1. With knowledge both ancient and brand-new (cf. Mt. 13:52), we are contacted us to reflect on the current obstacles and opportunities posed by scientific and technological developments, especially by the recent development of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The Christian tradition regards the gift of intelligence as a necessary element of how human beings are created "in the image of God" (Gen. 1:27). Starting from an essential vision of the human individual and the scriptural calling to "till" and "keep" the earth (Gen. 2:15), the Church highlights that this present of intelligence must be revealed through the responsible usage of reason and technical capabilities in the stewardship of the created world.

2. The Church encourages the advancement of science, technology, the arts, and other types of human endeavor, seeing them as part of the "partnership of males and female with God in perfecting the noticeable production." [1] As Sirach affirms, God "provided skill to human beings, that he might be glorified in his wonderful works" (Sir. 38:6). Human abilities and imagination come from God and, when utilized rightly, glorify God by showing his wisdom and goodness. In light of this, when we ask ourselves what it indicates to "be human," we can not omit a factor to consider of our clinical and technological abilities.

3. It is within this viewpoint that today Note addresses the anthropological and ethical challenges raised by AI-issues that are particularly substantial, as one of the goals of this innovation is to mimic the human intelligence that created it. For instance, unlike numerous other human productions, AI can be trained on the outcomes of human imagination and after that produce new "artifacts" with a level of speed and skill that frequently rivals or surpasses what humans can do, such as producing text or images equivalent from human compositions. This raises crucial issues about AI's prospective role in the growing crisis of fact in the public forum. Moreover, this technology is created to learn and make certain choices autonomously, adjusting to brand-new scenarios and supplying solutions not foreseen by its programmers, and hence, it raises basic concerns about ethical responsibility and human safety, with more comprehensive ramifications for society as a whole. This new scenario has prompted many individuals to reflect on what it suggests to be human and the role of humankind on the planet.

4. Taking all this into account, there is broad consensus that AI marks a brand-new and significant stage in humanity's engagement with technology, putting it at the heart of what Pope Francis has actually explained as an "epochal change." [2] Its impact is felt worldwide and in a vast array of locations, consisting of interpersonal relationships, education, work, art, healthcare, law, warfare, and international relations. As AI advances rapidly toward even greater accomplishments, it is seriously crucial to consider its anthropological and ethical implications. This involves not only mitigating dangers and preventing damage but also ensuring that its applications are used to promote human development and the typical good.

5. To contribute favorably to the discernment concerning AI, and in response to Pope Francis' require a renewed "knowledge of heart," [3] the Church provides its experience through the anthropological and ethical reflections contained in this Note. Committed to its active role in the global dialogue on these issues, the Church invites those delegated with sending the faith-including parents, instructors, pastors, and bishops-to commit themselves to this crucial subject with care and attention. While this document is intended particularly for them, it is likewise suggested to be available to a more comprehensive audience, especially those who share the conviction that clinical and technological advances need to be directed toward serving the human individual and the typical good. [4]
6. To this end, the file starts by comparing ideas of intelligence in AI and in human intelligence. It then explores the Christian understanding of human intelligence, offering a structure rooted in the Church's philosophical and doctrinal tradition. Finally, the file uses guidelines to make sure that the advancement and use of AI maintain human dignity and promote the important development of the human person and society.

7. The concept of "intelligence" in AI has actually evolved over time, drawing on a range of concepts from numerous disciplines. While its origins extend back centuries, a substantial turning point occurred in 1956 when the American computer researcher John McCarthy organized a summertime workshop at Dartmouth University to check out the issue of "Artificial Intelligence," which he specified as "that of making a device behave in manner ins which would be called smart if a human were so acting." [5] This workshop introduced a research program concentrated on creating devices efficient in carrying out tasks typically related to the human intelligence and intelligent behavior.

8. Ever since, AI research has actually advanced rapidly, leading to the development of complex systems capable of performing extremely advanced tasks. [6] These so-called "narrow AI" systems are normally created to deal with particular 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 varies, many modern AI systems-particularly those using maker learning-rely on analytical reasoning instead of rational deduction. By examining large datasets to determine patterns, AI can "anticipate" [7] outcomes and propose brand-new approaches, mimicking some cognitive processes normal of human analytical. Such achievements have been made possible through advances in computing technology (consisting of neural networks, without supervision artificial intelligence, and evolutionary algorithms) along with hardware innovations (such as specialized processors). Together, these innovations allow AI systems to react to different types of human input, adapt to brand-new scenarios, and even suggest unique services not expected by their original developers. [8]
9. Due to these rapid improvements, many jobs once handled exclusively by human beings are now turned over to AI. These systems can augment and even supersede what human beings are able to perform in many fields, especially in specialized locations such as data analysis, image acknowledgment, and medical diagnosis. While each "narrow AI" application is created for a particular job, lots of scientists aim to establish what is understood as "Artificial General Intelligence" (AGI)-a single system efficient in running 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," going beyond human intellectual capacities, or contribute 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 subject is the implicit presumption that the term "intelligence" can be utilized in the same way to refer to both human intelligence and AI. Yet, this does not capture the full scope of the principle. When it comes to humans, intelligence is a professors that pertains to the individual in his/her entirety, whereas in the context of AI, "intelligence" is comprehended functionally, frequently with the presumption that the activities characteristic of the human mind can be broken down into digitized steps that makers can replicate. [10]
11. This functional point of view is exhibited by the "Turing Test," which thinks about a machine "intelligent" if a person can not differentiate its behavior from that of a human. [11] However, in this context, the term "habits" refers just to the performance of particular intellectual jobs; it does not account for the full breadth of human experience, which consists of abstraction, emotions, creativity, and the visual, ethical, and religious sensibilities. Nor does it encompass the complete variety of expressions particular of the human mind. Instead, in the case of AI, the "intelligence" of a system is examined methodologically, but likewise reductively, based upon its capability to produce proper responses-in this case, those related to the human intellect-regardless of how those reactions are created.

12. AI's advanced features provide it advanced capabilities to perform tasks, but not the ability to think. [12] This distinction is crucially crucial, as the method "intelligence" is defined inevitably shapes how we understand the relationship between human thought and this technology. [13] To appreciate this, one need to recall the richness of the philosophical tradition and Christian faith, which use a much deeper and more detailed understanding of intelligence-an understanding that is main to the Church's teaching on the nature, dignity, and occupation of the human person. [14]
13. From the dawn of human self-reflection, the mind has played a main function in understanding what it means to be "human." Aristotle observed that "all individuals by nature desire to know." [15] This knowledge, with its capacity 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 analyzed the exact nature of this intellectual professors, they have likewise checked out how human beings understand the world and their distinct location within it. Through this expedition, the Christian tradition has pertained to comprehend the human individual as a being consisting of both body and soul-deeply connected to this world and yet transcending it. [17]
14. In the classical custom, the principle of intelligence is often understood through the complementary concepts of "factor" (ratio) and "intellect" (intellectus). These are not separate professors however, as Saint Thomas Aquinas explains, they are 2 modes in which the very same intelligence operates: "The term intellect is presumed from the inward grasp of the truth, while the name factor is taken from the curious and discursive process." [18] This concise description highlights the 2 fundamental and complementary dimensions of human intelligence. Intellectus refers to the user-friendly grasp of the truth-that is, nabbing it with the "eyes" of the mind-which precedes and premises argumentation itself. Ratio pertains to reasoning proper: the discursive, analytical procedure that causes judgment. Together, intellect and factor form the two elements of the act of intelligere, "the proper operation of the human being as such." [19]
15. Explaining the human individual as a "logical" being does not lower the individual to a specific mode of idea; rather, it acknowledges that the ability for intellectual understanding shapes and penetrates all aspects of human activity. [20] Whether exercised well or improperly, this capacity is an intrinsic aspect of humanity. In this sense, the "term 'logical' includes all the capacities of the human individual," consisting of those related to "understanding and understanding, in addition to those of willing, loving, selecting, and desiring; it also consists of all corporeal functions closely related to these capabilities." [21] This detailed point of view highlights how, in the human individual, developed in the "picture of God," reason is incorporated in a way that raises, shapes, and transforms both the individual's will and actions. [22]
16. Christian thought thinks about the intellectual faculties of the human individual within the framework of an important anthropology that views the human being as basically embodied. In the human person, spirit and matter "are not 2 natures joined, 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 outer shell housing an intangible "core." Rather, the entire human individual is all at once both material and spiritual. This understanding shows the teaching of Sacred Scripture, which sees the human person as a being who lives out relationships with God and others (and therefore, an authentically spiritual measurement) within and through this embodied existence. [24] The profound significance of this condition is more lit up by the mystery of the Incarnation, through which God himself handled our flesh and "raised it up to a sublime self-respect." [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 intellect's capability for transcendence and the self-possessed flexibility of the will come from the soul, by which the human person "shares in the light of the divine mind." [27] Nevertheless, the human spirit does not exercise its typical mode of knowledge without the body. [28] In this method, the intellectual professors of the human individual are an important part of an anthropology that recognizes that the human individual is a "unity of body and soul." [29] Further elements of this understanding will be established in what follows.

18. Human beings are "bought by their very nature to social communion," [30] possessing the capacity to know one another, to give themselves in love, and to get in into communion with others. Accordingly, human intelligence is not a separated faculty but is exercised in relationships, finding its maximum expression in dialogue, cooperation, and uniformity. We find out with others, and we discover through others.

19. The relational orientation of the human person is ultimately grounded in the eternal self-giving of the Triune God, whose love is exposed in creation and redemption. [31] The human person is "called to share, by knowledge and love, in God's own life." [32]
20. This vocation to communion with God is necessarily connected to the call to communion with others. Love of God can not be separated from love for one's next-door neighbor (cf. 1 Jn. 4:20; Mt. 22:37 -39). By the grace of sharing God's life, Christians are likewise 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 loved you" (Jn. 13:34). [33] Love and service, echoing the magnificent life of self-giving, go beyond self-interest to respond more completely to the human vocation (cf. 1 Jn. 2:9). Much more sublime than understanding lots of things is the dedication to look after one another, for if "I comprehend all mysteries and all knowledge [...] but do not have love, I am absolutely nothing" (1 Cor. 13:2).

21. Human intelligence is eventually "God's gift fashioned for the assimilation of truth." [34] In the double sense of intellectus-ratio, it allows the individual to check out realities that surpass mere sensory experience or utility, since "the desire for truth is part of human nature itself. It is an innate residential or commercial property of human factor to ask why things are as they are." [35] Moving beyond the limits of empirical information, human intelligence can "with real certitude attain to truth itself as knowable." [36] While truth remains only partly understood, the desire for fact "stimulates factor constantly to go further; certainly, it is as if factor were overwhelmed to see that it can constantly surpass what it has already attained." [37] Although Truth in itself goes beyond the borders of human intelligence, it irresistibly attracts it. [38] Drawn by this attraction, the human individual is led to look for "truths of a greater order." [39]
22. This natural drive towards the pursuit of fact is particularly apparent in the noticeably human capabilities for semantic understanding and creativity, [40] through which this search unfolds in a "way that is proper to the social nature and self-respect of the human individual." [41] Likewise, an unfaltering orientation to the reality is essential for charity to be both genuine and universal. [42]
23. The look for reality finds its greatest expression in openness to realities that transcend the physical and created world. In God, all truths attain their supreme and original significance. [43] Entrusting oneself to God is a "essential choice that engages the entire individual." [44] In this way, the human individual ends up being completely what he or she is contacted us to be: "the intellect and the will show their spiritual nature," allowing the person "to act in such a way that understands individual liberty to the full." [45]
24. The Christian faith understands production as the totally free act of the Triune God, who, as Saint Bonaventure of Bagnoregio explains, produces "not to increase his splendor, however to show it forth and to interact it." [46] Since God creates according to his Wisdom (cf. Wis. 9:9; Jer. 10:12), production 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 humans to presume a distinct role: to cultivate and take care of the world. [48]
25. Shaped by the Divine Craftsman, humans live out their identity as beings made in imago Dei by "keeping" and "tilling" (cf. Gen. 2:15) creation-using their intelligence and skills to look after and develop development in accord with God's plan. [49] In this, human intelligence shows the Divine Intelligence that created all things (cf. Gen. 1-2; Jn. 1), [50] continually sustains them, and guides them to their ultimate function in him. [51] Moreover, people are called to establish their abilities in science and technology, for through them, God is glorified (cf. Sir. 38:6). Thus, in a proper relationship with development, human beings, on the one hand, use their intelligence and skill to cooperate with God in directing creation towards the purpose to which he has called it. [52] On the other hand, development itself, as Saint Bonaventure observes, assists the human mind to "rise gradually to the supreme Principle, who is God." [53]
26. In this context, human intelligence becomes more plainly understood as a faculty that forms an integral part of how the entire individual engages with reality. Authentic engagement needs accepting the full scope of one's being: spiritual, cognitive, embodied, and relational.

27. This engagement with reality unfolds in numerous ways, as each individual, in his/her complex individuality [54], seeks to understand the world, connect to others, resolve issues, reveal imagination, and pursue important well-being through the harmonious interplay of the different dimensions of the individual's intelligence. [55] This includes rational and linguistic capabilities but can also incorporate other modes of interacting with truth. Consider the work of a craftsmen, who "must know how to recognize, in inert matter, a specific kind that others can not acknowledge" [56] and bring it forth through insight and practical skill. Indigenous individuals who live close to the earth typically have an extensive sense of nature and its cycles. [57] Similarly, a pal who knows the best word to say or a person skilled at managing human relationships exhibits 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 necessary to save our mankind." [59]
28. At the heart of the Christian understanding of intelligence is the combination of truth into the ethical and spiritual life of the individual, guiding his/her actions in light of God's goodness and fact. According to God's strategy, intelligence, in its fullest sense, also includes the ability to appreciate what is true, excellent, and lovely. As the twentieth-century French poet Paul Claudel revealed, "intelligence is nothing without delight." [60] Similarly, Dante, upon reaching the highest paradise in Paradiso, bbarlock.com testifies that the conclusion of this intellectual pleasure is discovered in the "light intellectual filled with love, love of real good filled with delight, joy which transcends every sweetness." [61]
29. An appropriate understanding of human intelligence, therefore, can not be reduced to the simple acquisition of truths or the ability to perform particular tasks. Instead, it involves the person's openness to the ultimate concerns of life and shows an orientation toward the True and the Good. [62] As an expression of the divine image within the person, human intelligence has the capability to access the totality of being, considering existence in its fullness, which exceeds what is quantifiable, and understanding the significance of what has actually been understood. For believers, this capacity includes, in a specific way, the capability to grow in the understanding of the secrets of God by utilizing factor to engage ever more profoundly with exposed truths (intellectus fidei). [63] True intelligence is shaped by magnificent love, which "is poured forth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit" (Rom. 5:5). From this, it follows that human intelligence has an essential reflective dimension, an unselfish openness to the True, the Good, and the Beautiful, beyond any utilitarian function.

30. Because of the foregoing discussion, the differences in between human intelligence and present AI systems become evident. While AI is an extraordinary technological achievement efficient in imitating certain outputs connected with human intelligence, it operates by performing jobs, attaining goals, or making choices based upon quantitative data and computational logic. For instance, with its analytical power, AI stands out at integrating data from a range of fields, modeling complex systems, and promoting interdisciplinary connections. In this method, it can help professionals work together in solving complex issues that "can not be handled from a single perspective or from a single set of interests." [64]
31. However, even as AI procedures and imitates certain expressions of intelligence, it remains basically confined to a logical-mathematical structure, which imposes fundamental constraints. Human intelligence, in contrast, establishes organically throughout the person's physical and mental growth, shaped by a myriad of lived experiences in the flesh. Although sophisticated AI systems can "find out" through procedures such as artificial intelligence, this sort of training is basically different from the developmental growth of human intelligence, which is formed by embodied experiences, consisting of sensory input, psychological responses, social interactions, and the special context of each minute. These elements shape and kind people within their personal history.In contrast, AI, lacking a physique, relies on computational thinking and learning based upon huge datasets that consist of tape-recorded human experiences and knowledge.

32. Consequently, although AI can simulate elements of human reasoning and carry out specific jobs with extraordinary speed and efficiency, its computational capabilities represent just a portion of the wider capabilities of the human mind. For instance, AI can not currently reproduce moral discernment or the ability to establish authentic relationships. Moreover, human intelligence is located within a personally lived history of intellectual and ethical formation that essentially shapes the individual's viewpoint, incorporating the physical, emotional, social, moral, and spiritual measurements of life. Since AI can not use this fullness of understanding, approaches that rely solely on this innovation or treat it as the main ways of translating the world can lead to "a loss of gratitude for the entire, for the relationships between things, and for the broader horizon." [65]
33. Human intelligence is not mainly about finishing practical tasks however about understanding and actively engaging with truth in all its measurements; it is likewise capable of unexpected insights. Since AI lacks the richness of corporeality, relationality, and the openness of the human heart to truth and goodness, its capacities-though apparently limitless-are unparalleled with the human capability to comprehend truth. So much can be gained from a health problem, an embrace of reconciliation, and even a basic sundown; certainly, many experiences we have as humans open brand-new horizons and provide the possibility of attaining brand-new wisdom. No gadget, working exclusively with data, can determine up to these and numerous other experiences present in our lives.

34. Drawing an excessively close equivalence between human intelligence and AI risks catching a functionalist viewpoint, where people are valued based on the work they can carry out. However, an individual's worth does not depend on possessing specific abilities, cognitive and technological achievements, or individual success, however on the person's intrinsic dignity, grounded in being developed in the image of God. [66] This dignity remains intact in all scenarios, including for those not able to exercise their abilities, whether it be an unborn kid, an unconscious person, or an older individual who is suffering. [67] It likewise underpins the tradition of human rights (and, in specific, what are now called "neuro-rights"), which represent "a crucial point of merging in the search for commonalities" [68] and can, hence, act as a fundamental ethical guide in conversations on the accountable development and usage of AI.

35. Considering all these points, as Pope Francis observes, "the extremely use of the word 'intelligence'" in connection with AI "can show misleading" [69] and dangers neglecting what is most precious in the human individual. Due to this, AI needs to not be seen as an artificial kind of human intelligence but as a product of it. [70]
36. Given these considerations, one can ask how AI can be understood within God's strategy. To answer this, it is very important to recall that techno-scientific activity is not neutral in character however is a human endeavor that engages the humanistic and cultural dimensions of human imagination. [71]
37. Seen as a fruit of the potential engraved within human intelligence, [72] clinical query and the development of technical abilities are part of the "partnership of males and female with God in refining the visible production." [73] At the same time, all clinical and technological accomplishments are, eventually, gifts from God. [74] Therefore, humans must constantly utilize their capabilities in view of the higher purpose for which God has actually approved them. [75]
38. We can gratefully acknowledge how innovation has actually "treated numerous evils which used to harm and restrict humans," [76] a truth for which we ought to rejoice. Nevertheless, not all technological developments in themselves represent authentic human development. [77] The Church is particularly opposed to those applications that threaten the sanctity of life or the dignity of the human person. [78] Like any human endeavor, technological development must be directed to serve the human person and add to the pursuit of "greater justice, more extensive fraternity, and a more humane order of social relations," which are "more valuable than advances in the technical field." [79] Concerns about the ethical ramifications of technological advancement are shared not only within the Church but also among lots of scientists, technologists, and expert associations, who progressively call for ethical reflection to guide this advancement in an accountable way.

39. To resolve these obstacles, it is necessary to emphasize the importance of ethical obligation grounded in the dignity and vocation of the human individual. This guiding concept also applies to questions concerning AI. In this context, the ethical dimension takes on main importance since it is individuals who create systems and identify the functions for which they are used. [80] Between a machine and a human being, just the latter is really a moral agent-a topic of ethical responsibility who exercises freedom in his or her choices and accepts their repercussions. [81] It is not the maker but the human who remains in relationship with truth and goodness, assisted by a moral conscience that calls the person "to enjoy and to do what is great and to avoid evil," [82] bearing witness to "the authority of truth 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, discerning with prudence, and seeking the good that is possible in every circumstance. [84] In fact, all of this likewise belongs to the person's exercise of intelligence.

40. Like any product of human creativity, AI can be directed toward positive or unfavorable ends. [85] When utilized in ways that respect human dignity and promote the wellness of individuals and communities, it can contribute positively to the human occupation. Yet, as in all areas where people are called to make choices, the shadow of evil likewise looms here. Where human flexibility enables for the possibility of choosing what is incorrect, the ethical assessment of this technology will need to consider how it is directed and utilized.

41. At the exact same time, it is not only the ends that are fairly substantial however likewise the ways used to attain them. Additionally, the overall vision and understanding of the human person ingrained within these systems are very important to think about as well. Technological products reflect the worldview of their developers, owners, users, and regulators, [86] and have the power to "form the world and engage consciences on the level of values." [87] On a societal level, some technological advancements could likewise enhance relationships and power dynamics that are inconsistent with a correct understanding of the human person and society.

42. Therefore, completions and the ways used in a given application of AI, along with the total vision it incorporates, should all be examined to guarantee they respect human self-respect and promote the typical good. [88] As Pope Francis has specified, "the intrinsic self-respect of every man and every female" should be "the crucial requirement in examining emerging technologies; these will show fairly sound to the degree that they assist regard that self-respect and increase its expression at every level of human life," [89] including in the social and economic spheres. In this sense, human intelligence plays an essential function not just in designing and producing innovation but likewise in directing its usage in line with the genuine good of the human individual. [90] The obligation for managing this wisely pertains to every level of society, guided by the principle of subsidiarity and other concepts of Catholic Social Teaching.

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

44. An examination of the ramifications of this assisting principle could start by thinking about the value of ethical duty. Since complete ethical causality belongs only to individual representatives, not synthetic ones, it is essential to be able to identify and define who bears responsibility for the procedures associated with AI, particularly those capable of discovering, correction, and reprogramming. While bottom-up methods and very deep neural networks enable AI to resolve intricate issues, they make it hard to understand the procedures that result in the options they adopted. This makes complex responsibility since if an AI application produces undesired results, identifying who is accountable becomes hard. To resolve this issue, attention needs to be provided to the nature of accountability procedures in complex, highly automated settings, where outcomes may just become apparent in the medium to long term. For this, it is very important that supreme duty for choices made using AI rests with the human decision-makers which there is accountability for the use of AI at each phase of the decision-making procedure. [91]
45. In addition to identifying who is responsible, it is vital to recognize the goals offered to AI systems. Although these systems might utilize without supervision self-governing knowing systems and sometimes follow courses that human beings can not rebuild, they eventually pursue objectives that humans have actually appointed to them and are governed by processes established by their designers and developers. Yet, this provides a challenge due to the fact that, as AI models become increasingly capable of independent learning, the ability to maintain control over them to ensure that such applications serve human functions may effectively lessen. This raises the vital question of how to guarantee that AI systems are bought for the good of people and not against them.

46. While obligation for the ethical use of AI systems begins with those who establish, produce, manage, and oversee such systems, it is also shared by those who use them. As Pope Francis noted, the maker "makes a technical choice amongst a number of possibilities based either on distinct requirements or on statistical inferences. People, nevertheless, not just choose, however in their hearts can choosing." [92] Those who utilize AI to accomplish a task and follow its results develop a context in which they are ultimately accountable for the power they have actually delegated. Therefore, insofar as AI can assist people in making choices, the algorithms that govern it needs to be reliable, secure, robust enough to manage disparities, and transparent in their operation to alleviate biases and unintentional adverse effects. [93] Regulatory structures need to guarantee that all legal entities remain liable for the usage of AI and all its repercussions, with appropriate safeguards for openness, privacy, and responsibility. [94] Moreover, those using AI ought to take care not to end up being extremely based on it for their decision-making, a pattern that increases modern society's already high reliance on technology.

47. The Church's ethical and social teaching supplies resources to help make sure that AI is utilized in a manner that maintains human firm. Considerations about justice, for instance, must also deal with issues such as promoting just social characteristics, maintaining global security, and promoting peace. By working out prudence, people and communities can discern methods to use AI to benefit humankind while avoiding applications that could degrade human self-respect or damage the environment. In this context, the principle of duty ought to be comprehended not only in its most minimal sense however as a "responsibility 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 accountable response to humankind's vocation to the excellent. However, as previously talked about, AI needs to be directed by human intelligence to line up with this vocation, guaranteeing it respects the dignity of the human person. Recognizing this "exalted self-respect," the Second Vatican Council affirmed that "the social order and its development need to inevitably work to the advantage of the human individual." [96] In light of this, using AI, as Pope Francis said, need to be "accompanied by an ethic inspired by a vision of the typical excellent, a principles of freedom, obligation, and fraternity, efficient in fostering the complete advancement of people in relation to others and to the whole of creation." [97]
49. Within this general viewpoint, some observations follow listed below to show how the preceding arguments can help offer an ethical orientation in practical circumstances, in line with the "knowledge of heart" that Pope Francis has actually proposed. [98] While not extensive, this discussion is offered in service of the dialogue that thinks about how AI can be used to maintain the dignity of the human person and promote the common good. [99]
50. As Pope Francis observed, "the inherent self-respect of each person and the fraternity that binds us together as members of the one human family must support the advancement of new technologies and act as unassailable criteria for assessing them before they are utilized." [100]
51. Viewed through this lens, AI might "introduce important developments in farming, education and culture, an enhanced level of life for entire nations and individuals, and the development of human fraternity and social friendship," and thus be "utilized to promote important human development." [101] AI might likewise help companies identify 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 many possibilities for promoting the good, it can also hinder or even counter human development and the common good. Pope Francis has noted that "evidence to date suggests that digital innovations have actually increased inequality in our world. Not simply differences in product wealth, which are also substantial, but likewise differences in access to political and social influence." [103] In this sense, AI could be used to perpetuate marginalization and discrimination, develop new forms of poverty, widen the "digital divide," and aggravate existing social inequalities. [104]
53. Moreover, the concentration of the power over mainstream AI applications in the hands of a few effective business raises considerable ethical concerns. Exacerbating this issue is the intrinsic nature of AI systems, where no single person can exercise total oversight over the large and intricate datasets utilized for computation. This lack of distinct responsibility creates the threat that AI might be controlled for personal or corporate gain or to direct popular opinion for the benefit of a particular industry. Such entities, motivated by their own interests, possess the capability to exercise "types of control as subtle as they are intrusive, producing mechanisms for the manipulation of consciences and of the democratic process." [105]
54. Furthermore, there is the risk of AI being used to promote what Pope Francis has actually called the "technocratic paradigm," which views all the world's issues as understandable through technological ways alone. [106] In this paradigm, human self-respect and fraternity are typically set aside in the name of efficiency, "as if reality, goodness, and reality automatically stream from technological and financial power as such." [107] Yet, human self-respect and the common excellent needs to never ever be broken for the sake of performance, [108] for "technological advancements that do not lead to an enhancement in the quality of life of all humanity, however on the contrary, exacerbate inequalities and disputes, can never ever count as true progress. " [109] Instead, AI ought to be put "at the service of another kind of progress, one which is healthier, more human, more social, more integral." [110]
55. Attaining this goal requires a much deeper reflection on the relationship between autonomy and duty. Greater autonomy heightens each person's duty throughout different elements of communal life. For Christians, the foundation of this obligation lies in the acknowledgment that all human capabilities, consisting of the person's autonomy, originated from God and are meant to be utilized in the service of others. [111] Therefore, instead of simply pursuing economic or technological goals, AI needs to serve "the typical good of the entire human family," which is "the sum overall of social conditions that permit people, either as groups or as people, to reach their fulfillment more fully and more quickly." [112]
56. The Second Vatican Council observed that "by his innermost nature guy is a social being; and if he does not participate in relations with others, he can neither live nor develop his presents." [113] This conviction highlights that residing in society is intrinsic to the nature and elearnportal.science occupation of the human person. [114] As social beings, we look for relationships that involve shared exchange and the pursuit of fact, in the course of which, people "share with each other the truth they have discovered, or think they have actually found, in such a way that they assist one another in the search for fact." [115]
57. Such a quest, along with other aspects of human interaction, presupposes encounters and shared exchange between individuals formed by their unique histories, thoughts, convictions, and relationships. Nor can we forget that human intelligence is a diverse, diverse, and complicated reality: specific and social, rational and affective, conceptual and symbolic. Pope Francis underscores this dynamic, keeping in mind that "together, we can look for the fact in discussion, in unwinded conversation or in passionate argument. To do so requires determination; it entails minutes of silence and suffering, yet it can patiently accept the broader experience of people and peoples. [...] The process of structure fraternity, be it regional or universal, can only be undertaken by spirits that are free and available to authentic encounters." [116]
58. It remains in this context that one can think about the difficulties AI presents to human relationships. Like other technological tools, AI has the potential to cultivate connections within the human family. However, it might likewise hinder a real encounter with reality and, ultimately, lead people to "a deep and melancholic frustration with interpersonal relations, or a hazardous sense of isolation." [117] Authentic human relationships require the richness of being with others in their pain, their pleas, and their happiness. [118] Since human intelligence is revealed and enhanced likewise in social and embodied methods, authentic and spontaneous encounters with others are important for engaging with truth in its fullness.

59. Because "true wisdom requires an encounter with reality," [119] the increase of AI presents another challenge. Since AI can successfully mimic the items of human intelligence, the ability to know when one is communicating with a human or a maker can no longer be considered granted. Generative AI can produce text, speech, images, and other sophisticated outputs that are generally associated with people. Yet, it needs to be understood for what it is: a tool, not a person. [120] This difference is often obscured by the language used by practitioners, which tends to anthropomorphize AI and hence blurs the line between human and device.

60. Anthropomorphizing AI likewise positions particular difficulties for the advancement of kids, possibly encouraging them to establish patterns of interaction that deal with human relationships in a transactional way, as one would connect to a chatbot. Such habits could lead young individuals to see instructors as simple dispensers of details instead of as mentors who guide and nurture their intellectual and moral development. Genuine relationships, rooted in empathy and a steadfast commitment to the good of the other, are essential and irreplaceable in cultivating the complete advancement of the human person.

61. In this context, it is very important to clarify that, in spite of making use of anthropomorphic language, no AI application can really experience compassion. Emotions can not be decreased to facial expressions or phrases generated in reaction to triggers; they reflect the way an individual, as a whole, relates to the world and to his or her own life, with the body playing a main role. True empathy needs the ability to listen, acknowledge another's irreducible individuality, welcome their otherness, and grasp the significance behind even their silences. [121] Unlike the realm of analytical judgment in which AI stands out, true empathy comes from the relational sphere. It involves intuiting and capturing the lived experiences of another while maintaining the distinction between self and other. [122] While AI can simulate compassionate reactions, it can not reproduce the eminently personal and relational nature of genuine empathy. [123]
62. Because of the above, it is clear why misrepresenting AI as an individual should constantly be prevented; doing so for deceptive functions is a severe ethical offense that could wear down social trust. Similarly, utilizing AI to deceive in other contexts-such as in education or in human relationships, including the sphere of sexuality-is likewise to be considered unethical and requires careful oversight to prevent damage, maintain openness, and guarantee the dignity of all individuals. [124]
63. In an increasingly isolated world, some individuals have turned to AI searching for deep human relationships, simple friendship, and even emotional bonds. However, while humans are implied to experience genuine relationships, AI can only mimic them. Nevertheless, such relationships with others are an important part of how a person grows to become who she or he is suggested to be. If AI is utilized to assist individuals foster real connections in between people, it can contribute favorably to the full awareness of the individual. Conversely, if we change relationships with God and with others with interactions with technology, we risk changing authentic relationality with a lifeless image (cf. Ps. 106:20; Rom. 1:22 -23). Instead of retreating into artificial worlds, we are contacted us to take part in a dedicated and intentional way with reality, particularly by identifying with the bad and suffering, consoling those in sadness, and creating bonds of communion with all.

64. Due to its interdisciplinary nature, AI is being increasingly integrated into economic and financial systems. Significant financial investments are currently being made not just in the innovation sector but likewise in energy, finance, and media, particularly in the areas of marketing and sales, logistics, technological development, compliance, and threat management. At the same time, AI's applications in these locations have likewise highlighted its ambivalent nature, as a source of incredible opportunities however also extensive threats. A first genuine crucial point in this area concerns the possibility that-due to the concentration of AI applications in the hands of a couple of corporations-only those large business would gain from the worth created by AI instead of business that use it.

65. Other broader aspects of AI's impact on the economic-financial sphere need to likewise be carefully analyzed, particularly worrying the interaction between concrete truth and the digital world. One essential consideration in this regard includes the coexistence of varied and alternative types of financial and monetary organizations within an offered context. This factor needs to be motivated, as it can bring benefits in how it supports the real economy by fostering its advancement and stability, specifically during times of crisis. Nevertheless, garagesale.es it must be worried that digital realities, not limited by any spatial bonds, tend to be more uniform and impersonal than neighborhoods rooted in a particular place and a specific history, with a typical journey characterized by shared values and hopes, however likewise by unavoidable disputes and divergences. This diversity is an indisputable asset to a community's financial life. Turning over the economy and financing totally to digital innovation would reduce this range and richness. As a result, lots of solutions to economic issues that can be reached through natural dialogue in between the involved celebrations might no longer be attainable in a world controlled by treatments and only the look of proximity.

66. Another location where AI is already having an extensive impact is the world of work. As in many other fields, AI is driving fundamental improvements throughout lots of professions, with a variety of impacts. On the one hand, it has the potential to enhance knowledge and productivity, create new tasks, enable workers to focus on more ingenious jobs, and open new horizons for imagination and innovation.

67. However, while AI promises to boost performance by taking over mundane tasks, it often forces workers to adapt to the speed and demands of rather than devices being created to support those who work. As a result, contrary to the advertised benefits of AI, present techniques to the innovation can paradoxically deskill workers, subject them to automated surveillance, and relegate them to stiff and repetitive tasks. The requirement to keep up with the rate of technology can erode workers' sense of firm and stifle the ingenious abilities they are expected to bring to their work. [125]
68. AI is currently removing the requirement for some tasks that were once performed by human beings. If AI is used to replace human workers rather than match them, there is a "substantial danger of disproportionate benefit for the few at the cost of the impoverishment of lots of." [126] Additionally, as AI ends up being more effective, there is an associated threat that human labor might lose its worth in the economic world. This is the logical repercussion of the technocratic paradigm: a world of mankind oppressed to performance, where, eventually, the cost of humanity need to be cut. Yet, human lives are intrinsically valuable, independent of their economic output. Nevertheless, the "present model," Pope Francis explains, "does not appear to favor a financial investment in efforts to assist the sluggish, the weak, or the less skilled to discover chances in life." [127] Due to this, "we can not permit a tool as effective and important as Artificial Intelligence to strengthen such a paradigm, but rather, we must make Artificial Intelligence a bulwark against its expansion." [128]
69. It is necessary to remember that "the order of things need to be secondary to the order of persons, and not the other method around." [129] Human work should not only be at the service of earnings however at "the service of the whole human person [...] taking into account the individual's product requirements and the requirements of his/her intellectual, moral, spiritual, and religious life." [130] In this context, the Church recognizes that work is "not just a way of earning one's daily bread" however is also "a vital dimension of social life" and "a way [...] 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 an individuals." [131]
70. Since work is a "part of the significance of life on this earth, a course to development, human development and personal satisfaction," "the goal must not be that technological progress increasingly changes human work, for this would be detrimental to mankind" [132] -rather, it should promote human labor. Seen in this light, AI ought to assist, not replace, human judgment. Similarly, it should never break down creativity or decrease workers to mere "cogs in a device." Therefore, "respect for the self-respect of workers and the value of work for the financial well-being of individuals, families, and societies, for job security and just salaries, ought to be a high concern for the global community as these types of innovation permeate more deeply into our workplaces." [133]
71. As participants in God's healing work, health care specialists have the occupation and responsibility to be "guardians and servants of human life." [134] Because of this, the health care profession brings an "intrinsic and indisputable ethical dimension," recognized by the Hippocratic Oath, which obliges doctors and healthcare specialists to dedicate themselves to having "absolute regard for human life and its sacredness." [135] Following the example of the Do-gooder, this commitment is to be carried out by men and women "who decline the creation of a society of exemption, and act rather as next-door neighbors, raising up and restoring the succumbed to the sake of the common good." [136]
72. Seen in this light, AI appears to hold enormous potential in a variety of applications in the medical field, such as helping the diagnostic work of health care suppliers, assisting in relationships between patients and medical personnel, providing new treatments, and broadening access to quality care also for those who are isolated or marginalized. In these ways, the innovation might boost the "compassionate and loving nearness" [137] that health care service providers are contacted us to reach the ill and suffering.

73. However, if AI is used not to enhance but to change the relationship between patients and health care providers-leaving patients to connect with a machine rather than a human being-it would reduce a most importantly essential human relational structure to a central, impersonal, and unequal framework. Instead of motivating solidarity with the ill and suffering, such applications of AI would risk getting worse the solitude that typically accompanies disease, especially in the context of a culture where "individuals are no longer seen as a critical value to be cared for and respected." [138] This abuse of AI would not line up with respect for the dignity of the human person and solidarity with the suffering.

74. Responsibility for the wellness of clients and the decisions that touch upon their lives are at the heart of the health care profession. This responsibility requires doctor to work out all their skill and intelligence in making well-reasoned and fairly grounded options regarding those delegated to their care, constantly respecting the inviolable dignity of the clients and the requirement for informed approval. As a result, decisions concerning client treatment and the weight of obligation they entail must always remain with the human individual and ought to never be entrusted to AI. [139]
75. In addition, utilizing AI to determine who need to get treatment based mainly on economic steps or metrics of performance represents an especially problematic instance of the "technocratic paradigm" that need to be rejected. [140] For, "optimizing resources indicates using them in an ethical and fraternal way, and not punishing the most delicate." [141] Additionally, AI tools in healthcare are "exposed to types of predisposition and discrimination," where "systemic mistakes can quickly multiply, producing not only oppressions in specific cases but also, due to the domino result, genuine kinds of social inequality." [142]
76. The integration of AI into healthcare also postures the danger of enhancing other existing variations in access to healthcare. As healthcare becomes significantly oriented towards avoidance and lifestyle-based methods, AI-driven options may accidentally prefer more upscale populations who currently delight in much better access to medical resources and quality nutrition. This pattern threats reinforcing a "medication for the rich" model, where those with financial methods gain from sophisticated preventative tools and customized health details while others battle to gain access to even fundamental services. To avoid such inequities, fair structures are required to make sure that using AI in health care does not intensify existing healthcare inequalities but rather serves the common good.

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

78. This technique includes a commitment to cultivating the mind, but constantly as a part of the essential development of the person: "We must break that idea of education which holds that informing ways filling one's head with ideas. That is the method we educate robots, cerebral minds, not people. Educating is taking a threat in the tension in between the mind, the heart, and the hands." [145]
79. At the center of this work of forming the entire human person is the essential relationship in between teacher and trainee. Teachers do more than convey knowledge; they model important human qualities and motivate the pleasure of discovery. [146] Their existence motivates trainees both through the material they teach and the care they demonstrate for their trainees. This bond cultivates trust, good understanding, and the capacity to deal with each individual's special self-respect and capacity. On the part of the trainee, this can generate a genuine desire to grow. The physical presence of an instructor produces a relational dynamic that AI can not replicate, one that deepens engagement and supports the trainee's important advancement.

80. In this context, AI presents both opportunities and challenges. If used in a prudent manner, within the context of an existing teacher-student relationship and ordered to the authentic objectives of education, AI can end up being a valuable instructional resource by enhancing access to education, offering tailored support, and providing immediate feedback to trainees. These benefits could boost the knowing experience, especially in cases where customized attention is required, or educational resources are otherwise limited.

81. Nevertheless, a vital part of education is forming "the intelligence to factor 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 even more vital in an age marked by innovation, in which "it is no longer simply a question of 'utilizing' instruments of communication, but of residing in an extremely digitalized culture that has had an extensive effect on [...] our ability to interact, find out, be notified and participate in relationship with others." [149] However, rather of fostering "a cultivated intellect," which "brings with it a power and a grace to every work and profession that it undertakes," [150] the extensive use of AI in education might cause the trainees' increased dependence on innovation, deteriorating their ability to carry out some skills independently and intensifying their dependence on screens. [151]
82. Additionally, while some AI systems are created to help people establish their critical thinking abilities and analytical abilities, numerous others merely supply answers rather of triggering trainees to arrive at answers themselves or write text for themselves. [152] Instead of training young individuals how to amass details and produce quick responses, education must encourage "the responsible usage of flexibility to face concerns with good sense and intelligence." [153] Building on this, "education in the usage of kinds of artificial intelligence must aim above all at promoting crucial thinking. Users of all ages, but particularly the young, need to establish a critical method to the usage of information and content collected on the web or produced by expert system systems. Schools, universities, and scientific societies are challenged to assist trainees and professionals to understand the social and ethical aspects of the development and uses of innovation." [154]
83. As Saint John Paul II recalled, "on the planet today, characterized by such fast developments in science and technology, the tasks of a Catholic University presume an ever greater significance and seriousness." [155] In a particular method, Catholic universities are prompted to be present as fantastic labs of hope at this crossroads of history. In an inter-disciplinary and cross-disciplinary key, they are prompted to engage "with knowledge and creativity" [156] in cautious research study on this phenomenon, helping to draw out the salutary capacity within the different fields of science and truth, and directing them constantly towards fairly sound applications that plainly serve the cohesion of our societies and the typical great, reaching brand-new frontiers in the dialogue in between faith and reason.

84. Moreover, it needs to be noted that existing AI programs have been known to provide prejudiced or fabricated details, which can lead trainees to rely on inaccurate material. This problem "not just runs the threat of legitimizing phony news and strengthening a dominant culture's benefit, however, in short, it likewise undermines the instructional process itself." [157] With time, clearer distinctions may emerge in between appropriate and improper usages of AI in education and research study. Yet, a decisive standard is that the use of AI need to constantly be transparent and never ever misrepresented.

85. AI might be utilized as an aid to human self-respect if it assists individuals comprehend intricate ideas or directs them to sound resources that support their search for the fact. [158]
86. However, AI also provides a major danger of creating manipulated material and false details, which can quickly mislead individuals due to its resemblance to the reality. Such misinformation might happen inadvertently, as when it comes to AI "hallucination," where a generative AI system yields results that appear real however are not. Since creating material that mimics human artifacts is main to AI's performance, reducing these threats shows tough. Yet, the consequences of such aberrations and false details can be rather grave. For this reason, all those included in producing and using AI systems need to be committed to the truthfulness and accuracy of the details processed by such systems and shared to the general public.

87. While AI has a hidden capacity to create false details, a much more troubling problem lies in the deliberate misuse of AI for manipulation. This can take place when people or companies purposefully produce and spread false material with the aim to deceive or cause damage, such as "deepfake" images, videos, and audio-referring to an incorrect depiction of a person, modified or created by an AI algorithm. The danger of deepfakes is especially obvious when they are utilized to target or harm others. While the images or videos themselves might be synthetic, the damage they cause is real, leaving "deep scars in the hearts of those who suffer it" and "genuine wounds in their human dignity." [159]
88. On a more comprehensive scale, by distorting "our relationship with others and with reality," [160] AI-generated phony media can slowly weaken the foundations of society. This concern needs cautious guideline, as misinformation-especially through AI-controlled or affected media-can spread inadvertently, sustaining political polarization and social discontent. When society ends up being indifferent to the truth, different groups construct their own versions of "realities," deteriorating the "mutual ties and shared dependences" [161] that underpin the material of social life. As deepfakes cause individuals to question everything and AI-generated incorrect content erodes rely on what they see and hear, polarization and dispute will only grow. Such extensive deceptiveness is no trivial matter; it strikes at the core of mankind, taking apart the foundational trust on which societies are constructed. [162]
89. Countering AI-driven fallacies is not just the work of industry experts-it needs the efforts of all individuals of goodwill. "If innovation is to serve human dignity and not damage it, and if it is to promote peace instead of violence, then the human neighborhood should be proactive in dealing with these trends with regard to human dignity and the promo of the great." [163] Those who produce and share AI-generated material ought to constantly work out diligence in confirming the reality of what they distribute and, in all cases, ought to "avoid the sharing of words and images that are breaking down of humans, that promote hatred and intolerance, that debase the goodness and intimacy of human sexuality or that make use of the weak and susceptible." [164] This requires the ongoing vigilance and careful discernment of all users regarding their activity online. [165]
90. Humans are naturally relational, and the information each individual produces in the digital world can be viewed as an objectified expression of this relational nature. Data communicates not just details however also individual and relational knowledge, which, in an increasingly digitized context, can total up to power over the individual. Moreover, while some kinds of information might pertain to public elements of an individual's life, others may discuss the person's interiority, possibly even their conscience. Seen in this way, privacy plays a necessary function in safeguarding the limits of a person's inner life, maintaining their liberty to relate to others, reveal themselves, and make choices without undue control. This security is likewise connected to the defense of spiritual flexibility, as security can likewise be misused to apply control over the lives of believers and how they reveal their faith.

91. It is proper, therefore, to resolve the issue of privacy from an issue for the legitimate freedom and inalienable dignity of the human individual "in all situations." [166] The Second Vatican Council consisted of the right "to protect privacy" amongst the fundamental rights "necessary for living a really human life," a right that should be reached all people on account of their "sublime dignity." [167] Furthermore, the Church has likewise verified the right to the legitimate respect for a personal life in the context of verifying the individual's right to a good track record, defense of their physical and psychological stability, and liberty from damage or unnecessary intrusion [168] -essential components of the due respect for the intrinsic dignity of the human person. [169]
92. Advances in AI-powered information processing and analysis now make it possible to presume patterns in an individual's habits and thinking from even a percentage of details, making the role of data privacy even more imperative as a safeguard for the dignity and relational nature of the human person. As Pope Francis observed, "while closed and intolerant mindsets towards others are on the increase, ranges are otherwise shrinking or vanishing to the point that the right to personal privacy hardly exists. Everything has actually ended up being a kind of phenomenon to be taken a look at and checked, and individuals's lives are now under continuous surveillance." [170]
93. While there can be legitimate and proper methods to use AI in keeping with human self-respect and the common good, using it for surveillance aimed at exploiting, limiting others' flexibility, or benefitting a couple of at the expense of the lots of is unjustifiable. The danger of monitoring overreach must be kept track of by appropriate regulators to guarantee openness and public accountability. Those accountable for security must never ever exceed their authority, which must always prefer the self-respect and freedom of everyone as the necessary basis of a just and gentle society.

94. Furthermore, "essential regard for human self-respect needs that we refuse to allow the individuality of the individual to be determined with a set of information." [171] This especially applies when AI is utilized to evaluate individuals or groups based on their habits, characteristics, or history-a practice known as "social scoring": "In social and financial decision-making, we need to beware about handing over judgments to algorithms that process data, typically collected surreptitiously, on a person's makeup and prior habits. Such information can be polluted by social prejudices and preconceptions. An individual's previous behavior ought to not be utilized to reject him or her the chance to change, grow, and contribute to society. We can not allow algorithms to restrict or condition respect for human self-respect, or to omit compassion, mercy, forgiveness, and above all, the hope that people have the ability to change." [172]
95. AI has many appealing applications for improving our relationship with our "typical home," such as creating designs to anticipate severe environment occasions, proposing engineering options to minimize their impact, managing relief operations, and predicting population shifts. [173] Additionally, AI can support sustainable farming, enhance energy use, and supply early caution systems for public health emergency situations. These developments have the potential to reinforce durability against climate-related difficulties and promote more sustainable development.

96. At the very same time, existing AI designs and the hardware needed to support them take in vast quantities of energy and water, considerably contributing to CO2 emissions and straining resources. This truth is often obscured by the method this innovation exists in the popular creativity, where words such as "the cloud" [174] can provide the impression that information is kept and processed in an intangible realm, detached from the physical world. However, "the cloud" is not an ethereal domain different from the real world; similar to all computing innovations, it depends on physical machines, cable televisions, and energy. The very same is true of the technology behind AI. As these systems grow in intricacy, specifically big language models (LLMs), they need ever-larger datasets, increased computational power, and greater storage facilities. Considering the heavy toll these innovations take on the environment, it is essential to establish sustainable options that reduce their effect on our typical home.

97. Even then, as Pope Francis teaches, it is important "that we search for solutions not just in technology however in a modification of mankind." [175] A total and authentic understanding of creation acknowledges that the worth of all developed things can not be decreased to their simple energy. Therefore, a completely human approach to the stewardship of the earth declines the distorted anthropocentrism of the technocratic paradigm, which looks for to "draw out everything possible" from the world, [176] and rejects the "myth of progress," which presumes that "ecological issues will fix themselves simply with the application of new innovation and without any requirement for ethical considerations or deep change." [177] Such a frame of mind should pave the way to a more holistic approach that respects the order of production and promotes the integral good of the human person while safeguarding our common home. [178]
98. The Second Vatican Council and the constant teaching of the Popes ever since have actually insisted that peace is not merely the absence of war and is not limited to maintaining a balance of powers between enemies. Instead, in the words of Saint Augustine, peace is "the serenity of order." [179] Certainly, peace can not be attained without safeguarding the products of individuals, complimentary communication, regard for the self-respect of individuals and individuals, 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 should be mainly built through patient diplomacy, the active promo of justice, uniformity, essential human advancement, and respect for the dignity of all people. [180] In this method, the tools used to maintain peace should never be enabled to justify injustice, violence, or injustice. Instead, they must always be governed by a "firm decision to regard other individuals and countries, together with their dignity, in addition to the purposeful practice of fraternity." [181]
99. While AI's analytical capabilities might assist countries look for peace and make sure security, the "weaponization of Artificial Intelligence" can also be highly bothersome. Pope Francis has observed that "the ability to carry out military operations through push-button control systems has resulted in a lessened perception of the devastation caused by those weapon systems and the concern of duty for their use, leading to a a lot more cold and separated approach to the enormous disaster of war." [182] Moreover, the ease with which self-governing weapons make war more viable militates against the concept of war as a last resort in legitimate self-defense, [183] potentially increasing the instruments of war well beyond the scope of human oversight and speeding up a destabilizing arms race, with devastating effects for human rights. [184]
100. In specific, Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, which are capable of recognizing and striking targets without direct human intervention, are a "cause for severe ethical issue" since they lack the "distinct human capability for ethical judgment and ethical decision-making." [185] For this factor, Pope Francis has actually urgently called for a reconsideration of the advancement of these weapons and a restriction on their usage, starting with "a reliable and concrete dedication to introduce ever higher and proper human control. No maker should ever choose to take the life of a human being." [186]
101. Since it is a little action from machines that can kill autonomously with precision to those efficient in large-scale destruction, some AI researchers have revealed concerns that such innovation positions an "existential threat" by having the potential to act in manner ins which might threaten the survival of whole regions or perhaps of humankind itself. This danger needs serious attention, showing the long-standing issue about innovations that grant war "an unmanageable damaging power over terrific numbers of innocent civilians," [187] without even sparing children. In this context, the call from Gaudium et Spes to "carry out an evaluation of war with a totally new attitude" [188] is more urgent than ever.

102. At the same time, while the theoretical dangers of AI should have attention, the more instant and pressing issue depends on how individuals with malicious intents may abuse this innovation. [189] Like any tool, AI is an extension of human power, and while its future abilities are unforeseeable, mankind's previous actions offer clear warnings. The atrocities committed throughout history are adequate to raise deep concerns about the prospective abuses of AI.

103. Saint John Paul II observed that "mankind now has instruments of extraordinary power: we can turn this world into a garden, or reduce it to a stack of rubble." [190] Given this reality, the Church reminds us, in the words of Pope Francis, that "we are totally free to apply our intelligence towards things progressing favorably," or towards "decadence and shared damage." [191] To avoid humanity from spiraling into self-destruction, [192] there should be a clear stand against all applications of innovation that naturally threaten human life and dignity. This dedication needs cautious discernment about using AI, especially in military defense applications, to ensure that it always respects human dignity and serves the typical good. The development and release of AI in armaments ought to go through the highest levels of ethical analysis, governed by a concern for human dignity and the sanctity of life. [193]
104. Technology offers exceptional tools to supervise and develop the world's resources. However, in many cases, humanity is progressively delivering control of these resources to makers. Within some circles of researchers and futurists, there is optimism about the potential of synthetic basic intelligence (AGI), a theoretical kind of AI that would match or surpass human intelligence and bring about unimaginable developments. Some even hypothesize that AGI could attain superhuman abilities. At the exact same time, as society wanders away from a connection with the transcendent, some are lured to turn to AI in search of meaning or fulfillment-longings that can only be really satisfied in communion with God. [194]
105. However, the anticipation of substituting God for an artifact of human making is idolatry, a practice Scripture clearly warns against (e.g., Ex. 20:4; 32:1 -5; 34:17). Moreover, AI may show even more seductive than conventional idols for, unlike idols that "have mouths but do not speak; eyes, however do not see; ears, however do not hear" (Ps. 115:5 -6), AI can "speak," or at least provides the impression of doing so (cf. Rev. 13:15). Yet, it is crucial to keep in mind that AI is however a pale reflection of humanity-it is crafted by human minds, trained on human-generated product, responsive to human input, and sustained through human labor. AI can not have many of the abilities particular to human life, and it is likewise fallible. By turning to AI as a viewed "Other" greater than itself, with which to share existence and duties, humanity dangers creating a replacement for God. However, it is not AI that is eventually deified and worshipped, but humanity itself-which, in this method, ends up being enslaved to its own work. [195]
106. While AI has the possible to serve humankind and contribute to the common good, it remains a production of human hands, bearing "the imprint of human art and resourcefulness" (Acts 17:29). It needs to never be ascribed unnecessary worth. As the Book of Wisdom verifies: "For a man made them, and one whose spirit is obtained formed them; for no guy 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 things he worships because he has life, however they never have" (Wis. 15:16 -17).

107. On the other hand, human beings, "by their interior life, transcend the whole product universe; they experience this deep interiority when they participate in their own heart, where God, who probes the heart, awaits them, and where they choose their own destiny in the sight of God." [196] It is within the heart, as Pope Francis advises us, that each private discovers the "mystical connection in between self-knowledge and openness to others, between the encounter with one's individual uniqueness and the desire 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 person, in a stance of reverence and caring obedience before the Lord," [198] who "offers to treat every one of us as a 'Thou,' constantly and forever." [199]
108. Considering the various difficulties presented by advances in technology, Pope Francis highlighted the need for growth in "human duty, values, and conscience," proportionate to the development in the potential that this technology brings [200] -recognizing that "with a boost in human power comes a widening of duty on the part of individuals and neighborhoods." [201]
109. At the same time, the "necessary and essential question" remains "whether in the context of this development man, as male, is becoming genuinely much better, that is to state, more mature spiritually, more aware of the dignity of his mankind, more responsible, more available to others, specifically the neediest and the weakest, and readier to give and to aid all." [202]
110. As an outcome, it is important to know how to assess private applications of AI in particular contexts to figure out whether its usage promotes human dignity, the occupation of the human person, and the typical good. Just like many innovations, the effects of the various usages of AI may not always be foreseeable from their inception. As these applications and their social effects end up being clearer, appropriate actions need to be made at all levels of society, following the concept of subsidiarity. Individual users, households, civil society, corporations, institutions, federal governments, and international companies should work at their appropriate levels to ensure that AI is utilized for the good of all.

111. A significant difficulty and chance for the typical excellent today depends on considering AI within a framework of relational intelligence, which highlights the interconnectedness of people and communities and highlights our shared obligation for cultivating the important well-being of others. The twentieth-century thinker Nicholas Berdyaev observed that individuals frequently blame makers for personal and social problems; however, "this only embarrasses male and does not represent his self-respect," for "it is not worthy to transfer obligation from guy to a maker." [203] Only the human person can be ethically accountable, and the difficulties of a technological society are ultimately spiritual in nature. Therefore, dealing with those difficulties "needs an intensification of spirituality." [204]
112. A more point to consider is the call, triggered by the look of AI on the world phase, for a restored gratitude of all that is human. Years earlier, the French Catholic author Georges Bernanos warned that "the threat is not in the reproduction of machines, however in the ever-increasing number of males 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 risks a "digital reductionism," where non-quantifiable elements of life are set aside and then forgotten and even considered irrelevant due to the fact that they can not be calculated in formal terms. AI must be utilized just as a tool to complement human intelligence rather than replace its richness. [206] Cultivating those aspects of human life that go beyond calculation is essential for maintaining "an authentic humankind" that "seems to dwell in the middle of our technological culture, nearly undetected, like a mist permeating gently beneath a closed door." [207]
113. The vast area of the world's knowledge is now available in ways that would have filled previous generations with awe. However, to ensure that advancements in understanding do not become humanly or spiritually barren, one must surpass the simple accumulation of information and aim to attain true wisdom. [208]
114. This wisdom is the present that mankind requires most to address the profound concerns and ethical difficulties postured by AI: "Only by adopting a spiritual way of seeing reality, just by recuperating a wisdom of the heart, can we confront and analyze the newness of our time." [209] Such "wisdom of the heart" is "the virtue that allows us to integrate the entire and its parts, our decisions and their repercussions." It "can not be looked for from devices," however it "lets itself be discovered by those who seek it and be seen by those who like it; it expects those who want it, and it goes in search of those who deserve it (cf. Wis 6:12 -16)." [210]
115. In a world marked by AI, we require the grace of the Holy Spirit, who "allows us to look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, situations, occasions and to reveal their genuine significance." [211]
116. Since a "person's excellence is measured not by the details or knowledge they possess, however by the depth of their charity," [212] how we integrate AI "to include the least of our brothers and sisters, the susceptible, and those most in need, will be the real measure of our humankind." [213] The "wisdom of the heart" can illuminate and guide the human-centered usage of this technology to help promote the common great, care for our "typical home," advance the search for the fact, foster essential human advancement, favor human uniformity and fraternity, and lead humankind to its supreme goal: happiness and full communion with God. [214]
117. From this point of view of knowledge, followers will be able to act as ethical representatives capable of utilizing this innovation to promote an authentic vision of the human individual and society. [215] This need to be done with the understanding that technological progress is part of God's strategy for creation-an activity that we are called to order toward the Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ, in the continual search for the True and the Good.

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

Given in Rome, at the 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 pass away 14 ianuarii 2025 Franciscus

Contents

I. Introduction

II. What is Artificial Intelligence?

III. Intelligence in the Philosophical and Theological Tradition

Rationality

Embodiment

Relationality

Relationship with the Truth

Stewardship of the World

An Integral Understanding of Human Intelligence

The Limits of AI

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

Helping Human Freedom and Decision-Making

V. Specific Questions

AI and Society

AI and Human Relationships

AI, the Economy, and Labor

AI and Healthcare

AI and Education

AI, Misinformation, Deepfakes, and Abuse

AI, Privacy, and Surveillance

AI and the Protection of Our Common Home

AI and Warfare

AI and Our Relationship with God

VI. Concluding Reflections

True Wisdom

[1] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. See likewise Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. [2] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 307. Cf. Id., Christmas Greetings to the Roman Curia (21 December 2019): AAS 112 (2020 ), 43. [3] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [4] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 2293; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [5] J. McCarthy, et al., "A Proposal for the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence" (31 August 1955), http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/history/dartmouth/dartmouth.html (accessed: 21 October 2024). [6] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), pars. 2-3: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [7] Terms in this file explaining the outputs or processes of AI are utilized figuratively to explain its operations and are not intended to anthropomorphize the device. [8] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3; Id., Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [9] Here, one can see the main positions of the "transhumanists" and the "posthumanists." Transhumanists argue that technological improvements will enable people to conquer their biological constraints and boost both their physical and cognitive abilities. Posthumanists, on the other hand, compete that such advances will eventually change human identity to the degree that mankind itself may no longer be considered genuinely "human." Both views rest on a basically unfavorable perception of human corporality, which treats the body more as a barrier than as an important part of the individual's identity and contact us to full awareness. Yet, this negative view of the body is inconsistent with a correct understanding of human dignity. While the Church supports genuine clinical development, it affirms that human self-respect is rooted in "the person as an inseparable unity of body and soul. " Thus, "self-respect is also 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 shows a functionalist perspective, which minimizes the human mind to its functions and assumes that its functions can be completely quantified in physical or mathematical terms. However, even if a future AGI were to appear truly 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 machines, it should be clarified that this refers to calculative thinking instead of crucial thinking. Similarly, if makers are said to run utilizing logical thinking, it must be specified that this is limited to computational reasoning. On the other hand, by its very nature, human thought is a creative process that avoids programming and goes beyond constraints. [13] On the fundamental role of language in shaping 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 conversation of these anthropological and theological foundations, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 43-144. [15] Aristotle, Metaphysics, I. 1, 980 a 21. [16] Cf. Augustine, De Genesi 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 illogical animals. Now, this [professors] is reason itself, or the 'mind,' or 'intelligence,' whatever other name it might more appropriately be offered"; Id., Enarrationes in Psalmos 54, 3: PL 36, 629: "When considering all that they have, humans discover that they are most identified from animals specifically by the fact they have intelligence." This is also repeated by Saint Thomas Aquinas, who states that "male is the most perfect of all earthly beings enhanced with motion, and his correct and natural operation is intellection," by which guy abstracts from things and "gets in his mind things really intelligible" (Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 76). [17] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [18] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 49, a. 5, ad 3. Cf. ibid., I, q. 79; II-II, q. 47, a. 3; II-II, q. 49, a. 2. For a contemporary perspective that echoes elements of the classical and middle ages difference in between these 2 modes of cognition, cf. D. Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, New York City 2011. [19] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 76, a. 1, resp. [20] Cf. Irenaeus of Lyon, Adversus Haereses, V, 6, 1: PG 7( 2 ), 1136-1138. [21] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 9. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1045: "The intelligence can examine the truth of things through reflection, experience and dialogue, and pertain to recognize in that truth, which transcends it, the basis of certain universal moral 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 "usually considers the human person as a being who exists in the body and is unthinkable outside of it" (Pontifical Biblical Commission, "Che cosa è l'uomo?" (Sal 8,5): Un itinerario di antropologia biblica [30 September 2019], par. 19). Cf. ibid., pars. 20-21, 43-44, 48. [25] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 22: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1042: Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 7: AAS 100 (2008 ), 863: "Christ did not disdain human bodiliness, however rather fully divulged its significance 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 for this reason it is united to the body in order that it might have a presence and an operation ideal to its nature." [29] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1035. Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 18. [30] International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 56. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 357. [31] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), pars. 5, 8; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 15, 24, 53-54. [32] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 356. Cf. ibid., par. 221. [33] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 13, 26-27. [34] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Donum Veritatis (24 May 1990), 6: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1552. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), par. 109: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1219. Cf. Pseudo-Dionysius, De divinis nominibus, VII, 2: PG 3, 868B-C: "Human souls also have reason and with it they circle in discourse around the truth of things. [...] [O] n account of the manner in which they are capable of focusing the many into the one, they too, in their own fashion and as far as they can, deserve 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 going beyond immediate concerns and grasping certain realities that are unchanging, as true now as in the past. As it peers into human nature, factor discovers universal values obtained from that exact same nature"; ibid., par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034. [38] Cf. B. Pascal, Pensées, no. 267 (ed. Brunschvicg): "The last proceeding of reason is to acknowledge that there is an infinity of things which are beyond it" (en. tr. Pascal's Pensées, E.P. Dutton, New York City 1958, 77). [39] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [40] Our semantic capacity allows us to understand messages in any form of interaction in a manner that both takes into account and transcends their product or empirical structures (such as computer code). Here, intelligence ends up being a knowledge that "allows us to take a look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, situations, events and to discover their real significance" (Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications [24 January 2024]: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8). Our imagination allows us to produce brand-new material or concepts, mainly by providing an initial viewpoint on truth. Both capabilities depend on the presence of a personal subjectivity for their complete realization. [41] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. [42] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034: "Charity, when accompanied by a commitment to the truth, is far more than individual feeling [...] Certainly, its close relation to fact promotes its universality and maintains it from being 'confined to a narrow field lacking relationships.' [...] Charity's openness to fact therefore safeguards it from 'a fideism that denies it of its human and universal breadth.'" The internal quotes are from Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), pars. 2-4: AAS 101 (2009 ), 642-643. [43] Cf. International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 7. [44] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [45] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15. [46] Bonaventure, In II Librum Sententiarum, d. I, p. 2, a. 2, q. 1; as estimated in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 293. Cf. ibid., par. 294. [47] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 295, 299, 302. Bonaventure compares deep space to "a book showing, representing, and explaining its Maker," the Triune God who grants presence to all things (Breviloquium 2.12.1). Cf. Alain de Lille, De Incarnatione Christi, PL 210, 579a: "Omnis mundi creatura quasi liber et pictura nobis est et speculum." [48] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 67: AAS 107 (2015 ), 874; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 6: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589-592; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 57: "human beings inhabit a special place in deep space according to the divine strategy: they take pleasure in the opportunity of sharing in the divine governance of visible development. [...] Since man's place as ruler remains in truth an involvement in the magnificent governance of production, we mention it here as a form of stewardship." [49] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), pars. 38-39: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1164-1165. [50] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. This concept is also reflected in the production account, where God brings creatures to Adam "to see what he would call them. And whatever [he] called every living creature, that was its name" (Gen. 2:19), an action that demonstrates the active engagement of human intelligence in the stewardship of God's development. Cf. John Chrysostom, Homiliae in Genesim, XIV, 17-21: PG 53, 116-117. [51] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 301. [52] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 302. [53] Bonaventure, Breviloquium 2.12.1. Cf. ibid., 2.11.2. [54] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 236: AAS 105 (2023 ), 1115; Id., Address to Participants in the Meeting of University Chaplains and Pastoral Workers Promoted by the Dicastery for Culture and Education (24 November 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 November 2023, 7. [55] Cf. J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 5.1, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 99-100; Francis, Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [56] Francis, Address to the Members of the National Confederation of Artisans and Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises (CNA) (15 November 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 15 November 2024, 8. [57] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Querida Amazonia (2 February 2020), par. 41: AAS 112 (2020 ), 246; Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 146: AAS 107 (2015 ), 906. [58] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 864. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), pars. 17-24: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47-50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985-987. [59] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 20: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [60] P. Claudel, Conversation sur Jean Racine, Gallimard, Paris 1956, 32: "L'intelligence n'est rien sans la délectation." Cf. Francis, utahsyardsale.com Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 13: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5: "The mind and the will are put at the service of the greater excellent by sensing and appreciating truths." [61] Dante, Paradiso, Canto XXX: "luce intellettüal, piena d'amore;/ amor di vero ben, pien di letizia;/ letizia che trascende ogne dolzore" (en. tr. The Divine Comedy of Dante Alighieri, C.E. Norton, tr., Houghton Mifflin, Boston 1920, 232). [62] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931:" [T] he highest norm of human life is the magnificent law itself-eternal, objective and universal, by which God orders, directs and governs the entire world and the ways of the human community according to a strategy conceived in his wisdom and love. God has enabled man to participate in this law of his so that, under the gentle disposition of divine providence, many might have the ability to come to 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 actually inscribed his own image and similarity on guy (cf. Gen 1:26), giving upon him an incomparable self-respect [...] In result, beyond the rights which man obtains by his own work, there exist rights which do not represent any work he carries out, but which circulation from his important self-respect 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 show this technology, recalling that the expression is likewise used to designate the field of research study and not only its applications. [71] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 34-35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 51: AAS 83 (1991 ), 856-857. [72] For example, see the encouragement of clinical expedition in Albertus Magnus (De Mineralibus, II, 2, 1) and the gratitude for the mechanical arts in Hugh of St. Victor (Didascalicon, I, 9). These writers, amongst a long list of other Catholics took part in clinical research study and technological expedition, illustrate that "faith and science can be unified in charity, provided that science is put at the service of the males and female of our time and not misused to hurt and even damage 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, it-viking.ch Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), pars. 2, 106: AAS 91 (1999 ), 6-7.86 -87. [73] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. [74] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [75] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [76] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 102: AAS 107 (2015 ), 888. [77] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889; Id., Encyclical Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 27: AAS 112 (2020 ), 978; Benedict XVI, Encyclical Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 23: AAS 101 (2009 ), 657-658. [78] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39, 47; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), passim. [79] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par 2293. [80] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2-4. [81] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1749: "Freedom makes male a moral subject. When he acts deliberately, man is, so to speak, the 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 make sure that innovation remains human-centered, fairly grounded and directed towards the excellent." [85] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 166: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1026-1027; Id., Address to the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (23 September 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 September 2024, 10. On the function of human agency in selecting a wider 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 influence on human society, constantly represents a kind of order in social relations and a plan of power, therefore making it possible for certain individuals to perform particular actions while avoiding others from carrying out various ones. In a more or less explicit method, this constitutive power-dimension of innovation always consists of the worldview of those who created and developed it." [87] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 309. [88] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [89] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti, pars. 212-213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [90] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 5: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589; Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [91] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "Confronted with the marvels of machines, which appear to understand how to pick separately, we must be really clear that decision-making [...] should constantly be delegated the human person. We would condemn humanity to a future without hope if we eliminated individuals's ability to make choices about themselves and their lives, by dooming them to depend on the options of devices." [92] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [93] The term "bias" in this file describes algorithmic bias (systematic and consistent errors in computer systems that may disproportionately bias certain groups in unexpected ways) or learning predisposition (which will lead to training on a biased information set) and not the "bias vector" in neural networks (which is a parameter utilized to change the output of "neurons" to change more precisely to the information). [94] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464, where the Holy Father affirmed the development in agreement "on the requirement for development procedures to respect such worths as inclusion, openness, security, equity, privacy and reliability," and likewise invited "the efforts of global organizations to control these innovations so that they promote genuine 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 additional conversation of the ethical questions 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 importance of dialogue in a pluralist society oriented toward a "robust and strong social ethics," see Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 211-214: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [100] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [101] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [102] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [103] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. [104] Cf. Pontifical Council for Social Communications, Ethics in Internet (22 February 2002), par. 10. [105] Francis, Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414; estimating the Final Document of the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops (27 October 2018), par. 24: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1593. Cf. Benedict XVI, Address to the Participants in the International Congress on Natural Moral Law (12 February 2017): AAS 99 (2007 ), 245. [106] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-33: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047-1050. [107] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-21: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047. [108] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 308-309. [109] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [110] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [111] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 101, 103, 111, 115, 167: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1004-1005, 1007-1009, 1027. [112] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047; cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 35: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 123. [113] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 12: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1034. [114] Cf. Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church (2004 ), par. 149. [115] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [116] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [117] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 865. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), pars. 88-89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414. [118] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057. [119] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985. [120] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [121] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [122] Cf. E. Stein, Zum Problem der Einfühlung, Buchdruckerei des Waisenhauses, Halle 1917 (en. tr. On the Problem of Empathy, ICS Publications, Washington D.C. 1989). [123] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057:" [Lots of people] want their interpersonal relationships supplied by advanced devices, by screens and systems which can be switched on and off on command. Meanwhile, the Gospel tells us continuously to risk of an in person encounter with others, with their physical existence which challenges us, with their pain and their pleas, with their delight which contaminates us in our close and continuous interaction. True faith in the incarnate Son of God is inseparable from self-giving, from subscription in the neighborhood, from service, from reconciliation with others." Also cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 24: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1044-1045. [124] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 1. [125] Cf. Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570; Id, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 18, 124-129: AAS 107 (2015 ), 854.897-899. [126] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [127] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 209: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1107. [128] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4. For Pope Francis' mentor about AI in relationship to the "technocratic paradigm," cf. Id., Encyclical Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 106-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893. [129] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047.; as quoted in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1912. Cf. John XXIII, Encyclical Letter Mater et Magistra (15 May 1961), par. 219: AAS 53 (1961 ), 453. [130] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par 64: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1086. [131] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 162: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1025. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 6: AAS 73 (1981 ), 591: "work is 'for man' and not male 'for work.' Through this conclusion one appropriately pertains to acknowledge 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 estimated in Id., Message for the XXXI World Day of the Sick (11 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 10 January 2023, 8. [137] Francis, Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [138] Francis, Address to the Diplomatic Corps Accredited to the Holy See (11 January 2016): AAS 108 (2016 ), 120. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 18: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975; Id., Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [139] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465; Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [140] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105, 107: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-890; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 18-21: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975-976; Id., Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465. [141] Francis, Address to the Participants at the Meeting Sponsored by the Charity and Health Commission of the Italian Bishops' Conference (10 February 2017): AAS 109 (2017 ), 243. Cf. ibid., 242-243: "If there is a sector in which the throwaway culture is manifest, with its painful repercussions, it is that of health care. When a sick person is not put in the center or their dignity is not considered, this generates attitudes that can lead even to speculation on the misery of others. And this is extremely grave! [...] The application of a business method to the health care sector, if indiscriminate [...] may risk discarding people." [142] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [143] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729. [144] Congregation for Catholic Education, Instruction on the Use of Distance Learning in Ecclesiastical Universities and Faculties, I. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729; Francis, Message for the LXIX World Day of Peace (1 January 2016), 6: AAS 108 (2016 ), 57-58. [145] Francis, Address to Members of the Global Researchers Advancing Catholic Education Project (20 April 2022): AAS 114 (2022 ), 580. [146] Cf. Paul VI, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi (8 December 1975), par. 41: AAS 68 (1976 ), 31, pricing quote Id., Address to the Members of the "Consilium de Laicis" (2 October 1974): AAS 66 (1974 ), 568: "if [the modern person] does listen to instructors, it is because they are witnesses." [147] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 6.1, London 18733, 125-126. [148] Francis, Meeting with the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [149] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 86: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413, 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: "Among the crucial questions [of the usage of generative AI (GenAI) in education and research] is whether human beings can potentially deliver basic levels of thinking and skill-acquisition procedures to AI and rather focus on higher-order thinking abilities based on the outputs provided by AI. Writing, for instance, is frequently connected with the structuring of thinking. With GenAI [...], humans can now begin with a well-structured outline provided by GenAI. Some specialists have defined using GenAI to generate text in this method as 'writing without believing'" (UNESCO, Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research [2023], 37-38). The German-American thinker Hannah Arendt visualized such a possibility in her 1959 book, The Human Condition, and cautioned: "If it must end up being real that understanding (in the sense of know-how) and believed have parted company for great, then we would certainly end up being the helpless slaves, not so much of our machines since our knowledge" (Id., The Human Condition, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 20182, 3). [153] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 262: AAS 108 (2016 ), 417. [154] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 7: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3; cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 167: AAS 107 (2015 ), 914. [155] John Paul II, Apostolic Constitution Ex Corde Ecclesiae (15 August 1990), 7: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1479. [156] Francis, Apostolic Constitution Veritatis Gaudium (29 January 2018), 4c: AAS 110 (2018 ), 9-10. [157] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3. [158] For example, it might assist individuals gain access to the "array of resources for creating greater knowledge of fact" 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 really indifferent to the question of whether what they understand holds true or not. [...] It is this that Saint Augustine teaches when he writes: 'I have met numerous who desired to deceive, but none who wished to be tricked'"; estimating Augustine, Confessiones, X, 23, 33: PL 32, 794. [163] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), par. 62. [164] Benedict XVI, Message for the XLIII World Day of Social Communications (24 May 2009): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2009, 8. [165] Cf. Dicastery for Communications, Towards Full Presence: A Pastoral Reflection on Engagement with Social Media (28 May 2023), par. 41; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Decree Inter Mirifica (4 December 1963), pars. 4, 8-12: AAS 56 (1964 ), 146, 148-149. [166] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 1, 6, 16, 24. [167] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046. Cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 40: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 127: "no man may with impunity violate that human self-respect which God himself treats with great reverence"; as estimated in John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 9: AAS 83 (1991 ), 804. [168] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2477, 2489; can. 220 CIC; can. 23 CCEO; John Paul II, Address to the Third General Conference of the Latin American Episcopate (28 January 1979), III.1-2: Insegnamenti II/1 (1979 ), 202-203. [169] Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to the Thematic Discussion on Other Disarmament Measures and International Security (24 October 2022): "Maintaining human self-respect in the online world obliges States to likewise appreciate the right to privacy, by protecting residents from invasive security and permitting them to safeguard 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 identified a list of "early promises of AI helping to resolve 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 change data into insights and insights into actions, AI-enabled tools might assist establish new strategies and investments to decrease emissions, affect brand-new personal sector investments in net zero, safeguard biodiversity, and build broad-based social resilience" (ibid.). [174] "The cloud" refers to a network of physical servers throughout the world that enables users to store, procedure, and handle their data from another location. [175] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 9: AAS 107 (2015 ), 850. [176] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 106: AAS 107 (2015 ), 890. [177] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 60: AAS 107 (2015 ), 870. [178] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 3, 13: AAS 107 (2015 ), 848.852. [179] Augustine, De Civitate Dei, XIX, 13, 1: PL 41, 640. [180] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 77-82: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1100-1107; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 256-262: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1060-1063; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 38-39; Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2302-2317. [181] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 78: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1101. [182] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [183] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2308-2310. [184] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 80-81: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1105. [185] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "We require to ensure and safeguard a space for appropriate human control over the choices made by expert system programs: human self-respect itself depends on it." [186] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to Working Group II on Emerging Technologies at the UN Disarmament Commission (3 April 2024): "The development and use of lethal self-governing weapons systems (LAWS) that do not have the suitable human control would present basic ethical concerns, offered that LAWS can never ever be ethically responsible subjects efficient in complying with international humanitarian law." [187] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 258: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1061. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [188] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [189] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3: "Nor can we ignore the possibility of sophisticated weapons ending up in the wrong hands, helping with, for example, terrorist attacks or interventions aimed at destabilizing the organizations of genuine systems of government. In a word, the world does not require brand-new innovations that add to the unfair development of commerce and the weapons trade and consequently wind up promoting the folly of war." [190] John Paul II, Act of Entrustment to Mary for the Jubilee of Bishops (8 October 2000), par. 3: Insegnamenti XXIII/2 (200 ), 565. [191] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 79: AAS 107 (2015 ), 878. [192] Cf. Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 51: AAS 101 (2009 ), 687. [193] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39. [194] Cf. Augustine, Confessiones, I, 1, 1: PL 32, 661. [195] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (30 December 1987), par. 28: AAS 80 (1988 ), 548:" [T] here is a much better understanding today that the simple build-up of goods and services [...] is not enough for the awareness of human happiness. Nor, in repercussion, does the availability of the many genuine advantages provided in recent times by science and technology, consisting of the computer technology, bring freedom from every type of slavery. On the contrary, [...] unless all the substantial body of resources and potential at man's disposal is assisted by a moral understanding and by an orientation towards the real good of the human race, it quickly turns against man to oppress him." Cf. ibid., pars. 29, 37: AAS 80 (1988 ), 550-551.563 -564. [196] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [197] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 18: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [198] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 27: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 6. [199] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 25: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5-6. [200] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. R. Guardini, Das Ende der Neuzeit, Würzburg 19659, 87 ff. (en. tr. Completion of the Modern World, Wilmington 1998, 82-83). [201] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [202] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptor Hominis (4 March 1979), par. 15: AAS 71 (1979 ), 287-288. [203] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," in C. Mitcham - R. Mackey, eds., Philosophy and Technology: Readings in the Philosophical Problems of Technology, New York 19832, 212-213. [204] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," 210. [205] G. Bernanos, "La révolution de la liberté" (1944 ), in Id., Le Chemin de la Croix-des-Âmes, Rocher 1987, 829. [206] Cf. Francis, Meeting the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023). [207] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [208] Cf. Bonaventure, Hex. XIX, 3; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986: "The flood of details at our fingertips does not make for greater wisdom. Wisdom is not born of quick searches on the web nor is it a mass of unproven data. That is not the way to mature in the encounter with reality." [209] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [210] Ibid. [211] Ibid. [212] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate (19 March 2018), par. 37: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1121. [213] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate (19 March 2018), par. 46: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1123-1124. [214] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [215] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570-1571.