1. With knowledge both ancient and brand-new (cf. Mt. 13:52), we are contacted us to review the present obstacles and chances posed by clinical and technological advancements, particularly by the current advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The Christian tradition regards the present of intelligence as a vital aspect of how human beings are produced "in the image of God" (Gen. 1:27). Beginning with an essential vision of the human individual and the scriptural contacting us to "till" and "keep" the earth (Gen. 2:15), the Church emphasizes that this gift of intelligence need to be revealed through the accountable 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 kinds of human venture, viewing them as part of the "cooperation of guy and female with God in improving the noticeable production." [1] As Sirach verifies, God "gave ability to humans, that he might be glorified in his marvelous works" (Sir. 38:6). Human abilities and imagination come from God and, when used appropriately, glorify God by reflecting his knowledge and goodness. In light of this, when we ask ourselves what it means to "be human," we can not omit a consideration of our clinical and technological capabilities.

3. It is within this perspective that today Note addresses the anthropological and ethical obstacles raised by AI-issues that are particularly considerable, as one of the goals of this innovation is to imitate the human intelligence that created it. For instance, unlike lots of other human productions, AI can be trained on the outcomes of human imagination and then produce new "artifacts" with a level of speed and skill that frequently matches or exceeds what people can do, such as producing text or images indistinguishable from human compositions. This raises crucial concerns about AI's potential role in the growing crisis of fact in the public forum. Moreover, this technology is designed to find out and make certain choices autonomously, adjusting to new circumstances and supplying services not anticipated by its programmers, and therefore, it raises fundamental concerns about ethical responsibility and human security, with broader ramifications for society as a whole. This new situation has prompted many individuals to assess what it suggests to be human and the function of mankind in the world.

4. Taking all this into account, there is broad consensus that AI marks a new and substantial stage in mankind's engagement with technology, positioning it at the heart of what Pope Francis has explained as an "epochal modification." [2] Its effect is felt globally and in a wide range of areas, including interpersonal relationships, education, work, art, health care, law, warfare, and global relations. As AI advances quickly toward even greater achievements, it is critically crucial to consider its anthropological and ethical ramifications. This includes not just mitigating risks and preventing harm but likewise ensuring that its applications are used to promote human progress and the common good.

5. To contribute favorably to the discernment relating to AI, and in response to Pope Francis' call for a renewed "wisdom of heart," [3] the Church uses its experience through the anthropological and ethical reflections contained in this Note. Committed to its active function in the worldwide dialogue on these concerns, the Church welcomes those delegated with transferring the faith-including moms and dads, teachers, pastors, and bishops-to dedicate themselves to this crucial subject with care and attention. While this file is intended especially for them, it is likewise suggested to be available to a more comprehensive audience, especially those who share the conviction that scientific and technological advances need to be directed toward serving the human person and the common good. [4]
6. To this end, the document begins by identifying in between concepts of intelligence in AI and in human intelligence. It then checks out the Christian understanding of human intelligence, offering a structure rooted in the Church's philosophical and theological custom. Finally, the document provides guidelines to ensure that the advancement and use of AI maintain human dignity and promote the integral advancement of the human person and society.

7. The idea of "intelligence" in AI has developed with time, making use of a variety of concepts from numerous disciplines. While its origins extend back centuries, a substantial turning point took place in 1956 when the American computer system researcher John McCarthy arranged a summer workshop at Dartmouth University to explore the problem of "Artificial Intelligence," which he specified as "that of making a machine behave in methods that would be called smart if a human were so behaving." [5] This workshop launched a research program focused on developing devices efficient in carrying out jobs generally associated with the human intelligence and intelligent behavior.

8. Since then, AI research has advanced rapidly, leading to the advancement of complex systems capable of performing extremely advanced tasks. [6] These so-called "narrow AI" systems are generally developed to deal with specific and restricted functions, such as equating languages, forecasting the trajectory of a storm, classifying images, answering concerns, or creating visual material at the user's demand. While the definition of "intelligence" in AI research varies, the majority of contemporary AI systems-particularly those using machine learning-rely on analytical reasoning instead of sensible deduction. By evaluating big datasets to identify patterns, AI can "predict" [7] outcomes and propose new approaches, imitating some cognitive processes normal of human analytical. Such achievements have been made possible through advances in calculating technology (including neural networks, without supervision artificial intelligence, and evolutionary algorithms) as well as hardware developments (such as specialized processors). Together, these technologies make it possible for AI systems to react to numerous types of human input, adapt to brand-new circumstances, and even recommend unique options not anticipated by their original developers. [8]
9. Due to these rapid developments, lots of tasks once managed solely by people are now turned over to AI. These systems can augment or perhaps supersede what humans are able to carry out in many fields, particularly in specialized areas such as information analysis, image acknowledgment, and medical diagnosis. While each "narrow AI" application is designed for a particular task, lots of researchers aim to establish what is understood as "Artificial General Intelligence" (AGI)-a single system capable of running throughout all cognitive domains and carrying out any job within the scope of human intelligence. Some even argue that AGI might one day attain the state of "superintelligence," exceeding human intellectual capabilities, or contribute to "super-longevity" through advances in biotechnology. Others, however, fear that these possibilities, even if theoretical, could one day eclipse the human person, while still others invite this potential improvement. [9]
10. Underlying this and numerous other perspectives on the topic is the implicit presumption that the term "intelligence" can be utilized in the same method to refer to both human intelligence and AI. Yet, this does not record the full scope of the concept. In the case of people, intelligence is a faculty that pertains to the individual in his or her totality, whereas in the context of AI, "intelligence" is understood functionally, frequently with the anticipation that the activities quality of the human mind can be broken down into digitized steps that machines can duplicate. [10]
11. This practical viewpoint is exhibited by the "Turing Test," which considers a device "smart" if a person can not identify its habits from that of a human. [11] However, in this context, the term "habits" refers just to the performance of particular intellectual jobs; it does not account for ai-db.science the full breadth of human experience, that includes abstraction, emotions, imagination, and the visual, moral, and spiritual perceptiveness. Nor does it incorporate the complete range of expressions particular of the . Instead, in the case of AI, the "intelligence" of a system is assessed methodologically, but likewise reductively, based on its capability to produce appropriate responses-in this case, those related to the human intellect-regardless of how those responses are generated.

12. AI's advanced functions provide it advanced capabilities to carry out tasks, however not the capability to think. [12] This difference is crucially crucial, as the method "intelligence" is defined inevitably shapes how we understand the relationship between human thought and this technology. [13] To value this, one need to recall the richness of the philosophical tradition and Christian faith, which provide a much deeper and more detailed understanding of intelligence-an understanding that is main to the Church's teaching on the nature, self-respect, and occupation of the human individual. [14]
13. From the dawn of human self-reflection, the mind has actually played a main function in comprehending what it implies to be "human." Aristotle observed that "all people by nature desire to know." [15] This knowledge, with its capability for abstraction that grasps the nature and significance of things, sets humans apart from the animal world. [16] As thinkers, theologians, and psychologists have taken a look at the exact nature of this intellectual professors, they have actually also checked out how humans comprehend the world and their special place within it. Through this expedition, the Christian custom has actually 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 concept of intelligence is frequently understood through the complementary concepts of "reason" (ratio) and "intellect" (intellectus). These are not separate faculties however, as Saint Thomas Aquinas explains, they are two modes in which the same intelligence runs: "The term intellect is presumed from the inward grasp of the reality, while the name reason is taken from the inquisitive and discursive process." [18] This concise description highlights the two basic and complementary dimensions of human intelligence. Intellectus describes the user-friendly grasp of the truth-that is, apprehending it with the "eyes" of the mind-which precedes and premises argumentation itself. Ratio pertains to thinking appropriate: the discursive, analytical process that leads to judgment. Together, intellect and reason form the two elements of the act of intelligere, "the proper operation of the human being as such." [19]
15. Explaining the human person as a "rational" being does not lower the person to a particular mode of idea; rather, it acknowledges that the capability for intellectual understanding shapes and penetrates all aspects of human activity. [20] Whether worked out well or improperly, this capacity is an intrinsic aspect of humanity. In this sense, the "term 'rational' incorporates all the capacities of the human person," consisting of those associated to "understanding and comprehending, in addition to those of prepared, caring, picking, and preferring; it also consists of all corporeal functions carefully related to these capabilities." [21] This detailed point of view underscores how, in the human person, produced in the "image of God," factor is incorporated in such a way that raises, shapes, and changes both the person's will and actions. [22]
16. Christian thought considers the intellectual faculties of the human person within the structure of an integral anthropology that sees the human being as basically embodied. In the human person, spirit and matter "are not 2 natures united, however rather their union forms a single nature." [23] In other words, the soul is not simply the immaterial "part" of the individual contained within the body, nor is the body an outer shell real estate an intangible "core." Rather, the whole human individual is all at once both product and spiritual. This understanding reflects the mentor of Sacred Scripture, which views the human individual as a being who lives out relationships with God and others (and hence, an authentically spiritual measurement) within and through this embodied existence. [24] The extensive significance of this condition is further illuminated by the secret of the Incarnation, through which God himself handled our flesh and "raised it approximately a sublime dignity." [25]
17. Although deeply rooted in bodily presence, the human person goes beyond the material world through the soul, which is "nearly on the horizon of eternity and time." [26] The intellect's capability for transcendence and the self-possessed flexibility of the will come from the soul, by which the human individual "shares in the light of the divine mind." [27] Nevertheless, the human spirit does not exercise its normal mode of understanding without the body. [28] In this method, the intellectual professors of the human person are an integral part of a sociology that acknowledges that the human individual is a "unity of body and soul." [29] Further elements of this understanding will be developed in what follows.

18. People are "purchased by their very nature to social communion," [30] possessing the capacity to understand one another, to give themselves in love, and to participate in communion with others. Accordingly, human intelligence is not an isolated professors but is exercised in relationships, discovering its max expression in discussion, partnership, and solidarity. We find out with others, and we learn through others.

19. The relational orientation of the human person is ultimately grounded in the everlasting self-giving of the Triune God, whose love is exposed in development and redemption. [31] The human individual is "called to share, by understanding and love, in God's own life." [32]
20. This occupation 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 imitate Christ's outpouring present (cf. 2 Cor. 9:8 -11; Eph. 5:1 -2) by following his command to "enjoy one another, as I have liked you" (Jn. 13:34). [33] Love and service, echoing the divine life of self-giving, go beyond self-interest to react more totally to the human occupation (cf. 1 Jn. 2:9). A lot more superb than knowing numerous things is the commitment to care for one another, for if "I comprehend all mysteries and all knowledge [...] however do not have love, I am nothing" (1 Cor. 13:2).

21. Human intelligence is eventually "God's present made for the assimilation of truth." [34] In the double sense of intellectus-ratio, it enables the individual to check out truths that surpass mere sensory experience or utility, considering that "the desire for fact is part of humanity itself. It is a natural property of human reason to ask why things are as they are." [35] Moving beyond the limits of empirical data, human intelligence can "with authentic certitude attain to truth itself as knowable." [36] While reality remains only partially understood, the desire for truth "spurs factor constantly to go further; certainly, it is as if reason were overwhelmed to see that it can always surpass what it has already attained." [37] Although Truth in itself goes beyond the limits of human intelligence, it irresistibly attracts it. [38] Drawn by this tourist attraction, the human individual is led to seek "truths of a higher order." [39]
22. This innate drive towards the pursuit of fact is especially apparent in the definitely human capabilities for semantic understanding and imagination, [40] through which this search unfolds in a "manner that is suitable to the social nature and self-respect of the human individual." [41] Likewise, a steadfast orientation to the reality is vital for charity to be both genuine and universal. [42]
23. The search for truth discovers its highest expression in openness to realities that transcend the physical and created world. In God, all facts attain their ultimate and initial meaning. [43] Entrusting oneself to God is a "essential decision that engages the entire individual." [44] In this way, the human individual becomes completely what he or she is called to be: "the intellect and the will display their spiritual nature," allowing the individual "to act in a manner that understands individual flexibility to the complete." [45]
24. The Christian faith understands creation as the free act of the Triune God, who, as Saint Bonaventure of Bagnoregio explains, produces "not to increase his glory, however to show it forth and to communicate it." [46] Since God produces according to his Wisdom (cf. Wis. 9:9; Jer. 10:12), creation is imbued with an intrinsic order that shows God's plan (cf. Gen. 1; Dan. 2:21 -22; Is. 45:18; Ps. 74:12 -17; 104), [47] within which God has called people to assume a special role: wavedream.wiki to cultivate and look after the world. [48]
25. Shaped by the Divine Craftsman, people live out their identity as beings made in imago Dei by "keeping" and "tilling" (cf. Gen. 2:15) creation-using their intelligence and skills to look after and develop production in accord with God's strategy. [49] In this, human intelligence shows the Divine Intelligence that produced all things (cf. Gen. 1-2; Jn. 1), [50] constantly sustains them, and guides them to their supreme function in him. [51] Moreover, humans are called to establish their abilities in science and innovation, for through them, God is glorified (cf. Sir. 38:6). Thus, in a correct relationship with creation, people, on the one hand, use their intelligence and skill to work together with God in directing development towards the function to which he has called it. [52] On the other hand, production itself, as Saint Bonaventure observes, helps the human mind to "ascend gradually to the supreme Principle, who is God." [53]
26. In this context, human intelligence ends up being more plainly comprehended as a professors that forms an essential part of how the entire person engages with truth. Authentic engagement requires embracing the full scope of one's being: spiritual, cognitive, embodied, and relational.

27. This engagement with reality unfolds in various methods, as each person, in his or her multifaceted individuality [54], seeks to comprehend the world, relate to others, solve issues, express creativity, and pursue essential wellness through the harmonious interplay of the numerous measurements of the individual's intelligence. [55] This includes sensible and linguistic abilities however can also encompass other modes of connecting with truth. Consider the work of a craftsmen, who "should know how to determine, in inert matter, a specific kind that others can not acknowledge" [56] and bring it forth through insight and useful ability. Indigenous peoples who live near to the earth typically have an extensive sense of nature and its cycles. [57] Similarly, a good friend who understands the ideal word to say or a person skilled at managing human relationships exhibits an intelligence that is "the fruit of self-examination, discussion and generous encounter in between persons." [58] As Pope Francis observes, "in this age of expert system, we can not forget that poetry and love are required to conserve our mankind." [59]
28. At the heart of the Christian understanding of intelligence is the integration of truth into the ethical and spiritual life of the individual, directing his/her actions due to God's goodness and truth. According to God's plan, intelligence, in its max sense, also includes the capability to appreciate what is real, good, and gorgeous. As the twentieth-century French poet Paul Claudel expressed, "intelligence is absolutely nothing without pleasure." [60] Similarly, Dante, upon reaching the highest heaven in Paradiso, testifies that the conclusion of this intellectual pleasure is found in the "light intellectual complete of love, love of real great filled with joy, joy which transcends every sweetness." [61]
29. A correct understanding of human intelligence, for that reason, can not be reduced to the mere acquisition of truths or the ability to carry out specific jobs. Instead, it includes the person's openness to the supreme questions of life and shows an orientation towards the True and the Good. [62] As an expression of the divine image within the individual, human intelligence has the capability to access the totality of being, contemplating existence in its fullness, which exceeds what is measurable, and grasping the meaning of what has been understood. For followers, this capability includes, in a particular way, the ability to grow in the understanding of the mysteries of God by utilizing factor to engage ever more exceptionally with revealed facts (intellectus fidei). [63] True intelligence is shaped by magnificent love, which "is put forth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit" (Rom. 5:5). From this, it follows that human intelligence has a vital contemplative dimension, an unselfish openness to the True, the Good, and the Beautiful, beyond any practical function.

30. Due to the foregoing discussion, the differences between human intelligence and existing AI systems become evident. While AI is a remarkable technological accomplishment capable of imitating certain outputs associated with human intelligence, it runs by performing jobs, attaining objectives, or making decisions based upon quantitative information and computational logic. For instance, with its analytical power, AI stands out at integrating data from a range of fields, modeling complex systems, and fostering interdisciplinary connections. In this way, it can assist specialists team up in resolving complex problems that "can not be handled from a single point of view or from a single set of interests." [64]
31. However, even as AI procedures and simulates certain expressions of intelligence, it remains essentially restricted to a logical-mathematical structure, which imposes fundamental constraints. Human intelligence, on the other hand, develops naturally throughout the individual's physical and psychological development, shaped by a myriad of lived experiences in the flesh. Although advanced AI systems can "discover" through procedures such as artificial intelligence, this sort of training is fundamentally various from the developmental growth of human intelligence, which is shaped by embodied experiences, including sensory input, psychological reactions, social interactions, and the distinct context of each moment. These elements shape and kind individuals within their individual history.In contrast, AI, doing not have a physique, relies on computational thinking and learning based upon vast datasets that include tape-recorded human experiences and knowledge.

32. Consequently, although AI can imitate aspects of human thinking and carry out specific jobs with amazing speed and effectiveness, its computational capabilities represent just a fraction of the broader capabilities of the human mind. For example, AI can not presently replicate ethical discernment or the capability to develop genuine relationships. Moreover, human intelligence is positioned within a personally lived history of intellectual and moral formation that essentially forms the person's perspective, encompassing the physical, emotional, social, moral, and spiritual measurements of life. Since AI can not provide this fullness of understanding, approaches that rely solely on this technology or treat it as the main ways of interpreting the world can lead to "a loss of appreciation for the whole, for the relationships between things, and for the more comprehensive horizon." [65]
33. Human intelligence is not mainly about finishing practical jobs however about understanding and actively engaging with reality in all its dimensions; it is also capable of surprising insights. Since AI lacks the richness of corporeality, relationality, and the openness of the human heart to truth and goodness, its capacities-though relatively limitless-are unparalleled with the human ability to understand reality. So much can be gained from a disease, an accept of reconciliation, and even an easy sundown; certainly, numerous experiences we have as humans open brand-new horizons and use the possibility of attaining new wisdom. No device, working entirely 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 threats catching a functionalist viewpoint, where individuals are valued based on the work they can perform. However, a person's worth does not depend on having specific abilities, cognitive and technological achievements, or specific success, but on the person's fundamental self-respect, grounded in being developed in the image of God. [66] This dignity remains intact in all situations, consisting of for those not able to exercise their capabilities, whether it be a coming kid, an unconscious person, or an older individual who is suffering. [67] It also underpins the tradition of human rights (and, in specific, what are now called "neuro-rights"), which represent "an essential point of merging in the search for commonalities" [68] and can, hence, act as a basic ethical guide in conversations on the responsible advancement and use of AI.

35. Considering all these points, as Pope Francis observes, "the extremely use of the word 'intelligence'" in connection with AI "can prove misleading" [69] and risks ignoring what is most valuable in the human individual. In light of this, AI needs to not be viewed as a synthetic kind of human intelligence however as an item of it. [70]
36. Given these considerations, one can ask how AI can be understood within God's plan. To address this, it is essential to recall that techno-scientific activity is not neutral in character however is a human undertaking that engages the humanistic and cultural measurements of human imagination. [71]
37. Viewed as a fruit of the prospective engraved within human intelligence, [72] scientific query and the development of technical skills are part of the "partnership of males and female with God in improving the visible production." [73] At the same time, all clinical and technological accomplishments are, ultimately, presents from God. [74] Therefore, humans must constantly utilize their capabilities in view of the higher function for which God has given them. [75]
38. We can gratefully acknowledge how innovation has "corrected countless evils which used to damage and restrict humans," [76] a fact for which we should rejoice. Nevertheless, not all technological developments in themselves represent genuine human development. [77] The Church is especially opposed to those applications that threaten the sanctity of life or the self-respect of the human individual. [78] Like any human endeavor, technological advancement needs to be directed to serve the human individual and contribute to the pursuit of "greater justice, more extensive fraternity, and a more humane order of social relations," which are "better than advances in the technical field." [79] Concerns about the ethical ramifications of technological advancement are shared not only within the Church however likewise among many scientists, technologists, and expert associations, who increasingly call for ethical reflection to direct this advancement in an accountable method.

39. To deal with these difficulties, it is vital to emphasize the value of moral duty grounded in the dignity and vocation of the human individual. This assisting principle likewise uses to concerns concerning AI. In this context, the ethical dimension takes on main importance due to the fact that it is individuals who develop systems and identify the functions for which they are used. [80] Between a device and a person, just the latter is truly a moral agent-a subject of moral obligation who works out liberty in his or her choices and accepts their effects. [81] It is not the machine but the human who remains in relationship with truth and goodness, assisted by an ethical conscience that calls the person "to love and to do what is great and to avoid wicked," [82] attesting to "the authority of reality in reference to the supreme Good to which the human person is drawn." [83] Likewise, in between a machine and a human, only the human can be adequately self-aware to the point of listening and following the voice of conscience, critical with prudence, and seeking the great that is possible in every circumstance. [84] In truth, all of this also belongs to the individual's exercise of intelligence.

40. Like any item of human creativity, AI can be directed toward positive or negative ends. [85] When used in methods that respect human dignity and promote the well-being of people and neighborhoods, it can contribute favorably to the human vocation. Yet, as in all locations where humans are contacted us to make choices, the shadow of evil likewise looms here. Where human freedom allows for the possibility of picking what is incorrect, the moral assessment of this technology will require to consider how it is directed and used.

41. At the very same time, it is not just the ends that are fairly considerable but also the methods used to attain them. Additionally, the overall vision and understanding of the human individual ingrained within these systems are crucial to think about too. Technological items show the worldview of their developers, owners, users, and regulators, [86] and have the power to "shape the world and engage consciences on the level of values." [87] On a societal level, some technological advancements could also reinforce relationships and power dynamics that are irregular with an appropriate understanding of the human person and society.

42. Therefore, completions and the means used in an offered application of AI, in addition to the general vision it incorporates, need to all be examined to guarantee they appreciate human dignity and promote the common good. [88] As Pope Francis has mentioned, "the intrinsic self-respect of every guy and every woman" must be "the crucial requirement in assessing emerging innovations; these will prove fairly sound to the level that they assist regard that self-respect and increase its expression at every level of human life," [89] consisting of in the social and financial spheres. In this sense, human intelligence plays a crucial role not only in creating and producing technology but also in directing its use in line with the genuine good of the human individual. [90] The responsibility for managing this carefully pertains to every level of society, directed by the principle of subsidiarity and other principles of Catholic Social Teaching.

43. The commitment to ensuring that AI constantly supports and promotes the supreme worth of the self-respect of every person and the fullness of the human vocation functions as a requirement of discernment for developers, owners, operators, and regulators of AI, along with to its users. It remains valid for every single application of the innovation at every level of its use.

44. An examination of the ramifications of this assisting concept might begin by thinking about the importance of ethical responsibility. Since complete ethical causality belongs only to individual agents, not artificial ones, it is crucial to be able to identify and define who bears duty for the procedures associated with AI, particularly those capable of learning, correction, and reprogramming. While bottom-up approaches and really deep neural networks make it possible for AI to solve intricate problems, they make it difficult to comprehend the procedures that cause the services they embraced. This makes complex accountability given that if an AI application produces undesired results, determining who is accountable becomes tough. To resolve this issue, attention needs to be offered to the nature of responsibility processes in complex, extremely automated settings, where outcomes might only end up being evident in the medium to long term. For this, it is crucial that ultimate obligation for decisions made utilizing AI rests with the human decision-makers and that there is accountability for the use of AI at each stage of the decision-making procedure. [91]
45. In addition to determining who is accountable, it is vital to identify the goals provided to AI systems. Although these systems may utilize not being watched autonomous knowing systems and sometimes follow courses that human beings can not reconstruct, they eventually pursue objectives that people have assigned to them and are governed by processes established by their designers and developers. Yet, this provides an obstacle since, as AI designs end up being significantly efficient in independent learning, the capability to maintain control over them to guarantee that such applications serve human purposes might successfully reduce. This raises the vital concern of how to make sure that AI systems are ordered 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, handle, and manage such systems, it is likewise shared by those who use them. As Pope Francis noted, the machine "makes a technical choice amongst numerous possibilities based either on well-defined requirements or on analytical reasonings. Human beings, however, not only pick, however in their hearts are capable of deciding." [92] Those who utilize AI to achieve a task and follow its results create a context in which they are ultimately responsible for the power they have actually delegated. Therefore, insofar as AI can assist human beings in making decisions, the algorithms that govern it needs to be credible, protected, robust enough to handle inconsistencies, and transparent in their operation to mitigate predispositions and unexpected adverse effects. [93] Regulatory frameworks ought to ensure that all legal entities remain liable for making use of AI and all its repercussions, with proper safeguards for openness, personal privacy, and responsibility. [94] Moreover, those utilizing AI should beware not to end up being excessively depending on it for their decision-making, a trend that increases modern society's currently high reliance on innovation.

47. The Church's ethical and social mentor supplies resources to help guarantee that AI is utilized in a manner that maintains human agency. Considerations about justice, for example, need to also address problems such as promoting just social dynamics, maintaining international security, and promoting peace. By exercising prudence, people and neighborhoods can discern methods to use AI to benefit mankind while avoiding applications that might break down human dignity or harm the environment. In this context, the idea of responsibility should be comprehended not only in its most limited sense however as a "obligation for the look after others, which is more than just representing outcomes attained." [95]
48. Therefore, AI, like any technology, can be part of a mindful and responsible response to humanity's vocation to the good. However, as previously gone over, AI must be directed by human intelligence to align with this occupation, ensuring it appreciates the self-respect of the human individual. Recognizing this "exalted self-respect," the Second Vatican Council affirmed that "the social order and its advancement must usually work to the advantage of the human person." [96] In light of this, the use of AI, as Pope Francis said, must be "accompanied by an ethic inspired by a vision of the common excellent, an ethic of liberty, duty, and fraternity, capable of promoting the complete development of individuals in relation to others and to the entire of creation." [97]
49. Within this basic viewpoint, some observations follow below to highlight how the preceding arguments can help offer an ethical orientation in practical situations, in line with the "knowledge of heart" that Pope Francis has proposed. [98] While not exhaustive, this conversation is provided in service of the discussion that thinks about how AI can be utilized to maintain the self-respect of the human individual and promote the common good. [99]
50. As Pope Francis observed, "the fundamental dignity of each human and the fraternity that binds us together as members of the one human household must support the development of new innovations and act as unassailable criteria for evaluating them before they are employed." [100]
51. Viewed through this lens, AI might "introduce essential developments in farming, education and culture, a better level of life for entire nations and peoples, and the growth of human fraternity and social relationship," and hence be "used to promote essential human development." [101] AI might likewise assist organizations identify those in requirement and counter discrimination and marginalization. These and other comparable applications of this innovation might add to human development and the common good. [102]
52. However, while AI holds many possibilities for promoting the good, it can also prevent or even counter human advancement and the common good. Pope Francis has actually kept in mind that "proof to date suggests that digital innovations have actually increased inequality in our world. Not just distinctions in material wealth, which are likewise considerable, however also distinctions in access to political and social impact." [103] In this sense, AI could be used to perpetuate marginalization and discrimination, develop new kinds of poverty, widen the "digital divide," and get worse existing social inequalities. [104]
53. Moreover, the concentration of the power over mainstream AI applications in the hands of a couple of effective business raises substantial ethical issues. Exacerbating this issue is the intrinsic nature of AI systems, where no single person can work out total oversight over the huge and complicated datasets used for computation. This lack of distinct responsibility produces the risk that AI could be controlled for personal or corporate gain or to direct public opinion for the advantage of a specific industry. Such entities, inspired by their own interests, have the capability to exercise "types of control as subtle as they are intrusive, creating mechanisms for the control of consciences and of the democratic procedure." [105]
54. Furthermore, there is the danger of AI being utilized to promote what Pope Francis has actually called the "technocratic paradigm," which views all the world's problems as understandable through technological methods alone. [106] In this paradigm, human dignity and fraternity are frequently reserved in the name of efficiency, "as if reality, goodness, and truth immediately flow from technological and financial power as such." [107] Yet, human self-respect and the common great should never be broken for the sake of effectiveness, [108] for "technological advancements that do not cause an enhancement in the quality of life of all humanity, however on the contrary, aggravate inequalities and disputes, can never count as true progress. " [109] Instead, AI must be put "at the service of another type of progress, one which is healthier, more human, more social, more important." [110]
55. Attaining this objective needs a deeper reflection on the relationship between autonomy and responsibility. Greater autonomy heightens everyone's duty across different elements of common life. For Christians, the structure of this obligation lies in the recognition that all human capacities, consisting of the individual's autonomy, come from God and are suggested to be utilized in the service of others. [111] Therefore, rather than merely pursuing financial or technological objectives, AI ought to serve "the typical good of the whole human family," which is "the sum overall of social conditions that permit individuals, either as groups or as people, to reach their fulfillment more totally and more easily." [112]
56. The Second Vatican Council observed that "by his inner nature male is a social being; and if he does not participate in relations with others, he can neither live nor establish his gifts." [113] This conviction underscores that living in society is intrinsic to the nature and occupation of the human person. [114] As social beings, we seek relationships that include mutual exchange and the pursuit of truth, in the course of which, people "show each other the reality they have found, or believe they have found, in such a way that they help one another in the search for truth." [115]
57. Such a mission, together with other elements of human interaction, presupposes encounters and mutual exchange between people shaped by their special histories, thoughts, convictions, and relationships. Nor can we forget that human intelligence is a varied, multifaceted, and complicated reality: private and social, rational and affective, conceptual and symbolic. Pope Francis underscores this vibrant, keeping in mind that "together, we can look for the fact in dialogue, in relaxed conversation or in passionate debate. To do so requires determination; it entails moments of silence and suffering, yet it can patiently accept the more comprehensive experience of people and individuals. [...] The procedure of building fraternity, be it local or universal, can only be undertaken by spirits that are free and available to genuine encounters." [116]
58. It remains in this context that one can consider the challenges AI presents to human relationships. Like other technological tools, AI has the potential to promote connections within the human family. However, it might also impede a true encounter with reality and, eventually, lead individuals to "a deep and melancholic frustration with social relations, or a hazardous sense of seclusion." [117] Authentic human relationships require the richness of being with others in their pain, their pleas, and their delight. [118] Since human intelligence is revealed and enhanced likewise in interpersonal and embodied methods, genuine and spontaneous encounters with others are essential for engaging with reality in its fullness.

59. Because "true knowledge demands an encounter with reality," [119] the rise of AI introduces another obstacle. Since AI can efficiently imitate the products of human intelligence, the capability to know when one is connecting with a human or a device can no longer be considered granted. Generative AI can produce text, speech, images, and other advanced outputs that are usually related to humans. Yet, it should be comprehended for what it is: a tool, not a person. [120] This difference is often obscured by the language utilized by professionals, which tends to anthropomorphize AI and thus blurs the line in between human and maker.

60. Anthropomorphizing AI also positions specific challenges for the development of children, possibly motivating them to establish patterns of interaction that deal with human relationships in a transactional way, as one would associate with a chatbot. Such habits might lead young people to see instructors as mere dispensers of details instead of as mentors who direct and support their intellectual and moral growth. Genuine relationships, rooted in compassion and a steadfast dedication to the good of the other, are necessary and irreplaceable in promoting the complete advancement of the human individual.

61. In this context, it is essential to clarify that, in spite of making use of anthropomorphic language, no AI application can really experience empathy. Emotions can not be decreased to facial expressions or expressions produced in action to prompts; they show the method an individual, as an entire, associates with the world and to his/her own life, with the body playing a main role. True empathy requires the ability to listen, recognize another's irreducible individuality, welcome their otherness, and comprehend the meaning behind even their silences. [121] Unlike the realm of analytical judgment in which AI excels, true empathy comes from the relational sphere. It includes intuiting and capturing the lived experiences of another while maintaining the difference in between self and other. [122] While AI can mimic understanding reactions, it can not replicate the incomparably individual and relational nature of genuine compassion. [123]
62. Because of the above, it is clear why misrepresenting AI as a person need to always be prevented; doing so for fraudulent functions is a grave ethical violation that might deteriorate social trust. Similarly, utilizing AI to deceive in other contexts-such as in education or in human relationships, consisting of the sphere of sexuality-is likewise to be thought about immoral and needs cautious oversight to avoid damage, maintain transparency, and make sure the self-respect of all individuals. [124]
63. In a significantly separated world, some individuals have turned to AI searching for deep human relationships, easy companionship, or perhaps psychological bonds. However, while human beings are meant to experience authentic relationships, AI can just 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 used to assist people foster real connections between individuals, it can contribute favorably to the complete realization of the person. Conversely, if we replace relationships with God and with others with interactions with technology, we run the risk of changing genuine relationality with a lifeless image (cf. Ps. 106:20; Rom. 1:22 -23). Instead of retreating into synthetic worlds, we are contacted us to participate in a committed and deliberate method with truth, especially by relating to the poor and suffering, consoling those in sadness, and creating bonds of communion with all.

64. Due to its interdisciplinary nature, AI is being progressively integrated into economic and monetary systems. Significant investments are presently being made not only in the innovation sector however likewise in energy, financing, and media, especially in the areas of marketing and sales, logistics, technological innovation, compliance, and risk management. At the same time, AI's applications in these areas have actually also highlighted its ambivalent nature, as a source of incredible opportunities however also profound dangers. A first real vital point in this area worries the possibility that-due to the concentration of AI applications in the hands of a few corporations-only those large business would gain from the value created by AI instead of business that use it.

65. Other broader elements of AI's effect on the economic-financial sphere must also be thoroughly taken a look at, particularly concerning the interaction between concrete reality and the digital world. One essential factor to consider in this regard involves the coexistence of diverse and alternative forms of economic and financial organizations within a given context. This element must be encouraged, as it can bring advantages in how it supports the genuine economy by fostering its development and stability, particularly throughout times of crisis. Nevertheless, it needs to be worried that digital truths, not restricted by any spatial bonds, tend to be more homogeneous and impersonal than communities rooted in a specific place and a particular history, with a common journey defined by shared worths and hopes, but also by unavoidable arguments and divergences. This variety is an indisputable property to a neighborhood's financial life. Turning over the economy and financing completely to digital innovation would lower this range and richness. As an outcome, lots of options to economic problems that can be reached through natural discussion in between the involved celebrations may no longer be attainable in a world controlled by treatments and only the look of proximity.

66. Another area where AI is already having a profound impact is the world of work. As in lots of other fields, AI is driving basic transformations throughout many professions, with a variety of impacts. On the one hand, it has the prospective to enhance knowledge and productivity, create new tasks, make it possible for workers to concentrate on more innovative tasks, and open new horizons for creativity and development.

67. However, while AI guarantees to boost performance by taking control of mundane tasks, it often forces workers to adjust to the speed and needs of devices instead of makers being created to support those who work. As a result, contrary to the advertised benefits of AI, existing approaches to the innovation can paradoxically deskill workers, subject them to automated monitoring, and relegate them to rigid and repetitive tasks. The need to stay up to date with the pace of innovation can wear down employees' sense of firm and suppress the innovative capabilities they are anticipated to bring to their work. [125]
68. AI is currently getting rid of the need for some tasks that were once carried out by human beings. If AI is used to change human workers rather than match them, there is a "substantial risk of out of proportion advantage for the few at the price of the impoverishment of numerous." [126] Additionally, as AI becomes more effective, there is an associated danger that human labor may lose its value in the economic world. This is the rational effect of the technocratic paradigm: a world of humankind enslaved to performance, where, ultimately, the expense of humanity should be cut. Yet, human lives are inherently important, independent of their economic output. Nevertheless, the "existing design," Pope Francis explains, "does not appear to prefer an investment in efforts to help the slow, the weak, or the less talented to find chances in life." [127] Because of this, "we can not enable a tool as powerful and essential as Artificial Intelligence to reinforce such a paradigm, but rather, we need to make Artificial Intelligence a bulwark against its expansion." [128]
69. It is essential to keep in mind that "the order of things must be subordinate to the order of persons, and not the other way around." [129] Human work must not just be at the service of revenue however at "the service of the entire human individual [...] considering the individual's material needs 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 method of earning one's daily bread" but is also "an important dimension of social life" and "a method [...] of personal development, the structure of healthy relationships, self-expression and the exchange of gifts. Work gives us a sense of shared obligation for the advancement of the world, and eventually, for our life as a people." [131]
70. Since work is a "part of the meaning of life on this earth, a path to development, human development and personal satisfaction," "the goal needs to not be that technological development significantly changes human work, for this would be detrimental to humanity" [132] -rather, it ought to promote human labor. Seen in this light, AI needs to help, not change, human judgment. Similarly, it should never ever degrade creativity or lower employees to simple "cogs in a device." Therefore, "respect for the self-respect of workers and the importance of employment for the economic well-being of individuals, households, and societies, for job security and simply salaries, should be a high top priority for the global neighborhood as these forms of technology permeate more deeply into our work environments." [133]
71. As individuals in God's recovery work, healthcare professionals have the vocation and obligation to be "guardians and servants of human life." [134] Because of this, the health care occupation brings an "intrinsic and indisputable ethical measurement," recognized by the Hippocratic Oath, which obliges physicians and health care professionals to dedicate themselves to having "outright respect for human life and its sacredness." [135] Following the example of the Do-gooder, this dedication is to be carried out by males and females "who decline the development of a society of exclusion, and act instead as next-door neighbors, raising up and rehabilitating the succumbed to the sake of the typical good." [136]
72. Seen in this light, AI seems to hold enormous capacity in a variety of applications in the medical field, such as assisting the diagnostic work of doctor, helping with relationships between clients and medical staff, using brand-new treatments, and expanding access to quality care likewise for those who are isolated or marginalized. In these methods, the technology could improve the "compassionate and caring closeness" [137] that doctor are called to reach the sick and suffering.

73. However, if AI is utilized not to enhance however to replace the relationship between clients and health care providers-leaving patients to interact with a maker rather than a human being-it would minimize a most importantly essential human relational structure to a central, impersonal, and unequal framework. Instead of encouraging solidarity with the sick and suffering, such applications of AI would risk getting worse the loneliness that often accompanies disease, especially in the context of a culture where "persons are no longer seen as a paramount worth to be taken care of and appreciated." [138] This abuse of AI would not line up with regard for the self-respect of the human person and uniformity with the suffering.

74. Responsibility for the well-being of clients and the choices that touch upon their lives are at the heart of the health care occupation. This responsibility needs doctor to work out all their ability and intelligence in making well-reasoned and fairly grounded choices regarding those delegated to their care, constantly respecting the inviolable dignity of the patients and the requirement for notified permission. As an outcome, choices relating to patient treatment and the weight of obligation they entail need to constantly remain with the human individual and must never be handed over to AI. [139]
75. In addition, utilizing AI to identify who should get treatment based mainly on financial measures or metrics of effectiveness represents a particularly problematic instance of the "technocratic paradigm" that must be rejected. [140] For, "enhancing resources implies using them in an ethical and fraternal method, and not penalizing the most fragile." [141] Additionally, AI tools in healthcare are "exposed to kinds of predisposition and discrimination," where "systemic mistakes can quickly multiply, producing not only injustices in private cases however likewise, due to the cause and effect, genuine forms of social inequality." [142]
76. The integration of AI into healthcare also postures the risk of magnifying other existing variations in access to medical care. As healthcare ends up being progressively oriented toward prevention and lifestyle-based methods, AI-driven services might accidentally prefer more affluent populations who already enjoy much better access to medical resources and quality nutrition. This pattern threats reinforcing a "medicine for the abundant" model, where those with financial means gain from sophisticated preventative tools and individualized health details while others battle to gain access to even basic services. To prevent such inequities, fair frameworks are required to guarantee that using AI in healthcare does not aggravate existing healthcare inequalities however rather serves the common good.

77. The words of the Second Vatican Council remain totally relevant today: "True education aims to form people with a view towards their last end and the good of the society to which they belong." [143] As such, education is "never ever a simple procedure of passing on facts and intellectual abilities: rather, its aim is to contribute to the individual's holistic development in its various aspects (intellectual, cultural, spiritual, and so on), including, for example, community life and relations within the scholastic neighborhood," [144] in keeping with the nature and dignity of the human individual.

78. This technique includes a commitment to cultivating the mind, but constantly as a part of the important advancement of the individual: "We should break that idea of education which holds that educating methods filling one's head with ideas. That is the way we educate robots, cerebral minds, not individuals. Educating is taking a danger in the tension in between the mind, the heart, and the hands." [145]
79. At the center of this work of forming the entire human person is the indispensable relationship in between instructor and trainee. Teachers do more than communicate understanding; they design necessary human qualities and motivate the delight of discovery. [146] Their presence inspires trainees both through the content they teach and the care they show for their trainees. This bond cultivates trust, shared understanding, and the capability to resolve everyone'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 duplicate, one that deepens engagement and nurtures the trainee's important advancement.

80. In this context, AI presents both chances and obstacles. If utilized in a prudent manner, within the context of an existing teacher-student relationship and purchased to the authentic goals of education, AI can end up being an important instructional resource by improving access to education, offering tailored support, and providing instant feedback to trainees. These advantages might improve the learning experience, specifically in cases where individualized attention is needed, or instructional resources are otherwise scarce.

81. Nevertheless, an important part of education is forming "the intelligence to reason well in all matters, to reach out towards fact, and to grasp it," [147] while assisting the "language of the head" to grow harmoniously with the "language of the heart" and the "language of the hands." [148] This is all the more important in an age marked by technology, in which "it is no longer simply a concern of 'utilizing' instruments of interaction, however of living in an extremely digitalized culture that has actually had a profound effect on [...] our capability to communicate, find out, be notified and enter into relationship with others." [149] However, instead of fostering "a cultivated intellect," which "brings with it a power and a grace to every work and occupation that it carries out," [150] the substantial usage of AI in education could cause the trainees' increased reliance on innovation, eroding their capability to carry out some skills separately and aggravating their reliance on screens. [151]
82. Additionally, while some AI systems are designed to help individuals establish their crucial thinking capabilities and analytical abilities, numerous others merely offer answers rather of triggering trainees to get here at responses themselves or compose text on their own. [152] Instead of training young people how to amass details and generate fast reactions, education needs to motivate "the accountable usage of liberty to deal with concerns with good sense and intelligence." [153] Building on this, "education in using forms of expert system should aim above all at promoting critical thinking. Users of any ages, however specifically the young, need to establish a critical method to using data and content collected on the internet or produced by expert system systems. Schools, universities, and clinical societies are challenged to assist trainees and professionals to comprehend the social and ethical aspects of the development and uses of innovation." [154]
83. As Saint John Paul II recalled, "worldwide today, identified by such quick advancements in science and innovation, the jobs of a Catholic University assume an ever higher value and seriousness." [155] In a specific way, Catholic universities are advised to be present as excellent labs of hope at this crossroads of history. In an inter-disciplinary and cross-disciplinary key, they are advised to engage "with knowledge and creativity" [156] in careful research on this phenomenon, assisting to draw out the salutary potential within the various fields of science and reality, and directing them always towards fairly sound applications that plainly serve the cohesion of our societies and the typical good, reaching brand-new frontiers in the discussion between faith and factor.

84. Moreover, it ought to be kept in mind that present AI programs have been known to supply prejudiced or produced details, which can lead trainees to trust unreliable content. This issue "not only runs the threat of legitimizing phony news and enhancing a dominant culture's advantage, however, in brief, it likewise undermines the educational process itself." [157] With time, clearer distinctions may emerge between correct and incorrect uses of AI in education and research. Yet, a definitive standard is that using AI ought to always be transparent and never ever misrepresented.

85. AI could be utilized as an aid to human self-respect if it helps individuals understand intricate concepts or directs them to sound resources that support their search for the reality. [158]
86. However, AI likewise presents a serious threat of creating controlled content and false details, which can easily deceive individuals due to its resemblance to the fact. Such false information might happen accidentally, as when it comes to AI "hallucination," where a generative AI system yields results that appear genuine however are not. Since producing content that mimics human artifacts is main to AI's functionality, mitigating these dangers proves tough. Yet, the consequences of such aberrations and false details can be rather severe. For this factor, all those associated with producing and using AI systems should be devoted to the truthfulness and accuracy of the details processed by such systems and disseminated to the public.

87. While AI has a latent capacity to create false details, a a lot more troubling issue lies in the intentional abuse of AI for adjustment. This can occur when people or companies intentionally create and spread out false material with the aim to deceive or cause damage, such as "deepfake" images, videos, and audio-referring to an incorrect representation of an individual, edited or produced by an AI algorithm. The threat of deepfakes is especially apparent when they are utilized to target or hurt others. While the images or videos themselves might be artificial, the damage they trigger is real, leaving "deep scars in the hearts of those who suffer it" and "real wounds in their human self-respect." [159]
88. On a wider scale, by distorting "our relationship with others and with truth," [160] AI-generated phony media can gradually weaken the foundations of society. This concern needs mindful guideline, as misinformation-especially through AI-controlled or affected media-can spread inadvertently, sustaining political polarization and social discontent. When society becomes indifferent to the fact, various groups construct their own versions of "truths," compromising the "reciprocal ties and mutual dependencies" [161] that underpin the material of social life. As deepfakes trigger people to question whatever and AI-generated false content wears down trust in what they see and hear, polarization and dispute will just grow. Such extensive deception is no insignificant matter; it strikes at the core of humankind, dismantling the fundamental trust on which societies are constructed. [162]
89. Countering AI-driven frauds is not just the work of market experts-it needs the efforts of all individuals of goodwill. "If technology is to serve human dignity and not hurt it, and if it is to promote peace instead of violence, then the human community must be proactive in dealing with these patterns with regard to human dignity and the promotion of the excellent." [163] Those who produce and share AI-generated material needs to constantly work out diligence in verifying the reality of what they distribute and, in all cases, need to "avoid the sharing of words and images that are degrading of human beings, that promote hatred and intolerance, that debase the goodness and intimacy of human sexuality or that make use of the weak and vulnerable." [164] This requires the continuous vigilance and cautious discernment of all users regarding their activity online. [165]
90. Humans are naturally relational, and the data each person produces in the digital world can be seen as an objectified expression of this relational nature. Data communicates not just details but also individual and relational knowledge, which, in an increasingly digitized context, can amount to power over the person. Moreover, while some kinds of data might pertain to public elements of a person's life, others might touch upon the person's interiority, maybe even their conscience. Seen in this way, personal privacy plays an essential function in securing the borders of an individual's inner life, maintaining their flexibility to connect to others, reveal themselves, and make decisions without excessive control. This protection is likewise connected to the defense of religious flexibility, as security can also be misused to apply control over the lives of believers and how they express their faith.

91. It is proper, for that reason, to attend to the concern of personal privacy from an issue for the genuine freedom and inalienable self-respect of the human person "in all scenarios." [166] The Second Vatican Council consisted of the right "to safeguard privacy" among the essential rights "required for living a really human life," a right that should be extended to all individuals on account of their "superb dignity." [167] Furthermore, the Church has actually also verified the right to the legitimate respect for a personal life in the context of affirming the individual's right to an excellent track record, defense of their physical and psychological stability, and freedom from damage or unnecessary invasion [168] -necessary elements of the due respect for the intrinsic dignity of the human person. [169]
92. Advances in AI-powered data processing and analysis now make it possible to infer patterns in an individual's habits and believing from even a small amount of details, making the role of data privacy even more necessary as a protect for the self-respect and relational nature of the human person. As Pope Francis observed, "while closed and intolerant attitudes towards others are on the increase, ranges are otherwise shrinking or vanishing to the point that the right to privacy hardly exists. Everything has become a sort of phenomenon to be taken a look at and checked, and individuals's lives are now under constant surveillance." [170]
93. While there can be legitimate and appropriate methods to use AI in keeping with human dignity and the common excellent, using it for security aimed at exploiting, restricting others' freedom, or benefitting a few at the expenditure of the numerous is unjustifiable. The danger of surveillance overreach need to be kept an eye on by suitable regulators to ensure openness and public accountability. Those responsible for surveillance needs to never exceed their authority, which need to always prefer the dignity and liberty of everyone as the necessary basis of a simply and gentle society.

94. Furthermore, "fundamental respect for human dignity needs that we refuse to allow the uniqueness of the individual to be determined with a set of information." [171] This particularly uses when AI is utilized to assess individuals or groups based on their habits, characteristics, or history-a practice called "social scoring": "In social and economic decision-making, we need to beware about handing over judgments to algorithms that process information, often gathered surreptitiously, on a person's makeup and previous habits. Such data can be infected by social prejudices and preconceptions. An individual's past habits should not be utilized to deny him or her the opportunity to alter, grow, and contribute to society. We can not allow algorithms to restrict or condition regard for human dignity, or to leave out compassion, mercy, forgiveness, and above all, the hope that individuals are able to change." [172]
95. AI has lots of promising applications for improving our relationship with our "typical home," such as developing designs to forecast severe environment occasions, proposing engineering options to minimize their impact, handling relief operations, and anticipating population shifts. [173] Additionally, AI can support sustainable farming, enhance energy use, and offer early warning systems for public health emergencies. These developments have the possible to enhance resilience against climate-related challenges and promote more sustainable advancement.

96. At the same time, existing AI designs and the hardware needed to support them consume huge amounts of energy and water, significantly contributing to CO2 emissions and straining resources. This truth is frequently obscured by the way this innovation exists in the popular creativity, where words such as "the cloud" [174] can provide the impression that information is saved and processed in an intangible world, detached from the real world. However, "the cloud" is not an ethereal domain separate from the real world; as with all calculating innovations, it counts on physical machines, cable televisions, and energy. The same is real of the technology behind AI. As these systems grow in complexity, especially large language designs (LLMs), they require ever-larger datasets, increased computational power, and higher storage facilities. Considering the heavy toll these technologies take on the environment, it is essential to develop sustainable solutions that decrease their impact on our typical home.

97. Even then, as Pope Francis teaches, it is vital "that we search for options not only in technology however in a modification of mankind." [175] A total and genuine understanding of creation recognizes that the worth of all developed things can not be decreased to their mere energy. Therefore, a fully human method to the stewardship of the earth declines the distorted anthropocentrism of the technocratic paradigm, which seeks to "draw out everything possible" from the world, [176] and rejects the "myth of progress," which assumes that "ecological problems will solve themselves merely with the application of brand-new innovation and without any need for ethical considerations or deep change." [177] Such a frame of mind should pave the way to a more holistic approach that appreciates the order of development and promotes the essential good of the human person while protecting our common home. [178]
98. The Second Vatican Council and the constant teaching of the Popes ever since have actually firmly insisted that peace is not merely the absence of war and is not restricted to maintaining a balance of powers between adversaries. Instead, in the words of Saint Augustine, peace is "the tranquility of order." [179] Certainly, peace can not be attained without protecting the goods of individuals, totally free communication, respect for the self-respect of individuals and peoples, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is the work of justice and the impact of charity and can not be attained through force alone; rather, it needs to be mainly constructed through patient diplomacy, the active promo of justice, uniformity, integral human development, and respect for the dignity of all individuals. [180] In this way, the tools used to maintain peace should never be permitted to justify injustice, violence, or oppression. Instead, they need to always be governed by a "firm determination to respect other people and nations, along with their dignity, along with the intentional practice of fraternity." [181]
99. While AI's analytical abilities could assist nations look for peace and make sure security, the "weaponization of Artificial Intelligence" can likewise be extremely bothersome. Pope Francis has observed that "the ability to perform military operations through push-button control systems has caused a reduced perception of the destruction brought on by those weapon systems and the burden of responsibility for their usage, leading to a much more cold and separated technique to the immense disaster of war." [182] Moreover, the ease with which autonomous weapons make war more feasible militates against the concept of war as a last option in genuine self-defense, [183] possibly increasing the instruments of war well beyond the scope of human oversight and precipitating a destabilizing arms race, with disastrous repercussions for human rights. [184]
100. In specific, Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, which can recognizing and striking targets without direct human intervention, are a "cause for severe ethical concern" 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 prohibition on their use, beginning with "an efficient and concrete dedication to present ever greater and appropriate human control. No maker should ever select to take the life of a human being." [186]
101. Since it is a small step from makers that can kill autonomously with accuracy to those efficient in large-scale damage, some AI researchers have revealed concerns that such innovation postures an "existential risk" by having the potential to act in manner ins which might threaten the survival of entire regions and even of humanity itself. This risk needs severe attention, showing the long-standing issue about technologies that approve 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 "undertake an examination of war with an entirely new attitude" [188] is more urgent than ever.

102. At the same time, while the theoretical risks of AI should have attention, the more immediate and pressing concern depends on how individuals with malicious intents might abuse this technology. [189] Like any tool, AI is an extension of human power, and while its future abilities are unforeseeable, humankind's previous actions provide clear warnings. The atrocities committed throughout history are adequate to raise deep concerns about the potential abuses of AI.

103. Saint John Paul II observed that "humanity now has instruments of unmatched power: we can turn this world into a garden, or decrease it to a stack of rubble." [190] Given this truth, the Church reminds us, in the words of Pope Francis, that "we are totally free to apply our intelligence towards things developing positively," or towards "decadence and mutual damage." [191] To prevent humanity from spiraling into self-destruction, [192] there should be a clear stand against all applications of innovation that inherently threaten human life and dignity. This commitment requires careful discernment about the usage of AI, particularly in military defense applications, to ensure that it always respects human dignity and serves the typical good. The advancement and release of AI in armaments should undergo the greatest levels of ethical scrutiny, governed by a concern for human dignity and the sanctity of life. [193]
104. Technology offers exceptional tools to oversee and establish the world's resources. However, in many cases, humankind is increasingly ceding control of these resources to devices. Within some circles of scientists and futurists, there is optimism about the capacity of synthetic basic intelligence (AGI), a theoretical form of AI that would match or exceed human intelligence and bring about unimaginable advancements. Some even speculate that AGI might attain superhuman abilities. At the very same time, as society wanders away from a connection with the transcendent, some are tempted to turn to AI searching for significance or fulfillment-longings that can only be truly pleased in communion with God. [194]
105. However, the presumption 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 might show a lot more sexy than conventional idols for, unlike idols that "have mouths however do not speak; eyes, however do not see; ears, but do not hear" (Ps. 115:5 -6), AI can "speak," or a minimum of gives the impression of doing so (cf. Rev. 13:15). Yet, it is essential 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 numerous of the capabilities particular to human life, and it is likewise fallible. By turning to AI as a perceived "Other" greater than itself, with which to share existence and obligations, humankind risks developing a replacement for God. However, it is not AI that is ultimately deified and worshipped, but humankind itself-which, in this method, becomes enslaved to its own work. [195]
106. While AI has the prospective to serve mankind and contribute to the common great, it remains a creation of human hands, bearing "the imprint of human art and resourcefulness" (Acts 17:29). It needs to never be ascribed excessive worth. As the Book of Wisdom affirms: "For a male made them, and one whose spirit is obtained formed them; for no man can form a god which is like himself. He is mortal, and what he makes with lawless hands is dead, for he is better than the things he worships given that he has life, but they never have" (Wis. 15:16 -17).

107. In contrast, human beings, "by their interior life, go beyond 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 decide their own fate in the sight of God." [196] It is within the heart, as Pope Francis advises us, that each specific finds the "mysterious connection in between self-knowledge and openness to others, in between the encounter with one's personal originality and the willingness to give oneself to others. " [197] Therefore, it is the heart alone that is "efficient in setting our other powers and passions, and our entire individual, in a position of reverence and caring obedience before the Lord," [198] who "uses to treat every one people as a 'Thou,' always and permanently." [199]
108. Considering the different difficulties presented by advances in technology, Pope Francis highlighted the requirement for development in "human responsibility, values, and conscience," proportionate to the growth in the capacity that this innovation brings [200] -acknowledging that "with an increase in human power comes a widening of responsibility on the part of individuals and communities." [201]
109. At the very same time, the "essential and essential question" remains "whether in the context of this development man, as man, is becoming genuinely better, that is to say, more mature spiritually, more familiar with the self-respect of his humanity, more accountable, more available to others, especially the neediest and the weakest, and readier to provide and to aid all." [202]
110. As a result, it is crucial to understand how to examine specific applications of AI in specific contexts to determine whether its usage promotes human dignity, the occupation of the human individual, and the common good. Just like lots of technologies, the results of the different uses of AI may not always be predictable from their creation. As these applications and their social effects become clearer, proper actions need to be made at all levels of society, following the concept of subsidiarity. Individual users, households, civil society, corporations, organizations, federal governments, and worldwide companies should operate at their correct levels to guarantee that AI is utilized for the good of all.

111. A substantial difficulty and chance for the typical great today depends on considering AI within a framework of relational intelligence, which highlights the interconnectedness of people and communities and highlights our shared responsibility for fostering the integral wellness of others. The twentieth-century theorist Nicholas Berdyaev observed that individuals often blame makers for personal and social problems; however, "this just embarrasses male and does not represent his self-respect," for "it is not worthy to transfer obligation from man to a machine." [203] Only the human individual can be morally responsible, and the obstacles of a technological society are ultimately spiritual in nature. Therefore, dealing with those difficulties "needs a climax of spirituality." [204]
112. A further point to think about is the call, triggered by the look of AI on the world phase, for a restored gratitude of all that is human. Years ago, the French Catholic author Georges Bernanos alerted that "the risk is not in the reproduction of devices, however in the ever-increasing variety of guys accustomed from their childhood to desire only what makers can offer." [205] This obstacle is as true today as it was then, as the quick rate of digitization risks a "digital reductionism," where non-quantifiable aspects of life are reserved and after that forgotten or even deemed irrelevant due to the fact that they can not be computed in formal terms. AI ought to be used only as a tool to complement human intelligence instead of replace its richness. [206] Cultivating those aspects of human life that transcend calculation is vital for maintaining "a genuine humanity" that "appears to dwell in the middle of our technological culture, almost unnoticed, like a mist permeating gently beneath a closed door." [207]
113. The huge expanse of the world's understanding is now available in manner ins which would have filled previous generations with awe. However, to make sure that improvements in understanding do not end up being humanly or spiritually barren, one should surpass the mere accumulation of data and aim to attain true knowledge. [208]
114. This wisdom is the gift that humankind needs most to attend to the extensive questions and ethical challenges postured by AI: "Only by embracing a spiritual method of seeing reality, only by recuperating a wisdom of the heart, can we confront and analyze the newness of our time." [209] Such "knowledge of the heart" is "the virtue that allows us to integrate the entire and its parts, our decisions and their effects." It "can not be looked for from makers," however it "lets itself be discovered by those who seek it and be seen by those who love it; it prepares for those who desire it, and it enters search of those who are deserving of 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 take a look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, scenarios, occasions and to uncover their genuine significance." [211]
116. Since a "individual's perfection is determined not by the details or understanding they have, however by the depth of their charity," [212] how we integrate AI "to consist of the least of our brothers and siblings, the susceptible, and those most in requirement, will be the true measure of our humankind." [213] The "wisdom of the heart" can brighten and direct the human-centered use of this innovation to help promote the common excellent, look after our "typical home," advance the look for the reality, foster important human development, prefer human uniformity and fraternity, forum.pinoo.com.tr and lead humanity to its supreme goal: happiness and complete communion with God. [214]
117. From this perspective of wisdom, followers will have the ability to function as ethical agents efficient in using this technology to promote a genuine vision of the human person and society. [215] This ought to be finished with the understanding that technological development belongs to God's prepare 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 given on 14 January 2025 to the undersigned Prefects and Secretaries of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Dicastery for Culture and Education, approved this Note and purchased its publication.

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

Ex audientia pass away 14 ianuarii 2025 Franciscus

Contents

I. Introduction

II. What is Artificial Intelligence?

III. Intelligence in the Philosophical and Theological Tradition

Rationality

Embodiment

Relationality

Relationship with the Truth

Stewardship of the World

An Important Understanding of Human Intelligence

The Limits of AI

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

Helping Human Freedom and Decision-Making

V. Specific Questions

AI and Society

AI and Human Relationships

AI, the Economy, and Labor

AI and Healthcare

AI and Education

AI, Misinformation, Deepfakes, and Abuse

AI, Privacy, and Surveillance

AI and the Protection of Our Common Home

AI and Warfare

AI and Our Relationship with God

VI. Concluding Reflections

True Wisdom

[1] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. See likewise Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. [2] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 307. Cf. Id., Christmas Greetings to the Roman Curia (21 December 2019): AAS 112 (2020 ), 43. [3] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [4] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 2293; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [5] J. McCarthy, et al., "A Proposition for the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence" (31 August 1955), http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/history/dartmouth/dartmouth.html (accessed: 21 October 2024). [6] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), pars. 2-3: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [7] Terms in this document explaining the outputs or processes of AI are utilized figuratively to explain its operations and are not intended to anthropomorphize the device. [8] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3; Id., Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [9] Here, one can see the main positions of the "transhumanists" and the "posthumanists." Transhumanists argue that technological developments will allow humans to overcome their biological constraints and enhance both their physical and cognitive capabilities. Posthumanists, on the other hand, contend that such advances will ultimately modify human identity to the extent that humankind itself may no longer be considered genuinely "human." Both views rest on an essentially negative perception of human corporality, which deals with the body more as a barrier than as an important part of the individual's identity and contact us to full realization. Yet, this unfavorable view of the body is inconsistent with a correct understanding of human dignity. While the Church supports authentic clinical progress, it verifies that human self-respect is rooted in "the individual as an inseparable unity of body and soul. " Thus, "self-respect is also intrinsic in each person'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 technique reflects a functionalist perspective, which minimizes the human mind to its functions and assumes that its functions can be totally measured in physical or mathematical terms. However, even if a future AGI were to appear truly smart, it would still remain functional in nature. [11] Cf. A.M. Turing, "Computing Machinery and Intelligence," Mind 59 (1950) 443-460. [12] If "thinking" is attributed to makers, it must be clarified that this refers to calculative thinking rather than critical thinking. Similarly, if devices are said to run using abstract thought, it needs to be specified that this is restricted to computational reasoning. On the other hand, by its very nature, human thought is a creative procedure that avoids shows and transcends 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 more conversation of these anthropological and doctrinal foundations, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 43-144. [15] Aristotle, Metaphysics, I. 1, 980 a 21. [16] Cf. Augustine, De Genesi ad litteram III, 20, 30: PL 34, 292: "Man is made in the image of God in relation to that [faculty] by which he is superior to the irrational animals. Now, this [professors] is factor itself, or the 'mind,' or 'intelligence,' whatever other name it may more suitably be offered"; Id., Enarrationes in Psalmos 54, 3: PL 36, 629: "When considering all that they have, human beings discover that they are most identified from animals specifically by the fact they have intelligence." This is also reiterated by Saint Thomas Aquinas, who mentions that "man is the most best of all earthly beings endowed with movement, and his proper and natural operation is intellection," by which male abstracts from things and "gets in his mind things in fact intelligible" (Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 76). [17] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [18] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 49, a. 5, advertisement 3. Cf. ibid., I, q. 79; II-II, q. 47, a. 3; II-II, q. 49, a. 2. For a contemporary perspective that echoes elements of the classical and middle ages difference in between these two modes of cognition, cf. D. Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, New York 2011. [19] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 76, a. 1, resp. [20] Cf. Irenaeus of Lyon, Adversus Haereses, V, 6, 1: PG 7( 2 ), 1136-1138. [21] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 9. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1045: "The intellect can investigate the reality of things through reflection, experience and dialogue, and pertain to recognize because truth, which transcends it, the basis of certain universal ethical demands." [22] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [23] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 365. Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 75, a. 4, resp. [24] Certainly, Sacred Scripture "typically considers the human individual as a being who exists in the body and is unthinkable beyond it" (Pontifical Biblical Commission, "Che cosa è l'uomo?" (Sal 8,5): Un itinerario di antropologia biblica [30 September 2019], par. 19). Cf. ibid., pars. 20-21, 43-44, 48. [25] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 22: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1042: Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 7: AAS 100 (2008 ), 863: "Christ did not disdain human bodiliness, however rather totally disclosed its significance and worth." [26] Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 81. [27] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [28] Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I, q. 89, a. 1, resp.: "to be separated from the body is not in accordance with [the soul's] nature [...] and hence it is joined to the body in order that it might have an existence and an operation suitable to its nature." [29] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1035. Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 18. [30] International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 56. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 357. [31] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), pars. 5, 8; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 15, 24, 53-54. [32] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 356. Cf. ibid., par. 221. [33] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 13, 26-27. [34] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Donum Veritatis (24 May 1990), 6: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1552. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), par. 109: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1219. Cf. Pseudo-Dionysius, De divinis nominibus, VII, 2: PG 3, 868B-C: "Human souls likewise have factor and with it they circle in discourse around the fact of things. [...] [O] n account of the manner in which they are capable of focusing the numerous 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 - Mahwah 1987, 106-107). [35] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 3: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7. [36] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [37] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 42: AAS 91 (1999 ), 38. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 208: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1043: "the human mind can transcending immediate concerns and comprehending certain realities that are imperishable, as true now as in the past. As it peers into humanity, reason finds universal values obtained from that same nature"; ibid., par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034. [38] Cf. B. Pascal, Pensées, no. 267 (ed. Brunschvicg): "The last proceeding of factor is to recognize that there is an infinity of things which are beyond it" (en. tr. Pascal's Pensées, E.P. Dutton, New York City 1958, 77). [39] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [40] Our semantic capacity allows us to understand messages in any form of interaction in a way that both takes into account and transcends their material or empirical structures (such as computer code). Here, intelligence ends up being a knowledge that "enables us to take a look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, scenarios, events and to uncover their real meaning" (Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications [24 January 2024]: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8). Our creativity allows us to create new material or ideas, mainly by providing an original perspective on truth. Both capabilities depend on the existence of an individual 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 reality, is a lot more than personal feeling [...] Certainly, its close relation to reality cultivates its universality and maintains it from being 'restricted to a narrow field lacking relationships.' [...] Charity's openness to truth therefore protects it from 'a fideism that deprives it of its human and universal breadth.'" The internal quotes are from Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), pars. 2-4: AAS 101 (2009 ), 642-643. [43] Cf. International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 7. [44] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [45] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15. [46] Bonaventure, In II Librum Sententiarum, d. I, p. 2, a. 2, q. 1; as estimated in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 293. Cf. ibid., par. 294. [47] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 295, 299, 302. Bonaventure compares the universe to "a book showing, representing, and explaining its Maker," the Triune God who gives existence to all things (Breviloquium 2.12.1). Cf. Alain de Lille, De Incarnatione Christi, PL 210, 579a: "Omnis mundi creatura quasi liber et pictura nobis est et speculum." [48] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 67: AAS 107 (2015 ), 874; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 6: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589-592; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 57: "humans inhabit an unique place in deep space according to the divine strategy: they take pleasure in the advantage of sharing in the magnificent governance of visible development. [...] Since male's place as ruler remains in fact an involvement in the divine governance of development, we speak of it here as a kind of stewardship." [49] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), pars. 38-39: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1164-1165. [50] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. This concept is likewise shown in the development account, where God brings animals to Adam "to see what he would call them. And whatever [he] called every living animal, that was its name" (Gen. 2:19), an action that shows the active engagement of human intelligence in the stewardship of God's production. Cf. John Chrysostom, Homiliae in Genesim, XIV, 17-21: PG 53, 116-117. [51] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 301. [52] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 302. [53] Bonaventure, Breviloquium 2.12.1. Cf. ibid., 2.11.2. [54] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 236: AAS 105 (2023 ), 1115; Id., Address to Participants in the Meeting of University Chaplains and Pastoral Workers Promoted by the Dicastery for Culture and Education (24 November 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 November 2023, 7. [55] Cf. J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 5.1, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 99-100; Francis, Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [56] Francis, Address to the Members of the National Confederation of Artisans and Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises (CNA) (15 November 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 15 November 2024, 8. [57] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Querida Amazonia (2 February 2020), par. 41: AAS 112 (2020 ), 246; Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 146: AAS 107 (2015 ), 906. [58] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 864. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), pars. 17-24: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47-50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985-987. [59] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 20: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [60] P. Claudel, Conversation sur Jean Racine, Gallimard, Paris 1956, 32: "L'intelligence n'est rien sans la délectation." Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 13: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5: "The mind and the will are put at the service of the higher good 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 divine law itself-eternal, unbiased and universal, by which God orders, directs and governs the entire world and the ways of the human neighborhood according to a strategy conceived in his wisdom and love. God has allowed guy to get involved in this law of his so that, under the gentle personality of magnificent providence, lots of may be able to show up at a deeper and much deeper knowledge of unchangeable reality." Also cf. Id., Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. [63] Cf. First Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius (24 April 1870), ch. 4, DH 3016. [64] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [65] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 891. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 204: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1042. [66] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 11: AAS 83 (1991 ), 807: "God has inscribed his own image and likeness on guy (cf. Gen 1:26), providing upon him an incomparable self-respect [...] In effect, beyond the rights which man obtains by his own work, there exist rights which do not correspond to any work he performs, however which circulation from his necessary self-respect as an individual." Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [67] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 8. Cf. ibid., par. 9; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 22. [68] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2024 ), 310. [69] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [70] In this sense, "Artificial Intelligence" is comprehended as a technical term to suggest this innovation, remembering that the expression is also used to designate the discipline and not just its applications. [71] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 34-35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 51: AAS 83 (1991 ), 856-857. [72] For instance, see the support of clinical exploration in Albertus Magnus (De Mineralibus, II, 2, 1) and the appreciation for the mechanical arts in Hugh of St. Victor (Didascalicon, I, 9). These writers, among a long list of other Catholics engaged in scientific research study and technological exploration, illustrate that "faith and science can be united in charity, supplied that science is put at the service of the guys and woman of our time and not misused to damage or even ruin them" (Francis, Address to Participants in the 2024 Lemaître Conference of the Vatican Observatory [20 June 2024]: L'Osservatore Romano, 20 June 2024, 8). Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 36: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053-1054; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), pars. 2, 106: AAS 91 (1999 ), 6-7.86 -87. [73] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. [74] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [75] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [76] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 102: AAS 107 (2015 ), 888. [77] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889; Id., Encyclical Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 27: AAS 112 (2020 ), 978; Benedict XVI, Encyclical Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 23: AAS 101 (2009 ), 657-658. [78] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39, 47; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), passim. [79] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par 2293. [80] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2-4. [81] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1749: "Freedom makes male an ethical subject. When he acts intentionally, guy is, so to speak, the father of his acts." [82] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1776. [83] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1777. [84] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 1779-1781; Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 463, where the Holy Father motivated efforts "to ensure that innovation remains human-centered, fairly grounded and directed towards the excellent." [85] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 166: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1026-1027; Id., Address to the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (23 September 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 September 2024, 10. On the role of human agency in picking a wider aim (Ziel) that then informs the particular purpose (Zweck) for which each technological application is developed, cf. F. Dessauer, Streit um pass away Technik, Herder-Bücherei, Freiburg i. Br. 1959, 70-71. [86] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4: "Technology is born for a purpose and, in its impact on human society, always represents a type of order in social relations and a plan of power, hence making it possible for certain people to perform specific actions while preventing others from performing various ones. In a basically specific method, this constitutive power-dimension of innovation constantly includes the worldview of those who developed and developed it." [87] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 309. [88] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [89] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti, pars. 212-213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [90] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 5: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589; Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [91] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "Faced with the marvels of devices, which appear to know how to choose independently, we should be extremely clear that decision-making [...] should constantly be left to the human individual. We would condemn humankind to a future without hope if we took away people's ability to make decisions about themselves and their lives, by dooming them to depend on the 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 "predisposition" in this document refers to algorithmic predisposition (methodical and constant mistakes in computer systems that may disproportionately prejudice certain groups in unintended ways) or discovering bias (which will lead to training on a prejudiced data set) and not the "bias vector" in neural networks (which is a specification utilized to change the output of "nerve cells" to change more precisely to the data). [94] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464, where the Holy Father affirmed the growth in consensus "on the requirement for development procedures to respect such worths as inclusion, openness, security, equity, personal privacy and dependability," and likewise welcomed "the efforts of worldwide companies to regulate these technologies so that they promote authentic development, contributing, that is, to a much better world and an integrally greater quality of life." [95] Francis, Greetings to a Delegation of the "Max Planck Society" (23 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 February 2023, 8. [96] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [97] Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1571. [98] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. For further discussion of the ethical questions raised by AI from a Catholic perspective, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 147-253. [99] On the importance of discussion 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, forum.altaycoins.com Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [102] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [103] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. [104] Cf. Pontifical Council for Social Communications, Ethics in Internet (22 February 2002), par. 10. [105] Francis, Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414; quoting the Final Document of the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops (27 October 2018), par. 24: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1593. Cf. Benedict XVI, Address to the Participants in the International Congress on Natural Moral Law (12 February 2017): AAS 99 (2007 ), 245. [106] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-33: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047-1050. [107] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-21: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047. [108] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 308-309. [109] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [110] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [111] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 101, 103, 111, 115, 167: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1004-1005, 1007-1009, 1027. [112] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047; cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 35: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 123. [113] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 12: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1034. [114] Cf. Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church (2004 ), par. 149. [115] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [116] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [117] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 865. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), pars. 88-89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414. [118] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057. [119] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985. [120] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [121] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [122] Cf. E. Stein, Zum Problem der Einfühlung, Buchdruckerei des Waisenhauses, Halle 1917 (en. tr. On the Problem of Empathy, ICS Publications, Washington D.C. 1989). [123] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057:" [Many individuals] desire their interpersonal relationships offered by sophisticated equipment, by screens and systems which can be turned on and off on command. Meanwhile, the Gospel informs us constantly to run the threat of an in person encounter with others, with their physical existence which challenges us, with their pain and their pleas, with their pleasure which contaminates us in our close and constant interaction. True faith in the incarnate Son of God is inseparable from self-giving, from membership in the neighborhood, from service, from reconciliation with others." Also cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 24: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1044-1045. [124] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 1. [125] Cf. Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570; Id, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 18, 124-129: AAS 107 (2015 ), 854.897-899. [126] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [127] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 209: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1107. [128] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4. For Pope Francis' teaching about AI in relationship to the "technocratic paradigm," cf. Id., Encyclical Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 106-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893. [129] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047.; as priced estimate in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1912. Cf. John XXIII, Encyclical Letter Mater et Magistra (15 May 1961), par. 219: AAS 53 (1961 ), 453. [130] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par 64: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1086. [131] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 162: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1025. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 6: AAS 73 (1981 ), 591: "work is 'for male' and not man 'for work.' Through this conclusion one appropriately pertains to acknowledge the pre-eminence of the subjective meaning of work over the objective one." [132] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 128: AAS 107 (2015 ), 898. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 24: AAS 108 (2016 ), 319-320. [133] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [134] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae (25 March 1995), par. 89: AAS 87 (1995 ), 502. [135] Ibid. [136] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 67: AAS 112 (2020 ), 993; as priced estimate in Id., Message for the XXXI World Day of the Sick (11 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 10 January 2023, 8. [137] Francis, Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [138] Francis, Address to the Diplomatic Corps Accredited to the Holy See (11 January 2016): AAS 108 (2016 ), 120. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 18: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975; Id., Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [139] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465; Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [140] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105, 107: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-890; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 18-21: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975-976; Id., Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465. [141] Francis, Address to the Participants at the Meeting Sponsored by the Charity and Health Commission of the Italian Bishops' Conference (10 February 2017): AAS 109 (2017 ), 243. Cf. ibid., 242-243: "If there is a sector in which the throwaway culture appears, with its painful effects, it is that of healthcare. When an ill person is not positioned in the center or their self-respect is not thought about, this generates attitudes that can lead even to speculation on the bad luck of others. And this is extremely severe! [...] The application of a business technique to the healthcare sector, if indiscriminate [...] may risk disposing of humans." [142] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [143] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729. [144] Congregation for Catholic Education, Instruction on 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, estimating Id., Address to the Members of the "Consilium de Laicis" (2 October 1974): AAS 66 (1974 ), 568: "if [the modern person] does listen to instructors, it is since they are witnesses." [147] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 6.1, London 18733, 125-126. [148] Francis, Consulting With the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [149] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 86: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413, pricing estimate the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, Final Document (27 October 2018), par. 21: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1592. [150] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 7.6, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 167. [151] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 88: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413. [152] In a 2023 policy document about making use of generative AI in education and research study, UNESCO notes: "One of the crucial concerns [of the usage of generative AI (GenAI) in education and research study] is whether human beings can possibly cede basic levels of thinking and skill-acquisition processes to AI and rather focus on higher-order thinking skills based on the outputs provided by AI. Writing, for example, is often related to the structuring of thinking. With GenAI [...], humans can now start with a well-structured overview provided by GenAI. Some experts have identified using GenAI to generate text in this way as 'writing without thinking'" (UNESCO, Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research [2023], 37-38). The German-American thinker Hannah Arendt anticipated such a possibility in her 1959 book, The Human Condition, and warned: "If it must end up being true that understanding (in the sense of knowledge) and believed have parted business for good, then we would certainly become the helpless slaves, not a lot of our makers as of our know-how" (Id., The Human Condition, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 20182, 3). [153] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 262: AAS 108 (2016 ), 417. [154] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 7: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3; cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 167: AAS 107 (2015 ), 914. [155] John Paul II, Apostolic Constitution Ex Corde Ecclesiae (15 August 1990), 7: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1479. [156] Francis, Apostolic Constitution Veritatis Gaudium (29 January 2018), 4c: AAS 110 (2018 ), 9-10. [157] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3. [158] For instance, it may assist individuals gain access to the "array of resources for producing higher understanding of fact" contained in the works of philosophy (John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio [14 September 1998], par. 3: AAS 91 [1999], 7). Cf. ibid., par. 4: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7-8. [159] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 43. Cf. ibid., pars. 61-62. [160] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [161] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par 25: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053; cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), passim: AAS 112 (2020 ), 969-1074. [162] Cf. Francis., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 414; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 25: AAS 91 (1999 ), 25-26: "People can not be truly indifferent to the question of whether what they know is true or not. [...] It is this that Saint Augustine teaches when he writes: 'I have actually satisfied lots of who desired to trick, however none who wished to be tricked'"; pricing quote Augustine, Confessiones, X, 23, 33: PL 32, 794. [163] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), par. 62. [164] Benedict XVI, Message for the XLIII World Day of Social Communications (24 May 2009): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2009, 8. [165] Cf. Dicastery for Communications, Towards Full Presence: A Pastoral Reflection on Engagement with Social 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 male might with impunity break that human self-respect which God himself treats with fantastic reverence"; as quoted in John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 9: AAS 83 (1991 ), 804. [168] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2477, 2489; can. 220 CIC; can. 23 CCEO; John Paul II, Address to the Third General Conference of the Latin American Episcopate (28 January 1979), III.1-2: Insegnamenti II/1 (1979 ), 202-203. [169] Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to the Thematic Discussion on Other Disarmament Measures and International Security (24 October 2022): "Maintaining human dignity in the online world requires States to likewise respect the right to privacy, by shielding people from invasive monitoring and allowing them to protect their individual details from unapproved gain access to." [170] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 42: AAS 112 (2020 ), 984. [171] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [172] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465. [173] The 2023 Interim Report of the United Nations AI Advisory Body recognized a list of "early guarantees of AI assisting to attend to climate modification" (United Nations AI Advisory Body, Interim Report: Governing AI for Humanity [December 2023], 3). The document observed that, "taken together with predictive systems that can change information into insights and insights into actions, AI-enabled tools may help develop brand-new methods and investments to reduce emissions, influence brand-new economic sector financial investments in net no, safeguard biodiversity, and build broad-based social resilience" (ibid.). [174] "The cloud" describes a network of physical servers throughout the world that allows users to shop, process, and handle their information from another location. [175] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 9: AAS 107 (2015 ), 850. [176] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 106: AAS 107 (2015 ), 890. [177] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 60: AAS 107 (2015 ), 870. [178] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 3, 13: AAS 107 (2015 ), 848.852. [179] Augustine, De Civitate Dei, XIX, 13, 1: PL 41, 640. [180] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 77-82: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1100-1107; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 256-262: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1060-1063; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 38-39; Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2302-2317. [181] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 78: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1101. [182] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [183] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2308-2310. [184] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 80-81: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1105. [185] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "We require to guarantee and safeguard a space for appropriate human control over the options 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 deadly self-governing weapons systems (LAWS) that do not have the suitable human control would pose essential ethical concerns, considered that LAWS can never be ethically accountable subjects efficient in abiding by global humanitarian law." [187] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 258: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1061. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [188] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [189] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3: "Nor can we neglect the possibility of advanced weapons ending up in the incorrect hands, facilitating, for instance, terrorist attacks or interventions aimed at destabilizing the organizations of genuine systems of government. In a word, the world does not need brand-new innovations that contribute to the unfair advancement of commerce and the weapons trade and as a result end up promoting the recklessness of war." [190] John Paul II, Act of Entrustment to Mary for the Jubilee of Bishops (8 October 2000), par. 3: Insegnamenti XXIII/2 (200 ), 565. [191] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 79: AAS 107 (2015 ), 878. [192] Cf. Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 51: AAS 101 (2009 ), 687. [193] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39. [194] Cf. Augustine, Confessiones, I, 1, 1: PL 32, 661. [195] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (30 December 1987), par. 28: AAS 80 (1988 ), 548:" [T] here is a much better understanding today that the simple build-up of goods and services [...] is inadequate for the realization of human happiness. Nor, in repercussion, does the availability of the many real benefits supplied in recent times by science and technology, consisting of the computer system sciences, bring liberty from every type of slavery. On the contrary, [...] unless all the significant body of resources and potential at male's disposal is guided by an ethical understanding and by an orientation towards the real good of the mankind, it quickly turns against guy to oppress him." Cf. ibid., pars. 29, 37: AAS 80 (1988 ), 550-551.563 -564. [196] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [197] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 18: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [198] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 27: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 6. [199] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 25: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5-6. [200] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. R. Guardini, Das Ende der Neuzeit, Würzburg 19659, 87 ff. (en. tr. Completion of the Modern World, Wilmington 1998, 82-83). [201] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [202] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptor Hominis (4 March 1979), par. 15: AAS 71 (1979 ), 287-288. [203] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," in C. Mitcham - R. Mackey, eds., Philosophy and Technology: Readings in the Philosophical Problems of Technology, New York City 19832, 212-213. [204] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," 210. [205] G. Bernanos, "La révolution de la liberté" (1944 ), in Id., Le Chemin de la Croix-des-Âmes, Rocher 1987, 829. [206] Cf. Francis, Meeting the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023). [207] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [208] Cf. Bonaventure, Hex. XIX, 3; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986: "The flood of details at our fingertips does not produce greater knowledge. Wisdom is not born of quick searches on the internet nor is it a mass of unverified data. That is not the way to develop in the encounter with fact." [209] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [210] Ibid. [211] Ibid. [212] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate (19 March 2018), par. 37: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1121. [213] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate (19 March 2018), par. 46: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1123-1124. [214] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [215] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570-1571.