a profound influence on [...] our ability to interact, find out, be notified and participate in relationship with others." [149] However, rather of cultivating "a cultivated intelligence," which "brings with it a power and a grace to every work and occupation that it undertakes," [150] the comprehensive use of AI in education could cause the trainees' increased dependence on technology, deteriorating their capability to perform some skills individually and worsening their reliance on screens. [151]
82. Additionally, while some AI systems are created to help people develop their crucial thinking abilities and analytical abilities, lots of others merely supply responses instead of triggering trainees to reach responses themselves or write text for themselves. [152] Instead of training youths how to accumulate details and produce fast reactions, education must encourage "the responsible use of flexibility to face problems with common sense and intelligence." [153] Building on this, "education in making use of types of synthetic intelligence should aim above all at promoting crucial thinking. Users of any ages, but especially the young, need to establish a critical approach to using data and content collected on the web or produced by artificial intelligence systems. Schools, universities, and clinical societies are challenged to help trainees and specialists to grasp the social and ethical elements of the development and usages of technology." [154]
83. As Saint John Paul II remembered, "on the planet today, identified by such quick developments in science and innovation, the jobs of a Catholic University presume an ever higher value and seriousness." [155] In a specific way, Catholic universities are advised to be present as terrific laboratories of hope at this crossroads of history. In an inter-disciplinary and cross-disciplinary secret, they are urged to engage "with knowledge and creativity" [156] in mindful research study on this phenomenon, assisting to draw out the salutary potential within the numerous fields of science and truth, and assisting them always towards fairly sound applications that plainly serve the cohesion of our societies and the common good, reaching brand-new frontiers in the discussion in between faith and reason.

84. Moreover, it needs to be kept in mind that present AI programs have been understood to offer prejudiced or made details, which can lead trainees to trust unreliable content. This problem "not just runs the danger of legitimizing fake news and reinforcing a dominant culture's benefit, but, in other words, it also weakens the academic process itself." [157] With time, clearer distinctions might emerge in between correct and incorrect usages of AI in education and research. Yet, a decisive guideline is that using AI need to always be transparent and never ever misrepresented.

85. AI could be utilized as an aid to human dignity if it assists individuals understand complex principles or directs them to sound resources that support their look for the fact. [158]
86. However, AI also presents a serious danger of producing controlled material and incorrect details, which can quickly misguide people due to its resemblance to the truth. Such misinformation may happen accidentally, as in the case of AI "hallucination," where a generative AI system yields results that appear genuine however are not. Since creating content that mimics human artifacts is main to AI's performance, reducing these dangers shows difficult. Yet, the repercussions of such aberrations and false details can be quite grave. For this factor, all those involved in producing and utilizing AI systems ought to be committed to the truthfulness and accuracy of the details processed by such systems and disseminated to the public.

87. While AI has a hidden potential to produce false details, an even more unpleasant issue depends on the intentional misuse of AI for control. This can take place when people or companies intentionally generate and spread incorrect content with the aim to trick or trigger damage, such as "deepfake" images, videos, and audio-referring to an incorrect representation of an individual, edited or created by an AI algorithm. The risk of deepfakes is particularly apparent when they are utilized to target or hurt others. While the images or videos themselves may be synthetic, the damage they cause is real, leaving "deep scars in the hearts of those who suffer it" and "real wounds in their human dignity." [159]
88. On a broader scale, by distorting "our relationship with others and with truth," [160] AI-generated phony media can slowly weaken the structures of society. This problem needs mindful guideline, as misinformation-especially through AI-controlled or affected media-can spread unintentionally, sustaining political polarization and social unrest. When society ends up being indifferent to the fact, numerous groups build their own versions of "truths," deteriorating the "reciprocal ties and shared dependences" [161] that underpin the fabric of social life. As deepfakes cause people to question everything and AI-generated false content wears down rely on what they see and hear, polarization and conflict will only grow. Such extensive deception is no unimportant matter; it strikes at the core of humanity, dismantling the foundational trust on which societies are built. [162]
89. Countering AI-driven falsehoods is not only the work of industry experts-it needs the efforts of all individuals of goodwill. "If technology is to serve human dignity and not damage it, and if it is to promote peace rather than violence, then the human neighborhood needs to be proactive in dealing with these patterns with respect to human dignity and the promotion of the great." [163] Those who produce and share AI-generated content ought to constantly exercise diligence in validating the fact of what they disseminate 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 make use of the weak and vulnerable." [164] This requires the ongoing prudence and careful discernment of all users regarding their activity online. [165]
90. Humans are naturally relational, and the data each individual creates in the digital world can be seen as an objectified expression of this relational nature. Data communicates not just details but likewise individual and relational knowledge, which, in a progressively digitized context, can total up to power over the person. Moreover, while some kinds of information may pertain to public elements of a person's life, others may touch upon the person's interiority, possibly even their conscience. Seen in this way, personal privacy plays a vital role in safeguarding the borders of a person's inner life, maintaining their freedom to relate to others, reveal themselves, and make decisions without undue control. This security is likewise connected to the defense of religious flexibility, as surveillance can likewise be misused to put in control over the lives of believers and how they express their faith.

91. It is proper, therefore, to deal with the problem of privacy from a concern for the genuine flexibility and inalienable self-respect of the human person "in all situations." [166] The Second Vatican Council included the right "to protect privacy" among the essential rights "necessary for living a really human life," a right that must be reached all individuals on account of their "sublime self-respect." [167] Furthermore, the Church has actually also verified the right to the legitimate regard for a private life in the context of verifying the person's right to a good reputation, defense of their physical and mental integrity, and freedom from harm or undue invasion [168] -necessary elements of the due regard for the intrinsic self-respect of the human person. [169]
92. Advances in AI-powered data processing and analysis now make it possible to infer patterns in an individual's behavior and thinking from even a small amount of details, making the role of information personal privacy a lot more necessary as a protect for the dignity and relational nature of the human individual. As Pope Francis observed, "while closed and intolerant attitudes towards others are on the increase, distances are otherwise diminishing or vanishing to the point that the right to personal privacy rarely exists. Everything has become a type of phenomenon to be examined and checked, and individuals's lives are now under constant monitoring." [170]
93. While there can be genuine and correct methods to utilize AI in keeping with human self-respect and the typical good, utilizing it for monitoring aimed at exploiting, restricting others' liberty, or benefitting a few at the cost of the numerous is unjustifiable. The risk of security overreach need to be kept an eye on by appropriate regulators to make sure transparency and public responsibility. Those responsible for monitoring ought to never ever exceed their authority, which need to always favor the self-respect and flexibility of every individual as the vital basis of a just and humane society.

94. Furthermore, "fundamental respect for human self-respect needs that we refuse to permit the individuality of the individual to be recognized with a set of data." [171] This specifically applies when AI is used to examine individuals or groups based on their behavior, qualities, or history-a practice called "social scoring": "In social and financial decision-making, we must be cautious about entrusting judgments to algorithms that process information, often gathered surreptitiously, on a person's makeup and previous habits. Such data can be contaminated by social prejudices and preconceptions. A person's previous habits ought to not be used to reject him or her the opportunity to alter, grow, and add to society. We can not enable algorithms to limit or condition regard for human self-respect, or to omit compassion, mercy, forgiveness, and above all, the hope that people are able to alter." [172]
95. AI has many appealing applications for enhancing our relationship with our "typical home," such as creating models to forecast severe environment occasions, proposing engineering options to lower their impact, handling relief operations, and forecasting population shifts. [173] Additionally, AI can support sustainable agriculture, enhance energy usage, and supply early warning systems for public health emergency situations. These improvements have the prospective to reinforce strength against climate-related difficulties and promote more sustainable development.

96. At the exact same time, current AI models and the hardware needed to support them consume huge quantities of energy and water, considerably contributing to CO2 emissions and straining resources. This truth is often obscured by the method this innovation is provided in the popular creativity, where words such as "the cloud" [174] can provide the impression that information is saved and processed in an intangible world, detached from the physical world. However, "the cloud" is not a heavenly domain separate from the real world; as with all computing innovations, it counts on physical devices, cables, and energy. The exact same is true of the technology behind AI. As these systems grow in complexity, specifically large language models (LLMs), they require ever-larger datasets, increased computational power, and higher storage infrastructure. Considering the heavy toll these technologies handle the environment, it is crucial to develop sustainable options that reduce their influence on our common home.

97. Even then, as Pope Francis teaches, it is essential "that we search for solutions not just in technology but in a change of mankind." [175] A total and authentic understanding of production recognizes that the worth of all produced things can not be decreased to their simple utility. Therefore, a completely human technique to the stewardship of the earth declines the distorted anthropocentrism of the technocratic paradigm, which seeks to "draw out whatever possible" from the world, [176] and declines the "misconception of progress," which assumes that "eco-friendly issues will fix themselves simply with the application of new technology and without any requirement for ethical factors to consider or deep change." [177] Such a mindset should give way to a more holistic technique that respects the order of production and promotes the integral good of the human individual while safeguarding our common home. [178]
98. The Second Vatican Council and the constant mentor of the Popes since then have insisted that peace is not merely the absence of war and is not limited to maintaining a balance of powers in between adversaries. Instead, in the words of Saint Augustine, peace is "the tranquility of order." [179] Certainly, peace can not be attained without safeguarding the products of individuals, free interaction, regard for the self-respect of persons and peoples, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is the work of justice and the effect of charity and can not be attained through force alone; instead, it needs to be mainly built through patient diplomacy, the active promo of justice, uniformity, essential human development, and respect for the dignity of all people. [180] In this way, the tools utilized to maintain peace must never ever be permitted to validate oppression, violence, or oppression. Instead, they must always be governed by a "firm determination to respect other people and nations, together with their self-respect, along with the intentional practice of fraternity." [181]
99. While AI's analytical abilities might assist nations seek peace and guarantee security, the "weaponization of Artificial Intelligence" can likewise be highly problematic. Pope Francis has actually observed that "the capability to carry out military operations through push-button control systems has led to a minimized perception of the destruction brought on by those weapon systems and the concern of duty for their use, leading to a much more cold and removed approach to the enormous tragedy of war." [182] Moreover, the ease with which autonomous weapons make war more viable militates against the concept of war as a last hope in genuine self-defense, [183] potentially increasing the instruments of war well beyond the scope of human oversight and precipitating a destabilizing arms race, with devastating effects for human rights. [184]
100. In particular, Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, which are capable of determining and striking targets without direct human intervention, are a "cause for grave ethical concern" since they lack the "special human capacity for ethical judgment and ethical decision-making." [185] For this reason, Pope Francis has actually urgently called for a reconsideration of the advancement of these weapons and a restriction on their use, starting with "an efficient and concrete commitment to present ever greater and proper human control. No maker should ever pick to take the life of a human." [186]
101. Since it is a small action from makers that can eliminate autonomously with accuracy to those efficient in large-scale damage, some AI researchers have actually revealed concerns that such innovation poses an "existential risk" by having the prospective to act in manner ins which might threaten the survival of entire regions or perhaps of humankind itself. This danger demands serious attention, showing the long-standing issue about technologies that give 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 a completely new mindset" [188] is more immediate than ever.

102. At the very same time, while the theoretical threats of AI should have attention, the more immediate and pushing concern depends on how individuals with harmful intentions may abuse this technology. [189] Like any tool, AI is an extension of human power, and while its future abilities are unforeseeable, humankind's past actions supply clear cautions. The atrocities committed throughout history are sufficient to raise deep concerns about the prospective abuses of AI.

103. Saint John Paul II observed that "humankind now has instruments of unmatched power: we can turn this world into a garden, or minimize it to a stack of rubble." [190] Given this reality, the Church reminds us, in the words of Pope Francis, that "we are complimentary to use our intelligence towards things progressing favorably," or towards "decadence and mutual destruction." [191] To avoid humankind from spiraling into self-destruction, [192] there need to be a clear stand against all applications of technology that naturally threaten human life and dignity. This commitment needs mindful discernment about using AI, especially in military defense applications, to make sure that it constantly appreciates human dignity and serves the common good. The advancement and implementation of AI in armaments should undergo the highest levels of ethical examination, governed by a concern for human self-respect and the sanctity of life. [193]
104. Technology uses exceptional tools to manage and establish the world's resources. However, in some 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 general intelligence (AGI), a theoretical kind of AI that would match or go beyond human intelligence and produce unimaginable improvements. Some even hypothesize that AGI might attain superhuman capabilities. At the exact same time, as society wanders away from a connection with the transcendent, some are tempted to turn to AI looking for meaning or fulfillment-longings that can only 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 explicitly cautions against (e.g., Ex. 20:4; 32:1 -5; 34:17). Moreover, AI may show a lot more sexy than standard idols for, unlike idols that "have mouths but do not speak; eyes, but do not see; ears, but do not hear" (Ps. 115:5 -6), AI can "speak," or a minimum of offers the impression of doing so (cf. Rev. 13:15). Yet, it is 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 have numerous of the abilities specific to human life, and it is also fallible. By turning to AI as a viewed "Other" higher than itself, with which to share existence and obligations, mankind threats creating a replacement for God. However, it is not AI that is ultimately deified and worshipped, however mankind itself-which, in this way, becomes enslaved to its own work. [195]
106. While AI has the potential to serve mankind and contribute to the typical excellent, it remains a creation of human hands, bearing "the imprint of human art and ingenuity" (Acts 17:29). It must never ever be ascribed excessive worth. As the Book of Wisdom verifies: "For a male made them, and one whose spirit is obtained formed them; for no man can form a god which resembles himself. He is mortal, and what he makes with lawless hands is dead, for he is better than the objects he worships since he has life, however they never have" (Wis. 15:16 -17).

107. In contrast, humans, "by their interior life, go beyond the entire product universe; they experience this deep interiority when they get in into their own heart, where God, who probes the heart, awaits them, and where they choose their own fate in the sight of God." [196] It is within the heart, as Pope Francis advises us, that each individual discovers the "mystical connection between self-knowledge and openness to others, between the encounter with one's personal originality and the willingness to offer oneself to others. " [197] Therefore, it is the heart alone that is "capable of setting our other powers and enthusiasms, and our whole individual, in a stance of respect and loving obedience before the Lord," [198] who "provides to deal with every one people as a 'Thou,' always and forever." [199]
108. Considering the numerous obstacles presented by advances in technology, Pope Francis stressed the requirement for development in "human obligation, worths, and conscience," proportionate to the development in the potential that this innovation brings [200] -acknowledging that "with a boost in human power comes a broadening of responsibility on the part of individuals and neighborhoods." [201]
109. At the exact same time, the "vital and essential concern" remains "whether in the context of this progress male, as male, is becoming truly better, that is to say, more fully grown spiritually, more knowledgeable about the self-respect of his humankind, more responsible, more available to others, particularly the neediest and the weakest, and readier to offer and to aid all." [202]
110. As an outcome, it is crucial to know how to evaluate individual applications of AI in specific contexts to identify whether its use promotes human dignity, the vocation of the human individual, and the common good. Just like numerous innovations, the impacts of the different uses of AI may not constantly be foreseeable from their beginning. As these applications and their social effects end up being clearer, appropriate reactions need to be made at all levels of society, following the concept of subsidiarity. Individual users, households, civil society, corporations, organizations, federal governments, and global companies must work at their proper levels to guarantee that AI is used for the good of all.

111. A considerable obstacle and opportunity for the common great today lies in considering AI within a structure of relational intelligence, which emphasizes the interconnectedness of individuals and communities and highlights our shared obligation for cultivating the integral well-being of others. The twentieth-century thinker Nicholas Berdyaev observed that people frequently blame makers for personal and social issues; however, "this only humiliates guy and does not represent his dignity," for "it is not worthy to move duty from guy to a device." [203] Only the human individual can be ethically accountable, and the challenges of a technological society are eventually spiritual in nature. Therefore, dealing with those obstacles "demands an accumulation of spirituality." [204]
112. A further point to think about is the call, triggered by the appearance of AI on the world stage, for a renewed appreciation of all that is human. Years earlier, the French Catholic author Georges Bernanos cautioned that "the threat is not in the reproduction of makers, but in the ever-increasing number of guys accustomed from their childhood to desire just what machines can offer." [205] This challenge is as true today as it was then, as the quick pace of digitization runs the risk of a "digital reductionism," where non-quantifiable aspects of life are set aside and then forgotten or even considered irrelevant because they can not be calculated in official terms. AI must 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 calculation is important for maintaining "a genuine mankind" that "seems to dwell in the middle of our technological culture, nearly undetected, like a mist permeating gently underneath a closed door." [207]
113. The huge stretch of the world's knowledge is now available in manner ins which would have filled previous generations with awe. However, to guarantee that advancements in understanding do not end up being humanly or spiritually barren, one must go beyond the simple accumulation of information and aim to attain real wisdom. [208]
114. This knowledge is the gift that humanity needs most to attend to the extensive concerns and ethical obstacles postured by AI: "Only by adopting a spiritual way of viewing reality, just by recovering a wisdom of the heart, can we challenge and translate the newness of our time." [209] Such "knowledge of the heart" is "the virtue that allows us to incorporate the whole and its parts, our decisions and their consequences." It "can not be sought from machines," but it "lets itself be found by those who seek it and be seen by those who love it; it anticipates those who desire it, and it enters search of those who are worthwhile of it (cf. Wis 6:12 -16)." [210]
115. In a world marked by AI, we need the grace of the Holy Spirit, who "enables us to take a look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, circumstances, events and to uncover their real meaning." [211]
116. Since a "individual's perfection is determined not by the details or knowledge they have, but by the depth of their charity," [212] how we integrate AI "to include the least of our siblings and sisters, the susceptible, and those most in requirement, will be the true measure of our humanity." [213] The "knowledge of the heart" can brighten and guide the human-centered usage of this innovation to help promote the common great, look after our "typical home," advance the search for the fact, foster integral human advancement, favor human uniformity and fraternity, and lead mankind to its ultimate goal: joy and full communion with God. [214]
117. From this viewpoint of wisdom, believers will have the ability to function as moral agents capable of using this technology to promote a genuine vision of the human person and society. [215] This should be done with the understanding that technological development is part of God's prepare for creation-an activity that we are contacted us to buy toward the Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ, in the consistent search for the True and the Good.

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

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

Ex audientia 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 Integral Understanding of Human Intelligence

The Limits of AI

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

Helping Human Freedom and Decision-Making

V. Specific Questions

AI and Society

AI and Human Relationships

AI, the Economy, and Labor

AI and Healthcare

AI and Education

AI, Misinformation, Deepfakes, and Abuse

AI, Privacy, and Surveillance

AI and the Protection of Our Common Home

AI and Warfare

AI and Our Relationship with God

VI. Concluding Reflections

True Wisdom

[1] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. See 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 Proposition for the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence" (31 August 1955), http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/history/dartmouth/dartmouth.html (accessed: 21 October 2024). [6] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), pars. 2-3: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [7] Terms in this file explaining the outputs or processes of AI are used figuratively to explain its operations and are not planned to anthropomorphize the machine. [8] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3; Id., Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [9] Here, one can see the main positions of the "transhumanists" and the "posthumanists." Transhumanists argue that technological developments will make it possible for people to conquer their biological constraints and improve both their physical and cognitive abilities. Posthumanists, on the other hand, contend that such advances will ultimately modify human identity to the extent that mankind itself might no longer be thought about genuinely "human." Both views rest on a basically negative understanding of human corporality, which treats the body more as a challenge than as an important part of the individual's identity and contact us to full realization. Yet, this negative view of the body is inconsistent with a correct understanding of human self-respect. While the Church supports genuine clinical development, it affirms that human dignity is rooted in "the person as an inseparable unity of body and soul. " Thus, "self-respect is likewise fundamental in everyone's body, which takes part in its own method remaining in imago Dei" (Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita [8 April 2024], par. 18). [10] This approach reflects a functionalist perspective, which reduces the human mind to its functions and presumes that its functions can be totally quantified in physical or mathematical terms. However, even if a future AGI were to appear really intelligent, it would still remain functional in nature. [11] Cf. A.M. Turing, "Computing Machinery and Intelligence," Mind 59 (1950) 443-460. [12] If "believing" is attributed to devices, it must be clarified that this refers to calculative thinking instead of important thinking. Similarly, if machines are said to run using abstract thought, it should be defined that this is restricted to computational logic. On the other hand, by its very nature, human thought is a creative procedure that eludes shows 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 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 advertisement litteram III, 20, 30: PL 34, 292: "Man is made in the image of God in relation to that [professors] by which he is exceptional to the irrational animals. Now, this [professors] is reason itself, or the 'mind,' or 'intelligence,' whatever other name it might more suitably be offered"; Id., Enarrationes in Psalmos 54, 3: PL 36, 629: "When considering all that they have, human beings find that they are most identified from animals specifically by the fact they possess intelligence." This is also repeated by Saint Thomas Aquinas, who mentions that "man is the most ideal of all earthly beings endowed with motion, and his correct and natural operation is intellection," by which man abstracts from things and "receives in his mind things actually intelligible" (Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 76). [17] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [18] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 49, a. 5, ad 3. Cf. ibid., I, q. 79; II-II, q. 47, a. 3; II-II, q. 49, a. 2. For a modern viewpoint that echoes elements of the classical and middle ages difference in between these two modes of cognition, cf. D. Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, New York City 2011. [19] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 76, a. 1, resp. [20] Cf. Irenaeus of Lyon, Adversus Haereses, V, 6, 1: PG 7( 2 ), 1136-1138. [21] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 9. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1045: "The intellect can investigate the reality of things through reflection, experience and discussion, and pertain to acknowledge because reality, which transcends it, the basis of certain universal ethical demands." [22] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [23] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 365. Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 75, a. 4, resp. [24] Certainly, Sacred Scripture "typically thinks about the human person as a being who exists in the body and is unimaginable outside of it" (Pontifical Biblical Commission, "Che cosa è l'uomo?" (Sal 8,5): Un itinerario di antropologia biblica [30 September 2019], par. 19). Cf. ibid., pars. 20-21, 43-44, 48. [25] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 22: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1042: Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 7: AAS 100 (2008 ), 863: "Christ did not disdain human bodiliness, however instead totally disclosed its meaning and value." [26] Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 81. [27] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [28] Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I, q. 89, a. 1, resp.: "to be separated from the body is not in accordance with [the soul's] nature [...] and hence it is unified to the body in order that it may have a presence and an operation appropriate to its nature." [29] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1035. Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 18. [30] International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 56. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 357. [31] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), pars. 5, 8; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 15, 24, 53-54. [32] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 356. Cf. ibid., par. 221. [33] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 13, 26-27. [34] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Donum Veritatis (24 May 1990), 6: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1552. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), par. 109: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1219. Cf. Pseudo-Dionysius, De divinis nominibus, VII, 2: PG 3, 868B-C: "Human souls also have reason and with it they circle in discourse around the reality of things. [...] [O] n account of the manner in which they are capable of concentrating the many into the one, they too, in their own style and as far as they can, are deserving of conceptions like those of the angels" (en. tr. Pseudo-Dionysius: The Complete Works, Paulist Press, New York City - Mahwah 1987, 106-107). [35] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 3: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7. [36] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [37] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 42: AAS 91 (1999 ), 38. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 208: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1043: "the human mind is capable of transcending instant issues and grasping certain truths that are unchanging, as real now as in the past. As it peers into humanity, reason discovers universal worths obtained from that very same nature"; ibid., par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034. [38] Cf. B. Pascal, Pensées, no. 267 (ed. Brunschvicg): "The last proceeding of factor is to acknowledge that there is an infinity of things which are beyond it" (en. tr. Pascal's Pensées, E.P. Dutton, New York 1958, 77). [39] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [40] Our semantic capability allows us to understand messages in any type of interaction in a way that both considers and transcends their material or empirical structures (such as computer code). Here, intelligence becomes a wisdom that "enables us to take a look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, situations, events and to uncover their genuine meaning" (Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications [24 January 2024]: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8). Our imagination allows us to create brand-new content or ideas, mainly by offering an original viewpoint on truth. Both capacities depend on the presence of a personal subjectivity for their complete awareness. [41] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. [42] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034: "Charity, when accompanied by a commitment to the reality, is much more than individual feeling [...] Certainly, its close relation to truth cultivates its universality and maintains it from being 'confined to a narrow field without relationships.' [...] Charity's openness to reality thus secures 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 likens deep space to "a book showing, representing, and explaining its Maker," the Triune God who approves 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: "human beings occupy a distinct location in deep space according to the magnificent plan: they enjoy the advantage of sharing in the divine governance of visible creation. [...] Since guy's location as ruler remains in truth a participation in the magnificent governance of production, we speak of it here as a kind of stewardship." [49] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), pars. 38-39: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1164-1165. [50] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. This idea is also reflected in the creation account, where God brings animals to Adam "to see what he would call them. And whatever [he] called every living animal, that was its name" (Gen. 2:19), an action that demonstrates the active engagement of human intelligence in the stewardship of God's production. Cf. John Chrysostom, Homiliae in Genesim, XIV, 17-21: PG 53, 116-117. [51] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 301. [52] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 302. [53] Bonaventure, Breviloquium 2.12.1. Cf. ibid., 2.11.2. [54] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 236: AAS 105 (2023 ), 1115; Id., Address to Participants in the Meeting of University Chaplains and Pastoral Workers Promoted by the Dicastery for Culture and Education (24 November 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 November 2023, 7. [55] Cf. J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 5.1, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 99-100; Francis, Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [56] Francis, Address to the Members of the National Confederation of Artisans and Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises (CNA) (15 November 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 15 November 2024, 8. [57] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Querida Amazonia (2 February 2020), par. 41: AAS 112 (2020 ), 246; Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 146: AAS 107 (2015 ), 906. [58] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 864. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), pars. 17-24: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47-50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985-987. [59] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 20: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [60] P. Claudel, Conversation sur Jean Racine, Gallimard, Paris 1956, 32: "L'intelligence n'est rien sans la délectation." Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 13: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5: "The mind and the will are put at the service of the greater great by sensing and savoring 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 divine law itself-eternal, unbiased and universal, by which God orders, directs and governs the entire world and the methods of the human community according to a strategy developed in his wisdom and love. God has enabled man to get involved in this law of his so that, under the mild personality of magnificent providence, lots of may have the ability to arrive at a much deeper and much deeper knowledge of unchangeable fact." Also cf. Id., Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. [63] Cf. First Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius (24 April 1870), ch. 4, DH 3016. [64] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [65] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 891. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 204: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1042. [66] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 11: AAS 83 (1991 ), 807: "God has inscribed his own image and similarity on man (cf. Gen 1:26), conferring upon him an unparalleled dignity [...] In impact, beyond the rights which man obtains by his own work, there exist rights which do not correspond to any work he carries out, however which circulation from his important dignity as a person." Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [67] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 8. Cf. ibid., par. 9; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 22. [68] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2024 ), 310. [69] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [70] In this sense, "Artificial Intelligence" is comprehended as a technical term to indicate this innovation, recalling that the expression is likewise used to designate the discipline and not only its applications. [71] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 34-35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 51: AAS 83 (1991 ), 856-857. [72] For example, see the encouragement of clinical exploration in Albertus Magnus (De Mineralibus, II, 2, 1) and the gratitude for the mechanical arts in Hugh of St. Victor (Didascalicon, I, 9). These authors, amongst a long list of other Catholics engaged in scientific research and technological exploration, show that "faith and science can be unified in charity, offered that science is put at the service of the males and female of our time and not misused to damage or perhaps 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 male a moral topic. When he acts deliberately, man is, so to speak, the father of his acts." [82] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1776. [83] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1777. [84] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 1779-1781; Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 463, where the Holy Father motivated efforts "to ensure that innovation remains human-centered, fairly grounded and directed towards the 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 role of human firm in picking a broader aim (Ziel) that then informs the specific function (Zweck) for which each technological application is developed, cf. F. Dessauer, Streit um die Technik, Herder-Bücherei, Freiburg i. Br. 1959, 70-71. [86] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4: "Technology is born for a purpose and, in its effect on human society, constantly represents a form of order in social relations and an arrangement of power, hence making it possible for certain people to perform specific actions while avoiding others from performing various ones. In a basically explicit way, this constitutive power-dimension of technology always 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: "Confronted with the marvels of machines, which appear to know how to pick separately, we must be really clear that decision-making [...] must constantly be left to the human person. We would condemn humanity to a future without hope if we removed individuals's capability to make choices about themselves and their lives, by dooming them to depend upon the choices of makers." [92] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [93] The term "bias" in this document describes algorithmic bias (systematic and constant errors in computer systems that might disproportionately prejudice certain groups in unintentional ways) or learning predisposition (which will lead to training on a prejudiced information set) and not the "bias vector" in neural networks (which is a specification used to change the output of "neurons" to adjust more properly to the information). [94] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464, where the Holy Father affirmed the growth in consensus "on the need for development procedures to appreciate such values as inclusion, transparency, security, equity, privacy and reliability," and likewise welcomed "the efforts of global organizations to manage these innovations so that they promote real progress, contributing, that is, to a better world and an integrally higher quality of life." [95] Francis, Greetings to a Delegation of the "Max Planck Society" (23 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 February 2023, 8. [96] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [97] Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1571. [98] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. For more conversation of the ethical concerns raised by AI from a Catholic point of view, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 147-253. [99] On the value of discussion in a pluralist society oriented towards a "robust and solid social principles," see Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 211-214: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [100] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [101] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [102] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [103] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. [104] Cf. Pontifical Council for Social Communications, Ethics in Internet (22 February 2002), par. 10. [105] Francis, Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414; quoting the Final Document of the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops (27 October 2018), par. 24: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1593. Cf. Benedict XVI, Address to the Participants in the International Congress on Natural Moral Law (12 February 2017): AAS 99 (2007 ), 245. [106] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-33: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047-1050. [107] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-21: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047. [108] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 308-309. [109] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [110] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [111] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 101, 103, 111, 115, 167: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1004-1005, 1007-1009, 1027. [112] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047; cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 35: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 123. [113] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 12: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1034. [114] Cf. Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church (2004 ), par. 149. [115] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [116] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [117] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 865. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), pars. 88-89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414. [118] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057. [119] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985. [120] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [121] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [122] Cf. E. Stein, Zum Problem der Einfühlung, Buchdruckerei des Waisenhauses, Halle 1917 (en. tr. On the Problem of Empathy, ICS Publications, Washington D.C. 1989). [123] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057:" [Many individuals] desire their social relationships supplied by advanced devices, by screens and systems which can be switched on and off on command. Meanwhile, the Gospel informs us constantly to run the risk of an in person encounter with others, with their physical presence which challenges us, with their pain and their pleas, with their joy which infects us in our close and constant interaction. True faith in the incarnate Son of God is inseparable from self-giving, from membership in the neighborhood, from service, from reconciliation with others." Also cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 24: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1044-1045. [124] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 1. [125] Cf. Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570; Id, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 18, 124-129: AAS 107 (2015 ), 854.897-899. [126] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [127] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 209: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1107. [128] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4. For Pope Francis' teaching about AI in relationship to the "technocratic paradigm," cf. Id., Encyclical Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 106-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893. [129] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047.; as estimated in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1912. Cf. John XXIII, Encyclical Letter Mater et Magistra (15 May 1961), par. 219: AAS 53 (1961 ), 453. [130] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par 64: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1086. [131] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 162: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1025. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 6: AAS 73 (1981 ), 591: "work is 'for man' and not male 'for work.' Through this conclusion one rightly pertains to recognize the pre-eminence of the subjective meaning of work over the unbiased one." [132] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 128: AAS 107 (2015 ), 898. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 24: AAS 108 (2016 ), 319-320. [133] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [134] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae (25 March 1995), par. 89: AAS 87 (1995 ), 502. [135] Ibid. [136] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 67: AAS 112 (2020 ), 993; as priced quote in Id., Message for the XXXI World Day of the Sick (11 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 10 January 2023, 8. [137] Francis, Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [138] Francis, Address to the Diplomatic Corps Accredited to the Holy See (11 January 2016): AAS 108 (2016 ), 120. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 18: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975; Id., Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [139] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465; Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [140] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105, 107: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-890; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 18-21: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975-976; Id., Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465. [141] Francis, Address to the Participants at the Meeting Sponsored by the Charity and Health Commission of the Italian Bishops' Conference (10 February 2017): AAS 109 (2017 ), 243. Cf. ibid., 242-243: "If there is a sector in which the throwaway culture appears, with its painful consequences, it is that of healthcare. When an ill individual is not put 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 serious! [...] The application of a business method to the healthcare sector, if indiscriminate [...] may run the risk of discarding humans." [142] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [143] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729. [144] Congregation for Catholic Education, Instruction on making use of Distance Learning in Ecclesiastical Universities and Faculties, I. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729; Francis, Message for the LXIX World Day of Peace (1 January 2016), 6: AAS 108 (2016 ), 57-58. [145] Francis, Address to Members of the Global Researchers Advancing Catholic Education Project (20 April 2022): AAS 114 (2022 ), 580. [146] Cf. Paul VI, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi (8 December 1975), par. 41: AAS 68 (1976 ), 31, pricing quote Id., Address to the Members of the "Consilium de Laicis" (2 October 1974): AAS 66 (1974 ), 568: "if [the contemporary person] does listen to instructors, it is since they are witnesses." [147] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 6.1, London 18733, 125-126. [148] Francis, Meeting with the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [149] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 86: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413, estimating the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, Final Document (27 October 2018), par. 21: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1592. [150] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 7.6, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 167. [151] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 88: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413. [152] In a 2023 policy document about using generative AI in education and research study, UNESCO notes: "One of the crucial questions [of using generative AI (GenAI) in education and research] is whether human beings can perhaps deliver basic levels of thinking and skill-acquisition processes to AI and rather focus on higher-order thinking abilities based upon the outputs offered by AI. Writing, for instance, is typically associated with the structuring of thinking. With GenAI [...], people can now begin with a well-structured outline supplied by GenAI. Some specialists have actually defined the usage of GenAI to generate text in this way as 'composing without thinking'" (UNESCO, Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research [2023], 37-38). The German-American philosopher Hannah Arendt anticipated such a possibility in her 1959 book, The Human Condition, and warned: "If it must end up being real that understanding (in the sense of know-how) and believed have actually parted company for good, then we would certainly end up being the helpless servants, not so much of our makers as of our know-how" (Id., The Human Condition, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 20182, 3). [153] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 262: AAS 108 (2016 ), 417. [154] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 7: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3; cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 167: AAS 107 (2015 ), 914. [155] John Paul II, Apostolic Constitution Ex Corde Ecclesiae (15 August 1990), 7: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1479. [156] Francis, Apostolic Constitution Veritatis Gaudium (29 January 2018), 4c: AAS 110 (2018 ), 9-10. [157] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3. [158] For instance, it may assist individuals gain access to the "array of resources for generating higher understanding of truth" contained in the works of approach (John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio [14 September 1998], par. 3: AAS 91 [1999], 7). Cf. ibid., par. 4: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7-8. [159] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 43. Cf. ibid., pars. 61-62. [160] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [161] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par 25: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053; cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), passim: AAS 112 (2020 ), 969-1074. [162] Cf. Francis., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 414; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 25: AAS 91 (1999 ), 25-26: "People can not be truly indifferent to the question of whether what they understand is real or not. [...] It is this that Saint Augustine teaches when he writes: 'I have met many who wished to deceive, however none who wished to be deceived'"; pricing quote Augustine, Confessiones, X, 23, 33: PL 32, 794. [163] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas (4 April 2024), par. 62. [164] Benedict XVI, Message for the XLIII World Day of Social Communications (24 May 2009): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2009, 8. [165] Cf. Dicastery for Communications, Towards Full Presence: A Pastoral Reflection on Engagement with Social Network (28 May 2023), par. 41; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Decree Inter Mirifica (4 December 1963), pars. 4, 8-12: AAS 56 (1964 ), 146, 148-149. [166] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 1, 6, 16, 24. [167] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046. Cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 40: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 127: "no man may with impunity breach that human self-respect which God himself treats with excellent respect"; as quoted in John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 9: AAS 83 (1991 ), 804. [168] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2477, 2489; can. 220 CIC; can. 23 CCEO; John Paul II, Address to the Third General Conference of the Latin American Episcopate (28 January 1979), III.1-2: Insegnamenti II/1 (1979 ), 202-203. [169] Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to the Thematic Discussion on Other Disarmament Measures and International Security (24 October 2022): "Maintaining human dignity in the online world requires States to also appreciate the right to personal privacy, by shielding citizens from intrusive monitoring and enabling them to secure their personal details from unapproved gain access to." [170] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 42: AAS 112 (2020 ), 984. [171] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [172] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465. [173] The 2023 Interim Report of the United Nations AI Advisory Body recognized a list of "early promises of AI assisting to address environment change" (United Nations AI Advisory Body, Interim Report: Governing AI for Humanity [December 2023], 3). The file observed that, "taken together with predictive systems that can transform information into insights and insights into actions, AI-enabled tools may assist develop new strategies and investments to decrease emissions, influence new economic sector investments in net no, protect biodiversity, and construct broad-based social durability" (ibid.). [174] "The cloud" describes a network of physical servers throughout the world that allows users to shop, process, and handle their information 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 secure a space for correct human control over the options made by synthetic intelligence programs: human dignity itself depends on it." [186] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to Working Group II on Emerging Technologies at the UN Disarmament Commission (3 April 2024): "The development and use of deadly self-governing weapons systems (LAWS) that do not have the proper human control would position essential ethical issues, considered that LAWS can never 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 disregard the possibility of sophisticated weapons winding up in the wrong hands, helping with, for circumstances, terrorist attacks or interventions aimed at destabilizing the institutions of genuine systems of federal government. In a word, the world does not require new innovations that contribute to the unfair advancement of commerce and the weapons trade and subsequently end up promoting the folly of war." [190] John Paul II, Act of Entrustment to Mary for the Jubilee of Bishops (8 October 2000), par. 3: Insegnamenti XXIII/2 (200 ), 565. [191] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 79: AAS 107 (2015 ), 878. [192] Cf. Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 51: AAS 101 (2009 ), 687. [193] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39. [194] Cf. Augustine, Confessiones, I, 1, 1: PL 32, 661. [195] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (30 December 1987), par. 28: AAS 80 (1988 ), 548:" [T] here is a much better understanding today that the simple accumulation of products and services [...] is insufficient for the realization of human joy. Nor, in effect, does the availability of the lots of genuine advantages offered in recent 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 potential at male's disposal is guided by a moral understanding and by an orientation towards the true good of the human race, 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 City 19832, 212-213. [204] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," 210. [205] G. Bernanos, "La révolution de la liberté" (1944 ), in Id., Le Chemin de la Croix-des-Âmes, Rocher 1987, 829. [206] Cf. Francis, Consulting With the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023). [207] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [208] Cf. Bonaventure, Hex. XIX, 3; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986: "The flood of details at our fingertips does not produce greater knowledge. Wisdom is not born of fast searches on the web nor is it a mass of unverified information. That is not the method to mature in the encounter with truth." [209] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [210] Ibid. [211] Ibid. [212] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate (19 March 2018), par. 37: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1121. [213] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate (19 March 2018), par. 46: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1123-1124. [214] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [215] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570-1571.