1. With wisdom both ancient and brand-new (cf. Mt. 13:52), we are called to assess the present challenges and opportunities posed by scientific and technological advancements, particularly by the recent advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The Christian tradition concerns the present of intelligence as a necessary aspect of how people are produced "in the image of God" (Gen. 1:27). Starting from an important vision of the human person and the scriptural contacting us to "till" and "keep" the earth (Gen. 2:15), the Church highlights that this present of intelligence must be expressed through the accountable use of factor and technical capabilities in the stewardship of the created world.

2. The Church encourages the advancement of science, innovation, the arts, and other types of human undertaking, viewing them as part of the "collaboration of guy and female with God in improving the visible development." [1] As Sirach affirms, God "gave ability to people, that he may be glorified in his wonderful works" (Sir. 38:6). Human capabilities and creativity originate from God and, when used appropriately, glorify God by showing 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 scientific and technological capabilities.

3. It is within this perspective that the present Note addresses the anthropological and ethical difficulties raised by AI-issues that are especially considerable, as one of the goals of this technology is to imitate the human intelligence that developed it. For example, unlike many other human developments, AI can be trained on the results of human creativity and then produce brand-new "artifacts" with a level of speed and skill that typically matches or surpasses what humans can do, such as producing text or images indistinguishable from human structures. This raises crucial issues about AI's possible function in the growing crisis of fact in the general public forum. Moreover, this innovation is designed to discover and make certain choices autonomously, adjusting to brand-new situations and offering options not foreseen by its programmers, and thus, it raises essential concerns about ethical responsibility and human security, with broader implications for society as a whole. This brand-new circumstance has actually triggered many individuals to reflect on what it implies to be human and the role of mankind on the planet.

4. Taking all this into account, there is broad consensus that AI marks a new and substantial phase in humankind's engagement with technology, putting it at the heart of what Pope Francis has explained as an "epochal modification." [2] Its effect is felt internationally and in a wide variety of areas, including social relationships, education, work, art, healthcare, law, warfare, and global relations. As AI advances quickly towards even greater achievements, it is seriously important to consider its anthropological and ethical implications. This involves not only mitigating dangers and avoiding damage but also making sure that its applications are used to promote human progress and the typical good.

5. To contribute positively to the discernment relating to AI, and in reaction 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 role in the global discussion on these concerns, the Church welcomes those entrusted with transferring the faith-including moms and dads, teachers, pastors, and bishops-to commit themselves to this vital topic with care and attention. While this file is planned particularly for them, it is likewise meant to be available to a more comprehensive audience, especially those who share the conviction that clinical and technological advances should be directed toward serving the human individual and the typical good. [4]
6. To this end, the file begins by differentiating 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 doctrinal custom. Finally, the file provides guidelines to guarantee that the development and usage of AI maintain human self-respect and promote the important advancement of the human person and society.

7. The concept of "intelligence" in AI has actually developed over time, drawing on a variety of ideas from different disciplines. While its origins extend back centuries, a substantial turning point occurred in 1956 when the American computer researcher John McCarthy organized a summer season workshop at Dartmouth University to check out the problem of "Artificial Intelligence," which he defined as "that of making a maker act in methods that would be called intelligent if a human were so behaving." [5] This workshop released a research program focused on developing machines efficient in performing tasks typically connected with the human intelligence and smart behavior.

8. Ever since, AI research study has advanced quickly, causing the development of complex systems capable of carrying out extremely advanced tasks. [6] These so-called "narrow AI" systems are generally designed to manage particular and limited functions, such as translating languages, forecasting the trajectory of a storm, categorizing images, addressing questions, or producing visual material at the user's request. While the meaning of "intelligence" in AI research study differs, most modern AI systems-particularly those using maker learning-rely on statistical inference instead of rational reduction. By evaluating large datasets to identify patterns, AI can "forecast" [7] outcomes and propose brand-new approaches, simulating some cognitive procedures typical of human analytical. Such achievements have actually been enabled through advances in computing innovation (consisting of neural networks, unsupervised artificial intelligence, and evolutionary algorithms) in addition to hardware innovations (such as specialized processors). Together, these technologies make it possible for AI systems to react to various types of human input, adjust to new scenarios, and even recommend unique solutions not expected by their initial developers. [8]
9. Due to these fast advancements, many jobs when managed specifically by humans are now delegated to AI. These systems can augment and even supersede what humans have the ability to carry out in numerous fields, especially in specialized areas such as information analysis, image recognition, and medical diagnosis. While each "narrow AI" application is designed for a specific job, many researchers aim to develop what is referred to as "Artificial General Intelligence" (AGI)-a single system efficient in operating throughout all cognitive domains and performing any job within the scope of human intelligence. Some even argue that AGI might one day attain the state of "superintelligence," exceeding human intellectual capacities, or add to "super-longevity" through advances in biotechnology. Others, however, fear that these possibilities, even if theoretical, could one day eclipse the human individual, while still others invite this potential change. [9]
10. Underlying this and lots of other viewpoints on the subject is the implicit presumption that the term "intelligence" can be utilized in the very same method to describe both human intelligence and AI. Yet, this does not record the complete scope of the concept. When it comes to people, intelligence is a faculty that pertains to the person in his/her entirety, whereas in the context of AI, "intelligence" is comprehended functionally, typically with the presumption that the activities quality of the human mind can be broken down into digitized actions that machines can replicate. [10]
11. This practical point of view is exhibited by the "Turing Test," which considers a maker "intelligent" if an individual can not distinguish its habits from that of a human. [11] However, in this context, the term "habits" refers just to the efficiency of specific intellectual tasks; it does not account for the full breadth of human experience, that includes abstraction, feelings, imagination, and the visual, ethical, and religious perceptiveness. Nor does it incorporate the complete range of expressions characteristic of the human mind. Instead, in the case of AI, the "intelligence" of a system is evaluated methodologically, however likewise reductively, based on its ability to produce suitable responses-in this case, those connected with the human intellect-regardless of how those responses are generated.

12. AI's innovative functions give it sophisticated abilities to perform tasks, however not the capability to believe. [12] This difference is crucially important, as the method "intelligence" is defined undoubtedly shapes how we comprehend the relationship in between human idea and this innovation. [13] To value this, one should recall the richness of the philosophical tradition and Christian faith, which provide a deeper and more detailed understanding of intelligence-an understanding that is main to the Church's teaching on the nature, self-respect, and vocation of the human person. [14]
13. From the dawn of human self-reflection, the mind has actually played a main function in comprehending what it suggests to be "human." Aristotle observed that "all people by nature desire to know." [15] This understanding, with its capability for abstraction that understands the nature and significance of things, sets human beings apart from the animal world. [16] As philosophers, theologians, and psychologists have actually taken a look at the specific nature of this intellectual professors, they have actually also explored how human beings comprehend the world and their special place within it. Through this exploration, the Christian custom has pertained to comprehend the human individual as a being including both body and soul-deeply linked to this world and yet transcending it. [17]
14. In the classical custom, the concept of intelligence is often understood through the complementary ideas of "reason" (ratio) and "intellect" (intellectus). These are not separate professors however, as Saint Thomas Aquinas explains, they are two modes in which the same intelligence operates: "The term intelligence is presumed from the inward grasp of the fact, while the name factor is taken from the curious and discursive procedure." [18] This concise description highlights the two essential and complementary dimensions of human intelligence. Intellectus describes the user-friendly grasp of the truth-that is, collaring it with the "eyes" of the mind-which precedes and grounds argumentation itself. Ratio pertains to reasoning proper: the discursive, analytical process that causes judgment. Together, intellect and reason form the 2 aspects of the act of intelligere, "the correct operation of the human being as such." [19]
15. Explaining the human person as a "reasonable" being does not lower the individual to a particular mode of idea; rather, it recognizes that the capability for intellectual understanding shapes and permeates all aspects of human activity. [20] Whether exercised well or inadequately, this capability is an intrinsic element of humanity. In this sense, the "term 'logical' incorporates all the capabilities of the human person," consisting of those associated to "understanding and comprehending, in addition to those of ready, caring, picking, and desiring; it likewise consists of all corporeal functions carefully related to these abilities." [21] This detailed perspective underscores how, in the human person, developed in the "picture of God," factor is integrated in a method 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 framework of an integral anthropology that sees the human being as basically embodied. In the human individual, spirit and matter "are not 2 natures unified, however rather their union forms a single nature." [23] To put it simply, the soul is not merely the immaterial "part" of the person contained within the body, nor is the body an external shell real estate an intangible "core." Rather, the entire human person is simultaneously both material and spiritual. This understanding reflects the teaching of Sacred Scripture, which sees the human individual as a being who lives out relationships with God and others (and hence, an authentically spiritual dimension) within and through this embodied existence. [24] The extensive meaning of this condition is additional lit up by the mystery of the Incarnation, through which God himself took on our flesh and "raised it approximately a sublime self-respect." [25]
17. Although deeply rooted in bodily existence, the human individual transcends the material world through the soul, which is "practically on the horizon of eternity and time." [26] The intellect's capability for transcendence and the self-possessed liberty of the will come from the soul, by which the human person "shares in the light of the magnificent mind." [27] Nevertheless, the human spirit does not exercise its normal mode of understanding without the body. [28] In this way, the intellectual faculties of the human individual are an important part of an anthropology that acknowledges that the human person is a "unity of body and soul." [29] Further elements of this understanding will be established in what follows.

18. Humans are "purchased by their very nature to interpersonal communion," [30] possessing the capability to understand one another, to provide themselves in love, and to participate in communion with others. Accordingly, human intelligence is not a separated professors however is exercised in relationships, finding its maximum expression in discussion, partnership, and solidarity. We discover with others, and we learn through others.

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

21. Human intelligence is ultimately "God's gift fashioned for the assimilation of truth." [34] In the double sense of intellectus-ratio, it allows the individual to check out truths that exceed mere sensory experience or energy, considering that "the desire for truth 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 limitations of empirical data, human intelligence can "with real certitude attain to truth itself as knowable." [36] While reality remains only partially known, the desire for fact "spurs factor constantly to go further; certainly, it is as if factor were overwhelmed to see that it can constantly go beyond what it has actually already attained." [37] Although Truth in itself transcends the limits of human intelligence, it irresistibly attracts it. [38] Drawn by this tourist attraction, the human person is led to look for "realities of a greater order." [39]
22. This natural drive toward the pursuit of truth is particularly evident in the definitely human capabilities for semantic understanding and imagination, [40] through which this search unfolds in a "way that is appropriate to the social nature and dignity of the human person." [41] Likewise, a steadfast orientation to the truth is necessary for charity to be both authentic and universal. [42]
23. The search for reality discovers its highest expression in openness to realities that go beyond the physical and created world. In God, all truths attain their ultimate and original meaning. [43] Entrusting oneself to God is a "essential choice that engages the whole person." [44] In this way, the human individual ends up being fully what he or she is contacted us to be: "the intelligence and the will display their spiritual nature," making it possible for the person "to act in a manner that recognizes personal freedom to the complete." [45]
24. The Christian faith comprehends development as the free act of the Triune God, who, as Saint Bonaventure of Bagnoregio explains, develops "not to increase his splendor, but to show it forth and to interact it." [46] Since God creates 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 human beings to presume a special function: 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 abilities to care for and establish production in accord with God's strategy. [49] In this, human intelligence shows the Divine Intelligence that developed all things (cf. Gen. 1-2; Jn. 1), [50] continually sustains them, and guides them to their supreme purpose in him. [51] Moreover, people are contacted us to develop their capabilities in science and innovation, for through them, God is glorified (cf. Sir. 38:6). Thus, in an appropriate relationship with creation, human beings, on the one hand, use their intelligence and ability to work together with God in assisting creation toward the purpose to which he has called it. [52] On the other hand, creation itself, as Saint Bonaventure observes, assists the human mind to "ascend slowly to the supreme Principle, who is God." [53]
26. In this context, human intelligence ends up being more plainly comprehended as a faculty that forms an integral part of how the entire person engages with reality. Authentic engagement requires accepting the full scope of one's being: spiritual, cognitive, embodied, and relational.

27. This engagement with truth unfolds in numerous methods, as everyone, in his/her diverse individuality [54], looks for to comprehend the world, connect to others, resolve problems, express imagination, and pursue important well-being through the harmonious interplay of the different measurements of the individual's intelligence. [55] This involves rational and linguistic abilities however can also encompass other modes of connecting with truth. Consider the work of an artisan, who "must understand how to determine, in inert matter, a specific kind that others can not acknowledge" [56] and bring it forth through insight and useful skill. Indigenous peoples who live near to the earth frequently possess an extensive sense of nature and its cycles. [57] Similarly, a buddy who knows the right word to say or a person proficient at handling human relationships exhibits an intelligence that is "the fruit of self-examination, dialogue and generous encounter in between individuals." [58] As Pope Francis observes, "in this age of expert system, we can not forget that poetry and love are needed to conserve our mankind." [59]
28. At the heart of the Christian understanding of intelligence is the combination of truth into the ethical and spiritual life of the individual, assisting his or her actions because of God's goodness and fact. According to God's plan, intelligence, in its fullest sense, likewise consists of the capability to savor what holds true, excellent, and lovely. As the twentieth-century French poet Paul Claudel expressed, "intelligence is absolutely nothing without delight." [60] Similarly, Dante, upon reaching the highest paradise in Paradiso, affirms that the culmination of this intellectual pleasure is found in the "light intellectual filled with love, love of real great filled with joy, happiness which transcends every sweet taste." [61]
29. A proper understanding of human intelligence, therefore, can not be lowered to the simple acquisition of facts or the ability to perform specific tasks. Instead, it involves the person's openness to the supreme questions of life and reflects an orientation towards the True and the Good. [62] As an expression of the divine image within the individual, human intelligence has the ability to access the totality of being, pondering existence in its fullness, which surpasses what is measurable, and grasping the meaning of what has actually been understood. For believers, this capacity consists of, in a specific method, the ability to grow in the understanding of the secrets of God by utilizing factor to engage ever more exceptionally with revealed realities (intellectus fidei). [63] True intelligence is formed 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 reflective measurement, an unselfish openness to the True, the Good, and the Beautiful, beyond any utilitarian purpose.

30. In light of the foregoing conversation, the differences between human intelligence and present AI systems end up being evident. While AI is a remarkable technological accomplishment efficient in imitating certain outputs related to human intelligence, it runs by carrying out tasks, attaining objectives, or making decisions based on quantitative data and computational logic. For instance, with its analytical power, AI excels at integrating data from a range of fields, modeling complex systems, and cultivating interdisciplinary connections. In this way, it can assist experts collaborate in solving complicated problems that "can not be dealt with from a single point of view or from a single set of interests." [64]
31. However, even as AI processes and mimics certain expressions of intelligence, it remains fundamentally restricted to a logical-mathematical structure, which enforces inherent constraints. Human intelligence, on the other hand, establishes naturally throughout the individual's physical and psychological development, formed 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 basically various from the developmental development of human intelligence, which is shaped by embodied experiences, consisting of sensory input, psychological reactions, social interactions, and the unique context of each moment. These aspects shape and form individuals within their individual history.In contrast, AI, lacking a physique, counts on computational thinking and learning based upon vast datasets that include taped human experiences and understanding.

32. Consequently, although AI can mimic aspects of human reasoning and perform particular jobs with extraordinary speed and effectiveness, its computational capabilities represent only a portion of the broader capabilities of the human mind. For example, AI can not presently replicate ethical discernment or the ability to develop genuine relationships. Moreover, human intelligence is situated within a personally lived history of intellectual and ethical formation that essentially forms the person's viewpoint, encompassing the physical, emotional, social, ethical, and spiritual dimensions of life. Since AI can not use this fullness of understanding, approaches that rely solely on this technology or treat it as the main methods of interpreting the world can lead to "a loss of appreciation for the whole, for the relationships in between things, and for the wider horizon." [65]
33. Human intelligence is not mainly about completing functional tasks but about understanding and actively engaging with reality in all its dimensions; it is also capable of surprising insights. Since AI does not have the richness of corporeality, relationality, and the openness of the human heart to fact and goodness, its capacities-though apparently limitless-are unparalleled with the human capability to grasp reality. So much can be gained from an illness, a welcome of reconciliation, and even a simple sundown; certainly, numerous experiences we have as humans open brand-new horizons and use the possibility of attaining new knowledge. No device, working entirely with data, can measure up to these and countless other experiences present in our lives.

34. Drawing an overly close equivalence between human intelligence and AI risks catching a functionalist point of view, where individuals are valued based on the work they can perform. However, a person's worth does not depend upon possessing specific skills, cognitive and technological achievements, or specific success, however on the person's inherent self-respect, grounded in being created in the image of God. [66] This self-respect remains intact in all scenarios, consisting of for those not able to exercise their abilities, whether it be a coming child, an unconscious individual, or an older person who is suffering. [67] It also underpins the custom of human rights (and, in particular, what are now called "neuro-rights"), which represent "a crucial point of merging in the search for typical ground" [68] and can, thus, work as an essential ethical guide in discussions on the responsible development and use of AI.

35. Considering all these points, as Pope Francis observes, "the very usage of the word 'intelligence'" in connection with AI "can prove misleading" [69] and dangers neglecting what is most precious in the human individual. Due to this, AI ought to not be viewed as an artificial form of human intelligence however as an item of it. [70]
36. Given these factors to consider, one can ask how AI can be understood within God's strategy. To address this, it is necessary to remember that techno-scientific activity is not neutral in character but is a human endeavor that engages the humanistic and cultural measurements of human imagination. [71]
37. Seen as a fruit of the prospective engraved within human intelligence, [72] scientific questions and the development of technical skills belong to the "cooperation of males and female with God in improving the noticeable creation." [73] At the exact same time, all clinical and technological achievements are, eventually, presents from God. [74] Therefore, people must always utilize their abilities in view of the greater purpose for which God has actually granted them. [75]
38. We can gratefully acknowledge how innovation has "treated numerous evils which utilized to harm and restrict people," [76] a fact for which we ought to rejoice. Nevertheless, not all technological improvements in themselves represent real human progress. [77] The Church is especially opposed to those applications that threaten the sanctity of life or the self-respect of the human person. [78] Like any human endeavor, technological advancement needs to be directed to serve the human individual and contribute to the pursuit of "higher justice, more comprehensive fraternity, and a more humane order of social relations," which are "better than advances in the technical field." [79] Concerns about the ethical implications of technological development are shared not just within the Church but also among many researchers, technologists, and expert associations, who progressively require ethical reflection to assist this development in a responsible way.

39. To resolve these challenges, it is vital to emphasize the significance of moral obligation grounded in the dignity and vocation of the human individual. This assisting principle likewise applies to concerns worrying AI. In this context, the ethical dimension handles main importance because it is people who develop systems and figure out the purposes for which they are used. [80] Between a maker and a human, just the latter is truly a moral agent-a topic of moral obligation who works out flexibility in his/her decisions and accepts their consequences. [81] It is not the device but the human who remains in relationship with reality and goodness, directed by a moral conscience that calls the individual "to love and to do what is great and to prevent evil," [82] attesting to "the authority of reality in recommendation to the supreme Good to which the human person is drawn." [83] Likewise, in between a maker and a human, just the human can be sufficiently self-aware to the point of listening and following the voice of conscience, critical with vigilance, and seeking the great that is possible in every scenario. [84] In fact, all of this also comes from the individual's workout of intelligence.

40. Like any product of human creativity, AI can be directed towards favorable or negative ends. [85] When utilized in ways that appreciate human dignity and promote the well-being of people and neighborhoods, it can contribute favorably to the human occupation. Yet, as in all locations where humans are called to make choices, the shadow of evil also looms here. Where human freedom permits for the possibility of selecting what is incorrect, the ethical assessment of this innovation will need to take into account how it is directed and utilized.

41. At the exact same time, it is not only the ends that are fairly significant but also the methods used to attain them. Additionally, the overall vision and understanding of the human individual ingrained within these systems are essential to consider also. Technological products reflect 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 worths." [87] On a societal level, some technological developments might also enhance relationships and power characteristics that are inconsistent with a correct understanding of the human individual and society.

42. Therefore, the ends and the methods used in a given application of AI, in addition to the general vision it incorporates, need to all be examined to guarantee they appreciate human self-respect and promote the common good. [88] As Pope Francis has actually specified, "the intrinsic dignity of every male and every lady" must be "the essential criterion in examining emerging innovations; these will prove fairly sound to the extent 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 an important role not just in creating and producing technology however also in directing its use in line with the genuine good of the human person. [90] The obligation for managing this wisely pertains to every level of society, assisted by the principle of subsidiarity and other concepts of Catholic Social Teaching.

43. The commitment to making sure that AI always supports and promotes the supreme worth of the self-respect of every person and the fullness of the human vocation serves as a requirement of discernment for designers, owners, operators, and regulators of AI, as well as to its users. It remains legitimate for each application of the technology at every level of its usage.

44. An evaluation of the ramifications of this directing principle might start by thinking about the significance of ethical duty. Since full ethical causality belongs only to personal agents, not synthetic ones, it is important to be able to determine and specify who bears responsibility for the processes associated with AI, especially those capable of learning, correction, and reprogramming. While bottom-up methods and really deep neural networks allow AI to solve complicated issues, they make it hard to understand the procedures that lead to the options they embraced. This complicates accountability because if an AI application produces undesired results, identifying who is responsible ends up being hard. To address this issue, attention requires to be provided to the nature of responsibility procedures in complex, extremely automated settings, where outcomes may just end up being apparent in the medium to long term. For this, it is very important that ultimate obligation for choices made utilizing AI rests with the human decision-makers and that there is accountability for making use of AI at each phase of the decision-making procedure. [91]
45. In addition to identifying who is accountable, it is essential to identify the goals provided to AI systems. Although these systems may utilize not being watched autonomous learning systems and often follow paths that people can not rebuild, they ultimately pursue goals that human beings have designated to them and are governed by procedures established by their designers and programmers. Yet, this presents a challenge since, as AI models become progressively efficient in independent learning, forum.pinoo.com.tr the ability to maintain control over them to make sure that such applications serve human functions might efficiently reduce. This raises the critical concern of how to guarantee that AI systems are purchased for the good of individuals and not against them.

46. While duty for the ethical usage of AI systems begins with those who develop, produce, manage, and supervise such systems, it is likewise shared by those who use them. As Pope Francis noted, the maker "makes a technical option among a number of possibilities based either on distinct criteria or on analytical inferences. Human beings, nevertheless, not just pick, but in their hearts are capable of choosing." [92] Those who utilize AI to accomplish a task and follow its outcomes create a context in which they are ultimately accountable for the power they have delegated. Therefore, insofar as AI can assist humans in making choices, the algorithms that govern it should be trustworthy, safe, robust enough to handle disparities, and transparent in their operation to reduce biases and unintended side results. [93] Regulatory structures need to make sure that all legal entities remain liable for the use of AI and all its repercussions, with appropriate safeguards for openness, personal privacy, and accountability. [94] Moreover, those utilizing AI must beware not to end up being excessively depending on it for their decision-making, a trend that increases modern society's already high reliance on innovation.

47. The Church's ethical and social teaching provides resources to help guarantee that AI is used in a way that maintains human company. Considerations about justice, for instance, ought to likewise deal with problems such as promoting simply social characteristics, maintaining international security, and promoting peace. By exercising vigilance, individuals and communities can recognize ways to use AI to benefit humanity while avoiding applications that could deteriorate human dignity or damage the environment. In this context, the idea of responsibility should be comprehended not just in its most minimal sense however as a "duty for the take care of others, which is more than simply representing outcomes attained." [95]
48. Therefore, AI, like any technology, can be part of a mindful and accountable answer to humankind's occupation to the good. However, as previously gone over, AI must be directed by human intelligence to line up with this occupation, ensuring it appreciates the dignity of the human individual. Recognizing this "exalted self-respect," the Second Vatican Council affirmed that "the social order and its advancement need to usually work to the benefit of the human individual." [96] Due to this, the usage of AI, as Pope Francis said, should be "accompanied by an ethic motivated by a vision of the common good, an ethic of liberty, responsibility, and fraternity, efficient in cultivating the full advancement of individuals in relation to others and to the entire of production." [97]
49. Within this general point of view, some observations follow below to show how the preceding arguments can assist offer an ethical orientation in practical scenarios, in line with the "knowledge of heart" that Pope Francis has proposed. [98] While not exhaustive, this discussion is provided in service of the dialogue that thinks about how AI can be used to maintain the dignity of the human person and promote the common good. [99]
50. As Pope Francis observed, "the inherent dignity of each person and the fraternity that binds us together as members of the one human household need to undergird the advancement of brand-new innovations and act as unassailable requirements for evaluating them before they are used." [100]
51. Viewed through this lens, AI might "present essential developments in agriculture, education and culture, a better level of life for whole countries and peoples, and the development of human fraternity and social relationship," and hence be "utilized to promote essential human development." [101] AI might likewise assist organizations recognize those in need and counter discrimination and marginalization. These and other comparable applications of this technology might add to human advancement and the typical good. [102]
52. However, while AI holds lots of possibilities for promoting the great, it can likewise hinder or perhaps counter human advancement and the common good. Pope Francis has kept in mind that "evidence to date recommends that digital technologies have increased inequality in our world. Not simply differences in product wealth, which are also significant, but also differences in access to political and social influence." [103] In this sense, AI could be utilized to perpetuate marginalization and discrimination, produce brand-new kinds of hardship, expand the "digital divide," and intensify existing social inequalities. [104]
53. Moreover, the concentration of the power over mainstream AI applications in the hands of a few powerful business raises significant ethical issues. Exacerbating this problem is the intrinsic nature of AI systems, where no single individual can exercise total oversight over the large and intricate datasets utilized for computation. This absence of well-defined responsibility develops the danger that AI could be manipulated for individual or corporate gain or to direct public viewpoint for the advantage of a specific industry. Such entities, motivated by their own interests, have the capability to work out "forms of control as subtle as they are invasive, producing mechanisms for the adjustment of consciences and of the democratic procedure." [105]
54. Furthermore, there is the danger of AI being used to promote what Pope Francis has actually called the "technocratic paradigm," which perceives all the world's issues as understandable through technological methods alone. [106] In this paradigm, human self-respect and fraternity are often set aside in the name of performance, "as if truth, goodness, and fact automatically stream from technological and financial power as such." [107] Yet, vetlek.ru human dignity and the typical excellent needs to never be broken for the sake of efficiency, [108] for "technological developments that do not cause an improvement in the quality of life of all humanity, however on the contrary, worsen inequalities and disputes, can never count as real development. " [109] Instead, AI needs to be put "at the service of another kind of progress, one which is healthier, more human, more social, more integral." [110]
55. Attaining this objective requires a much deeper reflection on the relationship in between autonomy and obligation. Greater autonomy increases everyone's obligation throughout numerous elements of common life. For Christians, the foundation of this obligation depends on the acknowledgment that all human capabilities, including the person's autonomy, come from God and are implied to be utilized in the service of others. [111] Therefore, rather than simply pursuing financial or technological goals, AI should serve "the common good of the entire human family," which is "the sum total of social conditions that allow people, either as groups or as people, to reach their satisfaction more completely and more easily." [112]
56. The Second Vatican Council observed that "by his inner nature guy is a social being; and if he does not get in into 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 look for relationships that involve shared exchange and the pursuit of reality, in the course of which, people "show each other the truth they have actually found, or believe they have actually found, in such a method that they help one another in the look for truth." [115]
57. Such a quest, together with other aspects of human communication, presupposes encounters and mutual exchange in between individuals shaped by their distinct histories, ideas, convictions, and relationships. Nor can we forget that human intelligence is a varied, complex, and complex truth: private and social, logical and affective, conceptual and symbolic. Pope Francis highlights this vibrant, noting that "together, we can look for the reality in discussion, in relaxed discussion or in passionate debate. To do so requires determination; it entails moments of silence and suffering, yet it can patiently welcome the wider experience of individuals and individuals. [...] The procedure of structure fraternity, be it regional or universal, can only be undertaken by spirits that are totally 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 possible to foster connections within the human household. However, it might also impede a true encounter with truth and, ultimately, lead people to "a deep and melancholic frustration with interpersonal relations, or a harmful sense of seclusion." [117] Authentic human relationships need the richness of being with others in their pain, their pleas, and their pleasure. [118] Since human intelligence is expressed and enriched also in social and embodied methods, genuine and spontaneous encounters with others are important for engaging with truth in its fullness.

59. Because "true wisdom requires an encounter with truth," [119] the increase of AI introduces another obstacle. Since AI can effectively imitate the items of human intelligence, the capability to understand when one is interacting with a human or a maker can no longer be taken for approved. Generative AI can produce text, speech, images, and other advanced outputs that are usually connected with human beings. Yet, it must be understood for what it is: a tool, not a person. [120] This distinction is often obscured by the language utilized by specialists, which tends to anthropomorphize AI and therefore blurs the line in between human and device.

60. Anthropomorphizing AI likewise presents specific challenges for the development of kids, potentially encouraging them to develop patterns of interaction that treat human relationships in a transactional way, as one would relate to a chatbot. Such practices might lead young people to see instructors as mere dispensers of details rather than as mentors who guide and nurture their intellectual and moral development. Genuine relationships, rooted in empathy and an unfaltering commitment to the good of the other, are necessary and irreplaceable in promoting the full advancement of the human person.

61. In this context, it is crucial to clarify that, regardless of the usage of anthropomorphic language, no AI application can truly experience empathy. Emotions can not be minimized to facial expressions or expressions produced in action to prompts; they reflect the way a person, as a whole, relates to the world and to his/her own life, with the body playing a main function. True compassion requires the capability to listen, acknowledge another's irreducible individuality, welcome their otherness, and understand the significance behind even their silences. [121] Unlike the realm of analytical judgment in which AI excels, real compassion comes from the relational sphere. It includes intuiting and apprehending the lived experiences of another while maintaining the difference between self and other. [122] While AI can mimic empathetic responses, it can not duplicate the incomparably individual and relational nature of genuine empathy. [123]
62. In light of the above, it is clear why misrepresenting AI as an individual need to constantly be avoided; doing so for fraudulent functions is a grave ethical infraction that could wear down social trust. Similarly, using AI to deceive in other contexts-such as in education or in human relationships, consisting of the sphere of sexuality-is likewise to be considered immoral and needs cautious oversight to prevent damage, maintain openness, and guarantee the self-respect of all individuals. [124]
63. In a significantly isolated world, some individuals have actually turned to AI looking for deep human relationships, simple companionship, and even emotional bonds. However, while human beings are indicated to experience genuine relationships, AI can just mimic them. Nevertheless, such relationships with others are an essential 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 awareness of the individual. Conversely, if we change relationships with God and with others with interactions with technology, we risk changing genuine relationality with a lifeless image (cf. Ps. 106:20; Rom. 1:22 -23). Instead of pulling away into artificial worlds, we are contacted us to engage in a dedicated and deliberate way with reality, specifically by relating to the bad and suffering, consoling those in grief, and creating bonds of communion with all.

64. Due to its interdisciplinary nature, AI is being progressively integrated into economic and financial systems. Significant investments are presently being made not only in the technology sector however likewise in energy, financing, and media, particularly in the areas of marketing and sales, logistics, technological innovation, compliance, and danger management. At the exact same time, AI's applications in these areas have also highlighted its ambivalent nature, as a source of incredible opportunities but also extensive threats. A very first real crucial point in this location worries the possibility that-due to the concentration of AI applications in the hands of a few corporations-only those big companies would gain from the worth produced by AI instead of business that use it.

65. Other wider aspects of AI's effect on the economic-financial sphere must likewise be thoroughly examined, especially concerning the interaction between concrete reality and the digital world. One essential consideration in this regard involves the coexistence of varied and alternative forms of financial and financial organizations within an offered context. This element should be motivated, as it can bring benefits in how it supports the genuine economy by cultivating its advancement and stability, particularly throughout times of crisis. Nevertheless, it should be stressed that digital truths, not limited by any spatial bonds, tend to be more homogeneous and impersonal than neighborhoods rooted in a specific location and a specific history, with a typical journey defined by shared worths and hopes, however likewise by unavoidable disputes and divergences. This diversity is an indisputable asset to a community's financial life. Turning over the economy and finance entirely to digital innovation would reduce this range and richness. As an outcome, lots of services to financial issues that can be reached through natural discussion between the included celebrations may no longer be attainable in a world controlled by procedures and only the look of proximity.

66. Another area where AI is already having a profound impact is the world of work. As in many other fields, AI is driving basic transformations across lots of occupations, with a range of results. On the one hand, it has the potential to enhance know-how and efficiency, produce new tasks, make it possible for employees to focus on more innovative jobs, and open new horizons for imagination and development.

67. However, while AI guarantees to boost productivity by taking over ordinary jobs, it regularly forces employees to adjust to the speed and demands of makers rather than devices being designed to support those who work. As a result, contrary to the advertised benefits of AI, present techniques to the technology can paradoxically deskill workers, subject them to automated monitoring, and relegate them to rigid and repetitive jobs. The need to keep up with the rate of technology can deteriorate workers' sense of firm and stifle the innovative capabilities they are anticipated to bring to their work. [125]
68. AI is presently eliminating the requirement for some tasks that were as soon as performed by people. If AI is utilized to change human employees rather than complement them, there is a "substantial danger of disproportionate advantage for the couple of at the cost of the impoverishment of lots of." [126] Additionally, as AI becomes more effective, there is an associated threat that human labor might lose its worth in the economic realm. This is the sensible effect of the technocratic paradigm: a world of humankind shackled to performance, where, eventually, the cost of humankind must be cut. Yet, human lives are intrinsically important, independent of their economic output. Nevertheless, the "current design," Pope Francis explains, "does not appear to favor a financial investment in efforts to assist the slow, the weak, or the less skilled to find opportunities in life." [127] In light of this, "we can not allow a tool as effective and essential as Artificial Intelligence to reinforce such a paradigm, however rather, we must make Artificial Intelligence a bulwark against its growth." [128]
69. It is essential to keep in mind that "the order of things must be secondary to the order of individuals, and not the other way around." [129] Human work needs to not just be at the service of revenue but at "the service of the entire human individual [...] taking into account the individual's material requirements and the requirements of his/her intellectual, moral, spiritual, and spiritual life." [130] In this context, the Church recognizes that work is "not only a method of earning one's daily bread" but is likewise "an important measurement of social life" and "a means [...] of individual growth, the structure of healthy relationships, self-expression and the exchange of gifts. Work provides us a sense of shared responsibility 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 course to development, human development and individual fulfillment," "the goal ought to not be that technological progress significantly replaces human work, for this would be detrimental to humankind" [132] -rather, it must promote human labor. Seen in this light, AI should assist, not change, human judgment. Similarly, it should never ever degrade creativity or reduce workers to mere "cogs in a machine." Therefore, "respect for the self-respect of workers and the importance of employment for the economic wellness of individuals, households, and societies, for job security and just salaries, ought to be a high concern for the international community as these kinds of innovation permeate more deeply into our work environments." [133]
71. As individuals in God's recovery work, healthcare experts have the occupation and duty to be "guardians and servants of human life." [134] Because of this, the healthcare occupation brings an "intrinsic and undeniable ethical dimension," acknowledged by the Hippocratic Oath, which obliges physicians and healthcare experts to dedicate themselves to having "absolute regard for human life and its sacredness." [135] Following the example of the Good Samaritan, this commitment is to be performed by males and females "who decline the production of a society of exemption, and act instead as next-door neighbors, raising up and fixing up the succumbed to the sake of the common good." [136]
72. Seen in this light, AI seems to hold immense capacity in a variety of applications in the medical field, such as helping the diagnostic work of healthcare service providers, facilitating relationships between patients and medical personnel, providing brand-new treatments, and expanding access to quality care likewise for those who are separated or marginalized. In these ways, the technology might boost the "caring and loving closeness" [137] that doctor are called to encompass the sick and suffering.

73. However, if AI is utilized not to improve however to replace the relationship in between patients and health care providers-leaving clients to interact with a device rather than a human being-it would lower a most importantly crucial human relational structure to a centralized, impersonal, and unequal structure. Instead of motivating solidarity with the sick and suffering, such applications of AI would run the risk of worsening the isolation that frequently accompanies illness, specifically in the context of a culture where "persons are no longer seen as a paramount worth to be looked after and appreciated." [138] This abuse of AI would not line up with respect for the self-respect of the human individual and uniformity with the suffering.

74. Responsibility for the wellness of patients and the decisions that touch upon their lives are at the heart of the health care occupation. This responsibility requires medical experts to work out all their ability and intelligence in making well-reasoned and fairly grounded options regarding those delegated to their care, constantly respecting the inviolable dignity of the patients and the requirement for informed authorization. As an outcome, decisions regarding client treatment and the weight of duty they entail must always remain with the human individual and ought to never ever be handed over to AI. [139]
75. In addition, utilizing AI to identify who ought to receive treatment based mainly on financial steps or metrics of effectiveness represents a particularly troublesome circumstances of the "technocratic paradigm" that need to be turned down. [140] For, "enhancing resources suggests using them in an ethical and fraternal method, and not punishing the most fragile." [141] Additionally, AI tools in healthcare are "exposed to forms of predisposition and discrimination," where "systemic errors can quickly multiply, producing not only oppressions in individual cases however also, due to the cause and effect, real kinds of social inequality." [142]
76. The integration of AI into healthcare likewise presents the threat of amplifying other existing variations in access to healthcare. As health care ends up being significantly oriented toward avoidance and lifestyle-based approaches, AI-driven solutions may inadvertently prefer more affluent populations who currently enjoy much better access to medical resources and quality nutrition. This trend risks reinforcing a "medicine for the rich" model, where those with financial ways gain from advanced preventative tools and individualized health details while others struggle to gain access to even fundamental services. To prevent such injustices, fair structures 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 toward their final end and the good of the society to which they belong." [143] As such, education is "never a mere procedure of passing on facts and intellectual skills: rather, its aim is to add to the individual's holistic formation in its numerous aspects (intellectual, cultural, spiritual, etc), including, for example, neighborhood life and relations within the academic neighborhood," [144] in keeping with the nature and self-respect of the human person.

78. This approach includes a commitment to cultivating the mind, however constantly as a part of the integral advancement of the individual: "We need to break that idea of education which holds that informing means filling one's head with ideas. That is the way we inform robots, cerebral minds, not individuals. Educating is taking a risk in the tension between the mind, the heart, and the hands." [145]
79. At the center of this work of forming the whole human person is the essential relationship between teacher and trainee. Teachers do more than convey understanding; they model essential human qualities and influence the joy of discovery. [146] Their presence motivates trainees both through the content they teach and the care they demonstrate for their trainees. This bond cultivates trust, mutual understanding, and the capacity to address each person's special dignity and capacity. On the part of the trainee, this can generate an authentic desire to grow. The physical presence of a teacher develops a relational dynamic that AI can not duplicate, one that deepens engagement and supports the trainee's essential development.

80. In this context, AI presents both opportunities and difficulties. If used in a sensible manner, within the context of an existing teacher-student relationship and ordered to the genuine goals of education, AI can end up being a valuable academic resource by boosting access to education, providing tailored assistance, and supplying instant feedback to trainees. These advantages could enhance the learning experience, particularly in cases where personalized attention is needed, or instructional resources are otherwise limited.

81. Nevertheless, an important part of education is forming "the intellect to factor well in all matters, to connect 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 even more vital in an age marked by innovation, in which "it is no longer merely a concern of 'using' instruments of communication, but of residing in a highly digitalized culture that has had a profound effect on [...] our capability to interact, discover, be informed and participate in relationship with others." [149] However, rather of fostering "a cultivated intellect," which "brings with it a power and a grace to every work and profession that it carries out," [150] the comprehensive usage of AI in education might lead to the trainees' increased dependence on technology, eroding their ability to carry out some abilities individually and aggravating their reliance on screens. [151]
82. Additionally, while some AI systems are designed to assist people establish their important thinking abilities and analytical skills, lots of others simply offer answers instead of prompting trainees to reach responses themselves or write text on their own. [152] Instead of training youths how to collect details and produce quick responses, education ought to motivate "the accountable use of freedom to deal with problems with excellent sense and intelligence." [153] Building on this, "education in making use of kinds of artificial intelligence ought to aim above all at promoting critical thinking. Users of all ages, however specifically the young, need to develop a critical technique to making use of information and content collected online or produced by expert system systems. Schools, universities, and clinical societies are challenged to assist trainees and specialists to comprehend the social and ethical elements of the development and uses of technology." [154]
83. As Saint John Paul II remembered, "on the planet today, identified by such fast advancements in science and technology, the jobs of a Catholic University presume an ever greater value and seriousness." [155] In a particular method, Catholic universities are advised to be present as fantastic labs of hope at this crossroads of history. In an inter-disciplinary and cross-disciplinary key, they are urged to engage "with wisdom and imagination" [156] in mindful research study on this phenomenon, helping to extract the salutary capacity within the numerous fields of science and reality, and assisting them constantly towards fairly sound applications that plainly serve the cohesion of our societies and the typical good, reaching brand-new frontiers in the dialogue between faith and factor.

84. Moreover, it should be kept in mind that current AI programs have been understood to offer biased or fabricated details, which can lead trainees to rely on unreliable content. This issue "not only risks of legitimizing phony news and reinforcing a dominant culture's advantage, however, simply put, it also weakens the academic procedure itself." [157] With time, clearer distinctions might emerge between proper and improper uses of AI in education and research. Yet, a definitive guideline is that using AI must always be transparent and never misrepresented.

85. AI could be utilized as an aid to human dignity if it helps people comprehend intricate principles or directs them to sound resources that support their search for the truth. [158]
86. However, AI also provides a severe risk of producing manipulated content and incorrect details, which can easily mislead individuals due to its resemblance to the reality. Such misinformation may occur unintentionally, as when it comes to AI "hallucination," where a generative AI system yields results that appear genuine but are not. Since producing content that simulates human artifacts is main to AI's performance, alleviating these risks shows difficult. Yet, the repercussions of such aberrations and incorrect details can be rather serious. For this reason, all those associated with producing and using AI systems ought to be committed to the truthfulness and precision of the details processed by such systems and shared to the general public.

87. While AI has a hidden capacity to produce false details, an even more unpleasant issue depends on the intentional misuse of AI for manipulation. This can happen when people or organizations deliberately generate and spread false content with the aim to deceive or cause harm, such as "deepfake" images, videos, and audio-referring to a false depiction of a person, modified or produced by an AI algorithm. The danger of deepfakes is particularly evident when they are utilized to target or damage others. While the images or videos themselves might be synthetic, the damage they trigger is real, leaving "deep scars in the hearts of those who suffer it" and "real injuries in their human dignity." [159]
88. On a broader scale, by distorting "our relationship with others and with truth," [160] AI-generated phony media can gradually undermine the foundations of society. This problem requires careful guideline, as misinformation-especially through AI-controlled or influenced media-can spread accidentally, sustaining political polarization and social discontent. When society becomes indifferent to the reality, different groups build their own variations of "truths," compromising the "mutual ties and shared reliances" [161] that underpin the material of social life. As deepfakes cause people to question everything and AI-generated incorrect content deteriorates trust in what they see and hear, polarization and dispute will only grow. Such widespread deception is no trivial matter; it strikes at the core of mankind, dismantling the fundamental trust on which societies are constructed. [162]
89. Countering AI-driven fallacies is not just the work of industry experts-it requires the efforts of all individuals of goodwill. "If innovation is to serve human self-respect and not hurt it, and if it is to promote peace rather than violence, then the human neighborhood should be proactive in attending to these patterns with respect to human dignity and the promo of the excellent." [163] Those who produce and share AI-generated material should always work out diligence in verifying the truth of what they disseminate and, in all cases, need to "avoid the sharing of words and images that are degrading of people, that promote hatred and intolerance, that debase the goodness and intimacy of human sexuality or that make use of the weak and vulnerable." [164] This requires the continuous prudence and cautious discernment of all users regarding their activity online. [165]
90. Humans are naturally relational, and the information each individual produces in the digital world can be seen as an objectified expression of this relational nature. Data conveys not only details but also personal and relational knowledge, which, in an increasingly digitized context, can amount to power over the person. Moreover, while some kinds of data may pertain to public aspects of a person's life, others might discuss the individual's interiority, possibly even their conscience. Seen in this method, privacy plays a vital role in securing the boundaries of an individual's inner life, maintaining their liberty to relate to others, express themselves, and make decisions without unnecessary control. This security is likewise tied to the defense of religious flexibility, as monitoring can also be misused to put in control over the lives of believers and how they reveal their faith.

91. It is appropriate, therefore, to deal with the problem of personal privacy from a concern for the legitimate liberty and inalienable dignity of the human individual "in all situations." [166] The Second Vatican Council included the right "to secure personal privacy" amongst the essential rights "needed for living a truly human life," a right that ought to be extended to all individuals on account of their "sublime self-respect." [167] Furthermore, the Church has actually also verified the right to the legitimate regard for a private life in the context of affirming the person's right to an excellent reputation, defense of their physical and mental integrity, and liberty from damage or unnecessary intrusion [168] -vital elements of the due respect for the intrinsic self-respect of the human person. [169]
92. Advances in AI-powered data processing and analysis now make it possible to infer patterns in a person's behavior and thinking from even a small quantity of details, making the function of information personal privacy much more crucial as a protect for the dignity and relational nature of the human individual. As Pope Francis observed, "while closed and intolerant mindsets towards others are on the rise, ranges are otherwise shrinking or vanishing to the point that the right to personal privacy hardly exists. Everything has become a sort of spectacle to be examined and checked, and people's lives are now under consistent security." [170]
93. While there can be genuine and appropriate ways to use AI in keeping with human dignity and the common great, using it for security aimed at making use of, limiting others' freedom, or benefitting a few at the expense of the lots of is unjustifiable. The risk of surveillance overreach must be kept track of by proper regulators to make sure transparency and public accountability. Those accountable for surveillance needs to never ever surpass their authority, which should always favor the self-respect and flexibility of everyone as the vital basis of a simply and gentle society.

94. Furthermore, "basic respect for human self-respect needs that we decline to enable the originality of the individual to be recognized with a set of information." [171] This especially uses when AI is used to assess individuals or groups based upon their behavior, qualities, or history-a practice called "social scoring": "In social and economic decision-making, we ought to beware about delegating judgments to algorithms that process data, often collected surreptitiously, on an individual's makeup and previous behavior. Such data can be contaminated by social prejudices and preconceptions. An individual's previous behavior should not be utilized to deny him or her the opportunity to change, grow, and contribute to society. We can not enable algorithms to restrict or condition regard for human self-respect, or to omit empathy, grace, forgiveness, and above all, the hope that people have the ability to change." [172]
95. AI has many promising applications for improving our relationship with our "typical home," such as producing designs to anticipate extreme climate occasions, proposing engineering options to minimize their effect, managing relief operations, and anticipating population shifts. [173] Additionally, AI can support sustainable agriculture, optimize energy usage, and provide early caution systems for public health emergencies. These improvements have the potential to strengthen strength against climate-related difficulties and promote more sustainable development.

96. At the same time, existing AI designs and the hardware required to support them take in vast amounts of energy and water, substantially adding to CO2 emissions and straining resources. This reality is typically obscured by the way this innovation is provided in the popular creativity, where words such as "the cloud" [174] can give the impression that information is saved and processed in an intangible world, separated from the real world. However, "the cloud" is not an ethereal domain different from the real world; similar to all calculating innovations, it counts on physical machines, cables, and energy. The exact same is real of the innovation behind AI. As these systems grow in complexity, specifically large language models (LLMs), they need ever-larger datasets, increased computational power, and greater storage infrastructure. Considering the heavy toll these technologies take on the environment, it is important to develop sustainable services that decrease their influence on our common home.

97. Even then, as Pope Francis teaches, it is important "that we search for options not only in innovation however in a modification of humankind." [175] A total and genuine understanding of development acknowledges that the worth of all produced things can not be reduced to their simple energy. Therefore, a completely human approach to the stewardship of the earth rejects the distorted anthropocentrism of the technocratic paradigm, which looks for to "draw out whatever possible" from the world, [176] and turns down the "misconception of progress," which presumes that "ecological issues will solve themselves simply with the application of brand-new technology and with no need for ethical factors to consider or deep modification." [177] Such a state of mind needs to pave the way to a more holistic technique that respects the order of development and promotes the essential good of the human person while securing our common home. [178]
98. The Second Vatican Council and the consistent mentor of the Popes ever since have actually firmly insisted that peace is not merely the absence of war and is not limited to maintaining a balance of powers in between enemies. Instead, in the words of Saint Augustine, peace is "the serenity of order." [179] Certainly, peace can not be attained without securing the products of individuals, free interaction, regard for the self-respect of individuals and individuals, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is the work of justice and the impact of charity and can not be attained through force alone; instead, it must be mainly constructed through patient diplomacy, the active promotion of justice, solidarity, important human advancement, and respect for the self-respect of all individuals. [180] In this method, the tools used to maintain peace should never be enabled to validate injustice, violence, or oppression. Instead, they must always be governed by a "firm determination to respect other individuals and nations, together with their dignity, along with the intentional practice of fraternity." [181]
99. While AI's analytical abilities could assist nations seek peace and guarantee security, the "weaponization of Artificial Intelligence" can likewise be highly problematic. Pope Francis has observed that "the capability to conduct military operations through remote control systems has caused a decreased understanding of the destruction triggered by those weapon systems and the concern of responsibility for their use, leading to a a lot more cold and separated approach to the immense tragedy of war." [182] Moreover, the ease with which self-governing weapons make war more viable militates against the concept of war as a last resort in genuine self-defense, [183] possibly increasing the instruments of war well beyond the scope of human oversight and precipitating a destabilizing arms race, with devastating effects for human rights. [184]
100. In specific, Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, which are capable of determining and striking targets without direct human intervention, are a "cause for serious ethical issue" due to the fact that they do not have the "special human capacity for moral judgment and ethical decision-making." [185] For this factor, Pope Francis has actually urgently required a reconsideration of the development of these weapons and a prohibition on their usage, starting with "a reliable and concrete dedication to present ever greater and proper human control. No device must ever pick to take the life of a human being." [186]
101. Since it is a little action from devices that can kill autonomously with accuracy to those capable of massive damage, some AI researchers have actually expressed issues that such technology poses an "existential risk" by having the potential to act in manner ins which might threaten the survival of entire areas or perhaps of humankind itself. This threat needs major attention, showing the enduring issue about technologies that grant war "an unmanageable destructive power over excellent numbers of innocent civilians," [187] without even sparing kids. In this context, the call from Gaudium et Spes to "carry out an examination of war with a totally brand-new mindset" [188] is more immediate than ever.

102. At the exact same time, while the theoretical threats of AI are worthy of attention, the more immediate and pressing concern depends on how individuals with harmful intentions might misuse this technology. [189] Like any tool, AI is an extension of human power, and while its future capabilities are unpredictable, mankind's previous actions provide clear warnings. The atrocities committed throughout history suffice to raise deep concerns about the prospective abuses of AI.

103. Saint John Paul II observed that "humankind now has instruments of unmatched power: we can turn this world into a garden, or lower it to a pile of debris." [190] Given this fact, the Church advises us, in the words of Pope Francis, that "we are complimentary to apply our intelligence towards things developing favorably," or towards "decadence and mutual destruction." [191] To prevent humankind from spiraling into self-destruction, [192] there need to be a clear stand against all applications of innovation that naturally threaten human life and self-respect. This commitment needs mindful discernment about making use of AI, particularly in military defense applications, to ensure that it always respects human dignity and serves the common good. The development and release of AI in armaments need to undergo the highest levels of ethical examination, governed by a concern for human self-respect and the sanctity of life. [193]
104. Technology offers impressive tools to manage and establish the world's resources. However, in many cases, humanity is progressively ceding control of these resources to makers. Within some circles of scientists and futurists, there is optimism about the potential of synthetic basic intelligence (AGI), a hypothetical type of AI that would match or surpass human intelligence and bring about inconceivable developments. Some even hypothesize that AGI might attain superhuman abilities. At the exact same time, as society drifts away from a connection with the transcendent, some are tempted to turn to AI in search of significance or fulfillment-longings that can just be genuinely satisfied in communion with God. [194]
105. However, the presumption of replacing God for an artifact of human making is idolatry, a practice Scripture explicitly alerts against (e.g., Ex. 20:4; 32:1 -5; 34:17). Moreover, AI might prove a lot more sexy than conventional idols for, unlike idols that "have mouths but do not speak; eyes, however do not see; ears, but do not hear" (Ps. 115:5 -6), AI can "speak," or at least gives the illusion of doing so (cf. Rev. 13:15). Yet, it is crucial to keep in mind that AI is however a pale reflection of humanity-it is crafted by human minds, trained on human-generated product, responsive to human input, and sustained through human labor. AI can not have a number of the abilities particular to human life, and it is also fallible. By turning to AI as a viewed "Other" higher than itself, with which to share presence and obligations, mankind risks producing an alternative to God. However, it is not AI that is ultimately deified and worshipped, however mankind itself-which, in this way, ends up being enslaved to its own work. [195]
106. While AI has the potential to serve humankind and contribute to the common great, it remains a development of human hands, bearing "the imprint of human art and resourcefulness" (Acts 17:29). It needs to never ever be ascribed excessive worth. As the Book of Wisdom affirms: "For a guy made them, and one whose spirit is obtained formed them; for no man can form a god which resembles himself. He is mortal, and what he makes with lawless hands is dead, for he is better than the objects he worships since he has life, however they never have" (Wis. 15:16 -17).

107. In contrast, humans, "by their interior life, transcend the whole product universe; they experience this deep interiority when they participate in their own heart, where God, who probes the heart, awaits them, and where they choose their own fate in the sight of God." [196] It is within the heart, as Pope Francis reminds us, that each individual finds the "mysterious connection between self-knowledge and openness to others, between the encounter with one's individual individuality and the determination to give oneself to others. " [197] Therefore, it is the heart alone that is "capable of setting our other powers and passions, and our entire individual, in a position of reverence and caring obedience before the Lord," [198] who "provides to deal with each one of us as a 'Thou,' always and permanently." [199]
108. Considering the different difficulties presented by advances in innovation, Pope Francis stressed the need for development in "human responsibility, values, and conscience," proportionate to the development in the capacity that this innovation brings [200] -recognizing that "with a boost in human power comes a widening of obligation on the part of individuals and communities." [201]
109. At the same time, the "essential and essential concern" remains "whether in the context of this development male, as male, is becoming genuinely better, that is to say, more mature spiritually, more familiar with the self-respect of his humanity, more responsible, more available to others, particularly the neediest and the weakest, and readier to provide and to aid all." [202]
110. As a result, it is essential to understand how to evaluate individual applications of AI in specific contexts to identify whether its usage promotes human self-respect, the vocation of the human individual, and the typical good. As with numerous technologies, the impacts of the different uses of AI may not constantly be predictable from their beginning. As these applications and their social effects end up being clearer, appropriate actions ought to be made at all levels of society, following the concept of subsidiarity. Individual users, households, civil society, corporations, institutions, governments, and global companies should work at their correct levels to guarantee that AI is used for the good of all.

111. A substantial obstacle and opportunity for the typical good today lies in considering AI within a structure of relational intelligence, which emphasizes the interconnectedness of people and neighborhoods and highlights our shared duty for fostering the essential well-being of others. The twentieth-century theorist Nicholas Berdyaev observed that people often blame makers for personal and social issues; however, "this just humiliates male and does not correspond to his self-respect," for "it is not worthy to transfer duty from male to a device." [203] Only the human person can be morally accountable, and the difficulties of a technological society are eventually spiritual in nature. Therefore, dealing with those difficulties "demands an augmentation of spirituality." [204]
112. An additional indicate think about is the call, triggered by the appearance of AI on the world phase, for a renewed gratitude of all that is human. Years back, the French Catholic author Georges Bernanos cautioned that "the threat is not in the multiplication of machines, however in the ever-increasing number of men accustomed from their childhood to desire just what devices can offer." [205] This challenge is as real today as it was then, as the rapid rate of digitization risks a "digital reductionism," where non-quantifiable aspects of life are reserved and then forgotten and even deemed unimportant since they can not be computed in official terms. AI ought to be used just as a tool to match human intelligence instead of replace its richness. [206] Cultivating those elements of human life that go beyond calculation is essential for maintaining "an authentic humankind" that "appears to dwell in the middle of our technological culture, practically undetected, like a mist seeping carefully below a closed door." [207]
113. The large area of the world's understanding is now available in methods that would have filled previous generations with wonder. However, to ensure that improvements in knowledge do not become humanly or spiritually barren, one need to go beyond the mere accumulation of data and aim to attain true wisdom. [208]
114. This wisdom is the gift that humanity needs most to resolve the profound concerns and ethical obstacles presented by AI: "Only by embracing a spiritual method of viewing reality, just by recovering a knowledge of the heart, can we confront and interpret the newness of our time." [209] Such "knowledge of the heart" is "the virtue that enables us to integrate the entire and its parts, our decisions and their repercussions." It "can not be sought from machines," but it "lets itself be found by those who seek it and be seen by those who enjoy it; it prepares for those who prefer it, and it goes in search of those who deserve it (cf. Wis 6:12 -16)." [210]
115. In a world marked by AI, we require the grace of the Holy Spirit, who "allows us to take a look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, circumstances, occasions and to discover their genuine meaning." [211]
116. Since a "person's perfection is measured not by the details or understanding they possess, however by the depth of their charity," [212] how we include AI "to include the least of our brothers and sisters, the vulnerable, and those most in need, will be the true measure of our humanity." [213] The "wisdom of the heart" can brighten and guide the human-centered usage of this technology to help promote the typical good, look after our "common home," advance the search for the reality, foster essential human advancement, prefer human uniformity and fraternity, and lead humanity to its supreme objective: happiness and complete communion with God. [214]
117. From this perspective of knowledge, believers will be able to serve as moral agents efficient in utilizing this innovation to promote a genuine vision of the human individual and society. [215] This need to be made with the understanding that technological progress belongs to God's prepare for creation-an activity that we are called to order toward the Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ, in the consistent look 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 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 meant to anthropomorphize the machine. [8] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3; Id., Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [9] Here, one can see the main positions of the "transhumanists" and the "posthumanists." Transhumanists argue that technological improvements will enable humans to conquer their biological constraints and enhance both their physical and cognitive abilities. Posthumanists, on the other hand, compete that such advances will ultimately modify human identity to the level that humanity itself may no longer be considered really "human." Both views rest on an essentially unfavorable perception of human corporality, which deals with the body more as an obstacle than as an important part of the person's identity and contact us to full awareness. Yet, this negative view of the body is inconsistent with an appropriate understanding of human dignity. While the Church supports authentic scientific progress, it verifies that human dignity is rooted in "the individual as an inseparable unity of body and soul. " Thus, "dignity is likewise inherent 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 method reflects a functionalist perspective, which minimizes the human mind to its functions and assumes that its functions can be entirely measured in physical or mathematical terms. However, even if a future AGI were to appear really smart, it would still remain practical in nature. [11] Cf. A.M. Turing, "Computing Machinery and Intelligence," Mind 59 (1950) 443-460. [12] If "thinking" is credited to machines, it should be clarified that this refers to calculative thinking rather than critical thinking. Similarly, if makers are said to run utilizing abstract thought, it should be defined that this is restricted to computational reasoning. On the other hand, by its very nature, human thought is a creative procedure that eludes programming and goes beyond constraints. [13] On the fundamental role of language in shaping understanding, cf. M. Heidegger, Über den Humanismus, Klostermann, Frankfurt am Main 1949 (en. tr. "Letter on Humanism," in Basic Writings: Martin Heidegger, Routledge, London - New York City 2010, 141-182). [14] For additional discussion of these anthropological and doctrinal structures, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 43-144. [15] Aristotle, Metaphysics, I. 1, 980 a 21. [16] Cf. Augustine, De Genesi ad litteram III, 20, 30: PL 34, 292: "Man is made in the image of God in relation to that [professors] by which he is exceptional to the illogical animals. Now, this [professors] is factor itself, or the 'mind,' or 'intelligence,' whatever other name it might more appropriately be provided"; Id., Enarrationes in Psalmos 54, 3: PL 36, 629: "When thinking about all that they have, people find that they are most differentiated from animals precisely by the reality they have intelligence." This is likewise repeated by Saint Thomas Aquinas, who states that "guy is the most best of all earthly beings enhanced with motion, and his appropriate and natural operation is intellection," by which male abstracts from things and "gets in his mind things really intelligible" (Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 76). [17] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [18] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 49, a. 5, advertisement 3. Cf. ibid., I, q. 79; II-II, q. 47, a. 3; II-II, q. 49, a. 2. For a contemporary perspective that echoes components of the classical and medieval distinction between these two modes of cognition, cf. D. Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, New York City 2011. [19] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 76, a. 1, resp. [20] Cf. Irenaeus of Lyon, Adversus Haereses, V, gratisafhalen.be 6, 1: PG 7( 2 ), 1136-1138. [21] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 9. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1045: "The intelligence can investigate the reality of things through reflection, experience and dialogue, and pertain to recognize in that reality, which transcends it, the basis of certain universal moral demands." [22] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [23] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 365. Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 75, a. 4, resp. [24] Certainly, Sacred Scripture "generally thinks about the human individual as a being who exists in the body and is unthinkable outside of it" (Pontifical Biblical Commission, "Che cosa è l'uomo?" (Sal 8,5): Un itinerario di antropologia biblica [30 September 2019], par. 19). Cf. ibid., pars. 20-21, 43-44, 48. [25] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 22: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1042: Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 7: AAS 100 (2008 ), 863: "Christ did not disdain human bodiliness, but rather completely revealed its meaning and value." [26] Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 81. [27] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [28] Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I, q. 89, a. 1, resp.: "to be separated from the body is not in accordance with [the soul's] nature [...] and for this reason it is united to the body in order that it may have an existence and an operation ideal to its nature." [29] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1035. Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 18. [30] International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 56. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 357. [31] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), pars. 5, 8; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 15, 24, 53-54. [32] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 356. Cf. ibid., par. 221. [33] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 13, 26-27. [34] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Donum Veritatis (24 May 1990), 6: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1552. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), par. 109: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1219. Cf. Pseudo-Dionysius, De divinis nominibus, VII, 2: PG 3, 868B-C: "Human souls also possess factor and with it they circle in discourse around the truth of things. [...] [O] n account of the manner in which they can focusing the lots of into the one, they too, in their own style and as far as they can, are worthy of conceptions like those of the angels" (en. tr. Pseudo-Dionysius: The Complete Works, Paulist Press, New York City - Mahwah 1987, 106-107). [35] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 3: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7. [36] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [37] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 42: AAS 91 (1999 ), 38. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 208: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1043: "the human mind can transcending instant issues and comprehending certain truths that are imperishable, as real now as in the past. As it peers into humanity, reason discovers universal worths obtained from that same nature"; ibid., par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034. [38] Cf. B. Pascal, Pensées, no. 267 (ed. Brunschvicg): "The last proceeding of reason is to recognize that there is an infinity of things which are beyond it" (en. tr. Pascal's Pensées, E.P. Dutton, New York 1958, 77). [39] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [40] Our semantic capacity allows us to comprehend messages in any kind of communication in a way that both considers and transcends their product or empirical structures (such as computer system code). Here, intelligence ends up being a wisdom that "allows us to take a look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, circumstances, occasions and to reveal their genuine significance" (Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications [24 January 2024]: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8). Our imagination allows us to generate new content or ideas, mainly by providing an original perspective on truth. Both capacities depend upon the existence of a personal subjectivity for their full awareness. [41] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. [42] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034: "Charity, when accompanied by a commitment to the truth, is much more than personal feeling [...] Certainly, its close relation to fact cultivates its universality and maintains it from being 'confined to a narrow field without relationships.' [...] Charity's openness to reality therefore protects it from 'a fideism that denies it of its human and universal breadth.'" The internal quotes are from Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), pars. 2-4: AAS 101 (2009 ), 642-643. [43] Cf. International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 7. [44] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [45] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15. [46] Bonaventure, In II Librum Sententiarum, d. I, p. 2, a. 2, q. 1; as quoted in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 293. Cf. ibid., par. 294. [47] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 295, 299, 302. Bonaventure likens the universe to "a book reflecting, representing, and explaining its Maker," the Triune God who gives presence to all things (Breviloquium 2.12.1). Cf. Alain de Lille, De Incarnatione Christi, PL 210, 579a: "Omnis mundi creatura quasi liber et pictura nobis est et speculum." [48] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 67: AAS 107 (2015 ), 874; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 6: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589-592; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 57: "human beings occupy a distinct location in the universe according to the magnificent strategy: they take pleasure in the privilege of sharing in the divine governance of visible creation. [...] Since man's place as ruler remains in truth an involvement in the magnificent governance of development, we speak of it here as a form of stewardship." [49] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), pars. 38-39: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1164-1165. [50] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. This concept is also shown in the production account, where God brings creatures 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 creation. Cf. John Chrysostom, Homiliae in Genesim, XIV, 17-21: PG 53, 116-117. [51] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 301. [52] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 302. [53] Bonaventure, Breviloquium 2.12.1. Cf. ibid., 2.11.2. [54] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 236: AAS 105 (2023 ), 1115; Id., Address to Participants in the Meeting of University Chaplains and Pastoral Workers Promoted by the Dicastery for Culture and Education (24 November 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 November 2023, 7. [55] Cf. J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 5.1, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 99-100; Francis, Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [56] Francis, Address to the Members of the National Confederation of Artisans and Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises (CNA) (15 November 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 15 November 2024, 8. [57] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Querida Amazonia (2 February 2020), par. 41: AAS 112 (2020 ), 246; Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 146: AAS 107 (2015 ), 906. [58] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 864. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), pars. 17-24: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47-50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985-987. [59] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 20: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [60] P. Claudel, Conversation sur Jean Racine, Gallimard, Paris 1956, 32: "L'intelligence n'est rien sans la délectation." Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 13: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5: "The mind and the will are put at the service of the greater great by sensing and appreciating facts." [61] Dante, Paradiso, Canto XXX: "luce intellettüal, piena d'amore;/ amor di vero ben, pien di letizia;/ letizia che trascende ogne dolzore" (en. tr. The Divine Comedy of Dante Alighieri, C.E. Norton, tr., Houghton Mifflin, Boston 1920, 232). [62] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931:" [T] he highest standard of human life is the divine law itself-eternal, objective and universal, by which God orders, directs and governs the entire world and the ways of the human neighborhood according to a strategy developed in his knowledge and love. God has allowed male to take part in this law of his so that, under the gentle disposition of divine providence, lots of may be able to come to a much deeper and deeper understanding of unchangeable truth." Also cf. Id., Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. [63] Cf. First Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius (24 April 1870), ch. 4, DH 3016. [64] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [65] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 891. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 204: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1042. [66] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 11: AAS 83 (1991 ), 807: "God has actually imprinted his own image and likeness on man (cf. Gen 1:26), giving upon him an unparalleled self-respect [...] In effect, beyond the rights which man obtains by his own work, there exist rights which do not represent any work he carries out, but which circulation from his important dignity as an individual." Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [67] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 8. Cf. ibid., par. 9; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 22. [68] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2024 ), 310. [69] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [70] In this sense, "Artificial Intelligence" is comprehended as a technical term to indicate this innovation, remembering that the expression is also used to designate the field of study 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 motivation of scientific exploration in Albertus Magnus (De Mineralibus, II, 2, 1) and the appreciation for the mechanical arts in Hugh of St. Victor (Didascalicon, I, 9). These authors, amongst a long list of other Catholics engaged in scientific research and technological exploration, highlight that "faith and science can be united in charity, offered that science is put at the service of the men and woman of our time and not misused to damage or even damage them" (Francis, Address to Participants in the 2024 Lemaître Conference of the Vatican Observatory [20 June 2024]: L'Osservatore Romano, 20 June 2024, 8). Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 36: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053-1054; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), pars. 2, 106: AAS 91 (1999 ), 6-7.86 -87. [73] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. [74] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [75] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [76] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 102: AAS 107 (2015 ), 888. [77] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889; Id., Encyclical Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 27: AAS 112 (2020 ), 978; Benedict XVI, Encyclical Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 23: AAS 101 (2009 ), 657-658. [78] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39, 47; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), passim. [79] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par 2293. [80] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2-4. [81] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1749: "Freedom makes male a moral topic. When he acts deliberately, male is, so to speak, the daddy of his acts." [82] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1776. [83] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1777. [84] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 1779-1781; Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 463, where the Holy Father encouraged efforts "to guarantee that innovation remains human-centered, fairly grounded and directed towards the excellent." [85] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 166: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1026-1027; Id., Address to the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (23 September 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 September 2024, 10. On the function of human company in picking a larger aim (Ziel) that then informs the particular function (Zweck) for which each technological application is produced, cf. F. Dessauer, Streit um pass away Technik, Herder-Bücherei, Freiburg i. Br. 1959, 70-71. [86] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4: "Technology is born for a function and, in its effect on human society, constantly represents a type of order in social relations and an arrangement of power, thus enabling certain people to perform specific actions while preventing others from carrying out various ones. In a basically specific way, this constitutive power-dimension of technology constantly includes the worldview of those who created and established it." [87] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 309. [88] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [89] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti, pars. 212-213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [90] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 5: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589; Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [91] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "Confronted with the marvels of makers, which seem to understand how to pick individually, we must be really clear that decision-making [...] should constantly be delegated the human individual. We would condemn humankind to a future without hope if we took away people's capability to make decisions about themselves and their lives, by dooming them to depend upon the options of makers." [92] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [93] The term "predisposition" in this document refers to algorithmic predisposition (systematic and consistent errors in computer system systems that may disproportionately prejudice certain groups in unexpected methods) or finding out bias (which will result in training on a prejudiced information set) and not the "predisposition vector" in neural networks (which is a criterion utilized to adjust the output of "neurons" to adjust more accurately 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 agreement "on the need for advancement processes to respect such worths as addition, transparency, security, equity, privacy and dependability," and likewise invited "the efforts of global companies to regulate these technologies so that they promote real progress, 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 conversation of the ethical questions raised by AI from a Catholic viewpoint, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 147-253. [99] On the importance of discussion in a pluralist society oriented toward a "robust and solid social principles," see Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 211-214: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [100] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [101] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [102] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [103] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. [104] Cf. Pontifical Council for Social Communications, Ethics in Internet (22 February 2002), par. 10. [105] Francis, Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414; estimating the Final Document of the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops (27 October 2018), par. 24: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1593. Cf. Benedict XVI, Address to the Participants in the International Congress on Natural Moral Law (12 February 2017): AAS 99 (2007 ), 245. [106] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-33: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047-1050. [107] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-21: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047. [108] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 308-309. [109] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [110] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [111] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 101, 103, 111, 115, 167: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1004-1005, 1007-1009, 1027. [112] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047; cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 35: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 123. [113] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 12: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1034. [114] Cf. Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church (2004 ), par. 149. [115] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [116] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [117] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 865. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), pars. 88-89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414. [118] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057. [119] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985. [120] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [121] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [122] Cf. E. Stein, Zum Problem der Einfühlung, Buchdruckerei des Waisenhauses, Halle 1917 (en. tr. On the Problem of Empathy, ICS Publications, Washington D.C. 1989). [123] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057:" [Many people] want their interpersonal relationships offered by advanced devices, by screens and systems which can be turned on and off on command. Meanwhile, the Gospel informs us continuously to run the danger of an in person encounter with others, with their physical existence which challenges us, with their pain and their pleas, with their pleasure which infects us in our close and continuous interaction. True faith in the incarnate Son of God is inseparable from self-giving, from 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' mentor about AI in relationship to the "technocratic paradigm," cf. Id., Encyclical Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 106-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893. [129] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047.; as 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 man' and not male 'for work.' Through this conclusion one appropriately pertains to acknowledge the pre-eminence of the subjective meaning of work over the unbiased one." [132] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 128: AAS 107 (2015 ), 898. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 24: AAS 108 (2016 ), 319-320. [133] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [134] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae (25 March 1995), par. 89: AAS 87 (1995 ), 502. [135] Ibid. [136] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 67: AAS 112 (2020 ), 993; as estimated in Id., Message for the XXXI World Day of the Sick (11 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 10 January 2023, 8. [137] Francis, Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [138] Francis, Address to the Diplomatic Corps Accredited to the Holy See (11 January 2016): AAS 108 (2016 ), 120. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 18: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975; Id., Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [139] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465; Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [140] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105, 107: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-890; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 18-21: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975-976; Id., Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465. [141] Francis, Address to the Participants at the Meeting Sponsored by the Charity and Health Commission of the Italian Bishops' Conference (10 February 2017): AAS 109 (2017 ), 243. Cf. ibid., 242-243: "If there is a sector in which the throwaway culture is manifest, with its painful consequences, it is that of health care. When an ill person is not positioned in the center or their self-respect is not considered, this generates attitudes that can lead even to speculation on the bad luck of others. And this is extremely severe! [...] The application of an organization technique to the health care sector, if indiscriminate [...] may run the risk of discarding humans." [142] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [143] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729. [144] Congregation for Catholic Education, Instruction on using Distance Learning in Ecclesiastical Universities and Faculties, I. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729; Francis, Message for the LXIX World Day of Peace (1 January 2016), 6: AAS 108 (2016 ), 57-58. [145] Francis, Address to Members of the Global Researchers Advancing Catholic Education Project (20 April 2022): AAS 114 (2022 ), 580. [146] Cf. Paul VI, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi (8 December 1975), par. 41: AAS 68 (1976 ), 31, pricing quote Id., Address to the Members of the "Consilium de Laicis" (2 October 1974): AAS 66 (1974 ), 568: "if [the contemporary person] does listen to instructors, it is because they are witnesses." [147] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 6.1, London 18733, 125-126. [148] Francis, Meeting the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [149] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 86: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413, pricing quote the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, Final Document (27 October 2018), bybio.co par. 21: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1592. [150] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 7.6, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 167. [151] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 88: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413. [152] In a 2023 policy file about using generative AI in education and research, UNESCO notes: "Among the essential questions [of using generative AI (GenAI) in education and research] is whether human beings can potentially deliver standard 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 frequently associated with the structuring of thinking. With GenAI [...], human beings can now begin with a well-structured summary offered by GenAI. Some experts have characterized using GenAI to create text in this method as 'composing without believing'" (UNESCO, Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research [2023], 37-38). The German-American thinker Hannah Arendt foresaw such a possibility in her 1959 book, The Human Condition, and cautioned: "If it needs to turn out to be real that understanding (in the sense of know-how) and believed have parted company for excellent, then we would certainly become the defenseless servants, 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 example, it might assist individuals gain access to the "selection of resources for generating greater knowledge of fact" contained in the works of approach (John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio [14 September 1998], par. 3: AAS 91 [1999], 7). Cf. ibid., par. 4: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7-8. [159] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 43. Cf. ibid., pars. 61-62. [160] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [161] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par 25: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053; cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), passim: AAS 112 (2020 ), 969-1074. [162] Cf. Francis., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 414; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 25: AAS 91 (1999 ), 25-26: "People can not be genuinely indifferent to the question of whether what they understand holds true or not. [...] It is this that Saint Augustine teaches when he writes: 'I have actually fulfilled lots of who wished to deceive, however none who wished to be tricked'"; pricing estimate Augustine, Confessiones, X, 23, 33: PL 32, 794. [163] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), par. 62. [164] Benedict XVI, Message for the XLIII World Day of Social Communications (24 May 2009): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2009, 8. [165] Cf. Dicastery for Communications, Towards Full Presence: A Pastoral Reflection on Engagement with Social Media (28 May 2023), par. 41; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Decree Inter Mirifica (4 December 1963), pars. 4, 8-12: AAS 56 (1964 ), 146, 148-149. [166] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 1, 6, ratemywifey.com 16, 24. [167] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046. Cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 40: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 127: "no man might with impunity violate that human self-respect which God himself treats with fantastic respect"; as priced estimate in John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 9: AAS 83 (1991 ), 804. [168] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2477, 2489; can. 220 CIC; can. 23 CCEO; John Paul II, Address to the Third General Conference of the Latin American Episcopate (28 January 1979), III.1-2: Insegnamenti II/1 (1979 ), 202-203. [169] Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to the Thematic Discussion on Other Disarmament Measures and International Security (24 October 2022): "Maintaining human dignity in the online world requires States to likewise appreciate the right to privacy, by protecting residents from intrusive security and permitting 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 identified a list of "early promises 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 assist establish new methods and investments to lower emissions, affect brand-new economic sector investments in net absolutely no, secure biodiversity, and develop broad-based social resilience" (ibid.). [174] "The cloud" refers to a network of physical servers throughout the world that makes it possible for users to store, 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 make sure and safeguard a space for appropriate human control over the choices made by expert system programs: human dignity itself depends on it." [186] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to Working Group II on Emerging Technologies at the UN Disarmament Commission (3 April 2024): "The advancement and use of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) that do not have the proper human control would pose basic ethical concerns, offered that LAWS can never be ethically accountable topics capable of adhering to worldwide humanitarian law." [187] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 258: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1061. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [188] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [189] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3: "Nor can we ignore the possibility of advanced weapons winding up in the wrong hands, helping with, for instance, terrorist attacks or interventions aimed at destabilizing the organizations of legitimate systems of government. In a word, the world does not require new innovations that contribute to the unfair advancement of commerce and the weapons trade and consequently end up promoting the recklessness of war." [190] John Paul II, Act of Entrustment to Mary for the Jubilee of Bishops (8 October 2000), par. 3: Insegnamenti XXIII/2 (200 ), 565. [191] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 79: AAS 107 (2015 ), 878. [192] Cf. Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 51: AAS 101 (2009 ), 687. [193] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39. [194] Cf. Augustine, Confessiones, I, 1, 1: PL 32, 661. [195] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (30 December 1987), par. 28: AAS 80 (1988 ), 548:" [T] here is a better understanding today that the simple build-up of goods and services [...] is insufficient for the realization of human happiness. Nor, in effect, does the availability of the numerous genuine advantages supplied in recent times by science and technology, consisting of the computer system sciences, bring liberty from every kind of slavery. On the contrary, [...] unless all the significant body of resources and possible 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 man to oppress him." Cf. ibid., pars. 29, 37: AAS 80 (1988 ), 550-551.563 -564. [196] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [197] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 18: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [198] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 27: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 6. [199] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 25: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5-6. [200] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. R. Guardini, Das Ende der Neuzeit, Würzburg 19659, 87 ff. (en. tr. Completion of the Modern World, Wilmington 1998, 82-83). [201] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [202] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptor Hominis (4 March 1979), par. 15: AAS 71 (1979 ), 287-288. [203] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," in C. Mitcham - R. Mackey, eds., Philosophy and Technology: Readings in the Philosophical Problems of Technology, New York 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 ), lovewiki.faith 892-893. [208] Cf. Bonaventure, Hex. XIX, 3; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986: "The flood of details at our fingertips does not produce higher wisdom. Wisdom is not born of fast searches on the internet nor is it a mass of unverified information. That is not the way to grow 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.